'14 MN RB Jeff Jones (Minnesota Verbal)

[PANDFAN]

My bad. Classic case of past comments messing up my thought process. Either way, maybe another MN commit could help with Cornell. Especially one that looks like a damn good prospect.

it's ok...you living the life in colorado and im in pa with nothing ;(

 

[woolybug25]

it's ok...you living the life in colorado and im in pa with nothing ;(

I live in WNY now... [/sadface]

 

[PANDFAN]

I live in WNY now... [/sadface]

shit...now we're both out of luck:brokenhea

 

[IrishLax]

Still don't think he is good for a spread. I mean, he could be a valuable piece and is probably superior to a Mahone or McDaniel on talent... but he's not fast enough to get to the outside in college. Pro-style between the tackles runner with a fullback? Absolutely think he could be great there.

I think he's only a situational red zone/short yardage type of guy for a spread team. I think the staff passed on him for a reason, and didn't contact him after Hood decommitted for a reason as well.

 

[woolybug25]

Still don't think he is good for a spread. I mean, he could be a valuable piece and is probably superior to a Mahone or McDaniel on talent... but he's not fast enough to get to the outside in college. Pro-style between the tackles runner with a fullback? Absolutely think he could be great there.

I think he's only a situational red zone/short yardage type of guy for a spread team. I think the staff passed on him for a reason, and didn't contact him after Hood decommitted for a reason as well.

We still haven't seen a true "spread" team here under BK though.

 

[IrishLax]

We still haven't seen a true "spread" team here under BK though.

What do you mean Wooly?

 

[connect the dots]

Your right, outside of a few schools formerly known as the Big Ten(and Iowa State), programs have not shown much interest. Premature verbal to Minnesota. I think there is mutual interest here, and that a visit will be scheduled. Invited to the Opening, and both Rivals and Scout list Jones in their top 100. Jeff Jones is one of the better running backs in the class of 2014.

Prescient prediction. His performance did not surprise me.

 

[woolybug25]

What do you mean Wooly?

I don't feel like we have seen that wide open, pass first, spread attack that he had at Cinci. We all thought that is what BK would bring, but we have never had it. Our offense has always looked more like the offenses he had at GVSU.

We run the ball more between the tackles than almost any spread team I can think of. Sure, we operate out of shotgun and rarely huddle. But in today's world of high octane spreads (ie Oregon, TAMU, Baylor, etc) our "brand" of spread is tame.

My personal belief is that we operate this way for the same reasons BK did it at GVSU. His strengths were offensive and defensive line. He can run the ball and stop the run. So if he cant get a quick lead, he will turn to grinding teams out.

I truly believe that there is room for a "between the tackles" RB in our offense. That being said, Jones had some of his best plays yesterday on the edges. He looked more versatile than I think he gets credit for.

 

[OCIrish]

Sorry, Wooly..... but I got to disagree with ya.......the staff passed, and the kid was begging for an offer, and didn't get one. There's a reason why, and you and I aren't privvy as to that reason. Maybe we'll find out eventually, but probably not.......

 

[woolybug25]

Sorry, Wooly..... but I got to disagree with ya.......the staff passed, and the kid was begging for an offer, and didn't get one. There's a reason why, and you and I aren't privvy as to that reason. Maybe we'll find out eventually, but probably not.......

No worries, no one said that you had to agree with me. lol

Did you watch him yesterday?

Blind trust in Notre Dame's staff is silly though. Why discuss prospects at all if we are just always going to decide if a prospect is good by whether the staff wants them or not? Weis didn't want Kuechly... how did that work for us?

 

[Luckylucci]

I'll agree that he looked good all week at UA practice and game. However, I'm good with no offer. We essentially have a 5star back in this class with Bryant red shirting. I dont see jones pushing Bryant and Folston for playing time. Unless it was going to be Hood, Scarborough or somebody in that group I say we use the schollie some place else.

 

[woolybug25]

I'll agree that he looked good all week at UA practice and game. However, I'm good with no offer. We essentially have a 5star back in this class with Bryant red shirting. I dont see jones pushing Bryant and Folston for playing time. Unless it was going to be Hood, Scarborough or somebody in that group I say we use the schollie some place else.

How much do you wanna bet that we don't have an 85 man roster come fall?

 

[Ironman8]

How much do you wanna bet that we don't have an 85 man roster come fall?

If we don't have 85, it will be because something unforeseen happened (late transfer or medically setback). Right now it looks like that will be unlikely, but definitely could happen.

Regardless, I would much rather not waste a spot towards our 85 on a RB the staff saw in person and didn't love (and is also rumored to have academic issues) when we could add a very good pure cover corner from a great program in LA, an additional explosive slot WR, or a lineman. Additionally, you have to keep in your back pocket the outside chance we get a good surprise on NSD from Quick / Juju / Braden Smith. Much more need at those positions then RB, especially for an RB that is definitely not better than Folston or Bryant.

Recruit a good RB in '15 (Robinson possibly?) and we are all set considering how young Folston and Bryant are.

