Posted by archalon on May 7, 2008 at 7:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Something I didn't expect. Hawk's previous comments - somewhere around signing day - spoke about general team GPA and graduation rate being higher than it had been in several years. Wish I had the quote here.

Is this APR stuff a leftover of the Barney era or the program turnover during the change ? Sounds like they measure 4 year cycles. Looking at the FB roster, it seems like 2/3rds of it is frosh, RS Frosh and Soph. Those are Hawks recruits, so I wonder what the deal is since they're not near graduating yet. Reports of transfers - like Maiava - indicate they are in good academic standing when they leave. hmm......

Regardless of on-field result, I find no excuse for a student athlete not being able to progress and graduate, no matter the sport. I have no qualms with Hawk suspending players from games for academic issues. You can win in both the classroom and on the field.

Posted by archalon on May 7, 2008 at 7:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Found it - signing day statement. Maybe the 'crack' Camera staff could follow-up and elaborate:

Head Coach Dan Hawkins

"OPENING STATEMENT—“We have posted the best team GPA in the last ten years of Colorado Football. We have graduated almost 100 percent of our seniors, and I feel really good about that. We have done a nice job on our APR."

Posted by rodrigo on May 7, 2008 at 8:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If you read closer, the suggestion is that guys exiting the program (not necessarily failing in the classroom) - Maiava would be the most recent example - before graduating are the reason for this year's drop. In other words Maiava could be a 4.0 student and still negatively impact the score because he left the program without a degree.

The question is whether that explanation is true or not - Neill? Kyle?

Ditto Hawk's quote, which appears to be about seniors (including, I assume, guys like Bernard Jackson) - not the whole team.

I'm no expert, but it appears these scores only reflect graduation rates - not GPAs. So conceivably the team's GPA could be the highest in 10 years - as Hawk says - and the team could still fail the APR.

A side note, Kansas football will lose two scholarships because of this - http://collegefootball.rivals.com/con...

Should be pretty darn easy to determine if this is a serious issue - as I'm sure many of friends will want to insist - or a blip.

Posted by dabuffs50 on May 7, 2008 at 8:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Players transferring negatively effects these figures and that needs to be changed. This casts a negative light on a new coaching staff when players transfer for better opportunity. Also, not that it has hit us particularly lately, but if a player declares for the draft early that hurts, etc.

Posted by rodrigo on May 7, 2008 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Actually, now that I re-read closer, this report was for the 2006-2007 year - Hawk's first - so I guess we'd be talking about almost exclusively Barnett-recruited players who either didn't graduate or who left the team before graduating.

Maybe Hawk's quote is reference to this year's team?

Posted by rodrigo on May 7, 2008 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't know how many transfered but a substantial number of underclassmen faded off the roster or quit. You can check for yourself if you don't accept my take: http://www.cubuffs.com/SportSelect.db...

And I think it does matter who recruited them. Neither Hawk nor Bzdelik are responsible for making sure academically questionable players recruited by their predecessors graduate; they are, however, responsible for ensuring players they bring into the program succeed academically.

I would assume that's why penalties are dished out over four-year spans. And I would argue that current team GPAs are a strong reflection of what those graduation rates will look like in the years to come.

Posted by cdservais on May 7, 2008 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Maybe Mr. Ringo has given a description of APR in a previous article, but it would have been nice to have a sidebar or a link to a reference. From Wikipedia:

The APR is calculated by allocating points for eligibility and retention -- the two factors that research identifies as the best indicators of graduation. Each player on a given roster earns a maximum of two points per term, one for being academically eligible and one for staying with the institution. A team's APR is the total points of a team's roster at a given time divided by the total points possible. Since this results in a decimal number, the CAP decided to multiply it by 1,000 for ease of reference. Thus, a raw APR score of .925 translates into the 925 that will become the standard terminology.

Basically, this means that any student athlete that decides to transfer or leave school for any reason will lower the overall APR score, regardless of their academic standing at the time. That means we can probably count on another failing score for the basketball team due to the number of transfers. This also seems to mean the score takes a hit every time a student is kicked out of school (see Sipili, and potentially Katoa and Geer) regardless of whether they return or not.

Posted by archalon on May 7, 2008 at 9:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hate to correct you rodrigo, but I think you'd agree that coaches are responsible to all players, not just their recruits. Its how you worded it.

But I agree with you that there is little that a new coaching staff can ultimately do to help those from a previous regime since they walk into the sitation unaware of their backrounds,a player's situation may already be beyond help ( long term academic default), attrition always occurs ( how many bolted or were jettisoned during the sex,drugs and rock n roll scandal ?)and other factors.

I think its wrong to blame the captain turning the ship around for the problems of the crew on board when he deposed the previous captain. But it is what it is and it is in the process of being corrected.

Regardless, I would be highly suprised if this is not the last time we hear of an APR problem. I'll put money on captain Hawk not having this issue next year or any other in his tenure.

Posted by rodrigo on May 7, 2008 at 9:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Arch, thanks for clarifying and amplifying my point. I await the assault from those who would otherwise twist my words.

On that note, let me commend Hawkins for his commitment to Barnett's recruits who for whatever reason didn't remain active members of the football team but who did stay in school - i.e. Bernard Jackson.

Posted by NCBUFF on May 7, 2008 at 10:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Dr. Tom, you misunderstood. The Huskers are dropping "speed" and gaining weight.....

Posted by archalon on May 7, 2008 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ok Ringo - rather than just throwing this stuff out there without explanation, do some real reporting: according to the report dated 5/2/2008, searchable and available as a .pdf file at the following link, CU's 4 yr. football APR for 2003-2007 is 929 ( basketball is 873).

Where are your numbers coming from if they arent the ones posted by the NCAA ? - please clarify

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/home?W...

Posted by archalon on May 7, 2008 at 10:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

And Dr. Tom's 'list', BTW, are the identical numbers from the website I listed.

Posted by shoulder2shoulder on May 7, 2008 at 10:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Dr. Tom I wouldn't put too much validity into those #s. Texas is 942 and we all know how "smart" their athletes are. Cedirc Benson, Ricky Williams and Mr. Wonderlic Vince Young. Just means the schools give them more help in the classroom.

Glad to hear Pelini called the defense fat and is getting them into shape. I hope his next target is the co-eds!!!!

Posted by shoulder2shoulder on May 7, 2008 at 10:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes they are, not the point to my post or this article. The point is Texas is #1 in the Big 12 in APR, Texas also has a very strong reputation of "helping" in the class room more than other programs.

Posted by shoulder2shoulder on May 7, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I know the buff fans have plenty to look forward to now that Pelini is in Lincoln. I am looking forward to him making a fool of himself again after a blow out loss. How dare a team run the score up on him. If you don't like it, stop it!

Posted by Black_Rob on May 7, 2008 at 11:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Nice, stay with DrTom. I'm tired of your tallisall personality.

Posted by walto_clown on May 7, 2008 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Question for folks out there:

If Coach Hawkins dismisses the Jake Durens of this world, is he then penalized?

Similarly.

If former Coach Callahan (sp?...sorry Doc Tom) keeps Mo Purify on the team, is he then rewarded?

I'm not criticizing the system, only trying to understand it.

However, if that is, in fact the case, I think a compelling arguement could me made (Tall is all) that if Barney's recruits didn't meet Hawkins' standards of discipline (Duren, White, the offensive line from two years ago etc...) that the dip is justified after all. I'm not suggesting that all of Hawk's recruits have demonstrated sterling judgment, only that somebody else's discipline problems can affect a four-year cycle.

I'm sure that Hawk will take full responsibility, regardless. It is certainly his problem to deal with now.

Posted by KyleRingo on May 7, 2008 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Some interesting comments here I thought I would address. First, let me say that we ran a chart with all the scores for every CU program for all four years in the paper this morning. I don't know why it didn't make it on the website. I apologize. It could have helped prevent some of the confusion.

The football team scored 888 for the 2006-07 school year. It's four-year score is 929.

Whenever a student-athlete becomes academically ineligible, it costs the program one point. If a student athlete leaves the program eligible, he or she costs the program one point. If he or she leaves the program and is ineligible, it costs the program two points.

So a player such as Kai Maiava leaving costs one point. If he leaves and is also ineligible, it costs two points. A player such as Jake Duren, does not factor in to the APR because he was not on scholarship.

The football program has a four-year score of 929, but that score is being propped up by a strong year in 2003-04 when it scored 960. Next year, the 960 will drop off the four-year score.

So the program needs to have a good score this spring to keep its four-year score up next year.

The opposite is true in men's basketball. Its four-year score should improve next year, because the 2003-04 year will drop off. That was a horrible year for the program.It scored 815 that year and seven players left the program ineligible.

All the nuances involved in the APR can be tough to follow, but it is accurate to say that the football program can't afford to have another failing score for 2007-08 as it did for 2006-07.

Hope I helped answer some questions.

Posted by archalon on May 7, 2008 at 2:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you for some explanation - still appears that a team is penalized for a coaching change and attrition. I'll gladly take the -2 for a BJax, but why be penalized for a Brian White, a Maiava, etc. ? Three completly different scenarios, but the program is hit for all three, more or less, negatively ?

Proves the NCAA still has its head where it has always been.

Posted by walto_clown on May 7, 2008 at 2:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks Kyle. Good point on Duren. Apparently my head was the same place as the NCAA's--I forgot about the scholie bit.

It does generate an interesting incentive system for coaches. On one had, it encourages coaches to recruit and graduate players. On the other hand, it encourages them to coddle criminals and provide an easy academic environment.

At the end of the day, I guess the sanctions aren't so bad. Far less than, say, feeding non-scholarship athletes at the wrong time of day, or wearing under armor to fund a professional skiing career. Click-clack.

Posted by dabuffs50 on May 7, 2008 at 2:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Heres hoping DrTomsHusband makes a triumphant return to the board also

Posted by rodrigo on May 7, 2008 at 3:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The truth will be told in the fall. 'Til then it's all hot air.

Posted by BuffSteve on May 7, 2008 at 3:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I hope Bo Pelini DOES improve the Bugeaters. It will make for better games and will improve the overall quality of the Big 12 North. Honestly, is it more fun for the Buffs to put 65 on a weak Bugeater team or 62 on a #1 ranked Bugeater team? Wow; that's a whole lotta points no matter how you slice it. Yikes.

Posted by archalon on May 7, 2008 at 3:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If its related to scholarships, all the more reason that coaching change is suffering the effects of previous regime. Maiava left so thats a -1 for Hawk,BJax is an understandable -2 but the players that left the program around the infamous "big XII, Brother !" rant weren't Hawk kids (obviously), neither were Backowski (?), White, Yates, A. Barnett, etc.

Where's a list of all the players to leave the program in last 2 years ? 9 of 10 are Barnett refugees Im sure. And as long as the 4 yr trend is considered, balance the 960 Ringo claims with Calhoun, Harris, Joseph and others who left over the 4 yr period.

If scholarship based, does that mean LOI guys who dont make it (Gates) or go to C.C. are negatives too ?

Posted by LAbuffAlum on May 7, 2008 at 5:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

His "results" weren't so impressive once Dorsey got hurt...

Posted by BuffTime on May 7, 2008 at 6:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

B Jax was ineligible last season, but he will leave the program (still on scholarship) with a degree won't he? I seem to remember that he is graduating... so not a -2 for him.

Also, Hawkins had a pretty good APR number for Boise State whose 4 yr number is something like 953. I looked it up earlier and am not positive anymore, but it was pretty impressive. Granted the last couple of years he can't claim, but it is his guys from a recruiting standpoint.

One of his big things in recruiting is to get guys who can win in the classroom too. Just check the GPAs of the last batch of recruits (not all but most are pretty impressive).

Posted by MDBuff on May 7, 2008 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dr. Tom - Best of luck with your 71 year old AD who won't be able to bring the program into the 21st century.

Posted by archalon on May 7, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeah - what BuffTime said........If I remember, all but Mohler in the last class and Gates before him are in good standing coming in, I think..........

It cant be that hard to find top talent that is smart as well

Posted by mtnboykev35 on May 7, 2008 at 8:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dr Tom. Pelini might have been a good D-coordinator but now he is the head coach and that is different, so don't hold your breath.
Or please do and turn a nice shade of KU blue.

Posted by mtnboykev35 on May 7, 2008 at 8:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

as to the article. Schools should get the point back if the kid who transfers out gets his degree at the new school. And if you put this scale to the school as a whole I think it would not be any better as many kids start college only to finish somewhere else or not at all.

Posted by extrapoint on May 7, 2008 at 9:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I hear Bo hates recruiting

Posted by extrapoint on May 8, 2008 at 7:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

so when these recruits finally make it to Lincoln to meet Bo, does Bo have a prescription from the doctor?
Maybe the same stuff that gave Callahan that blank stare?

Posted by BEL on May 8, 2008 at 7:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes, Hawk took a big hit with departures during his first year (2006-2007) at CU. The reasons for departing or transferring were many: injuries that ended playing careers, academic ineligibility, perceived lack of playing time, player misconduct, and inability to adapt or fit into new system. During that first year, the latter was by far the biggest reason. I seem to recall that about 6 players quit the team immediately after the end of the first winter conditioning program because they could not handle or adjust to the harsher and more rigorous demands. Before Hawk came aboard, winter conditioning was more like a stroll through the country club. But, not anymore. Nowadays, you will see guys puking out their guts. Among those who departed, three were offensive linemen, which temporarily created a severe shortage in this area.

Posted by bufffan8 on May 8, 2008 at 7:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

bo knows the female office staff pretty well too.

Posted by extrapoint on May 8, 2008 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

still the huksters were 2nd choice. Bo was hoping Les would take the Michigan job.

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Good thing Bo knows d. Now bug fans better hope he can teach his players some cuz the schedule includes three teams - Missouri (41), Colorado (65) and Kansas (76) - that put up over 40 points on what remains of a once proud tradition last year and will all be better and more experienced this year, and two more teams - Oklahoma and Texas Tech - that realistically could chalk up 80.

Better get some batteries for that calculator, D.

Posted by montanabuff on May 8, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Bo knows scheduling ....

Nebraska 2010 non-conference games (announced this spring, so don't go blaming Callahan): South Dakota State, Western Kentucky, and Idaho. Ooooh!

What Bo doens't know ... phone number for a travel agent. First game for Nebraska outside of Lincoln in '08? October 11th! Guess when NU gets off to a fast start, Nebraska fans will want to make Pelini governor (just like they did with Callahan last year when NU was undefeated and ranked 14th - right up until the USC game).

Go Buffs!

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 9:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

65, 76 and 41... and that was those teams' B games.

Missouri and Texas Tech (in Lubbock) back-to-back to open the Big 12 season?

No brag. Just fact.

Posted by MDBuff on May 8, 2008 at 9:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It's refreshing to have a discourse with Dr. Tom because we at least know where his allegiance lies, unlike Tall.

Posted by bufffan8 on May 8, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Dr - please go away until after the Missouri game. Until then, nothing matters except of course that the Buffs put up 65 and a W last November. It's easy to talk now when you have no results. Let's see if you are still talking at the end of the season.

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"I seen it"?

Jeez, you must have gotten your doctorate in gramer from Knebraska.

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 10:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Okie, D.

How many do you suppose the magician Mike Leach and his Red Raiders will score against the "Harvard of the Midwest" this year?

I say 72.

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow. One of the few teams to hold Tech to those type of numbers the past two years is...CU.

Let's not stop there. What about the Big Red Pelinis date with Mizzou?

I say Tigers 49, Nebraska 17 (but only because it's in Lincoln).

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 11:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Come to think of it, maybe Bo should call Hawk and get a few tips on how to slow the Red Raiders down.

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 12:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is fun - think I'll hold on to these for potentially more fun later.

Oklahoma? Uh-oh. Another road game...

Posted by mntbyker on May 8, 2008 at 12:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Watcher: It's good to see Doc back..., what?!..., go back to the Red sight, or better yet, hit Mizz, and let them tolerate you. Better yet, how about your rivalry with OK..., oh I guess it's not even that anymore, they'd just put you on ignore like a gnat. You really don't even have that with us anymore. Till we hear a significant sound, a sound that makes even us turn our heads toward the border-go back to your own site. But, it's good to have you back...LOL

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 12:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

VT? Down on d but a two-headed quarterback...

Posted by rodrigo on May 8, 2008 at 6:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

D? Your momma send you to bed early today? Or do you have Virginia Tech stuck in your craw? Darn. And we didn't even get to Kansas or CU yet.

Posted by rodrigo on May 9, 2008 at 7:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What, no score on this one? Losing a little confidence or what?

Posted by extrapoint on May 9, 2008 at 8:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

how about Western Michigan?

Posted by rodrigo on May 9, 2008 at 9:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Awesome,in what quarter will Bo call off the dogs?

Now to the crux:
Kansas?

Posted by extrapoint on May 9, 2008 at 10:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm putting my money on Western and the points.
Bo may know footbal and he may have the kids fired up but I dont think 63 is going to happen in the first game.....even against an eclair.

Posted by Dizonrocks on May 10, 2008 at 3:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Talliwacker, at what point will you be "dropping off"? let's hope real soon...how was that Husker spring scrimmage, you've never shared your experience here...I know I've asked you about it at least three or four times, why do you keep avoiding the topic? clearly, you are a fan of the Red...

Posted by walto_clown on May 10, 2008 at 5:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

IF NU puts up 63 on Western Michigan, does WMU's coach have the right to hurl obscenities at Bo?

Posted by rodrigo on May 13, 2008 at 8:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey, welcome back. Guess your mom let you out of the basement. Let's pick up where we left off:

Your prediction for Kansas vs. Nebraska?

Posted by rodrigo on May 13, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow. Wonder if Mangino will whine to Bo about running up the score...

And now, the game we've all been waiting for.

CU vs. the corn.

Posted by rodrigo on May 13, 2008 at 8:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh, I don't make predictions in May about events that will take place in September. People who do have a tendency to end up backpeddling down the road. But, given that such things never stop you, why don't you give me yours?

