Carter Coughlin bulking up for DE; hopes to get to 235#, last year was 214#

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
61,964
Reaction score
18,149
Points
113
per Randy:

Bulking up for DE

Sophomore Carter Coughlin, a linebacker last season, is playing defensive end this year, helping shore up depth in a thin group. To prepare for his new role, he has added weight.

"I'm up to 230, hoping to get to 235 before the season," Coughlin said. "[Last year] I said 220, but I played around 214."

He'll need that extra size when facing offensive linemen.

"It's a big transition for the run game," he said. "I have to take on tight ends, offensive tackles straight on."

http://www.startribune.com/gophers-...sted-as-third-down-plays-installed/438779173/

Go Gophers!!
 

Team first. Still, sucks to have to move our highest rated LB in years to a different position due to depth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


Spoofin said:
Team first. Still, sucks to have to move our highest rated LB in years to a different position due to depth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

But we're loaded and should build off 9 wins...
 

Interesting to see Carter working with both the DLine unit and LB unit at practice today.
 


Spoofin said:
Team first. Still, sucks to have to move our highest rated LB in years to a different position due to depth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

But we're loaded and should build off 9 wins...
 






Danielle Hunter for the Vikings is a DE listed at 6-6 240, so Coughlin at 235 is a good weight for him at DE. He can use his speed to avoid the OL and make plays.
 

GFBfan said:
Danielle Hunter for the Vikings is a DE listed at 6-6 240, so Coughlin at 235 is a good weight for him at DE. He can use his speed to avoid the OL and make plays.
Click to expand...

Hunter's listed at 252 now - and based on recent pictures, even that seems conservative.
 

Fleck says they will put the best 11 players on the field. One could argue that means finding ways to get multiple linebackers on the field.

I could see some kind of a rotation, with a "run defense" package, a "pass defense" package, a "3rd-and-long" package and so forth. You could see Coughlin at DE, LB, etc depending on the situation.

And not to forget the "Cash Money" package, where Cashman comes in and makes a play.

As far as weights, I don't care. If you can make plays, you can make plays. If Coughlin gets a sack, are we going to put an asterisk next to it because he doesn't weigh enough?

(Carter Coughlin had *6 sacks last season.......)
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Fleck says they will put the best 11 players on the field. One could argue that means finding ways to get multiple linebackers on the field.

I could see some kind of a rotation, with a "run defense" package, a "pass defense" package, a "3rd-and-long" package and so forth. You could see Coughlin at DE, LB, etc depending on the situation.

And not to forget the "Cash Money" package, where Cashman comes in and makes a play.

As far as weights, I don't care. If you can make plays, you can make plays. If Coughlin gets a sack, are we going to put an asterisk next to it because he doesn't weigh enough?

(Carter Coughlin had *6 sacks last season.......)
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree with you, Cashman had 6 sacks last year. I believe Coughlin only had 2.

EDIT Cashman had 7.5, so I guess I'm not sure who you are referencing.
 



So...is he really only 220 right now but they'll list him at 235...or...is he actually 230 right now and they'll list him at say, 245?

Does the bulk-up mean he was a weight room project last year and nobody knew?
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Fleck says they will put the best 11 players on the field. One could argue that means finding ways to get multiple linebackers on the field.

I could see some kind of a rotation, with a "run defense" package, a "pass defense" package, a "3rd-and-long" package and so forth. You could see Coughlin at DE, LB, etc depending on the situation.

And not to forget the "Cash Money" package, where Cashman comes in and makes a play.

As far as weights, I don't care. If you can make plays, you can make plays. If Coughlin gets a sack, are we going to put an asterisk next to it because he doesn't weigh enough?

(Carter Coughlin had *6 sacks last season.......)
Click to expand...

He's going to make full use of that playbook that he has been amassing since he was a young kid. You win as a team, and he will leverage the talent that he has to the max.
 

CC is a stud who flat-out understands the game of football. He'd make plays at any position. Not worried about this move in the least.
 

MGGopher said:
CC is a stud who flat-out understands the game of football. He'd make plays at any position. Not worried about this move in the least.
Click to expand...

The main reason I don't like it is that rush end is generally an all-or-nothing proposition. You may stumble into some run stuffs on occasion, but for the most part, it's either a sack, QB hurry, or nothing. If he is one of our best playmakers (and I think he is), you are really limiting his opportunities to make plays by not having him at LB. The most important thing is winning games, of course, but you are also limiting his pro potential by not getting him well-engrained at LB right now.
 

