Now what position group concerns you most?

[jonnyhawk]

I probably still go WR. Even though there have been some good reports, they really haven’t proven anything. Seems like the needed development of ISM and B Smith is far from complete.

Next for me is defensive tackle. And it may be my #1. Losing Bazata is a big deal. Really was a stalwart in there. Lattimore plateaued last year. Reiff and Jansen don’t carry much weight. The fact that Brincks moved in and was running 1 scares me more than it makes me feel good. We don’t have guys that naturally carry 300 to 310. Maybe a healthy Nelson, an improved Lattimore, another year in the program for Reiff and we get there.

The interesting thing (to me at least) is that I have lost a lot of my concerns about LB.

I actually feel really good about the team as a whole. We get good play from WR and DT, could be a really strong year.

 

[SHAWKER]

LB and WR.

 

[Johnsoda123]

Running back. You know one of the top two guys will get dinged and have to sit a game or two. Not sure on Bryan or Harrell. I'm guessing Geil will get a shot.

 

[NevadaHawk]

LB and WR.

This

 

[dbrocket]

Between having Matt Nelson back, Lattimore continuing to develop (he was a true Sophomore last year) and rotating guys in from DE, I think DT will be fine - probably better than fine. I think WR is the biggest concern, and then I wanna see how our LBs hold up vs spread teams.

 

[nu2u]

Losing Bazata is a big deal. Really was a stalwart in there. Lattimore plateaued last year. Reiff and Jansen don’t carry much weight.

Bazata played at 285 last year. Reiff and Jansen are at least 280 now. Your concern about weight seems misplaced. I think Reiff is primed for a break out year. He is quicker than Bazata IMO, just needs to stay healthy. Reiff won two HWT wrestling titles in SD giving up anywhere from 20-50 lbs. Would have won a third title but elected to enroll at Iowa early. Just like his brother, tough as shit and a pretty good motor.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

Still going to say punter

 

[Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll]

1. Wr
2. Lb
3. Dt.

I am actually excited to see Harrell get touches.

 

[dbrocket]

1. Wr
2. Lb
3. Dt.

I am actually excited to see Harrell get touches.

I don't expect Harrell or Bryan to see much of the field on offense this year. I see what you liked with Harrell, but he also looked really raw to me, even against the 2s and 3s. And Bryan needs to get stronger. I think Geil has a good chance of passing them for #3 RB and, hopefully, we stay healthy.

 

[Blackleaf40]

WR.

My gut is to lament how exposed we are at safety and CBs but we're actually in decent shape there.

 

[And1Hawk]

Lots of position groups

OL - tackles you feel good about but the interior 3 are not proven. OL makes everything go and struggled in the run game at times last year

RB - Depth after the top 2?

DT - Depth

LB - Unproven

P - has to get better?

 

[JupiterHawk]

LB for sure.

2011 and 2014 where years Iowa had to break in new LB (well Morris already played in 2010). The point is both years were a struggle at LB. I thought Iowa would be fine in 2014 with Quinton being a 5th year SR but the LB's got showed up in the early games. Hoping that is not true and we see a breakout performance.

 

[Hawkdome]

To many drops at wr.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

LB for sure.

2011 and 2014 where years Iowa had to break in new LB (well Morris already played in 2010). The point is both years were a struggle at LB. I thought Iowa would be fine in 2014 with Quinton being a 5th year SR but the LB's got showed up in the early games. Hoping that is not true and we see a breakout performance.

One difference I can see is new guys will have more experience. In 2011 all 3 starters were going to be Sophomores. In 14' besides Alston had a redshirt walk on in Bower Frosh and Spearman who was only 18 since he entered college so young. Sucks losing experienced guy like Mends but have guys like Jones, Hockaday, Welch all will be entering least year 3 in the program. I'm concerned cause of lack of experience but don't feel nearly as worried about the LB position as I did in 14'.

 

[HerkyFan]

For me it is offensive line. Not convinced yet as to how good we are at the guard position and we lack depth. Doesn’t really matter how good the WR, RB or TE’s are if we do poorly up front.

 

[millhawk]

Lots of position groups

OL - tackles you feel good about but the interior 3 are not proven. OL makes everything go and struggled in the run game at times last year

RB - Depth after the top 2?

