'08 TX WR DeSean Hales

irishunclebill

Well-known member
Messages
1,634
Reaction score
80
'08 TX WR DeSean Hales

DeSean Hales- Wide Receiver (5-10/165)
Oak HS (Klein, TX)

Combine
Forty: 4.41
Bench Reps:
Bench Max: 230
Squat Max: 350
Shuttle:
Vertical:
GPA:

Star Ratings
Rivals.com:
Scout.com: 3 stars

Rankings & Accolades
Rivals Pre-Evaluation 100 for 2008
#120 on the ESPN 150 as of 4/25/07

Statistics
N/A

Schools of Interest
Georgia
LSU
Nebraska
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
 

irishunclebill

Well-known member
Messages
1,634
Reaction score
80
ND is apparently taking a serious look at DeSean Hales, another elite Texas WR. Hales is one of the few top Texas recruits that have been offered by the University of Texas, and has not yet committed. Hales is on the Rivals 100 pre-evaluation list and is currently ranked #120 on the ESPN 150. He holds an offer from just about every major program in the Big 12. No word yet on whether an Irish offer for Hales is imminent, but does anyone want to bet that if and when Notre Dame does offer him, that the Cockwad will have an offer out to him within a week afterward.
 

Irishknight1023

LeBron James of VC
Messages
1,911
Reaction score
81
Yeah not the interested in him at WR we have enough little guys. If WR is what he's being recruited for i'd be suprised if he gets an offer seeing how we are in good standing already with a couple of taller targets
 
K

Katzenboyer

Guest
Yeah not the interested in him at WR we have enough little guys. If WR is what he's being recruited for i'd be suprised if he gets an offer seeing how we are in good standing already with a couple of taller targets

Size won't matter with Weis' scheme. The Pats receivers were called "smurfs" for a reason -- at one time, Notre Dame alumnus David Givens was the tallest player in the WR corps, listed at 6'0 (and more likely closer to 5'10 or 5'11).

Weis has shown that he doesn't need the huge down field receiver, and actually prefers the smaller, quicker guys. He had a nice gift of being able to use Mo and the Shark when he got here, but don't let this fool you -- Weis offense relies on quick, small players who can find holes in zone coverage, rather than a 6'5 230 pound monster to run down the field.
 

irishunclebill

Well-known member
Messages
1,634
Reaction score
80
Size won't matter with Weis' scheme. The Pats receivers were called "smurfs" for a reason -- at one time, Notre Dame alumnus David Givens was the tallest player in the WR corps, listed at 6'0 (and more likely closer to 5'10 or 5'11).

Weis has shown that he doesn't need the huge down field receiver, and actually prefers the smaller, quicker guys. He had a nice gift of being able to use Mo and the Shark when he got here, but don't let this fool you -- Weis offense relies on quick, small players who can find holes in zone coverage, rather than a 6'5 230 pound monster to run down the field.

I agree, and the events of the last 2 days sort of prove your theory. This smaller, quicker guy is getting serious interest, and Warren Reuland must have been told not to expect an offer any time soon, because he verballed to Stanford yesterday.
 

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
Size won't matter with Weis' scheme. The Pats receivers were called "smurfs" for a reason -- at one time, Notre Dame alumnus David Givens was the tallest player in the WR corps, listed at 6'0 (and more likely closer to 5'10 or 5'11).

Weis has shown that he doesn't need the huge down field receiver, and actually prefers the smaller, quicker guys. He had a nice gift of being able to use Mo and the Shark when he got here, but don't let this fool you -- Weis offense relies on quick, small players who can find holes in zone coverage, rather than a 6'5 230 pound monster to run down the field.

He might not need them but I think there is generous evidence that he prefers them, and so I must agree that size won't matter. CW didn't have control of personnel in NE, so he coached the short guys the franchise had under contract.

But, given the choice, CW goes after tall receivers, and has since he began recruiting at ND.

