- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 27,180
I don't either. I think this is a case of the draft experts falling too much in love with the measurables and trying to project what he could be. But if you use the good old eye test by sitting down and watching him play, there's no way in hell you can justify spending a 1st or 2nd round pick on what you just saw.I still wonder how the hell Hackenberg is rated so highly. He is awful.
Also, I think this may be one of those instances where the draft experts project a guy to go high but once the NFL teams do their homework on him and the draft rolls around he'll end up "falling" in the draft, going 2-3 rounds later than draftniks projected.
You're absolutely right about the Stanford offense. Watching Stanford on offense.....As an aside...Shaw shows again that he got by for awhile on what Harbaugh left behind. I really like Hogan, but in that offense he has no chance to flash.
It's like stepping into a time-machine and watching football in 1930s.
Their gameplan was incredibly conservative. There were a few times where they were in 3rd and 10 -type situations and they'd just call a give up play and give it to the HB up the middle. And they weren't backed up near their own goal line. They were well up the field, sometimes near midfield and they'd call plays they'd call those give up plays.
Last edited: