KSUFans Archives

Sports => Snyder's Electronic Cyber Space World => Topic started by: WildCatzPhreak on July 29, 2007, 01:48:34 AM

Title: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: WildCatzPhreak on July 29, 2007, 01:48:34 AM
Am I the only one that thinks he'd be better used this year in a different position?

Seems like a waste to use his athleticism at receiver, especially when we've got some solid starters and decent depth at that position.

Then we've got other positions which are a bit shallow(linebacker?) where someone with Lamark's size/speed would be able to contribute immediately and add some much needed depth.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: opcat on July 29, 2007, 02:01:49 AM
Need a good WR opposite Jordy.  If I am not wrong, he did only come here because we gave him assurance to play offense. I may be wrong on that.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: BigXIIpowercat on July 29, 2007, 02:04:26 AM
He's got the measurables of TO as an 18 yo. If he has hands anywhere near him (sans last year), it would be ridiculous to put him anywhere else besides WR.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: mjrod on July 29, 2007, 02:59:57 AM
Am I the only one that thinks he'd be better used this year in a different position?

Seems like a waste to use his athleticism at receiver, especially when we've got some solid starters and decent depth at that position.

Then we've got other positions which are a bit shallow(linebacker?) where someone with Lamark's size/speed would be able to contribute immediately and add some much needed depth.

Just think of a bigger Yamon Figurs.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 29, 2007, 03:12:29 AM
It seems like a lot of the better receivers out there today are LaMark's size.  Might as well give it a shot.  That OSU dude comes to mind.

I don't doubt though that he could have been a beast on defense.  IIRC, a coach said about him like, "He will start day 1 at receiver and get drafted as a defensive end".
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Poopley on July 29, 2007, 07:42:24 AM
Nobody knows if it is a good or bad decision yet. It's too early. Just like it's too early to declare any of our recruits a bust. But I'm not gonna let that stop me from pretending I have the ability to evaluate football talent and can predict the future.

Lamark at WR =  :dancin:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 29, 2007, 07:53:37 AM
If he went to any big time program, he'd be a linebacker.  You can take that for what it's worth.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Pett on July 29, 2007, 10:14:03 AM
We're definately in need of some physical/play making WR's. We know that Lamark is physical but the jury is still out on the play making ability.

We bring in Hogan though.  :woohoo:  :love: PLAYMAKER!!  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: cireksu on July 29, 2007, 11:06:23 AM
I think we need WR's more than LB's.  Hopefully he doesn't suck at reciever.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: konofo on July 29, 2007, 11:19:47 AM
F*ck it, let him ironman.  And see if he can put a ball through the uprights, too.

kono
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Brody88 on July 29, 2007, 12:05:20 PM
What a great problem to have
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: RegWalker53 on July 29, 2007, 12:24:00 PM
if i remeber right prince said that Lamark is also going to be used as a RB from time to time.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Bullfn33 on July 29, 2007, 12:47:08 PM
I think Lamark at WR is where we need him the most.  We need more play makers at the WR position.  Right now we only have Jordy and that won't get it done.  We need a big physical and fast threat on the other side of the ball to relieve some pressure from the backfield(Freeman, Patton, Johnson).  Defenses would have to respect the receivers more which would make them less likely to stack the box and blitz.  This could take some pressure off of the Oline which is a good thing.  We want to make defenses pick their poison and Lamark at WR helps us do that.  He would be valuable anywhere on the field, but for our team right now, he would be most valuable there. 

Lamark = TO
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Bookcat on July 29, 2007, 01:33:28 PM
If he went to any big time program, he'd be a linebacker.  You can take that for what it's worth.

With the addition of Patterson and Rowland in the mix...Lamark isn't needed at linebacker.

FWIW.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: NorthChamps07 on July 29, 2007, 02:50:10 PM
From what I have heard, Ernie Pierce, (JC from Santa Barbara) was impressive ths summer.  6'4" - 215 and fast as well. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Bullfn33 on July 29, 2007, 03:02:30 PM
From what I have heard, Ernie Pierce, (JC from Santa Barbara) was impressive ths summer.  6'4" - 215 and fast as well. 

Good.  We need him to come in a be productive right away as well.  I think a team should always have at least 3 solid WRs that can make some plays.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catinthehat on July 29, 2007, 04:36:25 PM
he won't be very effective this year as a true frosh.  It's normally hard for any wr to make a splash as a true frosh in this kind of offense.  let alone one that has very little wide receiver experience to begin with.  he played d in highschool, the army all american guys had him on D and said he was a D player all the way.

he could play as a true frosh on either side of the ball but at linebacker or safety he would be an elite athlete, at wr he would just be another wr.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: tmramrod91 on July 29, 2007, 05:00:48 PM
he won't be very effective this year as a true frosh.  It's normally hard for any wr to make a splash as a true frosh in this kind of offense.  let alone one that has very little wide receiver experience to begin with.  he played d in highschool, the army all american guys had him on D and said he was a D player all the way.

he could play as a true frosh on either side of the ball but at linebacker or safety he would be an elite athlete, at wr he would just be another wr.

Sadly...QFT

His frosh year i'm guessin he will struggle, but RP and JF will design plays to get the ball in his hands (reverses etc). He would step in and contribute right away on D, but need more help on O than on D at this point in time.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: opcat on July 29, 2007, 05:16:33 PM
he won't be very effective this year as a true frosh.  It's normally hard for any wr to make a splash as a true frosh in this kind of offense.  let alone one that has very little wide receiver experience to begin with.  he played d in highschool, the army all american guys had him on D and said he was a D player all the way.

he could play as a true frosh on either side of the ball but at linebacker or safety he would be an elite athlete, at wr he would just be another wr.


Yeah, Stfu.

What do you know?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: kstate16 on July 29, 2007, 05:35:07 PM
We shall see. (insert Mr. Burns emoticon, from the simpsons)

Anyone.....if you can make the emoticon i will love you forever.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Poopley on July 29, 2007, 05:45:55 PM
(http://emoticons.msn-beta.com/simpsons/Burns.gif)(http://emoticons.msn-beta.com/simpsons/Burns.gif)(http://emoticons.msn-beta.com/simpsons/Burns.gif)
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: fatty fat fat on July 29, 2007, 05:46:31 PM
Keep in mind, Lamark loves Manhattan.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Poopley on July 29, 2007, 05:48:22 PM
(http://forums.westhost.com/images/avatars/simpsons/Simpsons_-_Burns_Lawyer_2.gif)
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: JTKSU on July 29, 2007, 05:55:11 PM
he won't be very effective this year as a true frosh.  It's normally hard for any wr to make a splash as a true frosh in this kind of offense.  let alone one that has very little wide receiver experience to begin with.  he played d in highschool, the army all american guys had him on D and said he was a D player all the way.

he could play as a true frosh on either side of the ball but at linebacker or safety he would be an elite athlete, at wr he would just be another wr.
The kid is an elite athlete, and which side of the ball he plays on can't negate that.  He may be more effective on the defensive side but if a kid is an elite athlete it doesn't matter if he's playing freaking squash, athleticism doesn't come and go. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: waks on July 29, 2007, 06:43:33 PM
he won't be very effective this year as a true frosh.  It's normally hard for any wr to make a splash as a true frosh in this kind of offense.  let alone one that has very little wide receiver experience to begin with.  he played d in highschool, the army all american guys had him on D and said he was a D player all the way.

he could play as a true frosh on either side of the ball but at linebacker or safety he would be an elite athlete, at wr he would just be another wr.
LOL @ the black Husker fan.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catinthehat on July 29, 2007, 10:08:12 PM
"The kid is an elite athlete, and which side of the ball he plays on can't negate that."

it negates it a little.  It isn't like he is gonna suck at wr but if you ask yourself, in 3 years will he be all big 12 at linebacker the answer more than likely would be yes.  If he was a wr the answer would be no.  It's like taking a pitt bull out of the fighting ring and have him be a seeing eye dog.  sure he could do it and do it enough to get by, but if you want to get the most out of him, let a fighter fight.

btw, I have no interest in dog fighting or anything connected with dog fighting.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: waks on July 29, 2007, 10:09:12 PM
"The kid is an elite athlete, and which side of the ball he plays on can't negate that."