Spoofin said:
Team first. Still, sucks to have to move our highest rated LB in years to a different position due to depth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

dpodoll68 said:
The main reason I don't like it is that rush end is generally an all-or-nothing proposition. You may stumble into some run stuffs on occasion, but for the most part, it's either a sack, QB hurry, or nothing. If he is one of our best playmakers (and I think he is), you are really limiting his opportunities to make plays by not having him at LB. The most important thing is winning games, of course, but you are also limiting his pro potential by not getting him well-engrained at LB right now.
Click to expand...

Genius. What if he becomes our best DE in years due to his ability? Thank god Chicken Little doesn't coach football.
 

BadassMotherFlecker said:
While I don't disagree with you, Cashman had 6 sacks last year. I believe Coughlin only had 2.

EDIT Cashman had 7.5, so I guess I'm not sure who you are referencing.
Click to expand...

That was supposed to be a joke - reference to people who act like some of last year's victories should be counted as losses because the team didn't win by a bigger margin. That is where the asterisk comes from - so that is how Coughlin's stats will be listed next year. I should have put the line in quotation marks. Then again, you may be new on the board, so you didn't get the reference.
 

highwayman said:
Genius. What if he becomes our best DE in years due to his ability? Thank god Chicken Little doesn't coach football.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's not going to happen. He's not big enough and never will be. He said himself that he played at 214 last year. I was standing 5 feet away from him for quite a while at practice yesterday, and the biggest thing that struck me is how small he looks through the waist and thighs, despite that he's allegedly bulked up. He'll never be a good all-around DE because he'd be eaten alive if he were asked to stop the run.
 

Coughlin should absolutely be playing at OLB. It's embarrassing how little depth the previous staff left on the d-line.
 

I would guess two thirds of our schedule will be pass heavy offenses where a 3-4 or even 2-man defensive front makes best sense. Riley will try to throw even more this year, as will Gary Anderson win both relying on transfers from lower level to lead passing attacks. Brohm will want to chuck it at least 50 times. Zebrowski will push to open up even more passing in Buffalo. MTSU's Stockstill will want to highlight his kid's arm for the NFL. Maryland wants to throw more with their new QB. Northwestern wants to spread you out horizontally, not two tight end and two running back you to death. Not worried about whatever Lovie will try.

Wisconsin, Iowa, MSU, and Michigan will try to smash mouth. Smith has practiced every day versus Bert's power run game. I trust he can figure something out.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Yeah, that's not going to happen. He's not big enough and never will be. He said himself that he played at 214 last year. I was standing 5 feet away from him for quite a while at practice yesterday, and the biggest thing that struck me is how small he looks through the waist and thighs, despite that he's allegedly bulked up. He'll never be a good all-around DE because he'd be eaten alive if he were asked to stop the run.
Click to expand...

Expert. Thank god Chicken Little doesn't coach football.
 

MGGopher said:
CC is a stud who flat-out understands the game of football. He'd make plays at any position. Not worried about this move in the least.
Click to expand...

highwayman said:
Genius. What if he becomes our best DE in years due to his ability? Thank god Chicken Little doesn't coach football.
Click to expand...

Ability and talent isn't the concern. Pass rushing isn't the concern. Size is and stopping the run is the concern. DPO is right, but go ahead and dismiss it.

Or, better said, see below.....

John Galt said:
Coughlin should absolutely be playing at OLB. It's embarrassing how little depth the previous staff left on the d-line.
Click to expand...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

highwayman said:
Expert. Thank god Chicken Little doesn't coach football.
Click to expand...

Not only do you know less than the coaching staff, you may possibly know less than any poster on GH...

How is that Neil McLaurin prediction coming along?
 


dpodoll68 said:
The main reason I don't like it is that rush end is generally an all-or-nothing proposition. You may stumble into some run stuffs on occasion, but for the most part, it's either a sack, QB hurry, or nothing. If he is one of our best playmakers (and I think he is), you are really limiting his opportunities to make plays by not having him at LB. The most important thing is winning games, of course, but you are also limiting his pro potential by not getting him well-engrained at LB right now.
Click to expand...

What you just said regarding rush ends is true if they are taught to play the position poorly.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Yeah, that's not going to happen. He's not big enough and never will be. He said himself that he played at 214 last year. I was standing 5 feet away from him for quite a while at practice yesterday, and the biggest thing that struck me is how small he looks through the waist and thighs, despite that he's allegedly bulked up. He'll never be a good all-around DE because he'd be eaten alive if he were asked to stop the run.
Click to expand...
That is completely dependent on scheme

For instance Navy had a middle of the pack rush defense and were undersized at every positon
 

Think of it as 3-4 outside linebacker, I don't see a problem with it.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom