forums

Class Impact: Denzel Daxon Exits

View as article
Lance Roffers said:
Jason Blissett, on the other hand, is an athletic player. He tested at the Opening events and did everything. He ran a 5.13 at 271 pounds, had a 4.40 short-shuttle, a 37.5 Powerball throw, a 29.5" vertical jump, and had an overall 94.44 SPARQ. He tested as an 83rd percentile athlete at his position overall. That's out of 191 DT's to complete all tests and was above-average in every single event.

Gerald Willis was an 89th percentile athlete for comparison' sake.
Click to expand...

Appreciate the insight. Wish you would contribute more to the recruiting board.

Any chance you would be willing to make a post about how our other commits/targets have tested?
 
Advertisement
Lance Roffers said:
I know nothing more than what I read, but when a coach tells me he's a "one-trick pony" he's no telling me that he hasn't been taught other techniques, he's telling me he doesn't have the talent/athleticism/skills necessary to perform other techniques at the level required to play here.

Every DT has a bull-rush. It's your basic instinct when you're twice as big as the guy across from him to overwhelm him with size/strength. It's when the players get big too that things change inside. Daxon ran a 4.97 Short-Shuttle, which is below average at his position. He verticaled 27.1 inches, which is solid for a man of his size.

Where he really excelled is in the Powerl Ball throw. He threw it 43 feet, which would place him over 1.5 times the standard deviation of all DT's as a Junior in high school. Simpson is saying his game is built solely on power and not enough athleticism. Hence, the "one-trick pony" designation on his bull-rush.
Click to expand...

Are you affiliated with Roffers Ocean Fishing Forecasting Service?

You seem smart enough.
 
Combo said:
To be fair, I don't think most here are claiming our DL is on the same level as that or Clemson or Alabama at this time. Most are merely pointing out that we already have four quality DL committed and we will add a few more in this class. To get hysterical at this point in the cycle is absurd. We've got some talented young DL in the program (Garvin, Silver, Rousseau, Miller, Ford) and we're bringing in a big class in '19.

We're getting there. The talent level is improving all across the roster.
Click to expand...
Look, I’m optimistic on the kids we’re targeting, but we have three three star kids and one four star kid committed at the moment at DL. Every fanbase overrates the kids they sign. We’re no different. Maybe they’ll outperform their rankings, but we certainly don’t know that yet. It’s not some monster class on paper, that’s for sure. Likewise Miller. It’s encouraging to hear he’s looking good after a few days of practice, but he was a late addition under the radar three star kid who we found when other options went off the rails. None of it meams these kids won’t all be ballers. But recruiting isn’t about hope. It’s evals, and selling. We have limited info yet on how Simpson (or Diaz) evals on DL. And the data on selling suggests our defensive staff lags our offensive staff.

No one is hysterical, imo. I certainly am not. Just pointing out some balance. The objective isn’t just improving talent, moreover. it’s getting good enough to win the ACC and compete nationally. Since we hve to beat Clemson to do that, we should remember that they do remain a relevant benchmark here.
 
TotesMagotes said:
Appreciate the insight. Wish you would contribute more to the recruiting board.

Any chance you would be willing to make a post about how our other commits/targets have tested?
Click to expand...

We all kind of have "assignments" or "roles" within the team and I'd hate to step on the toes of those who work so hard to bring us recruiting news/info.

However, one thing I'm working on right now is to tabulate and compile the athletic testing data for the top programs over the past four years in recruiting to see how Miami stacks up, and how they are trending (it takes some time because Under Armour does not publish their results in an easily digestible format like Nike does). My guess is they are going to be trending in the right direction athletically.

I'm also calculating how the All-Americans tested coming out as a control group to see if the athletic testing really correlates and, if so, if it correlates more at some positions than others. I did something similar for a draft website a couple of years ago and it correlated for all positions except for WR and QB. I took a Harvard Analytics study and put my own spin on it and planned to do another twist for college here.