it negates it a little.  It isn't like he is gonna suck at wr but if you ask yourself, in 3 years will he be all big 12 at linebacker the answer more than likely would be yes.  If he was a wr the answer would be no.  It's like taking a pitt bull out of the fighting ring and have him be a seeing eye dog.  sure he could do it and do it enough to get by, but if you want to get the most out of him, let a fighter fight.

btw, I have no interest in dog fighting or anything connected with dog fighting.
:lol: You're lame.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: enjoytheNeujahr on July 29, 2007, 10:13:19 PM
What has anyone heard about Matt Wykes and his ability to contribute?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Leyton on July 30, 2007, 03:09:07 AM
Lamark Brown at _____any_position_____ is a good decision as long as he has a powercat on his helmet.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 30, 2007, 09:16:02 AM
I'd rather see Lamark on D (at LB).  WR has never been a problem.  It wasn't last year.  Our o-line is/was the problem, not the amount or quality of Freeman's weapons.   It wouldn't have mattered if we had TO or Marvin Harrison against ku, JF didn't have time to get into a 5 step drop (hell, even a 3 step drop) before he had someone in his face.  Conversely, given the nature of the 3-4, Lamark could have a greater impact, imo. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 09:19:24 AM
I'd rather see Lamark on D (at LB).  WR has never been a problem.  It wasn't last year.  Our o-line is/was the problem, not the amount or quality of Freeman's weapons.   It wouldn't have mattered if we had TO or Marvin Harrison against ku, JF didn't have time to get into a 5 step drop (hell, even a 3 step drop) before he had someone in his face.  Conversely, given the nature of the 3-4, Lamark could have a greater impact, imo. 

I think the lack of a quality WR vs. ku, especially killed us.  Without a legitimate threat at receiver, ku could bring the house every play.  I know it's kind of a chicken vs. egg thing, but to say WR has never been a problem and expect us to be OK with Jordy and DaGo is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 09:25:49 AM
We haven't had two receivers over 500 yards in the same year since 2002.

Last season D-Gon was on the field...a LOT, and started FOUR.

I'd say we need more options at WR, especially fast ones.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 09:28:40 AM
Really, to say any position isn't a "problem" is almost ridiculous, considering the state Bill left us in.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 09:34:56 AM
Prince has really saved our bacon at QB.  Freeman is a future Pro Bowler, and Coffman is going to be one of those career backups that becomes a coaching legend.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 09:36:52 AM
Yeah, I have a lot more confidence in Coffman than I did in Schwinn (Jeff).
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 09:43:43 AM
If we need an upgrade at WR, it would probably be better to upgrade WR prospects than convert an LB prospect to WR.  We all really need to pinch ourselves, though, because we'll have both the next TO and about four ones and done in basketball all on campus at the same time.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 30, 2007, 09:45:22 AM
I'd rather see Lamark on D (at LB).  WR has never been a problem.  It wasn't last year.  Our o-line is/was the problem, not the amount or quality of Freeman's weapons.   It wouldn't have mattered if we had TO or Marvin Harrison against ku, JF didn't have time to get into a 5 step drop (hell, even a 3 step drop) before he had someone in his face.  Conversely, given the nature of the 3-4, Lamark could have a greater impact, imo. 

I think the lack of a quality WR vs. ku, especially killed us.  Without a legitimate threat at receiver, ku could bring the house every play.  I know it's kind of a chicken vs. egg thing, but to say WR has never been a problem and expect us to be OK with Jordy and DaGo is ridiculous.

It would have been nice to say "hey, we're kind of thin at WR, let's hand the ball off to Patton and/or Johnson", but we couldn't consistently cause our o-line sucked.  We've never really had any depth at WR and we've managed (albeit in a different offense).  Is depth at WR a problem?  Certainly, I'm not saying it isn't/wasn't, but I think Lamark would be better served on defense.  
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: FBWillie on July 30, 2007, 09:47:41 AM
I'd rather see Lamark on D (at LB).  WR has never been a problem.  It wasn't last year.  Our o-line is/was the problem, not the amount or quality of Freeman's weapons.   It wouldn't have mattered if we had TO or Marvin Harrison against ku, JF didn't have time to get into a 5 step drop (hell, even a 3 step drop) before he had someone in his face.  Conversely, given the nature of the 3-4, Lamark could have a greater impact, imo. 

It's all related;  As a defense, are you more likely to blitz if you have to double cover every receiver?  A #1 defense wouldn't have helped us with ku.  We needed more time in the pocket.  An Oline would have helped, but a deep threat would have done just as much.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 09:48:36 AM
The problem at WR isn't just depth, it's quality.

Given that he didn't play LB in HS, it's a very presumptive statement to forecast stunning success for him at that position.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 09:52:59 AM
I think ku would have blitzed like hell even if we had Jerry Rice and Tim Brown on the field.  I also think they would have been successful with that strategy.

Given that he didn't play LB in HS, it's a very presumptive statement to forecast stunning success for him at that position.

No, it happens literally all of the time.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: FBWillie on July 30, 2007, 09:54:52 AM
Then you can blame play calling.... dont' remember, were we successful with any screens?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 10:09:07 AM
No, it happens literally all of the time.

More often fans are just being stupid.

I bet you haven't seen more than a dozen snaps of Lamark playing football, and you're predicting success at a position he's never played.

Think about that for a minute.

And don't go opcat.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 10:18:43 AM
I think ku would have blitzed like hell even if we had Jerry Rice and Tim Brown on the field.  I also think they would have been successful with that strategy.

LOL @ ku's crappy DB's in single coverage against Tim Brown.  Fade Fade Fade Fade TD TD TD TD
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 10:23:27 AM
No, it happens literally all of the time.

More often fans are just being stupid.

Take Ernie Simms, for example.  He was a big time stud running back in college.  When he went to FSU, fans argued back and forth about whether he would play offense or defense.  Fortunately for him, he was encouraged by his coaches to play defense and was the #9 overall pick in the NFL draft.

I bet you haven't seen more than a dozen snaps of Lamark playing football, and you're predicting success at a position he's never played.

You're right.  I haven't seen one.  Common sense will get you a lot farther than amateur hour film room sessions.

I think ku would have blitzed like hell even if we had Jerry Rice and Tim Brown on the field.  I also think they would have been successful with that strategy.

LOL @ ku's crappy DB's in single coverage against Tim Brown.  Fade Fade Fade Fade TD TD TD TD

Our problem is more one of hitting receivers than of getting them open.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 10:25:37 AM
Our problem is more one of hitting receivers than of getting them open.

D-Gon

:lol:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 10:40:32 AM
Common sense isn't making bold statements in the absence of fact.

That's tard behavior, and exactly what you're doing.

If Lamark doesn't set the world on fire at WR, move him over.  Worked with Jordy Nelson, Rashad Washington and many others.  Both started off at one position and moved later when it didn't work out.

And your Sims example:

Sims played LB in HS as well as RB. 

And was named Parade All American.

And was named top LB prospect in the nation by Parade.

It's one thing to suggest a guy might make a stud LB when he puts up 133 tackles (73 solo) as a HS Senior.   It's another when he's never played the position.







Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 10:45:55 AM
Why wait to move him?  How many true freshman have set the world on fire at WR? 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 30, 2007, 10:52:37 AM
Lamark is going to look fabulous running down the field while Freeman is getting sacked. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: FBWillie on July 30, 2007, 10:56:40 AM
Common sense isn't making bold statements in the absence of fact.

That's tard behavior, and exactly what you're doing.

If Lamark doesn't set the world on fire at WR, move him over.  Worked with Jordy Nelson, Rashad Washington and many others.  Both started off at one position and moved later when it didn't work out.

Don't forget Watts.   He was originally a WR.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 11:02:42 AM
Lamark is going to look fabulous running down the field while Freeman is getting sacked. 

Put him at left tackle?

???

Why wait to move him?  How many true freshman have set the world on fire at WR? 

I'd guess it's comparable to the number of true freshman that have set the world on fire at linebacker.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 11:06:58 AM
Why wait to move him?  How many true freshman have set the world on fire at WR? 

Because he sure looks like he has the ability to be a great WR, and he's been good catching the ball in HS.

