JUCO DL Ufomba Kamalu visiting this weekend

[rudebuddha]

Pls don't say you're comparing this unknown recruit to two once in a decade players.

By the way, Ware wasn't exactly a top recruit before he went to college. Where did he play? Troy?
Same as Cameron Wake. How about Elvis Dumervil? The list is long and prestigious when it comes to NFL stars
who came out of nowhere through their whole careers to prove people wrong.
My favorite of all time Kurt Warner. Tony Romo.
Look at our Cane greats like Maryland, The Tez, Dorsey etc.,

The percentages of any recruit becoming a once in a decade type player are infinitesimally small. And those ridiculously small percentages are even smaller for an unknown recruit who gets an OV out of nowhere on the eve of signing day.

I agree with you.

Signed,

The following 2013 NFL Hall of Fame Finalists.

Aeneas Williams, Southern University
Michael Strahan, Texas Southern University
Warren Sapp, The U
Andre Reed, Kutztown
Charles Haley, James Madison
Larry Allen, Sonoma State

Christ...

Simple math lesson for you. There are 85 scholarship players on a Division 1 roster. There are 125 teams in College Football. I'll allow you to do the rest for yourself.

****, 4 years of undergrad and 5 years of grad school and I should have taken more math classes.
Dude, I'm Japanese I can do simple and complex math without the use of electronic devices.

You guys have to all chill out a tad.
I'm not saying this kid is going to be a superstar. In my mind there are very few superstars, which is what makes that label so special.
Obviously, I know that only the best recruits in high school make it to play college ball at the D1 level and probably like 90% of those high school studs become simply average college football players.

I am saying that this kid flashes the athleticism, size and speed to become something special.
Whether he does or not is up to what is in his chest and his head.

One other thing. I haven't called anyone names or insulted anyone's intelligence on this site since I started a short while ago posting.
I'm on this site for the info and I'm on the blog because I like discussing and debating all things Cane related with fellow Canes.
It's all about civil debate and discussion.

 

[Dandycane]

A lawn chair would be an improvement on DL. sign this kid..

 

[bes628]

He's most likely a tackle. I'll take Anybody at this point at that spot.

 

[The Franchise]

Interesting that we'd take a kid like this knowing we have potential scholarship reductions right around the corner and can't afford to miss or waste scholarships

I'm just throwing this against the wall, but maybe the coach's and administration have already dissected the NOA and realized that potential scholarship reductions are not necessarily a certainty.

Rude, you're throwing a ton of **** at the wall in this thread. You've covered the walls of this thread with ****. We are getting a scholarship haircut. How many? Who knows? But we are getting some.

I know. And I was going to leave this thread alone a while back but I'm a little bored today and some poster called me a ****ing ****** and I know that i did do some ****ing earlier this morning and that I may be an idiot but I'm not a ******, at least not a full ******.

As for the scholarships, Objectively speaking I'd say that's up in the air.
It's all about the NOA and our rebuttal. As with anything in the law or in life, it's not what you think but what you can prove and I haven't seen much proof other then the players' culpability in taking the suspensions and restitution, that would make me believe we are going to get hammered.

I never said anything about getting "hammered". You went from surmising that "scholarship reductions are not a certainty" to talking about us getting "hammered". There's a middle ground, and I'm pretty sure that's where we'll end up on the scholarship reduction issue.

As a guy who has been in the law game for 20 years, I'm familiar with the concept of proof. Unfortunately, the NCAA isn't held to the same standards of evidence and proof to which litigants are held.

 

[rudebuddha]

Interesting that we'd take a kid like this knowing we have potential scholarship reductions right around the corner and can't afford to miss or waste scholarships

I'm just throwing this against the wall, but maybe the coach's and administration have already dissected the NOA and realized that potential scholarship reductions are not necessarily a certainty.

Rude, you're throwing a ton of **** at the wall in this thread. You've covered the walls of this thread with ****. We are getting a scholarship haircut. How many? Who knows? But we are getting some.