Posted by archalon on May 13, 2008 at 9:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ill make a prediction in May: NU, 5-6 wins this fall. Mark it down corn-queens, so I can say I told you so in December.

Posted by rodrigo on May 13, 2008 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Man, that's one warm wind blowin' out of Nebraska.

I'm gonna change my mind. I see Ganz breaking an ankle in the opener and Bo has to turn to a walk-on to play qb. The o proves so ineffective that Marlon Lucky asks to switch to linebacker, too, and players on the defensive side of the ball start fighting with the offense. Husker fans start e-mailing death threats to the offensive coordinator. After watching VT, Missouri and Texas Tech drub the punchless corn, Iowa State changes it's name to Iowa Tech and scores 11 touchdowns to beat Bo's boys, 77-75. Pelini storms the field, crying that Chizik ran up the score, then submits his resignation in shame after Gene puts him in a headlock and makes him say "uncle." Osborne returns to coaching and runs the table, finally restoring order.

Just kidding.

Posted by archalon on May 13, 2008 at 12:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

CU prediction ? 8 wins would be good, 6-7 is a possiblity.

Games NU wins in 2008:

Western Michigan
San Jose State
New Mexico State
Kansas
Iowa State
Baylor

Games NU loses in 2008:
Virginia Tech
Missouri
Texas Tech
Kansas State
Colorado

Why dont you try playing on the road more ? You must have lost a coin flip to get VT instead SW Middle-of-nowhere State.

NU scheduling is laughable

Posted by rodrigo on May 13, 2008 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Guess Tom doesn't read much. Missouri's new starting tight end should pass it's old starting tight end as the career leader in catches sometime around the Nebraska game. Sounds like they won't skip a beat to me.

Posted by extrapoint on May 13, 2008 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NU has a lock on 3 wins only
San Jose silicon geeks
NM State pepper farmers
and the perrenial patsy Bears

Chances are (not a lock)they will eke out a win over Western Mich.
I will definitely mark the opener on my calendar if it is on TV
Iowa State is not a lock either. They get it up for the huksters.

optimistically they get the 5 above and maybe, just maybe one more out of the rest of the schedule.

and with the way the BCS is running from the playoff idea by creating new bowls, NU may wind up in one.

Every southern coastal slack jawed town in this country already has a bowl so maybe NU will be the first to play one south of the border.

Perhaps the Imodil bowl in Managua Nicaragua.

and maybe....just maybe one of those hukster fans will take home a recipe so I can have something decent ot eat other than mashed potatoes when I go back to Lincoln to visit the inlaws

Posted by archalon on May 14, 2008 at 7:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

No question CU beats NU. Fixing NU's problems wont happen overnight

And what are the couple of tune up games CU has? I count 1 lesser opponent in Eastern Washington. Unless you think FSU and WVU are 'tune ups'.

"Why play on the road against tune up teams?" - start by scheduling tougher opponents and not having 5 home games to open the season. The concept of NU scheduling is dumb - teams should always play the toughest opponents they can , not hide like pansies in a cornfield and realize " hey wait, no wonder we cant win on the road in November".

Wheels will be off the husker wagon by week 7 and its conceivable you lose your last three in KU, KSU and CU. Quite drinking the Husker kool-aid and be a realist

Posted by extrapoint on May 14, 2008 at 7:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ganz was the difference
go back and look at my pre season posts
I always thought he was the best qb
Keller shared way too many "intangibles" with his bonehead coach.

Buffs will win. Dizon was a great player but we still have plenty of linebackers. Wheatly will be the biggest loss but we will have a better pass rush by design. Possibly a 3-4 with a more varied blitz scheme.
The hukster D better not melt down because our O has improved. Speed receivers have a year behind them and their will be fewer dropped passes. The O line will be gaining experience as well...and dont forget "Great Scott."

Posted by extrapoint on May 14, 2008 at 9:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

the hype has served to obscure what could easily be one hell of an entire rb class. Four stars for Polk and first team Ohio all state Stewart who I am projecting to make people compare to him to Dunn.
Sumler will probably start but the others will get more PT as the season goes on.

Posted by archalon on May 15, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Agreed - Scott is fantastic, but Polk can be a stud as well. Will also be nice to have KR\PR threat in Stewart. I think Sumler's days are numbered, hard to keep the others off the field.

Posted by extrapoint on May 15, 2008 at 9 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Jaffee had one run in the spring game off the left side that really impressed me. He used his downfield blocking and showed extremely quick feet in picking up about 10 or 15.