Did I mention that your Sims comparison really, really sucked?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Slick on July 30, 2007, 11:10:45 AM
Two things...

Am I the only one that thinks he'd be better used this year in a different position?

Seems like a waste to use his athleticism at receiver, especially when we've got some solid starters and decent depth at that position.

Then we've got other positions which are a bit shallow(linebacker?) where someone with Lamark's size/speed would be able to contribute immediately and add some much needed depth.

Just think of a bigger Yamon Figurs.


Lamark does not have Figurs explosiveness...

 

Lamark = TO


Lamark does not = TO

Be realistic people...
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 30, 2007, 11:17:49 AM
Lamark is going to look fabulous running down the field while Freeman is getting sacked. 

Put him at left tackle?

???


He can't be any worse than Spex and maybe he can stay healthy longer than Stringer.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 11:21:08 AM
Why wait to move him?  How many true freshman have set the world on fire at WR? 

I'd guess it's comparable to the number of true freshman that have set the world on fire at linebacker.

That's KSU4ME's standard, not mine.  KSU4ME probably also needs to explain why a position change of HS RB to WR is acceptable but one of HS RB to LB isn't.  

Why wait to move him?  How many true freshman have set the world on fire at WR? 

Because he sure looks like he has the ability to be a great WR, and he's been good catching the ball in HS.

Did he really only catch 47 passes least year?  As opposed to having 427 rushes?

Did I mention that your Sims comparison really, really sucked?

I was comparing the fans much more than the players (see your quote that I clearly referenced).

Why does everyone think that Prince bothered to say that Brown was off limits to the defensive coaches on signing day?  I mean, why even bring it up?  He did it because Brown is more of a defensive prospect.  Prince, himself, thinks this.  Our fans are the only ones that don't.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 11:28:02 AM
Why does everyone think that Prince bothered to say that Brown was off limits to the defensive coaches on signing day?  I mean, why even bring it up?  He did it because Brown is more of a defensive prospect.  Prince, himself, thinks this.  Our fans are the only ones that don't.

Honestly, I didn't bother to think about it until now.  I'll let the tards worry about what position he's supposed to play.  I think Leyton put it best:

Lamark Brown at _____any_position_____ is a good decision as long as he has a powercat on his helmet.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: doom on July 30, 2007, 11:28:52 AM
I don't think it matters where we put him, I don't see him failing wherever he goes position wise.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 11:34:58 AM
Why wait to move him?  How many true freshman have set the world on fire at WR? 

I'd guess it's comparable to the number of true freshman that have set the world on fire at linebacker.

That's KSU4ME's standard, not mine.  KSU4ME probably also needs to explain why a position change of HS RB to WR is acceptable but one of HS RB to LB isn't. 

Why wait to move him?  How many true freshman have set the world on fire at WR? 

Because he sure looks like he has the ability to be a great WR, and he's been good catching the ball in HS.

Did he really only catch 47 passes least year?  As opposed to having 427 rushes?

Did I mention that your Sims comparison really, really sucked?

I was comparing the fans much more than the players (see your quote that I clearly referenced).

Why does everyone think that Prince bothered to say that Brown was off limits to the defensive coaches on signing day?  I mean, why even bring it up?  He did it because Brown is more of a defensive prospect.  Prince, himself, thinks this.  Our fans are the only ones that don't.

Lamark has experience running routes, catching the ball and running after the catch.

The fact that you can't see this is hilarious, everyone else in the thread has seen it.

Fans arguing about a guy like Sims, the top LB prospect in the nation who averaged 9.4 YPC as a running back, is quite a bit different than you arguing Lamark should play LB -- a position he's never played.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 11:37:28 AM
Why does everyone think that Prince bothered to say that Brown was off limits to the defensive coaches on signing day?  I mean, why even bring it up?  He did it because Brown is more of a defensive prospect.  Prince, himself, thinks this.  Our fans are the only ones that don't.

Honestly, I didn't bother to think about it until now.  I'll let the tards worry about what position he's supposed to play.  I think Leyton put it best:

Lamark Brown at _____any_position_____ is a good decision as long as he has a powercat on his helmet.


Congrats on finding the wrong thread (misleading title notwithstanding).  Maybe the two of you should reconvene here:  http://kstatestats.blogspot.com/ (http://kstatestats.blogspot.com/).
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 11:43:17 AM
Lamark has experience running routes, catching the ball and running after the catch.

It looks like Lamark had fourteen times more tackles than receptions last year.
link (http://prepsports3.stltoday.com/football/06/stats/overall88.shtm)
 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 12:06:18 PM
It's the fact that you're basing the LB projection on thin air that I'm laughing at, and correctly identifying as tardish.

Here's an idea, lets all project every good incoming athlete to random positions!

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 12:09:58 PM
1.  It's based mostly on size and, to a lesser extent, speed.  You know, the usual factors.

2.  Why project him at WR?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 30, 2007, 01:14:16 PM
How many 6'4'' 230 pound linebackers are there?  A lot.

How many 6'4'' 230 pound receivers are out there?  Only the good ones.

Should OSU move Adarius Bowman to linebacker?  What about every other team with huge, successful receivers?

FWIW, LaMark came to the KSU camp and lit it up at WR, with Hartman passing.  I'm sure the coaches know what they are doing.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 01:19:35 PM
Because Lamark has looked good running routes, catching the ball and getting yards after catch.

And he's shown himself to be a better offensive player than defensive player in his HS career.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 01:39:16 PM
Let me see if I’ve got the case for Lamark at WR straight.  First, we’ve got a 1 in 1000 type of shot that he’ll be a great receiver because of his unusual combination of size and speed.  So, what the hell.  Let’s give it a shot.  Second, KSU4ME has studied film of all three of his 2006 receptions which total 47 yards and says he’s the real deal.

Sure, let’s go against conventional wisdom on this one.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: FBWillie on July 30, 2007, 01:46:12 PM
chances are prob better than 1/1000. 


FWIW, I made L. Brown on NCAA 2008 for PS2 with the same measurables, realitive speed/acceleration, with bad awareness and bad catching ability and he's done farely well, but his most improved area has been awareness and catching ability.    :ksu:  :peek:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 30, 2007, 01:51:21 PM
Quote from: Sporting News Top 10 Big 12 players
1.Reggie Smith, DB, Oklahoma

2. Adarius Bowman, WR, Oklahoma State 6'4'' 215

3. Frank Okam, DT, Texas

4. Colt McCoy, QB, Texas

5. Aqib Talib, CB, Kansas

6. Chase Daniel, QB, Missouri

7. Ian Campbell, LB, Kansas State

8. Limas Sweed, WR, Texas 6'5'' 215

9. Cody Wallace, C, Texas A&M

10. Malcolm Kelly, WR, Oklahoma 6'4'' 204

Quote from: Athlon All-Big 12
First Team:
WR Adarius Bowman    6'4"    220    Sr.    Oklahoma State
WR Malcolm Kelly    6'4"    217    Jr.    Oklahoma

Second Team:
WR    Todd Blythe    6'5"    209    Sr.    Iowa State
WR    Limas Sweed    6'5"    219    Sr.    Texas

Third Team:
WR    Will Franklin    6'2"    205    Sr.    Missouri
WR    Maurice Purify    6'4"    220    Sr.    Nebraska
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 30, 2007, 01:52:49 PM
Let me see if I’ve got the case for Lamark at WR straight.  First, we’ve got a 1 in 1000 type of shot that he’ll be a great receiver because of his unusual combination of size and speed.  So, what the hell.  Let’s give it a shot.  Second, KSU4ME has studied film of all three of his 2006 receptions which total 47 yards and says he’s the real deal.

Sure, let’s go against conventional wisdom on this one.


Your conventional wisdom is going up against the coaching staff watching him play receiver at camp.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: steve dave on July 30, 2007, 01:55:59 PM
Lamark has experience running routes, catching the ball and running after the catch.

It looks like Lamark had fourteen times more tackles than receptions last year.
link (http://prepsports3.stltoday.com/football/06/stats/overall88.shtm)
 

LOL at his team throwing the ball 40 times all year.  41 if he count the one Lamark threw.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 02:00:38 PM
0 tackles as a LB.

