More so than Best. 2 long runs for TD already. How many more years does he have? :-(

<blockquote><div class="name-said">HungryCalBear;664669 said:</div><hr>More so than Best. 2 long runs for TD already. How many more years does he have? :-(<hr></blockquote><br /><br />3, he's a true freshman. <br />and that kid is only 1 big tackle away from being injured. he's way small, left h.s. around 165. doesn't look like he's put on much more weight. he won't be able to play that in the league.<br /><br />i remember when Cal was playin UO, we took him down once on a solid hit, he was on the ground for a bit in pain. i question his build/frame. <br /><br />but he is indeed f*ckin fast, we need our LBs to be very careful.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">HungryCalBear;664669 said:</div><hr>More so than Best. 2 long runs for TD already. How many more years does he have? :-(<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Best would have killed it in that offense. We repeatedly ran him into the line between the tackles (like using a Ferrari as a battering ram) or thought it was a good idea to run him on sweeps behind a fullback (like a Ferrari stuck in traffic). <br /><br />The exception being the Nut Bowl against Miami. Best play calling at Cal since Cortez left.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">HungryCalBear;664669 said:</div><hr>More so than Best. :-(<hr></blockquote><br /><br />no

I love the way UO uses him. It'd be stupid to line him up in the backfield all day, so they don't and split him out. I agree he looks a bit frail but sizing him up and getting a solid hit on him seems real difficult.

he does need a new nickname. I mean isn't there already another famous black mamba?

He's the 2nd most feared guy in my books for 2012, right after MB.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">beeasyed;664670 said:</div><hr>3, he's a true freshman. <br />and<b> that kid is only 1 big tackle away from being injured. he's way small, left h.s. around 165. doesn't look like he's put on much more weight. he won't be able to play that in the league.</b><br />i remember when Cal was playin UO, we took him down once on a solid hit, he was on the ground for a bit in pain. i question his build/frame. <br /><br />but he is indeed f*ckin fast,<b> we need our LBs to be very careful</b>.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />I remember they used to say that about LaMichael James.<br /><br />We need the speed of Shaq Thompson

<blockquote><div class="name-said">Davidson;664926 said:</div><hr>He's the 2nd most feared guy in my books for 2012, right after MB.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />If I recall correctly, De'Anthony Thomas has had that nickname since Pee-Wee football. <br /><br />I am terrified of this guy, and more speed in the backfield/LB core could help [Shaq would be nice], but so too, would more discipline on the read option and things like that...reduce the amount of space he gets with proper run fits and by leveraging him toward other defenders.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">beeasyed;664670 said:</div><hr>3, he's a true freshman. <br />and that kid is only 1 big tackle away from being injured. he's way small, left h.s. around 165. doesn't look like he's put on much more weight. he won't be able to play that in the league.<br /><br />i remember when Cal was playin UO, we took him down once on a solid hit, he was on the ground for a bit in pain. i question his build/frame. <br /><br />but he is indeed f*ckin fast, we need our LBs to be very careful.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />DJ is making it in the league and he is not exactly Bo Jackson. Thomas has time to put on a few pounds. With crazy speed and the ability to catch there will be a place for him if he keeps this up.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">Davidson;664926 said:</div><hr>He's the 2nd most feared guy in my books for 2012, right after MB.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Why are you scared of MoragaBear?

^ usc qb if you're serious.

Also, DaT's 90+ yard TD run was right up the middle. Granted, he did go through a hole that simply wasn't there...anyone bigger would not have fit.

lol @ USC for wanting him on defense

<blockquote><div class="name-said">89Bear;665011 said:</div><hr>DJ is making it in the league and he is not exactly Bo Jackson. Thomas has time to put on a few pounds. With crazy speed and the ability to catch there will be a place for him if he keeps this up.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />yeah, only as a WR i mean. wasn't clear, i meant he can't be used as a RB at the next level

