forums

2026 James "JJ" Johnson 4* DT from Northwestern via Ft Myers Flips to Texas From UGA

Defensively you’re as good as your weakest position , which is where a competent offensive coordinator will attack. Last year our Secondary was really really bad and our opponents attacked us there.

I think we have good, but not great talent at DT, But our current depth there is worrisome. At DE we seem to have both talent and lots of it. My guess is if we have injuries at DT, Mesidor, Bain, or Blount play some DT.

Even if we don’t land the Lamar Brown types, we need more bodies at DT.
 
Advertisement
Memnon said:
If DT is as important as you all keep swearing it is...

Then that means whenever we play a team with better DT's than us, we should lose right?

And it should also mean we should win whenever we play a team that we have a better DT's than them, right?
Click to expand...
Brother are you being serious? Ok fine. Is the rest of the team supposed to be irrelevant? Is it just because you can have a good defensive tackle that you're supposed to win? This is a team game. Just because one position is pivotal doesn't mean others can be basic. Like you're making this such an extreme that your argument doesn't even make sense. Just because I'm stating to me my opinion defensive tackle is the most important position it doesn't mean you can be lacking at other positions and still expect the same results. There's 11 men on the field, everyone has a role.
 
Brooklyndee said:
Yes, it is a lil naive. Obviously talent is critical. However how do you judge talent at the high school level? Is it not talent IF a crooked system doesn't rate them as high as the man with the same exact measurements, 40 times, strength etc as the man standing right next to him? Use sapp as your example since you brought him up. Remember when he came to us he was a out of shape tight end... Is that not development that turned him into what he came as a tackle? Don't get me wrong. Talent has its place. But at a position where the physical talent is all so similar then what separates one from the other? 9 out of 10 (AT THAT POSITION)it's the intangibles. It's hand placement, it's get off, it's overall strength, it's your punch, it's the ability to shed at just the right moment, to occupy the double team efficiently so that you're linebackers or your edge can take advantage. That's more often than not at that particular position not something that you're able to quantify out of a recruit. Where you are able to prioritize something out of that spot it's the body type, it's the brute strength, it's an IQ.
Click to expand...

Totally fair. The raw materials need to be there though. This kid from Arkansas is case in point. He has the raw materials but will need a lot of work to be a high performer. So I can see where development kicks in. My solution would be to stack until they sort themselves out, like Mario is doing along the OL and at DE. Make it a numbers game. But I hear you.
 
grover said:
Totally fair. The raw materials need to be there though. This kid from Arkansas is case in point. He has the raw materials but will need a lot of work to be a high performer. So I can see where development kicks in. My solution would be to stack until they sort themselves out, like Mario is doing along the OL and at DE. Make it a numbers game. But I hear you.
Click to expand...
But that is what you do. You stack a particular body type. A particular skill set & you let them all sort out the pecking order. See how they respond to coaching & scheme. Kennedy is the perfect example. Seems to be a dude there's no consensus on. To some sites he has far more value than others which is why his rankings are so over the place. What you key on with him is his body type, his strength etc. that combined with footwork & hand placement is a **** solid core to build from.
 
Brooklyndee said:
But that is what you do. You stack a particular body type. A particular skill set & you let them all sort out the pecking order. See how they respond to coaching & scheme. Kennedy is the perfect example. Seems to be a dude there's no consensus on. To some sites he has far more value than others which is why his rankings are so over the place. What you key on with him is his body type, his strength etc. that combined with footwork & hand placement is a **** solid core to build from.
Click to expand...

100. Now I fully agree. My point on talent was just you can’t recruit Corey Kings no matter how good your development is. The traits need to be there.
 
AUcane said:
Cmon man, for you, this is a bad argument.
Click to expand...
Is it?

According to yalls logic, DT is the most important position on Defense, right?

THEREFORE, if we play a team with better DT's than us, we should lose?

If that's not the case, then what are YALL actually saying about the DT position??
 
Advertisement
Brooklyndee said:
Brother are you being serious? Ok fine. Is the rest of the team supposed to be irrelevant? Is it just because you can have a good defensive tackle that you're supposed to win? This is a team game. Just because one position is pivotal doesn't mean others can be basic. Like you're making this such an extreme that your argument doesn't even make sense. Just because I'm stating to me my opinion defensive tackle is the most important position it doesn't mean you can be lacking at other positions and still expect the same results. There's 11 men on the field, everyone has a role.
Click to expand...
If the argument doesn't make sense it's because logically it falls apart when extrapolated out to fulfillment.

The reason why it doesn't make sense is because it's YALLS argument flipped back on you.

IF DT is the most important position on Defense, that means it should have the most impact on the Defense's performance.

DT's affect the game more than any other position on Defense, according to what yall are saying.

