03-05-2022, 08:22 PM
Thomas Booker at the combine.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/stanfordfball/status/1500296836472459264?s=21[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/stanfordfball/status/1500296836472459264?s=21[/tweet]
(03-05-2022, 09:31 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote: There are more participants to come in all the events. Currently, among DT's, Booking is running:
- 1st among 7 in the 20 Yd Shuttle, well ahead of the field
- Tied for 1st among 5 in the 3 Cone Drill
- 4th among 12 in the Broad Jump
- 5th among 13 in the 40 Yd Dash (4.94 seconds and 301 pounds)
Bench press is presumably tomorrow for him.
Live results here: https://www.nfl.com/combine/tracker/live...-colleges/
(03-05-2022, 09:31 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote: There are more participants to come in all the events. Currently, among DT's, Booking is running:
- 1st among 7 in the 20 Yd Shuttle, well ahead of the field
- Tied for 1st among 5 in the 3 Cone Drill
- 4th among 12 in the Broad Jump
- 5th among 13 in the 40 Yd Dash (4.94 seconds and 301 pounds)
Bench press is presumably tomorrow for him.
Live results here: https://www.nfl.com/combine/tracker/live...-colleges/
(03-06-2022, 10:57 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(03-06-2022, 10:06 AM)Phogge Wrote: Booker isn’t in Jordan Davis’ universe.
NOBODY is in Jordan Davis' universe.
Booker will be drafted. Those are great numbers for a non-Avenger.
(03-06-2022, 10:57 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(03-06-2022, 10:06 AM)Phogge Wrote: Booker isn’t in Jordan Davis’ universe.
NOBODY is in Jordan Davis' universe.
Booker will be drafted. Those are great numbers for a non-Avenger.
(03-06-2022, 11:56 AM)Phogge Wrote: If Booker makes a roster and eventually is rated higher than average then it’s another nail in the Stanford coaches coffin.
(03-06-2022, 11:56 AM)Phogge Wrote: If Booker makes a roster and eventually is rated higher than average then it’s another nail in the Stanford coaches coffin.
(03-06-2022, 11:56 AM)Phogge Wrote: If Booker makes a roster and eventually is rated higher than average then it’s another nail in the Stanford coaches coffin.
(03-06-2022, 11:56 AM)Phogge Wrote: If Booker makes a roster and eventually is rated higher than average then it’s another nail in the Stanford coaches coffin.
(03-06-2022, 12:34 PM)Red80 Wrote:(03-06-2022, 11:56 AM)Phogge Wrote: If Booker makes a roster and eventually is rated higher than average then it’s another nail in the Stanford coaches coffin.
Booker was double-teamed a lot last season, providing opportunities for guys like DWP and Ryan Johnson to make plays, which they almost never did. Those two guys were awful.
(03-06-2022, 12:34 PM)Red80 Wrote:(03-06-2022, 11:56 AM)Phogge Wrote: If Booker makes a roster and eventually is rated higher than average then it’s another nail in the Stanford coaches coffin.
Booker was double-teamed a lot last season, providing opportunities for guys like DWP and Ryan Johnson to make plays, which they almost never did. Those two guys were awful.
(03-06-2022, 12:34 PM)Red80 Wrote:(03-06-2022, 11:56 AM)Phogge Wrote: If Booker makes a roster and eventually is rated higher than average then it’s another nail in the Stanford coaches coffin.
Booker was double-teamed a lot last season, providing opportunities for guys like DWP and Ryan Johnson to make plays, which they almost never did. Those two guys were awful.
(03-06-2022, 12:34 PM)Red80 Wrote:(03-06-2022, 11:56 AM)Phogge Wrote: If Booker makes a roster and eventually is rated higher than average then it’s another nail in the Stanford coaches coffin.
Booker was double-teamed a lot last season, providing opportunities for guys like DWP and Ryan Johnson to make plays, which they almost never did. Those two guys were awful.
(03-08-2022, 09:01 AM)Renaissance Man Wrote: Booker added a lot of weight for last season, and I thought that worked against him. He looks like his earlier self in those pictures. I wonder if there is any accurate weights for two years ago, last year, and right now.
(03-08-2022, 09:01 AM)Renaissance Man Wrote: Booker added a lot of weight for last season, and I thought that worked against him. He looks like his earlier self in those pictures. I wonder if there is any accurate weights for two years ago, last year, and right now.
(03-08-2022, 12:05 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Our horrific DL "depth" forced the need to bulk up that much. Remember the pathetic safety situation a couple years ago? That's been happening at DL now, and will continue to for the next 1-2 years because apparently just 1 per class for 3 straight classes was enough. Morons.
(03-08-2022, 12:05 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Our horrific DL "depth" forced the need to bulk up that much. Remember the pathetic safety situation a couple years ago? That's been happening at DL now, and will continue to for the next 1-2 years because apparently just 1 per class for 3 straight classes was enough. Morons.