 

[Luckylucci]

How much do you wanna bet that we don't have an 85 man roster come fall?

I absolutely don't think we will. However, I would much rather bring in somebody at another position. In our backfield Jones will be at best probably 4th string for the next two years. Then 3rd string after that. Barring a rash of injuries he won't be seeing the field for a long time. I'd rather bring in Nelson, Hendrix, Alexander, etc.

 

[woolybug25]

If we don't have 85, it will be because something unforeseen happened (late transfer or medically setback). Right now it looks like that will be unlikely, but definitely could happen.

I would say it's better than "could happen". When was the last time we had a full 85 man roster? Ever?

We argue about the amount of room in the class every season and every single year we could have signed more than we did. Just a few years ago we had great QB depth, that changed. Two years ago we had great DL depth, next year that changes. Things change fast in the depth chart, especially at Notre Dame. If a kid is really talented, I say you take him. This kid is really talented.

But he'll end up tearing it up at Minnesota or somewhere else. Meanwhile, two years from now we will revisit this as a missed opportunity.

 

[woolybug25]

I absolutely don't think we will. However, I would much rather bring in somebody at another position. In our backfield Jones will be at best probably 4th string for the next two years. Then 3rd string after that. Barring a rash of injuries he won't be seeing the field for a long time. I'd rather bring in Nelson, Hendrix, Alexander, etc.

If we aren't going to have a full roster, then why do we have to choose? We can literally take both.

Watch... we will end up signing 22-23 kids and not have an 85 man roster. There is no reason we cant take more kids.

 

[OCIrish]

No worries, no one said that you had to agree with me. lol

Did you watch him yesterday?

Blind trust in Notre Dame's staff is silly though. Why discuss prospects at all if we are just always going to decide if a prospect is good by whether the staff wants them or not? Weis didn't want Kuechly... how did that work for us?

Well, fuck.....if you're such an extraordinary evaluator of talent, how's come you're not on the staff??????

 

[woolybug25]

Well, fuck.....if you're such an extraordinary evaluator of talent, how's come you're not on the staff??????

Sorry... I guess no one on this site is suppose to have an opinion on players. No one disrespected your opinion, so I don't see why you are trying to shit on me.

Sheesh... get a grip.

 

[OCIrish]

Just giving you shit, but you know as well as I do, there's never a guarantee of a kid panning out based on how he does at the camps, all star games, etc......

Not fair to compare We is to this coaching staff......completely apples and oranges!!!

 

[Ironman8]

I would say it's better than "could happen". When was the last time we had a full 85 man roster? Ever?

We argue about the amount of room in the class every season and every single year we could have signed more than we did. Just a few years ago we had great QB depth, that changed. Two years ago we had great DL depth, next year that changes. Things change fast in the depth chart, especially at Notre Dame. If a kid is really talented, I say you take him. This kid is really talented.

But he'll end up tearing it up at Minnesota or somewhere else. Meanwhile, two years from now we will revisit this as a missed opportunity.

My point is not that we will or will not be at 85. Chances are we won't despite the staff's best efforts. My point is that I would rather go after many other guys in signing / over-signing to get to the 85 over Jones. Signing a kid you don't love a position of quality depth, especially over some possibly others, just to be at 85 is silly IMO.

 

[arrowryan]

Considering we return all 5 running backs, I would like to use that scholarship on someone like Terrance Alexander

 

[woolybug25]

My point is not that we will or will not be at 85. Chances are we won't despite the staff's best efforts. My point is that I would rather go after many other guys in signing / over-signing to get to the 85 over Jones. Signing a kid you don't love a position of quality depth just to be at 85 is silly, IMO.

How many kids do you think the staff is actively pursuing? I might be wrong, but at this point in the game, I would say they are focusing on the smallest amount of prospects they have since the beginning of the cycle. Seems like that's just natural as kids commit, verbal elsewhere, etc.

So I don't feel like pursuing a few extra prospects that we may have room for at the finish line would be a bad thing or interfere with our efforts with other prospects. I'm not saying that they put the full court press on him, but what does a "interest guaging offer" hurt?

 

[woolybug25]

Considering we return all 5 running backs, I would like to use that scholarship on someone like Terrance Alexander

- We can move Amir to slot
- GA3 will either graduate or transfer before this kid's freshman season (assuming RS)
- Folston or Bryant may only be here 3 seasons
- Cam will be a senior next season.


As I mentioned before... depth charts change fast. Not saying "full court press", but what does it hurt to guage interest? Especially when, like every year, we will leave scholarships on the table?

Wouldn't it be nice to be the benafactor of a NSD surprise for once?

 

[Ironman8]

How many kids do you think the staff is actively pursuing? I might be wrong, but at this point in the game, I would say they are focusing on the smallest amount of prospects they have since the beginning of the cycle. Seems like that's just natural as kids commit, verbal elsewhere, etc.

So I don't feel like pursuing a few extra prospects that we may have room for at the finish line would be a bad thing or interfere with our efforts with other prospects. I'm not saying that they put the full court press on him, but what does a "interest guaging offer" hurt?

