Jamal Custis and Adly Enoicy

[Trueblue25]

Will we see these guys playing a bigger role this year? Both around 6'5 230. Big fellas.

 

[Finwad32]

They're behind Ish and Cornelius... Fighting with Avant and Estime for the next man up roles.

Predominantly you're going to see Ish and Cornelius, whoever emerges after Summer Camp will be next up... I'd have to say it was trending towards them in the Spring.

 

[Upstate]

Played well in the Spring game, IIRC, so just throw it up for 'em in times of doubt. Could be huge in the RZ.

 

[OrangePA]

Gosh I hope so.

Big, strong, fast WRs are effective.

I'm with Chip Kelly - bigger and stronger guys normally beat smaller guys.

 

[Chip]

Gosh I hope so.

Big, strong, fast WRs are effective.

I'm with Chip Kelly - bigger and stronger guys normally beat smaller guys.

How fast are they? I haven't seen Enoicy play at all, and Custis was so limited last year it was tough to tell. Are they tight end speed or WR speed?

That's the other thing Chip Kelly likes. Faster guys normally beat slower guys.

 

[timkay99]

How fast are they? I haven't seen Enoicy play at all, and Custis was so limited last year it was tough to tell. Are they tight end speed or WR speed?

That's the other thing Chip Kelly likes. Faster guys normally beat slower guys.

So, to sum up, Chip Kelly believes that bigger, stronger, faster guys beat smaller, slower guys?

"It's a bold strategy Cotton, let's see if it pays off for 'em."

 

[RF2044]

Gosh I hope so.

Big, strong, fast WRs are effective.

I'm with Chip Kelly - bigger and stronger guys normally beat smaller guys.

What a revolutionary concept! Because for the last few years, it seems as though we've been recruiting slow, small guys.

 

[RF2044]

So, to sum up, Chip Kelly believes that bigger, stronger, faster guys beat smaller, slower guys?

"It's a bold strategy Cotton, let's see if it pays off for 'em."

No kidding--lol.

 

[Millhouse]

So, to sum up, Chip Kelly believes that bigger, stronger, faster guys beat smaller, slower guys?

"It's a bold strategy Cotton, let's see if it pays off for 'em."

if you have a guy that can be slow in the backfield, on the line, or split out wide, you're all set

 

[anomander]

They're behind Ish and Cornelius... Fighting with Avant and Estime for the next man up roles. Predominantly you're going to see Ish and Cornelius, whoever emerges after Summer Camp will be next up... I'd have to say it was trending towards them in the Spring.

This is why Estime's value is at CB

 

[Ottoble]

I think both will get a look at hybrid TE in our new system opposite Dunk, and our other full TEs especially if we are running double (or Triple?) tight passing sets out of running formations. As somone mentioned they might not be top speed guys at WR but ill bet they could have a shot at being fastest TEs in the ACC. 2-3 tight sets with 3 guys that can catch would wreak havoc on opponents D, just read the d and run or pass to the personell weakness. Oh and make sure they actually learn how to block

 

[O-pulse]

They also provide us with potentially formidable down-field blocking for our run game!

 

[baggerbob]

I know everyone likes Cornelius, and I do too, as a Senior he will play. The thing about Jamal, and Adly is for us to be a better team we need them to step up, and be playmakers. You can't teach size, and they have the size to get to overthrown balls, and block downfield, against both linebackers, and defensive backs. Its like having a lineman in a wide receivers body, and add Trey to this discussion, the different type of TE, WR, Lester is looking for in his offense.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

if you have a guy that can be slow in the backfield, on the line, or split out wide, you're all set

RACISM ALERT

 

[OrangePA]

What a revolutionary concept! Because for the last few years, it seems as though we've been recruiting slow, small guys.

The most noteworthy proponent of the "bigger, stronger and faster" theory is Bill Parcells.

He has also commented that "when you make exceptions, you end up with a team full of exceptions"

And, that is what a lot of coaches do - they make exceptions for one reason or another.

So, while it seems like a pretty obvious strategy, in practice it is oftentimes ignored.

It seems that Chip Kelly is sticking to his approach - at least with the CBs that the Eagles have been drafting.

 

[timkay99]

So, while it seems like a pretty obvious strategy, in practice it is oftentimes ignored.

This couldn't be any more false. The guys who are bigger, faster and stronger coming out of HS are all given the 5* treatment. Every coach is trying to land those guys.

Those are the easy guys to identify. Its not like coaches/recruiters struggle to identify who is the biggest, strongest and fastest...

The hard part is identifying the guys with a marginal tool or two and seeing if he can still help you win games b/c you can develop that tool.

 

[OrangePA]

This couldn't be any more false. The guys who are bigger, faster and stronger coming out of HS are all given the 5* treatment. Every coach is trying to land those guys.

Those are the easy guys to identify. Its not like coaches/recruiters struggle to identify who is the biggest, strongest and fastest...

The hard part is identifying the guys with a marginal tool or two and seeing if he can still help you win games b/c you can develop that tool.

Sometimes you have wonder about this board.

You really missed the point.

Nobody is talking about the ability to identify who is big and who is fast.

That's not the point at all.

My discussion was about what criteria that certain coaches stress.

Parcells and Kelly place a premium on physical measurables - they have certain parameters and they do not make exceptions to those parameters - that's the point.

