2014 Depth Chart Predictions

[dublinirish]

Hardy always strikes me as a player who is not "trusted" by the staff. To be fair all of the "Team Revo" guys seem to be in the same boat

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

I'd be shocked if Farley isn't back next year.

Bet all my vbucks on it..

I'll take that bet and put my small number of vbucks on the line. I think we saw the real Farley last year and we weren't playing that aggressive. With a VanGorder defense, I don't think Farley possesses the athleticism to play. After watching him get toasted routinely in practice, it'll only take a few blown coverages/TDs before he's yanked and put on special teams permanently.

I don't see anyway he plays unless he's used only as a blitzing safety for run support and even his tackling was suspect last year. I like Farley a lot but I think he was able to simply stay under cover in 12.

He can't play close to the line and cover a receiver, he didn't tackle well last year, I'm not sure that he does anything well enough to be asked back. I know Moore was asked back and he hasn't been a contributor but outside of great injuries to the safety position, I'm guessing Farley is gone.

We also have a large secondary recruiting class (and possibly one more addition to come) so they'll need to make room. Farley was great for us when we needed him but I'm hoping we've moved passed the point of needing him and into the phase of "nice to have back-up).

It's telling that when VanGorder arrived, he didn't like Farley at Safety so he tried him at corner. He was even worse at corner so he's been moved back to safety. He may get some Nickel looks but there are a number of combinations I'd rather see in the nickel package:
Russell, Luke, Butler, Riggs, Shumate, Redfield, Collinsworth, Baratti: Pick any 5 and I'd rather have them on the field.

Time will tell and I hope Farley proves me wrong.

 

[NCND]

Hardy always strikes me as a player who is not "trusted" by the staff. To be fair all of the "Team Revo" guys seem to be in the same boat

Hahaha yep. Him, J. Brown, Moore and Carlisle.

 

[nsisk157]

Nice work boner!

Prob missing the joke..Bonner, right??

I am far too immature.

 

[koonja]

Nice work boner!

Prob missing the joke..Bonner, right??

I am far too immature.

I think he's one of those guys who talks dirty to himself afterwards.

 

[dublinirish]

Hahaha yep. Him, J. Brown, Moore and Carlisle.

Don't forget Davaris!

We are a group of young men trying to change the world. We are REVO and we will revolutionize. #TeamRevo #YTN

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I'm willing to give Farley one more chance this year. I think his shoulder issue caused a bunch of his problems last year. We'll see what happens. With that said, I like the younger talent better and hope they shine on Saturdays.

 

[koonja]

What is team REVO?

 

[dublinirish]

What is team REVO?

Behold: https://twitter.com/TeamRevoINC

They just tryna change the world brah!

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>What you dream, We over here making it reality</p>— Team Revo™ (@TeamRevoINC) <a href="https://twitter.com/TeamRevoINC/statuses/372575868335296513">August 28, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>They playin Forrest Gump in chipotle.. 😑</p>— Team Revo™ (@TeamRevoINC) <a href="https://twitter.com/TeamRevoINC/statuses/311637208073371648">March 13, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Revo in Spanish.! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/hola?src=hash">#hola</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/JalenBrown21">@JalenBrown21</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/DaVarisDaniels">@DaVarisDaniels</a> <a href="http://t.co/eODDC6Rk">pic.twitter.com/eODDC6Rk</a></p>— Team Revo™ (@TeamRevoINC) <a href="https://twitter.com/TeamRevoINC/statuses/297371883312128000">February 1, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[koonja]

I'm willing to give Farley one more chance this year. I think his shoulder issue caused a bunch of his problems last year. We'll see what happens. With that said, I like the younger talent better and hope they shine on Saturdays.

What shoulder issue?

 

[NCND]

The mysterious shoulder injury... lol

 

[PANDFAN]

What shoulder issue?

the one that people have suspected but never was mentioned anywhere that i remember

 

[koonja]

The mysterious shoulder injury... lol

the one that people have suspected but never was mentioned anywhere that i remember

Farley's shoulder secretly contains the latitude/longitude of Area 51 (because he's an alient, duh), and so when he secretly injured it and they cut him open, they vowed no one would ever be made aware of the injury, lol.

