Film Study: Moving Kirkland to left tackle might not yield favorable results

[Piggfoot]

Man when did responding to someone become a sensitivity thing? I think that's what you want it to be, honestly.

I'm completely cool. I've been a full-time writer for a couple of years now and have had tons and tons of people disagree with my opinions -- it's nothing new and welcomed.

But trying to call me names over an opinion is different. Yes, I know I'm not Bret Bielema and the first part of the article plainly states that -- if you actually read it.

Name one time on here that I got "sensitive" over a differing opinion? Please do...

You can't.

It's only an opinion, bro. Let's debate it and keep it civil...

When were you called names?

[hawg66]

Yep horrible analysis. I suck. Don't know why anyone would ever listen to anything I have to say.


SMH

Yeah this was a levelheaded even-tempered response.  Accusing anyone who disagrees with you of not reading the article, that's level-headed too.  deep breaths my man, deep breaths.  Even for those who didn't read it, it's okay and logical to make a prima facea case against your conclusions based simply on the belief in Bielema's decisons, especially as they pertain to offensive line play, are better informed and more knowledgeable than yours. 

you want discussion?  discuss this.  Why do you think Bielema made the move, if it wasn't best for Kirkland and it wasn't best for the team?

[SECisKing]

When were you called names?

You know what, harping on this is going to take this thread off track -- and I'm not here for that. I like this community and come by periodically to chop it up with you guys although I was told countless times to stay off message boards as a member of the media.

But I like to talk ball with anyone, so let's do that and not try to upstage each other to prove a point. We're not going to change each other's opinion...But we can have some healthy debate, you feel me?

[PaintballHog]

2 things for those disagreeing:

1. Is it completely and utterly impossible that Murf may have some correct points, and that BB may be wrong on a few things?

2. If the answer above is no (as it should, even the brightest minds in their profession isn't right 100% of the time), then disregarding the article solely on the assumption that BB is right and Murf isn't, is faulty logic. If you disagree, point out specific parts of the film study that you believe is wrong. When arguing politics, if someone disagrees with a certain item of what the government is doing, it would be illogical to respond with "the politicians have been working on this more than you, and know more about it. They must be right."

All Murf is arguing is a basic logical argument of comparative advantage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

Kirkland is an All American calibar guard already, but can be a great tackle if switched. Also another player like Wallace or Ragnow can be a great guard or a great tackle. The most effective/efficient combination would be Kirkland at guard and Wallace/Ragnow at tackle. 

[hawg66]

2 things for those disagreeing:

1. Is it completely and utterly impossible that Murf may have some correct points, and that BB may be wrong on a few things?

2. If the answer above is no (as it should, even the brightest minds in their profession isn't right 100% of the time), then disregarding the article solely on the assumption that BB is right and Murf isn't, is faulty logic. If you disagree, point out specific parts of the film study that you believe is wrong. When arguing politics, if someone disagrees with a certain item of what the government is doing, it would be illogical to respond with "the politicians have been working on this more than you, and know more about it. They must be right."

All Murf is arguing is a basic logical argument of comparative advantage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

Kirkland is an All American calibar guard already, but can be a great tackle if switched. Also another player like Wallace or Ragnow can be a great guard or a great tackle. The most effective/efficient combination would be Kirkland at guard and Wallace/Ragnow at tackle.

1.  Why would I give Murph the benefit of the doubt in determining whose opinion on line play holds more validity?  Because he wants me to?  Saying Bielema may be wrong in no way leads to a logical assumption that Murph is right.

2.  Comparitive advantage would say that while he may be a better guard, if he's the best at pass pro, he's the best option for the team at LT

[Biggus Piggus]

My view - This story had no reason to be written. Absolutely no reason. It is way premature, based largely on a tiny bit of game film when Kirkland had to be moved, cold, to left tackle in the middle of a game. Kirkland had not been practicing at left tackle, had gotten a few reps months before to see if he could be an emergency fill-in. Georgia smartly attacked him recognizing the problem, and he wasn't ready. To write off the guy as a possible left tackle because of that game is a huge overreach of the writer's knowledge and available information.

People scramble for things to do in the offseason, but destroying a player in this fashion is cruel and unfair. Kirkland deserves a chance to go AT LEAST through spring practice before anybody issues judgment on his ability to play left tackle. The writer also grossly overreaches when presenting alternatives to Kirkland at left tackle as more reasonable: Brian Wallace, Frank Ragnow, Jalen Merrick? A redshirt freshman right tackle / guard, a second-year guard / center, and a true freshman tackle who just arrived? Really? On Wallace and Merrick, the writer doesn't even have any video to break down to analyze that conclusion. Writer seems comfortable saying "I don't know they can do it, but I don't know they can't, so they're better than Kirkland."

Well, contrary to what the writer pretends, he does not know Kirkland can't play left tackle. Coaches have said for a long time that Kirkland had the best feet among all the Olinemen. All of them. Pretty sure that includes anybody else who might play left tackle.