Hopefully it will be interesting to people, but if not, at least I'll have the database built for my own personal use.
 
Advertisement
Lance Roffers said:
We all kind of have "assignments" or "roles" within the team and I'd hate to step on the toes of those who work so hard to bring us recruiting news/info.

However, one thing I'm working on right now is to tabulate and compile the athletic testing data for the top programs over the past four years in recruiting to see how Miami stacks up, and how they are trending (it takes some time because Under Armour does not publish their results in an easily digestible format like Nike does). My guess is they are going to be trending in the right direction athletically.

I'm also calculating how the All-Americans tested coming out as a control group to see if the athletic testing really correlates and, if so, if it correlates more at some positions than others. I did something similar for a draft website a couple of years ago and it correlated for all positions except for WR and QB. I took a Harvard Analytics study and put my own spin on it and planned to do another twist for college here.

Hopefully it will be interesting to people, but if not, at least I'll have the database built for my own personal use.
Click to expand...
this is next level stuff.. glad you are on this hoard like our very own Tom Hollinger/ Nate Silver. Maybe you can share with the coaches some of your findings?
 
BoxingRobes said:
Seems you're doing the same thing. But, we aren't elite.

The counting stats are nice...sure...but more important numbers show a defense, namely pointing to the DLine that was average against the run at best, but also struggled getting off the field in part because they couldn't stop the run. Terrible third down and red zone defense, in part, again, because they couldn't stop the run.

So, will Miami's defense (or defensive line) be elite in 2018? No. Were they in 2017? No. 2016? No. They were very good overall, but there are some very key numbers that tell a much better story of what our defense really was all about, and it wasn't TFL and Sacks and INTs...all were great, no denying it, but when push comes to shove, they can't get off the field and struggle to stop the run when it matters. Thats not an elite defense by any measure.

As for this year coming up...

The team lost three starters and one major contributor...its likely Miami is going to give a ton of snaps to at least five first or second year players and will rely on two upperclassmen that have never come close to the number of snaps they will see this year. No, they won't be an elite DL. I think we're still going to struggle against the run, struggle on third down and in the red zone. Hopefully we'll see a little improvement, but I think scheme and the loss of four major pieces on the DL limit what kind of upside the unit has in 2018. I think having a DL that will have such a huge number of players playing significantly more snaps than they've ever played at this level will result in a defense that declines later in the year, as well.

Will Miami have a ton TFL, probably sacks...but thats in part due to scheme...Diaz defense have always had those...INTs? Those are a luck based stat that aren't often consistent year-to-year...we won't have 17 INTs again. I would split the difference between 2017 and 2016 for a safe number (12-13ish).

Book mark this post...we'll revisit after Thanksgiving.
Click to expand...

You are correct in that our DL is not yet elite. If Norton and McIntosh had stayed for this year, then we would be very close to it.

But I think you are severely underestimating our staff as talent evaluators and talent developers. Are we where we need to be in terms of signing 4-5* DL guys annually? Nope. But unlike the past, we have very, very few JAGS on the squad and probably only Martin from a DL standpoint. Every player on our DL is very talented, is progressing well, and actually should feast when it's their turn to hit the field. When was the last time you could say that about a Miami DL?

Our DL has much more depth this year as well which will help a ton - especially the DTs. And the DEs should feast on every opponent's OTs until Clemson.

Our D will improve this year. The only question is by how much. Not sure how you can objectively say otherwise.
 
The Sphinx said:
You are correct in that our DL is not yet elite. If Norton and McIntosh had stayed for this year, then we would be very close to it.

But I think you are severely underestimating our staff as talent evaluators and talent developers. Are we where we need to be in terms of signing 4-5* DL guys annually? Nope. But unlike the past, we have very, very few JAGS on the squad and probably only Martin from a DL standpoint. Every player on our DL is very talented, is progressing well, and actually should feast when it's their turn to hit the field. When was the last time you could say that about a Miami DL?