 

[irishfan]

5th years IMO

QB: Golson for sure
RB: none
WR: DD to NFl, almost left last year. Carlisle to stay for 5th.
TE: none
OL: if Hegarty starts whole year at LG he's back. no one else, we have too many young studs
DE: Hounshell depends on health. Don't think so but maybe.
DT: none
LB: Grace, Schmidt, Councell I think are all back
CB: none
S: Farley is good emergency depth. I think Hardy is gone.

Golson
Carlisle
Hegarty
Grace
Schmidt
Councell
Farley

anyone else would be surprising IMO. 7 is a lot of guys.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

5th years IMO

QB: Golson for sure
RB: none
WR: DD to NFl, almost left last year. Carlisle to stay for 5th.
TE: none
OL: if Hegarty starts whole year at LG he's back. no one else, we have too many young studs
DE: Hounshell depends on health. Don't think so but maybe.
DT: none
LB: Grace, Schmidt, Councell I think are all back
CB: none
S: Farley is good emergency depth. I think Hardy is gone.

Golson
Carlisle
Hegarty
Grace
Schmidt
Councell
Farley

anyone else would be surprising IMO. 7 is a lot of guys.

Martin?

 

[Ironman8]

the one that people have suspected but never was mentioned anywhere that i remember

Pete Sampson on II for one has said that while Farley and BK have never specifically mentioned it, he would be 'shocked' if Farley didn't have a serious shoulder ailment and required the use of a harness.

 

[Ironman8]

I'll take that bet and put my small number of vbucks on the line. I think we saw the real Farley last year and we weren't playing that aggressive. With a VanGorder defense, I don't think Farley possesses the athleticism to play. After watching him get toasted routinely in practice, it'll only take a few blown coverages/TDs before he's yanked and put on special teams permanently.

I don't see anyway he plays unless he's used only as a blitzing safety for run support and even his tackling was suspect last year. I like Farley a lot but I think he was able to simply stay under cover in 12.

He can't play close to the line and cover a receiver, he didn't tackle well last year, I'm not sure that he does anything well enough to be asked back. I know Moore was asked back and he hasn't been a contributor but outside of great injuries to the safety position, I'm guessing Farley is gone.

We also have a large secondary recruiting class (and possibly one more addition to come) so they'll need to make room. Farley was great for us when we needed him but I'm hoping we've moved passed the point of needing him and into the phase of "nice to have back-up).

It's telling that when VanGorder arrived, he didn't like Farley at Safety so he tried him at corner. He was even worse at corner so he's been moved back to safety. He may get some Nickel looks but there are a number of combinations I'd rather see in the nickel package:
Russell, Luke, Butler, Riggs, Shumate, Redfield, Collinsworth, Baratti: Pick any 5 and I'd rather have them on the field.

Time will tell and I hope Farley proves me wrong.

I don't think Farley will be asked back for his talent or potential at safety. I think he will get asked back for his knowledge of the D, his versatility, and his attitude.

You are on.

 

[PANDFAN]

Pete Sampson on II for one has said that while Farley and BK have never specifically mentioned it, he would be 'shocked' if Farley didn't have a serious shoulder ailment and required the use of a harness.

but that's what I'm saying...never anything concrete from coaches or it getting out of the bag and generally we get a list of a significant injury

 

[koonja]

Pete Sampson on II for one has said that while Farley and BK have never specifically mentioned it, he would be 'shocked' if Farley didn't have a serious shoulder ailment and required the use of a harness.

Shocked because of how poorly he tackled? If Sampson knew, I don't think the word of choice would be 'shocked'. It'd be something more concrete, like 'he WAS nursing an injured shoulder'.

I guess I don't understand the reason for secrecy if there were an injury. BK has talked about injuries during season before (last time this came up I gave in season examples, which I've now forgotten).

So IDK why BK/Farley would feel the need to keep it a secret. It's not like if teams knew, they would run at him. They would watch film and know to run at him if possible (plus he's a safety, so there's really no running at him).

He never missed a practice, or a game. So why the secret? I truly believe he's a poor tackler and the IE induced fake injury excuse took off.

