Expecting Big Things From Haskins and Irvin

[canegang3]

Adrian Colbert told me that Haskins is an absolute beast too. He said hes got NFL written all over him.

 

[BeachCanes]

I would love to see Haskins at DT. He's huge and he's an athlete. Coach Kool coached Sheldon Richardson, who played some TE before finding his home at DT.

Haskins is a good prospect at TE, too. Very powerful at the point of attack and he can catch. His only weakness would be a lack of quickness and pure speed.

Irvin is more of a receiver. Quick and QB-friendly with a good feel for the passing game. Both guys can help us next year if they stay out of trouble.

Didn't mean to downvote

LMAO, great gif.

 

[CaneSince4Ever]

[MENTION=16080]Santa[/MENTION]

Didn't Warren Sapp start out as a TE, or am I remembering wrong?

He did.

IIRC, Orgeron basically said He had to beg Erickson to put em' on D.

 

[grover]

Lu, strongly agree with letting kids play their natural position based upon where their body takes them. I know people will disagree with me on E Njoku, but that's why I think he ends up more a TE than a WR. I think he's just going to get too big and muscular for him to be a classic WR. If Haskins grows into DT size, and embraces a $$ move, then good for him and us.

I do disagree with your belief that you don't play a kid out of his $$ position when the team needs it. I think both coaches and players need to find what is best for everyone, can't be self-interest on either side. If our choices at wide receiver are our punter or Sam Shields, you play Sam at WR. Same thing with Deejay. He flips positions based on where we need him, after which coaches need to find a way to ensure he makes his NFL money. That's JMHO, but football is about team first.

Again, not saying coaches don't bear responsibility to make the player successful too. But there needs to be a balance.

 

[Mico Jones]

WTF are you talking about? You must have not watched much football back then. Keith Jackson was essentially a big WR and Marino would flex him pretty often as he did Jim Jensen. Eric Green had his moments flexed.

LMAO. Eric Green was a dancing bear and near unstoppable BECAUSE of his size. The tightend was used plenty in the passing game back them and good receiving te's were flexed some times. You know like Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, etc.

The TE position has gone to more receiving TE ONLY types because so many teams run spread and dropped the premium on blocking. But Richt likes to keep his TE in line as much as flexed.

Your thinking is backwards. Put him at TE and now you have a RARE mismatch and more variation. Essentially an extra OL in line that can beat a backer or post up in middle if the field Antonio Gates style. Then flex out when needed.

He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot.

I'll avoid addressing your emotional "WTF" and "LMAO" and keep this on the substance.

You're going to tell me that TEs "back then" flex'd out as much as they do now? For real? TEs played inline a ridiculous amount more than they do now, where they're mostly flex'd out. You just named me Keith Jackson, who still played inline a ton, and Jim Jenson, who doubled as an H-Back, as your counterexamples? You're BSing with the wrong guy. Winslow senior played inline as well. The ability to play inline was still critical despite minority examples of guys getting moved around, which is the overwhelming standard now.

Let's stop for a second and take note that @Mico Jones doesn't acknowledge the massive changes in formations and how TE usage has changed over the past 20 years. Oh wait, you'll now counter the formation point by saying the Warren Moon's Oilers (a small sample) ran the run & shoot with 4WRs?

He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot.

Yeah, we're definitely not going to agree on this or probably anything, as you're exhibiting what I consider narrow thinking. You don't move a successful TE, if that's what Haskins becomes, because of depth issues at another position. Horrendous suggestion. As I already stated, DT depth probably won't even be an issue if we pull Logan. You move him to DT or OT or whatever *if he outgrows his position and makes a better, more motivated prospect elsewhere.*

Here's a challenge for you: right now in the NFL, go ahead and list me examples of TEs who are making significant money playing at 285 or more.

[MENTION=3]LuCane[/MENTION]

You have Zero clue what you are talking about.

See Below Kellen Winslow flexed by Air Coryell in the 80's. Notice Joe Gibbs explaining lining up Kellen Winslow in the spread. Gibbs is only the man who essentially made the H-Back a household name. If you remember his Redskins teams rarely had the TE in line. Dan Marino lined up Jensen wide. JUST like the shotgun, the spread and the no huddle are NOTHING NEW , the fleed TE was used back then. The only thing that changed was the frequency of use.

[video=youtube;2CfZItuA5mY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CfZItuA5mY[/video]

I was watching football when you were still a cumshot in your Daddy's nads. TEs nowadays are not being used in any special new way except for the occasional Bubble screen or jailbreak screen. Its the very same route tree.

