Top walk-ons in 2009 (Jordan Kovacs)

Submitted by Magnus on

Rivals put out a list of some of the top walk-on performers in the country last season. Not surprisingly, Jordan Kovacs was on the list.

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1050279

I wouldn't be surprise to see Kovacs start again in 2010. And I don't think that would be a horrible thing. He performed pretty well as a free safety. He's limited physically, which is one of the reasons he played poorly when he played strong safety (Illinois, for example) or had deep coverage (PSU, for example). Plus he was only a redshirt freshman.

At some point in his career, Kovacs will likely get passed by somebody more gifted athletically, such as Mike Williams, Carvin Johnson, or Marvin Robinson. But neither of those freshmen enrolled early, so they've only got this summer to catch up to or surpass Kovacs and Williams.

mongoose0614

February 11th, 2010 at 7:13 AM ^

Completely disagree. No one performed pretty well in our back seven.

God help us if Vlad or someone else doesn't step up and take it from him. It would totally be a bad thing if Kovacs is starting again this year. Not hating on the kid......full effort but this is not Owen Schmitt 2.o type deal.

Magnus

February 11th, 2010 at 8:12 AM ^

Hmmmm...so Troy Woolfolk, Donovan Warren, and Steve Brown didn't perform well? Steve Brown led the team in tackles and really only had a "bad" game against PSU. Woolfolk didn't get exposed AT ALL as a cornerback, and only once or twice as a safety. Warren's probably going to be a 3rd round pick.

Anyway, I was talking about Kovacs in regard to his walk-on status. He played pretty well for a walk-on. I mean, he had an interception and 75 tackles as a part-time starter.

biakabutuka4ever

February 11th, 2010 at 10:39 AM ^

I agree with you that Warren, Woolfolk, and Brown played well. But that means somebody is responsible for the bad plays in the secondary, and its not all on the other corner. Kovacs played well for a walk-on as you stated, but I think we're in trouble if he stays in the secondary. He's a solid tackler, but really doesn't have the speed to make plays and stop big plays that go through the secondary. I can remember a couple off the top of my head where a quicker safety would have stopped a big play off the ground. I have nothing against Kovacs, I just think we're in trouble if he's still starting.

Magnus

February 11th, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^

Well, you have to remember that once Woolfolk moved to cornerback halfway through the season, it was Kovacs and Williams back there playing safety. Kovacs isn't good in space, and Williams wasn't really solid against the run or the pass.

Also, our inside linebackers weren't great at man coverage or getting to their zones.

If Kovacs can play close to the line, we'll be okay. And basically, there's no way he'll play strong safety this year. There's enough depth at SS that he won't need to be our last line of defense. If Woolfolk doesn't play there, they'll put Dorsey or Emilien or Turner back there.

Maize and Blue…

February 11th, 2010 at 7:42 AM ^

good, but can't cover anyone. I give the kid all the credit in the world for what he did last yearespecially coming off of surgery the year before. It would be a bad thing if he starts again this year for our defense.

VectorVictor05

February 11th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^

Or was your perceived lack of pass rush simply a result of quarterbacks being able to quickly pick apart our back seven? It was pretty evident that our linebackers weren't capable of covering anyone (save for S. Brown on certain occasions) and due to poor safety play our corners were forced to give 12 yd cushion (e.g., Donovan Warren playing deep thirds instead of press coverage because our safeties couldn't be relied on).

Teams knew our D-Line was our strength, mostly because of BG, and they schemed around that with quick passes underneath to WIDE OPEN receivers.

How many times did you see BG come up a split-second short when pressuring the opposing QB? You can say that was due to BG's lack of quickness or skill or something....but I personally wouldn't question him.

Big_G

February 11th, 2010 at 7:58 AM ^

I agree that given the circumstances, Kovacs played as well as he could. Seemed to play better the closer he got to the line of scrimmage. Really doesnt appear to be strong at all in space, and his pursuit angles were really bad. Definately has a future here probably on special teams and an occasional role on defense. I feel that he may start the season at FS but should be quickly passed on by as the better athletes get up to speed on the defense.

