David Cobb a Gopher

Donate To GopherHole
R

ruppertflywheel

Banned
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
12,226
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Picked this up on Sirus radio last night. David Cobb RB from Killeen Texas will sign a LOI with Minnesota. The 3***RB had an offer from Stanford, Army,Memphis among others. In looking at his film on y-tube my guess is he will be moved to the other side of the ball. He also had interest from TCU and Houston. His tape reminds me somewhat of Eskeridge. Not great top end speed but a good burst to the hole. He is listed on some sources as 210 lb's . Maybe Kill moves him to OLB.
 


ruppertflywheel said:
Picked this up on Sirus radio last night. David Cobb RB from Killeen Texas will sign a LOI with Minnesota. The 3***RB had an offer from Stanford, Army,Memphis among others. In looking at his film on y-tube my guess is he will be moved to the other side of the ball. He also had interest from TCU and Houston. His tape reminds me somewhat of Eskeridge. Not great top end speed but a good burst to the hole. He is listed on some sources as 210 lb's . Maybe Kill moves him to OLB.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Eskridge comparison makes some sense except that he will be a much bigger back than Eskridge. Eskridge is 5'11" 205 and this kid is already 5'9"-5'11" (depending on where you look) and he is already 210 lbs (for instance, Eskridge was 180 lbs when he signed with the U). I know everyone is different, but it is likely that this kid will be 5'10" 235 lbs by the time he gets much PT. He, along with Lamonte, are our big backs that we have been missing.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Yeah, the Eskridge comparison makes some sense except that he will be a much bigger back than Eskridge. Eskridge is 5'11" 205 and this kid is already 5'9"-5'11" (depending on where you look) and he is already 210 lbs (for instance, Eskridge was 180 lbs when he signed with the U). I know everyone is different, but it is likely that this kid will be 5'10" 235 lbs by the time he gets much PT. He, along with Lamonte, are our big backs that we have been missing.
Click to expand...


How does Kirkwood (sp?) fit in here?
 

Maverick said:
How does Kirkwood (sp?) fit in here?
Click to expand...

Good question. I liked what I saw and was hoping he'd be a feature back this season. Is Lamonte Edwards staying as a RB? I thought when he signed last year he was listed as an "Athlete".
 


Sweet! Personally, I prefer we keep him at Running Back.

As far as where Kirkwood fits, the same place he did yesterday - he'll have an opportunity to compete for the job and may the best man win.

And we've all seen how quickly running back depth can get depleted for a number of reasons (see Iowa).
 

Kirkwood and Edwards will be RBs. It wouldn't surprise me if Kill was going after this kid to fill his OLB spot that he mentioned he was looking to fill on NSD. Rivals shows him at 5'11" 205 lbs. and his most recent highlight tape (youtube) lists him at 6'0" 210 lbs. Seems about the right size for a OLB prospect. Kirkwood and Edwards are the future at RB for us.
 

sonnygarcia said:
Kirkwood and Edwards will be RBs. It wouldn't surprise me if Kill was going after this kid to fill his OLB spot that he mentioned he was looking to fill on NSD. Rivals shows him at 5'11" 205 lbs. and his most recent highlight tape (youtube) lists him at 6'0" 210 lbs. Seems about the right size for a OLB prospect. Kirkwood and Edwards are the future at RB for us.
Click to expand...

I don't know enough about Edwards, but you'd think with his size and speed coming out of High School, he'd be able to develop into a stud RB.
 

Maverick said:
How does Kirkwood (sp?) fit in here?
Click to expand...

After this season, my guess is that he will be the #1 RB.

It seems that Edwards is going to stay at RB (according to Hammock). There might be an ok chance for Wright to be moved to WR.

However, other than that I don't really think PT should be a major issue here. Kill uses a ton of RBs (I think 6 players had over 35 carries last season for Northern Illinois) and i'd guess this kid will RS next year.

In 2012, he will likely be in the top 3 of our depth chart, which in our offense, he should be getting some looks (as a RS FR). The PT should be there for him if he seizes it.
 



Lots of options at running back -- Edwards has the height to play linebacker...
Devon Wright Ht: 6-0 Wt: 190
http://minnesota.scout.com/a.z?s=176&p=8&c=1&nid=5055077
Lamonte Edwards Ht: 6-2 Wt: 215
http://minnesota.scout.com/a.z?s=176&p=8&c=1&nid=4873904
Duane Bennett Ht: 5-9 Wt: 210
http://minnesota.scout.com/a.z?s=176&p=8&c=1&nid=4873534
Donnell Kirkwood Ht: 5-10 Wt: 200
http://minnesota.scout.com/a.z?s=176&p=8&c=1&nid=4875586
DeLeon Eskridge Ht: 5-11 Wt: 198
http://minnesota.scout.com/a.z?s=176&p=8&c=1&nid=4873568
David Cobb Ht: 5-11 Wt: 205
http://minnesota.scout.com/a.z?s=176&p=8&c=1&nid=3867021
 

Jon said:
Edwards has the height to play linebacker...
Click to expand...

A) For the gazillionth time, it's not happening.

B) This is at least the second time I've seen the "height at linebacker" thing mentioned on here recently. Since when do you need height to play linebacker? Where did this come from? Many great college and pro linebackers are and have been 6'0" or less. Sam Mills was a borderline HOF LB for the Panthers, and he was 5'9" in shoes. Mike Singletary is possibly the greatest MLB in the history of football, and he was 6'0" if he was lucky. There are tons of other examples, but those are the two off the top of my head. Nowhere other than here have I ever seen a certain height mentioned as a requirement for LB. OL, DE, QB, sure - but never LB.
 

We go from having "poor depth" at RB in 2010 to flush with good, if not quality backs in 2011 by only adding one player. Amazing. ;) I think we've been fine at back and now we're better. I like them all. Let's see how the season plays out. We may have a primary starter, we may not. It is certainly going to be fun to watch.

Welcome aboard the Gopher Express, Mr. Cobb.
 

dpodoll68 said:
A) For the gazillionth time, it's not happening.

B) This is at least the second time I've seen the "height at linebacker" thing mentioned on here recently. Since when do you need height to play linebacker? Where did this come from? Many great college and pro linebackers are and have been 6'0" or less. Sam Mills was a borderline HOF LB for the Panthers, and he was 5'9" in shoes. Mike Singletary is possibly the greatest MLB in the history of football, and he was 6'0" if he was lucky. There are tons of other examples, but those are the two off the top of my head. Nowhere other than here have I ever seen a certain height mentioned as a requirement for LB. OL, DE, QB, sure - but never LB.
Click to expand...


A) I am in no way arguing for Lamonte to switch positions, anymore. Until they say something different (if it ever happens), i'm just going to assume he stays at RB.

B) Height has become sort of important for LBs now. There certainly are players who are under 6'0" who have had great careers at LB, but it's a rare thing now. For instance, in the NFL draft last year of the 26 LBs drafted, only 2 of them were under 6'0" (both 5'11"), and they had an average height of between 6'2"-6'3". There doesn't seem to be a premium on being real tall (like over 6'3"), but for whatever reason the ideal size for a LB seems to be about 6'2"-6'3" and 240ish pounds.
 



I would guess the whole height thing for linebackers has to do with increased emphasis on knocking down passes/dropping back in coverage to cover TEs. If you're going up against a 6'6 TE, you could be handicapped by putting a 5'9 LB on him.
 


Can't believe the debate about depth when most of the players in question haven't hit the field yet (Kirkwood being the exception). Cobb is the only RB in the class and it's always a good idea to sign at least one RB in each class. It's a position that is prone to a lot of injuries.

Cobb sounds like a great kid. Glad he's coming aboard.
 

Jeshurun said:
I would guess the whole height thing for linebackers has to do with increased emphasis on knocking down passes/dropping back in coverage to cover TEs. If you're going up against a 6'6 TE, you could be handicapped by putting a 5'9 LB on him.
Click to expand...


Yeah, that's important. It's also just that the Dlineman and OL have gotten so tall, that some height helps you see things in the backfield better. It's also a matter of being able to hold more weight effeciently. A taller player can (theoretically) hold more weight with losing less speed than a shorter player. You can get to that ideal weight where you won't get manhandled in the trenches without giving up so much athleticism.
 

Isn't it possible that Cobb is an insurance policy for Wright? Hasn't there been rumblings about Wright not being the best student? 5 Backs might seem like a lot, but 2 of them will be seniors, and one of them is a possible academic risk. I think Cobb stays at RB.

Edwards is a RB. Stop trying to move him to LB. It isn't happening.