0 snaps played as a LB.

And, from reading what Lamark has said, 0 interest in playing LB.

 :fatty: <--- Tyler Hughes
 :ohno:<--- Chum
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: fatty fat fat on July 30, 2007, 02:05:52 PM
Let's just hope he can beat out D-Gon.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 30, 2007, 02:06:39 PM
0 tackles as a LB.

0 snaps played as a LB.

And, from reading what Lamark has said, 0 interest in playing LB.

 :fatty: <--- Tyler Hughes
 :ohno:<--- Chum

Safety isn't all that different from linebacker.

He'll be good at whatever position he plays, we just happen to need a receiver.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: steve dave on July 30, 2007, 02:12:05 PM
I wish we had 8 Lamarks  :crybaby:  That would be a salty LB/S/WR/HB unit.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 30, 2007, 02:16:26 PM
I wish we had 8 Lamarks  :crybaby:  That would be a salty LB/S/WR/HB unit.

http://kansasstate.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Sport=1&pr_key=58357

Poor man's LaMark.

(Safety)
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 02:17:43 PM
I wish we had 8 Lamarks  :crybaby:  That would be a salty LB/S/WR/HB unit.

QFT

Maybe bulk a couple up and have some DE's.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 30, 2007, 03:12:08 PM
I wish we had 8 Lamarks  :crybaby:  That would be a salty LB/S/WR/HB unit.

QFT

Maybe bulk a couple up and have some DE's.

Not surprised.  This type of thing sounds like the football version of your basketball strategy which is to strive for a lineup consisting of five Michael Jordans.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 30, 2007, 03:25:27 PM
I wish we had 8 Lamarks  :crybaby:  That would be a salty LB/S/WR/HB unit.

QFT

Maybe bulk a couple up and have some DE's.

Not surprised.  This type of thing sounds like the football version of your basketball strategy which is to strive for a lineup consisting of five Michael Jordans.

LOL @ having five players that can't shoot the three.

LOL

chum1 (Premium Edition)'s shtick :flush:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 03:29:49 PM

Safety isn't all that different from linebacker.

 :rolleyes:

How often do safeties have to shed OL to make a tackle?

Picture Marcus Watts lining up in Chris Patterson's spot....or Reggie Walker lining up at Watts' spot.

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 30, 2007, 03:59:11 PM

Safety isn't all that different from linebacker.

 :rolleyes:

How often do safeties have to shed OL to make a tackle?

Picture Marcus Watts lining up in Chris Patterson's spot....or Reggie Walker lining up at Watts' spot.

I think a guy with Lamark's athleticism would be able to line up where Watts or Patterson plays and do well.  Dude has the abilities to play wherever, I just think he'd end up have a larger impact on defense. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 30, 2007, 04:00:15 PM
If he can play anywhere, we really need a DT.

But to say there's not much difference between safety and LB is just stupidity.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: cas on July 30, 2007, 10:26:52 PM
I wish we had 8 Lamarks  :crybaby:  That would be a salty LB/S/WR/HB unit.

Very True.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 31, 2007, 03:53:12 AM

Safety isn't all that different from linebacker.

 :rolleyes:

How often do safeties have to shed OL to make a tackle?

Picture Marcus Watts lining up in Chris Patterson's spot....or Reggie Walker lining up at Watts' spot.



What I meant was you can develop a 6'3'' 220 pound guy into a linebacker or safety.  It'd be easier to move a safety to linebacker.  Pretty much the main thing is if there's a safety agile enough to play at 220, then they usually wouldn't be too bad at LB.  I can definitely see Watts at linebacker if needed...easy...and that happens to be what LaMark would do...actually...does he even play safety?  I thought he did...maybe he doesn't...but still...S to LB is more possible than LB to S...


Safety isn't all that different from linebacker.

 :rolleyes:

How often do safeties have to shed OL to make a tackle?

Picture Marcus Watts lining up in Chris Patterson's spot....or Reggie Walker lining up at Watts' spot.

I think a guy with Lamark's athleticism would be able to line up where Watts or Patterson plays and do well.  Dude has the abilities to play wherever, I just think he'd end up have a larger impact on defense. 

QFT on your first part, QFT sort of on your second part, we really don't know where he'll have the most impact.  When you have a 6'4'' 220 beast on a crapty team, you usually try to get him the ball as much as possible.  So who knows how good of a season he would have had as a wide receiver, but at least according to our coaches (who watched him up close at camp), he was solid at receiver.

If he can play anywhere, we really need a DT.

But to say there's not much difference between safety and LB is just stupidity.

Why do you always try to be so mean to me.  I'm even on your side...I want to see LaMark at receiver. :'(

Do you think Antwon Moore had much trouble moving to linebacker?  Do you really think that shedding blocks is really the difference between how good a guy is at safety vs. linebacker?  It might just be my opinion, but if a guy is agile enough to play safety at a heavier weight, then he should make the transition to linebacker fine.  Don't take the linebacker vs. safety thing too literally, what mattered was although he excelled at safety (really, all I know was he kicked ass there in the All star game....wasn't he actually a corner in that game though?), it's not a huge jump to move to linebacker.  I'm just rambling now...but here is what everyone should fricking realize but nobody does...

HIGH SCHOOL POSITIONS ARE OVERRATED

Is that not obvious, considering most of you have followed recruiting for multiple years?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 31, 2007, 07:40:39 AM
If he can play anywhere, we really need a DT.

But to say there's not much difference between safety and LB is just stupidity.

The difference between him learning Safety at the college level and learning LB at the college level, after playing safety in HS is marginal.  That's the reason people can project him at LB and say there's "not much difference" than playing safety. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 09:10:45 AM
List of guys that are hate mailing their coaches for not listening to powertards that wanted them to become LBs:

Calvin Johnson
Dwayne Bowe
Dwayne Jarrett
Maurice Stovall
Marques Colston

Just rambling.

And Stunner, I don't think the ability to shed blocks is the difference between LB and Safety, I think it's one of the differences. 

And Watts would be greatly minimized if we stuck him at LB. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 31, 2007, 09:56:00 AM
List of guys that are hate mailing their coaches for not listening to powertards that wanted them to become LBs:

Calvin Johnson
Dwayne Bowe
Dwayne Jarrett
Maurice Stovall
Marques Colston

Just rambling.

And Stunner, I don't think the ability to shed blocks is the difference between LB and Safety, I think it's one of the differences. 

And Watts would be greatly minimized if we stuck him at LB. 

Rashaad Washinton, Lamar Chapman, Jon McGraw, Watts, all thank their coaches for having the foresight to take from the offensive side of the ball to defense.  Just saying. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 10:07:33 AM
I'm with you now, you have convinced me.

There is no place for 6'3" 215lb receivers in football.  That is not the direction the game is going.  Athletes of that size should not have the ball in their hands, they should be on defense.

And it's clear that Brown could come in, without ever having played LB, and beat out players like Reggie Walker, Justin Roland and Chris Patterson.

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 31, 2007, 10:10:53 AM
I could beat out Reggie Walker, but sadly, I have no eligibility left.   :crybaby:

I'm not saying he shouldn't play WR, I think that given the our LB situation this year and maybe even more so next year, he'd have a greater impact at that position.  IMO, WR is an over valued position. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 10:12:05 AM
All KSU4ME has left is the (slightly better than) 1 in 1000 argument.  He's done.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 10:17:37 AM
All KSU4ME has left is the (slightly better than) 1 in 1000 argument.  He's done.

Maybe he should bring up basketball.  :lol:

I could beat out Reggie Walker, but sadly, I have no eligibility left.   :crybaby:

I'm not saying he shouldn't play WR, I think that given the our LB situation this year and maybe even more so next year, he'd have a greater impact at that position.  IMO, WR is an over valued position. 

I think he has a better chance of starting from day 1 at WR.  Get him on the field, now.

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 10:22:11 AM
All KSU4ME has left is the (slightly better than) 1 in 1000 argument.  He's done.

You must think lowly of Mr. Brown if you fell he's just a 1 in 1000 shot to be a great receiver.  I think it's much more likely that he's an impact receiver.

And I think Brown would rather strive to be like Johnson/Jarrett/Bowe/Stovall/Colston than Marcus Watts.