2006 - Ausberry, 6-4; Parris, 6-4; Luckett, 6-3; R. Jackson, 6-3 (exeptions, Austin, West at 5-11)

2007 - Benn 6-2; Kamara, 6-3; Little, 6-3; J. Smith, 6-3; JR Hemingway 6-2; G. Jones, 6-1; a very late offer to Golden Tate 6-0

This year - Buckner, 6-4; Green, 6-4; J. Jones, 6-4; Floyd, 6-3; Stoneburner, 6-5; Goodman, 6-3; K. Tate 6-4 and the only exception is Odoms at 5-8.

So, I gotta disagree with ya Katz, I think it is obvious that CW would much prefer tall WRs.
 
K

Katzenboyer

Guest
He might not need them but I think there is generous evidence that he prefers them, and so I must agree that size won't matter. CW didn't have control of personnel in NE, so he coached the short guys the franchise had under contract.

But, given the choice, CW goes after tall receivers, and has since he began recruiting at ND.

2006 - Ausberry, 6-4; Parris, 6-4; Luckett, 6-3; R. Jackson, 6-3 (exeptions, Austin, West at 5-11)

2007 - Benn 6-2; Kamara, 6-3; Little, 6-3; J. Smith, 6-3; JR Hemingway 6-2; G. Jones, 6-1; a very late offer to Golden Tate 6-0

This year - Buckner, 6-4; Green, 6-4; J. Jones, 6-4; Floyd, 6-3; Stoneburner, 6-5; Goodman, 6-3; K. Tate 6-4 and the only exception is Odoms at 5-8.

So, I gotta disagree with ya Katz, I think it is obvious that CW would much prefer tall WRs.

If you think Weis didn't have any impact on who New England drafted, you're very, very, very wrong. Belichick, Pioli, Crennel and Weis all have remarked how in sync they were with each other, and how every player they picked would either a.) fit into the schemes the OC or DC wanted or b.) would have the approval of the OC or DC.

As for your lists -- cherry picking at it's finest. Let's take a look.

2005. David Grimes (commit) 5'9" -- this was an in-between year, so I won't look too closely.

2006. Barry Gallup (5'11"), George West (5'8) committed. Terrence Austin (5'10"), Chris James, Marques Wilkins (between 5'11" and 6'0) went elsewhere.

2007. Golden Tate (5'11) committed. Ronald Johnson (6'0) went elsewhere.

The guys you mentioned are pretty much the cream of the crop guys -- Benn, Green, Floyd, Jones, etc. EVERYBODY wants these guys, and Weis would be foolish if he didn't go after them.

I'm not saying that Weis won't play tall guys -- if they can pick up his system, then they'll see the field. But EVERY WHERE WEIS HAS GONE, the offensive scheme has relied on small, quick WRs. With the Pats it was Branch, Terry Glenn, Troy Brown, and David Givens (taller guys like Donald Hayes and Bethel Johnson struggled more in this system). With the Jets, it was Laverneus Coles and Wayne Chrebet (Keyshawn Johnson's production dropped after Weis became OC).

On the whole, Weis likes smaller guys who can get in and out of their cuts faster. He hasn't been playing with "his guys" in the last two years. Now he is.

The offense will look much different this year, I promise. There's a reason West and Grimes have been seen with the starting offense during Spring Practices. Weis' system likes those smaller guys.

Put it this way -- Golden Tate will see the field before Kamara does.
 

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
If you think Weis didn't have any impact on who New England drafted, you're very, very, very wrong. Belichick, Pioli, Crennel and Weis all have remarked how in sync they were with each other, and how every player they picked would either a.) fit into the schemes the OC or DC wanted or b.) would have the approval of the OC or DC.

As for your lists -- cherry picking at it's finest. Let's take a look.

2005. David Grimes (commit) 5'9" -- this was an in-between year, so I won't look too closely.

2006. Barry Gallup (5'11"), George West (5'8) committed. Terrence Austin (5'10"), Chris James, Marques Wilkins (between 5'11" and 6'0) went elsewhere.

