forums

Just watched highlights for both Chestnut & Woodley

5Ringz

5Ringz

Thunderdome
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
9,363
Give me Woodley any day.

I Like Chestnut. But we have that in Duke and OT......great pass catching wiggle guys with great explosiveness.....well maybe not OT but you know what I'm saying.

Woodley is just breaking tackles then hits that burst. Looks just as fast as Chesnut.....If not a little faster straight line. Kid is BIG and would be our 225 pound back and looks a ton faster than Mike James.

I don't know Pete. Woodley looks plenty good to me.
 
Advertisement
Woodley has regressed since his sophomore year. He doesn't have a good burst or mentality running the ball. He doesn't hit the whole hard and avoids contact.

0% chance he is even close to Mike James speed-wise
 
Peter Ariz said:
Woodley has regressed since his sophomore year. He doesn't have a good burst or mentality running the ball. He doesn't hit the whole hard and avoids contact.
Click to expand...

Then idk what the **** video I just watched bcuz dude looked like a man out there. Plenty fast to me.

Has he really regressed that bad?
 
Seen both several times and don't want either!!!! Pete, get off Chestnut's **** already! Radcliffe last year was better then both.
 
Advertisement
PUNCICANE said:
Seen both several times and don't want either!!!! Pete, get off Chestnut's **** already! Radcliffe last year was better then both.
Click to expand...

And I thought Radcliff should have been offered rather that Dillard. What's your point?
 
Advertisement
Chestnut is better than Woodley its not really close

And for the record I'd take both over Radcliff. Radcliff was hurt a ton at Columbus. Radcliff is close with Woodley, but Chestnut is clearly the the best prospect of the 3
 
Peter Ariz said:
PUNCICANE said:
Seen both several times and don't want either!!!! Pete, get off Chestnut's **** already! Radcliffe last year was better then both.
Click to expand...

And I thought Radcliff should have been offered rather that Dillard. What's your point?
Click to expand...

My point is that they're not UM caliber and Radcliffe had a horrible attitude! Talked back to coaches and threw temper tantrums when he was on the sidelines. If you went to Columbus you should have a clue!
 
Advertisement
PUNCICANE said:
Peter Ariz said:
PUNCICANE said:
Seen both several times and don't want either!!!! Pete, get off Chestnut's **** already! Radcliffe last year was better then both.
Click to expand...

And I thought Radcliff should have been offered rather that Dillard. What's your point?
Click to expand...

My point is that they're not UM caliber and Radcliffe had a horrible attitude! Talked back to coaches and threw temper tantrums when he was on the sidelines. If you went to Columbus you should have a clue!
Click to expand...

You should stop because. What your saying about Radcliffe is completely false. Never talked back and never threw a tantrum. His only worry was grades. I saw him last year and so did peter.
 
I like Woodley too.. He seems to have more potential. CHestnut is a very goood RB but I'm not sure how much better he's can be. He looks can he can be very productive but, with the right type of coaching, Woodley could end up being better in the long run. Tice also seems to have more potential. Pete, I know Chestnut is your guy but when you look at the film, he's doing alot of things he's suppose to do at the level. He runs over 170lb LB and out runs opposing teams saftey's. Woodley, at least, will has the potential to grow into a 230lb downhill back. I'd hate to count my eggs before they hatch, but were does Chestnut fit in a backfield of Duke, Michel, Cook, etc. ?
 
canadianhurricane said:
I like Woodley too.. He seems to have more potential. CHestnut is a very goood RB but I'm not sure how much better he's can be. He looks can he can be very productive but, with the right type of coaching, Woodley could end up being better in the long run. Tice also seems to have more potential. Pete, I know Chestnut is your guy but when you look at the film, he's doing alot of things he's suppose to do at the level. He runs over 170lb LB and out runs opposing teams saftey's. Woodley, at least, will has the potential to grow into a 230lb downhill back. I'd hate to count my eggs before they hatch, but were does Chestnut fit in a backfield of Duke, Michel, Cook, etc. ?
Click to expand...

I like Chestnut, but Duke/OT/Crawford are all slightly similar types of backs. No bruisers. We need someone with size and burst to pound that rock.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top