The ONLY thing that has changed is the frequency of the TEs lining up flexed. But even that is overstated as there are PLENTY coaches LIKE RICHT(Stanford, Michigan, FSU, Alabama,etc.) that still use a TE in line and double tight formations a TON. PART OF WHAT DROVE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SPREAD WAS SMALLER, LESS TALENTED TEAMS TRYING TO EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD BY USING SPEED. PART OF THE REASON THAT TE ARE FLEXED MORE IS BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN SO HARD TO FIND LARGE ATHLETES THAT CAN BOTH BLOCK A DE AND GET OPEN AS A RECEIVER. So if you have one in Haskins you take advantage of his mismatch and leave him there at TE.

LMAO. No one said switch a talented TE to DT because of depth nimrod. The statement was if he outgrew the position(as you say), which to me doesn't mean getting to 285, it means getting so big and bulky he's not fluid enough to play TE. In that case, and if there is not real Dt talent, you try him at DT.

LOL. You don't even recognize how ridiculous a statement you are already making. Like moving TE to DT is much more common than large in line TE's? The Warren Sapps of the world are also once in a lifetime type situations.

Also Haskins is 250. You are assuming the guy makes a 35 pound jump. If the coaches are carefully monitoring his diet that will NEVER happen.

Spare me your BS. You can try and act like you are some football aficionado in front of the many clueless mouthbreathers that frequent this board but I've **** more football than you've watched in your life.

 

[avicenna75]

Apparently inference, reason/deduction, common sense are not being utilized in this thread by all the posters. Ill do my best Key and Peele Obama translation . . .

Lu- Haskins is an athletic freak.
Lu- Haskins is a big boy now.
Lu- Haskins has really impressed folks with his play and abilities.
Lu- If, and it is a big if, if Haskins continues to grow, or outgrow the tight end spot, I wonder if DT is an option?
Lu- Tight ends knocking on 300lbs aren't very common in the NFL.
Lu- If Haskins reaches 285-290 lbs would be be better to beef up a few hairs more and play OT or DT? Better for Haskins, Canes, NFL ambitions?

I never saw Lu say move Haskin, but wtf do I know?

I give up. Even the post after your breakdown by avicenna75 misses the "if he outgrows..." portion. And, it's not only DT. It could be OT, SSDE, who knows. Or, he could just stick to about 265-270 and try to make his $$$ at TE.

PLP.

Well you did say you think he would make a fantastic DT if he were to get to 285+. I respect your opinion, but I just can't think of any precedents to support it. Defensive line just takes a different mentality, plus playing low at 6'5 is challenging. WR to CB, RB to S, QB to TE, and TE to OT are much more common.

*If he ever got that big*, sure, I'd be curious to see him there, if not OT. I'm aware he played QB, but as I've noted, the most interesting thing about his attributes, besides great feet, was how physical and strong he looked against much older guys.

Didn't Warren Sapp start out as a TE, or am I remembering wrong? Seems like that one worked out ok

Ah yes! Good call.

 

[Classic]

Man, I love hearing that Hogskins and Irving are legitimate beasts. I've always been super high on Hogskins especially. Makes me super nervous that these two monsters are such knuckleheads though. Fingers and toes crossed they don't get caught doing anything else stupid before spring practices. We need these two to step up and take a few of Njoku's catches...though I expect Herndon to have a big year.

 

[Samson Doyo]

WTF are you talking about? You must have not watched much football back then. Keith Jackson was essentially a big WR and Marino would flex him pretty often as he did Jim Jensen. Eric Green had his moments flexed.

LMAO. Eric Green was a dancing bear and near unstoppable BECAUSE of his size. The tightend was used plenty in the passing game back them and good receiving te's were flexed some times. You know like Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, etc.

The TE position has gone to more receiving TE ONLY types because so many teams run spread and dropped the premium on blocking. But Richt likes to keep his TE in line as much as flexed.

Your thinking is backwards. Put him at TE and now you have a RARE mismatch and more variation. Essentially an extra OL in line that can beat a backer or post up in middle if the field Antonio Gates style. Then flex out when needed.

He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot.

I'll avoid addressing your emotional "WTF" and "LMAO" and keep this on the substance.

You're going to tell me that TEs "back then" flex'd out as much as they do now? For real? TEs played inline a ridiculous amount more than they do now, where they're mostly flex'd out. You just named me Keith Jackson, who still played inline a ton, and Jim Jenson, who doubled as an H-Back, as your counterexamples? You're BSing with the wrong guy. Winslow senior played inline as well. The ability to play inline was still critical despite minority examples of guys getting moved around, which is the overwhelming standard now.

Let's stop for a second and take note that @Mico Jones doesn't acknowledge the massive changes in formations and how TE usage has changed over the past 20 years. Oh wait, you'll now counter the formation point by saying the Warren Moon's Oilers (a small sample) ran the run & shoot with 4WRs?

He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot.