I know. And I was going to leave this thread alone a while back but I'm a little bored today and some poster called me a ****ing ****** and I know that i did do some ****ing earlier this morning and that I may be an idiot but I'm not a ******, at least not a full ******.

As for the scholarships, Objectively speaking I'd say that's up in the air.
It's all about the NOA and our rebuttal. As with anything in the law or in life, it's not what you think but what you can prove and I haven't seen much proof other then the players' culpability in taking the suspensions and restitution, that would make me believe we are going to get hammered.

I never said anything about getting "hammered". You went from surmising that "scholarship reductions are not a certainty" to talking about us getting "hammered". There's a middle ground, and I'm pretty sure that's where we'll end up on the scholarship reduction issue.

As a guy who has been in the law game for 20 years, I'm familiar with the concept of proof. Unfortunately, the NCAA isn't held to the same standards of evidence and proof to which litigants are held.

After giving up 2 years of bowl games I think anything else is us getting hammered as we've already hammered ourselves.
I agree with you about the legal aspects of our investigation concerning standards of evidence.
One positive aspect of the NCAA and it's standing legally is that they don't have the power to subpoena.
I'm the only person in my family who is not an attorney and I remember when the Yahoo article came out my twin, a UM law school grad and I were discussing it and he said, "if they can prove all that then we are ****ed."
And I said what I've always said in business, "not what you think only what you can prove."
I'm really curious to see what the evidence truly is or if it is only supposition.
We'll find out soon enough.

 

[cowboycane]

Ok so here's the reality people. The reality is he is probably more like 6'3" - 6'4", 270 - 280. He looks semi-athletic and like he can fight through blocks. Given the size and that tape, he could project as a swingman on the line, or put on a lot of weight and be an athletic, pass rushing tackle. Factoring in all that, and then assuming the staff offers, what is the downside here? A worse defensive line? LESS quality depth?

 

[Cans4life]

Interesting that we'd take a kid like this knowing we have potential scholarship reductions right around the corner and can't afford to miss or waste scholarships

God you're just the worst. The cat you aren't a troll makes your posts even worse.

 

[DMoney]

Still at work and haven't seen the tape, but we desperately need long, 6'4 defensive linemen with enough strength to set the edge. It's the biggest need on the team IMO. Last year, we had Chickillo playing every snap and were forced to rely on an out-of-position Shayon Green. Teams like Kansas State attacked the edges and brutalized us.

I was hoping (and still hope) that Jelani Hamilton becomes that guy, but we need competition. We are doing good with the pure pass-rushers like McCord and have some guys that may develop into fire-hydrant DTs. But we need some Kendall Langford-types.

 

[rudebuddha]

Still at work and haven't seen the tape, but we desperately need long, 6'4 defensive linemen with enough strength to set the edge. It's the biggest need on the team IMO. Last year, we had Chickillo playing every snap and were forced to rely on an out-of-position Shayon Green. Teams like Kansas State attacked the edges and brutalized us.

I was hoping (and still hope) that Jelani Hamilton becomes that guy, but we need competition. We are doing good with the pure pass-rushers like McCord and have some guys that may develop into fire-hydrant DTs. But we need some Kendall Langford-types.

Lucky you didn't say Demarcus Ware types or you would be getting your *** chewed.

 

[TheMatador]

The Ugandan Giant!!!

Cute avatar. How long has he been dead?

 

[TheMatador]

I'm just throwing this against the wall, but maybe the coach's and administration have already dissected the NOA and realized that potential scholarship reductions are not necessarily a certainty.

Rude, you're throwing a ton of **** at the wall in this thread. You've covered the walls of this thread with ****. We are getting a scholarship haircut. How many? Who knows? But we are getting some.

I know. And I was going to leave this thread alone a while back but I'm a little bored today and some poster called me a ****ing ****** and I know that i did do some ****ing earlier this morning and that I may be an idiot but I'm not a ******, at least not a full ******.

