caneaddict
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2012
- Messages
- 5,431
forums
So how many Duke players got drafted
- Thread starter NVA CANE
- Start date
Advertisement
caneaddict
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2012
- Messages
- 5,431
no Juniors, all seniors we have feliciano, Walford, Dorsett, Chickillo, Gunter, and Perryman ranked
Joecane
But daddy....
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 19,644
So Duke has:
-Boone, #10 QB
-Tomlinson #2 Guard
- Brown #8 ILB
- Deaver #8 TE
-Crowder #15 WR
And Miami has:
Gunter #12 CB
Chick #9 DE
Perryman #1 MLB
Feliciano #20 G
Walford #11 TE
Dorsett #18 WR
Miami also has Ryan Williams ranked at QB, but he's hurt. I'm going to go waaaaay out on a limb and say last year's sophomore class from Miami (this year's junior class) is also more talented than Duke's. So, last season, with a more talented senior class, junior class and sophomore class we still got hammered by Duke.
Oh, and Malcolm Bunche is the projected #9 OG
Advertisement
caneaddict
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2012
- Messages
- 5,431
I mean yeah I hope we continue to distance the gap, but its close enough to stop referring to a loss to Duke without Duke as if it was 2006
caneaddict
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2012
- Messages
- 5,431
the 2006 reference was more towards Duke who at the time was still fielding intramural teams, and a loss to them would be embarrasing... The NFL has spoken and..
-Morris aint as good as we thought
-Hurns aint as good as we thought
-Seantrel aint as good as we thought
Point being Miami wasnt that much more talented than Duke on that day and was missing their best player, and their 2nd best player/true freshmen had to leave the game, which left our destiny in the hands of guess who..Morris, Hurns, Seantrel, Dallas Crawford etc... Get over it man, the Duke beat us thing doesnt have as much meat as you want it to, it just doesnt.
Add to that the amount of R-Jr, Sr, and R-Sr's they had.
Advertisement
The two dumbasses that liked your comment for starters... CaneAlmighty, dk72
It sure the **** does. Had this been goldenballs 1st year you would have a point. This was his 3rd. Why is it any other decent coach can turn a team around in 2, and goldenballs went backwards in 3...
caneaddict
Senior
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2012
- Messages
- 5,431
The only guys that did it in 2, which are Meyer and Saban(maybe tressel), inherited teams with tons of talent
Advertisement
Advertisement
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 4,273
Shannon's 4 years as HC. Only twice did our defense give up 500 yards in a game. With the "Shannon type players". That's a 50 game span with some pretty bad ball players. Cook, Davis, Cooper, Robinson etc.
Dudes acting like this team had zero talent. When coming into last season. People were posting threads talking about where this guy is getting drafted and how great our Ol would be. Morris was a 1st round pick talk. Yet when this team is displayed. The coaching and schemes make guys look worse than what they really are.
These cats had other pass rushers. Looking just as bad as Green was. Trying to cover slot receivers and backs. Granted there was no guys going to be drafted high, but they could have been put in better position on the field.
FSU had a top defense, and not too many guys were drafted high from that unit. Put the guys in a position to do their jobs. Not to where they are sitting out there thinking playing defense is the equivalent to building a rocket ship.
Dudes acting like this team had zero talent. When coming into last season. People were posting threads talking about where this guy is getting drafted and how great our Ol would be. Morris was a 1st round pick talk. Yet when this team is displayed. The coaching and schemes make guys look worse than what they really are.
These cats had other pass rushers. Looking just as bad as Green was. Trying to cover slot receivers and backs. Granted there was no guys going to be drafted high, but they could have been put in better position on the field.
FSU had a top defense, and not too many guys were drafted high from that unit. Put the guys in a position to do their jobs. Not to where they are sitting out there thinking playing defense is the equivalent to building a rocket ship.
Consigliere
All-American
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 21,927
I will put something I posted in a separate thread in this thread. Curious to know your thoughts.
Honestly, people look at a draft differently when it comes to how much talent the school had.
Maybe if we agreed on some ground rules, rather than making a big hullabaloo, it would be easier to discuss. We will likely all agree that the coaching/training is better in the pros. So it is expected that the better coaching/training in the pros may have something to do with that improvement or a players’ ceiling being risen. In addition, perhaps performing enhancing drugs have something to do with this increase/decrease in ability. With that being said, I think there are a few rules we could likely agree on.
