Class of 2016 QB Lindsey Scott Jr (LA) LSU /JUCO / Mizzou/Nicholls St/Incarnate Word

[Crusty]

Looking at the top of the QB food chain is not the right stat. What matters is if a recruit can be a winner at SU with our system. That lowers the height threshold and raises the speed threshold. Lester goes for smarts and athleticism. Height is secondary to him. He is probably correct for us.

 

[jekelish]

Well, I agree with most of this. You can overcome a height challenge as a college QB more easily than in the NFL. That makes height less critical in college, but not irrelevant. I also agree that we're not competing for a NC, and that we should take talented kids the staff likes at QB even if they're not prototypical QB size. All I'm saying is, I think height is enough of an advantage at the position that I wish we didn't have to compromise.

And our true freshman, starting QB is in the 6-3/6-4 range. He's probably going to be a four year starter. The other QB we are bringing in next year is a kid in the 6-3/6-4 range and had offers from Ohio State, Florida, etc.

We can afford to gamble on a 5-11 kid with a ton of talent, don't you think?

 

[jekelish]

And I hope this new recruit is a winner. No disrespect to him at all. That said, the last few tries we've made at diminutive QB's have not worked out. Even if they see the field, being short makes it that much harder to compete in the ACC. You can say, short but fast .. sure. But that's what they said about Long and he got dropped for losses in a hurry. And everyone was ooohing and ahhing over Womack and he's at WR. So, from what I've seen on the field, a short QB has to be special to outrun the ACC defenders we face.

Womack being moved to WR has nothing to do with his height, and everything to do with the fact that he was a tremendous athlete playing QB, rather than a QB who was a tremendous athlete.

 

[jekelish]

Ok. Well, I'll ask you then. What qualities do you see in Scott that weren't touted with Long and Womack?

He's a much, MUCH better passer than Womack. And his arm is a lot stronger than Long. And he's also 205, compared to 175 for Long and about 170 for Womack.

 

[RMH44]

That's all well and good. But it's FAR less important in college than the NFL.

Colt McCoy is 6-1, Kellen Moore is 6-0. Those are the two winningest QBs in college football history.

Houston's starting QB, Greg Ward, is completing 72.5% of his passes for 1302 yards with 8 TD/1 INT. He's 5-11. Bowling Green's starting QB is 6-0, and he's already thrown for 2500 yards this year with a 19/3 TD/INT ratio.

I like prototype QBs, but it's not exactly essential to winning in college.

Agree. Trevone Boykin, possibly the best "college" QB is listed at 6'2".

 

[jekelish]

Yes, he does look beefier than Womack from the tape I remember seeing of him. His arm .. I'll let you and others with more knowledge make that call. Both looked good on tape.

Anyway, I hope he turns out to be the next Russell Wilson. Like you said, we've already got a nice QB who's the likely starter for the time being. And we've recruited some size at the position. So let's see how this turns out.

Womack looked good on tape, yes, but a couple things to remember: he was playing against pretty weak competition (Scott is playing at the highest level in La.), and Womack's delivery was always more of a "baseball" style throw than an actual QB delivery, which makes sense since he's a shortstop playing QB. Tremendous athlete who was just so much better than the people around him that he could get away with being mechanically a little wonky.

 

[Crusty]

Womack is ar wr because he has speed and great hands - a commodity not seen much in these parts.

 

[Crusty]

And I hope this new recruit is a winner. No disrespect to him at all. That said, the last few tries we've made at diminutive QB's have not worked out. Even if they see the field, being short makes it that much harder to compete in the ACC. You can say, short but fast .. sure. But that's what they said about Long and he got dropped for losses in a hurry. And everyone was ooohing and ahhing over Womack and he's at WR. So, from what I've seen recently at SU and in conference play, a short QB has to be special to outrun the ACC defenders we face and still be able to hit downfield receivers with consistency.

Long was playing in GMS offense - might have thrived in Lester's. Now we will never know.

 

[retro44]

The 1984 Heisman trophy winner was listed at only 5'10" and I bet that was stretching it...This thread is nuts I say

DEEEEZZZZ NUTS

 

[SUskibum]

I would trade 1 inch of height for a 10 point IQ increase and a 10th of a second reduction in the 40 time for a quarterback in this system every day of the week.

