Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)

I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover:

Avatar

Posted: 9/20/2013 6:45 AM

I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


Glover said to Sal yesterday:''The undersized thing can get kind of old and worn out.'' And I know some posters wish those of us who harp on the undersized angle would stop, so I will, at least for a while not mention it.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/20/2013 10:24 AM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


And yet by mentioning that you will not mention it you harp!

I asked my wife the other day if I could just call her Harpo?  She didn't appreciate it.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/20/2013 11:46 AM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 



plain wrote: Glover said to Sal yesterday:''The undersized thing can get kind of old and worn out.'' And I know some posters wish those of us who harp on the undersized angle would stop, so I will, at least for a while not mention it.
Way to go, Glover!!!  He stated the case well.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/20/2013 12:32 PM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


I mentioned this on another thread but it is very hard to figure out how Morgan State could push us all over the field and Stanford did not.

I am certain that the size differential verses Morgan State was a factor as they were behemoth and we were grasshoppers.  They zone blocked & we couldn't find the running backs until they were 5 yards downfield.  We must have played them without any defensive wrinkles.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/20/2013 1:03 PM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 



oldgrad74 wrote: ...it is very hard to figure out how Morgan State could push us all over the field and Stanford did not...
I would suspect it was more a factor of expectations.  Against Morgan State the players may have played a little tight - knowing they were suppossed to win and understanding the negative aspects of a loss to an inferior team.  Against Stanford, most expected them to get blown out - this may have allowed them to play with abandon as their were no expectations of a negative judgement in a loss.

Remember most of these kids came to WP to play at the D-1A level after not getting seriously recruited by the Stanfords of the football world - they had an opportunity to show the opposing coaches how wrong they were about them.  They played with the "hair on fire" mentality because they had nothing to lose in the Stanford game.
"a nation allowing a chasm between its educated and warriors becomes a nation whose thinking is done by cowards and fighting done by fools"

Last edited 9/20/2013 1:04 PM by GIBSON87

Reply | Quote
  • stash76
  • Potato Peeler
  • 25 posts this site

Posted: 9/20/2013 3:52 PM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


Some of you may remember another Rich Glover that was undersized (6'-1" and 233lbs.)  He was an All-American middle guard for Nebraska.  He won the Outland Trophy and Lombardi Trophy and came in third in Heisman votes in 1972,  I had the "pleasure" of playing against him in HS.  He also played for the NY Giants and Eagles.  He and his Cornhuskers came to Michie my plebe year and beat us 77-7 on national TV.  I bet he is a pretty good inspiration for #98 today.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/20/2013 5:39 PM

oldgrad,politicians have been known to have friendly... 


journalists ask them at pressers if they were candidates for president, so they could deny it, though they were. I thought I'd make some folks happy by announcing I'm done with the whole undersized thing.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/20/2013 8:23 PM

Re: oldgrad,politicians have been known to have friendly... 


Look, we are very undersized against all our opponents except for AF and Navy.
We lose most games due to the disparity in weight and talent.
Sure, we talk about it a lot but you can never hide reality. Not in this game. noidea
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/21/2013 10:07 AM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


Quick story.

Had a chance to talk with the parents of Alex Meier at the Ball State game.

They said that Alex had come up against a 6'7", 362 lb Morgan State lineman a couple of times in the first quarter. He said it was like running into the side of a house.

Then he noticed that the guy would rock back as he stood up to block. Alex would hit him during his rock and the rest was like dominoes as the larged framed guy toppled into the backfield. RE has said a couple of times that we would not play "Sumo" football. But, apparently, Judo is okay......
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/21/2013 11:36 AM

Re: oldgrad,politicians have been known to have friendly... 


So plain, are you denying that you will harp on the size matter.

I have a feeling after today we will all be OK with it.

If not I am denying that I will ever post again supporting RE.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/21/2013 6:32 PM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


So how can Navy and Air Force compete without D1 size?

Or how does Navy and Air Force recruit and keep lineman with size?

There is a little military element at those 2 schools as well.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/21/2013 11:21 PM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


What's wrong with Sumo Football? Anyway you ban block somebody that's legal is OK with me.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/24/2013 2:08 PM

Re: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 



RangerGray92 wrote: So how can Navy and Air Force compete without D1 size?

Or how does Navy and Air Force recruit and keep lineman with size?

There is a little military element at those 2 schools as well.
What makes you think that AFA and Navy recruit and retain linemen with size?  If you check out the football thread on the AFA forum, you'll see them complaining about hte size of their linemen compared to ours.  One of the factors they were tossing about on their forum was the semi-annual PFT requirement, and they were wondering if Navy requires their guys to run.  In the past, we let some guys ride the bike rather than run, but the article below cites a case of a football player who did that for 4 years and then failed the PFT the last semester of his senior year and didn't graduate.  The article is from 2005, and the lawsuit that they cite may have a bearing on the policies that WP has followed since that time.  

http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...t/1520122/posts
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/24/2013 6:18 PM

glarson, Navy's NG is 303 and here are other big 'uns on.. 


the current roster:318, 310, 310, 305, 303, 302, 295, 290, 288, 287, 283, 281, 281,
280, 280, 278, 276, 275, 275, 275, 273, 272.
      Big enough for ya? In fact I noticed Navy recruiting bigger people two years ago when the talk began that they'd join the Big East. They realized you can't play a strong schedule with undersized linemen. By contrast we have only 7 players over 270, topping off at 280.
      Indeed, AF is about our size which partially accounts for their falloff the last two years. They used to be able to go head to head with BYU or ND, but not anymore. They also need to get much bigger.
      I come back again to Dan Patrick who, last Monday, on his show, twice expressed shock at how small Army was. He said it looked to him that Stanford's DBs were as big as most of our linemen.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 9/24/2013 9:14 PM

RE: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


Nikita Whitlock, Wake Forest University ... He's pretty good, right? We all know what he can do after watching last week's game. He's 5'11" 250lb. Those numbers are real. Size is not everything.
We need some if that fire he's got deep inside. Little guys that play big are fine with me.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 9/24/2013 10:03 PM

RE: I'm listening to my critics here and to NT Richard Glover: 


I'd rather have an O Line full of beef that can push the DLs back a few yards.
Of course, we don't get that and it sure is showing.
Reply | Quote