DT - Depth

LB - Unproven


P - has to get better?

Lots of position groups

OL - tackles you feel good about but the interior 3 are not proven. OL makes everything go and struggled in the run game at times last year

RB - Depth after the top 2?

DT - Depth

LB - Unproven

P - has to get better?

Reynolds and Render are proven. I bet Reynolds had more snaps last year than Wirfs and this is the fifth year in the program for both. The concern with Render is about him adapting to center but by most accounts he is doing well there. Hopefully Levi gets and stays healthy at rg. I'm not concerned about the starters but depth is a problem.

Lattimore will be solid. He played well the second half of the season. He and Nelson will be fine. The comments about Reiff in this thread are spot on. He will probably play at least at 280 this year. He's quick, athletic and understands leverage. Brincks is a good player a smart move in playing him inside.

 

[DodgerHawki]

I probably still go WR. Even though there have been some good reports, they really haven’t proven anything. Seems like the needed development of ISM and B Smith is far from complete.

Next for me is defensive tackle. And it may be my #1. Losing Bazata is a big deal. Really was a stalwart in there. Lattimore plateaued last year. Reiff and Jansen don’t carry much weight. The fact that Brincks moved in and was running 1 scares me more than it makes me feel good. We don’t have guys that naturally carry 300 to 310. Maybe a healthy Nelson, an improved Lattimore, another year in the program for Reiff and we get there.

The interesting thing (to me at least) is that I have lost a lot of my concerns about LB.

I actually feel really good about the team as a whole. We get good play from WR and DT, could be a really strong year.

Whichever one suffers the most injuries to key players. For example, I really like the quality and experience at safety. But if Hooker goes down, I think there's a huge dropoff in terms of ability to the next guy. No one in the rotation can do what Hooker can do. DL I live the overall number of quality big bodies Iowa has. Barring a huge number of injuries, I don't see how Iowa won't have a good rotation there.

I like the potential for this team. The chance for difference-making ability at QB, TE, both tackles on offense, and DE, SS and corner on defense. The linebacking corps looked good in spring going against an offense they know very well. Let's see what happens when they are all forced to play in space and are schemed against.

 

[Johnsoda123]

Reynolds and Render are proven. I bet Reynolds had more snaps last year than Wirfs and this is the fifth year in the program for both. The concern with Render is about him adapting to center but by most accounts he is doing well there. Hopefully Levi gets and stays healthy at rg. I'm not concerned about the starters but depth is a problem.

Lattimore will be solid. He played well the second half of the season. He and Nelson will be fine. The comments about Reiff in this thread are spot on. He will probably play at least at 280 this year. He's quick, athletic and understands leverage. Brincks is a good player a smart move in playing him inside.

I don't understand the concern about Lattimore. He played DT as a true frosh and soph in the B1G. Everything I've seen says he is ready to anchor that position.

 

[hexumhawk]

Think we will be ok at DT with the guys we have. Hopefully Lattimore picks it up a notch as he has some talent. Also think Jensen will be a monster in the middle.

Losing Mends really hurts this team imo as I thought he was ready for a big year in a position group where there are a lot of questions. Interesting that they are throwing out the idea of moving Colbert around.

WR- as long as we are serviceable we will be fine. Good running game and QB to go with the best TE group in the country. If they cant get open with all of that then there is no hope.

 

[42hawk]

I don't understand the DL/DT depth concern. Iowa returns 8 players that have shown they can make plays in the Big Ten. You have two other players that the staff is exited to see what they can do (Golston and Simon) and you have 3 recruits that could play if needed.

Reese Morgan (and staff ) didn't travel to Georgia and Az because he was worried about lack of depth, the staff invested time and $ to figure out how to better use the depth. Of the 8 kids that have played "real" minutes, 7 have played DT at one time or another.

I understand that there is currently no "Mike Daniels" type players at DT but than again Mike Daniels didn't play much until he was a Jr.

All 8 of these kids will be bigger, stronger and more skilled than last year.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

To me, it's all about the comparative analysis ... and also recognizing the developmental nature of some positions.

Top concern - No question LB is my biggest concern. The data set we have observing the new LBs playing in games is nominal at best. It is true that our scheme is LB-friendly ... we tend to err on the side of simplicity so that our LBs can play faster. However, that description especially applied to the D when Norm was the DC. Phil has a tendency of playing more games with coverages ... and that can impact the LBs (if they don't know their assignments). I like the talent that we have at LB ... however, it's also true that the LBs are our biggest unknown.

2nd biggest concern - OL depth. In terms of guys who have played and who are "trusted" ... we have Wirfs, Jackson, Reynolds, Levi Paulsen, Render, and Banwart. In good years, our depth sometimes goes something like 8 or 9 guys deep ... and that's with guys who have game experience. I like the guys we have on the OL ... but of the 6 guys mentioned ... 3 are just SOs. OL is typically a developmental position ... so excellent play requires the individual to really get down technique AND requires the group to learn to play together cohesively as a unit. Developing depth on the OL will likely be a pretty big priority this year.

3rd biggest concern - Punter (on any given day, it's can leap ahead to being my 2nd biggest concern). Without question, our punting game needs to improve. Our D had to defend way too many shortened fields due to poor punting.

4th biggest concern - WR play is almost perennially on my list of concerns for Ferentz coached teams. The good news is that my concern at WR is far less than it was last season ... after all, we have almost all the same personnel as last season ... and last year they were working with a brand new QB, learning a new O, and learning from a new position coach. This year, the situation should be better on most fronts ... but more guys need to step up with a sense of urgency ... and really focus on improving.


As for people having concerns about DT ... that one is a bit of a head-scratcher. Lattimore made huge strides at the position. Matt Nelson really seemed to get acclimated to position ... and once that happened ... his productivity really seemed to shoot up. Reiff is a guy who flashed some really good things. The primary reason why Morgan and Parker have been trying to work more guys in at DT is because they've realized the importance of keeping guys fresh on the DL. Our guys are a little undersized at DT ... so it becomes a little more valuable to help the guys out by helping them stay fresh. We're already going to be giving Hesse some interior reps on pass-rushing downs ... that will be a given. However, having a solid top four to be participating in an active rotation is important. Last year, our top 4 guys were Bazata, M. Nelson, Lattimore, and Reiff. Now that Bazata is gone ... the coaches are also likely trying to make sure that we can overcome injuries ... so building depth is really beneficial. To that end, they're experimenting to see who will help give us the best top 4 or 5 guys in a rotation. Consequently, Brincks and Golston have been trying their hand at DT. My guess is that the #4 DT spot is still mostly a free-for-all ... right now I would guess that the top candidates are Brincks, Golston, and Jansen ... but we'll see who can make the most of their opportunity.

Also, I think that it's a little funny to worry too much about our DTs being undersized ... because I still remember back to 2005 when Mitch King was starting at DT ... and through the season, his weight was dipping down into the 240s. That season, Mitch was given up 70 to 80 lbs to some of the O-linemen he was facing off against. In '18 ... our DTs aren't facing that sort of scenario. The "lightest" guy who is likely slated to be an every-down DT is Reiff ... and he's still a little over 270. Most of the younger guys will likely continue to put on "good weight" prior to the season while working with Doyle over the summer. Reiff was just listed at 260 in the '17 media guide.

 

[Pepperman]

Homer, I like the post and always appreciate your thoughts.

That said, one thing I'll throw out there is after damn near 20 years of KF I've learned that I really don't need to be worried about the defense. It seems Iowa's defense is always solid and is really the reason for KF's success. It is the offense that usually lets us down. Having OL concerns is by far my biggest worry the more I think about this. WR production bugs me but frankly I'm used to it by now. We shall see how different things are with more of a bruising RB and if it helps to keep Iowa's offense out of the dreaded 2nd and 10s. Should the offense get a lot of 2nd and 6s, followed by 3rd and 2s, I think Stanley can do a lot of damage with play action and finding the excellent TEs.

I forgot to even address special teams, but as much as the punting game has been maligned, I see statistics on here quite a lot (cocoem posted recently I think) that the difference between Iowa's punting being average and "bad" is something like 2 yards per kick. That can't be enough to dramatically impact the games even if there are times where our eyes tell us so.

 

[CanadaHawk]

Not really a concern, but a solution. If Lattimore can be a run-stopping rock, if Matt Nelson can pick up where he left off before injury, then the DL will allow the LBs breathing space and the O can lean on the D while the WR/RB situation gets settled.

DL is expected to be the strength of this team and could allow other units time to grow. A little worried about stopping the run. Puts a lot of pressure on Lattimore without another 300+ guy in there. Could’ve used Nixon this year. Perhaps Noah Shannon will get some snaps?

 

[Rocket98]

To me, it's all about the comparative analysis ... and also recognizing the developmental nature of some positions.

Top concern - No question LB is my biggest concern. The data set we have observing the new LBs playing in games is nominal at best. It is true that our scheme is LB-friendly ... we tend to err on the side of simplicity so that our LBs can play faster. However, that description especially applied to the D when Norm was the DC. Phil has a tendency of playing more games with coverages ... and that can impact the LBs (if they don't know their assignments). I like the talent that we have at LB ... however, it's also true that the LBs are our biggest unknown.

2nd biggest concern - OL depth. In terms of guys who have played and who are "trusted" ... we have Wirfs, Jackson, Reynolds, Levi Paulsen, Render, and Banwart. In good years, our depth sometimes goes something like 8 or 9 guys deep ... and that's with guys who have game experience. I like the guys we have on the OL ... but of the 6 guys mentioned ... 3 are just SOs. OL is typically a developmental position ... so excellent play requires the individual to really get down technique AND requires the group to learn to play together cohesively as a unit. Developing depth on the OL will likely be a pretty big priority this year.

3rd biggest concern - Punter (on any given day, it's can leap ahead to being my 2nd biggest concern). Without question, our punting game needs to improve. Our D had to defend way too many shortened fields due to poor punting.

4th biggest concern - WR play is almost perennially on my list of concerns for Ferentz coached teams. The good news is that my concern at WR is far less than it was last season ... after all, we have almost all the same personnel as last season ... and last year they were working with a brand new QB, learning a new O, and learning from a new position coach. This year, the situation should be better on most fronts ... but more guys need to step up with a sense of urgency ... and really focus on improving.


As for people having concerns about DT ... that one is a bit of a head-scratcher. Lattimore made huge strides at the position. Matt Nelson really seemed to get acclimated to position ... and once that happened ... his productivity really seemed to shoot up. Reiff is a guy who flashed some really good things. The primary reason why Morgan and Parker have been trying to work more guys in at DT is because they've realized the importance of keeping guys fresh on the DL. Our guys are a little undersized at DT ... so it becomes a little more valuable to help the guys out by helping them stay fresh. We're already going to be giving Hesse some interior reps on pass-rushing downs ... that will be a given. However, having a solid top four to be participating in an active rotation is important. Last year, our top 4 guys were Bazata, M. Nelson, Lattimore, and Reiff. Now that Bazata is gone ... the coaches are also likely trying to make sure that we can overcome injuries ... so building depth is really beneficial. To that end, they're experimenting to see who will help give us the best top 4 or 5 guys in a rotation. Consequently, Brincks and Golston have been trying their hand at DT. My guess is that the #4 DT spot is still mostly a free-for-all ... right now I would guess that the top candidates are Brincks, Golston, and Jansen ... but we'll see who can make the most of their opportunity.

Also, I think that it's a little funny to worry too much about our DTs being undersized ... because I still remember back to 2005 when Mitch King was starting at DT ... and through the season, his weight was dipping down into the 240s. That season, Mitch was given up 70 to 80 lbs to some of the O-linemen he was facing off against. In '18 ... our DTs aren't facing that sort of scenario. The "lightest" guy who is likely slated to be an every-down DT is Reiff ... and he's still a little over 270. Most of the younger guys will likely continue to put on "good weight" prior to the season while working with Doyle over the summer. Reiff was just listed at 260 in the '17 media guide.

Right on ghost! Linebacker is still very concerning for me. Having lbs playing against ourselves is easy. Learning different offensive systems each week has me very concerned. Amani in coverage has me very concerned as well. WR’s will be fine as Fant, Hockensen, and Beyer will fill any concerns there might be. Easley and Groeneweg are MVB and MCCarron. My concerns besides LB are depth at RB and finding a pass catching RB in the incoming freshman class. My other concern is depth at OT. The drop off from 2 elite OT’s is significant.

 

[kceasthawk]

I probably still go WR. Even though there have been some good reports, they really haven’t proven anything. Seems like the needed development of ISM and B Smith is far from complete.

Next for me is defensive tackle. And it may be my #1. Losing Bazata is a big deal. Really was a stalwart in there. Lattimore plateaued last year. Reiff and Jansen don’t carry much weight. The fact that Brincks moved in and was running 1 scares me more than it makes me feel good. We don’t have guys that naturally carry 300 to 310. Maybe a healthy Nelson, an improved Lattimore, another year in the program for Reiff and we get there.

The interesting thing (to me at least) is that I have lost a lot of my concerns about LB.

I actually feel really good about the team as a whole. We get good play from WR and DT, could be a really strong year.

I don't understand your comment that Ced Lattimore has plateaued at all. Go back and look at the the careers of Carl Davis and Jaleel Johnson. Neither did bubcus the first couple of years, carried bad weight and had maturity issues. Then look at their last two years, and where they are now. Ced had to play early, and he just wasn't ready. After he lost the starting role, he came back and played better the 2nd half of last year. He's pretty athletic, and right in that 295 to 300 lb range. I'll be suprised if he doesn't play well the next two seasons and end up in the league.

 

[buchs]

OL - depth

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

Homer, I like the post and always appreciate your thoughts.

That said, one thing I'll throw out there is after damn near 20 years of KF I've learned that I really don't need to be worried about the defense. It seems Iowa's defense is always solid and is really the reason for KF's success. It is the offense that usually lets us down. Having OL concerns is by far my biggest worry the more I think about this. WR production bugs me but frankly I'm used to it by now. We shall see how different things are with more of a bruising RB and if it helps to keep Iowa's offense out of the dreaded 2nd and 10s. Should the offense get a lot of 2nd and 6s, followed by 3rd and 2s, I think Stanley can do a lot of damage with play action and finding the excellent TEs.

I forgot to even address special teams, but as much as the punting game has been maligned, I see statistics on here quite a lot (cocoem posted recently I think) that the difference between Iowa's punting being average and "bad" is something like 2 yards per kick. That can't be enough to dramatically impact the games even if there are times where our eyes tell us so.

I don't disagree (for the most part). Iowa's D does tend to be a team strength ... particularly when it returns good leadership and depth. However, this comment does come with conditions. Iowa's scoring D has mostly remained solid ... however, our run D doesn't quite seem as tight as it was back in the Norm Parker days. Thus, whenever we have transitions on the edges of our D ... that sometimes impacts how effective our D is at defending runs to the edges. Furthermore, when our LBs are young ... then there are usually issues defending the pass to either TEs or RBs. Lastly, when we have a transition at safety (particularly at free-safety) ... then that tends to lead to an above-average number of blown coverage assignments.

Given the composition of the '18 D ... returning experience at DE inspires some confidence concerning our defending outside runs ... but it is similarly undercut by the "newness" of Nick Niemann. Thus, our rush D on the edge might hold steady ... not great, but not bad. The bigger thing I expect from our D are hiccups in defending the short pass game to RBs and TEs. We'll see how that unfolds ... it will probably tighten up as the season progresses.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

I don't understand your comment that Ced Lattimore has plateaued at all. Go back and look at the the careers of Carl Davis and Jaleel Johnson. Neither did bubcus the first couple of years, carried bad weight and had maturity issues. Then look at their last two years, and where they are now. Ced had to play early, and he just wasn't ready. After he lost the starting role, he came back and played better the 2nd half of last year. He's pretty athletic, and right in that 295 to 300 lb range. I'll be suprised if he doesn't play well the next two seasons and end up in the league.