Our DL has much more depth this year as well which will help a ton - especially the DTs. And the DEs should feast on every opponent's OTs until Clemson.

Our D will improve this year. The only question is by how much. Not sure how you can objectively say otherwise.
Click to expand...

Because a lot of what made our defense as good as it was over a stretch of the season isn't something that is often sustainable from season to season. Phil Steele uses the metric of turnovers across NFL and CFB where turnovers are a result of what he calls "good fortune"...teams that have a turnover margin of 11+ in one season, the next, are often "weaker" the next. On the flipside, teams that have -11 turnovers in one season, the next, are often "stronger" the next. Are there outliers? Absolutely. But relying on turnovers isn't a sustainable, predictable metric, and it drove a lot of the success we had last year.

That isn't to say our team will be weaker, but the defense surely will be. Miami can offset a lot of those trends because they have some positive trends like a veteran QB where cutting down on his turnovers and raising his completion percentage will go a long way to this...but also a weaker schedule with a lot of favorable games for the team.

http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/Blog_PDFs_Images/2018/DBJuly24/TO_Equal_Turnaround.pdf
cfbstats.com - 2017 National Team Leaders

Also, I am still very concerned with how the team ultimately plays the run and its inability to get off the field on third down. Couple it with poor red zone defense and there are just some issues - possibly schematically - that I think keep us from being elite. Hopefully there is some improvement (some of the metrics by proxy of being so poor last year, will be have to go up), but I think the "youth" (lack of track record with high snap counts), the turnover numbers I explained above, and some of these troubling metrics against the run/redzone, I am not sure how anyone can objectively say we are elite or where they absolutely say they see improvement from the defense.
 
Advertisement
BoxingRobes said:
Because a lot of what made our defense as good as it was over a stretch of the season isn't something that is often sustainable from season to season. Phil Steele uses the metric of turnovers across NFL and CFB where turnovers are a result of what he calls "good fortune"...teams that have a turnover margin of 11+ in one season, the next, are often "weaker" the next. On the flipside, teams that have -11 turnovers in one season, the next, are often "stronger" the next. Are there outliers? Absolutely. But relying on turnovers isn't a sustainable, predictable metric, and it drove a lot of the success we had last year.

That isn't to say our team will be weaker, but the defense surely will be. Miami can offset a lot of those trends because they have some positive trends like a veteran QB where cutting down on his turnovers and raising his completion percentage will go a long way to this...but also a weaker schedule with a lot of favorable games for the team.

http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/Blog_PDFs_Images/2018/DBJuly24/TO_Equal_Turnaround.pdf
cfbstats.com - 2017 National Team Leaders

Also, I am still very concerned with how the team ultimately plays the run and its inability to get off the field on third down. Couple it with poor red zone defense and there are just some issues - possibly schematically - that I think keep us from being elite. Hopefully there is some improvement (some of the metrics by proxy of being so poor last year, will be have to go up), but I think the "youth" (lack of track record with high snap counts), the turnover numbers I explained above, and some of these troubling metrics against the run/redzone, I am not sure how anyone can objectively say we are elite or where they absolutely say they see improvement from the defense.
Click to expand...

Good points, however I think you may be going too stat nerd on me. Not saying the metrics you’ve posted aren’t viable. There is some truth to those numbers and I agree that relying on turnovers is not sustainable.

But toss the numbers out for a second and look at the players. We lost Chad and Trent from the DE group but we make up for that with an improved JJ, Garvin, hopefully healthy DJax and Patch plus a very promising Rousseau. That’s more than we had last year and I think you will see the difference.

Same with the DTs, we only had a 4 man rotation last year relying too heavily on Mc and Nort. This year we will have 6 guys who can all contribute. And if J Ford and Tito bring it, you will have 0 drop off from Willis and Bethel.

The D especially upfront should be improved from last year and I stand by that prediction. We’ll revisit by season’s end.
 