2007. Golden Tate (5'11) committed. Ronald Johnson (6'0) went elsewhere.

The guys you mentioned are pretty much the cream of the crop guys -- Benn, Green, Floyd, Jones, etc. EVERYBODY wants these guys, and Weis would be foolish if he didn't go after them.

I'm not saying that Weis won't play tall guys -- if they can pick up his system, then they'll see the field. But EVERY WHERE WEIS HAS GONE, the offensive scheme has relied on small, quick WRs. With the Pats it was Branch, Terry Glenn, Troy Brown, and David Givens (taller guys like Donald Hayes and Bethel Johnson struggled more in this system). With the Jets, it was Laverneus Coles and Wayne Chrebet (Keyshawn Johnson's production dropped after Weis became OC).

On the whole, Weis likes smaller guys who can get in and out of their cuts faster. He hasn't been playing with "his guys" in the last two years. Now he is.

The offense will look much different this year, I promise. There's a reason West and Grimes have been seen with the starting offense during Spring Practices. Weis' system likes those smaller guys.

Put it this way -- Golden Tate will see the field before Kamara does.

I'm just saying ... if he likes the smaller guys, why is there only one offered this year who isn't over 6 feet tall? There are a ton of smaller receivers available, but the majority of the guys he offered are 6-1 or better. Most of the smaller guys that CW has signed since coming to ND are those that got offers after the taller guys dropped off the radar like West 2 years ago and G.Tate last year. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, but we'll see it all play out in the next few years.
 

Irishknight1023

LeBron James of VC
Messages
1,911
Reaction score
81
After reading all the bickering i've come up with one thing. Weis is only going after the best weapons for his offense period.
 

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
After reading all the bickering i've come up with one thing. Weis is only going after the best weapons for his offense period.

OK, just one more point on tall WRs...
Jonathan Baldwin, the 6-6 WR from PA was quoted in a Scout article as saying -- "“I’m also interested in Notre Dame. I got the offer in the mail and then Charlie Weis called my school and he told my coaches that they could do big things with me, considering my size and speed…that I was just the type of receiver they were looking for.

We can argue all day long ... this is what CW said.

Incidently, Baldwin lists ND, Michigan, Alabama, USC and Pitt as his favorites.
Official Lineup
 
K

Katzenboyer

Guest
OK, just one more point on tall WRs...
Jonathan Baldwin, the 6-6 WR from PA was quoted in a Scout article as saying -- "“I’m also interested in Notre Dame. I got the offer in the mail and then Charlie Weis called my school and he told my coaches that they could do big things with me, considering my size and speed…that I was just the type of receiver they were looking for.

We can argue all day long ... this is what CW said.

Incidently, Baldwin lists ND, Michigan, Alabama, USC and Pitt as his favorites.
Official Lineup

Hmm -- interesting. I really thought that Weis would be like "you know what? You're tall, we're going to offer you but we really don't want you to come to Notre Dame!"

Of course that's what he said.

Am I saying that Weis doesn't recruit tall WRs? Nope. Am I saying that tall WRs are never used in Weis' offense? Nope.

I'm saying that shorter WRs are usually the WRs best suited for Weis' offense. And with Weis' past record in the NFL, and the guys who've been coming in lately, it's done nothing to change my opinion.
 

GoIrish41

Paterfamilius
Messages
9,929
Reaction score
2,119
I'm saying that shorter WRs are usually the WRs best suited for Weis' offense.

I'd say you should take it up with Charlie then Katz, because he's clearly trying to screw up the passing game. He's completely ignoring your advice and going after tall WRs. Of the 9 or 10 he's offered so far this year average about 6-4, and only 1 is below 6-0 (Odoms). This pattern is more pronounced this year than last or the year before, but it has clearly been his preference since he's arrived at ND.

I clearly understand what you are saying Katz, and I'm really not trying to pick a fight with you. I just don't agree.
 
Top