Breakout players?

[The Q]

Without having seen spring ball yet, who will have a breakout season next year? (For the purposes of this poll, only players who played last year, so no 2003 redshirts, transfers or true freshmen.)

I'm going to say:
DE Justin Rogers and (I hope) Jay Taylor

[Lefty]

Q, I sure hope you're right about Jay Taylor. I know he's battled some health issues, but he's got the size and speed to be a good one -- a REALLY good one. And Coach Bennett's cries for bigger WRs would be over. We'd have 6'4" Jay Taylor, 6'4" Bobby Chase, 6'3" Reynaldo Pellerin, 6'2" Tony Hawkins .... sounds like the makings of a far more imposing crew of WRs.

For my breakout players, give me Desmond Jones and Ryan Kennedy.

[Stallion]

you may think they're special but very few other Division 1A schools thought so-they are all sleepers none of which have established a thing at this level . Jay Taylor has never caught two passes in one game averages about 10 yards a catch on what 4-6 catches in two playing years? I'd call that position a complete questionmark no matter how nice and tall they look in uniform.

[Big Easy Pony]

Where did anyone call those guys special? "Lefty" said Taylor had the size and speed to be "a good one" .... which you'll note does not mean he IS a good one, at least not yet -- just that he has the size and speed. And Lefty's assessment that those bigger WRs present a "more imposing" WR crew is absolutely accurate. How they pan out remains to be seen, of course. But to suggest that Taylor, Chase, Pellerin and the new Hawkins kid aren't more imposing than a smaller bunch of Rushbrook, Griffin, Warren, etc., is nothing short of foolish. Are they better? Who knows. Are they more imposing? Absolutely.

Look, basketball is winding down and spring football hasn't yet started. Why do you feel the obligation to belittle someone who's enjoying some light-hearted speculation about next year's team? That's the reason we're all on this board, because we're fans .... remember?

[PK]

Why do you feel the obligation to belittle someone who's enjoying some light-hearted speculation about next year's team?

I assume you aren't expecting an answer to that question...are you?

[PerunaPunch]

On offense, I'm hoping for breakout seasons from Munlin, Boren and Pellerin (We saw flashes of his talent last year, but he's still pretty raw. Having a full spring and summer under his belt could make a huge difference).

On defense I'm hoping that Adami is going to win some all-WAC accolades. Of the young guys, I'm looking for breakout seasons from Desmond Jones, Avery Cleveland and Joe Sturdivant.

[LA_Mustang]

Desmond Jones and Chris Phillips. Both have the potential to be dominate in our conference.

[SoCal_Pony]

We were the worst team in all of D1-A last season. If you could not contribute on last years’ team (redshirts, freshmen and injured excluded, of course) I suspect you will not contribute this year as well. To think otherwise is truly rose-colored.

With that in mind, my breakout players on offense are Vincent Chase, Richuel Massey, Jessie Henderson, Justin Boren, Caleb Peveto and the winner of the RJ Meeks/Chris Phillips competition.

My defensive breakout players are Lucky Delay, Desmond Jones, Joe Sturdivant and Jonathan Lindley.

Special recognition to breakout linebackers Zach Hall, Corey Muse and Avery Cleveland. Their upside potential unlimited.

[Horseshoe]

I agree with you -- I'm really excited to see the young LBs play.

Are Reggie Carrington and D.D. Lee still expected to battle for the starting MLB spot? Or is there a chance we could see THREE redshirt freshmen starting at LB? Last year I heard whispers that Zach Hall looked fantastic in the middle with the scout team.

I hope Lucky's Achilles allows him to play at full speed, thereby giving him the chance to be one of the breakout guys.

[Pony4Life]

I hear Lucky Delay is moving around pretty well on campus. I don't know if that means he's able to run or come out of a three-point stance, but I don't think he's on crutches or even limping any more.

[Stallion]

while the prospects in the Offensive Line are looking up and are considerably brighter-The Stallion Dose of Reality to this Little Lovefest and Suck-up-a- Thon is that SMU's offensive line prospects even in a couple of years is still below average to the caliber of teams SMU plays in the WAC and CUSA espececially when you consider the advantage of experienced, mature JUCOs other teams utilize. Truth is that the majority of SMU offensive linemen even today were not highly recruited although there are about 4 exceptions.

[Corso]

while the prospects in the Offensive Line are looking up and are considerably brighter-The Stallion Dose of Reality to this Little Lovefest and Suck-up-a- Thon is that SMU's offensive line prospects even in a couple of years is still below average to the caliber of teams SMU plays in the WAC and CUSA espececially when you consider the advantage of experienced, mature JUCOs other teams utilize. Truth is that the majority of SMU offensive linemen even today were not highly recruited although there are about 4 exceptions.

Let's see, you know this because:
(A) You're on the team.
Nope
(B) You're a coach.
Nope
(C) You scout opposing teams and know their young players who are moving up to starting roles.
Nope
(D) You like to quote the opinions of recruiting "experts" -- many of whom never have seen the players actually play.
!! BINGO !!

And you say we have 4 exceptions to the "nobody wanted 'em" rule on the offensive line. I contend that we have more than that, but for the sake of argument, let's say you're right. We only play 5 OLs at a time, and if we have four that other schools wanted and one guy that the coaches discovered, then you have yourself a line worthy of a stamp of approval from recruiting experts.

Personally I'd rather have 5 guys who can play. And we do. They might be a little raw, since they're young, but we have some good OLs on this team who will be just fine, and we're building depth behind them -- quality depth.

[Mike Damone]

I have no doubt whatsoever that both the offense and the defense will look great this spring. I expect to hear that both are vastly improved and that numerous players are beginning to step up. I expect the line will be better, some of our receivers are poised for big years, rb's are going to tear it up, and the db's are much better than advertised.

What I don't expect to hear is people pointing out that everyone looks great when they play SMU.

[PerunaPunch]

while the prospects in the Offensive Line are looking up and are considerably brighter-The Stallion Dose of Reality to this Little Lovefest and Suck-up-a- Thon is that SMU's offensive line prospects even in a couple of years is still below average to the caliber of teams SMU plays in the WAC and CUSA espececially when you consider the advantage of experienced, mature JUCOs other teams utilize. Truth is that the majority of SMU offensive linemen even today were not highly recruited although there are about 4 exceptions.

Give me a freakin' break! They're still young, but of the "theoretical" starting OL I proposed, Johnson, Borin and Peveto all had Big 12 offers (which everyone else would generally consider a higher level of competition than the WAC or CUSA). Kieschnick and Urbanus may have had "big school" offers too, but that was before I joined the Mustang Club and started following recruiting so closely.

[Hoofprint]

Kenard Burley also had a Big 12 offer.