‘23 GA TE Ethan Davis (Tennessee commit)

If you think what you have seen the entire offense of CJH, you are mistaken. There is a whole series of plays that really puts the SS, and Mike in conflict. Im sure CJH has put his flair and creativity into the plays as well.
The Hyatt sneak out of the backfield play for a TD is something that would be done more with a great TE.

I don’t see any post where someone said we have seen everything Heupel has to offer offensively.

I was responding to your comment that the TE has to be able to run the ball in this offense to play, which has never been a staple of Heupel’s offense at any stop until he was forced into it this season.

You’re just adjusting the goalposts of your stance and creating a statement that didn’t exist all to avoid looking incorrect. It’s ok man. Good talk.
 
Our TEs do not need to be able to convert on 3rd and short from the backfield with the ball in their hands.

Fant was different and used differently.

That's all I'm stating.

Yep. I think the takeaway is that Heupel utilizes whatever skill sets he has to work with, unlike so many coaches who try to force a kid to play a role for which he isn't suited or just waste a kid. I think about guys like Derrick Tinsley, David Martin, and Eric Parker who were basically wasted at UT because our staff was so unbending and uncreative. Heupel would've made those guys stars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc
I don’t see any post where someone said we have seen everything Heupel has to offer offensively.

I was responding to your comment that the TE has to be able to run the ball in this offense to play, which has never been a staple of Heupel’s offense at any stop until he was forced into it this season.

You’re just adjusting the goalposts of your stance and creating a statement that didn’t exist all to avoid looking incorrect. It’s ok man. Good talk.
Didn’t say play. I said start. Good try though man. It’s amazing how some people here look for arguments to have.
The argument that Fant ran because he was the only big back isn’t a true statement. He ran not from a tailback position but from that Hback/TE position.
You are definitely entitled to your own thoughts and opinions on things, you aren’t entitled to your own facts though.
 
Our TEs do not need to be able to convert on 3rd and short from the backfield with the ball in their hands.

Fant was different and used differently.

That's all I'm stating.
The argument out there was to start. My opinion is that just because a kid is athletic and is really good at something, doesn’t mean he will start. The TE position on the offense is definitely one where the player is asked to do a lot more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TennacJed
Didn’t say play. I said start. Good try though man. It’s amazing how some people here look for arguments to have.
The argument that Fant ran because he was the only big back isn’t a true statement. He ran not from a tailback position but from that Hback/TE position.
You are definitely entitled to your own thoughts and opinions on things, you aren’t entitled to your own facts though.

He doesn't need to be able to carry the ball to "start" either. That has never been a staple of this offense and what CJH consistently asks the TE to do. Fant had a total of 6 carries this year. Please keep telling us how the TE has to carry the ball though or he won't "start". You honestly think that the difference in a TE being able to start or not is 6 carries? C'mon man.

Our RBs this year (Small, Wright, and Sampson) are listed at 213, 200, and 190 lbs respectively and I would argue that Small was the least physical of the 3. I don't want to let facts get in the way of your argument here, but its clear we did not have a big back to use in short yardage situations. So we had to improvise and use Fant for that. Where he lined up is irrelevant, he was used in the short yardage situations because we didn't have a thumper. Which is also why this staff has gone after bigger backs specifically this recruiting cycle.
 
He doesn't need to be able to carry the ball to "start" either. That has never been a staple of this offense and what CJH consistently asks the TE to do. Fant had a total of 6 carries this year. Please keep telling us how the TE has to carry the ball though or he won't "start". You honestly think that the difference in a TE being able to start or not is 6 carries? C'mon man.

Our RBs this year (Small, Wright, and Sampson) are listed at 213, 200, and 190 lbs respectively and I would argue that Small was the least physical of the 3. I don't want to let facts get in the way of your argument here, but its clear we did not have a big back to use in short yardage situations. So we had to improvise and use Fant for that. Where he lined up is irrelevant, he was used in the short yardage situations because we didn't have a thumper. Which is also why this staff has gone after bigger backs specifically this recruiting cycle.
The argument before us was, is this kid going to be a starter year 1 correct? Obviously not every player can do what a coach requires. Don’t make a straw man argument out of this. The fact that a well rounded TE can create matchup problems in a no huddle fast pace offense, has way more value than just a good pass catcher or good run blocker or good pass blocker.
There is a reason that RBs don’t play a bunch if they can’t figure out pass pro. They might be better at carrying the rock, however, it limits the offense on what they can do when in there and thus signals to the defense what play is coming up. It’s as simple as that.
WR is a position in this offense that simplifies things and allows for underclassmen to get PT. TE isn’t one of those positions in this offense.
 
Does anyone know if he's going to be 100% healthy when he arrives on campus? I wasn't sure what his injury was like senior year.
 

VN Store



Back
Top