clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Five Wide Fullbacks: Michael Floyd’s Draft Stock, Scholarships and QB Questions Abound

This week the OFD staff is turning the world on its axis. Whiskey went off the grid and E is headed out on a well-deserved vacation (he finally met his word quota for posts). As such, Mouth is taking on some additional duties handling TWIN and the Saturday practice. Unfortunately for him, something had to give--which means that this week's edition of 5WF falls to me.

I apologize in advance, as I tried my best to channel my inner Mouth. After all, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

More after the jump.

A mysterious man approaches you and wants you to bet that Michael Floyd will not be drafted in the first round in April. You want to fight him and take the bet, but the man says if you're wrong, the Irish will lose an additional 3 games in 2012. If you're right, the Irish will win an additional game next year. Do you ultimately take the bet?

Yes, and there is no question about this one. Barring any major set-backs at next week's pro day, Floyd is a consensus lock for the first round. The latest mock drafts I have seen have him as high as 7th overall (to Jacksonville) and as low as 22nd (to Cleveland, and Burger rejoices). Honestly, I think he has a much better career as a pro than Justin Blackmon, but I am admittedly biased on the point.

Notre Dame is slated to play a number of Heisman favorites in 2012. If you could remove one opponent from their team for their game against the Irish, who would it be and why?

The Heisman Pundit has been hard at work at a thankless job, offering a watch list in mid-January. Just in case you don't follow such things, he recently named Cierre Wood as one of a dozen players set to explode in 2012. I am not sure if he secretly means spontaneous human combustion explosion w/r/t Mr. Wood or not, but clearly C-Dub is setting up for a special 2012 season.

For those of you who generally do not follow the Heisman goings-on year-round, one thing I can tell you is this: to be named an early favorite for the award guarantees you one thing-that you won't win it.

But enough dancing around the question and on to the candidates (in order of appearance on the 2012 schedule): Denard Robinson, Landry Jones or Matt Barkley.

My initial thought would be to pick Mouth's favorite Spencer Pratt look-alike. However, since I know this is a trick question, I must eliminate that as a possibility. Using the most sound Princess Bride logic that I can channel, the answer is but clear-LOOK! (silently switches choices)-I have to go with D-Rob on this one.

Why you ask? The solution is but obvious-he is the entire Michigan offense and has been for far too long. Last year, he accounted for over 60% of the total offense and TDs.

The NCAA recently discussed decreasing the number of football scholarships from 85 to 80. Thoughts?

To be honest, I can't say that I am in favor of this move. In the end, it is likely inevitable that it happens, especially with Title IX restrictions and decreased public funding to state schools.

In case you are curious, here is a good breakdown of scholarship limits by sport.

While I am sure that college presidents and conference commissioners will sell the move as a leveling of the playing field, I think it just hurts the programs that follow the rules and increases the competitive advantage of those who do not (I am not pointing any fingers, but you know who you are).

Instead, I would like to see the NCAA look into a system that rewards programs that graduate players and avoid violations. Sounds like a novel concept, right? They are already penalizing programs with low APR with scholarship reductions, so why not take it a step further?

One other eye-opener for you to think about-did you realize that football players only have to earn nine credit hours to be eligible to play? Even better, that was a recent rule change to increase the requirement.

Regardless, lowering the total number of scholarships doesn't address the fundamental issue-the NCAA needs to figure out how to put the student back in the athlete.

This week, DMAC4REAL posed the following question in the Malik Zaire comments section:


First, here are three highlight clips I used to review:

Everett Golson Notre Dame Recruit High School Highlights (via johnificationfootbal)

Gunner Kiel - 2012 Notre Dame Football Signee (via NotreDameAthletics)

2011 Malik Zaire Season Highlights (via SuttmanRecruitment)

I have to say that all three look pretty impressive in their highlight film-but then again, isn't that the point of a highlight film? Each QB ran varying versions of a spread offense in high school, so translating their abilities to CBK's system should be pretty straight-forward.

Golson's clip shows some great playmaking ability and arm strength--ridiculous arm strength. He showed great accuracy, especially when throwing on the run. His ability to extend the play while keeping his eyes downfield is phenomenal. He was definitely a pass-first QB in high school, which led to some questionable decisions (that he got away with at that level, but probably wouldn't in college).

Kiel actually reminds me a bit of Tim Tebow in his running style. He was more willing than the other two to stand in the pocket, take the hit and deliver the ball down field for a big play. Many peg him as a pro-style QB, but he is deceptively fast and tough to bring down as a runner.

And then I watched Zaire's film--which I have to say I was the most impressed with. He probably plays against the best competition of the three at the high school level, but that didn't really impact my decision. He just made the game look too easy, and that is why I am the most impressed. He has something intangible about his game, a play-making ability that just can't be taught.

Speaking of QBs, a Tweet caught my attention this week:

As a general rule, I tend to ignore what Mr. Hamilton has to say. If you have to ask, then I can't help you with the answer. But for some unknown reason, this little comment garnered a second look from me.

Why, you ask? Basically because he compared the QB competition to a popular television program by the name of Survivor. As one of three known Americans to have never watched an episode of said Survivor, I find myself uniquely qualified to answer this question.

One thing I do know about this Survivor show is that it airs on CBS, a network that embraces a semi-professional brand of football played on Saturdays commonly referred to as the SEC. No way a Notre Dame QB competition would be aired on that station, right? But I digress...

From what little I know about the show, I understand that it generally takes place in some exotic location-most frequently an island. For my QB survivor competition, let's create a fictitious island-let's call it Eye-R-Land for the sake of argument.

Which of the four QB candidates would win this competition and be crowned the survivor of this mythical Eye-R-Land? First, if one applies Darwinian Theory to the problem, it is obvious that only the strongest (and fastest survive). I guess that means that TR can take a seat and ready his responses for some form of a "reunion" show.

Next, generally one would think that experience would weigh in at some point, as the younger competitors tend to make things called "rookie mistakes." Sorry Gunner, you have been relegated to the scout team for the year. QBs generally need the first year to learn the system, bulk up and spend time watching film. Really, it's best for everyone.

So that leaves us with a head-to-head competition-He Whom Must Not Be Slept Upon (HWMNBSU) vs. the Voodoo Child. Who wins? I will tell you who wins-the fans do. After all, wouldn't you rather see either of these two than the peanut butter cup perfectionist**?

So there you have it-Goldrix wins Survivor Eye-R-Land.

**Note: that reference is even a stretch for me, but if you keep up with the comments (or have an ounce of logic), you will understand.