[hawg66]

I think Kirkland will be a better LT than Skinner.  I think Skinner will be a better RT than Cook was.  The move seems to have strengthened both positions over last years line. That leaves  RG.  For all his skills as a power blocker, Kirkland wasn't the best a pulling and filling back side.  Ragnow's feet and speed make him perfect for that.  So now you have your two best power blockers side by side on the left, with a RG extremely capable of pulling.  It opens up much of what Bielema did at Wisconsin that the Hogs struggled with last year.  I think it's a great move.

[SECisKing]

My view - This story had no reason to be written. Absolutely no reason. It is way premature, based largely on a tiny bit of game film when Kirkland had to be moved, cold, to left tackle in the middle of a game. Kirkland had not been practicing at left tackle, had gotten a few reps months before to see if he could be an emergency fill-in. Georgia smartly attacked him recognizing the problem, and he wasn't ready. To write off the guy as a possible left tackle because of that game is a huge overreach of the writer's knowledge and available information.

People scramble for things to do in the offseason, but destroying a player in this fashion is cruel and unfair. Kirkland deserves a chance to go AT LEAST through spring practice before anybody issues judgment on his ability to play left tackle. The writer also grossly overreaches when presenting alternatives to Kirkland at left tackle as more reasonable: Brian Wallace, Frank Ragnow, Jalen Merrick? A redshirt freshman right tackle / guard, a second-year guard / center, and a true freshman tackle who just arrived? Really? On Wallace and Merrick, the writer doesn't even have any video to break down to analyze that conclusion. Writer seems comfortable saying "I don't know they can do it, but I don't know they can't, so they're better than Kirkland."

Well, contrary to what the writer pretends, he does not know Kirkland can't play left tackle. Coaches have said for a long time that Kirkland had the best feet among all the Olinemen. All of them. Pretty sure that includes anybody else who might play left tackle.

Did you actually read the article? In no uncertain terms does it states that he can't be a good LT. I stated it's not a slam dunk and provided analysis that had more to do with it than those GIFs. But seeing as though it seems you didn't read it, I'm sure you're basing that entire article on those couple of GIFs -- and that's not right.

I want someone to point to where it says he "CAN'T" play LT. Even the actual title says "Might" not yield favorable results.

Here's an actual quote from the piece:

"Let's be clear: I'm not saying Kirkland won't or can't be an effective left tackle. He's a great football player so I'm sure over time he may get better at the position.

However, he doesn't quite possess the type of foot quickness or lateral agility that we've seen from recent star tackles in the Southeastern Conference like University of Alabama rising sophomore Cam Robinson or former Texas A&M star Jake Matthews."

Nuff said.

Edit: lol at not having any video on those other guys to support what I'm saying. What video did Nick Saban have on Cam Robinson to think he could be a true freshman LT for a potential national championship contender?

And you called Ragnow a center/guard -- well what was Kirkland before this move? This is starting to go in circles.

[hawg66]

Did you actually read the article?

Believe it or not, people can read what you write and disagree with your conclusions.  We can question your judgement, you credentials, your motives, whatever.  Why?  Because you put it out there for us to judge. Words stir emotions.  From that point of view, nice job.  Assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is uninformed?  Not such a nice job.

[Biggus Piggus]

Did you actually read the article? In no uncertain terms does it states that he can't be a good LT. I stated it's not a slam dunk and provided analysis that had more to do with it than those GIFs. But seeing as though it seems you didn't read it, I'm sure you're basing that entire article on those couple of GIFs -- and that's not right.

I want someone to point to where it says he "CAN'T" play LT. Even the actual title says "Might" not yield favorable results.

Here's an actual quote from the piece:

"Let's be clear: I'm not saying Kirkland won't or can't be an effective left tackle. He's a great football player so I'm sure over time he may get better at the position.

However, he doesn't quite possess the type of foot quickness or lateral agility that we've seen from recent star tackles in the Southeastern Conference like University of Alabama rising sophomore Cam Robinson or former Texas A&M star Jake Matthews."

Nuff said.

I read your screed when it was posted on another board days ago. Read it again this morning. There's no reason to make the kid look bad by putting in footage from the Georgia game. You can say he's a great right guard + Arkansas might struggle to replace what he did there. Fine. Say that. Saying he does not have adequate quickness or lateral movement to play left tackle -- that's where you overreach. You make it clear in your story that you believe he will be ordinary at best at left tackle while he's a great guard. The way you went about this might not look the way you intended, but in effect you destroy Kirkland as a left tackle, make it look like he could be a liability.

You can spin all you want, but that's what I took away from the tone of the piece. The reason you wrote the article was to point out downside risk to moving Kirkland to left tackle. It's really unusual to do this kind of thing to a college player who has little notoriety hasn't earned negative attention in the least. It's like you are taking the "NFL analyst" template and applying it without thought to an unassuming college kid. Not a loud, ballyhooed Heisman candidate or All-America, but a guy who has played right guard two seasons for a rebuilding football team.

[SECisKing]

Believe it or not, people can read what you write and disagree with your conclusions.  We can question your judgement, you credentials, your motives, whatever.  Why?  Because you put it out there for us to judge. Words stir emotions.  From that point of view, nice job.  Assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is uninformed?  Not such a nice job.

Considering you asked questions that I answered in the piece, I'm sure you will say something like this.

I asked did he read it, and actually tated the reason for me asking did he read this as he stated that I said he "CAN'T" be a LT.

Sure, you can question my motives and credentials -- but the same thing can be questioned for you, as well. But guess what?

It's only opinions and it's not that serious. And I stand behind all my work, I played ball, and as a writer I've had a ton of success, too. And that's starting to be evident as now I'm being compensated in multiple media platforms for my opinions/analysis and it's all out there for everyone to see.

But you're starting to make this personal off an opinion article. Really?

I think it's time to move on.

[Biggus Piggus]

I have to underscore the absolute absence of a reason to raise the alarm on Kirkland playing left tackle in spring -- let's just note this. Kirkland playing left tackle in the spring is the opportunity for Arkansas coaches to evaluate all their options at every Oline position. You can be certain that the five starters and key backups for the 2015 offensive line will come from the players who are going through spring practices. You can be sure that Arkansas will play the best at each position. You can have no doubt that if Kirkland is not the best left tackle, he will start at another position.

[SECisKing]

I read your screed when it was posted on another board days ago. Read it again this morning. There's no reason to make the kid look bad by putting in footage from the Georgia game. You can say he's a great right guard + Arkansas might struggle to replace what he did there. Fine. Say that. Saying he does not have adequate quickness or lateral movement to play left tackle -- that's where you overreach. You make it clear in your story that you believe he will be ordinary at best at left tackle while he's a great guard. The way you went about this might not look the way you intended, but in effect you destroy Kirkland as a left tackle, make it look like he could be a liability.

You can spin all you want, but that's what I took away from the tone of the piece. The reason you wrote the article was to point out downside risk to moving Kirkland to left tackle. It's really unusual to do this kind of thing to a college player who has little notoriety hasn't earned negative attention in the least. It's like you are taking the "NFL analyst" template and applying it without thought to an unassuming college kid. Not a loud, ballyhooed Heisman candidate or All-America, but a guy who has played right guard two seasons for a rebuilding football team.

If Kirkland goes out and balls out, guess what? I'm wrong.

If Kirkland goes out and isn't as good at tackle as he is at Guard, guess what? I have nothing to do with either outcome. He controls his own destiny. I'm wrote an article, big deal.

I can post about 10 articles about how great I think certain aspects are about hog football, which i actually just did, as I wrote that they have the most complete run game in football. http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/arkansas-football/arkansas-complete-run-game-college-football/

Should I receive all the credit when they prove that? Nope! It's just an opinion.

You can't be serious, bro? This article came out yesterday when I posted it as I was co-hosting Game On and was going to discuss the issue with Mike Irwin as we did on-air.

[hawg66]

you want discussion?  discuss this.  Why do you think Bielema made the move, if it wasn't best for Kirkland and it wasn't best for the team?

[Hoggish1]

  But I still disagree with you pulling a clip (one of the only times) when Kirkland was moved from RG to LT in the heat of the moment in a game when Skipper went out and then thinking he may not be a good fit.

Agreed.  Using that clip to prove a point is a problem since he was rushed into action there.

Let's see how he responds to a full spring season at the position.  Who knows what can happen with some extended work out there on the left.

Kirkland can easily move back inside, if needed.  But I'm counting on this working out.

[Wildhog]

It's the spring.  We really have no idea what the OL is going to look like in the fall.  This happens every year.  It's all good fodder for discussion, but people do love to be offended.

[Biggus Piggus]

Man, Murf, you do tons of great stuff. I hope you will be there right in the thick of it when things are not going well. If anything what people want to know most is why things went wrong. Coaches do not lead fans to that level of understanding. You seem to have that level of knowledge + ability to communicate it.

Just in this specific case I think you tried to do too much with too little. No need for me to keep griping about this.

[hawg66]

FWIW, I was reading the thread and was pretty disinterested until you started getting upset about people who disagreed.  Like it was some kind of unexplainable thing. You've basically accused everyone with a different opinion of not reading your piece, as if that could be the only reason for disagreement.  As I said, even if someone didn't read it, their decision to trust the judgment of Bielema is more logical than trusting a writer, even if Orville was resurrected and started posting here. 

Glad your career is going so well.  I thought it was an okay piece, but I didn't agree with your reasoning, or your conclusions.  Tell me again I didn't read it.

[ricepig]

FWIW, I was reading the thread and was pretty disinterested until you started getting upset about people who disagreed.  Like it was some kind of unexplainable thing. You've basically accused everyone with a different opinion of not reading your piece, as if that could be the only reason for disagreement.  As I said, even if someone didn't read it, their decision to trust the judgment of Bielema is more logical than trusting a writer, even if Orville was resurrected and started posting here. 

Glad your career is going so well.  I thought it was an okay piece, but I didn't agree with your reasoning, or your conclusions.  Tell me again I didn't read it.

+1

[SECisKing]

FWIW, I was reading the thread and was pretty disinterested until you started getting upset about people who disagreed.  Like it was some kind of unexplainable thing. You've basically accused everyone with a different opinion of not reading your piece, as if that could be the only reason for disagreement.  As I said, even if someone didn't read it, their decision to trust the judgment of Bielema is more logical than trusting a writer, even if Orville was resurrected and started posting here. 

Glad your career is going so well.  I thought it was an okay piece, but I didn't agree with your reasoning, or your conclusions.  Tell me again I didn't read it.

I never once got mad at anyone who disagreed. lol Is this the Twilight Zone? I never got mad period, first of all. And I only debated my point just like other's debated their points. It's such a double standard that someone who makes the original point can't further discuss it?!?

And by saying trusting Bielema you're belittling half the article. I all but professed my love for Bielema and stated that I'm sure I'm the only cat around wearing Wisconsin Hoodies and shorts all the time because Coach BB is one of my absolute favorite coaches way before he went to Arkansas. Had he gone to Iowa, guess what? I'd be trying to moonlight at some Iowa site because I know his scheme front and back since like 2005.

So yes, EVERYONE should trust Coach BB. However, I'm compensated to formulate any opinion I may have and that's what I did. And I will do it again and again and again. As I have done this way before most of you knew I existed for multiple popular platforms.

It's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things. But jumping on here and trying to discredit me makes no sense. Just debate the topic and keep the personals out of it, like grown men.

[Biggus Piggus]

I didn't have to deal with the Internet when I was a sportswriter. Still made some people incensed enough to 1) send hate mail, 2) call me and yell at me, 3) call me and slam the phone down, 4) accost me in public.

The different part about latter-day Internet media: 1) Instant feedback from practically anybody, 2) ability to edit on the fly (how many mistakes / dumb headlines did I ever want to take back), 3) more and more reporters writing about stuff without ever facing their subjects.

It changes your perspective when you have to go into the locker room after having written something negative about somebody. You end up calibrating what you write when you think about how you're going to deal with them afterwards.

[PaintballHog]

FWIW, I was reading the thread and was pretty disinterested until you started getting upset about people who disagreed.  Like it was some kind of unexplainable thing. You've basically accused everyone with a different opinion of not reading your piece, as if that could be the only reason for disagreement.  As I said, even if someone didn't read it, their decision to trust the judgment of Bielema is more logical than trusting a writer, even if Orville was resurrected and started posting here. 

Glad your career is going so well.  I thought it was an okay piece, but I didn't agree with your reasoning, or your conclusions.  Tell me again I didn't read it.

I think he said people didn't read the article because the points they made kinda were addressed in the article....

1.  Why would I give Murph the benefit of the doubt in determining whose opinion on line play holds more validity?  Because he wants me to?  Saying Bielema may be wrong in no way leads to a logical assumption that Murph is right.

But there is the possiblity that Murph is correct and BB isn't on this issue. Just like a political writer can disagree with Obama, and be correct while the president isn't. The difference is people will discuss why the writer is wrong, and not just say "Obama is the president and knows more about the issue than you, he has to be right."

If Murf is going to take the time and research and present an argument, why can't any posters do the same to form a counter argument? It just seems like blind homerism to discredit any constructive criticism with a cheap cop out. 

2.  Comparitive advantage would say that while he may be a better guard, if he's the best at pass pro, he's the best option for the team at LT

You have a good point. Now the question is, is the pass protection skills of Kirkland over the next possible option cover the dropoff the guard position he's leaving?

you want discussion?  discuss this.  Why do you think Bielema made the move, if it wasn't best for Kirkland and it wasn't best for the team?

Because it's what BB thinks is the best move, we will have to see the results if it is the best move.

[Razordiddy]

If Kirkland goes out and balls out, guess what? I'm wrong.

If Kirkland goes out and isn't as good at tackle as he is at Guard, guess what? I have nothing to do with either outcome. He controls his own destiny. I'm wrote an article, big deal.

I can post about 10 articles about how great I think certain aspects are about hog football, which i actually just did, as I wrote that they have the most complete run game in football. http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/arkansas-football/arkansas-complete-run-game-college-football/

Should I receive all the credit when they prove that? Nope! It's just an opinion.

You can't be serious, bro? This article came out yesterday when I posted it as I was co-hosting Game On and was going to discuss the issue with Mike Irwin as we did on-air.

I think the issue is that you wrote that your opinion was not based on the Georgia game, but yet that is the only piece of evidence you pointed to. You gave no other in game evidence of Kirkland showing that he lacks the skills to play LT. People have rightly responded that basing your opinion on the Georgia game isn't fair; you respond that that isn't the basis of your opinion, but never give what the basis of your opinion really is! I don't see the coaches raving about his pass protection skills if they haven't really seen it, so we're basically left with taking your word for it or the coaches' words for it, which is really no decision.

[PaintballHog]

I didn't have to deal with the Internet when I was a sportswriter. Still made some people incensed enough to 1) send hate mail, 2) call me and yell at me, 3) call me and slam the phone down, 4) accost me in public.

The different part about latter-day Internet media: 1) Instant feedback from practically anybody, 2) ability to edit on the fly (how many mistakes / dumb headlines did I ever want to take back), 3) more and more reporters writing about stuff without ever facing their subjects.

It changes your perspective when you have to go into the locker room after having written something negative about somebody. You end up calibrating what you write when you think about how you're going to deal with them afterwards.

So it's bad that one doesn't have to edit their writing nowadays in fear of who they're writing about? Wouldn't that mean a more honest, uncensored article?

[Razordiddy]

I never once got mad at anyone who disagreed. lol Is this the Twilight Zone? I never got mad period, first of all. And I only debated my point just like other's debated their points. It's such a double standard that someone who makes the original point can't further discuss it?!?

And by saying trusting Bielema you're belittling half the article. I all but professed my love for Bielema and stated that I'm sure I'm the only cat around wearing Wisconsin Hoodies and shorts all the time because Coach BB is one of my absolute favorite coaches way before he went to Arkansas. Had he gone to Iowa, guess what? I'd be trying to moonlight at some Iowa site because I know his scheme front and back since like 2005.

So yes, EVERYONE should trust Coach BB. However, I'm compensated to formulate any opinion I may have and that's what I did. And I will do it again and again and again. As I have done this way before most of you knew I existed for multiple popular platforms.

It's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things. But jumping on here and trying to discredit me makes no sense. Just debate the topic and keep the personals out of it, like grown men.

BTW, I really like most of what you write. Please keep it up!

[SECisKing]

I think the issue is that you wrote that your opinion was not based on the Georgia game, but yet that is the only piece of evidence you pointed to. You gave no other in game evidence of Kirkland showing that he lacks the skills to play LT. People have rightly responded that basing your opinion on the Georgia game isn't fair; you respond that that isn't the basis of your opinion, but never give what the basis of your opinion really is! I don't see the coaches raving about his pass protection skills if they haven't really seen it, so we're basically left with taking your word for it or the coaches' words for it, which is really no decision.

Most articles will make an opinion and won't even remotely try to support it with any type of visual. The article makes points beyond the video clips. I'm a writer not a video guy -- I'm still able to convey my point without the visual but decided to support it with that as it was tangible. But that's one part of the analysis -- which is what most will concentrate on because it's an easy reference point in an article that was close to 1,400 words. Had I not included that section the points would've still been made.

[Biggus Piggus]

So it's bad that one doesn't have to edit their writing nowadays in fear of who they're writing about? Wouldn't that mean a more honest, uncensored article?

No, it makes for an unbalanced perspective. It is too easy to be unwisely slanted now. When you face people, you make sure you don't say things that go too far. If I wrote something unfair, I got a good blast in the face about it. It's a great way to calibrate your reporting instincts. One thing I observed about Mike Irwin -- he was great about going public with the stuff he was sure was right. He had other opinions, but there's a big difference between opinions + news.

Reporters all had strong opinions, and their opinions were laced with knowledge + bull. Had to be really careful about what deserved to be printed. Being accurate mattered more, which is kinda assbackwards. Internet media can last a lot longer than paper. Somebody might clip out an article from the paper, but generally stories literally disappeared in a few days. Now they are archived and searchable. Accuracy ought to matter more, only writers don't exactly have their feet held to the fire.

[SECisKing]

So it's bad that one doesn't have to edit their writing nowadays in fear of who they're writing about? Wouldn't that mean a more honest, uncensored article?

Yep. And it would be easy for me to have written that and just hid on the radio behind it. I came right here with it because I'm not running from anything I do, because I believe in everything I do.

Fans think because you point out something negative that you're wishing ill will on that aspect. It's the contrary. I hope I'm wrong and he becomes the absolute truth at the position because he seems like a good dude and he's a really great player as I stated in the actual article.

[SECisKing]

BTW, I really like most of what you write. Please keep it up!

Thanks, I appreciate ya.

[hellwonthaveme]

Yep. And it would be easy for me to have written that and just hid on the radio behind it. I came right here with it because I'm not running from anything I do, because I believe in everything I do.

Fans think because you point out something negative that you're wishing ill will on that aspect. It's the contrary. I hope I'm wrong and he becomes the absolute truth at the position because he seems like a good dude and he's a really great player as I stated in the actual article.

Murph.....Don't let these fellas get to you. You are running up against the hogville groupthink. You do good work, let that speak for yourself.

You are arguing against folks, some who have never played a down of football, coached a down of football....and it would take two of three guesses for them to even point out which ball is the football....

Keep up the good work.....

PRJ

[Razordiddy]

I'm a writer not a video guy -- I'm still able to convey my point without the visual

But that's the thing, you didn't present any evidence to support your points (written or video) other than the clips from the Georgia game. So your article amounted to taking 1400 words to say "Kirkland is a great guard, but in my opinion doesn't have the skills to be a LT". Which is fine if that's your opinion. But when the coaches are on the record saying that he's the best pass pro guy on the team, it seems like you would have given a little more fact based explanation of why you disagree.

[onebadrubi]

Come on, don't be goofy man. If Jordan Jenkins is the barometer for which edge-rushers are measured then you have some problems on your hand. Jenkins is decent -- but he only had 4.5 sacks despite being surrounded by Leonard Floyd and Lorenzo Carter.

