Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight? - Page 5
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 80
  1. #61
    All-Star
    Points: 14,946, Level: 37
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 704
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    wherever i go, there i am
    Posts
    1,074
    Points
    14,946
    Level
    37
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 155
    Given: 234

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Another scapegoat. I was wondering how long YM could duck the scrutiny brought on by such a knowledgeable fanbase. I can only wonder who is next. Tune in next week as...



  2. #62
    Pro
    Points: 42,939, Level: 63
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 11
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    25000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Borger, TX
    Posts
    2,704
    Points
    42,939
    Level
    63
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 54
    Given: 4

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by TXN4CY View Post
    yea its the strength coaches fault they sign 6-4 235lb OL and they are expected to be able to block 300lb first roundrs in 10 months. Totally his fault
    There is not a single true freshman playing in the trenches. So come back when you grow a brain. Also, this is year 5, not year 1. There is no excuse for playing this many underclassman unless you absolutely whiffed on the first few classes through the program.


    Last edited by brett108; 10-29-2013 at 10:15 PM.

  3. #63
    Rookie
    Points: 6,850, Level: 24
    Level completed: 60%, Points required for next Level: 200
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience Points1 year registered
    AuH2O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    592
    Points
    6,850
    Level
    24
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 68
    Given: 0

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclonin View Post
    Yea, but it pales in comparison to the bigger schools.
    Actually it doesn't. Is it Oregon, is it OSU, no, but it is competitive with everybody but the top dogs with a major deep pockets donor. Now, can we keep pace in the arms race, probably not, but right now it is a good facility that is better than most.



  4. #64
    Rookie
    Points: 6,850, Level: 24
    Level completed: 60%, Points required for next Level: 200
    Overall activity: 5.0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience Points1 year registered
    AuH2O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    592
    Points
    6,850
    Level
    24
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 68
    Given: 0

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by brett108 View Post
    There is not a single true freshman playing in the trenches, you moron. So come back when you grow a brain. Also, this is year 5, not year 1. There is no excuse for playing this many underclassman unless you absolutely whiffed on the first few classes through the program.
    Exactly, it's the 4th and 5th year players getting pushed around by UNI's 240 lb DEs. That might be as much technique as S&C, but people making claims they know S&C isn't the problem have no basis for this.



  5. #65
    Starter
    Points: 8,018, Level: 26
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 132
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience Points1 year registered
    GWad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    642
    Points
    8,018
    Level
    26
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 78
    Given: 78

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Either our program has a problem in the new facility or we are incredibly unlucky. I saw something like 20 bodies in sweats last Saturday. You decide.



  6. #66
    Walk On
    Points: 8,753, Level: 28
    Level completed: 1%, Points required for next Level: 597
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    136
    Points
    8,753
    Level
    28
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 7
    Given: 4

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Yancy sat at my table at Cy's House of Trivia after this staff's first spring game in 2009. I was impressed with him. He said he didn't think the team had done any flexibility drills in the 2 previous years and it was an emphasis for him. He said KO could only get down to 19 inches with the box squat when he arrived in January, but after winter workouts he had improved to 13 inches. He also said he would get Stephens, Lamaak and KO into the NFL. He went 2 for 3 and was pretty close to a sweep. Look, we've done pretty well with injuries during Yancy's first four years. Then we have one bad year and suddenly he may not know what he's doing? Injuries are cyclical and we're having a bad year. Take EIU, they have had some bad luck recently but this year they seem to be unscathed.



