forums

Ruben Hyppolite

Captain Uberpants said:
Kind of strange when you think about it. It’s one of or both of 2 things:

1. Patke and Manny (as LB coach) are below average recruiters.

2. Shaq and Pinckney along with McCloud have been entrenched for 4 years and big time targets didn’t want to sit. We did land Brooks and Huff with them knowing they’d only be backups for a year before open competition.
Click to expand...

I used to think about Shaq and Pinckney being the incumbent starters here was a deterrent, yet they're leaving by next cycle and we're still struggling.
 
Advertisement
theuksu said:
@Liberty City El do you think we can get Hyppolite?
Click to expand...
Maybe.

They're going 4-8 this year, so I'm sure he'll be looking around later in the year. It comes down to if the staff remains interested or if other schools jump in on his recruitment.

He was just offered by Bama & Clemson, so obviously other schools are lining up for prime position to get the flip at some point this year.
 
Rellyrell said:
I used to think about Shaq and Pinckney being the incumbent starters here was a deterrent, yet they're leaving by next cycle and we're still struggling.
Click to expand...
How are we struggling? We’ll have 3 LBs committed before the first game. Then go all out for Flowe or Hyppolite.
 
86Gang said:
How are we struggling? We’ll have 3 LBs committed before the first game. Then go all out for Flowe or Hyppolite.
Click to expand...

That's an assumption, and I don't care if we have 4 LBs committed. It's about having LBs committed that are our Plan A and B and not Plan C kids. That's my point. We are scary thin at LB once The trio leaves. Jennings is a ? mark as an impact player. Steed is dealing w/ major injuries, in which who knows how he will come back. Brooks is more of a rush end. Wilder may never play football again. Our depth chart is way too f'ing wide open to have 1 LB committed.
 
Advertisement
Rellyrell said:
That's an assumption, and I don't care if we have 4 LBs committed. It's about having LBs committed that are our Plan A and B and not Plan C kids. That's my point. We are scary thin at LB once The trio leaves. Jennings is a ? mark as an impact player. Steed is dealing w/ major injuries, in which who knows how he will come back. Brooks is more of a rush end. Wilder may never play football again. Our depth chart is way too f'ing wide open to have 1 LB committed.
Click to expand...
Mathis, Flagg, Cave, and Hyppolite are kids that are wanted. We can have 3-4 before the first game. Then we play a lot of 4-2-5. McCloud barely see the field some games. The better we recruit the Striker position, the more the LB in that Will position becomes depth and special team needs players.
 
86Gang said:
Mathis, Flagg, Cave, and Hyppolite are kids that are wanted. We can have 3-4 before the first game. Then we play a lot of 4-2-5. McCloud barely see the field some games. The better we recruit the Striker position, the more the LB in that Will position becomes depth and special team needs players.
Click to expand...

Are we not on the Hyppolite page? Did you not see his interest? We have Matthis and that's it. Cory Flagg is the freggin 1256 ranked player in the country standing at 5'10 w/ NO TEXAS SCHOOL OFFERS and he's leaning OK St. We might, MIGHT have a shot w/ Austin-Cave although he's been long considered a WVU lean.

Again, our LB recruiting has a lot to desired, and that's facts. Not a hyperbole, that's facts.
 
Rellyrell said:
Are we not on the Hyppolite page? Did you not see his interest? We have Matthis and that's it. Cory Flagg is the freggin 1256 ranked player in the country standing at 5'10 w/ NO TEXAS SCHOOL OFFERS and he's leaning OK St. We might, MIGHT have a shot w/ Austin-Cave although he's been long considered a WVU lean.

Again, our LB recruiting has a lot to desired, and that's facts. Not a hyperbole, that's facts.
Click to expand...
Flagg got CB to us. Cave, Flagg, and Mathis will be good enough to add to Joyner, Brooks, and Huff. That’s assuming Wilder, Steed, and Jennings never play again which is probably 40/60. Even with those 6 LBs if the 3 don’t play again ever, we still have 3 Strikers that will be out there as well. We currently have 2 Strikers committed who are essentially WLB. So once again, Relax, we’ll be fine. DL recruiting is becoming more and more a strong suit, that’s WAY more important than a WLB.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
I like Cave a lot. Mathis is an athletic LB with potential. And Flagg plays the position with intellect and instinct. But if we end up with a LB class of Cave, Mathis, and Flagg, especially in a year where we have our top 3 LBs leaving and the back-ups are unproven or freshmen, that's a subpar recruiting effort.

There's still plenty of time so no need to panic, and the more we use the striker the less we need to rely on a conventional will. But this staff needs a better recruiting effort at LB, all things considered.
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
I like Cave a lot. Mathis is an athletic LB with potential. And Flagg plays the position with intellect and instinct. But if we end up with a LB class of Cave, Mathis, and Flagg, especially in a year where we have our top 3 LBs leaving and the back-ups are unproven or freshmen, that's a subpar recruiting effort.

There's still plenty of time so no need to panic, and the more we use the striker the less we need to rely on a conventional will. But this staff needs a better recruiting effort at LB, all things considered.
Click to expand...
So how would you feel about Mathis, Cave, and Hyppolite?
 
86Gang said:
So how would you feel about Mathis, Cave, and Hyppolite?
Click to expand...

Better, in my opinion, but I like Hyppolite a lot. That's closer to a solid LB class to me. Not an extraordinary or great LB class considering the need and ability to sell early playing time, but I'd be fine with that class.

And I'm not one of these people who thinks we need 4 LBs in this class. I think we need 3 LBs. Depending on the health of our LBs, we could use a 4th, but I don't need one because of all the guys we have playing striker now.
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
Better, in my opinion, but I like Hyppolite a lot. That's closer to a solid LB class to me. Not an extraordinary or great LB class considering the need and ability to seek early playing time, but I'd be fine with that class.

And I'm not one of these people who thinks we need 4 LBs in this class. I think we need 3 LBs. Depending on the health of our LBs, we could use a 4th, but I don't need one because of all the guys we have playing striker now.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think we only take 3. Depending on our season, I think we start with the 3 of Mathis, Cave, and Flagg.. then take the best options at the end out of all the targets that we’re going to be actively recruiting.
 
Advertisement
No_Fly_Zone said:
I like Cave a lot. Mathis is an athletic LB with potential. And Flagg plays the position with intellect and instinct. But if we end up with a LB class of Cave, Mathis, and Flagg, especially in a year where we have our top 3 LBs leaving and the back-ups are unproven or freshmen, that's a subpar recruiting effort.

There's still plenty of time so no need to panic, and the more we use the striker the less we need to rely on a conventional will. But this staff needs a better recruiting effort at LB, all things considered.
Click to expand...
Striker takes out the sam not will.
 
252cane said:
Striker takes out the sam not will.
Click to expand...
Yeah that’s right. I said will too. So we’re going to offset traditional LBs with Striker. So the LB recruiting should include the Strikers when we have these discussions. So basically our LB board as of now is Mathis, Washington, Branch.. with Flagg and Cave on watch alert.
 
86Gang said:
Yeah that’s right. I said will too. So we’re going to offset traditional LBs with Striker. So the LB recruiting should include the Strikers when we have these discussions. So basically our LB board as of now is Mathis, Washington, Branch.. with Flagg and Cave on watch alert.
Click to expand...
I mean striker isn't a LB. Its a extra DB which is why you see frierson there now. Iook at a guy like branch. I don't see him beeing 215 like finley. He may end up at 190-195.
 
Advertisement
252cane said:
I mean striker isn't a LB. Its a extra DB which is why you see frierson there now. Iook at a guy like branch. I don't see him beeing 215 like finley. He may end up at 195-200.
Click to expand...
But Gil came in about 190-195, so did Finley. They won’t play from day 1. Even if Smith plays Striker, he’s about 190 too. That’s basically a Will backer that needs maybe 10-15 pounds. That will be the recruiting model obviously. While the Striker isn’t called LB, his assignments are closer to LB than DB.
 
I think we take three and add a portal LB opportunistically. Need Hyppolite or Flowe to go along with Cave for it to replace the talent that graduates.
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
I like Cave a lot. Mathis is an athletic LB with potential. And Flagg plays the position with intellect and instinct. But if we end up with a LB class of Cave, Mathis, and Flagg, especially in a year where we have our top 3 LBs leaving and the back-ups are unproven or freshmen, that's a subpar recruiting effort.

There's still plenty of time so no need to panic, and the more we use the striker the less we need to rely on a conventional will. But this staff needs a better recruiting effort at LB, all things considered.
Click to expand...

I will say it’s no time to panic b/c the season hasn’t started, but there’s been a continued theme in this dept. We literally was LBU. I’m not sure after all the success we’ve had w the trio, especially as Freshmen, why we r still struggling to land Blue Chip LBs to play here.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top