GRAHAM STEWART TO UCONN...

[kcc1442]

We only have Donahue for a year. But I agree with it all. Very awesome! Now it's time to reel in some big fish from the HS ranks. Ogun I'm looking straight at you kid!

Actually looking more into it we may have donahue for 2 years. Interesting. I always thought he was a 1 year pick up for us.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

And a lot of glory going to class in 80 degrees in February, sitting at the beach in November and seeing Gainesville co-eds in miniskirts twelve months a year.

It's a tough choice for kids. I don't begrudge anyone for going south instead of playing here.

Did you mean "sitting on the bench in November" instead of "sitting at the beach"? Look, I love warm weather too. I get it, but the are only so many minutes/playing spots in a program, so it becomes a matter of mathematics.

If a school like Florida has kids lining up to eventually "sit on the shelf", it remains puzzling why they wouldn't take the next best option (or another option) and get to a program where they would have a better chance of getting onto the field quickly.

Personally, I'd like to see the NCAA limited scholarships to around 50 (2 deep on the depth chart and some special team players). That would force #'s 51-85 to look elsewhere, thereby dispersing talent throughout the nation. As for the arguments about depth and injuries, etc. let programs fill the rest of their rosters with "walk-ons". It would give them a little Ivy League flavor.

Point is, a program like UConn will never have a chance a breaking into the "elite circles", if the Florida's and the Alabama's of the world can continuously court kids into chasing a dream that is "mathematically" skewed against the majority of them (again, limited number of players on the field at a time and finite number of minutes in a given game).

Think that's far-fetched? Not so fast, years ago programs like Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma would have upwards of 120 scholarships they would grant. The convential thinking was "better to have them sitting the bench on our sidelines than to have to go out and try to beat those same players" (like Goldfingers of the Gridiron). Over the years, reforms have reduce the number of scholarships and, while these same schools have remained dominant in the recruiting arena, there is definitely more parity on the field throughout college football.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

Sorry for the double post, I was unable to delete it.

Anyway, thats how Pitt got very good very fast in the early 70's, one year they brought in something like 60-70 kids.

 

[pj]

TDH, they need a balance between parity and quality among the teams that appear on TV and have the most fans. If the quality of play sinks then fans will switch to the NFL. It's a balancing act. I think around 80 scholarships works pretty well. It's enough to recruit one player for each position per year. Two-deep with senior and junior, sophomore on special teams, you can swing and miss 1/4 of the time, or take some players who need a few years to develop before seeing the field. I could see conceivably going as low as 66 for 3 deep at each position, which would leave minimal depth. My trouble would be (a) it deprives players of scholarships -- fewer kids going to college free; and (b) it deprives talented but raw kids from areas with poor high school football from chances, since schools will need kids who can play right away and won't be able to afford to recruit kids who need to practice and train 2 years before seeing the field.

Since our recruiting area generates a lot of kids in category (b), I think big scholarship cuts would hurt UConn, and really favor schools in Texas etc where high school football is very strong.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

(b) it deprives talented but raw kids from areas with poor high school football from chances, since schools will need kids who can play right away and won't be able to afford to recruit kids who need to practice and train 2 years before seeing the field.

Since our recruiting area generates a lot of kids in category (b), I think big scholarship cuts would hurt UConn, and really favor schools in Texas etc where high school football is very strong.

Actually a reduction in scholarships would solve (b). UConn would be benefiting from being able to recruit players that Florida or Alabama or Penn State or Ohio State are currently landing. Even allowing for 15 scholarships per year means that Florida loses approximately 10 players a year that they normally would have landed. They go elsewhere. Programs like UConn recruit them, a logical assumption since normally Florida lands stronger recruiting classes than UConn.

Have to wonder. If a program like Florida had to "freeze" any 50 players they wanted and then the rest became available to a programs like UConn, just how many of those other 35 would make an impact on field for the Huskies. I'm guessing more than a few (Cam Newton was always gonna sit behind Tim Tebow even had he stayed at UF. Also behind Tebow was John Brantley, who while not great, would be an upgrade at QB at UConn.

 

[pj]

In recruiting from Florida and Texas, we'd be at a disadvantage because of distance. It would help mediocre southern programs more. Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, USF, UCF, Ole Miss, Miss St, ...

 

[TouchdownHusky]

In recruiting from Florida and Texas, we'd be at a disadvantage because of distance. It would help mediocre southern programs more. Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, USF, UCF, Ole Miss, Miss St, ...

Yeah but then they'd have to reduce by 10 (plus those needed to make room for the Forida or Texas players they pick up). Bottom line: there are 65 BCS programs (more or less) @ 85 scholarships. Reduce the number to 15 per year and that free's up roughly 250 scholarships each season from perennial Top 25 programs. These kids , in turn, could most assuridly get picked up elsewhere.

Guess what I'm saying is the following. If you took a mediorce-to-pretty decent program like Iowa or Texas A&M or Cal or Arkansas or Tennessee and put their recruiting classes up against UConn's. How many of theirs get picked ahead our the Huskies in the first ten choices, second ten choices and so on? So a limit on scholarships would most certainly help programs like UConn.

 

[pj]

I agree we'd have better players, but so would every school not in the top 10 ... because the 22*65 starters at the top 65 programs would be drawn from the top 70*65 players rather than the top 85*65 players, there would be fewer weak players in college football. But depth would be worse.

For UConn what we care about is relative standing. In the northeast, programs like UMass, Buffalo, and Temple would benefit even more than UConn. Also, with the lack of depth, we would have down years in which such programs would outperform us. That may never happen at 85 scholarships.

I think we'll have an easier time being in the top 25 with 85 scholarships, because we can dominate northeast recruiting and the larger roster gives us time to develop northeast players.

 

[bmayuc]

Depth wouldn't be worse. Same player pool, just classification different. Lots more walk-ons.

Also, FCS football would be LEGIT.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[UconnFamily]

Busted me on that one.

Point I've been trying to make is that he has a game film resume as strong as many of our linebacker.

By playing special teams as a true freshman he had his red shirt burned meaning the coaches were using him throughout the week for practices and game film and he had to prepare himself as if he was going to be playing defense. And he played it against the highest level of college football.

I'm not knocking any of our current players and I'm not annoiting Stewart as the second coming of anyone.

What I am saying is that he is a big time catch and has shown he can play at the highest level of college football which is a good thing.

Yeah I think he got you there! Where not knocking what you are trying to say about Graham Stewart by all means, but our linebackers were used throughout the week for practice, watched game film, and had to prepare themselves as if they were going to be playing defense too! They weren't cheerleaders!! It wouldn't hurt for Graham to sit out and get familiar with the defense, he can get a lot better, and he'll have more time to start here! just saying!

 

[mattp]

It wouldn't hurt for Graham to sit out and get familiar with the defense, he can get a lot better, and he'll have more time to start here! just saying!

isn't he going to have to sit a year? otherwise play whoever can contribute. imagine if we'd RSed Todman a year. it would have been a waste and he'd have left with two years of eligibility instead of one. this isn't a video game, you never know what will happen next season, so i think it's always better to play the best guys at the time.

 

[pj]

Yes, you want to do well this year and hopefully that success will help you recruit a replacement that's just as good.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

isn't he going to have to sit a year? otherwise play whoever can contribute. imagine if we'd RSed Todman a year. it would have been a waste and he'd have left with two years of eligibility instead of one. this isn't a video game, you never know what will happen next season, so i think it's always better to play the best guys at the time.

Todman should have stayed one more year, nevermind leaving after two. A Donald Brown career in the NFL he hasn't exactly had.

 

[mattp]

Todman should have stayed one more year, nevermind leaving after two. A Donald Brown career in the NFL he hasn't exactly had.

i agree with you, but some people could make a logical argument that staying would have only worn down his body a little bit more. personally i don't totally buy the argument that RBs have a limited shelf life and should leave early whenever possible, but it's certainly a rational one.

my main point though was that you never know what tomorrow will bring so i don't think it's always necessary to try to save everyone's extra year. some kids leave after they graduate even if they have a year left, some leave early or transfer, you never know so you might as well put the best players on the roster on the field. like i said, i think it's a moot point anyway b/c i'm pretty sure Stewart will have to sit a year

 

[Palatine]

Todman should have stayed one more year, nevermind leaving after two. A Donald Brown career in the NFL he hasn't exactly had.

Another player who should have prepared better for the combine. Regardless of his college production or if he stayed another year, a better combine gets him drafted higher. I have no question he can play at the NFL level but higher draft choices get a more money a bigger margin for error.

 

[BHusky]

Todman should have stayed one more year, nevermind leaving after two. A Donald Brown career in the NFL he hasn't exactly had.

Not sure what another year at UConn would have done for him. As a RB you have to strike while the iron is hot and he it was not going to get any better than he had it his last year. Top producing RB in the country, great performances on national TV (i.e., ND), BCS bowl, etc. His situation could only get worse and at best be a giant question mark with his head coach leaving and the graduation of some key players. What if UConn brought in a pass happy, 5 wide type of coach? Long story short, he was not going to produce more than he did his last year and the team was not going to be as good, so he left. Regardless of what you do in college, once you get in front of the NFL evaluators it is a whole new ballgame. Something as random as small hands could drop you a round in the NFL draft versus just basing things on the game tape.

 

[UconnFamily]

Not sure what another year at UConn would have done for him. As a RB you have to strike while the iron is hot and he it was not going to get any better than he had it his last year. Top producing RB in the country, great performances on national TV (i.e., ND), BCS bowl, etc. His situation could only get worse and at best be a giant question mark with his head coach leaving and the graduation of some key players. What if UConn brought in a pass happy, 5 wide type of coach? Long story short, he was not going to produce more than he did his last year and the team was not going to be as good, so he left. Regardless of what you do in college, once you get in front of the NFL evaluators it is a whole new ballgame. Something as random as small hands could drop you a round in the NFL draft versus just basing things on the game tape.

How would you know he wouldn't produce more then what he did? We had Lyle "little" McCombs rush for over 1,100 yards as a freshmen. Imagine how much yards Todman would have gotten and he's bigger and faster then McCombs. There's player's who accomplished more then what Jordan Todman did and still came back for their senior year and went high on draft boards just becasue they wanted an extra year in college to get better. If Todman stood for his senior year he would of been a top draft pick, produce talent wise, and Uconn would of had a way better record then what they did. Remember the year they went to a BCS bowl? he was the one to stop. Uconn would of had more exposure too cause he would have been the top running back in the country. He should of stood another year!

 

[businesslawyer]

How would you know he wouldn't produce more then what he did? We had Lyle "little" McCombs rush for over 1,100 yards as a freshmen. Imagine how much yards Todman would have gotten and he's bigger and faster then McCombs. There's player's who accomplished more then what Jordan Todman did and still came back for their senior year and went high on draft boards just becasue they wanted an extra year in college to get better. If Todman stood for his senior year he would of been a top draft pick, produce talent wise, and Uconn would of had a way better record then what they did. Remember the year they went to a BCS bowl? he was the one to stop. Uconn would of had more exposure too cause he would have been the top running back in the country. He should of stood another year!

????

No one is arguing UConn wouldn't have been better with Todman. Why are you trying to convince people of what everyone knows?

 

[pj]

It would have been great to have him, but there's nothing wrong with starting your pro career when you've accomplished all you can in college. Another year of huge yardage in a 7-5 or 8-4 season doesn't change his profile to NFL evaluators. An injury might.

 

[kcc1442]

Just talked to my brother in-law about Graham. My brother in law teaches @ Xavier and coaches football at another H.S. He indicated that he heard that among the main reason of being homesick that Florida also told him that he was going to be moved to full back next year and that solidified his decision of transferring back home. Also he said that the coaches have been talking to Boyle about considering UCONN much more now that Graham is transferring home. Which would be awesome if Graham really steps up and recruits Boyle. Although he did mention that Tennessee, Oregon and Notre Dame (although they received a recent QB commit so have backed off) have been on Campus recently. Also Florida was in contact and starting to get involved.

 

[kris1]

Stewart will sit out the season and have three years remaining.
http://www.ctpost.com/highschool/article/Ex-Xavier-star-transfers-from-Florida-to-UConn-3600995.php

 

[jrazz12]

Stewart will sit out the season and have three years remaining.
http://www.ctpost.com/highschool/article/Ex-Xavier-star-transfers-from-Florida-to-UConn-3600995.php

I believe he was trying to apply for a waiver from the NCAA. Muschamp was backing him up on it. This doesn't make it clear if that has been processed/denied yet, unless you have other inside info. Hopefully he can come in and contribute right away, although he's here for the long haul either way so it's all gravy.