  7. #67
    Pro
    Points: 42,939, Level: 63
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 11
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    25000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Borger, TX
    Posts
    2,704
    Points
    42,939
    Level
    63
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 54
    Given: 4

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by clonehome View Post
    Yancy sat at my table at Cy's House of Trivia after this staff's first spring game in 2009. I was impressed with him. He said he didn't think the team had done any flexibility drills in the 2 previous years and it was an emphasis for him. He said KO could only get down to 19 inches with the box squat when he arrived in January, but after winter workouts he had improved to 13 inches. He also said he would get Stephens, Lamaak and KO into the NFL. He went 2 for 3 and was pretty close to a sweep. Look, we've done pretty well with injuries during Yancy's first four years. Then we have one bad year and suddenly he may not know what he's doing? Injuries are cyclical and we're having a bad year. Take EIU, they have had some bad luck recently but this year they seem to be unscathed.
    He seriously said that about Stephens and Osemele? Those two were NFL caliber before Yancy came here, and would be there regardless. The only recruit that committed to Rhoads and not Chizik and his staff in the NFL is Knott, so lets not talk about Rhoads great track record or Yancy getting players into the NFL.



  8. #68
    Speechless
    Points: 348,268, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first GroupRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Tre4ISU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Estherville
    Posts
    19,591
    Points
    348,268
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 736
    Given: 92

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by brett108 View Post
    There is not a single true freshman playing in the trenches. So come back when you grow a brain. Also, this is year 5, not year 1. There is no excuse for playing this many underclassman unless you absolutely whiffed on the first few classes through the program.
    Or Dika, Tuftee, and Gannon are hurt/have been hurt for the past years. If you have them (two of them were two of the top 3 and I have heard Dika may have been the best) then you have actual upperclassmen on the entire line save Lalk who has arguably been the best of the bunch but yet he hasn't been healthy. Not to mention those 4 your next best guy was injured. That's your starting five once we figured out Lich and Loth weren't capable. Oh yeah and Graham was injured. I'd love to go the route of "injuries aren't an excuse" but when you step back and look at the line, it has been killed. It takes an animal of a freshman to play. It takes a really good RS freshman to be successful. We simply haven't been able to recruit guys who are ready in less than three years and that's what you are asking most of the line to be.


    It's all snark from here on out

  9. #69
    Speechless
    Points: 348,268, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first GroupRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Tre4ISU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Estherville
    Posts
    19,591
    Points
    348,268
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 736
    Given: 92

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by brett108 View Post
    He seriously said that about Stephens and Osemele? Those two were NFL caliber before Yancy came here, and would be there regardless. The only recruit that committed to Rhoads and not Chizik and his staff in the NFL is Knott, so lets not talk about Rhoads great track record or Yancy getting players into the NFL.
    So nothing is in his control. Why even have a S&C guy. I mean, they are or they aren't NFL guys right? You're grasping.


    It's all snark from here on out

  10. #70
    Speechless
    Points: 348,268, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 13.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialYour first GroupRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Tre4ISU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Estherville
    Posts
    19,591
    Points
    348,268
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 736
    Given: 92

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by GWad View Post
    Either our program has a problem in the new facility or we are incredibly unlucky. I saw something like 20 bodies in sweats last Saturday. You decide.
    How many injuries have we had the past four years. I seem to remember us always being pretty lucky. These guys aren't all pulling hammies or straining muscles.


    It's all snark from here on out

  11. #71
    Addict
    Points: 120,825, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 44.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience PointsSocial
    Cycsk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,839
    Points
    120,825
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 513
    Given: 460

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tre4ISU View Post
    How many injuries have we had the past four years. I seem to remember us always being pretty lucky. These guys aren't all pulling hammies or straining muscles.

    Maybe it is the "Excessive Blocking for Zone Read and Bubble Screen Syndrome."



  12. #72
    Pro
    Points: 54,718, Level: 72
    Level completed: 45%, Points required for next Level: 832
    Overall activity: 22.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,454
    Points
    54,718
    Level
    72
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1
    Given: 0

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by brett108 View Post
    There is not a single true freshman playing in the trenches. So come back when you grow a brain. Also, this is year 5, not year 1. There is no excuse for playing this many underclassman unless you absolutely whiffed on the first few classes through the program.
    Are you kidding with this ****?

    I get that the facts of what realignment did to our recruiting don't fit the agenda, but if you don't think espn constantly talking about Iowa State being one of just a handful of schools on the outside looking in didn't have an effect on the kids we could sign, you aren't here to discuss reality.

    We have enough hawk trolls posing as Iowa State "fans" and Mac fans and fire everybody crowd dragging down the level of discourse on this site now as it is. Quit being part of the problem



  13. #73
    Walk On
    Points: 4,091, Level: 18
    Level completed: 61%, Points required for next Level: 159
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    211
    Points
    4,091
    Level
    18
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 30
    Given: 5

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by clonehome View Post
    Yancy sat at my table at Cy's House of Trivia after this staff's first spring game in 2009. I was impressed with him. He said he didn't think the team had done any flexibility drills in the 2 previous years and it was an emphasis for him. He said KO could only get down to 19 inches with the box squat when he arrived in January, but after winter workouts he had improved to 13 inches. He also said he would get Stephens, Lamaak and KO into the NFL. He went 2 for 3 and was pretty close to a sweep. Look, we've done pretty well with injuries during Yancy's first four years. Then we have one bad year and suddenly he may not know what he's doing? Injuries are cyclical and we're having a bad year. Take EIU, they have had some bad luck recently but this year they seem to be unscathed.
    I don't know about the rest of your post but going below 90 degrees on squats is a good way to hurt a knee. I know a guy who is in his 60's and has walked with a limp for many years because of exactly that.



  14. #74
    Speechless
    Points: 223,066, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 27.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    cyclonedave25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,007
    Points
    223,066
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 822
    Given: 381

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by Newell View Post
    I don't know about the rest of your post but going below 90 degrees on squats is a good way to hurt a knee. I know a guy who is in his 60's and has walked with a limp for many years because of exactly that.
    I'm a trainer and this is false.
    In fact, sometimes if you don't go to parallel or lower, you can hurt the knee joint. Mainly because you may tend to fire from the knees, rather than your hips to get back up.

    It's not about how deep you go, its about performing the lift properly. If you go below parallel and bounce to get out of the hole, you will hurt your knee. If you have too much weight on your toes and not your heels, it doesnt matter how deep you go, you will hurt your knee. If you drop into your squat too fast and uncontrolled, you will hurt your knee. None of those are about the squat depth. If you are squatting below parallel and hurt your knees, its because you are doing it wrong, not the depth.

    I know a lot of older people who have deep squatted all their life and have zero knee problems. I always squat below parallel and have zero knee problems. I also know people who squat above parallel and have chronic knee pain.



  15. #75
    Walk On
    Points: 4,091, Level: 18
    Level completed: 61%, Points required for next Level: 159
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    211
    Points
    4,091
    Level
    18
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 30
    Given: 5

    Re: Are we far enough along to evaluate Yancy McKnight?

    Quote Originally Posted by cyclonedave25 View Post
    I'm a trainer and this is false.
    In fact, sometimes if you don't go to parallel or lower, you can hurt the knee joint. Mainly because you may tend to fire from the knees, rather than your hips to get back up.

    It's not about how deep you go, its about performing the lift properly. If you go below parallel and bounce to get out of the hole, you will hurt your knee. If you have too much weight on your toes and not your heels, it doesnt matter how deep you go, you will hurt your knee. If you drop into your squat too fast and uncontrolled, you will hurt your knee. None of those are about the squat depth. If you are squatting below parallel and hurt your knees, its because you are doing it wrong, not the depth.

    I know a lot of older people who have deep squatted all their life and have zero knee problems. I always squat below parallel and have zero knee problems. I also know people who squat above parallel and have chronic knee pain.
    I realize there are trainers saying you should go below 90 degrees. The reason they bounce is because they go all the way down. Hard to bounce at parallel and harder to hurt the knee.

    But do what you want to do, it's your body.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • TV: Mediacom 22
  • HOOPS: Iowa State vs. Drake
  • December 20, 2014
  • 04:00 PM