Jacobs4Heisman wrote:I think the core issue here is....would this guy be getting this chance if he were a 3rd string tight end? If you think yes then you are most likely kidding yourself. You can say all you want about Amstutz's good intentions being the driving force, but this kid is getting this chance because he's a potential impact player.
I have no doubt Amstutz has good intentions, and I have no doubt that Amstutz only wants what's best for the kid, but he's thinking of the team at the same time, as he should. If I were a UT guy, I would not be happy he was let anywhere near the team -- just like I'm not happy about the Nick Lawrence situation here.
Jacobs, I agree with almost everything that you said there. The only part that I don't agree with is your argument about the third string TE. In a lot of cases, if a player was only capable of ever being a third string player at his position, I would say that he doesn't stand a chance of getting a walk-on opportunity, even if he had a completely clean prior record. That is assuming that the coaches could evaluate him close enough to determine that he could only be a third string player, but we're talking theory here so we'll say that they can do that. Since there are only 20 available preferred walk-on positions available, I don't think they'd give the opportunity to someone that they didn't think could compete for the top. However, in the case of TE, I think that UT would do it. Similar to the RBs, they do a good job of utilizing the TEs in the games. In fact, 3 TEs caught TD passes in the GMAC Bowl this year and one of them was a third string preferred walk-on freshman who will now be on scholarship this year.
But, I understand the underlying basis of your argument and to that, I'd say no, he wouldn't be given a chance if he were not a RB or TE.
UT is listed in the 2004 edition of The Unofficial, Unbiased Guide to the 328 Most Interesting Colleges by Trent Anderson and Seppy Basili as one of the U.S. schools with the “Most Beautiful Urban Campus.”
