IMG Academy OL Daniel Faalele commits to the Gophers

Donate To GopherHole
Bob_Loblaw said:
Redshirting is usually a function of having enough talent.

Most people are better football players at 23 than they are at 18. As much as Dunlap could help us next season, he would help us even more in 2022.

That said, we may or may not have that luxury.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying, but I'd be curious to see how many IMG recruits red-shirt versus play each year. They live football at the school preparing for the next step. He's here for spring ball and I would be shocked if he doesn't start at one of the guard spots from day one.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Redshirting is usually a function of having enough talent.

Most people are better football players at 23 than they are at 18. As much as Dunlap could help us next season, he would help us even more in 2022.

That said, we may or may not have that luxury.
Click to expand...

That is true, but even the teams with loads of talent play true freshman. Both OU and Georgia had True FR playing in the game the other day. Didn't watch the Clemson-Bama game, so can't say if either had any Fr that played in that game. If a Fr is good enough to beat out the others on the team they should play. If the Fr is about the same, then the older player should play and hold onto the redshirt for the freshman.
If Dunlop comes in and can handle the guard position better than any of the others, then he should be the one that plays.
 

GFBfan said:
That is true, but even the teams with loads of talent play true freshman. Both OU and Georgia had True FR playing in the game the other day. Didn't watch the Clemson-Bama game, so can't say if either had any Fr that played in that game. If a Fr is good enough to beat out the others on the team they should play. If the Fr is about the same, then the older player should play and hold onto the redshirt for the freshman.
If Dunlop comes in and can handle the guard position better than any of the others, then he should be the one that plays.
Click to expand...

You're 100% right. There are some kids that are so good that they should see the field right away. I hope that Dunlap is one of those guys and for those guys - - all bets are off. Play them.

I think the majority of players fall into a different category where they are either (1) not ready to play yet; or (2) capable but will be really good as a RS SR. Ideally, you are a position of depth where you don't have to play many players from these groups. That top group (the guys who are so good that they should see the field right away), like I said, all bets are off. Play them.
 

GFBfan said:
That is true, but even the teams with loads of talent play true freshman. Both OU and Georgia had True FR playing in the game the other day. Didn't watch the Clemson-Bama game, so can't say if either had any Fr that played in that game. If a Fr is good enough to beat out the others on the team they should play. If the Fr is about the same, then the older player should play and hold onto the redshirt for the freshman.
If Dunlop comes in and can handle the guard position better than any of the others, then he should be the one that plays.
Click to expand...

I found this web site that has depth charts for every single FBS team. I'm not sure how accurate they are, but it's interesting to look at the depth charts of both the helmet schools and schools that Minnesota should aspire to be like.

http://www.ourlads.com/ncaa-football-depth-charts/

You look at the teams in the FBS playoffs, and freshmen in skill positions aren't super rare, but freshmen on the lines are definitely the exception and not the norm. I saw one on Georgia's depth chart. Then you look at a team like Wisconsin and the number of starters with "RS" next to their name is remarkable. Draw your own conclusions.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
You're 100% right. There are some kids that are so good that they should see the field right away. I hope that Dunlap is one of those guys and for those guys - - all bets are off. Play them.

I think the majority of players fall into a different category where they are either (1) not ready to play yet; or (2) capable but will be really good as a RS SR. Ideally, you are a position of depth where you don't have to play many players from these groups. That top group (the guys who are so good that they should see the field right away), like I said, all bets are off. Play them.
Click to expand...

Agree with all you have said here! :)
 


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...ess-rate-for-5-star-recruits-reaching-the-nfl

Over half of 5-star recruits are drafted by the NFL.

5-star recruits and the NFL draft
Number Percentage
Round 1 35 17.4
Round 2 21 10.4
Round 3 17 8.5
Round 4 12 6.0
Round 5 8 4.0
Round 6 9 4.5
Round 7 3 1.5
Undrafted 96 47.8

There are, of course, lower rates recruits who go on to the NFL, but 5-star recruits are much more likely to be drafted. Nobody says that there's a guarantee that a 5-star recruit will be a good college player, but there is good reason think think that they will. The fact that there is an article on 5-star recruits who were busts illustrated this point. The equivalent article for 1-star recruits would be about the 1-star recruits who go on to the NFL. 1-star recruits who go on to the NFL are interesting, because it's less likely. Likewise, 5-star recruits who don't pan out in college is interesting, because it's not the norm.
 

Quickly from Scholarship Chart. We will have about 45 True and Redshirt FR on Scholarship next year. Looking at what you need to field a team with depth, many will have to play. About 20 Freshmen or True Freshmen will have to see the field.

