Any reports from the Recruiting Reception?

Redwingtom · Post by **Redwingtom** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 4:00 pm

Okay...if this punter is supposed to be so good, do any of you actually think we will change our punt formation to a normal one and just let him boom it?

PGY Tiercel · Post by **PGY Tiercel** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 4:19 pm

Redwingtom wrote:Okay...if this punter is supposed to be so good, do any of you actually think we will change our punt formation to a normal one and just let him boom it?

I kind of think yes. It seems that, when the punts got off, the returns were limited last year, but the kicks weren't that long. If your kicks are shorter, you need to limit the return. But if Rojas gets off big kicks, and with some good directional control on them I think we will see a normal punt formation.

San Diego Falcon · Post by **San Diego Falcon** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 4:26 pm

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Redwingtom:
Okay...if this punter is supposed to be so good, do any of you actually think we will change our punt formation to a normal one and just let him boom it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I kind of think yes. It seems that, when the punts got off, the returns were limited last year, but the kicks weren't that long. If your kicks are shorter, you need to limit the return. But if Rojas gets off big kicks, and with some good directional control on them I think we will see a normal punt formation.

Given his #1 status, it seems he would have had leverage in dictating his preference for a punt formation prior to signing his LOI. I imagine any punter would prefer the traditional formation vs having 3 guys getting pushed back into you while you're trying to punt.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 4:50 pm

He's a two step punter...this means we could run the goofy formation without as much worry of his own people running into him

San Diego Falcon · Post by **San Diego Falcon** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 5:27 pm

He's a two step punter...this means we could run the goofy formation without as much worry of his own people running into him

Sounds like an opportunity to make the formation even goofier!

BourbonFalcon · Post by **BourbonFalcon** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 5:41 pm

Western Michigan showed us a thing or two last year about what can be accomplished with a young team! Trying to remember correctly but they finished with a pretty good record too I believe. If these recruits pan out I can definitely see us competing for a top position in the MAC! With improved defense, special teams, and an offense that's average we could be very successful.

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Fri Feb 03, 2006 7:44 pm

San Diego Falcon wrote:[quote}

Given his #1 status, it seems he would have had leverage in dictating his preference for a punt formation prior to signing his LOI.

I seriously doubt that.

San Diego Falcon · Post by **San Diego Falcon** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:34 am

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by San Diego Falcon:
[quote}

Given his #1 status, it seems he would have had leverage in dictating his preference for a punt formation prior to signing his LOI.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I seriously doubt that.

We needed him a lot more than he needed us. He had 100+ similar options. Our options were much fewer and not as attractive.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 12:03 pm

Actually...he probably had fewer options than that for a full schoillie. I've read that there are as few as 20 or so full rides a year given to kickers. Even for the number #1 guy (per one service) that limits things quite a bit.

Breandon did say they had scoured the country looking for kickers though....according to Rivals we even made an offer to a kid from CLackamass, OR.

I'm just glad to have both of the kickers we signed. They look like talented kids.

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 1:10 pm

San Diego Falcon wrote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by San Diego Falcon:
[quote}

Given his #1 status, it seems he would have had leverage in dictating his preference for a punt formation prior to signing his LOI.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I seriously doubt that.
We needed him a lot more than he needed us. He had 100+ similar options. Our options were much fewer and not as attractive.

"Ok, I'll come to Bowling Green, but only if the following formations are used. There must be at least nine men on the line of scrimmage, or I don't leave Miami." Hmm.

BGSUfalcons · Post by **BGSUfalcons** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 1:44 pm

orangeandbrown wrote:
San Diego Falcon wrote:[quote}

Given his #1 status, it seems he would have had leverage in dictating his preference for a punt formation prior to signing his LOI.

I seriously doubt that.

Orange, given the kid's talent, BG's formation will change for him and not the other way around. I agree with SDF.

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:06 pm

Whatever. I hate off-season.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:09 pm

I'd say his "release time" might have more to do with the formation we use than anything. It's awesome that the kid can kick 12 miles, but if he takes longer to get it off, we might see the same formation out there (though having "the wall" take a giant step forward might help things, too.)

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 10:54 pm

orangeandbrown wrote:Whatever. I hate off-season.