Henry Parrish, 2020 RB

Advertisement
I mean not like we ever have drama at Columbus right? But honestly out of the 3 he does seem the most realistic
Derrick Crudup and Kyle Cobia are the last players we got from Deerfield and Lakeland, respectively. We can't even create drama there. We just have no shot.
 
Jakhari Gore had 2,000 all purpose yards in a HS season, too.

I like Parrish, but the measurables matter. Columbus clearly had a fantastic OL that opened up holes for him consistently.
 
Advertisement
I like Parrish, but the measurables matter. Columbus clearly had a fantastic OL that opened up holes for him consistently.

He’s a legit 5'10 if not taller. Only issue for me is that he has kind of a skinny frame.

Speed is not an problem from what I could see. His best time as a sophomore was 11.09 in the 100M. That's right in line with Chaney's best time last year, 11.08.

Very interested to see how he tests on Sunday at the Opening.
 
Jakhari Gore had 2,000 all purpose yards in a HS season, too.

I like Parrish, but the measurables matter. Columbus clearly had a fantastic OL that opened up holes for him consistently.
Parrish's didn't have all purpose yards, he had over 1,800yds rushing & the fantastic OL that everybody keeps giving all the credit to, go ahead & name me one of them that has offers?

If it was all just the OL how come none of them are 4/5-star prospects?
 
Advertisement
Lingard and Harris have been here for one year. I don’t know if you actually watched Miami but Harris flashed a lot with what he shown. So I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Burns hasn’t done anything in Four years so again what are you trying make a point of?

Whobis this Harris guy you are talking about
 
Parrish's didn't have all purpose yards, he had over 1,800yds rushing & the fantastic OL that everybody keeps giving all the credit to, go ahead & name me one of them that has offers?

If it was all just the OL how come none of them are 4/5-star prospects?

Great point, I've been thinking this...I mean I'm sure they had a nice OL and Cristobal a decent player...**** probably a top 2 or 3 OL in Dade right? But some monster offensive line huh?
 
Advertisement
Great point, I've been thinking this...I mean I'm sure they had a nice OL and Cristobal a decent player...**** probably a top 2 or 3 OL in Dade right? But some monster offensive line huh?
Cristobal signed with Georgia State & Federico Maranges signed with FAU, that's it.

None of the others have offers & none of them 4-star OL's. And I'm not denying that they did a great job as an OL opening up holes, but to try to dismiss Parrish's productivity & give all the credit to the OL is completely unfair.

I know everybody might not like Parrish for their own reasons & that's fine, but people gotta cut that out saying his production was because of his OL, that's just not true.
 
Parrish's didn't have all purpose yards, he had over 1,800yds rushing & the fantastic OL that everybody keeps giving all the credit to, go ahead & name me one of them that has offers?

If it was all just the OL how come none of them are 4/5-star prospects?

a) I'm not counting yards here just making a general comparison to characterize the importance of measurables for a high level power 5 running back. If you're gonna be 5'9 and under 180, you better offer some elite speed/burst

b) Often the most successful HS OLs aren't loaded with P5 prospects. OL recruiting is as much about potential and traits as anything else. A HS OL with 5 guys that are 6' 270 pounds, squat 500 pounds, and have good feet/shuttle times in the right zone scheme and good coaching will dominate. Those 5 guys may not hear from Bama though. Just watch Parrish's tape and you see the outstanding blocking and lanes created.

I'm not trying to discredit Parrish. He's an outstanding RB and I'm sure he'll be a good college player. I'm getting flashbacks of the Yearby-Cook debates of the past. Yearby was a very solid college RB and IMO through their junior years, a more impressive HS prospect than Parrish. Next level traits are the difference makers here.
 
He’s a legit 5'10 if not taller. Only issue for me is that he has kind of a skinny frame.

Speed is not an problem from what I could see. His best time as a sophomore was 11.09 in the 100M. That's right in line with Chaney's best time last year, 11.08.