The Sphinx said:
Good points, however I think you may be going too stat nerd on me. Not saying the metrics you’ve posted aren’t viable. There is some truth to those numbers and I agree that relying on turnovers is not sustainable.

But toss the numbers out for a second and look at the players. We lost Chad and Trent from the DE group but we make up for that with an improved JJ, Garvin, hopefully healthy DJax and Patch plus a very promising Rousseau. That’s more than we had last year and I think you will see the difference.

Same with the DTs, we only had a 4 man rotation last year relying too heavily on Mc and Nort. This year we will have 6 guys who can all contribute. And if J Ford and Tito bring it, you will have 0 drop off from Willis and Bethel.

The D especially upfront should be improved from last year and I stand by that prediction. We’ll revisit by season’s end.
Click to expand...

The team has more depth, but its young depth.

The team needs to replace 35.5 tackles for loss and 16.5 sacks last year. Thats well...a lot. And you're going from 5* and 4* seniors on the outside and one of the most productive interior DL in all of college football (RJM) to first and second year players and hoping for injury bounce backs to do it. Willis and Tito have combined for a CAREER 13 TFL on the interior. RJ McIntosh had 12.5 by himself last year.

Also, it hasn't been mentioned enough, but the team is going from maybe the best DL coach in America (not to say anything for his recruiting, but Kuligowski's history of producing DL is second to none nationally) to a bit of an unknown. Will these high upside ends reach their ceiling under Simpson? I guess we'll see.

Listen, I love our LB and DB groups...those two units are legitimately upper echelon nationally. But, DL is being overrated on this site to an unjustifiable level. I'm not saying they are actually ****, but the unit isn't elite nor will it be an elite unit. It needs some big leaps from numerous players just to maintain last year's defensive line production and it wasn't elite last year.
 
BoxingRobes said:
The team has more depth, but its young depth.

The team needs to replace 35.5 tackles for loss and 16.5 sacks last year. Thats well...a lot. And you're going from 5* and 4* seniors on the outside and one of the most productive interior DL in all of college football (RJM) to first and second year players and hoping for injury bounce backs to do it. Willis and Tito have combined for a CAREER 13 TFL on the interior. RJ McIntosh had 12.5 by himself last year.

Also, it hasn't been mentioned enough, but the team is going from maybe the best DL coach in America (not to say anything for his recruiting, but Kuligowski's history of producing DL is second to none nationally) to a bit of an unknown. Will these high upside ends reach their ceiling under Simpson? I guess we'll see.

Listen, I love our LB and DB groups...those two units are legitimately upper echelon nationally. But, DL is being overrated on this site to an unjustifiable level. I'm not saying they are actually ****, but the unit isn't elite nor will it be an elite unit. It needs some big leaps from numerous players just to maintain last year's defensive line production and it wasn't elite last year.
Click to expand...
We had 43 sacks last year and only lost 116.5
Had 110 plus tfls last year and only lost 35.5 tfls

That can definitely be replaced since we are returning most of our production
 
brock said:
We had 43 sacks last year and only lost 116.5
Had 110 plus tfls last year and only lost 35.5 tfls

That can definitely be replaced since we are returning most of our production
Click to expand...

Team lost 3 of its Top 5, 5 of its Top 10.

From a TEAM aspect, the defense is losing 52 tackles for loss...18.5 sacks. Replacing 47% of your TFL and 42% of your sacks is...well...a lot.
 
Advertisement
BoxingRobes said:
Team lost 3 of its Top 5, 5 of its Top 10.

From a TEAM aspect, the defense is losing 52 tackles for loss...18.5 sacks. Replacing 47% of your TFL and 42% of your sacks is...well...a lot.
Click to expand...
McIntosh 12.5 tfls 2.5 sacks
Norton 6.5 tfls 2.0 sacks
Thomas 12.5 tfls 5.5 sacks
Harris 10.5 tfls 8.5 sacks
That’s 42 tfls and 18.5 sacks

That can be replaced with the addition of Gerald Willis, whoever we put as the 2nd dt weather its pat bethel or whoever behind him in our scheme. Jon garvin getting more playing time, and Djack coming back who led the team in both sacks and tfls before his injury in the first 6 games
 
Our defensive ends are elite. Wouldn't trade them for any unit in the country, even Clemson. Our DTs aren't at that level but I like the three young guys (Nesta, Miller and Ford).

