Welcome back to the latest scholarship update from 18 Stripes. We’re now just over 2 weeks away from National Signing Day and since our last update the Notre Dame coaching staff has gone through a shocking transformation. Their objective right now is clear: Recruit your tail off through Wednesday, February 1st.
Please note, we have walk-ons who have been awarded one-year scholarships in the past highlighted in gray within our Google form but do NOT count them for year-to-year scholarships.
Out of Eligibility Following the 2016 Season:
OL Mark Harrell
DT Jarron Jones
S Avery Sebastian
LS Scott Daly
DE Isaac Rochell
LB James Onwualu
CB Cole Luke
Both Jones and Rochell have picked up NFL Combine invitations so that’s good news for their professional football careers. They will combine (get it?) with Onwualu and Luke in hopes of hearing their names called during the NFL Draft but it could be a long, sweat-filled couple of days for all of these players.
2017-18 Academic Classes
15 Verbal Commits
23 Sophomores
21 Juniors
17 Seniors
5 Grad Students
81 Total Scholarships
With the recent attrition it feels like the scholarship number should be down to 75 right now but things aren’t quite that bad at the moment. We were projecting DeShone Kizer to leave for the NFL in our last update and he made it official in between so now the senior class is down to 17 bodies.
In the loss category, receiver Jordan Pouncey (.854), corner Paulson Adebo (.920), and corner Elijah Hicks (.890) have all left the Irish class recently with the latter recruit immediately giving his verbal to coach-less California. Say hello to Demetris Robertson for us!
In the addition ledger, Notre Dame added offensive lineman Aaron Banks (.926) after our last update which keeps the current verbal number from going under 15 bodies.
List of Eligible 2017 Grad Students
Tier 1
OL Mike McGlinchey
TE Durham Smythe
Tier 2
OL Colin McGovern
OL Hunter Bivin
Tier 3
TE Jacob Matuska
Curiously, there hasn’t been any word on the future of running back Tarean Folston although we continue to project him not to play football for the Irish in 2017.
As things stand today, if the Tier 2 and Tier 3 players want in there is likely to be room for them which is often the case every year. For these grad players it’s usually a matter of health, access to playing time, real job opportunities, or quality transfer options than it is strictly about scholarship room.
*****
The Roster
^2018 commits are included below, for reference. All eligibility displayed is for the upcoming 2017 season.
QUARTERBACK
Roster (2): Wimbush r-SO, Book r-FR
Commits (1): Davis
The Irish head into 2017 with a 3-star one snap away from being the starter. The last time that happened it was done by a player who is rumored to be a new assistant coach at Notre Dame. This is a good place to drop the good news that Reviewing the Redshirts begins soon with Ian Book!
This feels like a good year to bring in a grad transfer but of course most quarterbacks don’t want to transfer only to be a backup. The keys are being given to Wimbush. Then the backup set of keys, as well.
RUNNING BACK
Roster (4): Adams JR, Williams JR, Brent r-JR, Jones r-FR
Commits (2): Holmes [2017], Stepp [2018]
We have the ascendancy of Dexter Williams whose carries should go up 200% or more plus Justin Brent coming off a season-long injury and trying to get his career back on track. Tony Jones could’ve played last year but wasn’t needed so we’ll see if he’s in the mix, too. Don’t forget Holmes is already on campus, as well.
WIDE RECEIVER
Roster (7): St. Brown JR, Sanders JR, Boykin r-SO, Stepherson SO, McKinley SO, Claypool SO, McIntosh r-FR
Commits (1): Young [2017]
This is good depth…for a team in 1972. But, when you add in Chris Finke, the snaps that Alize Jones will eat up, and that any true freshman is unlikely to make a big impact I’m not too worried. Out of all the positions, the Irish are positioned best to add recruits at receiver as we close out the cycle.
TIGHT END
Roster (5): Smythe r-SR, Jones r-SO, Weishar r-JR, Luatua SR, Matuksa r-SR
Commits (2): Wright [2017], Kmet [2017]
Alize Jones recently tweeted that he’s academically eligible again so we should expect him for spring ball.
OFFENSIVE TACKLES
Roster (5): McGlinchey r-SR, Bars JR, Bivin r-SR, Kraemer r-FR, Eichenberg r-FR
Commits (2): Lugg [2017], Banks [2017]
As expected, lots of chatter that Alex Bars will be moving to right guard following the Steve Elmer plan. In other news, Mike McGlinchey officially made his intentions clear to come back for his final year of school.