By Position:
TE 3 of 5 Scholarship are Freshmen ( Will have to play some)
OG 3 of 7 (O-Line can have some shifting by position, so I see Dunlap and Andries playing)
OT 6 of 8
OC 2 of 3
QB 2 of 4 (2nd and 3rd string most likely Freshmen)
RB 4 of 7 (Talent and injuries will decide who plays)
WR 6 of 10 (Johnson only sure starter, so wide open)

DT 3 of 6 (Have to rotate 4 guys, so freshmen will play)
DE 5 of 9 (Depends on system and if Coughlin plays LB, but Freshmen will play)
LB 4 of 8 (LB will have position flexibility, likely all play and fill special teams)
CB 6 of 11 (Again some position flexibility and need to fill special teams)
S 1 of 4
 

diehard said:
Faalele and Dunlap will not redshirt in 2018.
Click to expand...

They probably won't be on the scout team. But if it can be absolutely avoided, I don't think Fleck will play them. Similar to Andries this season.

On the other hand, we have it from Dunlap himself in another thread that Fleck used immediate playing time as a carrot. So it could well be ...


Bob_Loblaw said:
Anyone from Minneapolis would have put "Mpls".
Click to expand...

Already answered this.

I did.

"MplsGopher" is already taken. So you tell us, Mr. Minneapolis, what is the next most common abbreviation??


MaxyJR1 said:
I get what you are saying, but I'd be curious to see how many IMG recruits red-shirt versus play each year. They live football at the school preparing for the next step. He's here for spring ball and I would be shocked if he doesn't start at one of the guard spots from day one.
Click to expand...

Probably the more accurate predictor would be how many IMG 4+ star players that go to non-helmet schools redshirt or play as true freshmen.


RodentRampage said:
Over half of 5-star recruits are drafted by the NFL.
Click to expand...

This is just another meaningless correlation, like saying that there is a 75% correlation between class ranking and winning percentage.

Neither of those correlations generalize well beyond helmet schools.
 

MnplsGopher said:
This is just another meaningless correlation, like saying that there is a 75% correlation between class ranking and winning percentage.
Click to expand...

You clearly have no comprehension of correlation.

Dunning-Kruger.
 




MnplsGopher said:
I think you'll find that I have more than enough. But I suspect you do not posses the technical chops to put up a challenge.
Click to expand...

He obviously didn't find that you "had more than enough". So you were wrong in that thought.
 


MnplsGopher said:
you'll --> you will

will:

verb

1.
expressing the future tense.
Click to expand...

I get it. But he already came to the conclusion that you lacked the comprehension of correlation. He already made his finding and it was a clear finding.

So it's improper to say "I think you'll find" when he already made his finding. You may disagree with his finding and think he'll change his mind, but he already made his finding.
 



MnplsGopher said:
Already answered this.

I did.

"MplsGopher" is already taken. So you tell us, Mr. Minneapolis, what is the next most common abbreviation??
Click to expand...


I'm Mr. Minneapolis? I don't even live there anymore. It's so important for Minneapolis to be part of your username that you have created a username with the second most common abbreviation? If anyone is Mr. Minneapolis, it's you buddy.

As far as the second most common abbreviation for Minneapolis? I have no idea. I've never seen Mnpls used by someone correctly, so it's as common as any other abbreviation.

Like I said earlier, before you posted, I figured it wasn't a big deal, it still isn't. However, when you look at it, coupled with the content of your posts, I think you're a troll. It was just a bit of evidence, I don't care if you want to use the second most common abbreviation for Minneapolis or the 17th most common abbreviation for something else.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
I get it. But he already came to the conclusion that you lacked the comprehension of correlation. He already made his finding and it was a clear finding.

So it's improper to say "I think you'll find" when he already made his finding. You may disagree with his finding and think he'll change his mind, but he already made his finding.
Click to expand...

Lawyered
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
He already made his finding and it was a clear finding.

So it's improper to say "I think you'll find" when he already made his finding.
Click to expand...

People never change their minds or discover new information at some point in the future ... brilliant!


Bob_Loblaw said:
It was just a bit of evidence
Click to expand...

I disproved it, so it is not evidence of anything other than your admitted lack of expertise in the area.

So with that, we can all dismiss your evaluation.
 

Clips of Faalele in blocking drill. Fared well against some top competition.

0:20 Eyabi Anoma - 5 star, 0.9957 - Alabama Crimson Tide
0:27 Eyabi Anoma
0:32 Devin O'Rourke - 4 star, 0.9075 - Northwestern Wildcats (visted Gophers on unofficial in April)
0:38 Devin O'Rourke


<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

GFBfan said:
That is true, but even the teams with loads of talent play true freshman. Both OU and Georgia had True FR playing in the game the other day. Didn't watch the Clemson-Bama game, so can't say if either had any Fr that played in that game. If a Fr is good enough to beat out the others on the team they should play. If the Fr is about the same, then the older player should play and hold onto the redshirt for the freshman.
If Dunlop comes in and can handle the guard position better than any of the others, then he should be the one that plays.
Click to expand...

IMHO, there is a HUGE difference between playing trFR on the OL or DL and every other position. It isn't a question of talent, it is a question of strength. 18-year olds who have never been in a CFB strength program can't compete on strength with grown men who have for years. I am sure there are exceptions, but I can't ever agree with not RSing an OL or DL player. I think this even applies if your trFR is better than an older player on the team... a)if that good at 18 just think what he will be at 23; and b)they will still be at a disadvantage against the opponents. My $0.02.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

WinLoseOrTy said:
Clips of Faalele in blocking drill. Fared well against some top competition.