As for Daxon, Simpson saw him in spring and didn't like him. Not athletic enough for what he is looking for. I saw Daxon at the Opening and was also unimpressed with his athleticism, although I liked his Central film and upside as a run-stuffer.
 
brock said:
McIntosh 12.5 tfls 2.5 sacks
Norton 6.5 tfls 2.0 sacks
Thomas 12.5 tfls 5.5 sacks
Harris 10.5 tfls 8.5 sacks
That’s 42 tfls and 18.5 sacks

That can be replaced with the addition of Gerald Willis, whoever we put as the 2nd dt weather its pat bethel or whoever behind him in our scheme. Jon garvin getting more playing time, and Djack coming back who led the team in both sacks and tfls before his injury in the first 6 games
Click to expand...

You said TEAM TFL (with your 110 number - it was actually 111) and sacks...if its team TFL and sacks, you need to include everyone, and that includes Darrion Owens, Malek Young, and Anthony Moten as well who won't be on the team this year.

Defensive Line accounted for 31.5 sacks last year and needs to replace 58% of that production. The DL accounted for 66 TFL, of which 65% of the production will need to be replaced.

Yeah man...not sure if you know this...but that ain't gonna be easy.
 
Advertisement
BoxingRobes said:
You said TEAM TFL (with your 110 number - it was actually 111) and sacks...if its team TFL and sacks, you need to include everyone, and that includes Darrion Owens, Malek Young, and Anthony Moten as well who won't be on the team this year.

Defensive Line accounted for 31.5 sacks last year and needs to replace 58% of that production. The DL accounted for 66 TFL, of which 65% of the production will need to be replaced.

Yeah man...not sure if you know this...but that ain't gonna be easy.
Click to expand...

Like Diaz said yesterday every year you lose players, the production is going to be replaced regardless
 
BoxingRobes said:
You said TEAM TFL (with your 110 number - it was actually 111) and sacks...if its team TFL and sacks, you need to include everyone, and that includes Darrion Owens, Malek Young, and Anthony Moten as well who won't be on the team this year.

Defensive Line accounted for 31.5 sacks last year and needs to replace 58% of that production. The DL accounted for 66 TFL, of which 65% of the production will need to be replaced.

Yeah man...not sure if you know this...but that ain't gonna be easy.
Click to expand...

I'm in agreement that our dl Is currently being overrated..and misjudging the loss of talent we had.
I do also believe were one class away from having one of the better units. Chad and Trent were really really good outside. RJM had times where he was unblockable without being held. Im praying Willis can give us some of that this year.
 
gogeta4 said:
I'm in agreement that our dl Is currently being overrated..and misjudging the loss of talent we had.
I do also believe were one class away from having one of the better units. Chad and Trent were really really good outside. RJM had times where he was unblockable without being held. Im praying Willis can give us some of that this year.
Click to expand...
People are being pessimistic for no reason, what experienced depth did we have at any position on the 2016 dline? Yet they still balled right?
 
DMoney said:
Our defensive ends are elite. Wouldn't trade them for any unit in the country, even Clemson. Our DTs aren't at that level but I like the three young guys (Nesta, Miller and Ford).

As for Daxon, Simpson saw him in spring and didn't like him. Not athletic enough for what he is looking for. I saw Daxon at the Opening and was also unimpressed with his athleticism, although I liked his Central film and upside as a run-stuffer.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If our DEs stay healthy, we're elite there. At DT, we're not elite, but it's a more than solid group. Overall, DL looks good, but needs more depth. Which by all appearances we are getting.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top