HelenaHandBasket
Well-known member
I don't think impact making TE or OLB stronger was as important as how much weaker the DE position would be.
Not quite my point. My point is and has been that there have to be additional HS-to-FCS recruiting possibilities that didn't exist before the portal. To simplify: We get HS players that would've gone FBS pre-portal, they play for us, and then go FBS if they're good enough.This works both ways though. As a FCS coach, do you spend a scholarship on a high school kid or a FBS dropdown? No-brainer on average, right?
Probably right...but now DE is weaker AND TE/OLB aren't stronger...so it's a lose/lose.I don't think impact making TE or OLB stronger was as important as how much weaker the DE position would be.
You are seeing UM offer more high school kids in this cycle than any since BH returned. But the schools that may benefit the most are the G5 schools.Not quite my point. My point is and has been that there have to be additional HS-to-FCS recruiting possibilities that didn't exist before the portal. To simplify: We get HS players that would've gone FBS pre-portal, they play for us, and then go FBS if they're good enough.
Well how did keeping him at DE position work out.....now just as weak as if he was moved. Hopefully they now use his scholarship for a plug and play DE or the team is weaker now at DE and not stronger at another position to maybe balance a little. He is a great athlete, and is a big loss not having him on the field somewhere.I don't think impact making TE or OLB stronger was as important as how much weaker the DE position would be.
And apparently you must let them play where THEY want to play in addition....And I wouldn't waste a red shirt on a real talented player that can play some right away knowing they might be gone in a year or two.
This doesn't make sense to me.Probably right...but now DE is weaker AND TE/OLB aren't stronger...so it's a lose/lose.
I just don't think this team is better overall by moving him to OLB or TE because the drop at DE is so much bigger. Seems it was a lose/lose no matter what.Probably right...but now DE is weaker AND TE/OLB aren't stronger...so it's a lose/lose.
Probably the same overall.Well how did keeping him at DE position work out.....now just as weak as if he was moved. Hopefully they now use his scholarship for a plug and play DE or the team is weaker now at DE and not stronger at another position to maybe balance a little. He is a great athlete, and is a big loss not having him on the field somewhere.
Or you pass on the kid.And apparently you must let them play where THEY want to play in addition....
This doesn't make sense to me.
They need him to play DE, they don't need him to play OLB or TE. If he's not going to play DE, then they should go find someone who will and give that guy his scholarship.
Agreed. I'd play Wilson over Edwards. Mostly because we don't really know what Edwards' skillset at that position looks like in comparison.Not 100% sure if this would have been the case, but if putting Kale on the field at rush OLB means taking Riley Wilson off, then I'm glad they didn't do that.
I think he would make exactly the same decision.Well, I disagree. He's probably a better TE than everyone on the team not named Grossman, and he'd be a wrecking ball at OLB with his size and speed. Now we're worse off at DE and no better at TE or OLB...seems like a no brainer...and that being said, I'm not a fan of the inmates running the asylum...I get that Bobby has to say, "THIS is where we need you"...but do you think he'd make the same decision if he thought it was gonna push Edwards to the portal?
And Bobby would appear to agree with you.I just don't think this team is better overall by moving him to OLB or TE because the drop at DE is so much bigger. Seems it was a lose/lose no matter what.
Why do you think he'd be a better TE than Barker or Schafer? I don't see it.Well, I disagree. He's probably a better TE than everyone on the team not named Grossman, and he'd be a wrecking ball at OLB with his size and speed. Now we're worse off at DE and no better at TE or OLB...seems like a no brainer...and that being said, I'm not a fan of the inmates running the asylum...I get that Bobby has to say, "THIS is where we need you"...but do you think he'd make the same decision if he thought it was gonna push Edwards to the portal?
I'm sorry, but the fact that we're responding to one another in two separate threads, both titled "Kale Edwards in the portal" is very confusing lolAgreed. I'd play Wilson over Edwards. Mostly because we don't really know what Edwards' skillset at that position looks like in comparison.
If you don’t get kids from high school, you probably won’t have a chance to get them later. So far, for Griz football, most kids who could play at FBS level don’t depart. Obviously, there’s evaluation and a balance. Tough for coaches.
You are seeing UM offer more high school kids in this cycle than any since BH returned. But the schools that may benefit the most are the G5 schools.
My impression is that the UM coaches have always aimed high for any recruit that they thought might consider UM. Maybe you are right that more kids will consider MT for early playing time, knowing they can move up easily later and have a complete college resume/tape. Interesting thought.If this is true, and if it's true that FBS coaches will increasingly utilize the portal to fill rosters, it's even more reason to aim higher in HS recruiting. Maybe some kids who grade out at 80 (random number) who would have never considered Montana pre-portal would consider signing now that they know the current reality. If they stay, even better.
Importantly, what do you tell the kids in the LB room? Hey, we know you worked your butts off, and we know that you have been competing against each other for every rep you can earn. Now, we have a player who wants to join your position.This doesn't make sense to me.
They need him to play DE, they don't need him to play OLB or TE. If he's not going to play DE, then they should go find someone who will and give that guy his scholarship.