Yeah, we're definitely not going to agree on this or probably anything, as you're exhibiting what I consider narrow thinking. You don't move a successful TE, if that's what Haskins becomes, because of depth issues at another position. Horrendous suggestion. As I already stated, DT depth probably won't even be an issue if we pull Logan. You move him to DT or OT or whatever *if he outgrows his position and makes a better, more motivated prospect elsewhere.*

Here's a challenge for you: right now in the NFL, go ahead and list me examples of TEs who are making significant money playing at 285 or more.

[MENTION=3]LuCane[/MENTION]

You have Zero clue what you are talking about.

See Below Kellen Winslow flexed by Air Coryell in the 80's. Notice Joe Gibbs explaining lining up Kellen Winslow in the spread. Gibbs is only the man who essentially made the H-Back a household name. If you remember his Redskins teams rarely had the TE in line. Dan Marino lined up Jensen wide. JUST like the shotgun, the spread and the no huddle are NOTHING NEW , the fleed TE was used back then. The only thing that changed was the frequency of use.

[video=youtube;2CfZItuA5mY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CfZItuA5mY[/video]

I was watching football when you were still a cumshot in your Daddy's nads. TEs nowadays are not being used in any special new way except for the occasional Bubble screen or jailbreak screen. Its the very same route tree.

The ONLY thing that has changed is the frequency of the TEs lining up flexed. But even that is overstated as there are PLENTY coaches LIKE RICHT(Stanford, Michigan, FSU, Alabama,etc.) that still use a TE in line and double tight formations a TON. PART OF WHAT DROVE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SPREAD WAS SMALLER, LESS TALENTED TEAMS TRYING TO EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD BY USING SPEED. PART OF THE REASON THAT TE ARE FLEXED MORE IS BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN SO HARD TO FIND LARGE ATHLETES THAT CAN BOTH BLOCK A DE AND GET OPEN AS A RECEIVER. So if you have one in Haskins you take advantage of his mismatch and leave him there at TE.

LMAO. No one said switch a talented TE to DT because of depth nimrod. The statement was if he outgrew the position(as you say), which to me doesn't mean getting to 285, it means getting so big and bulky he's not fluid enough to play TE. In that case, and if there is not real Dt talent, you try him at DT.

LOL. You don't even recognize how ridiculous a statement you are already making. Like moving TE to DT is much more common than large in line TE's? The Warren Sapps of the world are also once in a lifetime type situations.

Also Haskins is 250. You are assuming the guy makes a 35 pound jump. If the coaches are carefully monitoring his diet that will NEVER happen.

Spare me your BS. You can try and act like you are some football aficionado in front of the many clueless mouthbreathers that frequent this board but I've **** more football than you've watched in your life.

Holy ****, get a hold of yourself.

Go Canes!

 

[LuCane]

WTF are you talking about? You must have not watched much football back then. Keith Jackson was essentially a big WR and Marino would flex him pretty often as he did Jim Jensen. Eric Green had his moments flexed.

LMAO. Eric Green was a dancing bear and near unstoppable BECAUSE of his size. The tightend was used plenty in the passing game back them and good receiving te's were flexed some times. You know like Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, etc.

The TE position has gone to more receiving TE ONLY types because so many teams run spread and dropped the premium on blocking. But Richt likes to keep his TE in line as much as flexed.

Your thinking is backwards. Put him at TE and now you have a RARE mismatch and more variation. Essentially an extra OL in line that can beat a backer or post up in middle if the field Antonio Gates style. Then flex out when needed.

He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot.

I'll avoid addressing your emotional "WTF" and "LMAO" and keep this on the substance.

You're going to tell me that TEs "back then" flex'd out as much as they do now? For real? TEs played inline a ridiculous amount more than they do now, where they're mostly flex'd out. You just named me Keith Jackson, who still played inline a ton, and Jim Jenson, who doubled as an H-Back, as your counterexamples? You're BSing with the wrong guy. Winslow senior played inline as well. The ability to play inline was still critical despite minority examples of guys getting moved around, which is the overwhelming standard now.

Let's stop for a second and take note that @Mico Jones doesn't acknowledge the massive changes in formations and how TE usage has changed over the past 20 years. Oh wait, you'll now counter the formation point by saying the Warren Moon's Oilers (a small sample) ran the run & shoot with 4WRs?

He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot.

Yeah, we're definitely not going to agree on this or probably anything, as you're exhibiting what I consider narrow thinking. You don't move a successful TE, if that's what Haskins becomes, because of depth issues at another position. Horrendous suggestion. As I already stated, DT depth probably won't even be an issue if we pull Logan. You move him to DT or OT or whatever *if he outgrows his position and makes a better, more motivated prospect elsewhere.*

Here's a challenge for you: right now in the NFL, go ahead and list me examples of TEs who are making significant money playing at 285 or more.

