08-23-2023, 07:14 PM
* I noted that "running' is the word both Byham and Taylor in a previous interview used to describe Yurosek. It's both Yurosek's most obvious skill but also it sounds like his injury was such that he wasn't running in the spring. Byham mentioned Yurosek's hips twice, so I wonder if the surgery was in that part of the body. I don't recall anything specific about Yurosek's injury history but it seems like he's usually nursing something in the off-season. Beyond the running, Byham really extolled Yurosek's body control, hands, and concentration. We know Yurosek is a weapon. I'm looking forward to seeing him in Taylor's offense.
* Byham's comments on Roush started with the work Roush has put in and crediting him with having the most reps (because of health) of anyone spanning spring and camp, which suggests to me that there have been health issues in the room. Byham mostly seemed to be commenting in terms of Roush's comfort with the offense. This has been a theme across coaches, highlighting players that do (and sometimes players that don't) stand out in terms of adapting to the new schemes. That's important to them. How much of it is something you focus on when you're installing versus an enduring thing that gives Roush and advantage, we'll see. But the big thing that really stood out in Byham's comments on Roush was the emphasis he gave to saying Roush is competing in the run game. This sounds like a growth area Roush has impressed in (and in the Roush interview there were interesting insights into adjustments he's making mentally). For what it's worth, PFF (and my eyes) did not like Roush at all last year as a receiver or run blocker (he did fine as a pass blocker) so growth is the watch word for him.
* In making the run blocking point, Byham implied it's impressive because of the degree of difficulty going up against our "really great" OLBs (and ILBs, which he added in a way that seemed notable not to exclude them but less front of mind than the OLBs). There was another mention at the end of the interview about wanting to see the TEs continue to battle with the OLBs (and ILBs, said the same way) in the run game, and a comment on the physicality of practice that referenced the way our ILBs come downhill and the way our OLBs set the edge. Taken together, this is another data point that the coaches think the OLBs are good (no surprise) and like the ILBs more than many of us probably feared. Again, we're going up against ourselves and off-season thoughts on a group's quality have been off many times before, but nice to hear the coaches like these groups.
* Byham talked about setting a high standard in the TE room. What I found most interesting is he said we've had great TEs and will continue to bring in great TEs, which he used to say we just brought in another great TE in Holt. That was interesting to get the high praise for Holt totally unsolicited and, frankly, in a context in which it's a bit aggressive to bring him up. It feels to me like Holt looms like an unusually prominent player as far as true freshmen or transfers or 3-star recruits go. He seems like an archetypal (and certainly first TE) Taylor recruit and a Taylor/Byham guy in the sense that Holt is important to what they're building but also in the sense that he literally wouldn't have been here under Shaw/Turner. I don't know if it means anything, but Byham had a bit of a cartoonish googly eye/pouted lips when Ben asked a follow-up on Holt. The tidbit that we had a head start on the transfer machinations because Stanford had the transcripts due to the old staff recruiting Holt is interesting to me because it reinforces my sense Holt was not a Shaw/Turner guy if they had his academic information squared away and still didn't offer. In context the exaggeratedly positive reaction seems like it may be signifying "we wanted another TE and got so lucky one fell in our laps via the transfer portal so late in the year." Perhaps most notably, Byham was extraordinarily detailed in praising Holt's play: said he can really run, looks skinny at 228 pounds and will get big, great hips, great body control, with the body control part the part that jumped out to me as unusual with two detailed blow-by-blow descriptions of catches the day of the interview and the day before). Arrow up on a player for sure when the coach says such nice things two weeks in. Byham said Holt will be a "playmaker" and keep our TE tradition alive. All this another data point in me wondering if maybe Hawkins is on the less favored end of the spectrum if there's a new kid in town the coaches talk about like this.
* Byham said in that discussion that we were looking to bring in a TE. This shouldn't be a shock as we lost two TEs at the end of the 2023 class (though only one immediate matriculator) but I do think it's notable. As I look at the roster, Yurosek seems highly likely to move on to the NFL after this year, Ungar seems wholly undeserving of being asked back for a fifth year, and Taylor could be a possibility for transfer if the lack of true position becomes demoralizing or something the coaches would rather not have on the roster. One would assume we'll likely lose two TEs on the roster. Easy to see hoow getting Holt in this class and Black in the next one could be part of the plan.
* Nice to hear Byham talk about how fun it is to be involved in seeing the offense evolve and how the players are now playing with confidence. This is a big part of what we're hoping to click. Also a fun description at the end (which I already referenced above) on the physical collisions/iron sharpening iron against the OLBs and ILBs. Byham seems pretty struck by the physicality, which I wonder if it's more a function of really notable physicality or his prior frame of reference being Albany.
* Byham's comments on Roush started with the work Roush has put in and crediting him with having the most reps (because of health) of anyone spanning spring and camp, which suggests to me that there have been health issues in the room. Byham mostly seemed to be commenting in terms of Roush's comfort with the offense. This has been a theme across coaches, highlighting players that do (and sometimes players that don't) stand out in terms of adapting to the new schemes. That's important to them. How much of it is something you focus on when you're installing versus an enduring thing that gives Roush and advantage, we'll see. But the big thing that really stood out in Byham's comments on Roush was the emphasis he gave to saying Roush is competing in the run game. This sounds like a growth area Roush has impressed in (and in the Roush interview there were interesting insights into adjustments he's making mentally). For what it's worth, PFF (and my eyes) did not like Roush at all last year as a receiver or run blocker (he did fine as a pass blocker) so growth is the watch word for him.
* In making the run blocking point, Byham implied it's impressive because of the degree of difficulty going up against our "really great" OLBs (and ILBs, which he added in a way that seemed notable not to exclude them but less front of mind than the OLBs). There was another mention at the end of the interview about wanting to see the TEs continue to battle with the OLBs (and ILBs, said the same way) in the run game, and a comment on the physicality of practice that referenced the way our ILBs come downhill and the way our OLBs set the edge. Taken together, this is another data point that the coaches think the OLBs are good (no surprise) and like the ILBs more than many of us probably feared. Again, we're going up against ourselves and off-season thoughts on a group's quality have been off many times before, but nice to hear the coaches like these groups.
* Byham talked about setting a high standard in the TE room. What I found most interesting is he said we've had great TEs and will continue to bring in great TEs, which he used to say we just brought in another great TE in Holt. That was interesting to get the high praise for Holt totally unsolicited and, frankly, in a context in which it's a bit aggressive to bring him up. It feels to me like Holt looms like an unusually prominent player as far as true freshmen or transfers or 3-star recruits go. He seems like an archetypal (and certainly first TE) Taylor recruit and a Taylor/Byham guy in the sense that Holt is important to what they're building but also in the sense that he literally wouldn't have been here under Shaw/Turner. I don't know if it means anything, but Byham had a bit of a cartoonish googly eye/pouted lips when Ben asked a follow-up on Holt. The tidbit that we had a head start on the transfer machinations because Stanford had the transcripts due to the old staff recruiting Holt is interesting to me because it reinforces my sense Holt was not a Shaw/Turner guy if they had his academic information squared away and still didn't offer. In context the exaggeratedly positive reaction seems like it may be signifying "we wanted another TE and got so lucky one fell in our laps via the transfer portal so late in the year." Perhaps most notably, Byham was extraordinarily detailed in praising Holt's play: said he can really run, looks skinny at 228 pounds and will get big, great hips, great body control, with the body control part the part that jumped out to me as unusual with two detailed blow-by-blow descriptions of catches the day of the interview and the day before). Arrow up on a player for sure when the coach says such nice things two weeks in. Byham said Holt will be a "playmaker" and keep our TE tradition alive. All this another data point in me wondering if maybe Hawkins is on the less favored end of the spectrum if there's a new kid in town the coaches talk about like this.
* Byham said in that discussion that we were looking to bring in a TE. This shouldn't be a shock as we lost two TEs at the end of the 2023 class (though only one immediate matriculator) but I do think it's notable. As I look at the roster, Yurosek seems highly likely to move on to the NFL after this year, Ungar seems wholly undeserving of being asked back for a fifth year, and Taylor could be a possibility for transfer if the lack of true position becomes demoralizing or something the coaches would rather not have on the roster. One would assume we'll likely lose two TEs on the roster. Easy to see hoow getting Holt in this class and Black in the next one could be part of the plan.
* Nice to hear Byham talk about how fun it is to be involved in seeing the offense evolve and how the players are now playing with confidence. This is a big part of what we're hoping to click. Also a fun description at the end (which I already referenced above) on the physical collisions/iron sharpening iron against the OLBs and ILBs. Byham seems pretty struck by the physicality, which I wonder if it's more a function of really notable physicality or his prior frame of reference being Albany.