I really don't care one way or another. Hopefully he's healed this year if he was ever injured, JW why Sampson would be shocked, because when he says it like that, it sounds like speculation that there were an injury, not definitive knowledge of one.

 

[Ironman8]

but that's what I'm saying...never anything concrete from coaches or it getting out of the bag and generally we get a list of a significant injury

We hear about ones that affect playing time / availability. If a kid can play through something, we usually don't hear about it (to protect the player and the team). Been that for a bunch of kids.

I don't want to argue about this. I think it was pretty clear he favored his shoulder from watching the games, but I don't care enough to debate someone about it. Let's hope he plays better this year.

 

[Legacy93]

We hear about ones that affect playing time / availability. If a kid can play through something, we usually don't hear about it (to protect the player and the team). Been that for a bunch of kids.

I don't want to argue about this. I think it was pretty clear he favored his shoulder from watching the games, but I don't care enough to debate someone about it. Let's hope he plays better this year.

Just to back that up, I lived near one of the players last year and would routinely hear about injuries that that never were never discussed or even mentioned publicly. If they told the media about every injury we would probably all unnecessarily fear the worst in addition to it tipping off other teams to potential weaknesses to exploit.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

He never missed a practice, or a game. So why the secret? I truly believe he's a poor tackler and the IE induced fake injury excuse took off.

How do you account for the 2012 season, then? That was just luck?

Which sounds more plausible to you? That: (1) Farley was solid in 2012, but struggled in 2013 due to a shoulder injury; or (2) we saw the real Farley in 2013, and 2012 was a total fluke.

As Ironman8 pointed out, there are some compelling strategic reasons to keep manageable injuries out of the press. Only when an injury will result in a conspicuous absence is it likely to be addressed publicly.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

I don't think Farley will be asked back for his talent or potential at safety. I think he will get asked back for his knowledge of the D, his versatility, and his attitude.

You are on.

Sounds good. Do we make this official in anyway to get it "on the books"? I'll be happy if I'm wrong because it means Farley is capable of giving us something more.

If I win, my signature will say:

This post brought to you by the guy who beat the guy who was the champion of all 2012 fantasy things.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

IM8, Whiskey, and Legacy nailed it. I just hope everything has healed properly and he can get back to '12 form. Like IM8 said, he's a real asset to the defense based solely on knowledge/experience. Lets hope some rubs off on Schu and the others.

 

[koonja]

How do you account for the 2012 season, then? That was just luck?

Which sounds more plausible to you? That: (1) Farley was solid in 2012, but struggled in 2013 due to a shoulder injury; or (2) we saw the real Farley in 2013, and 2012 was a total fluke.

As Ironman8 pointed out, there are some compelling strategic reasons to keep manageable injuries out of the press. Only when an injury will result in a conspicuous absence is it likely to be addressed publicly.

So is this our new thing? If someone has a bad year, we create an injury for them with zero evidence or mention of it? He had a great front 7 in 2012 to help the DBS as a whole. And let's not pretend like he was a show stopper. He didn't stand out as a terrible tackler, but that's about it. It's not like he was flying around, wrecking people.

True, and as I have pointed out, BK absolutely has spoken publicly about in season injuries for players who did not miss time because of it (Farley falls user this category).

Again, Never mentioned by BK, Farley, any coaches and he never missed time. Apparently even Sampson won't go as far as to say there was a definite injury.

He very well could have had an injury, but can we at least stop staying it as fact on here? Because we don't know if it is.

 

[Ndaccountant]

How do you account for the 2012 season, then? That was just luck?

Which sounds more plausible to you? That: (1) Farley was solid in 2012, but struggled in 2013 due to a shoulder injury; or (2) we saw the real Farley in 2013, and 2012 was a total fluke.

As Ironman8 pointed out, there are some compelling strategic reasons to keep manageable injuries out of the press. Only when an injury will result in a conspicuous absence is it likely to be addressed publicly.

To be fair, injury or not, his performance cannot be looked at in isolation. Perhaps Zeke's play made it so Farley only had to worry about one thing. Maybe the DL was that much better that he didn't have to defend as long. Maybe his tackling was so poor since he was out of position so much due to the previous points.

