08-27-2019, 10:45 PM
<p>
</p><p><br></p><p>OL and S are in rough shape, but at least for OL the cavalry is coming. </p><p><br></p><p>In terms of offensive balance, I'm not sure; taking 4 WRs immediately tells me we're trying to shift to a little more West Coast of an offense. But of course in the next class we're also taking 2 TEs and another RB. Full complement of weapons.</p><p><br></p><p>I'm a little nervous for the immediate future of the TE position once Park is gone to the NFL. He was the last in a great line of high 4-5* TE recruits (Schultz, Smith, Park). Of course Hooper was a 3* recruit so who knows. Fisk is a mauler but can he be a threat as a pass catcher? Will Harrington step up? How good will Bradley Archer be in a year?</p>
(08-27-2019, 11:46 AM)Phogge Wrote: Hey Sam how do you read the scholie balance or lack of it? In a past example Tight End U wasn't much the year that Shaw would not move Hewitt back to TE and the offense suffered.
</p><p><br></p><p>OL and S are in rough shape, but at least for OL the cavalry is coming. </p><p><br></p><p>In terms of offensive balance, I'm not sure; taking 4 WRs immediately tells me we're trying to shift to a little more West Coast of an offense. But of course in the next class we're also taking 2 TEs and another RB. Full complement of weapons.</p><p><br></p><p>I'm a little nervous for the immediate future of the TE position once Park is gone to the NFL. He was the last in a great line of high 4-5* TE recruits (Schultz, Smith, Park). Of course Hooper was a 3* recruit so who knows. Fisk is a mauler but can he be a threat as a pass catcher? Will Harrington step up? How good will Bradley Archer be in a year?</p>