As for the scholarships, Objectively speaking I'd say that's up in the air.
It's all about the NOA and our rebuttal. As with anything in the law or in life, it's not what you think but what you can prove and I haven't seen much proof other then the players' culpability in taking the suspensions and restitution, that would make me believe we are going to get hammered.

I never said anything about getting "hammered". You went from surmising that "scholarship reductions are not a certainty" to talking about us getting "hammered". There's a middle ground, and I'm pretty sure that's where we'll end up on the scholarship reduction issue.

As a guy who has been in the law game for 20 years, I'm familiar with the concept of proof. Unfortunately, the NCAA isn't held to the same standards of evidence and proof to which litigants are held.

After giving up 2 years of bowl games I think anything else is us getting hammered as we've already hammered ourselves.
I agree with you about the legal aspects of our investigation concerning standards of evidence.
One positive aspect of the NCAA and it's standing legally is that they don't have the power to subpoena.
I'm the only person in my family who is not an attorney and I remember when the Yahoo article came out my twin, a UM law school grad and I were discussing it and he said, "if they can prove all that then we are ****ed."
And I said what I've always said in business, "not what you think only what you can prove."
I'm really curious to see what the evidence truly is or if it is only supposition.
We'll find out soon enough.

When I was a kid and I got constipated they'd give me one of those suppositions. I don't know what this has to do with the NCAA.

 

[magilacuty cane]

He has got 3 to play 3 to.Want

 

[bbcane]

Eddie Johnson - Is a huge knucklehead and almost kicked off team multiple times. Might be good player.
Rashawn Scott - Is a huge knucklehead and almost kicked off team multiple times. Might be good player.
Ladarius Gunter- Ummmmm........done nothing.

olsen pierre hate or love best dt on team

 

[NDE]

4.65....I say prove it unless you believe everything you read on the net.

90% chance you never hear this guys name again after the visit.

9.9% he becomes a good player.

0.1% chance he is a star.

My take. If this kid is 4.65 then I am Santa Claus. I might be fat but I don't have the white beard.

 

[arcane]

So, is he a backup plan to Bryant/Bostwick or someone they want anyways?

They want someone who can play a significant role NOW (2013). I would not be surprised if Bryant/Bostwick redshirt(s).

 

[Canesfan1899]

I try to help out some of my people here and tell them to wait until the weekend to freak out about visitors. Always last minute surprises this time of year, especially with some ruthless relentless mother****ers in charge.

That's a great name for a DL

Like the kids measurables, seems like he could grow into a decent sized DT.

 

[nebcane]

Bingo - we have a winner. Got killed by everyone last year with our DE's not setting the edge. In addition, we need DE's who can disengage from blocks. The film on this kid tells me he knows how to use his hands to disengage and close fast on a ball carrier. This is what we need badly.

""we desperately need long, 6'4 defensive linemen with enough strength to set the edge"

 

[jerzeycane]

Bingo - we have a winner. Got killed by everyone last year with our DE's not setting the edge. In addition, we need DE's who can disengage from blocks. The film on this kid tells me he knows how to use his hands to disengage and close fast on a ball carrier. This is what we need badly.

""we desperately need long, 6'4 defensive linemen with enough strength to set the edge"

N.C. State
Notre Dame
KSU
FSU
Georgia Tech

All had an absolute field day running to the edges. The stretch play was our worst nightmare this year. Seemed like anything with zone blocking principles was a guaranteed 8 yards.

 

[CaneSuger]

Al Golden found Alex Collins last year before he blew up and became a five star.

 

[CaneSuger]

Still at work and haven't seen the tape, but we desperately need long, 6'4 defensive linemen with enough strength to set the edge. It's the biggest need on the team IMO. Last year, we had Chickillo playing every snap and were forced to rely on an out-of-position Shayon Green. Teams like Kansas State attacked the edges and brutalized us.

I was hoping (and still hope) that Jelani Hamilton becomes that guy, but we need competition. We are doing good with the pure pass-rushers like McCord and have some guys that may develop into fire-hydrant DTs. But we need some Kendall Langford-types.

This is it.