<blockquote><div class="name-said">Davidson;665038 said:</div><hr>^ usc qb if you're serious.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />I know, lol. Just feel only one MB deserves mention on this board.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">beeasyed;665131 said:</div><hr>yeah, only as a WR i mean. wasn't clear, i meant he can't be used as a RB at the next level<hr></blockquote><br /><br />He could be a special packages guy like Dexter McCluster.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">ColoradoBear1;664921 said:</div><hr>he does need a new nickname. I mean isn't there already another famous black mamba?<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Let's see, on the one hand, you have Kobe, who gave himself a stupid nickname that doesn't fit that nobody calls him. On the other hand, you have a kid who was such a stud all the way back in middle school that Snoop gave him that nickname - and he really IS lightning fast like that. Can you tell which of these is legit? What this really means is Kobe should finally lose the stupid nickname.

I can be totally wrong, but I see D'Anthony as a straight ahead running back. He's someone who can succeed on the sweep, but won't be very effective up the middle. Of course, if their line is successful in bulldozing holes, my whole theory goes out the window. He also fumbles, much more so than LaMichael.<br /><br />I think the bigger problem in playing Oregon is Tuinei. He is big, has good hands and some speed. Where before, you could concentrate on Darren Thomas and LaMichael and you might stop them on 3 downs, with Thomas throwing accurately they now have a real threat in the passing game. I'm not forgetting Josh Huff, either. So, which way do you swallow your poison?

<blockquote><div class="name-said">6bear6;665467 said:</div><hr>I can be totally wrong, but I see D'Anthony as a straight ahead running back. He's someone who can succeed on the sweep, but won't be very effective up the middle. Of course, if their line is successful in bulldozing holes, my whole theory goes out the window. He also fumbles, much more so than LaMichael.<br /><br />I think the bigger problem in playing Oregon is Tuinei. He is big, has good hands and some speed. Where before, you could concentrate on Darren Thomas and LaMichael and you might stop them on 3 downs, with Thomas throwing accurately they now have a real threat in the passing game. I'm not forgetting Josh Huff, either. So, which way do you swallow your poison?<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Chip Kelly will figure out how to use a guy who runs straight ahead at light speed. He will plug him into the right place. Maybe he keeps him split out as he mostly does this year. If the next QB is more a runner than Thomas, they will go back to more read option and D'Anthony would be scary in that. People haven't realized that the Oregon system is not dependent on any player or position? Chip Kelly is very adaptable and he keeps gaining new weapons to replace ones who leave. <br /><br />Somewhat the same with Stanford, though less so. People said they would take a step back when Gerhardt left because they were such a run-oriented offense? Now it is Luck because they are such a passing offense? They have coaches who are very flexible in their approach depending on the personnel available. They lose their WRs (like we did in 2004)?--they just play three TEs instead. Stanford is bringing in better recruits than in the past (largely due to changes in their admissions/recruiting process, but now fueled by BCS appearances combined with great academics and a young African American head coach). They may take a step back next year (to our level?), but don't look for a long-term downturn.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">Quote:</div><hr>They may take a step back next year (to our level?), but don't look for a long-term downturn. <hr></blockquote><br /><br />I dunno, sustaining success seems to be much more difficult in college football than turning a college team around for a few seasons. Especially at non-powerhouses. I do agree focusing on individuals like Gerhart is silly, but Stanford is finally losing a whole lot of talent on offense, rather than just one/two really good players. Luck is gone, but so are the starting WR's (though that's not a huge deal since they weren't that good), one of the starting TE's, and possibly most importantly, 3 olinemen, including what look to be two 1st rounders. Gonna be hard to get the offense back to that level after that. Just look at Cal's offensive problems since early in Tedford's reign - it may not be that tough to replace a part or two, but rebuilding the whole thing once all the talent is gone? That can be difficult...