You're argument is based entirely on supposition.  Quite solid.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 10:24:50 AM
Speaking of position changes, I think we should move Freeman to TE based on his size, and to a lesser extent, speed.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 10:29:30 AM
Speaking of position changes, I think we should move Freeman to TE based on his size, and to a lesser extent, speed.

Nick Stringer should be a TE as well.  He's wasted on OL.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 10:33:33 AM
Is there really any question about which position Brown would play if he was at a top ten program? 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 10:36:16 AM
All KSU4ME has left is the (slightly better than) 1 in 1000 argument.  He's done.

Maybe he should bring up basketball.

Check out Michael Jordan's 3 pt % from 90-97.  You really shouldn't let it bother you that I know more about basketball than you do.  I mean, you really don't know that much.  Stick with it, though.  You'll catch on.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 10:44:08 AM
Is there really any question about which position Brown would play if he was at a top ten program? 

I don't know enough about LaMark's skills to make that decision, but we are far from a top ten program, so what a top ten program would do with Brown doesn't really apply to us, does it?

All KSU4ME has left is the (slightly better than) 1 in 1000 argument.  He's done.

Maybe he should bring up basketball.

Check out Michael Jordan's 3 pt % from 90-97.  You really shouldn't let it bother you that I know more about basketball than you do.  I mean, you really don't know that much.  Stick with it, though.  You'll catch on.

 :lol:

I'll get on that right after I check out Marques Hayden's percentage from 03-04.

 :fatty:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ScubaSteve on July 31, 2007, 10:51:14 AM
I can't believe this thread is approaching 100 posts.   :jerkoff:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 31, 2007, 10:53:32 AM
And Stunner, I don't think the ability to shed blocks is the difference between LB and Safety, I think it's one of the differences. 

And Watts would be greatly minimized if we stuck him at LB. 

Bulk him up to 210 and develop him there, I think he'd do just fine.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 10:54:25 AM
Top ten programs don't have players out of their best projected positions very often simply because they don't have as many needs due to glaring weaknesses.  So, if Brown would be a linebacker for ten out of the top ten programs, it's a pretty safe bet that he best projects as a linebacker.  Of course, that doesn't mean it's where we should play him, but many KSU fans seem to think that he best projects at receiver.  I think that's far form obvious, to say the least.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 11:01:28 AM
Top ten programs don't have players out of their best projected positions very often simply because they don't have as many needs due to glaring weaknesses.  So, if Brown would be a linebacker for ten out of the top ten programs, it's a pretty safe bet that he best projects as a linebacker.  Of course, that doesn't mean it's where we should play him, but many KSU fans seem to think that he best projects at receiver.  I think that's far form obvious, to say the least.

Where was Brown clearly projected as a linebacker, anyway?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Bookcat on July 31, 2007, 11:14:16 AM
I had always figured Lamark signed with us because we would give him a shot at reciever.

If it doesn't pan out, who knows, maybe Ron will move him elsewhere...but it's pretty obvious that Freeman needs a go-to-guy that is big.

Example"
See that GIANT WR that Louisville rolled out last fall. How the hell do you consistently defend a guy that big and tall?


I think we can see where Prince is going with this.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 11:20:22 AM
Top ten programs don't have players out of their best projected positions very often simply because they don't have as many needs due to glaring weaknesses.  So, if Brown would be a linebacker for ten out of the top ten programs, it's a pretty safe bet that he best projects as a linebacker.  Of course, that doesn't mean it's where we should play him, but many KSU fans seem to think that he best projects at receiver.  I think that's far form obvious, to say the least.

Where was Brown clearly projected as a linebacker, anyway?

No where.

Marcus Watts, on the other hand, is clearly a stud LB in the making. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 11:20:40 AM
Rivals had him as a d-back initially, but it is pretty much a given that he would bulk up at least a little and very unlikely that he would be one of the biggest safties of all time.  Based on all the early articles, it was just assumed that he would play defense.  This was before Ron told him he could be a receiver at KSU (probably securing his commitment) and set the WR PR wheels in motion.  Ron had a number of quotes like the one from signing day in which he stressed that Brown would play offense, not defense. 

Quote
Defensive backs will showcase the talent of guys like Lamark Brown of Hazelwood West
http://kansasstate.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=889&CID=541342 (http://kansasstate.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=889&CID=541342)
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 11:29:58 AM
Rivals had him as a d-back initially, but it is pretty much a given that he would bulk up at least a little and very unlikely that he would be one of the biggest safties of all time.  Based on all the early articles, it was just assumed that he would play defense.  This was before Ron told him he could be a receiver at KSU (probably securing his commitment) and set the WR PR wheels in motion.  Ron had a number of quotes like the one from signing day in which he stressed that Brown would play offense, not defense. 

Quote
Defensive backs will showcase the talent of guys like Lamark Brown of Hazelwood West
http://kansasstate.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=889&CID=541342 (http://kansasstate.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=889&CID=541342)


LOL.  If that's the closest thing you could find, you should seriously go look up more Michael Jordan stats or hang out exclusively in premium.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 31, 2007, 11:33:08 AM
Didn't Lamark play/make the non-Army All Star game on defense?  Was that because he was such a good receiver that the coaches thought he'd make a good safety?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 11:33:51 AM
Lamark Brown would be an elite PG in a team that doesn't utilize a true PG.

Frank Martin is clearly missing the boat.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 11:36:24 AM
Didn't Lamark play/make the non-Army All Star game on defense?  Was that because he was such a good receiver that the coaches thought he'd make a good safety?

No, it was because top ten programs would clearly put him at linebacker.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 11:39:00 AM
Have we found anyone other than the resident tards put the words "Lamark Brown" and "Linebacker" in the same sentence?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 31, 2007, 11:42:25 AM
Have we found anyone other than the resident tards put the words "Lamark Brown" and "Linebacker" in the same sentence?

Never in the history of football has a player played a position in HS and then switched in college.  Never.  Never has a player played one postion on defense in HS and then switched to another position on defense in college because the player's size/speed/skill set warranted that.  Never. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 11:47:37 AM
That's all I could find in the span of a couple of minutes.  Anyone with unclouded judgement and a decent memory could tell you that all schools recruiting him were recruiting him for defense...except one.  It happened to be the one that secured his commitment.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 11:50:45 AM
That's all I could find in the span of a couple of minutes.  Anyone with unclouded judgement and a decent memory could tell you that all schools recruiting him were recruiting him for defense...except one.  It happened to be the one that secured his commitment.

Arkansas wanted him as a WR.

Quote
"I received a text from him this morning telling me that the offer was being sent out in writing. They are interested in me as a wide receiver as they need one for Mitch Mustain."

http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=2&cid=531084&nid=2443675&fhn=1
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 11:57:16 AM
Yeah, I was going back much earlier than that.  Before he committed to KSU (and letting the desire to play WR KAT out of the bag).
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: waks on July 31, 2007, 12:00:10 PM
I had always figured Lamark signed with us because we would give him a shot at reciever.

If it doesn't pan out, who knows, maybe Ron will move him elsewhere...but it's pretty obvious that Freeman needs a go-to-guy that is big.

Example"
See that GIANT WR that Louisville rolled out last fall. How the hell do you consistently defend a guy that big and tall?


I think we can see where Prince is going with this.
Mario Urrutia is who you are talking about. He was the one that ran Watts all the way down after Watts's int.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on July 31, 2007, 12:03:10 PM
http://www.themercury.com/k-statesports/article.aspx?articleId=23626f9225704c22845a50e28d77ca4f (http://www.themercury.com/k-statesports/article.aspx?articleId=23626f9225704c22845a50e28d77ca4f)

Quote
Though Brown played everything from linebacker to safety to running back and tight end, he thinks he is best suited for wide receiver –and so does K-State.
"I can play a lot of different positions, I think," Brown said. "But I really think receiver would be my best spot. I'm feeling the most comfortable there, because I think it's a more natural position for me. I'm big, strong and have good speed. The K-State coaches want me at receiver too, but I'm versatile enough to move around if I have to."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/players/02/08/big12.blitz/1.html (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/players/02/08/big12.blitz/1.html)

Quote
A physically imposing prospect, the 6-3, 215-pound Lamark Brown is one of the nation's most college-ready prospects. Brown, who has the body of a linebacker, will be a receiver at K-State. With his body, size and speed, he should be an instant mismatch for any defensive back in the Big 12.

I won't argue that he won't make a good receiver, I think he'd make a better LB. 


Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 12:07:45 PM
Yeah, I was going back much earlier than that.  Before he committed to KSU (and letting the desire to play WR KAT out of the bag).

Oh, good for Prince, then.

BTW, can you find any stories prior to his commitment to KSU?  His commitment was pretty much the first story anyone did for both Rivals and Scout.

http://www.themercury.com/k-statesports/article.aspx?articleId=23626f9225704c22845a50e28d77ca4f (http://www.themercury.com/k-statesports/article.aspx?articleId=23626f9225704c22845a50e28d77ca4f)

Quote
Though Brown played everything from linebacker to safety to running back and tight end, he thinks he is best suited for wide receiver –and so does K-State.
"I can play a lot of different positions, I think," Brown said. "But I really think receiver would be my best spot. I'm feeling the most comfortable there, because I think it's a more natural position for me. I'm big, strong and have good speed. The K-State coaches want me at receiver too, but I'm versatile enough to move around if I have to."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/players/02/08/big12.blitz/1.html (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/players/02/08/big12.blitz/1.html)

Quote
A physically imposing prospect, the 6-3, 215-pound Lamark Brown is one of the nation's most college-ready prospects. Brown, who has the body of a linebacker, will be a receiver at K-State. With his body, size and speed, he should be an instant mismatch for any defensive back in the Big 12.

I won't argue that he won't make a good receiver, I think he'd make a better LB. 

I can buy that...that said, I think it's pretty clear that the answer to this:

Is there really any question about which position Brown would play if he was at a top ten program? 

is a definite yes.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 12:09:14 PM
This defense would be top 10 if only Lamark Brown and Marcus Watts were moved to LB.

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 12:13:22 PM
I can buy that...that said, I think it's pretty clear that the answer to this:

Is there really any question about which position Brown would play if he was at a top ten program? 

is a definite yes.

LOL @ Lamark Brown telling Bob Stoops or Mack Brown where he wants to play
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on July 31, 2007, 12:43:37 PM
I can buy that...that said, I think it's pretty clear that the answer to this:

Is there really any question about which position Brown would play if he was at a top ten program? 

is a definite yes.

LOL @ Lamark Brown telling Bob Stoops or Mack Brown where he wants to play

Brown/Stoops didn't ask.

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 31, 2007, 01:21:49 PM
Didn't Lamark play/make the non-Army All Star game on defense?  Was that because he was such a good receiver that the coaches thought he'd make a good safety?

IIRC they actually had him and Curtis Thomas at corner.

***edit*** they had brown at safety and thomas at corner

That's all I could find in the span of a couple of minutes.  Anyone with unclouded judgement and a decent memory could tell you that all schools recruiting him were recruiting him for defense...except one.  It happened to be the one that secured his commitment.

I think his commitment here had more to do with KSU being his favorite team.  You don't think other schools tried selling him on receiver too?  Like you don't think it crossed other coach's minds, "Let's promise him WR and move him later"?  Are you following the Chris Harper recruitment?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 01:51:26 PM
I think his commitment here had more to do with KSU being his favorite team.

Me too, but who knows.  I've also wondered if there is some sort of family connection to the school given the way he stands out like a sore thumb on our commit list (as evidenced by all of the discussion dedicated solely to him).

You don't think other schools tried selling him on receiver too?  Like you don't think it crossed other coach's minds, "Let's promise him WR and move him later"?  Are you following the Chris Harper recruitment?

Yeah, coaches do that all the time.  Given that one of our selling points was opportunity to play on offense, though, it doesn't seem like they were.  Maybe other coaches weren't after him all that hard because he was a high academic risk?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: fatty fat fat on July 31, 2007, 01:52:55 PM
OT: Someone needs to research true freshmen playing WR and their production.

We REALLY REALLY need a receiver op. jordu.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 01:56:57 PM
I think his commitment here had more to do with KSU being his favorite team.

Me too, but who knows.  I've also wondered if there is some sort of family connection to the school given the way he stands out like a sore thumb on our commit list (as evidenced by all of the discussion dedicated solely to him).

You don't think other schools tried selling him on receiver too?  Like you don't think it crossed other coach's minds, "Let's promise him WR and move him later"?  Are you following the Chris Harper recruitment?

Yeah, coaches do that all the time.  Given that one of our selling points was opportunity to play on offense, though, it doesn't seem like they were.  Maybe other coaches weren't after him all that hard because he was a high academic risk?

Are you working your way to a point?

TIA
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 31, 2007, 02:02:14 PM
You don't think other schools tried selling him on receiver too?  Like you don't think it crossed other coach's minds, "Let's promise him WR and move him later"?  Are you following the Chris Harper recruitment?

Yeah, coaches do that all the time.  Given that one of our selling points was opportunity to play on offense, though, it doesn't seem like they were.  Maybe other coaches weren't after him all that hard because he was a high academic risk?

Who knows...his recruitment seemed pretty quiet.  Looking through his updates, it seemed like all he ever said was "Missouri/Arkansas/etc is recruiting me" and that's it.  His coach must not have much experience with players like him, considering he didn't even have video on rivals, but still got on the top 100.  These is pretty much the only things he's said position-wise:

Quote from: February 27, 2006
Brown said he will attend the Kansas State junior day on March 4. He also said most schools are recruiting him as an athlete.

"Most everybody has said athlete," he said. "I would like to play on the offensive side of the ball."

Quote from: March 5, 2006, after his commitment
"I really don't know what position I'm going to play right now," Brown said. "It will be either running back or wide receiver. I don't think I have a preference, but it will be on the offensive side of the ball."
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 02:04:01 PM
OT: Someone needs to research true freshmen playing WR and their production.

We REALLY REALLY need a receiver op. jordu.

http://iowa.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Sport=1&pr_key=45012

^Had 49 receptions for 654 yards
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: The Manhatter on July 31, 2007, 02:06:23 PM
I think his commitment here had more to do with KSU being his favorite team.

Me too, but who knows.  I've also wondered if there is some sort of family connection to the school given the way he stands out like a sore thumb on our commit list (as evidenced by all of the discussion dedicated solely to him).

You don't think other schools tried selling him on receiver too?  Like you don't think it crossed other coach's minds, "Let's promise him WR and move him later"?  Are you following the Chris Harper recruitment?

Yeah, coaches do that all the time.  Given that one of our selling points was opportunity to play on offense, though, it doesn't seem like they were.  Maybe other coaches weren't after him all that hard because he was a high academic risk?


this has been entertaining since chum started posting. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 02:08:07 PM
Interesting:

Quote
MIKE WILLIAMS ON:
Coming to USC from Florida: "The Florida schools just didn't think I could play wide receiver. They thought I was too big or not fast enough or whatever. At USC, they had a clear-cut picture of what I could do."

http://usctrojans.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/williams_mike00.html
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: The Manhatter on July 31, 2007, 02:09:47 PM
the stuff about Lamark being an academic risk appears to be pure speculation started by Nubb and beak to convince themselves it had to be something like that for KSU to get a prospect of his caliber.  Fact of it is he was hooked on KSU early and never waivered.  Funny that if he was such an academic risk he was in the program the earliest a frosh could get here.

stunner, there was an article in the st. louis post dispatch...big guns were coming after Lamark.  He just wanted to go to KSU.

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ScubaSteve on July 31, 2007, 02:11:44 PM
OT: Someone needs to research true freshmen playing WR and their production.

We REALLY REALLY need a receiver op. jordu.

