Football depth chart update - 3-25

**ChrisMWilliams** · 03-25-2010, 11:13 AM

Iowa State just updated their football depth chart.

http://www.cyclones.com//pdf8/681995.pdf

No major changes at all. Just some tweaks on defense. Roosevelt Maggitt jumped in front of Aaron Moore @ DE but they're still in the "or" category.

Willie Scott isn't listed at LE anymore.

**cycloneman003** · 03-25-2010, 11:41 AM

Willie is still listed there... 3rd string

Only other changes I notices are Broomfield being listed 3rd at FS and Baysinger now listed in the "or" category with Davis at backup RG

**ChrisMWilliams** · 03-25-2010, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by cycloneman003

Willie is still listed there... 3rd string

Only other changes I notices are Broomfield being listed 3rd at FS and Baysinger now listed in the "or" category with Davis at backup RG

My mistake. Thanks.

**tejasclone** · 03-25-2010, 11:51 AM

Kinda surprised to still see Sedrick at one of the three starting WR positions.

**wheels686** · 03-25-2010, 11:55 AM

I noticed Brayden Burris actually lost a pound on the depth chart. 276 pounds is concerning for a right tackle in the big 12. Hopefully he can get up to 300

**Ficklone02** · 03-25-2010, 11:58 AM

Originally Posted by wheels686

I noticed Brayden Burris actually lost a pound on the depth chart. 276 pounds is concerning for a right tackle in the big 12. Hopefully he can get up to 300

I think our coaches are moving in favor of mobile linemen vs. roadgraders.

**VeloClone** · 03-25-2010, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by wheels686

I noticed Brayden Burris actually lost a pound on the depth chart. 276 pounds is concerning for a right tackle in the big 12. Hopefully he can get up to 300

I wouldn't be surprised for us to see a rotation of 8-10 275-300 lb. linemen in future years all playing a significant number of minutes. The spread will often require more mobile linemen and we may need to have a little smaller linemen that can give each other a breather as they fight some bigger guys in the trenches.

Frankly I am surprised to see as many 330+ linemen with the spread. I kind of think that will go down.

I know Tech has some big linemen, but I don't think that offense is the same as the spread ISU is running.

Go ahead and tell me I'm all wet. It's just my opinion...

Edit: FYI - Tech's line as of 30 NOV went 290, 296, 307, 312, 334.

**wheels686** · 03-25-2010, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by Ficklone02

I think our coaches are moving in favor of mobile linemen vs. roadgraders.

I understand that, but they have said they prefer the 300 to 310 range. Brayden is way below that

**wheels686** · 03-25-2010, 12:04 PM

If you look at teams like the florida gators, every one of their starting lineman this year was over 300 pounds. You can be quick and athletic and still be over 300. You can add teams like oklahoma to that list of being over 300 and running a spread (even though its a different type of spread).

**UNIGuy4Cy** · 03-25-2010, 12:05 PM

Anyone got an update on Rony Nelson, please tell me he will be the starter over Neal, even though that kids go alot of heart.

**ChrisMWilliams** · 03-25-2010, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by UNIGuy4Cy

Anyone got an update on Rony Nelson, please tell me he will be the starter over Neal, even though that kids go alot of heart.

Nobody knows anything about Rony because he can't practice until camp. He's not enrolled at Iowa State right now. I don't know how good he's going to be but don't get your hopes too high regarding Nelson. He could be good but don't count on it. Personally, I'm hoping that Maggitt beats everybody out to start at that position. He's got a ton of talent and some D-1 experience. A ton of upside with him.

**cycloneman003** · 03-25-2010, 12:10 PM

i'd say brayden's ability/agility are what have him at that spot. he's better than any other options at this point IMO. he played last year at what? like 260? and wasnt to bad. coaches really like him. but i agree, you can be big and quick KO and Haughton go 327 and 337 respectively, but move very well for that size

**VeloClone** · 03-25-2010, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by wheels686

If you look at teams like the florida gators, every one of their starting lineman this year was over 300 pounds. You can be quick and athletic and still be over 300. You can add teams like oklahoma to that list of being over 300 and running a spread (even though its a different type of spread).

Florida and OU can land receivers with sub 4.40 speed and afford to redshirt them as well.

My point is we may have to sacrifice a little bit of size to get the mobility. There is a limited number of guys that can get over 300 and have the mobility that is desired in this offense. We may be able to get 2, 3 or even 4, but to think we are going to have 5 every year is probably not going to be an option. We will probably have to make a decision at some of the positions to either sacrifice some mobility or some size.

**Kyle** · 03-25-2010, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by wheels686

If you look at teams like the florida gators, every one of their starting lineman this year was over 300 pounds. You can be quick and athletic and still be over 300. You can add teams like oklahoma to that list of being over 300 and running a spread (even though its a different type of spread).

I heard about a study done not too long ago that showed that line size does not correlate to better line play in the NFL. I think that was especially true for passing teams (the Colts have one of the smallest lines in the league). I think that size, while useful, is probably a bit overrated.

**tazclone** · 03-25-2010, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Kyle

I heard about a study done not too long ago that showed that line size does not correlate to better line play in the NFL. I think that was especially true for passing teams (the Colts have one of the smallest lines in the league). I think that size, while useful, is probably a bit overrated.

For years, the Denver Broncos had the smallest or one of the smallest lines int he NFL, yet produced 1000 yard rushers year in and year out. Size is great and I would tke a 300lb guy that can move over a 280 lb guy that can't. BUT size is not everything.