The RB battle should be interesting next year. You've got 2 seniors that probably have the least amount of natural talent, and a group of underclassmen that probably fit much better into what Kill is looking for from the RB position. I think you see a lot of Kirkwood, Edwards and Bennett next season.
 

COBB YOUTUBE HIGHLIGHTS

ruppertflywheel said:
Picked this up on Sirus radio last night. David Cobb RB from Killeen Texas will sign a LOI with Minnesota. The 3***RB had an offer from Stanford, Army,Memphis among others. In looking at his film on y-tube my guess is he will be moved to the other side of the ball. He also had interest from TCU and Houston. His tape reminds me somewhat of Eskeridge. Not great top end speed but a good burst to the hole. He is listed on some sources as 210 lb's . Maybe Kill moves him to OLB.
Click to expand...

David Cobb's youtube Hi-lites:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2JKu9QbuSU&NR=1

Kid can run, but Keanon Cooper clone, anyone?
 

We need bodies and athletes. I believe Kill and staff will get these guys in the right positions to help win games.
 


I think Cobb will red shirts and that Eskridge starts out as lead back in the spring, then best back wins the playing time...
RUSHING --------GP-GS Att Gain Loss Net Avg TD Long Avg/G
Eskridge,DeLeon--12-5 193 746 48 698 3.6 7 26 58.2
Bennett, Duane---12-7 123 560 31 529 4.3 3 32 44.1
Weber, Adam----- 12-12 52 288 132 156 3.0 0 29 13.0
Gray, MarQueis---12-7 23 119 9 110 4.8 1 14 9.2
Kirkwood,Donnel--4-0 27 112 5 107 4.0 0 18 26.8
Hoese, Jon---------11-7 19 53 0 53 2.8 3 8 4.8
http://www.gophersports.com/ViewArt...280&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=8400&ATCLID=204992534
 

Is lipscomb out of the picture?

Last i heard he was still planning on coming here but have heard nothing lately. And wasnt he 4 star?
 

Doc1001 said:
Last i heard he was still planning on coming here but have heard nothing lately. And wasnt he 4 star?
Click to expand...

He no longer plays football, and is focusing on academics at a school in south west Texas. Sul Ross state or something like that
 

dpodoll68 said:
A) For the gazillionth time, it's not happening.

B) This is at least the second time I've seen the "height at linebacker" thing mentioned on here recently. Since when do you need height to play linebacker? Where did this come from? Many great college and pro linebackers are and have been 6'0" or less. Sam Mills was a borderline HOF LB for the Panthers, and he was 5'9" in shoes. Mike Singletary is possibly the greatest MLB in the history of football, and he was 6'0" if he was lucky. There are tons of other examples, but those are the two off the top of my head. Nowhere other than here have I ever seen a certain height mentioned as a requirement for LB. OL, DE, QB, sure - but never LB.
Click to expand...

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/10133492

Beason has speed and he's one of the surest tacklers among this year's draft-eligible linebackers. Plus, he played at a school that has produced a litany of NFL linebackers, most of them good ones.

But it's his size that's the problem. At 6-foot, 237 pounds, he's considered short for an outside linebacker –- and that's not me talking, it's NFL scouts combing through prospects for flaws.

Although yes, the range of LB heights currrently in the NFL is 5-10 to 6-5.
 


grunkiejr said:
Although yes, the range of LB heights currrently in the NFL is 5-10 to 6-5.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that they don't look at height - of course they do. If you have two guys that are equally productive, you're probably going to take the 6'2" guy over the 5'11" guy. I've just never seen the phrase "too short to play LB", like you see "too short to play QB" or "too short to play LT" all the time. I mean, yeah, if the guy's like 5'6", sure, but he probably wouldn't be playing BCS football then anyway. Since linebackers are usually among the shortest guys on the field, I'd say that if you're tall enough to play football, you're tall enough to play linebacker.
 

First off, welcome aboard Mr. Cobb!
Secondly I think he shows enough at RB to stay there, unless Kill's already pegged him at LB and I haven't heard about it.
Third, if he is going to play LB in college, there's really no strict height issue IMO.
There are plenty of very good and productive linebackers under 6'0'', and in college it should be no problem, next level yes, but not in college.
 

My buddy tells me he was recruited as a RB, so I guess we can end the speculation. Not a back pick up late in the game, always good to have some depth there for when we lose our 2 Sr's after this year.
 

Verification

I just noticed that on the Rival page for David Cobb, that his height and weight are verified to be 5'11" 205 lbs.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom