247 Sports changing some football position labels

Submitted by Magnus on May 29th, 2021 at 9:25 AM

I noticed a couple days ago that guys who used to be listed at "WDE" were labeled as "EDGE" guys on 247 Sports. I wondered if it was a mistake or an overall shift, and yesterday an article popped up explaining the changes.

247 is getting rid of "APB" (all-purpose back) and combining dual-threat quarterback and pro-style quarterback into one category: QB. Overall, they're going from 19 different position designations to just 14.

Here's the article if you want to see their reasoning and the rest of the changes: LINK.

JonnyHintz

May 29th, 2021 at 9:32 AM ^

Makes sense. Vast majority of QBs are “dual-threat” in some capacity nowadays, so there’s no real need to make the distinction. Labeling a guy a WDE that is linebacker sized or would play LB in a 3-4 defense isn’t a great label to begin with,  labeling them as EDGE gives them the multi-scheme fit. Even the APB is kinda outplayed in the modern schemes, you almost need some level of versatility in the backfield now. 

Magnus

May 29th, 2021 at 9:39 AM ^

I agree with the changes. There were a ton of "dual-threat quarterbacks" who couldn't do much damage with their feet. I also was really annoyed over the years by the offensive line designations, because a) not many players would be listed at center and b) it seemed like every kid taller than 6'3" wanted to be called a tackle, not a guard.

JonnyHintz

May 29th, 2021 at 6:30 PM ^

Even then we’ve gotten guys like Chris Evans, Zach Charbonnet and Blake Corum who have that versatility. We just simply didn’t effectively use it. 
 

Donovan Edwards is another guy who should have that versatility in the backfield. It’s just a matter of whether or not we utilize that. 

Blue@LSU

May 29th, 2021 at 9:49 AM ^

Magnus, what do you think about the ATH category? I may be off base here, but this category just seems strange to me. I see the usefulness of identifying versatile players. But don't most of these players project to a certain position (CB, WR) and, if so, wouldn't it be more useful to compare them to other players at that projected position?

Edit: or maybe limit the number of players with the ATH designation. There are currently 119 players with the athlete designation. Where would these players be ranked if they were put into a projected category. E.g., would the #50 athlete even crack the top-100 at a projected position?

Magnus

May 29th, 2021 at 12:06 PM ^

I don't know, but is it really so hard to just watch the kid's film and/or look at his body type and see what position he might play? You're never going to make everyone happy. Jabrill Peppers played QB/RB/LB/Nickel/CB/S at Michigan. Ross Douglas played RB/Nickel/CB at Michigan and ended up at LB at Rutgers. 

If you're a good football player with speed, you can play about 5 positions (RB/WR/CB/S/LB). 

Magnus

May 29th, 2021 at 12:00 PM ^

The "athlete" designation is mostly for players who could play on either side of the ball, but it's not always WR/CB. Sometimes it's RB/LB, RB/S, WR/S, etc.

I just went to 247 and watched highlights of the #50 athlete and I was not impressed (Mississippi State commit Dakota Jordan). I would probably not put him in the top 100 at any position. But I'm familiar with #48 (Isaiah Bond) and #49 (Kye Stokes), and I think they would probably be in the top-100 at WR (Bond) or CB/S (Stokes). 

Side note: We have a kid in our program who's better than Dakota Jordan, IMO, and he's not even ranked. I think rankings are especially weird this year because of a lack of camps, short seasons, not much game film for some, etc.