In partnership with CBSSports.com
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
bell ran for 140 yards @ 4.8 per carry against iowa; we really have to throw out the OSU game for comparison sake because travis got hurt during the game, and then we were behind in the 2nd half.
yep, @ michigan and @ wisconsin were VERY TOUGH (no different than ND, really).
why, though, wouldn't you consider:
nebraska 188; 5.2 per carry
northwestern 133; 4.2 per carry
minnesota 266; 7.6 per carry
tcu 145; 4.5 per carry
travis and fou are QUALITY, QUALITY players, no question about it.
from a recruiting standpoint, though, we are going to lose fou, treadwell, and france next year.
1) PLAYING TIME is what ALL recruits want. i'd say, COME AND GET IT. especially, offensive tackles.
2) even with injuries, staten, who has taken his share of criticism, showed that he could put pieces together, that arguably, put its best foot forward in its last four games. not only that, but it has to be a pretty good reflection on mannie, that these guys were ready to step in and FINISH STRONG.
bottom line, parents of offensive lineman (tackles): send you kid to be a SPARTAN !!!! haha
I'd say both this season and last season it took 3-5 games to make the adjustments after serious injuries/lineup shakeups. I thought we looked pretty good in the bowl game. When you have that many linuep changes due to injury it's just impossible to string together 12 good looking games.
I can agree with you that early on, Jack was playing a position that's not his natural position (I think we can agree he has a very high ceiling at C) and on top of that going against some better DL. Obviously some of that is going to end poorly for a young, inexperienced player.
I guess what I was going for is that both Jackson and Allen looked very good at C, and perhaps the disparity of how good Allen was at C compared to LG was what came to mind.
I don't doubt he can play OG but in my opinion his long term outlook is at C. Treadwell seemed better at LG and Allen seemed to "fit in" better at C. If we hadn't lost Fonoti I think we could have handled the loss of Jackson much easier. The transition at C seemed pretty good. As experience builds for Allen (and Jackson, honestly) I think the two will be almost interchangeable at that spot. I just don't know if either of them have higher long-term outlook at OG than, say, McGowan or Clark.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports