Final ESPN300

[dg151]

Jerzey, I agree with you 100% that Collins is a better back than Taylor. But to dg151's defense, he did give two reasons why he prefers Taylor: "Kelvin's burst and acceleration at his size are fantastic". Just saying

I understand, but that's crazy. There isn't a back in the class with more burst or acceleration and that's regardless of size.

Size and power. Collins is going to make his money by making people miss in small places and by having insane vision. That's not to say Collins doesn't run with power (he definitely ran angry as **** his senior year), but he won't be as efficient at it as Taylor will. And while Collins acceleration is top notch, I'll still take Taylor over him by a bit. Taylor's lower half is insane, once he develops he's going to be 5-10 225, while Collins will likely be at his best in the 215 range. Collins has the superior feet and vision but Taylor is going to be an insane yac player. Both are 5* talents though.

If we're talking about Greg Bryant, oh god yes Collins does everything a thousand times better than him.

 

[jerzeycane]

Jerzey, I agree with you 100% that Collins is a better back than Taylor. But to dg151's defense, he did give two reasons why he prefers Taylor: "Kelvin's burst and acceleration at his size are fantastic". Just saying

I understand, but that's crazy. There isn't a back in the class with more burst or acceleration and that's regardless of size.

Size and power. Collins is going to make his money by making people miss in small places and by having insane vision. That's not to say Collins doesn't run with power (he definitely ran angry as **** his senior year), but he won't be as efficient at it as Taylor will. And while Collins acceleration is top notch, I'll still take Taylor over him by a bit. Taylor's lower half is insane, once he develops he's going to be 5-10 225, while Collins will likely be at his best in the 215 range. Collins has the superior feet and vision but Taylor is going to be an insane yac player. Both are 5* talents though.

If we're talking about Greg Bryant, oh god yes Collins does everything a thousand times better than him.

Just No. On everything.

[video=youtube;ZV3CdA7HC2s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV3CdA7HC2s[/video]

[video=youtube;dYYgctPBK5M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYYgctPBK5M[/video]

Y'all let me know who better.

 

[rayray]

there's nothing wrong with alex collins being the second best running back in the state. idk why everyone on this board has to act as if every 4-star miami commit is the best at his position.

 

[bbcane]

collins running stlye reminds me of gore.

 

[jerzeycane]

there's nothing wrong with alex collins being the second best running back in the state. idk why everyone on this board has to act as if every 4-star miami commit is the best at his position.

Huh? negged

And btw, AC is a 5 star and ranked ahead of Taylor on Scout and 247

 

[UMprodigy]

Bosa blows

Meh

 

[grover]

Collins will fit our pro-set play-action package very well. I personally think he's the best back, but that's less relevant than the fact that he is part of a class that is insanely well-balanced. Even during the dark days of Coker/Shannon, we kept putting kids in the NFL. The problem was we had no symmetry, as Golden likes to point out. If we close with the guys we think/hope, this class will have elite talent at literally every position. 11 kids in Top 150 plus best Juco TE. That's following a class with guys like Duke, Bush, Flowers, Kirby, McCord, and Howard, along with Lewis, Lockhart and Waters at WR.

2013 looks more talented to me than 2012 even with fewer kids. Both are better than Golden's mulligan year of 2011. All three are step-function improvements over Shannon's classes of 2009 and 2010. That's the right vector to be on.

 

[Church95]

Honestly I think Kelvin compares more to Bryant's running style.(they're in each others league talent wise.) While Buddha's just a Phucking Freak!

 

[Golden Era]

grace and kirkland are too low... and that kermit ranking doesn't even make sense. #6 #6 how convenient :stormwarning:

 

[Plzwork4]

Jerzey, I agree with you 100% that Collins is a better back than Taylor. But to dg151's defense, he did give two reasons why he prefers Taylor: "Kelvin's burst and acceleration at his size are fantastic". Just saying

I understand, but that's crazy. There isn't a back in the class with more burst or acceleration and that's regardless of size.

Size and power. Collins is going to make his money by making people miss in small places and by having insane vision. That's not to say Collins doesn't run with power (he definitely ran angry as **** his senior year), but he won't be as efficient at it as Taylor will. And while Collins acceleration is top notch, I'll still take Taylor over him by a bit. Taylor's lower half is insane, once he develops he's going to be 5-10 225, while Collins will likely be at his best in the 215 range. Collins has the superior feet and vision but Taylor is going to be an insane yac player. Both are 5* talents though.

If we're talking about Greg Bryant, oh god yes Collins does everything a thousand times better than him.

Just No. On everything.

[video=youtube;ZV3CdA7HC2s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV3CdA7HC2s[/video]

[video=youtube;dYYgctPBK5M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYYgctPBK5M[/video]

Y'all let me know who better.

If you honestly look at these and take out the names...just first time you turned on the film of these guys. Collins>Taylor and its not close. Not remotely close.

 

[Dwinstitles]

Hargraves looked as good in the UA game as probably any DB ever. And didn't just look it, made multiple plays. I don't know about his ceiling, but as a prospect I think he's about as good as it's bee since PP.

Greg Reid had a monster game. Anyway its hard to tell because theres no chemistry between wr and qbs in that game. Also all DL prospects look like studs in those games.