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/playerDetail.jsp?yr=2003&org=545&player=1 (http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/playerDetail.jsp?yr=2003&org=545&player=1)

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/playerDetail.jsp?yr=2003&org=657&player=1 (http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/playerDetail.jsp?yr=2003&org=657&player=1)

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/playerDetail.jsp?yr=2003&org=522&player=9 (http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/playerDetail.jsp?yr=2003&org=522&player=9)

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/playerDetail.jsp?yr=2003&org=703&player=4 (http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/playerDetail.jsp?yr=2003&org=703&player=4)

My personal favorites:

Freshman
Rk Player, Year Yds
1. Aaron Lockett, 1998 ........................................................................928
2. Kevin Lockett, 1993..........................................................................770
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on July 31, 2007, 02:12:25 PM
the stuff about Lamark being an academic risk appears to be pure speculation started by Nubb and beak to convince themselves it had to be something like that for KSU to get a prospect of his caliber.  Fact of it is he was hooked on KSU early and never waivered.  Funny that if he was such an academic risk he was in the program the earliest a frosh could get here.

stunner, there was an article in the st. louis post dispatch...big guns were coming after Lamark.  He just wanted to go to KSU.



 :love:

I wish the other lifelong KSU fans were like that! :curse:

I'm talking to you Arthur Brown and Chris Harper. :curse:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 08:02:55 PM
(http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j3/tdj7349/lbpdt.jpg)
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Pett on July 31, 2007, 08:20:27 PM
I wish the other lifelong KSU fans were like that! :curse:

I'm talking to you Arthur Brown and Chris Harper. :curse:

The big guns got the best of them.  :curse: :mad:
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Iceberg on July 31, 2007, 10:00:58 PM
Sure Lamark Brown has the talent and size to be placed in other positions, but I am fine with him at WR. Several coaches passed up on Bishop because they wanted him to play positions other than QB and look how we came out in that situation.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 10:08:53 PM
Other questions:

1.  Will Lamark really be a wide receiver, contrary to what Prince said about him being an h-back?

2.  Will Lamark even see the field very much as a true freshman, or do we all just know Prince better than that?

3.  Will Lamark make a seamless transition from podunk MO football to Big XII football in spite of the odds against that?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: The Manhatter on July 31, 2007, 10:14:49 PM
Other questions:

1.  Will Lamark really be a wide receiver, contrary to what Prince said about him being an h-back?

2.  Will Lamark even see the field very much as a true freshman, or do we all just know Prince better than that?

3.  Will Lamark make a seamless transition from podunk MO football to Big XII football in spite of the odds against that?

1.  H-Back, Receiver..same thing and who cares?  An H-Back led the nation in receiving in '05. 
2.  does this question need to be asked?
3.  No, it won't be seamless.  Who expects it to be?

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: Iceberg on July 31, 2007, 10:16:26 PM
3.  Will Lamark make a seamless transition from podunk MO football to Big XII football in spite of the odds against that?

It seems like not to long ago that another MO football stud played as a true freshman and earned National Player of the Week honors.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 10:26:55 PM
Well, if he's not going to be our savior this year, I really don't know why we would talk about him so much.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: The Manhatter on July 31, 2007, 10:46:42 PM
Well, if he's not going to be our savior this year, I really don't know why we would talk about him so much.

Not sure that I can say anyone here is thinking of him as a savior THIS year.  I apologize for all of us about being exciting that we got a big athlete and we're excited about him.  We should stop talking about him.

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on July 31, 2007, 10:51:59 PM
What would you like to talk about, chum?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 11:11:02 PM
Well, if he's not going to be our savior this year, I really don't know why we would talk about him so much.

Not sure that I can say anyone here is thinking of him as a savior THIS year.  I apologize for all of us about being exciting that we got a big athlete and we're excited about him.  We should stop talking about him.

Dude, we already have a catfan28 here.  And unless I missed something, we've been saying all along that we need Lamark this year because we need better receivers this year.  I'm assuming that we've not been talking about another body to come off the bench and have eight receptions all year long.

What would you like to talk about, chum?

I was suggesting that the amount of talk is entirely disproportionate to what we should realistically expect.  Controversial, I know.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: doom on July 31, 2007, 11:54:58 PM
&@#%ing let him coach if he's not at a rival school, I love him.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on July 31, 2007, 11:59:17 PM
Re: Reasons to be hopeful about next year.

3) receivers.  Bigger, more versatility, deeper.  Sure, we're a little wet behind the ears but nobody was healthy last season.  Jordy should be back to '05 form.  Wilson should help...I don't care if Lamark has never played receiver.  LOL.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: The Manhatter on August 01, 2007, 12:44:50 AM
Re: Reasons to be hopeful about next year.

3) receivers.  Bigger, more versatility, deeper.  Sure, we're a little wet behind the ears but nobody was healthy last season.  Jordy should be back to '05 form.  Wilson should help...I don't care if Lamark has never played receiver.  LOL.

And what does that say?  Do you think you have something w/ that?

Receivers were injured.  And?

more versatility = MORE SIZE...MORE NUMBERS...One might suggest Pierce, Murphy, Hogan, and Lamark are more athletic than a thin receiving corp last year.

Get to your point already.  Did I say Lamark was going to be Roy Williams next year?

I don't think you get it...that we're excited about Lamark does not mean people are thinking he's going to catch 60 balls for a 1,000 yards....hell, all I'm hopeful for is 25 receptions for 300 yards or something.  And? 

LOL...keep reaching chum.

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuno1stunner on August 01, 2007, 03:54:45 AM
He's the #70 or so prospect in the nation.  Would you rather talk about whether Drinkgern will bulk up to 260 from his present 230?

Chum, we love you and all, but you're just wrong regarding this thread.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: fatty fat fat on August 01, 2007, 05:47:53 AM
If ever there was a GRCOAT of worst posters ever, chum would be the michael beasley.


 :blank:

Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on August 01, 2007, 06:19:02 AM
What would you like to talk about, chum?

I was suggesting that the amount of talk is entirely disproportionate to what we should realistically expect.  Controversial, I know.

How much would be appropriate?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2007, 07:35:25 AM
Re: Reasons to be hopeful about next year.

3) receivers.  Bigger, more versatility, deeper.  Sure, we're a little wet behind the ears but nobody was healthy last season.  Jordy should be back to '05 form.  Wilson should help...I don't care if Lamark has never played receiver.  LOL.

And what does that say?

It says that having better receivers than we had last year (a dubious claim at best given the departure of a thrid round NFL pick) is a reason to be hopeful. 

How much would be appropriate?

Probably less than Dylan Meier had a year ago when I was just wrong about him. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on August 01, 2007, 07:52:10 AM
How much would be appropriate?

Probably less than Dylan Meier had a year ago when I was just wrong about him. 

Then we're cool?  There was a lot more Dylan talk a year ago than there is LaMark talk right now.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on August 01, 2007, 08:37:00 AM
So what's the realistic expectation for Lamark's production this year?  The saying all along this off season is that we needed another reciever opposite of Jordy.  If Lamark's as advertised, then shouldn't he be the other starting WR?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ScubaSteve on August 01, 2007, 08:37:36 AM
If ever there was a GRCOAT of worst posters ever, chum would be the michael beasley.


 :blank:



My favorite posters constantly disappoint me.  Chum sucks.  His videos are cool though.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: fatty fat fat on August 01, 2007, 08:39:44 AM
Quote
My favorite posters constantly disappoint me.  Chum sucks.  His videos are cool though.

I knew that wouldn't last. Chum has always been terrible when talking kstate sports.

The only reason you really hate is because I'm a flaming faggot liberal.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2007, 10:28:03 AM
So, who here thinks Larmark would have played receiver for Bill Snyder as a true freshman?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on August 01, 2007, 10:29:39 AM
So, who here thinks Larmark would have played receiver for Bill Snyder as a true freshman?

I don't think Snyder would have signed Lamark....so....not me!
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on August 01, 2007, 10:36:34 AM
I don't think Lamark would have played as a true freshman under Snyder.  How many have?  Endzone dive, Overrated Reggie Walker..who else recently?  I think his position would have ended up being LB under Snyder, but with Bill being Bill, he probably would have told him he wanted him on defense and then Lamark would've signed elsewhere. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on August 01, 2007, 11:32:57 AM
Moreira, Walker, Hafferty, Reyer most recently.  Also Clary, Sproles, Leckey, Rheem a little further back.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ScubaSteve on August 01, 2007, 12:09:45 PM
The only reason you really hate is because I'm a flaming faggot liberal.

Congratulations on your outage!  Please though... I'm conservative, but I'm not a very good one.   I'm not really fond of liberals, but being metro myself, I'd fit right in at your gay bashes.  Your hate issues are pretty obvious however.  You might want to work on that.

I hate because you lost your sense of humor and your posts started to suck.  Chum picked it up, but now he sucks too.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2007, 12:12:01 PM
I agree that Snyder would have either turned away a four star lifelong fan or likely not played him as a true freshman.  Prince's system is definitely much more friendly to someone like Lamark "Reggie Bush" Brown.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on August 01, 2007, 12:15:48 PM
If Bill would have played Reggie Walker, why wouldn't he have played Lamark Brown?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2007, 12:20:38 PM
Given his track record, it's unlikely that Snyder would see Brown as a good candidate for that.  He redshirted plenty of players rated higher by Rivals than Reggie Walker.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on August 01, 2007, 12:22:28 PM
Given his track record, it's unlikely that Snyder would see Brown as a good candidate for that.  He redshirted plenty of players rated higher by Rivals than Reggie Walker.

Who did he redshirt that was rated higher than Lamark Brown?

What did Reggie Walker have that Lamark Brown doesn't?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: The Manhatter on August 01, 2007, 01:21:31 PM
It says that having better receivers than we had last year (a dubious claim at best given the departure of a thrid round NFL pick) is a reason to be hopeful. 

Nice sidestep.  We were talking about Lamark and you thought you would throw in my quote to do what?  You were insinuating that people were referring to him as a savior for the team and I said nobody believes that to be the case his true freshman season.  So you replied w/ something where I mentioned Lamark.  Is that it?

Yamon prolly sucked last year at this time according to you.  Truth be told Yamon's draft status was based on a 40 at the combine, kick returning ability...and, and, and, nothing else.  He was not particularly elusive.  His hands were not reliable.  Very small. 

Moreira = small and no speed.  He did possess great elusiveness, body control, balance, etc. but simply not explosive enough to make too much of an impact.

We had zero size last year.  Zero.  Oh we had a hobbling Jordy and Gonzales but not a true threat w/ size.

We know that a healthy Jordy, Pierce, and Lamark are all big and can run.  Murphy and Hogan appear to be athletic. 

It takes a fool to look at last year's WR corps and this year's and not see a positive difference in numbers, size, and athleticism.  Will they play great off the bat or even next year?  Who knows...but it's hilarious you are in love w/ last year's group when you were probably damning them a year ago.


So, who here thinks Larmark would have played receiver for Bill Snyder as a true freshman?

It's settled then.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: waks on August 01, 2007, 01:49:08 PM
The only reason you really hate is because I'm a flaming faggot liberal.

Congratulations on your outage!  Please though... I'm conservative, but I'm not a very good one.   I'm not really fond of liberals, but being metro myself, I'd fit right in at your gay bashes.  Your hate issues are pretty obvious however.  You might want to work on that.

I hate because you lost your sense of humor and your posts started to suck.  Chum picked it up, but now he sucks too.
lol at this.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: chum1 on August 01, 2007, 02:05:01 PM
It says that having better receivers than we had last year (a dubious claim at best given the departure of a thrid round NFL pick) is a reason to be hopeful. 

Nice sidestep.  We were talking about Lamark and you thought you would throw in my quote to do what?

It seems you don't think much of our receivers last year.  If they are to improve to such a degree that we should be hopeful, it seems that they will have made a significant upgrade.  Lamark Brown would presumably play a big role in this.

So, who here thinks Larmark would have played receiver for Bill Snyder as a true freshman?

It's settled then.

According to Manhatter, Prince >>> Snyder.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: The Manhatter on August 01, 2007, 02:14:17 PM
It seems you don't think much of our receivers last year.  If they are to improve to such a degree that we should be hopeful, it seems that they will have made a significant upgrade.  Lamark Brown would presumably play a big role in this.

Moreira played half the season.  Jordy was far less than 100%...but we did have yamon's speed!!  I liked our receivers but when there is no depth and nobody can stay healthy.  And I was fully aware of the limitations. 

"Lamark Brown would presumably play a big role in this."

Is it all about Lamark?  I don't know...maybe a few JC's, Wilson, and Hogan too?  Some posters around here act like we have zero speed now that Yamon is gone.  I guess I missed what Jordy did in '05 or something.  He was the more reliable long ball threat going into '06 and then the knee injury.  But Murphy and Woods do not possess speed so....Pierce is not a faster and better athlete than Gonzales.  Neither is Lamark.

Again, we have more numbers, size, versatility.  And it's not like one receiver in particular has to go off for 1,000 yards for it to be effective.

So, who here thinks Larmark would have played receiver for Bill Snyder as a true freshman?
According to Manhatter, Prince >>> Snyder.

Yep, that is what I said...I guess.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: WildCatzPhreak on August 01, 2007, 02:15:40 PM
I'd rather see Hogan opposite Jordy than Lamark, but maybe that's just me.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: KSU4ME on August 01, 2007, 02:20:01 PM
I'd rather see Hogan opposite Jordy than Lamark, but maybe that's just me.

I'd rather see Jordy, Pierce and Lamark on the field.

That's a combination that can cause some legitimate mis-matches.

Especially if one of our TEs learns how to outrun a slug.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on August 01, 2007, 02:25:56 PM
I'd like to see Jordy, Pierce, and Hogan on the field.

I'd like to see Sampson, Smoke, Roland, and Lamark on the field. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: michigancat on August 01, 2007, 02:29:01 PM
I'd like to see Jordy, Pierce, and Hogan on the field.

I'd like to see Sampson, Smoke, Roland, and Lamark on the field. 

God, what is it with everyone saying Prince is better than Snyder?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: catzacker on August 01, 2007, 02:38:57 PM
I'd like to see Jordy, Pierce, and Hogan on the field.

I'd like to see Sampson, Smoke, Roland, and Lamark on the field. 

God, what is it with everyone saying Prince is better than Snyder?

Not only is Prince a better coach, he's a better human being than Snyder. 
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: swish1 on September 09, 2007, 01:40:27 PM
bump

2 stellar plays from lamark saturday.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: doom on September 09, 2007, 01:41:42 PM
bump

2 stellar plays from lamark saturday.

No there weren't.  He came in once or twice w/ Ernie, Ernie dropped a pass that hit him in the hands and they left quicker than they came.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: WildCatzPhreak on September 09, 2007, 01:57:10 PM
I was on the opposite side of the field so I didn't see anything from Lamark or Ernie, but I do remember hearing Wyatt say Lamark dropped one pass that was right in his hands.

In other news, Antwon Moore is out for the season, diminishing the depth in our already thin linebacking corps.  Did I mention we run a defense that is basically predicated on linebacker play?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: greasd up deaf guy on September 09, 2007, 08:35:35 PM
Christ. This thread again? Can one un-bump a thread?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: ksuftballfan1 on September 09, 2007, 08:52:01 PM
lamark should be at safety now that antwon moore's out
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: waks on September 09, 2007, 11:41:37 PM
lamark should be at safety now that antwon moore's out
I don't believe that Antoine Moore played safety.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: power4PURPLE on September 09, 2007, 11:44:22 PM
All I know is that if Prince continues to play Gonzo, a redshirt better be slapped on either Pierce or Lamark cuz their sitting on the sideline catching moths isn't helping anybody down the road.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: waks on September 09, 2007, 11:45:53 PM
All I know is that if Prince continues to play Gonzo, a redshirt better be slapped on either Pierce or Lamark cuz their sitting on the sideline catching moths isn't helping anybody down the road.
Isn't it too late since they've both played now?
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: power4PURPLE on September 09, 2007, 11:50:55 PM
Ahhh! Bologna I think you're right! Well that's no good
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: WildCatzPhreak on September 09, 2007, 11:52:44 PM
I don't know what you're talking about WAKS.
Lamark: "MY ACL!  I'm out for the season!  Medical redshirt!"
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: waks on September 09, 2007, 11:54:26 PM
I don't know what you're talking about WAKS.
Lamark: "MY ACL!  I'm out for the season!  Medical redshirt!"

LOLs.
Title: Re: Lamark Brown as a receiver..Good or bad decision?
Post by: WorldWideBalla21 on September 11, 2007, 11:45:30 PM
Tom Lemming says put him at RB...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NAoku2kFYuk