Yeah ... I didn't get the comment about Lattimore plateauing either. In fact, as a group I thought that across the board, our DTs played much better late in the season compared to their play early in the season. Early in the season, it looked like Ced was "thinking" a lot ... just trying to make sure he was taking care of his responsibility of keeping the LBs clean. Consequently, he was still getting caught in the wash a lot ... and, even when he wasn't, he was often still a step away from making plays. As the season progressed ... I'd say that Ced probably cut down the prior distance by maybe a half step. That was probably reflective of him trusting his technique more and him just being able to play faster. Consequently, he ended up contributing in a lot more plays later in the season ... and that was even with him no longer starting! Hopefully through the spring and fall ... and working throughout the summer ... hopefully he can cut off another half step. That will come with him better understanding his role in the D ... and with him continuing to learn to play faster. As that occurs, he'll be able to be an increasingly disruptive force on the DL.

 

[The Sleeping Dog]

Receivers. Haven't seen or heard anything that indicates there's a break out player at that position. By break out I mean someone that can generally force a double team down field. Get another hat out of the box on a regular basis.

Linebackers. By all reports looked good in the spring game but still not live action. The reports indicate Iowa will field good linebackers. Given the coaching we've seen on defense I think that we will see the position well played but we haven't seen it yet so my concern is moderate.

Interior offensive line. Thought we were overrated last year and more question marks. My concern level is low on this one.

Think that defensive line will be a team strength.

 

[mazda1]

Interior line play, both sides.

Lb's and WR will be inconsistent and they are concerns, but if we can't control the middle of either line we are going to be in a world of hurt.

We need to be injury free in fall camp and that's not likely.

 

[bloodredd]

1)LB
2)OL
3)WR
4)CB
5)Punter

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

1)LB
2)OL
3)WR
4)CB
5)Punter

I'm intrigued to hear what your reasons are for concern relating to our CB situation. I'm honestly surprised to hear that someone may be concerned about CB ... but that also doesn't make the concern any less valid. I could certainly understand someone pointing to neither Ojemudia nor Rugamba being particularly outstanding last year. Of course, I would counter that Josh Jackson didn't look particularly outstanding during the 2016 season either ... it was a credit to both Josh and Phil (Parker) that Josh emerged in '17 like he did.

Desmond King had a bit of a sophomore slump in '14 too. He came back in '15 to have a Thorpe Award winning campaign. Player development can be strange that way ... your experience lays the foundations for your success. However, it's all the hard work you put in to truly refine your craft ... to get to the point where your reactions are nearly instantaneous and automatic ... then you're capable of making more plays because you're playing that much faster.

Hankins looked okay in '17 ... does that mean he's due for a sophomore slump? Are Ojemudia's and Rugamba's respective developments going to stagnate? It's possible ... but not necessarily likely. As we saw in 2013, we had Draper who had seen action as a TR FR, we had Fleming who seemed like he could be an heir apparent (really athletic kid), Lomax was pencilled in as the starter opposite Lowery, and we had 2 pretty solid TR FR CBs in Rucker and King. What happened when Lomax got injured? Phil Parker gave King the nod ... based on the merits of what he had shown in practice! Pretty impressive that King leap-frogged the other guys ... also it nicely illustrates that Phil Parker will play whoever ends up winning the job.

Thus, despite that fact that Ojemudia, Rugamba, and Hankins each have starting experience ... and have each had moments where they looked pretty good (they've each also had moments where the didn't good, I'll concede) ... the CB room will be pretty loaded ... because nothing prevents Creamer, Turner, Boswell, Johnson, Brents, or Roberts from ultimately winning the job based on what they show in practice come next summer/fall-camp!

 

[bagdropper]

O-line.

If Iowa can run the ball (say 1800+ yards reg season) while protecting Stanley (say 24 sacks or less), every other positional group's job becomes easier.

Stanley won't be running for his life, he'll have time to find the open receivers, the RB's will chew up clock wearing down the opponent, and the defense won't be on the field all game long.

 

[Dick Rambone]

1. Wr
2. Lb
3. Dt.

I am actually excited to see Harrell get touches.

except for him forgetting to block, if that was a real game He would have gotten the QB killed a couple times, re watch the tape.

 

[bloodredd]

I'm intrigued to hear what your reasons are for concern relating to our CB situation. I'm honestly surprised to hear that someone may be concerned about CB ... but that also doesn't make the concern any less valid. I could certainly understand someone pointing to neither Ojemudia nor Rugamba being particularly outstanding last year. Of course, I would counter that Josh Jackson didn't look particularly outstanding during the 2016 season either ... it was a credit to both Josh and Phil (Parker) that Josh emerged in '17 like he did.

