kick ball, get scholarship wrote:
Only a junior and 31-years-old. Clearly, he has a HUGE advantage punting against players a decade younger. Is Oklahoma State cheating?
What's his advantage?
Doesn't need a shampoo?
kick ball, get scholarship wrote:
Only a junior and 31-years-old. Clearly, he has a HUGE advantage punting against players a decade younger. Is Oklahoma State cheating?
What's his advantage?
Doesn't need a shampoo?
Bad Wigins wrote:
The punt is one of the worst plays in American football. The rugby version is okay because it doesn't require its own set play and wastes only a few seconds of everyone's time.
A great punter is of little more value than an average punter unless you're playing SCC-style "field position" ball, which is even worse! Nobody finds that interesting.
The punter is among the most likely of players to be soft and pudgy. Fat but not strong.
You clearly have not met a D1 punter. Punters are extremely athletic. They have great hands, can kickoff, can kick field goals. The punter we had at my school (MSU) could bench 350 and run a 4.8 40. I would classify him more athletic than most runners at the top levels.
Did nobody catch the obvious sarcasm of my original post? I even used nearly the exact thread title as the Mantz thread. It was meant to be a joke after so many people seemed to go bananas about Mantz running for BYU at 24. I have no more problem with this guy playing at 31 than I do Mantz running at 24. Good for them I say. I think I did pretty good on the troll meter, though.
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=10967577
31-yo is young compared to these guys
It might bother me if I cared at all about college football.
These posts are ridiculous. There are so many reasons why someone would not be 19 years old in college… military, lack of funds, maybe even didn’t think he wanted to go to college when he graduated HS. Does that mean they can’t compete in the NCAA???
no way jose 2021 wrote:
You clearly have not met a D1 punter. Punters are extremely athletic. They have great hands, can kickoff, can kick field goals. The punter we had at my school (MSU) could bench 350 and run a 4.8 40. I would classify him more athletic than most runners at the top levels.
benching 350 and 4.8 40 may be more than your average distance runner can do, but it's nothing special for your average football player or other non-skinny person.
Bad Wigins wrote:
no way jose 2021 wrote:
You clearly have not met a D1 punter. Punters are extremely athletic. They have great hands, can kickoff, can kick field goals. The punter we had at my school (MSU) could bench 350 and run a 4.8 40. I would classify him more athletic than most runners at the top levels.
benching 350 and 4.8 40 may be more than your average distance runner can do, but it's nothing special for your average football player or other non-skinny person.
I will never understand why people who couldn't bench 350 if you gave them 10 years think every guy in the world but them can do it...
^ thinks I can't bench 350
maybe not quite atm, but 1RM predictors put me within easy reach with a bit of focused training. And I don't play football
Don't care at all.
Bad Wigins wrote:
^ thinks I can't bench 350
maybe not quite atm, but 1RM predictors put me within easy reach with a bit of focused training. And I don't play football
^ You just admitted you can't... lol... So I think correctly...
Most football players can't bench 350...
A 1rm max of 350 would mean at least being able to bench 225 like 17 times.
Based on the combine that would exclude pretty much ALL of the QBs, kickers, and punters and the overwhelming majority of the receivers and DBs...
Most men do not lift weights. Many men that do lift weights still aren't very strong.
350 is a LOT of weight and very few people can actually do it.
Punters aren't athletic and not strong, right?
Pat O'Donnell:
https://nflcombineresults.com/playerpage.php?i=21015
Michael Turk of Oklahoma and Arizona State:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwzQnLipUS4
Steve Weatherford:
Again, these are some of the stronger guys, but all college kickers and punters are instructed to go through the teams weight training and conditioning programs at the college level. I can almost guarantee that every football player at any position who goes through 5 years of training at a major D1 program is strong as F*%! .
Anecdotal, but the best player on our high school football team was a guy who was our QB, KR, All-State FS and also the All-State punter. He also All-State HM as a sprinter. He was the total package athlete who went to be just a mediocre punter in the MAC conference. If that doesn't tell you the level of athlete at the D1 level, I have nothing for you.
kick ball, get scholarship wrote:
Only a junior and 31-years-old. Clearly, he has a HUGE advantage punting against players a decade younger. Is Oklahoma State cheating?
Did you catch that he was the SECOND OLDEST? Not even the oldest. Who's the oldest?
Brandon Weeden was 29 when he started his last game as QB for Ok State.
kick ball, get scholarship wrote:
Did nobody catch the obvious sarcasm of my original post? I even used nearly the exact thread title as the Mantz thread. It was meant to be a joke after so many people seemed to go bananas about Mantz running for BYU at 24. I have no more problem with this guy playing at 31 than I do Mantz running at 24. Good for them I say. I think I did pretty good on the troll meter, though.
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1096757731-yo is young compared to these guys
https://www.oldest.org/sports/college-football-players/
In regard to your handle, I doubt if a punter is on a scholarship.
A month ago I started a similar thread on the 30-year old USC punter.
No - give it a rest.
Heisman U wrote:
further left than V.I.U. wrote:tuition free public education to everyone from age 3 to 23 sans means test. No F.A.F.S.A. forms.
So you're one of those flat-tax libertarians. Or something like that. You obviously want more govt money to go to well-off people like you. You don't like the current system where the lower middle class and poor get free college through grants and aid but also want the rich to benefit from government largesse.
Your proposed system might be successful in keeping the riff-raff out of private colleges, which is clearly what you want. Or it might do away with private colleges all-together. Maybe that's your plan.
There are WAY too many people in college in the USA. WAY more high school grads need to go into trades, apprentice programs, entrepreneurship, certifications, learning to code, etc. Higher education is great and has its place, but it was really meant to be for a small percentage of the population. Millions and millions of young people wasting time and money taking worthless classes they don't even care about is stupid beyond measure. It's a scam, really.
Liberals tried to fix college education. Of course it's broken now...
Heisman U wrote:
further left than V.I.U. wrote:tuition free public education to everyone from age 3 to 23 sans means test. No F.A.F.S.A. forms.
So you're one of those flat-tax libertarians. Or something like that. You obviously want more govt money to go to well-off people like you. You don't like the current system where the lower middle class and poor get free college through grants and aid but also want the rich to benefit from government largesse.
Your proposed system might be successful in keeping the riff-raff out of private colleges, which is clearly what you want. Or it might do away with private colleges all-together. Maybe that's your plan.
Libertarians don’t want government money.
The OSU punter is probably a Christian, so nobody gets worked up about that. They only dislike the mormon cult age cheaters.