CaneDaddy
All-American
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 11,138
I think it is the fact that you compared Rolle, Winslow, and Taylor to Chick, Grimble and Pierre. Maybe it is talent depletion, maybe it is lack of players, or maybe it is coaching but comparing that group to the other is apples to mangoes.
Or comparing the circumstances of Coker following Butch to the mess Golden walked into. You gotta be half ******.
What does Coker and Golden circumstances have to do with the development of the players they signed. I mean, are you going to be sitting here in two years talking about how Chickillo should have redshirted, and that is the reason he is a senior, and is still not making any plays?
You are what you are. Chick has been average, while Rolle, Taylor and even Kelly Jennings where great.
I laugh at you cats who get upset when someone call you out on your opinion. It's not like I haven't used facts to support my argument that most elite players are elite level players by their second year.
It doesn't matter if Coker was on staff or not, the coach still picks the player, and most, if not all, of the people was loving stealing Grimble from USC, and seeing Chick win MVP of the Under Armour Game.
So what is the end game of your argument? Are you saying Golden and staff have not developed their players into NFL caliber players in the 18 months they have had them? Or the coaches are not good at schemes, etc. You are making points but I dont know what you are trying to say.
My argument was a simple one. It's not always on the coaches. I believe that Taylor, Vilma, Rolle, and Jennings where NFL players in high school, and no lack of player development chances that.
I believe that Chick doesn't have the ability to be a dominate player, and waiting another year to see that is foolish.
I believe that Miami's refusal to matchup with other teams personnel will be one of their downfall in the future.
Okay. So you are saying our players are not very good and our coaches are not scheming to overcome that deficiency?