INTERIOR OFFENSIVE LINEMEN
Roster (7): Nelson r-JR, Mustipher r-JR, McGovern r-SR, Hoge r-SO, Byrne r-JR, Ruhland r-SO, Boudreaux r-FR
Commits (2): Gibbons [2017], Hainsey [2017]
If we see Bars move to guard that’s bad news for the interior linemen looking to grab a starting spot. Depth is good for Notre Dame but sometimes bad for certain players. Also, Quenton Nelson has also officially announced he’s coming back for 2017.
STRONG-SIDE DEFENSIVE END
Roster (4): Bonner r-JR, J. Hayes r-JR, Kareem SO, Ogundeji r-FR
Commits (1): MacCollister [2017]
There’s expected to be 5 bodies to work with here but that could change rather quickly in a new scheme plus the two youngest aren’t expected to contribute yet.
WEAK-SIDE DEFENSIVE END
Roster (3): Trumbetti SR, D. Hayes SO, Okwara SO
Commits (0)
We’ll see how Elko and Elston deal with this position. We could see some hybrid situations—which could add smaller players to the mix—or possibly bulk some of these players up into different roles. The lack of commits here continues to be the biggest weakness of this class.
DEFENSIVE TACKLE
Roster (3): Tillery JR, Taylor r-SO, Dew-Treadway r-SO
Commits (3): Hinish [2017], Ewell [2017], Ja. Ademilola [2018]
For the sake of our sanity is there any way this group can become a strength of the defensive line? I remain high on the freshmen so there will be plenty of options. We might also see a couple others bulk up and added to the interior, as well.
NOSE GUARD
Roster (3): Cage SR, Mokwuah r-JR, Tiassum r-SO
Commits (0)
Whether it’s a 4-3 or 3-4 you’re typically using a nose guard in some capacity. Although, we may see both interiors starters coming from the tackle position.
STRONG-SIDE LINEBACKER
Roster (2): Martini, SR, Jam. Jones SO
Commits (1): Oghoufo [2018]
The responsibilities of this position are bound to change quite a bit with the new defense so there may be some reshuffling of bodies soon.
MIDDLE LINEBACKER
Roster (3): Morgan SR, Barajas r-SO, Jon. Jones r-FR
Commits (2): Adams [2017], Ju. Ademilola [2018]
Morgan and Barajas seem like locks to remain in the middle. Depending on his speed and development Jonathan Jones might be someone to move elsewhere under Elko.
WEAK-SIDE LINEBACKER
Roster (2): Coney JR, Bilal r-SO
Commits (2): White [2017], Bauer [2018]
Bilal is destined to move to the Rover position which using the traditional verbiage would be the strong-side position. That might be good news for Coney unless Martini moves and offers an off-season worth of competition.
CORNERBACK
Roster (7): Watkins r-JR, Coleman JR, Crawford r-SO, White r-SO, Pride SO, Love SO, Vaughn SO
Commits (0)
Losing your only two corner commits a month before Signing Day is not ideal. The large amount of sophomores makes things a little more manageable but the Irish can’t afford a scholarship gap anywhere in the secondary as that could have disastrous consequences.
SAFETY
Roster (6): Tranquill r-JR, Fertitta JR, Studstill SO, Elliott SO, Perry r-FR, Morgan r-FR
Commits (1): Roberston [2017]
It’s doubtful that all three move but Tranquill, Perry, and Morgan are ideal candidates to move to linebacker in Elko’s scheme. We’ve been saying this even under VanGorder, as well. In either case we may see moving around among the players in the secondary.
SPECIAL TEAMS
Roster (3): Newsome r-JR, Yoon JR, Shannon r-FR
Commits (0)
We’re no longer carrying two long-snappers on scholarship, so that’s nice.
*****
Remaining Focus for 2017
During the last update I figured 4 more players would be added to the class for 21 bodies overall. With the recent changes to the class there’s now room for at least 6 more recruits–and word out of South Bend is that would ideally like to take push that number closer to 10 which seems unlikely.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what needs to be done for the finish of the 2017 cycle and it’s focused on three positions: receiver, defensive end, and corner. To a lesser extent (and entirely welcome to come aboard!) defensive tackle and safety.
