Common Misconception of Devin Gardner
I keep seeing people saying that OSU is the leader for Devin Gardner mainly because he likes the color red. I am dispelling the notion of OSU being the leader which is in fact false. OSU is not recruiting him hard and Devin does not hold an offer from OSU as of now. Why? That I cannot say since it's preminum information.
He is wide open and is open to any school. From what I've gathered, playing time will be the main factor toward him picking a school. Michigan may have a shot of landing Devin Gardner but if Tate Forcier or Denard Robinson plays well in their 1st year at Michigan, I doubt that Michigan will get Devin Gardner but I could be wrong. Plus, there are plenty of targets, like Christian Green, Jeffery Godfrey, Stephen Morris, etc. who fits RR's system.
February 9th, 2009 at 8:39 PM ^
They have Pryor for at least 2 more years and by then that 2011 kid, Braxton Moore, or w/e his name is, will be in?
February 9th, 2009 at 8:50 PM ^
.....then I hope we never see Devin Gardner. I hope Tate or Denard lock this down for 4 years and we don't have to worry about more QBs until 2011.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:40 PM ^
I bellieve the saying that I am looking for goes something like "I'm saying" After the debachle that was the 2008 season I am happy to get the 2 QBs that we have and while the compliment of another QB that can run would be nice I do not think it needs to be a hot topic at this point in the season. I would look more for a big recruit in 11 or 12 than 10.
February 10th, 2009 at 11:40 AM ^
Shouldn't that be all one sentence?
February 9th, 2009 at 11:17 PM ^
RR wants and needs at least 3 qbs that can run his offense. Look at what happened to wVU and Oregon when their qbs went down. They had no viable back ups and those team suffered.
I am not going to argue that Gardner is a must get because he's not. There are lot of options for UM on the QB front for '10. Getting Gardner would be great because he's in state but anyone would be foolish and wrong to think he is a must get for the program to be successful.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:59 PM ^
If Tate or Denard do well in their starting role, 2010 QB's can redshirt and get 2 years as a starter. That's really how it should happen in college football, especially for QB's. The only reason Pryor didn't redshirt was that Boeckman was so god-awful.
February 10th, 2009 at 12:30 AM ^
boeckman was easily the better of the two quarterbacks...he lead his team to a national championship! If pryor was pre-hyped as being the next coming of vince young, boeckman would have, and should have, been the starter, and OSU would have had a more impressive year.
February 10th, 2009 at 7:39 AM ^
1 would be the regular redshirt, but what is the second? I have only heard of medical. Thanks.
GO BLUE!
February 10th, 2009 at 7:48 AM ^
If he comes here and one of the other QBs pans out, RR shatters DG's kneecaps.
Oops! Medical hardship. MOAR eligibility.
February 10th, 2009 at 10:03 AM ^
Ummm...Tate/Denard's last season (barring redshirts) would be 2012.
A class of 2010 QB could redshirt in 2010, giving him eligibility for 2011-2014.
So there are your two years: 2013 and 2014.
February 10th, 2009 at 11:08 AM ^
Dont most elite quarterbacks feel like they wont be redhirted?
February 10th, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^
That's impossible to gauge.
Did Mark Sanchez expect to redshirt with Matt Leinart returning? I'd say that's an emphatic yes.
It just depends on who's in front of you.
February 10th, 2009 at 2:08 PM ^
Speaking of elite quarterbacks and redshirts, how does USC continue to lock down the #1 pro-style guy over and over and over again every year (it seems)? Sanchez, check, John David Booty, check, Barkley, check, Mitch Mustain (on Scout, anyway -- and as a transfer!), check. I'm pretty sure Leinart was a #1 type guy, too. And then on top of that, they have that really highly rated dual threat guy from a few years ago sitting right behind Sanchez.
February 10th, 2009 at 3:00 PM ^
out of all the USC QB's you just listed, the one you didn't name was Carson Palmer
February 10th, 2009 at 3:02 PM ^
First of all, Carson Palmer committed before the Pete Carroll era, so that might not fit the argument, and it seemed his point was that they get great QB's even though they got a great one the year before. This doesn't apply to Carson Palmer.
February 10th, 2009 at 3:04 PM ^
you could use Palmer as your starting point in saying they got a great QB recruit with Palmer already there
February 10th, 2009 at 3:05 PM ^
Stop it with your knowledge of recent college football history!!!
Show-off.
February 10th, 2009 at 3:03 PM ^
Why is this even a question?
NFL factory? Check.
Great players around me? Check.
Southern California weather? Check.
Hot girls? Check.
Perennial Pac-10 champs? Check.
Perennial national championship contenders? Check.
So...ummm...yeah...that's why.
February 10th, 2009 at 3:09 PM ^
Why is it a bad thing? I for one love my incoming quarterbacks to bring a lot of swagger and be prepared to compete for the starting job. Every one of these highly rated kids should want to be better than the guy above them on the depth chart.