Rule 1: Inefficiency: the player who gets drafted or picked up as a free agent and that player goes on to play much better in the pros. Under the inefficiency rule, it is possible to believe that the player who performs better in the pros was not used properly in college or his talent was not maximized in college. This does not mean a player has to ball out of his mind in the pros to become an example of this rule. It could be a player that was hardly used in college but is able to stay in the pros for some time (i.e. Spencer Adkins). When players end up making a bigger impact in the pros, I tend to blame the college staff for not maximizing his abilities during his college tenure. Keep in mind, the competition/talent pool is better in the pros so if a pro team wants to keep you…the kid probably could have probably done more in college.
This inefficiency rule does NOT apply to players who were injured most of college, suspended a lot and/or thrown out of school.
Rule 2: Maximized Talent:the player who gets drafted and that player goes on to do much less in the pros. Under the maximized talent rule, it is possible to believe that the player was used to his best ability in college (i.e. the coaches maximized his talent in college). When a player goes on to fizzle out in the pros, I give the college staff a lot of credit for maximizing the player’s ability during his tenure. So basically when the competition/talent pool improves in the pros, the player doesn’t stand out anymore.
This maximized talent rule does not apply to players that get injured toward the end of their career in college or injured in the pros.
Rule 3: Try-Outs, UDFA and Actual Roster Spots: I am not a big believer in a try-out or UDFA meaning anything other than a chance to try-out. A lot of these kids are just given a chance; possibly because of a connection or possibly the NFL team wants to see them close up. Some of these kids never do much in college but earn a try-out for some reason. If the try-out/UDFA goes on to stay with a team for a number of years, than this will mean they probably fit into Rule 1. If nothing happens to the player, than he shouldn't fit into either rule.
Honestly, people look at a draft differently when it comes to how much talent the school had.
Maybe if we agreed on some ground rules, rather than making a big hullabaloo, it would be easier to discuss. We will likely all agree that the coaching/training is better in the pros. So it is expected that the better coaching/training in the pros may have something to do with that improvement or a players’ ceiling being risen. In addition, perhaps performing enhancing drugs have something to do with this increase/decrease in ability. With that being said, I think there are a few rules we could likely agree on.
Rule 1: Inefficiency: the player who gets drafted or picked up as a free agent and that player goes on to play much better in the pros. Under the inefficiency rule, it is possible to believe that the player who performs better in the pros was not used properly in college or his talent was not maximized in college. This does not mean a player has to ball out of his mind in the pros to become an example of this rule. It could be a player that was hardly used in college but is able to stay in the pros for some time (i.e. Spencer Adkins). When players end up making a bigger impact in the pros, I tend to blame the college staff for not maximizing his abilities during his college tenure. Keep in mind, the competition/talent pool is better in the pros so if a pro team wants to keep you…the kid probably could have probably done more in college.
This inefficiency rule does NOT apply to players who were injured most of college, suspended a lot and/or thrown out of school.
Rule 2: Maximized Talent:the player who gets drafted and that player goes on to do much less in the pros. Under the maximized talent rule, it is possible to believe that the player was used to his best ability in college (i.e. the coaches maximized his talent in college). When a player goes on to fizzle out in the pros, I give the college staff a lot of credit for maximizing the player’s ability during his tenure. So basically when the competition/talent pool improves in the pros, the player doesn’t stand out anymore.
This maximized talent rule does not apply to players that get injured toward the end of their career in college or injured in the pros.
Rule 3: Try-Outs, UDFA and Actual Roster Spots: I am not a big believer in a try-out or UDFA meaning anything other than a chance to try-out. A lot of these kids are just given a chance; possibly because of a connection or possibly the NFL team wants to see them close up. Some of these kids never do much in college but earn a try-out for some reason. If the try-out/UDFA goes on to stay with a team for a number of years, than this will mean they probably fit into Rule 1. If nothing happens to the player, than he shouldn't fit into either rule.
Add Stoops and Chizik to that list. Of the past 14 champions, 6 (almost half) were won by coaches in their 2nd year or less. More than half won it by their 3rd season. With that said, I'm ready for the 2014 season to start.
Advertisement