Our National Signing Day table is ready. Currently 21 names the Irish are looking to sign and/or flip. Just over 2 weeks to go! pic.twitter.com/4pFUL95NR3
— 18 Stripes (@18stripes) January 16, 2017
It’s going to be an absolute mad dash to the finish line, that’s for sure. Offers are going out left and right as the new Irish coaches hit the trail. The biggest issue is that even with a frenzied finish Notre Dame may not bring in more than 1 additional 4-star.
Which way do you look at that? Following a disastrous 4-8 season and an early off-season full of numerous coaching changes just be happy the Irish bring in 20 players? Or, is it an embarrassing chase for bodies that’s going to hurt the program in the long run? Something in between?
Ellis Brooks- thought he was still in the mix
Also, I think we need to stop looking at Finke as a maybe on SS. It would be shocking IMO if he ever returned to walk on status.
Now MVG, yes he is the post spring attrition SS vulture.
Recruiting bros. said take Brooks off, he’s moved on.
Sorry, but not even Finke can break our rules (neither did Schmidt) w/r/t scholarships to walk-ons. They aren’t guaranteed anything–although very, very likely to receive one for the rest of their careers.
Seems like with two inside guys already committed and half the safety depth chart about to move to Rover, the new staff is okay with this.
Any word on a CB moving to safety? One of the podcasts for another site always floats Ashton White’s name. And we saw Julian Love there in one game. He seems smart and instinctive enough to pick up the position. Maybe it’ll depend on who plays nickel.
You have to think at least one body is moving to safety with a new DC, right? Probably more likely than not, I guess.
Think Steve Elmer is sick of DC (I mean, at this point, who wouldn’t be?) and wants to come back?
Think he’d play nose guard?
BUT BUT BUT YOU CAN NEVER HAVE ENOUGH OFFENSIVE LINEMEN, ERIC!!
I’m worried it is an embarrassing chase for bodies that’s going to hurt in the long run. And still wonder whether it wouldn’t be better (if that is indeed the case – admittedly difficult to know for sure) whether it would be better to hold on to a couple of scholarships this year in order to hand them out next year (better going without a couple for 1 year than practically going without for 4 years – which is what would happen with guys who are just taking up space on the roster) to better players.
We’re never really capped out when it comes to recruiting though. Every year under Kelly we end up under the 85 maximum for scholarships. Might as well give them out and fill up the depth chart, because it’s unlikely we’ll actually need extras in future years.
But isn’t some of that because we can only focus on so many every year? In other words, by the very fact that we end up at 83-84 every year whether we have 15 spots or 25 spots to fill shows that we self-cap. If we have 5 extra spots one year we open up the pool of candidates (of the higher quality players that we target at the BEGINNING of a cycle) a little more and go after them and still end up only 1 or 2 under the limit rather than 5 under the limit.
If we had an extra spot or 2 next year, then we’d open up the pool by a little bit at the beginning and end up filling those spots (with presumably better players than we will end up with this year). We wouldn’t just end up with 82 players instead of 84 (and we wouldn’t need to just take anybody to make it to 84, we’d find whatever our normal recruiting quality would be — with the usual caveats, unless we go 4-8 again, etc.).
I don’t believe there is much evidence for “self-capping,” though maybe someone has a better sense of this. I think our NSD hauls the past four years were:
2013: 24 (Vanderdoes didn’t end up coming)
2014: 23 (Sykes didn’t end up coming)
2015: 24 (Bo Wallace didn’t end up coming)
2016: 23
Given that we are usually trying to save a couple of spots for elite guys leading up to signing day, this seems reasonable (e.g., last year we were in it for Demetris Robertson, who didn’t even end up committing until May; also were doing well with Caleb Kelly until the very end).
that is the evidence for self-capping. This is just the natural thing that happens when you need to stay under a certain number.
E.g. when you have 25 spots (and need 4 wrs) you might start off going after 40 WRs (i’m just making these numbers up to make a point) whereas if you only have 15 spots (and need 2 wrs) you aren’t going to go after 40 to begin with but maybe only 20 (10x the number you need). And if it happens you strike out with those you don’t get left with #21 you get left with closer to the bottom of the barrel because you’ve already self-selected yourself out of many of the next tier of guys.
Haven’t there always been a few guys who have wanted to come but we said no first and then later wanted them but they committed elsewhere?
I must still be missing the connection between signing 23-24 players each year and self-capping. If the NCAA limit is 25 and you still want to save a spot for someone like Demetris on (or beyond) signing day, I think, on average, 23-24 is the best you can hope for unless ND begins to oversign/greyshirt or pull scholarships from committed players in the last couple of weeks like Harbaugh.
