Aubbie?

RaceBannon

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=sec&id=70788

Steve_Bowman

Go Rebels!

DerekJohnson

LOL

Auburndawg

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

It's year fucking 5. If UW is still starting young players (which by the way, they're really not), that shit falls on the head coach for not recruiting well enough and not developing well enough.

TierbsHsotBoobs

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

It's year fucking 5. If UW is still starting young players (which by the way, they're really not), that shit falls on the head coach for not recruiting well enough and not developing well enough.

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

I do. So does Ole Miss.

RaceBannon

I thought Sark was a great recruiter?

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

RaceBannon said:

I thought Sark was a great recruiter?

Everyone says so.

Auburndawg

Read my other post. We are NOT young now.

DingaLing

SEC young >>>> PAC 12 young, old, gay, black, mormon

hth

MisterEm

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

Yes. The national champions from last year disagree.

They played 12 freshmen and rotated between 3 and 4 freshmen starters per week and 8 or more on the 2 deeps.

I will take a young team and a natty over experienced redshirt juniors all-around.

Gladstone

How in the hell did Ol Miss reel in a top ten recruiting class, including the #1 prospect out of Georgia. I guess the boosters are stepping up.

dnc

Gladstone said:

How in the hell did Ol Miss reel in a top ten recruiting class, including the #1 prospect out of Georgia. I guess the boosters are stepping up.

Ole Miss teenage boy stocking superiority guy here. Coach Blindside and his staff are extremely well liked by the kids for one. Also, they had that #1 recruit's older brother which is the reason they got baby bro. Last year was a confluence of lucky connections and good recruiting, kind of like last year's UW hoops could have been if Romar knew how to close.




























Also, the boosters really stepped up. Hotty Toddy!

puppylove_sugarsteel

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

It's year fucking 5. If UW is still starting young players (which by the way, they're really not), that shit falls on the head coach for not recruiting well enough and not developing well enough.

well there's attrition, early NFL defectors, injuries etc., things not on the coach

TierbsHsotBoobs

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

It's year fucking 5. If UW is still starting young players (which by the way, they're really not), that shit falls on the head coach for not recruiting well enough and not developing well enough.

well there's attrition, early NFL defectors, injuries etc., things not on the coach

It's a shame that Washington is the only program in the country that suffers from attrition, early NFL defectors, injuries etc.

RaceBannon

The Huskies have filled NFL rosters with early entry guys

Mohun

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

It's year fucking 5. If UW is still starting young players (which by the way, they're really not), that shit falls on the head coach for not recruiting well enough and not developing well enough.

well there's attrition, early NFL defectors, injuries etc., things not on the coach

Recruiting their replacements, is on the coach.

HTH

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

It's year fucking 5. If UW is still starting young players (which by the way, they're really not), that shit falls on the head coach for not recruiting well enough and not developing well enough.

well there's attrition, early NFL defectors, injuries etc., things not on the coach

Here I've been promoting you for the front page and then you come back with this?

You're better than that.

dnc

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

puppylove_sugarsteel said:

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

Auburndawg said:

The point of the article is that starting young players generally isn't a good thing. Anyone really disagree with that?

It's year fucking 5. If UW is still starting young players (which by the way, they're really not), that shit falls on the head coach for not recruiting well enough and not developing well enough.

well there's attrition, early NFL defectors, injuries etc., things not on the coach

Here I've been promoting you for the front page and then you come back with this?

You're better than that.

disagree