@LuCane

You have Zero clue what you are talking about.

See Below Kellen Winslow flexed by Air Coryell in the 80's. Notice Joe Gibbs explaining lining up Kellen Winslow in the spread. Gibbs is only the man who essentially made the H-Back a household name. If you remember his Redskins teams rarely had the TE in line. Dan Marino lined up Jensen wide. JUST like the shotgun, the spread and the no huddle are NOTHING NEW , the fleed TE was used back then. The only thing that changed was the frequency of use.

[video=youtube;2CfZItuA5mY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CfZItuA5mY[/video]

I was watching football when you were still a cumshot in your Daddy's nads. TEs nowadays are not being used in any special new way except for the occasional Bubble screen or jailbreak screen. Its the very same route tree.

The ONLY thing that has changed is the frequency of the TEs lining up flexed. But even that is overstated as there are PLENTY coaches LIKE RICHT(Stanford, Michigan, FSU, Alabama,etc.) that still use a TE in line and double tight formations a TON. PART OF WHAT DROVE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SPREAD WAS SMALLER, LESS TALENTED TEAMS TRYING TO EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD BY USING SPEED. PART OF THE REASON THAT TE ARE FLEXED MORE IS BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN SO HARD TO FIND LARGE ATHLETES THAT CAN BOTH BLOCK A DE AND GET OPEN AS A RECEIVER. So if you have one in Haskins you take advantage of his mismatch and leave him there at TE.

LMAO. No one said switch a talented TE to DT because of depth nimrod. The statement was if he outgrew the position(as you say), which to me doesn't mean getting to 285, it means getting so big and bulky he's not fluid enough to play TE. In that case, and if there is not real Dt talent, you try him at DT.

LOL. You don't even recognize how ridiculous a statement you are already making. Like moving TE to DT is much more common than large in line TE's? The Warren Sapps of the world are also once in a lifetime type situations.

Also Haskins is 250. You are assuming the guy makes a 35 pound jump. If the coaches are carefully monitoring his diet that will NEVER happen.

Spare me your BS. You can try and act like you are some football aficionado in front of the many clueless mouthbreathers that frequent this board but I've **** more football than you've watched in your life.

I'll go point for point with your nonsense accusations.

You say: You have Zero clue what you are talking about.

In no way did I say flex TEs weren't at all used and that Jensen and Winslow Sr. (also) weren't moved around. In fact, I even said Jenson was moved around. I stated a basic point: TEs were mostly used inline and that has changed a ton in the last 25 years. You citing singular cases doesn't disprove that. In fact, you apparently agree.

You say: "The ONLY thing that has changed is the frequency of the TEs lining up flexed."
Well, thank you for agreeing with my point. See, guys like you seem to like to make up what other posters have stated. If you can find where I stated anything otherwise, I'll come back on here and apologize. Otherwise, it's just your typical self trying to act like a tough guy and creating strawman arguments.

You go on to say: LIKE RICHT(Stanford, Michigan, FSU, Alabama,etc.) that still use a TE in line and double tight formations a TON.
No ****. That's the point. The frequency (as you put it) of flex'd out TEs vs inline TEs has gone 180 degrees. Which is to say there is a bigger use for flex guys' quickness now than there was back then. You are basically making my argument for me, but too emotional to realize it, apparently.

You emotionally say: LMAO. No one said switch a talented TE to DT because of depth nimrod. The statement was if he outgrew the position(as you say), which to me doesn't mean getting to 285, it means getting so big and bulky he's not fluid enough to play TE. In that case, and if there is not real Dt talent, you try him at DT.

Again, avoiding your personal insults and emotions, YOU'RE THE ONE who actually said: "He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot."

Once again, you're too much in your own nonsense accusation to realize that's the entire point. I'm making the argument that, if he outgrows the position and it benefits him, consider moving positions. The entire point of this was that (a) he's athletically talented, (b) he's already a big dude, (c) what happens if. You say to move him "IF" we have depth issues and he has outgrown the position. That's where I disagree wholeheartedly. I never encourage moves for depth purposes unless they're very short term.

You say: LOL. You don't even recognize how ridiculous a statement you are already making. Like moving TE to DT is much more common than large in line TE's? The Warren Sapps of the world are also once in a lifetime type situations. Also Haskins is 250. You are assuming the guy makes a 35 pound jump. If the coaches are carefully monitoring his diet that will NEVER happen.

Again with the emotional "LOL." You understand we can discuss something without all of that, correct? I never said it was common. You're challenged to show where I state or infer that. Never even mentioned Warren Sapp. I made an entire post about Haskins flashing as a physical TE and then, not knowing what he weighs right now (i've been told anywhere between 250-260), saying "IF HE CONTINUES TO NATURALLY OUTGROW TO..."