0:20 Eyabi Anoma - 5 star, 0.9957 - Alabama Crimson Tide
0:27 Eyabi Anoma
0:32 Devin O'Rourke - 4 star, 0.9075 - Northwestern Wildcats (visted Gophers on unofficial in April)
0:38 Devin O'Rourke


<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

Nice footing on that field. With a dude falling every play, how the hell are they supposed to gauge where they're at? Faalele continues to make me more and more excited for where his potential lays. I still hope he gets redshirted, even if he's our best tackle on Day 1.
 

During the UA practice today I thought it was interesting that the evaluators/commentators thought that Faalale should/would initially start (not start the game rather initial position) at guard. Seems like a big a$$ guard!
 

Spoofin said:
IMHO, there is a HUGE difference between playing trFR on the OL or DL and every other position. It isn't a question of talent, it is a question of strength. 18-year olds who have never been in a CFB strength program can't compete on strength with grown men who have for years. I am sure there are exceptions, but I can't ever agree with not RSing an OL or DL player. I think this even applies if your trFR is better than an older player on the team... a)if that good at 18 just think what he will be at 23; and b)they will still be at a disadvantage against the opponents. My $0.02.


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

Would agree with you for the most part, but HS strength programs are as good as college ones in some schools and at IMG where Dunlop and Faalele came from I would think theirs was on par with a college strength program.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
IMHO, there is a HUGE difference between playing trFR on the OL or DL and every other position. It isn't a question of talent, it is a question of strength. 18-year olds who have never been in a CFB strength program can't compete on strength with grown men who have for years. I am sure there are exceptions, but I can't ever agree with not RSing an OL or DL player. I think this even applies if your trFR is better than an older player on the team... a)if that good at 18 just think what he will be at 23; and b)they will still be at a disadvantage against the opponents. My $0.02.


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

Agree. Having said that, Michigan and Notre Dame had OL from IMG that saw PT during freshman season. While that may or not be case for these 2, IMG's strength program is about as good as one can expect with Gadeken running it.
 

Spoofin said:
IMHO, there is a HUGE difference between playing trFR on the OL or DL and every other position.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with this. Sure, there are freaks. We might have gotten two freaks, who are ready to play now. We will see.

But I'm also big on seniority. If there's a guy who has been in the program a couple or few years that is equally as good as a true freshman, then play the older guy.
 

MnplsGopher said:
I mostly agree with this. Sure, there are freaks. We might have gotten two freaks, who are ready to play now. We will see.

But I'm also big on seniority. If there's a guy who has been in the program a couple or few years that is equally as good as a true freshman, then play the older guy.
Click to expand...

Nope; if the younger player is as good or close you play him. Your way, I’m sure the next coach will be appreciative.[emoji41]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Sportsfan24 said:
Nope; if the younger player is as good or close you play him. Your way, I’m sure the next coach will be appreciative.
Click to expand...

This isn't wrong per se, I just question why any recruit would want to come here then ... knowing that they'll have a chance to play as a freshman ... then just get replaced by whatever hot new freshman is brought in.
 

MnplsGopher said:
This isn't wrong per se, I just question why any recruit would want to come here then ... knowing that they'll have a chance to play as a freshman ... then just get replaced by whatever hot new freshman is brought in.
Click to expand...

Fair point; it’s amazing how this normally isn’t a problem. Open competition has a funny way of humbling people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

hungan1 said:
HE BIG!
Click to expand...

I have something of an odd question, but I've often wondered if guys like Faalele and Dunlap are less prone to knee injury than guys like Jalen Mayfield, the 4 star OT who was briefly a Gopher commit.

Mayfield is listed at 270 right now, which means he'll be putting on 35 pounds or more fairly quickly to get enough mass to play tackle. Does it take longer for connective tissue , like cartilage and ligaments, to adjust to such a large increase in weight? Are guys who are already tipping the scales at 340+ less likely to sustain knee injuries? Thanks in advance if anyone has any thoughts.
 

Fan of Ray Christensen said:
I have something of an odd question, but I've often wondered if guys like Faalele and Dunlap are less prone to knee injury than guys like Jalen Mayfield, the 4 star OT who was briefly a Gopher commit.

Mayfield is listed at 270 right now, which means he'll be putting on 35 pounds or more fairly quickly to get enough mass to play tackle. Does it take longer for connective tissue , like cartilage and ligaments, to adjust to such a large increase in weight? Are guys who are already tipping the scales at 340+ less likely to sustain knee injuries? Thanks in advance if anyone has any thoughts.
Click to expand...

Cartilage and ligaments cannot adjust to extra weight. It's possible to strengthen the muscles around a joint but weight does nothing but harm to the integrity of a joint.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


He is going to have 150 pounds on the Des he plays against and he moves better than most OL.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom