For Those Who Actually Watch Film
Comments
-
Thought this thread might be about snuff films.
-
You mean he actually improved as an upper classman?Houhusky said:
Many people here forget that King came in weighing like 150 lbs and inspired the term "Long Neck"whuggy said:
I'm talking about Kevin King who came in prettyWeakarmCobra said:
dude you realize that king was one top 40 players drafted last year? those guys dont just grow on treeswhuggy said:
So can Stanley get to Kevin King territory?Dennis_DeYoung said:
Stanley is a nice looking athlete who moves nimbly. A guy who probably would be good eventually for us, but doesn't have great instincts. DDY2. Right in the middle.whuggy said:How do Stanley and Hampton compare? Appear to physically
be similar. Does Stanley have an upside comparable to Hampton?
Hampton, who I was meh on until I saw him as a senior, is a totally different level. He's the #2 corner in the west (according to me, Coker and some other smart people) and his body and agility are rare. The guy has crazy instincts and fast twitch movement. He's a DDY3 and what I think would be close to a 5* guy.
Stanley is a guy you take because you see athleticism and you think you can turn it into a DB.
Hampton is a guy who - if he can get to 200 lbs - will look like Patrick Peterson.
lightly regarded as a recruit. Could he have the same
trajectory considering the quality of coaching he will
receive?
FYI at the NFL combine he weighed in at 200lbs and had the top CB time for 3 cone, 20yrd shuttle, 60yrd shuttle, and the 2nd best Vert.
Dude went from a nobody 3 star tall JAG playing CB because he was too weak to play safety to an amazing college CB and so-far a pretty good NFL CB.
Perfect example of scouting an athlete, developing, and coaching a guy that would have likely just disappeared if left to squander natural ability at SDSU or Cal -
The question for me with instincts is why are they bad. Are they bad because you just haven't gotten enough reps? Are they bad because you aren't getting good coaching? Or are they bad because you're a mental midget and things just don't click for you?
If it's either of the first 2, you can overcome them with time in the program and potentially be a contributor at some point. If it's the mental midget side of things, then the odds of it ever clicking is about zero and you're destined to be one of those athletes that lucks into a few plays but always leaves you massively underwhelmed.
In a normal situation, if you're in the UW program, that kind of player will almost always get passed at some point by our typical recruit. -
Instincts and football IQ are so fucking underrated in scouting. They can be improved, but for the most part, they are what they are.Tequilla said:The question for me with instincts is why are they bad. Are they bad because you just haven't gotten enough reps? Are they bad because you aren't getting good coaching? Or are they bad because you're a mental midget and things just don't click for you?
If it's either of the first 2, you can overcome them with time in the program and potentially be a contributor at some point. If it's the mental midget side of things, then the odds of it ever clicking is about zero and you're destined to be one of those athletes that lucks into a few plays but always leaves you massively underwhelmed.
In a normal situation, if you're in the UW program, that kind of player will almost always get passed at some point by our typical recruit.
You’re an IMA legend, so I’ll give you a hoops comparison. Guys with court vision, that understand floor spacing, and are consistently in good help side defensive positioning are valuable. Most guys have it or don’t.
In football, guys that time their blitzes, disguise coverages, anticipate and avoid blocks
We need guys with both instincts and talent. It’s easier said than done. I think both Pete and coach K are such good coaches they know they can win with guys like BBK and Myles Bryant. Both those guys are very smart football players.
Ultimately, if we want to win a natty, we are going to play Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson type teams. BBK is probably as instinctual of a player as Rueben Foster. We all know what the difference is.
I don’t always agree with Dennis, but he’s 100% right that we need more talent. We have the coaching. We need more talent and a NFL type at QB. That’s the formula for UW. -
Agree 100%RoadDawg55 said:
Instincts and football IQ are so fucking underrated in scouting. They can be improved, but for the most part, they are what they are.Tequilla said:The question for me with instincts is why are they bad. Are they bad because you just haven't gotten enough reps? Are they bad because you aren't getting good coaching? Or are they bad because you're a mental midget and things just don't click for you?
If it's either of the first 2, you can overcome them with time in the program and potentially be a contributor at some point. If it's the mental midget side of things, then the odds of it ever clicking is about zero and you're destined to be one of those athletes that lucks into a few plays but always leaves you massively underwhelmed.
In a normal situation, if you're in the UW program, that kind of player will almost always get passed at some point by our typical recruit.
You’re an IMA legend, so I’ll give you a hoops comparison. Guys with court vision, that understand floor spacing, and are consistently in good help side defensive positioning are valuable. Most guys have it or don’t.
In football, guys that time their blitzes, disguise coverages, anticipate and avoid blocks
We need guys with both instincts and talent. It’s easier said than done. I think both Pete and coach K are such good coaches they know they can win with guys like BBK and Myles Bryant. Both those guys are very smart football players.
Ultimately, if we want to win a natty, we are going to play Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson type teams. BBK is probably as instinctual of a player as Rueben Foster. We all know what the difference is.