I think maybe a big issue we have is passing on certain positions in certain years and then wondering why we have no linebackers or safeties two years later.
I’m not sure about guys we didn’t pursue hard enough and then missed out on, though there are probably cases like that. When I was watching WMU this year, it made me wish we’d offered Justin Tranquill, who is their starting safety. I’m not sure if he’d start for us, but I think he was a guy who seemed interested based on my recollection. I seem to recall we were scrambling for safeties a couple of cycles ago when McKinney had to decommit. Maybe we would have had a better shot with those guys if we’d been on them earlier. I’m not sure if that’s a matter of casting too small of a net or maybe ending communication with guys prematurely?
I think though part of the small net or ending communication is natural because you can’t keep telling so many guys you want them when you don’t have enough spots for them. They are just going to be more wanted by other teams.
What do you think self-capping means? I used the term in response to argument which says we might as well take extra guys this year – even if they are basically not going to contribute – because well we won’t be able to use them next year because we are always going short of 85. My response was that we always go short of 85 because we self-regulate (maybe that is better than “self-cap”) not just because we run of out players to take. i.e. we run out of players to take because we regulate the pool in some ways to begin with based on our target number (both total and with certain positions).
the conclusion then is: if we start with a bigger number next year we could take better players or contributors where this year we may end up taking non-contributors (or at any rate that is the assumption that makes the question/argument worthwhile — if we take all legit prospects then take them).
Thanks for the clarification. I am working on the assumption that ND goes into every recruiting cycle with the intention of signing 23-24 players (saving a spot or two for a five star to break our hearts on NSD) regardless of what the current numbers are on the team, and I assume that is how we’ve approached the last four or five recruiting cycles based on the fact that we’ve signed 23-24 guys in each of the last four cycles. With early entries, maybe we should aim to take 26-27 guys in some cycles (while still being willing to take a late-deciding five star). That is probably something we should explore more?
My sense is that if we took 15 or 18 guys this year, we still aren’t planning to take more than our usual 23-24 guys next cycle, so I’m not sure if limiting our 2017 class would change our approach going forward all that much. It would leave us around 10 scholarships below the limit heading into 2017, though. With transfers and early draft entries and injuries and D.C. job offers, the scholarship numbers work out every year. I am fine beating out Oklahoma or Louisville for a few developmental guys at DB, and I’m not too concerned about that affecting the 2018 cycle.
Regarding communication, you’re right that we can’t string guys along. I think it might still be good to maintain some contact with guys, though, just in case something pops up, like an admissions issue. It’s my understanding that, in the past, ND coaches have basically stopped talking to guys once we fill up at a position. Some programs will maintain those relationships, even if they’re not actively recruiting someone, and it can pay off for them later on.
As stated above, we’ve pretty much never been short on scholarships. I understand the logic, though.
For the most part, based on offer lists and some of the breakdowns I’ve read, I am not sure many of the recent offers are too big of reaches. We’re not in the mix for any elite guys, but in my opinion, we should still try to grab guys who can contribute at positions of need.
Yea I was stipulating (with my question) that it would be necessary for my logic to follow that we’d be taking guys that won’t be contributors. If they will be contributors and aren’t huge reaches then great, let’s take them. But it seems anyway we may be close to having to reach just to get enough guys to fill up the ranks.
I think a contention is just automatically writing players off as non-contributors, when it’s difficult to project specifically which players may grow and develop into having a good college career. Can’t win the lottery if you don’t buy a ticket, and traditionally ND doesn’t fill out (or retain) the 85-man max, so it’s really not that big an issue, as others have talked about
Sure, there’s no guarantee some of these 3* they’re going after now will be college contributors, but if the choice is take a chance on them, or be content to come in at the 82-83 level, well, there’s only 1 way to have an opportunity to develop players…
Guys who don’t crack the 2-deep after a few years seemingly tend to have natural retention issues (transfers, off-field issues) that cull them from the program as it is. Best to try and max out on bodies now, and see who can help and the ones who don’t contribute usually flush out (especially at ND) and it’s on to the next batch.
Obviously no one wants to see them get a significant number of players that have little-to-no chance of developing, but I’d argue that right now they probably feel that the guys they’re targeting can get there. And it’s better to add prospects than just slide under the 85-man limit.
Especially on defense, I look at some of the prospective “reaches” in terms of how they fit the new staff’s scheme and more importantly, how they compare to what Elko has had to work with over the past few years. If you picked up a group of the new defenders on the board, Wake would probably be ecstatic with that group on paper so it’s all relative. And two of the guys who got so much out of mostly two and three star recruits are in South Bend now.
