Where's the beef?

[bcubs9497]

Are you referring to prior to this year? Ruff is 300+. Elmore is a shade under 300. Also have Curtis Harper at 300. No longer on the 2 deep due to McKinley's return. I think because Black is a bit undersized for the position people state we don't have the size we need at DT. While we're a bit smaller than the ideal DT, I don't think it's as big a problem as we make it out to be.

I was.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

This is a rehash of something Bnoro said a few months ago. Big AND athletically elite coming out of high school is incredibly rare. Those guys are going high P5.

For Syracuse, there's two routes. Undersized and elite athlete or big and decent athlete. This staff seems to prefer undersized and growing guys. This route makes sense, but it, of course, has its drawbacks.

But there's not really another option available.

We have sort of always been that way. We need to grow Safeties into LBs. LBs into DEs. DEs into DTs. TEs into Ts or DEs. RBs into Safeties. WRs into CBs. QBs into Safeties, RBs, WRs, TEs.

When you are forced to play guys early that kind of ruins things.

I do think our WRs and RBs look small compared to our peers. I think our lack of physicality hurts there.

 

[upperdeck]

if we ever stay the course long enough we can be fine again. We were able to not play most of our Fr the last 2 yrs so that helps in the long run. we just cant have a whole team of Cordy DBs. really if we can just get the oline/dline issues resolved you can work around the other size issues but you cant be small at every position.

Imagine a Big/Physical WR so jackson gets teams number #2 db and then Harris gets the #3 when we want to go big at WR.

 

[4the Dubbz]

After watching the game changers the entire SU athletics program has decided to go vegan.

 

[corpjet]

Seeing us match up against Notre Dame last year was eye opening, their WRs were huge!

Speaking of WRs can we not see our biggest one Cam Jordan get some snaps please for the love of God!

 

[cuse309]

Somebody posted a chart for all ACC teams as to size, height, weight and where SU falls at each position group as it related to the conference.

SU was far from at the bottom of that chart, maybe for a position or 2.

I don't recall who, maybe they should pin that thread to stop people from posting "Where's The Beef Threads" ?

I went back to look for it. Can't find it. I remember us being average, or better than avg. size at most positions. I think our O-line was just about avg. for ACC.

 

[orangenauburn]

Football Recruiting Guidelines: What Coaches Look For

See how you stack up and learn what it takes to compete in college football based on your position and desired division level.

www.ncsasports.org

 

[orangenauburn]

 

[orangenauburn]

 

[OrangePA]

In reviewing this year and in particular our starters one area that jumps out is how light this team is. With the exception of our Defensive backfield and Guards we lack size.
DT, LB, WR, TE, Tackle positions all lack size. Strength is important but when your opponent has 30 or more pounds on you its a disadvantage. As they say. Size matters.

It has been a problem for years - when he arrived on the Hill, Martinez was dumbfounded by our lack of size.