WR U

[D-man44]

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...tball-programs-produce-best-worst-nfl-players
pretty cool stuff here

 

[D-man44]

And y'all say we aren't a factory

 

[kg01]

Dang Oklahoma sucks. 13 draftees, 0 pro-bowls. Not surprised USC is so low. Lotta overrated 'measurables' guys come outta there.

ETA: This is a double-whammy considering the Tenneknee volunteers fancy themselves as WRU (for some dumbarse reason).

 

[FightWinDrink]

WRI*

 

[Techster]

GT is also one of the schools that produces the most players who are long term starters. That's pretty cool.

Goes to show, GT doesn't engineer mass NFL players, just quality ones.

 

[JacketFromUGA]

WRI*

 

[Deleted member 2897]

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...tball-programs-produce-best-worst-nfl-players
pretty cool stuff here

I could be wrong (happy to stand corrected), but I believe every Georgia Tech Wide Receiver who has been a multi-year starter over the last decade has gone to the NFL.

 

[zhavenor]

I could be wrong (happy to stand corrected), but I believe every Georgia Tech Wide Receiver who has been a multi-year starter over the last decade has gone to the NFL.

Melton didn't and I think he started 4 years.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Melton didn't and I think he started 4 years.

Okay so if true we're like 6 of 7. Still a really high percentage.

 

[zhavenor]

Okay so if true we're like 6 of 7. Still a really high percentage.

It really is when you think about it. We've had a really amazing amount of talent at WR considering everything people say about WR and our offense.

 

[FredJacket]

Isn't it true... one of the things that makes our WR's so attractive is their proficiency blocking? Besides the obvious things for WRs: size, speed, hands, route running, & winning the one-on-one battles... our system forces these guys to be able to block and they are all exceptional at it (or they would not play for CPJ). A skill (I'd imagine) supremely undervalued at the college level compared to the NFL.

 

[ATL1]

If I were a WR I'd still be hesitant about GT. Just don't throw to wide outs enough. I'll never want GT to have some air raid O but something in which averages more than 20 attempts.

With that said this may make for good a great branding opportunity.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

If I were a WR I'd still be hesitant about GT. Just don't throw to wide outs enough. I'll never want GT to have some air raid O but something in which averages more than 20 attempts.

With that said this may make for good a great branding opportunity.

Good thing recruits don't read the board.

 

[Coloradojacket]

If I were a WR I'd still be hesitant about GT. Just don't throw to wide outs enough. I'll never want GT to have some air raid O but something in which averages more than 20 attempts.

With that said this may make for good a great branding opportunity.

Let's see, yes you will not get the ball as many times but if you can get open and catch you will average 20 plus YPC. You will get single coverage. you will score touchdowns.
Fact is in these wide open throw the ball offenses, 70% of the passes are 5 yards or less and are bubble screens. If you think about it our rocket toss and pitch to the A back is about the same as a bubble screen.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

If I were a WR I'd still be hesitant about GT. Just don't throw to wide outs enough. I'll never want GT to have some air raid O but something in which averages more than 20 attempts.

With that said this may make for good a great branding opportunity.

This is a catch-22. When we had Smelter and Waller, we threw a lot more. You can go back and look at how we had nearly 2,000 passing yards in 2014. Smelter and Waller had 13 combined touchdowns. People forget how much our ABs factor into the receiving game. Many of those guys played WR in high school.

When our guys struggle to get open and our OL fails to give our QB time, then indeed our passing game falls apart. But it kind of is a self fulfilling prophecy.

 

[deeeznutz]

Melton didn't and I think he started 4 years.

Balanced out by Kevin Cone, who barely saw the field here but was on the Falcons roster for a few years.

 

[Skeptic]

Let's see, yes you will not get the ball as many times but if you can get open and catch you will average 20 plus YPC. You will get single coverage. you will score touchdowns.
Fact is in these wide open throw the ball offenses, 70% of the passes are 5 yards or less and are bubble screens. If you think about it our rocket toss and pitch to the A back is about the same as a bubble screen.

I think Clemson has a great offense for moving the football in a hurry, and certainly Alabama believes it. It is snap the ball, count to two and sling it. But the curls, slants, bubbles and quickouts are to my mind in some ways our running game., and when they go down the field it's the same as our run and shoot vertical routes. I'm not knocking either offense, just noting there are two ways to get where you want to go, and in these examples both of them are exciting to watch.

 

[tsrich]

It still surprises me we've had more success with WRs than RBs. After Johnson's first year here, I figured we'd be landing 4 and 5 star stud RBs

 

[Josh H]

I think Clemson has a great offense for moving the football in a hurry, and certainly Alabama believes it. It is snap the ball, count to two and sling it. But the curls, slants, bubbles and quickouts are to my mind in some ways our running game., and when they go down the field it's the same as our run and shoot vertical routes. I'm not knocking either offense, just noting there are two ways to get where you want to go, and in these examples both of them are exciting to watch.

Kind of interesting as you also note two of the concerns with each offense. With Tech's, since the running game replaces the short passing game, we don't have a short passing game (slant/flats, screen game, etc) to keep the defense from blitzing. Our offense *expects* to be able to run the ball against the blitz. Likewise, Clemson is built to get the ball out fast hoping to catch the defense out of position or just tired. Break a tackle and its off to the races. But they aren't built to line up and run the ball, they will get their rushing yards, but not the same way that we get ours. (There's also as many complaints about "pick" plays in that offense as there are chop-blocking in ours).

Just goes to show that for as much theory as there is about "hitting a defense where they ain't", there's just as much theory for having an identity and imposing your will.

It still surprises me we've had more success with WRs than RBs. After Johnson's first year here, I figured we'd be landing 4 and 5 star stud RBs

I definitely thought we would at B-back. Who wouldn't want to be the featured back and get 20-25 touches a game. Oddly enough that's the position that has issues translating to the NFL.

 

[Coloradojacket]

It still surprises me we've had more success with WRs than RBs. After Johnson's first year here, I figured we'd be landing 4 and 5 star stud RBs

Most running backs don't want to fire off from three point stances, not get the ball deep in the backfield and look for holes, and they do not like to block, which is requirement 1 at Tech.