Laurinaitis vs. Grant (Starting LB Discussion)

[RCollett]

I like Tressels comment during the NLOID press conference. He said that he went to the weight room at six that morning and saw Ross Homan there on the bench with A.J. on one side and Laurinaitis on the other side. Both of these young men are learning from the best of the best while Grant has been running another system on the other side of the country. It is going to take alot of god given, natural talent for him to come in a take someones starting position.

[Jaxbuck]

Originally Posted by osugrad21

I'll bet you 500 vCash you are complaining about some aspect of the offense or playcalling by the end of the Texas game

LOL

not the playcalling

its always been the execution(or lack thereof)

don't anyone start a meltdown..I'm just busting balls.

[MililaniBuckeye]

My position was (and is) based on seeing how high-profile "can't miss" and "sure starter" newbies (either recruits or transfers) haven't turned out as expected (Zwick, D'Andrea, Kerr, etc.). Hell, nearly everyone had Schlegel beating out D'Andrea for the starting spot in 2004 (but he didn't), although Schlegs turned out pretty good in the long run.

Keep in mind the level of competition that Grant has played at...he hasn't seen near the speed, complexity, and intensity of I-A football. Many also dismiss the importance of Laurinaitis playing in two very-high-profile games, regardless if he only played 25-30% of the defensive plays. In my mind, it's far more reasonable to pencil in a kid who was his state's HS player of the year, who has a full year in system, who has played special teams all year, and who has started in games against both Michigan and Notre Dame (along with mop-up duty in other games) over a kid who has never set foot on a I-A football field. Hey, if Grant actually is better than Laurinaitis, then we got the "steal of the class" in linebacking recruits this year.

[EdDantes22]

Originally Posted by ScarletNGry

This type of discussion is exactly what message boards and offseasons are for... I think Dante22 might need to step back just a hair and realize that he is taking this thing with Mili just a bit too personal. Everyone has their opinions and it is great to see what everyone thinks, lets not continue this need for constant sarcasm and just continue to debate about the possibilities of having the luxery of continued success in our defense and the linebackers in particular. We may find out that none of us are right and someone else steps up and performs better in the spring, then certain people might feel stupid for taking something they had no control over to start with so serious...

First of all, I'm not sure why "sarcasm" is so taboo around here; I don't see any problem with joking around in a way that gets one's point across, too. If anything, it's a sign that I don't take this disagreement so "seriously."

If you read back to the beginning of this thread, you'd see it started because one person suggested that Grant could very well come in and start and Mili immediately declared that there was "no way" that this could happen. This is a pretty extreme statement, considering we know very little about either player. I'm open to anyone expressing their opinion as to who might win that battle, but for someone to say the outcome isn't even in doubt--that is a stance in need of refutation.

We could all be wrong; time will tell. In the meantime, I think we all agree that these boards exist for speculation, and sometimes pretty heated arguments, just like this. I have no problem asserting my views forcefully and at the same time remembering that we're all on the same side, in a sense, and we all want what's best for tOSU. Mili refutes me all the time, and I don't take it personally, or very seriously at all. So, please, let's not stop the debate for the sake of playing nice (or declaring our love for nachos).

[JXC]

I love nachos!

[EdDantes22]

Originally Posted by MililaniBuckeye

My position was (and is) based on seeing how high-profile "can't miss" and "sure starter" newbies (either recruits or transfers) haven't turned out as expected (Zwick, D'Andrea, Kerr, etc.). Hell, nearly everyone had Schlegel beating out D'Andrea for the starting spot in 2004 (but he didn't), although Schlegs turned out pretty good in the long run.

Keep in mind the level of competition that Grant has played at...he hasn't seen near the speed, complexity, and intensity of I-A football. Many also dismiss the importance of Laurinaitis playing in two very-high-profile games, regardless if he only played 25-30% of the defensive plays. In my mind, it's far more reasonable to pencil in a kid who was his state's HS player of the year, who has a full year in system, who has played special teams all year, and who has started in games against both Michigan and Notre Dame (along with mop-up duty in other games) over a kid who has never set foot on a I-A football field. Hey, if Grant actually is better than Laurinaitis, then we got the "steal of the class" in linebacking recruits this year.

Finally, I agree. It is reasonable to pencil in Lauranaitis, especially at this point. "Far more reasonable?"--eh, maybe. But a mere formality, a virtual lock? No. You can't say that, not when you're dealing with someone of Grant's athletic ability. It's not unreasonable to think that the day Grant committed he became the most athletically gifted LB we have. While he may never pan out, he could also come in and shock everyone; either way, his potential alone demands we reserve judgment until we have more information.

[JXC]

I love lamp.