IF THAT IS TRUE, then that means what YALL are saying is that the team with better DT's is supposed to win the game more often than not.

If you can have the better DT's and still lose, then how much did those DT's actually affect the outcome of the game?

IF they're the most important position, they're supposed to have the most impact on the outcome of the game, right?
 
Memnon said:
If the argument doesn't make sense it's because logically it falls apart when extrapolated out to fulfillment.

The reason why it doesn't make sense is because it's YALLS argument flipped back on you.

IF DT is the most important position on Defense, that means it should have the most impact on the Defense's performance.

DT's affect the game more than any other position on Defense, according to what yall are saying.

IF THAT IS TRUE, then that means what YALL are saying is that the team with better DT's is supposed to win the game more often than not.

If you can have the better DT's and still lose, then how much did those DT's actually affect the outcome of the game?

IF they're the most important position, they're supposed to have the most impact on the outcome of the game, right?
Click to expand...

All else being equal, yes. The theory is you look at teams that have equivalent talent across the defense and then gauge the marginal impact on Ws if you keep every group the same but add talent at one. Then you look at which has the biggest impact on Ws across all position groups. I believe it’s DT.
 
Last edited:
I think it's pretty universally known that you win in the trenches and that starts on the both sides of the line. Not sure what's so difficult to understand. It's not glamorous. It's not pretty but it's where it all starts. Has been True since day one...
 
Memnon said:
If the argument doesn't make sense it's because logically it falls apart when extrapolated out to fulfillment.

The reason why it doesn't make sense is because it's YALLS argument flipped back on you.

IF DT is the most important position on Defense, that means it should have the most impact on the Defense's performance.

DT's affect the game more than any other position on Defense, according to what yall are saying.

IF THAT IS TRUE, then that means what YALL are saying is that the team with better DT's is supposed to win the game more often than not.

If you can have the better DT's and still lose, then how much did those DT's actually affect the outcome of the game?

IF they're the most important position, they're supposed to have the most impact on the outcome of the game, right?
Click to expand...
Your odds of winning are exponentially higher when you have good DTs. It doesn’t guarantee that you will win, but it **** sure improves your chances.

A good LB can’t be a good LB without a good DT in front of him to keep the OL off him. An Edge playing next to weak DTs has to overcompensate so much that he can’t be a good Edge.

All 11 positions on D are vital to winning a ship. But you build around your DTs. They don’t need to be 5* caliber, but try winning with the 2 and 3 star specials we had back in the Golden era and see how far that gets you.
 
50 pages later, we’re here. Shut this ******* thread down, enough. Kid decided to go elsewhere, not a Cane. Move on, he’s now the enemy. I don’t want a single kid that doesn’t want to be A CANE.
 
305 MOUNTAIN MAN said:
50 pages later, we’re here. Shut this ******* thread down, enough. Kid decided to go elsewhere, not a Cane. Move on, he’s now the enemy. I don’t want a single kid that doesn’t want to be A CANE.
Click to expand...
No disrespect to you personally but locking threads is ridiculous

Just don’t read them. Since when has the discourse around here been so elite that we have to lock threads because the conversation isn’t to some people’s liking?
 
Memnon said:
If the argument doesn't make sense it's because logically it falls apart when extrapolated out to fulfillment.

The reason why it doesn't make sense is because it's YALLS argument flipped back on you.

IF DT is the most important position on Defense, that means it should have the most impact on the Defense's performance.

DT's affect the game more than any other position on Defense, according to what yall are saying.

IF THAT IS TRUE, then that means what YALL are saying is that the team with better DT's is supposed to win the game more often than not.

If you can have the better DT's and still lose, then how much did those DT's actually affect the outcome of the game?

IF they're the most important position, they're supposed to have the most impact on the outcome of the game, right?
Click to expand...
Would you say the defensive backfield is far and away more important? I flip flop on it all the time but being able to shut down a run game with less committed bodies is very advantageous. Tackles kind of drive that engine imo. But in the day of more passing maybe that’s not so. But being able to stop the run with a lighter box still is big if you ask me(a nobody)
 
Advertisement
JHallCanes said:
No disrespect to you personally but locking threads is ridiculous

Just don’t read them. Since when has the discourse around here been so elite that we have to lock threads because the conversation isn’t to some people’s liking?
Click to expand...
It’s mental *********ion, how long is this acceptable? At some point you have to ejaculate.
 
CT Cane 44 said:
Kennedy and Bacon are both terrific DTs. We need two more. I agree that DT recruiting has been brutal. We have 5 DTs going into the season one is a true freshman one is a redshirt freshman. We have to play ND FSU Florida and others this year. That has got to change.
Click to expand...
Simpson better be diabolical because in spring they hyped him up so much. When you are hyped that much I am expecting you to play. If he’s legit that changes the narrative this season about DT IMO
 
Back
Top