'10 DE Delvin Jones

#102
#102
DelvinJones.jpg
[/IMG]
:)

Everyone complains that the T isn't ever on ESPN!

Well it is now..
 
#115
#115
Any word on whether this kid will graduate early? I would love to get him here for spring ball next year, let him give WR a go, then shove a truck load of Gus's Good Times & Cajun Roosters down his throat for a summer and turn him loose after the QB's in the fall.
 
#117
#117
I will be honest. This is the biggest surprise this year for me. He is one of the best athletes, regardless of position, this year in highschool.

I thought he was definately USC bound.

Wonderful pickup.
 
#118
#118
says he wants to try WR first, i need to do some more checking up on this kid. 6'6 230 lb WR would be hudge. with milton. geeze.
 
#119
#119
i wouldnt be suprised if they keep hims as a TE, i mean look how well a super athletic TE helped FL last year untill ingrahm went down, and plus he could be lined up in differnt sports, ie the slot or even outside. that would be my plan for him.


and hopefully we develope enough OL depth to keep douglas at TE too, that would be an awsome combonation of TE's QB's love great TE's (no pun intended) i completed about 47% of my passes to TE's in hs,(if it wasent for having browning wynn to throw to (one of the best VT TE's at the school) i wouldnt have a bunch of my old hs passing reccords to brag about 10 years later.

another 30% to backs and 24% wr's trust me great duo of TE's can make your QB look like manning. i mean as much as i hate to admit it, phil simms (new york giant not
sims bamer) wouldnt have ben half of what he was without bavaro, cross and mowatt (FB/TE).
 
Last edited:
#120
#120
Douglas won't be going back to TE. He's already gotten too big and will have had too much time at OT which won't have nearly as much depth.

I do think he'd be a great UF type TE, but from what I remember, Kiffin doesn't roll with that. Then again, I think he'd be solid in the USC TE role that we'll be using too.

I just think he has too much potential at DE to keep him away from there though.
 
#121
#121
you might be right, but if it were my team (being an offensive coach) i would want him on my side of the ball though. if he put on 5-10 more lbs he would be a protypical TE but i wouldnt want him to loose his speed cause im sure that 40 time listed is laster timed. but he would also be a protypical DE, no mtter what he does we cant lose. but it does seam like we are already pretty lodaded on the defensive side of the ball on the DL though. so maybe he gets his shot at WR/TE hybrid.


aslso everyone said kiffen didnt roll with the "wildcat" to, but yet they had nuke doing it other day in practice, one thing ive learmd is good offensise's adapt, randy sanders didnt do it and he got caned, clawson didnt do it caned, last guy that did it was cutt and he left on his on.
 
Last edited:
#122
#122
Aaron Douglas has a chance to be a very special player at tackle. The thought of him moving back to TE is ludicrous. He is going to have a chance to be a highly drafted player.


So noone knows why the "soft" commitment designation? I thought it may have been something he said in an interview or something. It's weird.

And as has been said earlier about visits, that's strictly Scout that does that.
 
#123
#123
Sabanocchio said:
Aaron Douglas has a chance to be a very special player at tackle. The thought of him moving back to TE is ludicrous. He is going to have a chance to be a highly drafted player.
Click to expand...


its not ludicrous at all, he was going to be a verry special player at TE too, and would have also ben higley drafted.
 
#124
#124
orange_fan_inVa said:
its not ludicrous at all, he was going to be a verry special player at TE too, and would have also ben higley drafted.
Click to expand...

I agree that he would have been a special TE, but he was always going to be a better fit at tackle IMO, and I think his upside is much better there. I'm just saying with the need and as well as he has adapted, it would be stupid to move him back.
 
#125
#125
Sabanocchio said:
I agree that he would have been a special TE, but he was always going to be a better fit at tackle IMO, and I think his upside is much better there. I'm just saying with the need and as well as he has adapted, it would be stupid to move him back.
Click to expand...

oh i agree with you there, with the lack of depth, but i was only saying in the case that we developed alot more depth. baring injry do you think he will see the field at tackle this year?

plus a good strength and conditioning coach can take it off of you just as well as put it on, i went to E&H @ 6'3 235 lbs and by my rs freshman year i was 6'3 215-220
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top