What would be the point though? They saw him in person, didn't love him, and he has potential academic issues. He is also at a position of probably the most depth on our team save WR and maybe OL.

I'd much rather have an extra spot for an extra 5th year for '14 if we miss on everyone and have an extra spot for what should be a pretty small '15 class than take a RB we don't love on scholarship for the next 4 years who will be behind a very talented stable.

 

[arrowryan]

Personally, I would rather take 2 running backs in 2015 than settling for someone the staff isn't high on

 

[woolybug25]

What would be the point though? They saw him in person, didn't love him, and he has potential academic issues. He is also at a position of probably the most depth on our team save WR and maybe OL.

I'd much rather have an extra spot for an extra 5th year for '14 if we miss on everyone and have an extra spot for what should be a pretty small '15 class than take a RB we don't love on scholarship for the next 4 years who will be behind a very talented stable.

I suppose the point would be to fill the roster. As I said, we don't need "extra spots for 5th years" if we aren't filling an 85 man roster. For instance, Bama has 8 RB's on their current roster and would like one in this class. They will fill an 85 man roster.

 

[Emcee77]

If we aren't going to have a full roster, then why do we have to choose? We can literally take both.

Watch... we will end up signing 22-23 kids and not have an 85 man roster. There is no reason we cant take more kids.

I've got 58 non-seniors returning. Lombard is a virtual certainty for a 5Y so let's say 59 returning. That number could rise to 62 (Kendall Moore, Collinsworth and Utupo could all conceivably return) or fall to 57 (we could take none of Moore, Collinsworth and Utupo and lose Tuitt and GAIII to the NFL).

Right now we have 23 commits counting Morgan (as apparently the staff is). So we are at 85 already if everyone comes back, which I think we want to happen; I do, anyway. The only player of the 5 bubble guys that I could take or leave is GAIII, and even he is a real asset on kick returns. We have little experienced depth at Moore and Utupo's positions, Collinsworth can provide veteran leadership and consistency, and Tuitt speaks for himself.

We are still pursuing, and have a decent shot at, McKenzie/Nelson, Juju, Quick, Braden Smith, Alexander, and Holley (per Loy). Then there's P. Hendrix hanging around, whom we could maybe flip if we made a NSD-eve push.

I want each of those guys more than Jones. I like Jones, but we are really deep at RB for the time being. Even if Atkinson doesn't return, we've got Cam, Amir, Folston, Bryant, and Mahone back next year, and all but Cam are eligible through 2016.

So the issue here, at least until some of those other recruits fall off the board, is not whether you take Jones as an 86th guy with the understanding that we always lose somebody. It's whether you take Jones as an 89th or 90th guy, expecting to lose 4 or 5. I don't think you do. That's just too risky.

 

[NDdomer2]

I suppose the point would be to fill the roster. As I said, we don't need "extra spots for 5th years" if we aren't filling an 85 man roster. For instance, Bama has 8 RB's on their current roster and would like one in this class. They will fill an 85 man roster.

and to add to something you already said. if his coming here would help land Cornell it is totally worth it imo.

 

[JD Irish]

The staff passed on him after seeing him in person. John Turner approves of this approach.

 

[woolybug25]

I've got 58 non-seniors returning. Lombard is a virtual certainty for a 5Y so let's say 59 returning. That number could rise to 62 (Kendall Moore, Collinsworth and Utupo could all conceivably return) or fall to 57 (we could take none of Moore, Collinsworth and Utupo and lose Tuitt and GAIII to the NFL).

Right now we have 23 commits counting Morgan (as apparently the staff is). So we are at 85 already if everyone comes back, which I think we want to happen; I do, anyway. The only player of the 5 bubble guys that I could take or leave is GAIII, and even he is a real asset on kick returns. We have little experienced depth at Moore and Utupo's positions, Collinsworth can provide veteran leadership and consistency, and Tuitt speaks for himself.

We are still pursuing, and have a decent shot at, McKenzie/Nelson, Juju, Quick, Braden Smith, Alexander, and Holley (per Loy).

I want each of those guys more than Jones. I like Jones, but we are really deep at RB for the time being. Even if Atkinson doesn't return, we've got Cam, Amir, Folston, Bryant, and Mahone back next year, and all but Cam are eligible through 2016.

So the issue here is not whether you take Jones as an 86th guy with the understanding that we always lose somebody. It's whether you take Jones as a 90th guy, expecting to lose 4 or 5. I don't think you do. That's just too risky.

I fully understand how we all get to the 23 number. That being said, we came up with a "number" last year... and the year before... and the year before...

By the time NSD comes, we end up losing somebody and not signing that number anyway. Also, by the time spring football comes along, attrition happens.

Every other program in the country plays numbers like this. I'm not saying we drop kids or not honor our scholarships. But what's worse... not fielding a full roster or not being able to offer all of the 5th years you wanted? Because we have always played safe, signed all of the 5th years we wanted (even some that we didn't need) and ended up with a roster not at the limit. With the history of high attrition this team has, it seems like signing to the 85 limit would be the more prudent thing to do.

Just me...