Sales to . . .
- Thread starter SuPurduePer
- Start date
I don't just look at star ratings, but offers from other schools. Based on the offers so far I would not call the OL prospect we are linked to now "good." He looks similar to Nalin Fox last year, who was at last check the lowest rated player of last year's class. Yes, I know this guy is rated higher, but the offers are from similar schools; his only other known offer was another MAC school. And if we felt he was that good, we would have went after him earlier, instead of swinging and missing on these other guys.
Fair enough.
Doesn't mean the kids aren't ... "good". Correct?
This past NFL draft, some of the top centers were from Temple, San Diego State, Memphis, Western Michigan.
Among the top Guards were players from Louisiana-Lafayette, Fresno State, Charlotte, Kansas, Iowa State, Washburn, Rhode Island, Ball State.
Some of the top Tackles were from Houston, Louisiana-Lafayette, St. John's (MN!), UConn, SC State.
We can "talk-down" and trash the recruits, or we can recognize that it is an incredibly difficult game to look at a 17/18 year old HS student and project him to the CFB game in 2-3 years ... ON THE OFFENSIVE LINE!
Not picking on you, but this narrative you (and others) have chosen is abundantly pointless. Especially for OL.
The examples you've chosen are from the extreme end of the bell curve. They don't disprove my assertion that most lower rated OL don't pan out. When we start developing those sorts of players--or even just produce middle of the pack B1G offensive lines--I'll give our staff the benefit of the doubt in recruiting. Until that time, I'll remain rightfully skeptical.
I bet our staff is tremendously thankful that YOU give them the benefit of the doubt. Blessed.
Brother, you really can't expect to be taken seriously. I just gave you NUMEROUS examples across all OL positions from the most recent draft.
That's not extreme on some fictitious bell curve.
Wring your hands and lose sleep if you like.
yes on Rivals. Once again 247 is considered the standard. Actually both of their ratings might change when updates occur.
Lol? How about 2 captains transferring from IU because they lost their starting gigs to younger, more talented players? Hilarious.
WTH?
A four year starter (well, 3+), Captain, considered a mid-round NFL pick prior to last year, going to a program (Iowa) known as "Offensive Line U", and you're going to play that card.
"Hilarious."
That dude wanted out of Blowmington.
Cronk was not considered a mid round pick by anyone.
If he was, I'd like to see the mock showing it.
I don't make it a habit of posting stuff I just pull out my arse.
From SI:
"Cronk was considered a mid-round draft pick prior to his senior year, according to a few draft services."
At least know the facts of the situation before presenting your own made up narrative as fact.They told him he would be playing OG in 2020 and he left. It is what it is. Pigelow's post is correct, he 'lost' his starting OT spot. Best of luck to him.
Edit: looks like the source you just provided confirms this for you.
Last edited:
Holy crap, brother!
It was a dumb@ss post I responded to.
IU wanted him back and needed him.
You clowns are going into overdrive with your spin.
Of course IU wanted him back, they have a hole at OG. That doesn't make Pigalow's post any less accurate for why those two guys left..? Them's the facts, as they say. So I am not sure what you are trying to refute and nobody is trying to spin anything.
IU did want him back - that's true.
IU wanted him back to play guard. That's also true.
Cronk wanted to play tackle even though most NFL scouts projected him at guard. True as well.
Iowa told him he could play tackle. Whether that proves true is still TBD.
IU wanted him back to play guard. That's also true.
Cronk wanted to play tackle even though most NFL scouts projected him at guard. True as well.
Iowa told him he could play tackle. Whether that proves true is still TBD.
Wha...?
It made Pigalow's post idiotic. The point was clear: Losing Cronk was no big deal.
it was a helluva big deal.
spin away.
I don't see where he said it was no big deal. My take away from the post was that it was about the best possible circumstances to be losing two captains under, and doesn't really reflect as poorly on the IU program (or at all) as Rowdy's original post seemed to imply.
What of I told you purdues offense line got better as the year went on and wasn't bad by the end of the year? Starting 3 underclassman. No reason the think they can't be above average this next year as they continue to recruit and develop the position. Unfortunately it isn't plug and play like WR. Lines take time to build.
Lol? How about 2 captains transferring from IU because they lost their starting gigs to younger, more talented players? Hilarious.
I'm not surprised.
It does reflect poorly. At a minimum, Cronk is a possible NFL player (SI article), 4 year starter, Captain, and that genius is trying to downplay it.
Pfffffffffffft.... lost their starting gig.
Reality: It's a huge loss.
You can continue to spin it any way you like, it's a horrible look.
Your own article said that we wanted him back but he didn't want to play guard...
Bedford is a projected star at left tackle, but it believed that Indiana still wanted Cronk to come back. The Hoosiers are losing longtime starting guard Simon Stepaniak and center Hunter Littlejohn and would have loved to have been able to plug Cronk in at guard and have him available to play tackle if necessary.
Not arguing at all if he's a big loss. He was gonna be one of our five best o-lineman, but he was gonna be a guard for us and he didn't want to play guard, which is fine. We are rolling with Bedford and Caleb Jones at tackle. We like where we are there.
You can do what you like. When you lose TWO captains to transfer, it's a bad look. And, it depletes depth.
It's not my article. It's SI.
You can like what you want. He's a huge loss. The fact he went to O-Line U is ample evidence.
Any clown who tries to portray it otherwise (which prompted my response) is exactly that: a clown.
WakeMan appears to be another iteration of the same guy we've gotten tired of repeatedly in the past. Time for ignore.
What about the other captain? He did lose his job to a younger, more talented player.
whatabout
whatabout
whatabout
Don't be dense. The post to which I responded was idiotic.
That should tell you how much more talented he is, The captain started over 20 Big Ten games. Half a season was enough for the coaches and the captain, to know it's time for him to move on.
I didn’t say he wasn’t talented. I insinuated he was made of glass
He wasn't gonna start at tackle for us, but he would have started at guard had he stayed.
We do have depth on o-line, but he's most definitely a loss.
No spin needed. The irrelevance of your logic is obvious.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Jacobsen to compete for spot on U18 USA National team- Latest: DwaynePurvis00