I'm not predicting or assuming that is what happens. I am saying "in the case something like that does." You've been a sound poster in other posts, so I can only assume you're too caught up (not sure with what, but your later comment indicates some personal stuff with me, which is weird) now to accept I wasn't going beyond that simple point. I also said coaches shouldn't keep him, or anyone, artificially slim. Should just let the kids eat, train and see what happens.

You say: Spare me your BS. You can try and act like you are some football aficionado in front of the many clueless mouthbreathers that frequent this board but I've **** more football than you've watched in your life.

Nah, I'd say you spare me the fake tough guy stuff. I've neither insulted you or acted like a teenager in responding to you. I don't try to act like any type of adicionado or ever say as much. I pretty consistently just talk football and others can disagree or agree. I learn, they learn, it's shared. If you wish, go through some of my old posts and challenge my football commentary. By all means.

I've seen you join in on some of the substantive stuff in the past, so apparently you're not opposed to my discussions there. Perhaps you should take a step back from the namecalling and stick to posts. Thanks for the lesson on how you're somehow superior, though.

*Edit: By the way, the neg isn't for any disagreement. It's for you, someone who likes and follows football, to feel the need to go off the football discussion with someone who isn't doing that with you. Pointless.

 

[The Svengali]

LuCane, both you and Mico are saying a lot of the same things

And yes, TE's were used similary to the way they're being used today for a long @ss time; Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, Brent Jones, Ozzie Newsome, Todd Christensen, are just some the great TE receiving threats I can think of, just off the top of my head

 

[LuCane]

LuCane, both you and Mico are saying a lot of the same things

And yes, TE's were used similary to the way they're being used today for a long @ss time; Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, Brent Jones, Ozzie Newsome, Todd Christensen, are just some the great TE receiving threats I can think of, just off the top of my head

That's kinda my point. If you look through the entire flow of posts and what I've said, this dude is essentially agreeing with me. I'm well aware TEs have been used a particular way for a long time.

My point to that was it wasn't until more recently (maybe the last 10 years) where the flex usage is on the other side in comparison to 25 years ago. Basically, you now see the types you mentioned as Flex first and inline second. Back then, even a guy like Brent Jones, who was smallish, and Keith Jackson during his time for the phins, played some inline. But, most TEs played inline and needed to. ****, a simple youtube search for Keith Jackson, who everyone can agree would be primarily a flex guy in today's sets, shows him inline with the Phins. Here's what a 1 minute search pulled up, where Keith Jackson has a key fumble after a catch over the middle (from inline):



So, this madness and this guy's responses are basically arguing over my comment about how the frequency has changed? Except, he agrees things have moved a lot more to flex. Which, to your point, is basically us saying the same ****.

Then, the logic goes: ok, if most TEs are moving in this direction and IF Haskins happens to naturally outgrow what most TEs do, why not consider a position change down the line?

Really wasn't that big of a deal.

 

[Mico Jones]

[MENTION=3]LuCane[/MENTION]

You are obfuscating.

YOU SAID THE FOLLOWING:
“Let's stop for a second and take note that [MENTION=1003]Mico Jones[/MENTION] doesn't acknowledge the massive changes in formations and how TE usage has changed over the past 20 years”

Plus this gem

“You just named me Keith Jackson, who still played inline a ton, and Jim Jenson, who doubled as an H-Back, as your counterexamples? You're BSing with the wrong guy. Winslow senior played inline as well.”

I showed you how that it hasn’t changed at all. There are no massive formation or usage changes just the frequency of use.

I also showed you how Winslow spent the majority of time flexed. Its not just him. Todd Christianson was the quintessential H Back. Jim Jensen another. Marino flexed, Green, Jackson, etc. Remember Shannon Sharpe.

None of this is new.

You also said

"You go on to say: LIKE RICHT(Stanford, Michigan, FSU, Alabama,etc.) that still use a TE in line and double tight formations a TON.

No ****. That's the point. The frequency (as you put it) of flex'd out TEs vs inline TEs has gone 180 degrees. Which is to say there is a bigger use for flex guys' quickness now than there was back then. You are basically making my argument for me, but too emotional to realize it, apparently.

NOOOO. You are saying he gets to 285 you start looking to move him DT because the college game requires/prefers smaller athletic TEs. I’m saying the reverse. At 285 he's bigger than most Tes. He’s a rare asset teams stopped looking for because they were so difficult to find. Therefore, you take advantage of the mismatch he creates at TE.

