nicksjuzunk
Lurking
- Joined
 - May 29, 2009
 
- Messages
 - 35,555
 
- Likes
 - 112,832
 
There is no lock other than death and taxes
We are in the Top 5 of Rod Crayton, Darius Latham, & Donovan Munger,
and
in the mix with Jaynard Bostwick, Jay Ellison, Kelsey Griffin, Michael Hill, Antonio Riles, & Dominique Threatt amongst others.
JUCO players Johnson and Peko are two top rated DT's and would be good p/u's.
I understand your point but don't underestimate the value of JC players and their contributions.
Under Dooley, we will always go after JUCO DL because they provide immediate impact depth.
I am not saying that you are wrong about Dooley's approach but I hope that this is not true. I would prefer for Dooley to get big name high school stars at DL positions whom UT could grow internally in the program rather than always relying on JUCO DL talent. I am always concerned with JUCOs because the bust rate seems fairly high, the learning curve is steep and it usually takes one year to adjust (like Nick Fairley), and, most importantly, the majority of impact players, including DL, come directly from high school. I really hope that Dooley gets the DL recruiting machine cranking to the point that JUCOs are rarely taken and only if they are definitively dominant. Whereas, at this point, I feel like we are taking so many JUCO DLs because of the lack of quality depth at these critical positions. From my perspective, Dooley is using JUCO DLs as stopgap measures until he is able to effectively grow DLs within the program. Of course, maybe I am entirely wrong and Dooley thinks that he can always get a few impact DLs from the JUCO ranks. Regardless, I am rooting for a shift to recruiting high school kids to grow internally. That's just my opinion, though.
I am not saying that you are wrong about Dooley's approach but I hope that this is not true. I would prefer for Dooley to get big name high school stars at DL positions whom UT could grow internally in the program rather than always relying on JUCO DL talent. I am always concerned with JUCOs because the bust rate seems fairly high, the learning curve is steep and it usually takes one year to adjust (like Nick Fairley), and, most importantly, the majority of impact players, including DL, come directly from high school. I really hope that Dooley gets the DL recruiting machine cranking to the point that JUCOs are rarely taken and only if they are definitively dominant. Whereas, at this point, I feel like we are taking so many JUCO DLs because of the lack of quality depth at these critical positions. From my perspective, Dooley is using JUCO DLs as stopgap measures until he is able to effectively grow DLs within the program. Of course, maybe I am entirely wrong and Dooley thinks that he can always get a few impact DLs from the JUCO ranks. Regardless, I am rooting for a shift to recruiting high school kids to grow internally. That's just my opinion, though.
I am not saying that you are wrong about Dooley's approach but I hope that this is not true. I would prefer for Dooley to get big name high school stars at DL positions whom UT could grow internally in the program rather than always relying on JUCO DL talent. I am always concerned with JUCOs because the bust rate seems fairly high, the learning curve is steep and it usually takes one year to adjust (like Nick Fairley), and, most importantly, the majority of impact players, including DL, come directly from high school. I really hope that Dooley gets the DL recruiting machine cranking to the point that JUCOs are rarely taken and only if they are definitively dominant. Whereas, at this point, I feel like we are taking so many JUCO DLs because of the lack of quality depth at these critical positions. From my perspective, Dooley is using JUCO DLs as stopgap measures until he is able to effectively grow DLs within the program. Of course, maybe I am entirely wrong and Dooley thinks that he can always get a few impact DLs from the JUCO ranks. Regardless, I am rooting for a shift to recruiting high school kids to grow internally. That's just my opinion, though.