I don’t always agree with Dennis, but he’s 100% right that we need more talent. We have the coaching. We need more talent and a NFL type at QB. That’s the formula for UW.
Not all instincts are just natural ... but there are certain ones that are. They really do matter because if you can read a play and react to it it makes you faster than you really are -
but coming out of HS he was a middle of the pack guyWeakarmCobra said:
dude you realize that king was one top 40 players drafted last year? those guys dont just grow on treeswhuggy said:
So can Stanley get to Kevin King territory?Dennis_DeYoung said:
Stanley is a nice looking athlete who moves nimbly. A guy who probably would be good eventually for us, but doesn't have great instincts. DDY2. Right in the middle.whuggy said:How do Stanley and Hampton compare? Appear to physically
be similar. Does Stanley have an upside comparable to Hampton?
Hampton, who I was meh on until I saw him as a senior, is a totally different level. He's the #2 corner in the west (according to me, Coker and some other smart people) and his body and agility are rare. The guy has crazy instincts and fast twitch movement. He's a DDY3 and what I think would be close to a 5* guy.
Stanley is a guy you take because you see athleticism and you think you can turn it into a DB.
Hampton is a guy who - if he can get to 200 lbs - will look like Patrick Peterson. -
After watching Stanley a bit more, one thing I like about him is that they have him punt and throw trick-play passes.
At first that might seem like nothing, but it speaks to how much they trust him. A lot of athletic kids who can't play football don't get trusted with that sort of thing.
The fact they let him punt tells you they think he is a smart player.
That's something I like about him.
And he has really good change-of-direction quickness.
One thing I'm always looking for in defenders is guys who instinctively cut down angles so the ball-carrier is trapped and can't do what he wants. That's where Stanley lacks, to me. We teach angles all the time, so it should improve, but it's something that some guys just do instinctively.
It's what made Budda so devastating. Guys just couldn't get around him. -
Roaddawgsan and Teq are agreeing. Not sure what to do.Tequilla said:
Agree 100%RoadDawg55 said:
Instincts and football IQ are so fucking underrated in scouting. They can be improved, but for the most part, they are what they are.Tequilla said:The question for me with instincts is why are they bad. Are they bad because you just haven't gotten enough reps? Are they bad because you aren't getting good coaching? Or are they bad because you're a mental midget and things just don't click for you?
If it's either of the first 2, you can overcome them with time in the program and potentially be a contributor at some point. If it's the mental midget side of things, then the odds of it ever clicking is about zero and you're destined to be one of those athletes that lucks into a few plays but always leaves you massively underwhelmed.
In a normal situation, if you're in the UW program, that kind of player will almost always get passed at some point by our typical recruit.
You’re an IMA legend, so I’ll give you a hoops comparison. Guys with court vision, that understand floor spacing, and are consistently in good help side defensive positioning are valuable. Most guys have it or don’t.
In football, guys that time their blitzes, disguise coverages, anticipate and avoid blocks
We need guys with both instincts and talent. It’s easier said than done. I think both Pete and coach K are such good coaches they know they can win with guys like BBK and Myles Bryant. Both those guys are very smart football players.
Ultimately, if we want to win a natty, we are going to play Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson type teams. BBK is probably as instinctual of a player as Rueben Foster. We all know what the difference is.
I don’t always agree with Dennis, but he’s 100% right that we need more talent. We have the coaching. We need more talent and a NFL type at QB. That’s the formula for UW.
Not all instincts are just natural ... but there are certain ones that are. They really do matter because if you can read a play and react to it it makes you faster than you really are -
Alright I'm convinced, sign me up.Dennis_DeYoung said:After watching Stanley a bit more, one thing I like about him is that they have him punt and throw trick-play passes.
At first that might seem like nothing, but it speaks to how much they trust him. A lot of athletic kids who can't play football don't get trusted with that sort of thing.
The fact they let him punt tells you they think he is a smart player.
That's something I like about him.
And he has really good change-of-direction quickness.
One thing I'm always looking for in defenders is guys who instinctively cut down angles so the ball-carrier is trapped and can't do what he wants. That's where Stanley lacks, to me. We teach angles all the time, so it should improve, but it's something that some guys just do instinctively.
It's what made Budda so devastating. Guys just couldn't get around him.
He's obviously #3 on the remaining DB list, but I won't be upset if he's the third best DB in the class. Second best DB would be a problem. -
With all due respect, this is the dumest thing you've ever said. You're reading too much into it. I don't GAF is he can punt and run trick plays. If Teq had said this it would get a million WTF's.Dennis_DeYoung said:After watching Stanley a bit more, one thing I like about him is that they have him punt and throw trick-play passes.
At first that might seem like nothing, but it speaks to how much they trust him. A lot of athletic kids who can't play football don't get trusted with that sort of thing.
The fact they let him punt tells you they think he is a smart player.
That's something I like about him.