This kid looks smart, fast and strong (good arm) I will take it.

 

[Rocco]

This thread is getting out of control.

IF the staff likes the kid, I like the kid. They've forgotten more about football than most of us will ever know.

This is Lester's system, so he gets to handpick HIS QB's that he thinks will run it effectively.

I am favorably intrigued by this kid; he's very athletic, smart as hell, has a good arm and has a knack for making plays. You can't teach any of those things.

 

[baggerbob]

Wilson is 6-3, but he quickly went to the end of the line in Lester's offense.

 

[Whitey23]

Wilson is 6-3, but he quickly went to the end of the line in Lester's offense.

 

[rackman18]

And our true freshman, starting QB is in the 6-3/6-4 range. He's probably going to be a four year starter. The other QB we are bringing in next year is a kid in the 6-3/6-4 range and had offers from Ohio State, Florida, etc.

We can afford to gamble on a 5-11 kid with a ton of talent, don't you think?

110% my friend, I do think.

 

[TheCusian]

Wilson is 6-3, but he quickly went to the end of the line in Lester's offense.

Can't run. Can't read defenses. Panics when pressured.

Complete opposite of what we look for.

 

[javadoc]

I would trade 1 inch of height for a 10 point IQ increase and a 10th of a second reduction in the 40 time for a quarterback in this system every day of the week.

This kid looks smart, fast and strong (good arm) I will take it.

Unless a kid is 5'2" I will take accuracy and touch over NFL height. The more I see the more I think you can't teach those things.

 

[retro44]

Can't run. Can't read defenses. Panics when pressured.

Complete opposite of what we look for.

That's harsh.....I can't mock kids who has more talent than me. Some things are better left inside of one.

 

[TheCusian]

That's harsh...I can't mock kids who has more talent than me. Some things are better left inside of one.

I overstated for effect - he's not that bad. But if people want to spend 6 pages dissecting a guys height, we should probably give equal weight to other faults with players, no?

 

[qdawgg]

I don't get all the height b.s. It's like evaluating all of our recruits based on speed. Who gives a . Traditionally our best or at least most productive players haven't been our fastest guys; last 8 - 10 years. At the end of the day all that matters is can the kid play football and improve the team.

This kid is lighting it up against good competition, that's one of the first things we should always look for. It wasn't that long ago we were recruiting and getting commits from kids who played nobody in H.S. and we were left hoping that their numbers on paper would translate to something when they got here. Success in High School, at a large school, against good competition, and doing well in the camps. all the measurable, I only care how the kid plays on the football field. This kid seems to have the abilities, I'll take it.

On a side note: Instead of looking at his heigh to measure his potential future success I think a far better indicator would be this. He's lighting it up against his competition, what is the heigh and size of the D-Lines he's competing against. Are those players being recruited and are they similar in size to other H.S. players that continue on to D-1 schools? If yes, than I think that shows he is playing (proportionally) to the level of play you want a H.S. recruit to compete against.

That would be a far better indicator than simply looking at his height only. IMO

 

[GoCuse08]

I am in the camp that thinks people are making too big a deal about his height. Also, how old is this kid? Its not inconceivable that he is still growing and could be an inch or 2 taller when he is done. I know I grew a couple inches in college. :noidea:

 

[Pearl309]

This thread is making Scott out to be like we'd be putting jacob hill at qb

 

[Cusester]

Would love to snag a Zachary t shirt.

 

[CuseLegacy]

OK everyone has had their say and stated their opinion on whether height is an important factor or not. I don't think we need to have another post on height ... time to move on.

 

[jekelish]

Updates on Scott, Sadiq, Moe, Aapri, and Hooker:

 

[Roger N]

If his actual height is 5-10 ... that would make it pretty difficult for the kid to see over all the 6-5" linemen in a P5 conference.

His Dad was a WR for the Saints and his height is listed as 6'1". Maybe he'll grow a couple inches. If they list him at 5'10" is he really 5'8"?