- Jun 12, 2014
- 30,651
- 17,028
Founding Member
Brick by brick.
That's what happens when you dont bother to sign inside linebackers for years.
Brick by brick.
That's what happens when you dont bother to sign inside linebackers for years.
If he ends up being the starter or even 2nd stribg it's bc we neglected LB for the last 4 years, not bc some walkin is the next Davis or anzalone.
From the 247 practice notes:
Defensive tackle Luke Ancrum still appears far too light to really play major minutes inside. It's easy to wonder at this point if he'll ever add the size Florida's coaches thought he might when they slotted him at nose tackle.
---
I know they want Polite and CeCe to play some DT. I'd like to hear how those two look. I'm surprised there's not a new roster posted w/ updated weights/sizes.
Polite yes, but I thought I read where they were going to leave Cece at DE.From the 247 practice notes:
Defensive tackle Luke Ancrum still appears far too light to really play major minutes inside. It's easy to wonder at this point if he'll ever add the size Florida's coaches thought he might when they slotted him at nose tackle.
---
I know they want Polite and CeCe to play some DT. I'd like to hear how those two look. I'm surprised there's not a new roster posted w/ updated weights/sizes.
CeCe is getting screwed having to play DT a lot. He could be a dominant DE.
Polite yes, but I thought I read where they were going to leave Cece at DE.
Is it? Because he is still n the building and we are still bargain shopping at directional schools.
Polite and Ancrum are 40-50 lbs away.From the 247 practice notes:
Defensive tackle Luke Ancrum still appears far too light to really play major minutes inside. It's easy to wonder at this point if he'll ever add the size Florida's coaches thought he might when they slotted him at nose tackle.
---
I know they want Polite and CeCe to play some DT.
Never heard of that or considered that as an option until I first read it here on the board. Do you know whether there any rules concerning that option, or whether any of the big boy schools do that as a matter of policy? I'm not asking you to research it out, btw.Polite and Ancrum are 40-50 lbs away.
This is why we need to be able to pull schollies.
Polite's gonna be what, a sophomore this year? He's already put on 20+ pounds from HS and we don't even have an updated weight for him. Don't think we should be pulling a scholarship from a guy who has a lot of potential who could easily get to where he needs to get to play the position.Polite and Ancrum are 40-50 lbs away.
This is why we need to be able to pull schollies.
Alabama seems to get away with it, they also stretch the "gray shirting" to the limitNever heard of that or considered that as an option until I first read it here on the board. Do you know whether there any rules concerning that option, or whether any of the big boy schools do that as a matter of policy? I'm not asking you to research it out, btw.
Many schools do this including basically all of our rivals. There's no rule against it, however, there is a UofF rule against it because our previous AD and U Pres think its unethical to pull a kids football based scholly if he isn't performing on the field. Bama and fsu do it every year and laugh at us when doing so. I'm all for doing right by the kids so if they aren't performing on the field but trying and doing well in the classroom, let them have an academic scholly or something, but the football program shouldnt be saddled with dead weight on the roster either.Never heard of that or considered that as an option until I first read it here on the board. Do you know whether there any rules concerning that option, or whether any of the big boy schools do that as a matter of policy? I'm not asking you to research it out, btw.
Polite and Ancrum are 40-50 lbs away.
This is why we need to be able to pull schollies.
I disagree with your entire premise. Giving a kid a football scholarship is a privilege, not a right. If the kid can't make it on the field and positively contribute, rescinding the scholarship is not punishment. It's simply doing away with the privilege. This is no different than taking away someones food-stamps or welfare... they aren't being punished, they simply aren't getting special benefits anymore.Pull them for what reason. I seem to remember that we have open ones. Now if a player has issues sure they should be punished, but not just because they did not meet your or a coaches expectations. Lack of effort is a different thing.
Polite and Ancrum are 40-50 lbs away.
This is why we need to be able to pull schollies.
Polite's gonna be what, a sophomore this year? He's already put on 20+ pounds from HS and we don't even have an updated weight for him. Don't think we should be pulling a scholarship from a guy who has a lot of potential who could easily get to where he needs to get to play the position.
Ancrum on the other hand is 3" taller and 10 pounds lighter than Polite - maybe he would be a good DE candidate? Apparently he's just one big muscle and will likely never get up to 300lbs.
Pull them for what reason. I seem to remember that we have open ones. Now if a player has issues sure they should be punished, but not just because they did not meet your or a coaches expectations. Lack of effort is a different thing.
Should have stopped right here.All scholarships are annual and have to be renewed each year.
You'd think so... however, most of the big boy schools we play, and all of the ones that are currently beating our azzes on the field and on signing day are doing the exact thing you're discussing. FSU and bama do this every year and have for a long time.The coaches offer the scholarships as a 4-5 year commitment to recruits and we wouldn't be able to recruit anyone if they were told they only had a 1 year scholarship. And if you get the reputation of "pulling" scholarships prior to that 4-5 years you're just going to make it that much tougher to recruit.