 

[Mico Jones]

LuCane, both you and Mico are saying a lot of the same things

And yes, TE's were used similary to the way they're being used today for a long @ss time; Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, Brent Jones, Ozzie Newsome, Todd Christensen, are just some the great TE receiving threats I can think of, just off the top of my head

There's another one that lined up wide often in Bill Walsh's sets. Even the backside TE wheel route and backside screen were Bill Walsh West Concepts incorporated into the spread formation.

 

[The Svengali]

LuCane, both you and Mico are saying a lot of the same things

And yes, TE's were used similary to the way they're being used today for a long @ss time; Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, Brent Jones, Ozzie Newsome, Todd Christensen, are just some the great TE receiving threats I can think of, just off the top of my head

There's another one that lined up wide often in Bill Walsh's sets. Even the backside TE wheel route and backside screen were Bill Walsh West Concepts incorporated into the spread formation.

Don't forget about Shannon Sharpe!

 

[LuCane]

@LuCane

You are obfuscating.

YOU SAID THE FOLLOWING:
“Let's stop for a second and take note that @Mico Jones doesn't acknowledge the massive changes in formations and how TE usage has changed over the past 20 years”

Plus this gem

“You just named me Keith Jackson, who still played inline a ton, and Jim Jenson, who doubled as an H-Back, as your counterexamples? You're BSing with the wrong guy. Winslow senior played inline as well.”

I showed you how that it hasn’t changed at all. There are no massive formation or usage changes just the frequency of use.

I also showed you how Winslow spent the majority of time flexed. Its not just him. Todd Christianson was the quintessential H Back. Jim Jensen another. Marino flexed, Green, Jackson, etc. Remember Shannon Sharpe.

None of this is new.

You also said

"You go on to say: LIKE RICHT(Stanford, Michigan, FSU, Alabama,etc.) that still use a TE in line and double tight formations a TON.

No ****. That's the point. The frequency (as you put it) of flex'd out TEs vs inline TEs has gone 180 degrees. Which is to say there is a bigger use for flex guys' quickness now than there was back then. You are basically making my argument for me, but too emotional to realize it, apparently.

NOOOO. You are saying he gets to 285 you start looking to move him DT because the college game requires/prefers smaller athletic TEs. I’m saying the reverse. At 285 he's bigger than most Tes. He’s a rare asset teams stopped looking for because they were so difficult to find. Therefore, you take advantage of the mismatch he creates at TE.

Ok, this I can work with because you're just sticking to the statements. I'll address (in red) your statements (in bold):

You are obfuscating.

I'm not. Certinaly not intentionally. But, will gladly clarify whatever seems like it to you.

YOU SAID THE FOLLOWING:
“Let's stop for a second and take note that @Mico Jones doesn't acknowledge the massive changes in formations and how TE usage has changed over the past 20 years”

To me, we're talking passed each other at this point. I am aware and have acknowledged that TEs were moved around, moved into the slot or out wide (minority cases) in the past. My point has consistently been this has drastically changed. You call it frequency. I call it massive changes because all over football - from HS to the NFL - you consistently (this is my key word for this discussion) see traditional TEs flex'd in the slot, out wide and overall used in positions other than inline. It happens so much more now than before that I consider that very big. Apparently, you agree it happens more.

Plus this gem
“You just named me Keith Jackson, who still played inline a ton, and Jim Jenson, who doubled as an H-Back, as your counterexamples? You're BSing with the wrong guy. Winslow senior played inline as well. I showed you how that it hasn’t changed at all. There are no massive formation or usage changes just the frequency of use.”

Are you saying Keith Jackson didn't play a bunch of inline? Or, Winslow? I don't get it. Winslow was moved around more than even Jackson. Jim Jenson played everywhere and was used in motion a ton. Shannon Sharpe played inline in the single back a ton. You know that as well as anyone. You mentioned guys who anyone will concede were used in a lot of different ways to contradict what? My point is things have changed.

Where guys capable of flexing out before were used that way and inline, they'd now primarily be used flex'd. You're saying that nothing has changed "only the frequency." What exactly are we disagreeing with here? Isn't that precisely what I'm saying? Because TEs are used A TON more a particular way now (which you agree with), that = big changes.

Some time ago during this season, I posted the differences between 11, 12, 22 personnel groupings in current football. It has changed a bunch (in terms of percentage used) where it's in the minority now. To me, and you can correct me by all means, it seems like you're arguing to argue and prove "superior football knowledge." I find that pointless, but ok.

NOOOO. You are saying he gets to 285 you start looking to move him DT because the college game requires/prefers smaller athletic TEs. I’m saying the reverse. At 285 he's bigger than most Tes. He’s a rare asset teams stopped looking for because they were so difficult to find. Therefore, you take advantage of the mismatch he creates at TE.