I am not saying he was or wasn't hurt. Drawing conclusions from his play alone isn't ironclad.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

So is this our new thing? If someone has a bad year, we create an injury for them with zero evidence or mention of it? He had a great front 7 in 2012 to help the DBS as a whole. And let's not pretend like he was a show stopper. He didn't stand out as a terrible tackler, but that's about it. It's not like he was flying around, wrecking people.

True, and as I have pointed out, BK absolutely has spoken publicly about in season injuries for players who did not miss time because of it (Farley falls user this category).

Again, Never mentioned by BK, Farley, any coaches and he never missed time. Apparently even Sampson won't go as far as to say there was a definite injury.

He very well could have had an injury, but can we at least stop staying it as fact on here? Because we don't know if it is.

What don't you get about what the others have posted? It's poor strategy to broadcast injuries to players who are "playing through them." The public will not be in the know about these types of injuries. Is it possible there was no injury and he just played poorly? Sure. But it's also possible that he was and just played through it. Sampson is a guy who's very much in the know, and if he mentions it, I'm rolling with it. Even if it's not made public.

 

[gkIrish]

How do you account for the 2012 season, then? That was just luck?

Which sounds more plausible to you? That: (1) Farley was solid in 2012, but struggled in 2013 due to a shoulder injury; or (2) we saw the real Farley in 2013, and 2012 was a total fluke.

As Ironman8 pointed out, there are some compelling strategic reasons to keep manageable injuries out of the press. Only when an injury will result in a conspicuous absence is it likely to be addressed publicly.

I get that you don't want to bring up an injury to avoid the player being targeted in that area during the season but why not mention it at the end of the season?

 

[PANDFAN]

"We think that he can be a very good player, especially a tackler from an outside‑in position," Kelly said. "He's been playing inside‑out, right — he's been running the alley inside‑out. We think he can be a very good force player from an outside in position, and he's really a good athlete. He can run, and he's got very good ball skills."

Farley had a handful of high-profile missed tackles last fall playing inside-out at safety, and the move to cornerback was made to give him a better angle to make tackles. It's an admission of Farley's struggles last year but a nod to the talent he still possesses
Notre Dame aims to put Matthias Farley in a better position | CSN Chicago

I think the reasoning others talk about suspecting an injury is because he had quite the drastic change in play...it appears from what BK has said it is the angle of his pursuit he was put in and not the potential injury that may or may not have happened...


Kelly could have easily mentioned him having a banged up shoulder; which this article is from March 1 heading into this spring camp...he didn't require any surgery.... Devin Butler had a shoulder injury which didn't keep him out of any playing time but was noted as having surgery in the off season...

 

[koonja]

What don't you get about what the others have posted? It's poor strategy to broadcast injuries to players who are "playing through them." The public will not be in the know about these types of injuries. Is it possible there was no injury and he just played poorly? Sure. But it's also possible that he was and just played through it. Sampson is a guy who's very much in the know, and if he mentions it, I'm rolling with it. Even if it's not made public.

Thanks for asking. I get everything. All of it.

I get that they think Farley had a shoulder injury (not sure how they picked the shoulder, but I'm guessing cause that's what you lead with when tackling) because of his poor play.

I also get that Farley never missed a game. I get that Farley never reportedly missed practice.

I get that BK will protect some player's form being injured, but I also get that he has spoken publicly in-season about injured players that continued to play and never missing time.

I get that Sampson is very much in the know. I also get that Sampson doesn't know there was an injury to Farley based on his comments, but that he, like you, bets there was one (probably for the same reason - poor play in 2013).

I get that BK was asked specifically about Farley's poor play after the year, and he never mentioned 'well he was playing injured' to protect the Farley from the scrutiny. Let me repeat, this is after the season.

I get it all. I get that he might have been injured, but the only basis for that is his poor play and Sampson betting (albeit not knowing) that he was in fact injured.

I get that the sole argument for Farley having an injured shoulder is 1) His poor play in 2013, and 2) That Sampson bets on it (although if Sampson's reasoning is poor tackling as well - which it probably is -, it makes this only one point).

All I'm asking is that we quit posting it as fact on here, and instead use less difinitive comments when mentioning the 2013 mystery injury, Farley version. Because that's how rumors grow into facts.

So let me turn your question on you. What don't you get?