2016 4* WR Kyle Davis (AU commit 11/25/15)

[amsterjam 107]

Re: my earlier comment.

I was just curious if there was an unannounced philosophical change taking place at AU.

Not that long ago, Lefty and Chiz made the disastrous decision to go for the pro-style offense.

Granted the talent was not correct for that approach back in Lefty's day...but now that Gus has had a few years to recruit toward his offensive preferences, I'm starting to believe that we are seeing a subtle shift in offensive strategy...in that same direction.

If I read things correctly, several of the QBs we are hot after (and our current back-ups) are generally considered to be Pro Style ( though a couple might be called dual-purpose). SO....I'm wondering if the days of seeing an AU quarterback as a true running threat....a guy who can rush for 750 or more yards in a season might be a thing of the past.

Folks talk about the next Cam Newton....but I don't think Gus is looking for another Cam Newton who can rush for 1000+ yards. The HU offense is not necessarily incompatible with a Pro Style offense.

PS...this s not about Kyle Davis obviously...but something worth thinking about IMO

You don't think Gus is looking for the next Cam Newton? If not then we may be the only team in the country who isn't.

[AU64 10,122]

I'm thinking the next " Cam Newton" will not get a chance to do what Cam did.

So, no matter what kind of legs the guy might have, we won't be seeing a QB run for 100 or more yards each game. Cam was more or less forced into the role....can't see that happening again. JMO

[amsterjam 107]

i

I'm thinking the next " Cam Newton" will not get a chance to do what Cam did.

So, no matter what kind of legs the guy might have, we won't be seeing a QB run for 100 or more yards each game. Cam was more or less forced into the role....can't see that happening again. JMO

I have to respectfully disagree. Nick Marshall rushed for over 1000 yards in 2013. its also hard for me to believe we are recruiting Narcissi to be a pocket passer.

[gman87 398]

Cam wasn't forced into the role, he created the role. Once Gus saw what he had, he exploited it to the maximum. It was a perfect storm of talent, play calling and supporting cast and nobody could stop it. Some slowed it, but it was awesome and a once every 10 years type talent.

[TIGGR82 4]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

[ellitor 33,093]

Re: my earlier comment.

I was just curious if there was an unannounced philosophical change taking place at AU.

Not that long ago, Lefty and Chiz made the disastrous decision to go for the pro-style offense.

Granted the talent was not correct for that approach back in Lefty's day...but now that Gus has had a few years to recruit toward his offensive preferences, I'm starting to believe that we are seeing a subtle shift in offensive strategy...in that same direction.

If I read things correctly, several of the QBs we are hot after (and our current back-ups) are generally considered to be Pro Style ( though a couple might be called dual-purpose). SO....I'm wondering if the days of seeing an AU quarterback as a true running threat....a guy who can rush for 750 or more yards in a season might be a thing of the past.

Folks talk about the next Cam Newton....but I don't think Gus is looking for another Cam Newton who can rush for 1000+ yards. The HU offense is not necessarily incompatible with a Pro Style offense.

PS...this s not about Kyle Davis obviously...but something worth thinking about IMO

Gus's philosophy is to have both dual and pro style QBs on roster if possible so he can always have a QB to fit with whatever talent that is on offense. Whether pro style or dual his biggest thing is having guys that make the best decisions in terms of ball security.

[ellitor 33,093]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

JMO but I think we will have as good or better shot with him than Nate.

[Timeslider 6 269]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

JMO but I think we will have as good or better shot with him than Nate.

Kyle seems like a really good natured kid, which makes me think he would be a more coachable kid. Meaning he is more likely to fulfill his potential. Kids who are difficult to coach usually don't met their potential. My example would be Kerryon, he really seems like the kind of kid that will meet his potential or exceed it.

[ellitor 33,093]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

JMO but I think we will have as good or better shot with him than Nate.

Kyle seems like a really good natured kid, which makes me think he would be a more coachable kid. Meaning he is more likely to fulfill his potential. Kids who are difficult to coach usually don't met their potential. My example would be Kerryon, he really seems like the kind of kid that will meet his potential or exceed it.

Nate may not be a natural guy or very coachable but FTR there is no sentiment of that about him in the recruiting world. Him decommitting does not mean he is not natural or coachable. For example, Donty Russell flipped from UGA to us and all indications so far through a year plus is he has been very coachable.

[war eagle6 0]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

JMO but I think we will have as good or better shot with him than Nate.

Yep

[McLoofus 35,182]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

JMO but I think we will have as good or better shot with him than Nate.

Kyle seems like a really good natured kid, which makes me think he would be a more coachable kid. Meaning he is more likely to fulfill his potential. Kids who are difficult to coach usually don't met their potential. My example would be Kerryon, he really seems like the kind of kid that will meet his potential or exceed it.

Nate may not be a natural guy or very coachable but FTR there is no sentiment of that about him in the recruiting world. Him decommitting does not mean he is not natural or coachable. For example, Donty Russell flipped from UGA to us and all indications so far through a year plus is he has been very coachable.

Good post. Timeslider6 might have other intel on Craig, but in general we shouldn't make a connection between decommitting and character flaws. I know a lot of folks can't get past their literal, traditional definition of "commitment", but it simply doesn't mean any more in football than "contract" does (I mean, seriously, if you want to whine about decommitments, whine about the schools and the coaches, not the kids). /soapbox /brokenrecord

Come on down, Mr. Davis! (And Mr. Craig! We ain't mad atcha.)

[Mikey 16,604]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

JMO but I think we will have as good or better shot with him than Nate.

Kyle seems like a really good natured kid, which makes me think he would be a more coachable kid. Meaning he is more likely to fulfill his potential. Kids who are difficult to coach usually don't met their potential. My example would be Kerryon, he really seems like the kind of kid that will meet his potential or exceed it.

Nate may not be a natural guy or very coachable but FTR there is no sentiment of that about him in the recruiting world. Him decommitting does not mean he is not natural or coachable. For example, Donty Russell flipped from UGA to us and all indications so far through a year plus is he has been very coachable.

Good post. Timeslider6 might have other intel on Craig, but in general we shouldn't make a connection between decommitting and character flaws. I know a lot of folks can't get past their literal, traditional definition of "commitment", but it simply doesn't mean any more in football than "contract" does (I mean, seriously, if you want to whine about decommitments, whine about the schools and the coaches, not the kids). /soapbox /brokenrecord

Come on down, Mr. Davis! (And Mr. Craig! We ain't mad atcha.)

Agreed. We old fogey types need to remember that many different areas of life have their own jargon. In recruiting jargon, "committed" means "today's favorite", nothing more. The idea takes some getting used to, but the recruiting definition of committed and the dictionary definition are very different.

[McLoofus 35,182]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

JMO but I think we will have as good or better shot with him than Nate.

Kyle seems like a really good natured kid, which makes me think he would be a more coachable kid. Meaning he is more likely to fulfill his potential. Kids who are difficult to coach usually don't met their potential. My example would be Kerryon, he really seems like the kind of kid that will meet his potential or exceed it.

Nate may not be a natural guy or very coachable but FTR there is no sentiment of that about him in the recruiting world. Him decommitting does not mean he is not natural or coachable. For example, Donty Russell flipped from UGA to us and all indications so far through a year plus is he has been very coachable.

Good post. Timeslider6 might have other intel on Craig, but in general we shouldn't make a connection between decommitting and character flaws. I know a lot of folks can't get past their literal, traditional definition of "commitment", but it simply doesn't mean any more in football than "contract" does (I mean, seriously, if you want to whine about decommitments, whine about the schools and the coaches, not the kids). /soapbox /brokenrecord

Come on down, Mr. Davis! (And Mr. Craig! We ain't mad atcha.)

Agreed. We old fogey types need to remember that many different areas of life have their own jargon. In recruiting jargon, "committed" means "today's favorite", nothing more. The idea takes some getting used to, but the recruiting definition of committed and the dictionary definition are very different.

Never surprised when Mikey says what I was trying to better than I did.

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

So how bout that WIDE RECEIVER Kyle Davis, eh?? I hear he's pretty good and seems to like us a decent bit.

JMO but I think we will have as good or better shot with him than Nate.

The longer it drags out with Nate the better and better it looks for AU. Looks to me like he is giving AU a chance to show him the offense this year before he really decides. Great job by DC. Now watch him commit to fsu today.

[LKEEL75 2,566]

If you were Davis & Craig, would you also be holding out to see the progress that Duke makes? I mean as hyped as Sammie was and he didn't go as one of the top WR in draft. Don't you want to go somewhere that is coaching up the WR. Now don't go bashing me. I am not saying that DC is not doing a great job. I am a huge supporter of DC & I wouldn't have him any other place. I am simply asking if a teenage kid would be looking at the draft stock of players in his position to make his decision. And if the top WR coming from a school the last 2 years can't break into the top 10 then maybe you look somewhere else. Again, not saying Duke won't be in the top 10 or even a Heisman finalist with JJ, Rock & Robinson.

[McLoofus 35,182]

If you were Davis & Craig, would you also be holding out to see the progress that Duke makes? I mean as hyped as Sammie was and he didn't go as one of the top WR in draft. Don't you want to go somewhere that is coaching up the WR. Now don't go bashing me. I am not saying that DC is not doing a great job. I am a huge supporter of DC & I wouldn't have him any other place. I am simply asking if a teenage kid would be looking at the draft stock of players in his position to make his decision. And if the top WR coming from a school the last 2 years can't break into the top 10 then maybe you look somewhere else. Again, not saying Duke won't be in the top 10 or even a Heisman finalist with JJ, Rock & Robinson.

Sammie was a 2* who had major questions about his catching ability going into the draft and still went 3rd round. He's already got $632k in his pocket and has a 4-yr, $3 million contract. He played one season where the team averaged over 300 yards rushing and another where he was hurt. I hear what you're saying- Auburn has not been WRU in the Malzahn era- but I would chalk that up to other factors (read: Nick Marshall's, um, unique skill set) more than the WRs themselves. Also, I agree that it is totally reasonable for a high school WR considering Auburn to want some gaudy numbers from Duke, Ricardo and the others this season. This very well could be the best combination of passing and catching talent we've had since 2004.

[subterranean_jack 112]

Traditionally, Auburn has not been very successful in recruiting either top QBs or WRs. Not until Malzahn arrived did that begin to change. Still, there has been an emphasis on running the ball. All our rivals are telling QB and WR recruits that we are RBU. There is little evidence otherwise.

This will be a pivotal season in respect to whether Malzahn will really commit to the pass or will fall back on the tradition of running the ball. If it doesn't happen with a QB as talented a passer as JJ is, then it will never happen. This is exactly what Kyle and Nate are waiting to see.

That Malzahn kept JJ on the bench while Nick was struggling so painfully to complete a pass at times last year did not help change that image. I know Gus was waiting all season to see what he saw Nick accomplish against Alabama. Nick was a senior and possibly the top read-option QB of all time, but sometimes you just have to take a struggling QB out for a series to get his head straight and give the backup a chance, especially if you have a talent like JJ waiting in the wings.

I expect to see more emphasis on passing this season. JJ has been more than patient. Malzahn seemed to indicate at the SEC Media Days that Auburn would be throwing more. Nice words, but, if I was a top QB or WR recruit, I would be waiting to see proof on the field rather than trust what any coach says.

If JJ lights it up like I've been saying he would for the past 3 years given a real chance, then the top WR recruits will be contacting Malzahn and asking for a chance, not the other way around.

[mustache eagle 2,406]

i cant help but think we average slightly higher than 300 yards in the air this year. I am hoping we play 15 games (wink wink) ... thats 4500 yards minimum through the air. That is a lot of yards for a handful of receivers. I really believe we are looking at something between the 2013 stats and Gus's tulsa offensive stats.

i looked at tulsa stats from 2006 to 2007 ... rushing went from 2100 yards to 2400 yards and passing jumped from 2944 to 5194. holy cow! I don't expect the same type of yards per game in the air, but do expect us to have a couple of more games than tulsa did. that is alot of yards to spread around. that 2007 tulsa team had 3 - 1000 yard receivers. crazy.

edit: oh yea, gus still had his traditional 1000 yard rusher in that 2007 season also. so our "primary" running back will get his stats too

[Mikey 16,604]

On the other hand, if we can continue to run the ball as successfully as we've been doing, who cares about where WR prospects go? If a team can hang 40 on 'em and never throw a pass, then never pass...

[TIGGR82 4]

On the other hand, if we can continue to run the ball as successfully as we've been doing, who cares about where WR prospects go? If a team can hang 40 on 'em and never throw a pass, then never pass...

The true days of strictly running offenses doesn't really exist anymore. At least if you want to be competitive and challenge for titles. You HAVE to have some ability to balance out your attack. It's just the way the game is played today.

[1TexasTiger 55]

That Malzahn kept JJ on the bench while Nick was struggling so painfully to complete a pass at times last year did not help change that image. I know Gus was waiting all season to see what he saw Nick accomplish against Alabama. Nick was a senior and possibly the top read-option QB of all time, but sometimes you just have to take a struggling QB out for a series to get his head straight and give the backup a chance, especially if you have a talent like JJ waiting in the wings.

Honest question. When has that philosophy worked?

[mustache eagle 2,406]

On the other hand, if we can continue to run the ball as successfully as we've been doing, who cares about where WR prospects go? If a team can hang 40 on 'em and never throw a pass, then never pass...

i have to admit ... Watching auburn run the ball in 2013 was a beautiful thing to behold. The sec champ game was awesome.

[AUbritt 611]

On the other hand, if we can continue to run the ball as successfully as we've been doing, who cares about where WR prospects go? If a team can hang 40 on 'em and never throw a pass, then never pass...

i have to admit ... Watching auburn run the ball in 2013 was a beautiful thing to behold. The sec champ game was awesome.

Most beautiful offense ever IMO.

[IronMan70 3,277]

I think having a passing QB like JJ will actually make it easier on the RBs. Just try to stop the run by stacking the box when JJ is in there and see what happens then.

[toddc 13,194]

Wonder how Kyle Davis is doing???