Agree with them or not neither likely would have recruited Cam Lynch because of his height.

 

[timkay99]

Sometimes you have wonder about this board.

You really missed the point.

Nobody is talking about the ability to identify who is big and who is fast.

That's not the point at all.

My discussion was about what criteria that certain coaches stress.

Parcells and Kelly place a premium on physical measurables - they have certain parameters and they do not make exceptions to those parameters - that's the point.

Agree with them or not neither likely would have recruited Cam Lynch because of his height.

But they don't is what I am telling you. Every single coach places a premium on physical measurables. If Kelly didn't make exceptions to those parameters, his signing class would be 5 guys.

Oregon's recruiting was littered with 5'10 and shorter RB's, WR's and CB's.

Considering Lynch did get Georgia interest at the end, think that is a stretch to say they likely wouldn't have recruited him b/c he is too small. Especially since Kelly recruited a 5'10" ILB by the name of Isaac Ava in 2010.

 

[OrangePA]

But they don't is what I am telling you. Every single coach places a premium on physical measurables. If Kelly didn't make exceptions to those parameters, his signing class would be 5 guys.

Oregon's recruiting was littered with 5'10 and shorter RB's, WR's and CB's.

Considering Lynch did get Georgia interest at the end, think that is a stretch to say they likely wouldn't have recruited him b/c he is too small. Especially since Kelly recruited a 5'10" ILB by the name of Isaac Ava in 2010.

I'm just reporting what Parcells wrote in his recent bio and what Chip Kelly has said recently.

Parcells recognizes that there are exceptions, but he also maintains that when you make exceptions you end up with a team of exceptions - not a good thing in his opinion.

At least in this year's draft Kelly seems to have stuck to his theory - he drafted fairly tall/big CBs.

 

[baggerbob]

I'm just reporting what Parcells wrote in his recent bio and what Chip Kelly has said recently.

Parcells recognizes that there are exceptions, but he also maintains that when you make exceptions you end up with a team of exceptions - not a good thing in his opinion.

At least in this year's draft Kelly seems to have stuck to his theory - he drafted fairly tall/big CBs.

But Parcells 2nd round RB from Syracuse, who didn't have the correct size, was better then the Michigan 1st rounder with the correct size. As Floyd has said you can't teach " Heart".

 

[RF2044]

Sometimes you have wonder about this board.

You really missed the point.

Nobody is talking about the ability to identify who is big and who is fast.

That's not the point at all.

My discussion was about what criteria that certain coaches stress.

Parcells and Kelly place a premium on physical measurables - they have certain parameters and they do not make exceptions to those parameters - that's the point.

Agree with them or not neither likely would have recruited Cam Lynch because of his height.

Using truisms as a substitute for assessment and the eye test rarely results in long term sustainable success. In general, bigger might be better--but it doesn't always work out that way. Who would you rather have--Marvin Harrison who was minuscule physically, or Lavar Lobdell / Johnny Morant, who were physical specimens? Guess which two players were rated higher.

In sports, too much emphasis is often placed upon physical measurables. I'm convinced that's why so many draft selections ultimately bust--GMs and teams place too much emphasis on the wrong evaluative criteria. Its fine to have a rule of thumb ["bigger is better"], but blind adherence to a rule of thumb is dumb.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Using truisms as a substitute for logic and assessment rarely results in long term sustainable success. In general, bigger might be better--but it doesn't always work out that way. Who would you rather have--Marvin Harrison who was minuscule physically, or Lavar Lobdell / Johnny Morant, who were physical specimens? Guess which two players were rated higher.

In sports, too much emphasis is often placed upon physical measurables. I'm convinced that's why so many draft selections ultimately bust--GMs and teams place too much emphasis on the wrong evaluative criteria. Its fine to have a rule of thumb ["bigger is better"], but blind adherence to a rule of thumb is dumb.

Might of been on this board somewhere, but I remember seeing something comparing John Kruk to some all-world athlete that looked the part but flamed out in the minors, while Kruk went on to be an all-star, weird body shape and all.

Granted, different sports, but some guys can do things other people can't when they compete that are more than just "I can be bigger."

 

[OrangePA]

Using truisms as a substitute for assessment and the eye test rarely results in long term sustainable success. In general, bigger might be better--but it doesn't always work out that way. Who would you rather have--Marvin Harrison who was minuscule physically, or Lavar Lobdell / Johnny Morant, who were physical specimens? Guess which two players were rated higher.

In sports, too much emphasis is often placed upon physical measurables. I'm convinced that's why so many draft selections ultimately bust--GMs and teams place too much emphasis on the wrong evaluative criteria. Its fine to have a rule of thumb ["bigger is better"], but blind adherence to a rule of thumb is dumb.

Again, I'm just reporting what Bill Parcells wrote and what Chip Kelly recently observed.

And yes, sometimes bigger, stronger and faster is not the final/determining factor.

But, most of the time, I suspect, according to Bill and Chip, it is.

 

[RF2044]

Again, I'm just reporting what Bill Parcells wrote and what Chip Kelly recently observed.

And yes, sometimes bigger, stronger and faster is not the final/determining factor.

But, most of the time, I suspect, according to Bill and Chip, it is.

All things being equal, that philosophy is probably right. But the problem is, when it comes to player-personnel things are rarely equal.