(03-08-2022, 01:04 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:For the record, I classify DL as different from the new "Edge" position. We're talking about the big middle 2 guys. Aaron Armitage and the three pass rushers will not be DLs.(03-08-2022, 12:05 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Our horrific DL "depth" forced the need to bulk up that much. Remember the pathetic safety situation a couple years ago? That's been happening at DL now, and will continue to for the next 1-2 years because apparently just 1 per class for 3 straight classes was enough. Morons.
My only nit here is that we can't very well simultaneously say: (1) load up on recruits because no one stays longer than 4 years anymore and you can't count on good players staying beyond 3 years anymore; and (2) the DL is going to suck in 2023 because all the DLs are too young, even though the 2021 and 2022 classes each had 3 DLs (plus a strong group of OLB pass rushers, one or more of whom might grow into a DL). But I agree that the DL numbers have been way too thin for a while.
(03-08-2022, 01:04 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:For the record, I classify DL as different from the new "Edge" position. We're talking about the big middle 2 guys. Aaron Armitage and the three pass rushers will not be DLs.(03-08-2022, 12:05 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Our horrific DL "depth" forced the need to bulk up that much. Remember the pathetic safety situation a couple years ago? That's been happening at DL now, and will continue to for the next 1-2 years because apparently just 1 per class for 3 straight classes was enough. Morons.
My only nit here is that we can't very well simultaneously say: (1) load up on recruits because no one stays longer than 4 years anymore and you can't count on good players staying beyond 3 years anymore; and (2) the DL is going to suck in 2023 because all the DLs are too young, even though the 2021 and 2022 classes each had 3 DLs (plus a strong group of OLB pass rushers, one or more of whom might grow into a DL). But I agree that the DL numbers have been way too thin for a while.
(03-08-2022, 01:44 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(03-08-2022, 01:04 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:For the record, I classify DL as different from the new "Edge" position. We're talking about the big middle 2 guys. Aaron Armitage and the three pass rushers will not be DLs.(03-08-2022, 12:05 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Our horrific DL "depth" forced the need to bulk up that much. Remember the pathetic safety situation a couple years ago? That's been happening at DL now, and will continue to for the next 1-2 years because apparently just 1 per class for 3 straight classes was enough. Morons.
My only nit here is that we can't very well simultaneously say: (1) load up on recruits because no one stays longer than 4 years anymore and you can't count on good players staying beyond 3 years anymore; and (2) the DL is going to suck in 2023 because all the DLs are too young, even though the 2021 and 2022 classes each had 3 DLs (plus a strong group of OLB pass rushers, one or more of whom might grow into a DL). But I agree that the DL numbers have been way too thin for a while.
(1) and (2) are completely unrelated to each other. You should ABSOLUTELY load up on recruits at a position where ideally 5-6 rotate in a given game; 3 in 3 years makes zero sense. And the DL SHOULD suck in 2023 (let alone 2022...) because they are all still too young, except for Tobin Phillips, at a position where old man strength is important.
Re (1), my hope and belief is we are signing 2 DL in the 2023 class as well. The pipeline should - from a numbers perspective - look much healthier moving forward. From a ratings/stars perspective, TBD but leaning towards yikes.
Oh-oh!
(03-08-2022, 01:44 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(03-08-2022, 01:04 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:For the record, I classify DL as different from the new "Edge" position. We're talking about the big middle 2 guys. Aaron Armitage and the three pass rushers will not be DLs.(03-08-2022, 12:05 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Our horrific DL "depth" forced the need to bulk up that much. Remember the pathetic safety situation a couple years ago? That's been happening at DL now, and will continue to for the next 1-2 years because apparently just 1 per class for 3 straight classes was enough. Morons.
My only nit here is that we can't very well simultaneously say: (1) load up on recruits because no one stays longer than 4 years anymore and you can't count on good players staying beyond 3 years anymore; and (2) the DL is going to suck in 2023 because all the DLs are too young, even though the 2021 and 2022 classes each had 3 DLs (plus a strong group of OLB pass rushers, one or more of whom might grow into a DL). But I agree that the DL numbers have been way too thin for a while.
(1) and (2) are completely unrelated to each other. You should ABSOLUTELY load up on recruits at a position where ideally 5-6 rotate in a given game; 3 in 3 years makes zero sense. And the DL SHOULD suck in 2023 (let alone 2022...) because they are all still too young, except for Tobin Phillips, at a position where old man strength is important.
Re (1), my hope and belief is we are signing 2 DL in the 2023 class as well. The pipeline should - from a numbers perspective - look much healthier moving forward. From a ratings/stars perspective, TBD but leaning towards yikes.
Oh-oh!