Very interested to see how he tests on Sunday at the Opening.

His burst on film looks like Chaney's to you?
 
Advertisement
He's not 5'9 though & in what way is this a flashback to the Yearby/Cook debate? No one is arguing that Parrish is better than Chaney or Knighton, or Bowman.

The entire argument is that Pareish could be a solid #2 back in this class, that's all it's ever been. We have a more realistic shot at getting Parrish than we do any of the other RB's we're after, not one person has said Parrish would be the best or feature back in this class.

And to your discussion on the OL, bruh... Come on man lol you know **** well if they were really that good a bunch of them would have more offers. Both Chaminade & South Dade has multiple lineman with D1 P5 offers, Columbus's OL is average at best.
Do not bother trying to speak the truth to these clowns. There is an excuse for everything. The Parrish haters are out and they can not be reasoned with. If he doesn't run a 4.40 laser timed 40 and a 4.1 shuttle we should not recruit him.
 
I'm not trying to discredit Parrish. He's an outstanding RB and I'm sure he'll be a good college player. I'm getting flashbacks of the Yearby-Cook debates of the past. Yearby was a very solid college RB and IMO through their junior years, a more impressive HS prospect than Parrish. Next level traits are the difference makers here.

Traits are huge. That's why I was on the Cook>Yearby train back when they were sophomores and it was an unpopular opinion.

But Parrish is faster than Yearby. An 11.09 as a sophomore is really good. For comparison, CamRon Davis ran an 11.06 as a sophomore. And he's a speed back without the elite moves of Parrish. As another example, Parrish was faster as a HS freshman than Deejay Dallas ever was in high school. He's skinnier than Davis and Dallas, of course, but he's not short or soft. Yearby was 5'9 and didn't even run the 100M, for good reason.

I was a Parrish agnostic until I saw him live. The guy is the truth. His best games were against teams like Deerfield Beach, Northwestern and South Dade. He made good players fall on their *** with moves. It pains me to promote a Columbus player, but he left me no choice.
 
He's not 5'9 though & in what way is this a flashback to the Yearby/Cook debate? No one is arguing that Parrish is better than Chaney or Knighton, or Bowman.

The entire argument is that Pareish could be a solid #2 back in this class, that's all it's ever been. We have a more realistic shot at getting Parrish than we do any of the other RB's we're after, not one person has said Parrish would be the best or feature back in this class.

And to your discussion on the OL, bruh... Come on man lol you know **** well if they were really that good a bunch of them would have more offers. Both Chaminade & South Dade has multiple lineman with D1 P5 offers, Columbus's OL is average at best.

I have no problem with Parrish as the 2nd back in the class. I think it would be pretty **** cool to have a Belen & Columbus RB as the 2 RBs for the class.

My knowledge of Parrish is limited to having watched his tape. That's it. I'm just informing the discussion with parallels, comparisons, and concerns. I have no idea why you're being so defensive and putting words in my mouth.

As for the OL, I 1000% stand by that statement. I played HS football about 12 years ago. We went up against a lot of teams with a couple big time OL prospects. The best overall OL we went against was Immokalee's. It was 5 guys that were all between 5'10 and 6'1 and between 250 and 270 pounds. None were major P5 prospects that I'm aware of. All of them had the feet to pull, get to the second level, and effectively zone block as a unit. Javarris James ran wild on us.

Sure, if you want to compare HS OL's to STA's which is always well coached, well rounded, and has P5 talent, go ahead. BUt in a discussion about which OL will best serve a HS RB's success, number of scholarship offers a guy has is not close to the top of my list. The film speaks for itself. He's got lanes for days.

Again, I'm very content with the prospect of Parrish as the 2nd back in the class. I can still have reservations. Please don't pin me on the opposite end of whatever your position is just for the sake of having a something to contrast. That's lazy and unproductive.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top