Desmond King had a bit of a sophomore slump in '14 too. He came back in '15 to have a Thorpe Award winning campaign. Player development can be strange that way ... your experience lays the foundations for your success. However, it's all the hard work you put in to truly refine your craft ... to get to the point where your reactions are nearly instantaneous and automatic ... then you're capable of making more plays because you're playing that much faster.

Hankins looked okay in '17 ... does that mean he's due for a sophomore slump? Are Ojemudia's and Rugamba's respective developments going to stagnate? It's possible ... but not necessarily likely. As we saw in 2013, we had Draper who had seen action as a TR FR, we had Fleming who seemed like he could be an heir apparent (really athletic kid), Lomax was pencilled in as the starter opposite Lowery, and we had 2 pretty solid TR FR CBs in Rucker and King. What happened when Lomax got injured? Phil Parker gave King the nod ... based on the merits of what he had shown in practice! Pretty impressive that King leap-frogged the other guys ... also it nicely illustrates that Phil Parker will play whoever ends up winning the job.

Thus, despite that fact that Ojemudia, Rugamba, and Hankins each have starting experience ... and have each had moments where they looked pretty good (they've each also had moments where the didn't good, I'll concede) ... the CB room will be pretty loaded ... because nothing prevents Creamer, Turner, Boswell, Johnson, Brents, or Roberts from ultimately winning the job based on what they show in practice come next summer/fall-camp!

The reason CB came in fourth on my list is mainly because of depth.
Hankins is a little bit of a concern to me because I haven't seen enough of him yet. OJ and Manny concern me a little mostly because of the Purdue game...... I also have questions about quality of run support from the position. Dez and JJ did that well. Not saying the current guys won't do just as well but still a concern at this point. Manny missed Toren in the open field at the spring game. Not an indictment, just an observation. That said, I feel pretty decent about any of those 3 choices. Beyond that it gets pretty mysterious. Injuries happen and that is the real concern. What if the top 2 go down? Is Creamer ready? He didn't get his head turned around on the TD to Dafney. It's only one play and really means nothing but I did take note of it.
Phil usually has them ready so I hope my concerns are unfounded.

 

[Hawkdome]

First base. Bullpen and nobody that can hit for power from the left side of the plate.

 

[Hawkeyeinsoutherncalifornia]

As spring games are a crap shoot no one knows as we could all agree that one certain position is going to be awesome then get bitch slapped to reality as the one or two positions we “thought” were going to be a downer ... let’s hope all positions excel leaps and bounds over last years squad and hope we squash our opposition badly..

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

The reason CB came in fourth on my list is mainly because of depth.
Hankins is a little bit of a concern to me because I haven't seen enough of him yet. OJ and Manny concern me a little mostly because of the Purdue game...... I also have questions about quality of run support from the position. Dez and JJ did that well. Not saying the current guys won't do just as well but still a concern at this point. Manny missed Toren in the open field at the spring game. Not an indictment, just an observation. That said, I feel pretty decent about any of those 3 choices. Beyond that it gets pretty mysterious. Injuries happen and that is the real concern. What if the top 2 go down? Is Creamer ready? He didn't get his head turned around on the TD to Dafney. It's only one play and really means nothing but I did take note of it.
Phil usually has them ready so I hope my concerns are unfounded.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Given that Phil has stated that he thinks that 1 or 2 TR FR CBs could play (maybe it was DBs and not CBs) ... I was thinking that he was trying to continue to build depth at the position. The purpose, of course, would be to help us match-up better against pass-happy teams (when we're doing nickel and dime packages) ... but also to help continue to raise the level of competition in the CB room.

The "heat" applied by Rugamba helped drive Josh Jackson to "up his game" ... and that led to his terrific '17 season. Hopefully some new "young guns" will help drive the current group of veterans forward ... or, if not, hopefully a next-gen Desmond King emerges.

Lastly, concerning Creamer not turning his head around ... how often did Mabin do that? ... even as an upper classman? Sometimes guys panic ... they're afraid that they'll lose a half step by turning ... because they'd rather play the ball by keying on the eyes and arms of the WR. Of course, without turning, that can lead to PI calls too.