The Hogs have two elite pass-rushers on the schedule next season I can think of offhand: Texas A&M's Myles Garrett & Tennessee's Derek Barnett, both of whom had double-digit sacks as true freshmen.

I'm all for talking ball, but I don't like homerism. Let's not make Jordan Jenkins out to be a first-round draft pick. He came back to school for his senior season because he received a mid-to-late draft grade.

Him being a top recruit in GA was almost 4 seasons ago, he's now just a pretty good player.

And saying Jenkins is one year ahead of Kirkland is just plain silly when left tackles like Cameron Robinson from Bama played every game as a true freshman and dominated some of the best the country had to offer.

La'el Collins from LSU played really early and held his own. I can name a host of other young LTs who had to play against juniors and seniors. None of what you're saying is unique to Kirkland because he plays for your team.

And did you even read the article? It sounds like you read the title and looked at the GIFs and formulated an opinion. I said Kirkland has a chance to be possibly be a good left tackle, but as presently constructed he's a top-10 pick at Guard.

You're overdoing it man.

So to judge a position, you require the number one player in his class?  So we say every QB that does not sustain the number 1 qb in their class's stats will not yield favorable results?  You want to compare Kirkland to Robinson?  Robinson by the time his first start came already had hundreds of hours of practice at LT than Kirkland had.  You pull one of his first snaps as your evidence.  It would be similar if your boss came to you and asked for an article on underwater basket weaving due by 5:00pm today.  It wouldn't be your best work, but what if critics judged you by that only piece of work?  That is basically what you've done here. 

You want to call it homerism because that is exactly like ricepigs comment early on, it's easy to do.  It's the path of least resistance for you to defend yourself.  It's not homerism to highlight you article as being poor taste because your evidence to write it is off.  I'm all for writers to pick apart the Hogs, I don't have to even like or agree with the piece to respect it, but their evidence to reach their conclusion must be fair in the full scope of things. 

Disclaimer, Murf, I'm not trying to personally attack you, I love your writings and even more so love that you are coming here to discuss.  I carry much more respect for you in doing that than many other of the writers.  I would follow your writings where ever you wrote because of the respect you have earned.  I'm able to discuss and critique this one article without thinking everything you write is awful. 

[SECisKing]

Murph.....Don't let these fellas get to you. You are running up against the hogville groupthink. You do good work, let that speak for yourself.

You are arguing against folks, some who have never played a down of football, coached a down of football....and it would take two of three guesses for them to even point out which ball is the football....

Keep up the good work.....

PRJ

HAHAHA!!! You made me spit out my water Jimmy!!! I appreciate the props, bro. And if you look at the totality of the thread, 95% of the posters in it are bringing it, whether they agree or disagree.

It's just a couple of cats who are more concerned with trying to look cool opposed to discussing the article, like men.

But I like Hogville and even shouted out the community on-air, twice on 93.3 The Jock, yesterday. And I've shouted out members on the "ball Hawg" podcast. So I don't even see those haters, they're like Waldo.

[cosmodrum]

Big Daddy,lol I cringe calling another man that -- reminds me of jail or something -- I definitely hear where you're coming from. But can you tell me what you don't agree with? And thanks for the kind words, too.

I, for one, am glad that you've found a nice gig you're good at since jail.

[hellwonthaveme]

Murph.....You are trying to argue with folks who up until 8:30 last Saturday night said North Carolina wasn't any good and was about to be run out of the gym.....by 11 pm, the groupthink had moved to North Carolina was the 2nd most talented team in all of the land....

You could be 100% right on this issue and if it were to come to fruition, they will revive this thread and blame the failure on you....for bad karma or bad JuJu, Voodoo or you just plain hate BB or ole Denver......

PRJ

[SECisKing]

But that's the thing, you didn't present any evidence to support your points (written or video) other than the clips from the Georgia game. So your article amounted to taking 1400 words to say "Kirkland is a great guard, but in my opinion doesn't have the skills to be a LT". Which is fine if that's your opinion. But when the coaches are on the record saying that he's the best pass pro guy on the team, it seems like you would have given a little more fact based explanation of why you disagree.

Are you being for real, Diddy? The analysis of his footspeed, lateral agility etc. is independent of the video. I can literally remove the video and make the same points. I just so happen to have something tangible with him receiving playing time.

Had he gotten in there and grabbed Jenkins outside the numbers and pancaked his a$$, and I had written he had the tools to be a great LT, would you be saying the same thing?

Be honest.

And would all the other things I wrote be glossed over? You have to ask yourself that question.

[SECisKing]

Murph.....You are trying to argue with folks who up until 8:30 last Saturday night said North Carolina wasn't any good and was about to be run out of the gym.....by 11 pm, the groupthink had moved to North Carolina was the 2nd most talented team in all of the land....

You could be 100% right on this issue and if it were to come to fruition, they will revive this thread and blame the failure on you....for bad karma or bad JuJu, Voodoo or you just plain hat BB or ole Denver......

PRJ

lol you gotta stop with the punchlines , bro. You're making my obliques hurt from laughing as I worked them and they are sore!! You need to go into comedy, bro.

[SECisKing]

I, for one, am glad that you've found a nice gig you're good at since jail.

lolololol

[onebadrubi]

If Kirkland goes out and balls out, guess what? I'm wrong.

If Kirkland goes out and isn't as good at tackle as he is at Guard, guess what? I have nothing to do with either outcome. He controls his own destiny. I'm wrote an article, big deal.

I can post about 10 articles about how great I think certain aspects are about hog football, which i actually just did, as I wrote that they have the most complete run game in football. http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/arkansas-football/arkansas-complete-run-game-college-football/

Should I receive all the credit when they prove that? Nope! It's just an opinion.

You can't be serious, bro? This article came out yesterday when I posted it as I was co-hosting Game On and was going to discuss the issue with Mike Irwin as we did on-air.

Murf, honest questions.  Did you or ANY other writer high light that top talented bama receiver getting man handled by Arkansas's secondary, specifically a freshman by the name of Henre Toliver? 

[hellwonthaveme]

lol you gotta stop with the punchlines , bro. You're making my obliques hurt from laughing as I worked them and they are sore!! You need to go into comedy, bro.

I got em all day for some of these folks......

You keep doing what you do. I appreciate the analysis and the article. I actually think Kirkland may end up great at LT. But it could also be a bigtime failure. Thing is Pittman and Bret are both great at what they do with the O line. But sometimes, even a Mad Genius just reads the situation wrong and it doesn't pan out.

It is refreshing to have someone in the Arkansas media who brings it with analysis and rational thinking...when all we have had for years and years is there is nothing to see here, the plane isn't getting closer to the ground, it is an optical illusion....You want Nutt gone? You must be a member of Al Quada....oh yeah, and Softball. Don't forget softball.

Some of these yokels have been trained to think like a second grader.

PRJ

[hawg66]

I think he said people didn't read the article because the points they made kinda were addressed in the article....

But there is the possiblity that Murph is correct and BB isn't on this issue. Just like a political writer can disagree with Obama, and be correct while the president isn't. The difference is people will discuss why the writer is wrong, and not just say "Obama is the president and knows more about the issue than you, he has to be right."

If Murf is going to take the time and research and present an argument, why can't any posters do the same to form a counter argument? It just seems like blind homerism to discredit any constructive criticism with a cheap cop out. 

You have a good point. Now the question is, is the pass protection skills of Kirkland over the next possible option cover the dropoff the guard position he's leaving?

Because it's what BB thinks is the best move, we will have to see the results if it is the best move.

Paint, I gave my reasons why i think it's a good move.  Did you even read the thread?


Re: Film Study: Moving Kirkland to left tackle might not yield favorable results
« Reply #106 on: Today at 11:32:46 am »
ReplyQuoteModifyModify
I think Kirkland will be a better LT than Skinner.  I think Skinner will be a better RT than Cook was.  The move seems to have strengthened both positions over last years line. That leaves  RG.  For all his skills as a power blocker, Kirkland wasn't the best a pulling and filling back side.  Ragnow's feet and speed make him perfect for that.  So now you have your two best power blockers side by side on the left, with a RG extremely capable of pulling.  It opens up much of what Bielema did at Wisconsin that the Hogs struggled with last year.  I think it's a great move.

[onebadrubi]

Murph.....You are trying to argue with folks who up until 8:30 last Saturday night said North Carolina wasn't any good and was about to be run out of the gym.....by 11 pm, the groupthink had moved to North Carolina was the 2nd most talented team in all of the land....

You could be 100% right on this issue and if it were to come to fruition, they will revive this thread and blame the failure on you....for bad karma or bad JuJu, Voodoo or you just plain hate BB or ole Denver......

PRJ

So since anyone post here against what you think, they must also be the same who said UNC was no good?  People on here do this often.  They try linking to opinions together, often one they don't agree with and the other being complete absurd and try to link the writers together as being asinine, yet the only thing they know is that both were typed on Hogville. 

[hellwonthaveme]

Murf, honest questions.  Did you or ANY other writer high light that top talented bama receiver getting man handled by Arkansas's secondary, specifically a freshman by the name of Henre Toliver? 

What in the world does this have to do with Denver Kirkland playing LT? I am serious, what does it have to do with what he wrote?

Don't be that guy who when his orginal argument is exhausted, you try to change up the argument so you can say gotcha......

Did you really just ask dude if he or any of his peers wrote about shutting down Amare Cooper......in a is Denver Kirkland a good fit at LT article?

SMH

PRJ

[SECisKing]

I got em all day for some of these folks......

You keep doing what you do. I appreciate the analysis and the article. I actually think Kirkland may end up great at LT. But it could also be a bigtime failure. Thing is Pittman and Bret are both great at what they do with the O line. But sometimes, even a Mad Genius just reads the situation wrong and it doesn't pan out.

It is refreshing to have someone in the Arkansas media who brings it with analysis and rational thinking...when all we have had for years and years is there is nothing to see here, the plane isn't getting closer to the ground, it is an optical illusion....You want Nutt gone? You must be a member of Al Quada....oh yeah, and Softball. Don't forget softball.

Some of these yokels have been trained to think like a second grader.

PRJ

Dang, you're a good, smart dude, bro. Thanks for pointing all that out. And see you actually disagree and still can keep it rational and balanced.

Who would've thought?

[Razordiddy]

Are you being for real, Diddy? The analysis of his footspeed, lateral agility etc. is independent of the video. I can literally remove the video and make the same points. I just so happen to have something tangible with him receiving playing time.

Had he gotten in there and grabbed Jenkins outside the numbers and pancaked his a$$, and I had written he had the tools to be a great LT, would you be saying the same thing?

Be honest.

And would all the other things I wrote be glossed over? You have to ask yourself that question.

I don't know enough about analyzing offensive line play to have an opinion, I'm just critiquing the content and form of your article. The only statement or analysis of any kind that you make in the article about Kirkland's foot speed or lateral agility, other than when you are referring to the gifs, is this sentence near the end:

"he doesn't quite possess the type of foot quickness or lateral agility that we've seen from recent star tackles in the Southeastern Conference like University of Alabama rising sophomore Cam Robinson or former Texas A&M star Jake Matthews."

You may be right for all I know. I'm just saying that without some evidence to support your opinions (other than the GA clips which we all seem to agree is not a fair sample), I have no reason to think that you are correct and the coaches are wrong. Fans generally believe their coaches know what they are doing and what they are talking about, so it's hard to take a sports writer seriously when you basically say that the coaches don't know what they are talking about without strong supporting evidence. That's all I'm saying - you didn't make your case.

[SECisKing]

Murf, honest questions.  Did you or ANY other writer high light that top talented bama receiver getting man handled by Arkansas's secondary, specifically a freshman by the name of Henre Toliver?

Huh? Uhh I guess this is the Twilight Zone...I've pointed out a thousand things in reference to Arkansas, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

[hellwonthaveme]

So since anyone post here against what you think, they must also be the same who said UNC was no good?  People on here do this often.  They try linking to opinions together, often one they don't agree with and the other being complete absurd and try to link the writers together as being asinine, yet the only thing they know is that both were typed on Hogville. 

HAHAHA....dear Lord almighty

PRJ

[onebadrubi]

Murph.....You are trying to argue with folks who up until 8:30 last Saturday night said North Carolina wasn't any good and was about to be run out of the gym.....by 11 pm, the groupthink had moved to North Carolina was the 2nd most talented team in all of the land....

You could be 100% right on this issue and if it were to come to fruition, they will revive this thread and blame the failure on you....for bad karma or bad JuJu, Voodoo or you just plain hate BB or ole Denver......

PRJ

Lay off the drugs man, YOU brought it up, not me. 

[SECisKing]

I don't know enough about analyzing offensive line play to have an opinion, I'm just critiquing the content and form of your article. The only statement or analysis of any kind that you make in the article about Kirkland's foot speed or lateral agility, other than when you are referring to the gifs, is this sentence near the end:

"he doesn't quite possess the type of foot quickness or lateral agility that we've seen from recent star tackles in the Southeastern Conference like University of Alabama rising sophomore Cam Robinson or former Texas A&M star Jake Matthews."

You may be right for all I know. I'm just saying that without some evidence to support your opinions (other than the GA clips which we all seem to agree is not a fair sample), I have no reason to think that you are correct and the coaches are wrong. Fans generally believe their coaches know what they are doing and what they are talking about, so it's hard to take a sports writer seriously when you basically say that the coaches don't know what they are talking about without strong supporting evidence. That's all I'm saying - you didn't make your case.

As it was just pointed out to me in a message. Where were people like you when I predicted that Brooks Ellis could play weak-side linebacker and when the depth chart came out he was actually moved to weak-side linebacker?

Not one person contacted me and said I don't know what I'm talking about nor did anyone told me the article wasn't necessary, etc.

As a part of my job, I'm going over certain players and analyzing what I believe will happen with them next season. I theoretically made the same point in that Brooks Ellis article as I said he makes for a better weak-side LB opposed to a middle LB especially when Josh Williams seems to have that type of skill set.

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/arkansas-football/brooks-ellis-capable-replicating-spaights-production-hogs-d/

Things that make you go hmmm...

[hellwonthaveme]

I don't know enough about analyzing offensive line play to have an opinion, I'm just critiquing the content and form of your article. The only statement or analysis of any kind that you make in the article about Kirkland's foot speed or lateral agility, other than when you are referring to the gifs, is this sentence near the end:

"he doesn’t quite possess the type of foot quickness or lateral agility that we’ve seen from recent star tackles in the Southeastern Conference like University of Alabama rising sophomore Cam Robinson or former Texas A&M star Jake Matthews."

You may be right for all I know. I'm just saying that without some evidence to support your opinions (other than the GA clips which we all seem to agree is not a fair sample), I have no reason to think that you are correct and the coaches are wrong. Fans generally believe their coaches know what they are doing and what they are talking about, so it's hard to take a sports writer seriously when you basically say that the coaches don't know what they are talking about without strong supporting evidence. That's all I'm saying - you didn't make your case.

He didn't make his case? You just stated you didn't know enough about O line play to give an educated opinion....but you say he didn't make his case?

Dude....really?

PRJ