Ok, if this is the heart of our disagreement, this back and forth could have been a lot simpler and far more substantive. I disagree. If he gets up to 285, which is a total "what if" I'd assess his attributes at that point. If you've seen him play live, which maybe you have, he's already not the quickest guy out there. I never said it's because it requires. I said it's because it relates to potentially placing him at whatever position makes him the most $$$. You disagree with that?

Because of that, IF (i'm capitalizing not to yell but so no one misses this again) he gets up to that weight, I'd have a simple talk with him about how he intends to make his $$$. Could it be at LT? Could it be at SSDE in the pros? Could it be at DT? I have no idea. But, I consistently go across this board sharing what players have told me over the years: they want to make money. I want them to stay motivated. I will always consider moving a player to keep him motivated and put him in the best position to make $$$. To be clear, I'm not predicting it or calling for it. I'm saying if those conditions happen, and I'm a coach and even Haskins, I strongly consider all the alternatives.

Is that really something to get so bent out of shape over?

 

[LuCane]

LuCane, both you and Mico are saying a lot of the same things

And yes, TE's were used similary to the way they're being used today for a long @ss time; Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, Brent Jones, Ozzie Newsome, Todd Christensen, are just some the great TE receiving threats I can think of, just off the top of my head

There's another one that lined up wide often in Bill Walsh's sets. Even the backside TE wheel route and backside screen were Bill Walsh West Concepts incorporated into the spread formation.

I address it above, but I never said (please show me where) these TEs and them getting used in all sorts of ways by a bunch of different systems - from spreads to west coast - didn't exist. We're talking about how much of a difference it is from then till now. A guy like Witten, now, shows up in the slot a ton more than he would've then. On this topic, we're not even disagreeing. I noted the topic we're disagreeing on and it's much narrower. It's actually pretty straightforward and could have avoided all of this in 2 points:

1. You'd want Haskins to remain as a 285 pound TE as a rarity (we agree he'd be a rarity) and take advantage of him like that.
2. If he were to get up there, I'd work with him to consider a move (OT, DT, SSDE which wouldn't fit in our current defensive system).

 

[LuCane]

Lu, strongly agree with letting kids play their natural position based upon where their body takes them. I know people will disagree with me on E Njoku, but that's why I think he ends up more a TE than a WR. I think he's just going to get too big and muscular for him to be a classic WR. If Haskins grows into DT size, and embraces a $$ move, then good for him and us.

I do disagree with your belief that you don't play a kid out of his $$ position when the team needs it. I think both coaches and players need to find what is best for everyone, can't be self-interest on either side. If our choices at wide receiver are our punter or Sam Shields, you play Sam at WR. Same thing with Deejay. He flips positions based on where we need him, after which coaches need to find a way to ensure he makes his NFL money. That's JMHO, but football is about team first.

Again, not saying coaches don't bear responsibility to make the player successful too. But there needs to be a balance.

Didn't mean to skip through your post. I can only agree with that if it's an intentionally short term thing. Otherwise, you're hurting the player and the program long term. It's why I've been so adamant hoping for DJ to begin as a CB, where others who want him at WR are upset and mention depth issues, but we'll see what happens.

 

[umhurricane2511]

A lot of football nerdery going on in this thread, and I love it.



Learning a lot actually.

 

[Notsince1985]

WTF are you talking about? You must have not watched much football back then. Keith Jackson was essentially a big WR and Marino would flex him pretty often as he did Jim Jensen. Eric Green had his moments flexed.

LMAO. Eric Green was a dancing bear and near unstoppable BECAUSE of his size. The tightend was used plenty in the passing game back them and good receiving te's were flexed some times. You know like Keith Jackson, Kellen Winslow, etc.

The TE position has gone to more receiving TE ONLY types because so many teams run spread and dropped the premium on blocking. But Richt likes to keep his TE in line as much as flexed.

Your thinking is backwards. Put him at TE and now you have a RARE mismatch and more variation. Essentially an extra OL in line that can beat a backer or post up in middle if the field Antonio Gates style. Then flex out when needed.

He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot.

I'll avoid addressing your emotional "WTF" and "LMAO" and keep this on the substance.

You're going to tell me that TEs "back then" flex'd out as much as they do now? For real? TEs played inline a ridiculous amount more than they do now, where they're mostly flex'd out. You just named me Keith Jackson, who still played inline a ton, and Jim Jenson, who doubled as an H-Back, as your counterexamples? You're BSing with the wrong guy. Winslow senior played inline as well. The ability to play inline was still critical despite minority examples of guys getting moved around, which is the overwhelming standard now.

Let's stop for a second and take note that @Mico Jones doesn't acknowledge the massive changes in formations and how TE usage has changed over the past 20 years. Oh wait, you'll now counter the formation point by saying the Warren Moon's Oilers (a small sample) ran the run & shoot with 4WRs?

He should only be considered for DT because of what @teddywestside the DT depth, and only if we whiff at recruiting the DT spot.

Yeah, we're definitely not going to agree on this or probably anything, as you're exhibiting what I consider narrow thinking. You don't move a successful TE, if that's what Haskins becomes, because of depth issues at another position. Horrendous suggestion. As I already stated, DT depth probably won't even be an issue if we pull Logan. You move him to DT or OT or whatever *if he outgrows his position and makes a better, more motivated prospect elsewhere.*

Here's a challenge for you: right now in the NFL, go ahead and list me examples of TEs who are making significant money playing at 285 or more.

[MENTION=3]LuCane[/MENTION]

You have Zero clue what you are talking about.

See Below Kellen Winslow flexed by Air Coryell in the 80's. Notice Joe Gibbs explaining lining up Kellen Winslow in the spread. Gibbs is only the man who essentially made the H-Back a household name. If you remember his Redskins teams rarely had the TE in line. Dan Marino lined up Jensen wide. JUST like the shotgun, the spread and the no huddle are NOTHING NEW , the fleed TE was used back then. The only thing that changed was the frequency of use.

[video=youtube;2CfZItuA5mY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CfZItuA5mY[/video]

I was watching football when you were still a cumshot in your Daddy's nads. TEs nowadays are not being used in any special new way except for the occasional Bubble screen or jailbreak screen. Its the very same route tree.

The ONLY thing that has changed is the frequency of the TEs lining up flexed. But even that is overstated as there are PLENTY coaches LIKE RICHT(Stanford, Michigan, FSU, Alabama,etc.) that still use a TE in line and double tight formations a TON. PART OF WHAT DROVE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SPREAD WAS SMALLER, LESS TALENTED TEAMS TRYING TO EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD BY USING SPEED. PART OF THE REASON THAT TE ARE FLEXED MORE IS BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN SO HARD TO FIND LARGE ATHLETES THAT CAN BOTH BLOCK A DE AND GET OPEN AS A RECEIVER. So if you have one in Haskins you take advantage of his mismatch and leave him there at TE.

LMAO. No one said switch a talented TE to DT because of depth nimrod. The statement was if he outgrew the position(as you say), which to me doesn't mean getting to 285, it means getting so big and bulky he's not fluid enough to play TE. In that case, and if there is not real Dt talent, you try him at DT.

LOL. You don't even recognize how ridiculous a statement you are already making. Like moving TE to DT is much more common than large in line TE's? The Warren Sapps of the world are also once in a lifetime type situations.

Also Haskins is 250. You are assuming the guy makes a 35 pound jump. If the coaches are carefully monitoring his diet that will NEVER happen.

Spare me your BS. You can try and act like you are some football aficionado in front of the many clueless mouthbreathers that frequent this board but I've **** more football than you've watched in your life.

Jim Jensen wasn't a TE, he was a WR

 

[teddywestside]

[MENTION=3]LuCane[/MENTION]

You are obfuscating.

YOU SAID THE FOLLOWING:
“Let's stop for a second and take note that [MENTION=1003]Mico Jones[/MENTION] doesn't acknowledge the massive changes in formations and how TE usage has changed over the past 20 years”

Plus this gem

“You just named me Keith Jackson, who still played inline a ton, and Jim Jenson, who doubled as an H-Back, as your counterexamples? You're BSing with the wrong guy. Winslow senior played inline as well.”

I showed you how that it hasn’t changed at all. There are no massive formation or usage changes just the frequency of use.

I also showed you how Winslow spent the majority of time flexed. Its not just him. Todd Christianson was the quintessential H Back. Jim Jensen another. Marino flexed, Green, Jackson, etc. Remember Shannon Sharpe.

None of this is new.

You also said

"You go on to say: LIKE RICHT(Stanford, Michigan, FSU, Alabama,etc.) that still use a TE in line and double tight formations a TON.

No ****. That's the point. The frequency (as you put it) of flex'd out TEs vs inline TEs has gone 180 degrees. Which is to say there is a bigger use for flex guys' quickness now than there was back then. You are basically making my argument for me, but too emotional to realize it, apparently.

NOOOO. You are saying he gets to 285 you start looking to move him DT because the college game requires/prefers smaller athletic TEs. I’m saying the reverse. At 285 he's bigger than most Tes. He’s a rare asset teams stopped looking for because they were so difficult to find. Therefore, you take advantage of the mismatch he creates at TE.

Bruh, why are you getting so EMOTIONAL about this? Jeez, you sound like a dumb byt*h whining to her husband about not being able to read her mind. You're acting like suggesting that Haskins could dominate at DT is the same thing as someone suggesting they run train on your mommy. Just chill out, dude.