'16 AZ DE Jonathan Kongbo UT Signee 2/3/16

#3,301
#3,301
Wickman said:
Ok, let's actually think instead of "Oh nooooo someone said we are passing on an olineman what a retard!!!!!!"

Warrior is in. Legacy, and safety is a huge position of need.

Brown is in if he wants in. Elite DT. After next year depth has a few question marks after Shy and Kahlil.

Kongbo is a take. See: Brown for same reasoning.

Byrd is a take due to how versatile he is. He is a 4* at CB or WR. Could potentially be a two way player and WR recruiting this cycle puts him higher on the board.

Now, if one of them doesn't want in and Dickerson does (a very likely situation) then he is absolutely a take. It isn't hard to see he probably projects as a guard. Now, if you'll take a peak at the roster, we have a lot of young depth there. Not to mention we have 3 OL commits already in a smaller class. That would make that not a huge position of need. Taking Dickerson would simply be a luxury then.

Again, no one is saying he isn't a take. No one. It is being stated that we have a few needs higher on the board, which is absolutely true. If you weren't such an azz all the time you'd be a decent poster. But you're a huge azz all the time
Click to expand...
Dickerson has visited a number of times. He is a take, regardless. OL of his caliber are never a backup plan. It's silly to suggest otherwise. At worst, he is solid depth the same way Brown would be for the DT position. Dickerson can also play OT or OG equally well, so those kind of guys are extremely valuable. You don't know how many we are willing to take, so this is a major waste of time bickering about who is a take and who isn't. He is as big of a fish as Richmond was last year.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,303
#3,303
Numbers can seem hard, but really they are not. When properly used they can be your friend.

1 2 3 4 5 - names

If we can take 1 2 3 4 5 people we can take all 1 2 3 4 5 names.

If we can only take 1 2 3 4 people, then 1 of those names will be left off. If names 1 2 3 & 4 say yes, then name 5 is the one left off. If any one of 1 2 3 & 4 say no, then name 5 is in.

See how simple and fun numbers can be. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#3,304
#3,304
BaldBiker said:
Numbers can seem hard, but really they are not. When properly used they can be your friend.

1 2 3 4 5 - names

If we can take 1 2 3 4 5 people we can take all 1 2 3 4 5 names.

If we can only take 1 2 3 4 people, then 1 of those names will be left off. If names 1 2 3 & 4 say yes, then name 5 is the one left off. If any one of 1 2 3 & 4 say no, then name 5 is in.

See how simple and fun numbers can be. :)
Click to expand...

Sounds like an LSAT question
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,305
#3,305
BaldBiker said:
Numbers can seem hard, but really they are not. When properly used they can be your friend.

1 2 3 4 5 - names

If we can take 1 2 3 4 5 people we can take all 1 2 3 4 5 names.

If we can only take 1 2 3 4 people, then 1 of those names will be left off. If names 1 2 3 & 4 say yes, then name 5 is the one left off. If any one of 1 2 3 & 4 say no, then name 5 is in.

See how simple and fun numbers can be. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, we may be dealing with imaginary numbers though. Square root of -25 for example. 🤔
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,306
#3,306
Wickman said:
Ok, let's actually think instead of "Oh nooooo someone said we are passing on an olineman what a retard!!!!!!"

Warrior is in. Legacy, and safety is a huge position of need.

Brown is in if he wants in. Elite DT. After next year depth has a few question marks after Shy and Kahlil.

Kongbo is a take. See: Brown for same reasoning.

Byrd is a take due to how versatile he is. He is a 4* at CB or WR. Could potentially be a two way player and WR recruiting this cycle puts him higher on the board.

Now, if one of them doesn't want in and Dickerson does (a very likely situation) then he is absolutely a take. It isn't hard to see he probably projects as a guard. Now, if you'll take a peak at the roster, we have a lot of young depth there. Not to mention we have 3 OL commits already in a smaller class. That would make that not a huge position of need. Taking Dickerson would simply be a luxury then.

Again, no one is saying he isn't a take. No one. It is being stated that we have a few needs higher on the board, which is absolutely true. If you weren't such an azz all the time you'd be a decent poster. But you're a huge azz all the time
Click to expand...

.
 
#3,307
#3,307
BaldBiker said:
Numbers can seem hard, but really they are not. When properly used they can be your friend.

1 2 3 4 5 - names

If we can take 1 2 3 4 5 people we can take all 1 2 3 4 5 names.

If we can only take 1 2 3 4 people, then 1 of those names will be left off. If names 1 2 3 & 4 say yes, then name 5 is the one left off. If any one of 1 2 3 & 4 say no, then name 5 is in.

See how simple and fun numbers can be. :)
Click to expand...

Well there is the '16 commit +1 that brings a '17 +1 commit along. I'm not trying to imply parallel universes or anything, but it's hard to avoid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,310
#3,310
3x + 2y - 1z = 4

If you have a three 5*s and two 4*s that want to be added, you can subtract a 3* to reach the desired number.

Or you can carry forward an overage and reconcile it next year.

You take the elite players and make the numbers work.
 
#3,312
#3,312
jasonvol18 said:
Everything I have heard is Dickerson is way down the priority list. They love Tatum more than Dickerson. Warrior,Byrd,Brown and Kongbo are top priority right now.
Click to expand...

Nathan Neihaus higher on the board than a top OL in Dickerson? Elite programs rather have Dickerson
 
Last edited:
#3,313
#3,313
jbr82 said:
Nathan Neihaus higher on the than a top OL in Dickerson? Elite programs rather have Dickerson
Click to expand...

Elite programs that have spots can have him...FSU has 5 spots filled...every one of them better than Dickerson?
 
#3,314
#3,314
When it comes to all this fuzzy math, "I am not a smart man", but I would stomp my feet and light a match to add Kongbo to our demolition defense!
 
#3,315
#3,315
jbr82 said:
Nathan Neihaus higher on the board than a top OL in Dickerson? Elite programs rather have Dickerson
Click to expand...

It could be that they will try Niehaus at tackle and if he doesn't work there, then he could play guard. Would love to have Dickerson, but you can develop very good 3 stars at guard. Tackle is the tougher position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,316
#3,316
VolGee4 said:
It could be that they will try Niehaus at tackle and if he doesn't work there, then he could play guard. Would love to have Dickerson, but you can develop very good 3 stars at guard. Tackle is the tougher position.
Click to expand...

NN is probably not built to play OG, he is practically 6'7. However, he could end up a extra blocking TE in some sets. Some schools recruited him as such.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,322
#3,322
butchna said:
Elite programs that have spots can have him...FSU has 5 spots filled...every one of them better than Dickerson?
Click to expand...

Don't believe this.

Dickerson is rated the 43rd overall player. If FSU has 5 OL RANKED 42 or higher then they have to have the #1 class this year
 
#3,324
#3,324
As of this second 247 CB predictions are:

Tennessee 47% Ole Miss 12% Oregon 12% Alabama 12% Florida State 12% Poll Results:

Vols Trending /
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top