E. J. Drewery just committed

by **Argyle Pony** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 3:58 pm

Go Mustangs!!!

by **GeorgiaMustang** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:00 pm

Argyle Pony wrote:Just committed...Go Mustangs!!!

Beat me to it! Great pickup coach! Here's to having numerous marks in the win column!

by **Stallion** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:02 pm

I would say 75% of these kids will commit, if they haven't already, based upon their other "offers".

by **Cadillac** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:05 pm

Drewery is now tied with Ellison for the top rated prospect.

While I trust that Jones can find the right pieces to fit his system... If Bennett had been bringing us a class like this, we'd have been having a meltdown right now. I'll reserve judgement until things settle out, and sure, it's great to have the ball rolling again, but I think that we went so long without news that we're overreacting to the news that's finally coming in.

-CoS

by **GeorgiaMustang** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:05 pm

According to the article, he posted a 33 inch vertical at a 2006 combine. Just imagine the possibilities with a 6'6" receiver owning a 33 inch vert. I'm starting to feel bad for the little corner who has to cover him.

by **Dutch** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:05 pm

nice to see some height on the outside to support the speed on the inside.

great addition.

i'm assuming that he's a 2 star?

by **Stallion** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:17 pm

at least this guy has some real physical tools to work with. This is the type of sleeper I prefer. Check out our list-almost every single player committed to us is very small for his projected position except Drewery and Emshoff.

by **mrydel** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:18 pm

Stallion wrote:at least this guy has some real physical tools to work with. This is the type of sleeper I prefer. Check out our list-almost every single player committed to us is very small for his projected position except Drewery and Emshoff.

Yeah, but you can't coach small!! :shock:

by **George S. Patton** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:22 pm

Stallion wrote:at least this guy has some real physical tools to work with. This is the type of sleeper I prefer. Check out our list-almost every single player committed to us is very small for his projected position except Drewery and Emshoff.

With regard to Hualulu, I think height on an OL can be an overrated quality. I'm more concerned on how well he moves his feet. If he can move -- especially laterally -- that makes a great lineman.

by **SMU 86** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:23 pm

Sounds like he has height and some speed. If he returned a kick for a TD against those solid athletes at Hargrave for a TD he probably has some speed. Great pick up for so last in the recruiting season. Welcome aboard E. J.!

by **mrydel** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:25 pm

George S. Patton wrote:
Stallion wrote:at least this guy has some real physical tools to work with. This is the type of sleeper I prefer. Check out our list-almost every single player committed to us is very small for his projected position except Drewery and Emshoff.

With regard to Hualulu, I think height on an OL can be an overrated quality. I'm more concerned on how well he moves his feet. If he can move -- especially laterally -- that makes a great lineman.

Being a wrestler should help in that regard.

by **giacfsp** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:30 pm

Stallion wrote:at least this guy has some real physical tools to work with. This is the type of sleeper I prefer. Check out our list-almost every single player committed to us is very small for his projected position except Drewery and Emshoff.

Well that's a relief that we're getting the sleepers you prefer. I feel better.

Andrew Ellison is what, 6-2, 230 or 235? Is that small for a linebacker?
Andrew Robiskie is 6-3 (or so), and in the 280-290 range.
Evan Huahulu is 330 pounds. Yesterday he was too big to play defense, and now he's too small?
How big is Alex Odiari? 6-0 and 230 or 240? Or more?

Coach Jones' offense made a national star out of little Davone Bess .... I'm guessing some of these "too small" guys will be just fine.

by **Stallion** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:44 pm

6-1 is short for offensive linemen. 6-2 is short for an Offensive Lineman, 6-0 or 6-1 is short for DE, 5-5 is short for an IR, 5-7 is short for IR, 5-8 is short for an IR, 5-9 is short for a receiver, 6-0 is short for a QB, 6-1 is short for a QB, basically the entire list containds players that do not project well to the Division 1A level or at least are on the smaller side. I understand some of you have invested so much in the new coach that you can't see your nose from your face and fair evaluation of such players causes you great pain. Wait until your check out the other schools who have offered our boys. It ain't pretty. Hopefully, we can get some good players in the next few weeks. I have been very measured in my comments-as mentioned by another poster if this was Phil Bennett's class getting this caliber recruits I think all hell would have broken lose.

by **JasonB** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:45 pm

You can't have a team of all small guys though. It is nice to have the role players who bust the mold, but they need to be surrounded by guys who fit the mold.

As for height in an offensive linemen, you are right in that a smaler guy can have great balance and hold his own. But there are some drawbacks. Tall offensive linemen tend to make the defensive linemen go lower, which means they don't get their hands up in the passing line. They also have leverage when they drive forward and run block. Don't think that it isn't a factor.

That said, you can get away with a smaller center, so maybe that is where he projects?

by **George S. Patton** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:49 pm

I'm not overwhelmed by these kids but these are the kids that we're getting now that probably would have been offered and committed in the summer fall or December visits by the previous regime.

The influence of Jones will be known during the May evaluation period.

E. J. Drewery just committed

E. J. Drewery just committed

Re: Drewry

Who is online