<blockquote><div class="name-said">BTUR;665590 said:</div><hr>I dunno, sustaining success seems to be much more difficult in college football than turning a college team around for a few seasons. Especially at non-powerhouses. I do agree focusing on individuals like Gerhart is silly, but Stanford is finally losing a whole lot of talent on offense, rather than just one/two really good players. Luck is gone, but so are the starting WR's (though that's not a huge deal since they weren't that good), one of the starting TE's, and possibly most importantly, 3 olinemen, including what look to be two 1st rounders. Gonna be hard to get the offense back to that level after that. Just look at Cal's offensive problems since early in Tedford's reign - it may not be that tough to replace a part or two, but rebuilding the whole thing once all the talent is gone? That can be difficult...<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Here are Stanford's (Scout) recruiting rankings the last few years:<br /><br />2006 #38<br />2007 #43<br />2008 #43<br />2009 #15<br />2010 #24<br />2011 #23<br /><br />The guys they are losing now are from the 2007 and 2008 classes. <br /><br />The back-up QB was Brett Nottingham a 4 star recruit (#14 in the country) from Monte Vista and while he did not play much, he was good when he was in (5 of 8 for 78 yards 1 TD and 0 INT). People who have seen them play in HS can compare them to our incoming savior, Kline.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">calumnus;666083 said:</div><hr>Here are Stanford's (Scout) recruiting rankings the last few years:<br /><br />2006 #38<br />2007 #43<br />2008 #43<br />2009 #15<br />2010 #24<br />2011 #23<br /><br />The guys they are losing now are from the 2007 and 2008 classes. <br /><br />The back-up QB was Brett Nottingham a 4 star recruit (#14 in the country) from Monte Vista and while he did not play much, he was good when he was in (5 of 8 for 78 yards 1 TD and 0 INT). People who have seen them play in HS can compare them to our incoming savior, Kline.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />I find recruiting rankings to be useful for future expectations (as there are strong enough correlations to suggest they at least tell us something worthwhile), but when looking back on the past, does it matter that players like Martin/DeCastro/Fleener weren't that highly regarded? Those guys obviously outperformed their recruiting rankings by a ton and turned into excellent players. Is there a reason we should expect that to continue? Stanford isn't going to be completely talentless or anything, they still have their RB coming back (I thought he looked pretty good in the bowl), a couple of olinemen who are probably pretty good, and Ertz and Toilolo, and that fullback Hewitt, but it's still a lot to replace. Especially such a good QB and such a great line - those are the drivers of that offense. They're also losing two of their primary OL backups, according to their depth chart - they only have 4 guys returning on the 2 deep.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">BTUR;666110 said:</div><hr>I find recruiting rankings to be useful for future expectations (as there are strong enough correlations to suggest they at least tell us something worthwhile), but when looking back on the past, does it matter that players like Martin/DeCastro/Fleener weren't that highly regarded? Those guys obviously outperformed their recruiting rankings by a ton and turned into excellent players. Is there a reason we should expect that to continue? Stanford isn't going to be completely talentless or anything, they still have their RB coming back (I thought he looked pretty good in the bowl), a couple of olinemen who are probably pretty good, and Ertz and Toilolo, and that fullback Hewitt, but it's still a lot to replace. Especially such a good QB and such a great line - those are the drivers of that offense. They're also losing two of their primary OL backups, according to their depth chart - they only have 4 guys returning on the 2 deep.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />I think they have talent waiting in the wings but will take a step back next year due to lack of experience. I don't know if they will get back to the BCS level in the next few years, but I don't know if we will get there either.

If you look closely at the rosters of Stanford, Oregon and $C with respect to the national ranking of the players at the position they played coming out of high school, you will see that each of the teams are ridiculously deep and talented at the skill positions. $C is particulary deep at wr and qb while Oregon is particularly deep at wr and te and Stanford is deep at rb. As a unit those groups will rank with the best in the entire country next year. <br /><br />In addition, Oregon and Stanford are significantly upgrading their defenses with the last years and this years recruiting classes. And both are recruiting effectively on the offensive line as well.<br /><br />To think that any players graduating will significantly weaken these teams is to make a judgement error that will set you up for disappointment. Cal has to get better, not wait for them to get worse. Our young talented defense needs to come of age quickly.<br /><br />As talented as we are, our competitors are keeping pace. There is more talent coming to the conference than ever before. There is more talent coming out of high school than ever before. So, in the end it is our level of talent compared to others that matters as opposed to our talent compared to past years.