LabattBlue Posted April 16, 2006 Posted April 16, 2006 http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/prospects;_ylt...bYF?rank_type=2 Wouldn't they be better suited for basketball at 7'7" or 7'8"?
JimBob2232 Posted April 16, 2006 Posted April 16, 2006 I'm just trying to imagine Flutie playing behind a line made up entirely of linemen over 7 foot tall.
Mark VI Posted April 16, 2006 Posted April 16, 2006 I'm just trying to imagine Flutie playing behind a line made up entirely of linemen over 7 foot tall. 662897[/snapback] He'd always have a bruised chin , coming out of the locker room shower.
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 16, 2006 Posted April 16, 2006 6-11 is kind of tall for a running back, I think.
IndyMark Posted April 16, 2006 Posted April 16, 2006 6-11 is kind of tall for a running back, I think. 662984[/snapback] .....and a CB and WR. But, then I did not watch much college football this past season, so maybe they are quicker and more agile than what I imagine. Either way, I would like to see a 6-11 CB match up against Roscoe Parrish; stride length versus stride rate....which would win?
Astrobot Posted April 16, 2006 Posted April 16, 2006 Can a 7'7" cornerback bend down far enough to cover Roscoe? Throw low, JP. Throw low.
Dennis in NC Posted April 16, 2006 Posted April 16, 2006 How about having a couple of 7 foot 6 defensive ends? It's tough to throw the ball past those guys! Although it would be easier for OL to get leverage on them...
JimBob2232 Posted April 17, 2006 Posted April 17, 2006 Throw low, JP. Throw low. Since I dont think we have a WR taller than 6 foot on the roster...this might not be a bad idea anyway.
Recommended Posts