So at least for this year, the defensive staff deserves a little bit more benefit of the doubt. They are basically starting from scratch very late in the process in identifying and recruiting the guys they need to fill out the roster.
Another question I have about recruiting rankings: why does the “overall” score matter on 247? Isn’t that an unfair comparison when teams have different number of slots open every year? Wouldn’t it make more sense to take the average as the way to rank the teams, then it wouldn’t matter as much whether you can offer 25 or 15 this year?
A class with 25 recruits that have an average score of .900 is a better haul than a class of 15 recruits with an average score of .900.
I remember in the lead-up to the 2012 NCG when BK basically said they couldn’t go live in practice because they didn’t have enough bodies. Depth, especially quality depth, matters a great deal in CFB.
Well sure, depth of course matters, but only having 15 slots open would indicate you already HAVE depth. Seems somewhat silly to punish that year’s recruiting ranking for only needing/being able to take 15 bodies. Now, if you had 25 slots open and only took 15, that’s a problem.
It’s not a straight addition problem. They have some kind of proprietary algorithm that they keep a very close-guarded secret, but basically, it sort of combines quality and quantity, with an outsized effect of increased quality.
For example, the ND class would get more of a bump from signing Foster Sarell (+29.75 to the class score) than it would from signing Oliver Martin, Jafar Armstrong, Jalen Harris, and Mac Hippenhammer combined (+27.11). That’s why you don’t see a ton of movement in the class rankings late aside from teams that get five-stars and high four-stars down the stretch.
It doesn’t account for program needs, definitely a fair critique there. On the other hand, there’s no way 247 can reasonably maintain a picture of program needs at all schools. FWIW, I really like what 247 has done with the Composite, both for individual players and for class rankings. I think it’s easily their most useful addition to the recruiting picture.
The score also allows you to differentiate between teams that have seemingly tied rankings over multiple years. So, for example, suppose Florida State was ranked 3rd in 2015 and 4rth in 2014 (I’m making all these rankings up) and LSU was ranked 4th in 22015 and 3rd in 2015. Their two year average ranks (both are 3.5) would seem to be the same. But the sum of each teams overall scores from the two years would be a tiebreaker.
Basically, in the same way that certain NFL draft classes have more talent than others, the overall score gives you the same feel for high school recruiting classes.
FWIW, since ND offered him and he decommitted from Louisville, Norwood (.8391 in the composite) has received offers from Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Tennessee. He’s an example of a guy who, for whatever reason, is being recruited by some quality teams despite being a “low” three-star recruit. If he joined the class, I’d be okay with that.
In the past month, Evan Fields has picked up offers from UCLA, Baylor, Louisville, Rutgers, and Minnesota. He’s another guy that would be nice to add to the class.
I have not been following recruiting as much the past 2 years, but last night I had a thought:
When is the last time we have gone head to head vs. Stanford for a recruit and won (not including them not getting into school like Niklas)?
The only guy I can think of is ESB.
Off the top of my head, weve lost–Abedo, Foster Sarrell, Mini St. Brown, Frank Buncom, Scarlett, Soloman Thomas, Dalton Schultz, and Terrance Alexander.
Woof. I understand why. Almost unbeatable education, great football, and Nor. Cal. But woof.
Well fortunately we couldn’t have used any of those guys. Lots of bullets dodged there.
We also lost Blake Leuders
I don’t know if it fits your criteria of “head to head” but Hoge had a Stanford offer. Javon McKinley and Khalid Kareem had Stanford offers too, and I just quickly checked from 2016 list so there could be more. A google search says Corey Robinson had Stanford’s attention but no offer, but I suspect if he showed more interest in them, they would have had more interest in him.
Not going to pretend that ND hasn’t taken more L’s than W’s to Stanford these days, but I don’t think the record is quite so lopsided that anyone with the choice just automatically goes to Stanford, though certainly many have. One of the recruiting bros definitely has more information and might have other examples as well.
We seem to have a big problem going head-to-head with them for safeties, for some reason. Overall, though, we’ve done fine – in fact, even counting this year, we’ve won more than we’ve lost against them recently. Over the last five cycles, from 2013 to 2017, we’ve landed 22 commits with Stanford offers, while Stanford has landed 19 commits with Notre Dame offers (I left out Dalyn Wade-Perry in this cycle, as we stopped pushing for him a very long time ago). This year, as you might expect, has been pretty favorable to them; if you look at just 2013 to 2016, it’s 20-14 in our favor.
Safeties are another story. I really don’t understand that one. We’re 0-6 against them on safeties, losing on Frank Buncom, Ben Edwards, Justin Reid, Andrew Pryts, Connor Wedington, and Stuard Head over the last few years. That’s what heavily colors the perception of them taking our lunch money on the recruiting trail.
ND commits with Stanford offers:
2017: Darnell Ewell, David Adams
2016: Javon McKinley, Khalid Kareem, Jonathan Jones
2015: Brandon Wimbush, Josh Adams, Equanimeous St. Brown, CJ Sanders, Jalen Guyton, Jerry Tillery, Tristen Hoge
2014: Corey Holmes, Quenton Nelson, Alex Bars, Nick Watkins
2013: Tarean Folston, Torii Hunter, James Onwualu, Durham Smythe, Steve Elmer, Doug Randolph (flip)
Stanford commits with ND offers:
2017: Foster Sarell, Osiris St. Brown, Connor Wedington, Paulson Adebo, Stuart Head
2016: Curtis Robinson, Andrew Pryts
2015: Frank Buncom, Ben Edwards, Justin Reid, Cameron Scarlett
2014: Christian McCaffrey, Dalton Schultz, Casey Tucker, Solomon Thomas, Terrence Alexander, Brandon Simmons
2013: Francis Owusu, Austin Hooper
Total recruits with offers from both places doesn’t really tell the story, though. It’s not like a bunch of these guys were just battling between Stanford and ND. But the ones that do seem to be down to a top 2 or 3 containing Stanford and ND seem to be overwhelmingly choosing Stanford.
ESB and Randolph (maybe Wimbush?) are just about the only guys who fit that bill for us. They have, at least, Sarell, OSB, Pryts, Adebo, Buncom, Edwards, Reid, Schultz, Alexander. This is really becoming a problem.
Hard to know which ones were down to a Stanford-ND head to head, but from this list, we have gotten 21 over the period and them 19. In the last two years it favors them 8-5. I think it is pretty much statistically even, except for the DB point that Brendan makes. I imagine that is a weird coincidence as much as anything.
I bet it’s all about Sherman. He’s super successful and flashy. I bet Stanford pushes his success hard. ND has a few safeties in the league, but they don’t have Sherman’s success or flash. They’re kids. I’m sure they’re drawn to him like moths to a flame.
I don’t envy the coaches and recruiting. Nothing like having your livelihood depend on the whims of pampered 17 year olds.
Then try balancing the various positions, current players, project early departures, try to account for injuries, etc. Then add in that recruiting is being done earlier, which puts more emphasis on projection of growing boys and then their dedication to the game.
Folston to the NFL, officially.
Huh…did not see that coming. A transfer, sure, but the NFL? Well, good luck to him.
Now that I step back and think about it, the RB rule applies here, especially with injury issues, because he’s got his degree. At best he’d be a rotation guy at ND and not get enough action to improve any draft stock. And unless he found a perfect fit, another year somewhere else wasn’t likely to do much good either. In both cases, that’s an additional year of hits, and RBs only get so long. Might as well take your shot, even if you only make a practice squad, and see what happens, since he’s already got the diploma.
I agree, and hopefully now that he’s a year further out from the ACL recovery he can load up and have good workouts and impress. Shame he couldn’t get back to former levels in 2016, hopefully he can still get there.
This is a mighty compliment, but some of Folston’s early highlights show the patience of a Lev Bell type. Of course, he hasn’t shown the acceleration, forward cutting type of explosiveness that Bell has and isn’t nearly the same receiving weapon out of the backfield, so I’m not trying to make a grand comparison. But with Bell’s success, maybe, hopefully a team will see a parallel if Folston can prove to test well this spring.
I don’t think Folston has even close to enough explosiveness to work in the NFL with Bell’s patience. That running style only works because he can go from flat footed to full speed in an instant. Folston, in my view, needs to be a downhill runner who hits the hole hard.
If he wants to look at a runner he could emulate, Jordan Howard from the Bears wouldn’t be a bad example. Howard is a bit taller, but not much heavier. He tends to pick a whole and hit it hard, with very few cutbacks. Doesn’t have the top end speed or elite acceleration of other backs, but he makes a decision and doesn’t hesitate. One cut and he goes. I think that’s the type of player Folston could have the best success modeling his game after.