AC1997

February 11th, 2010 at 8:17 AM ^

I think that the Kovacs story (and to a lesser extent Leach) is a classic case of the balance between brains and brawn. As several posters have pointed out, he's slow and not good in space. Athletically he shouldn't be on the same team as some other safeties on our 2010 roster.

But Kovacs made as many plays as anyone in our secondary last year, including the NFL bound Donovan Warren. I'll grant you that none of those plays were in coverage, but I thought that Kovacs was one of the better tacklers on the team and had some of the best run-stopping instincts on the team. He knew how to be around the ball. If he were bigger, he'd be a great middle linebacker.

Contrast that with Mike Williams - a highly touted recruit who is fast, strong, and far more physically gifted than Kovacs. Yet no matter where they put him on the field he looked lost.

Obviously we want something between those two. And there will be no shortage of candidates with Vlad, Robinson, and Johnson. But until those guys show they have football instincts, let's not assume they're better players because of their athletic ability.

I don't want to see Kovacs starting either, but I would be okay with him back there. As a redshirt freshman with no experience at all he held his own. A year on the Barwis program and in the film room means he'll be better. We'll have to see how the rest of the candidates perform and whether they can take it from him.....

Victory Collins

February 11th, 2010 at 8:19 AM ^

with any of the Kovacs-specific comments, but what I do disagree with is the focus on "athletic ability" as the primary factor driving success in the secondary. Athletic ability is only part of the equation (and I would say a sometimes overrated part) -- especially for players playing in space. Of much more importance is the ability to read and react quickly (i.e., the mental aspect of the game), especially for a safety where even one false step is probably fatal.

Has anyone actually watched a 40 yard dash? The difference between a 4.6 (Kovacs) and a 4.4 (amazing time) is about a step and a half, or a yard or two.

So let's assume that a player with a 4.6 speed reads and reacts to a play a half second faster than a kid who runs 4.4, chances are the kid who runs the 4.6 is in equal, if not better, position to make the play.

And finally, one Kovacs specific point: if you reviewed the film, you would see that when he had man coverage on TEs, he was very effective. His coverage skills against WRs and making the right read in zones is what could use improving. So I do disagree with blanket statements that he is not "good in coverage" as an overly broad criticism.

Magnus

February 11th, 2010 at 8:37 AM ^

a) The difference is that athletic ability allows you to make up for mental mistakes. For example, someone other than Kovacs might have stopped that long option play by Indiana that went for a TD.

b) You're probably being generous with giving Kovacs a 4.6, but your point still stands.

Victory Collins

February 11th, 2010 at 8:56 AM ^

was self-reported -- he said that he ran a mid- to high- 4.6 in his tryout, and that that opened some eyes. Also, for comparison sake, I am not sure what Williams runs, but my guess is it is a 4.5 at best -- I do not think he has been reported as hitting the hallowed 4.4 mark, which is speed-demon territory.

jg2112

February 11th, 2010 at 8:24 AM ^

If Kovacs is the best player in the defensive secondary for the free (close) safety position, I DO want to see him starting.

The kid was a Freshman All-American about a year after having knee surgery, without going through spring practice, and without the coaches not even knowing his name during fall practice.

If he is able to gain the benefit of a year of Barwis, film study, and coaching, I see no reason why he cannot be a functionable option at the free (close) safety position (despite what everyone is saying here, he was rather decent at the free spot - 17 tackles against Sparty, right?). He was already a functionable option LAST year at the free spot, as a redshirt freshman. If he can build upon that, I fully support seeing him on the field.

I cannot understand why people on this board have a Kovacs aversion. I would personally find Kovacs succeeding much more satisfying in an abstract sense than any of the highly touted recruits brought in each year, because success stories like Kovacs are supposedly the kind of opportunities that intercollegiate athletics are supposed to offer to EVERYONE. If he can take it, we should all support him.

Brick

February 11th, 2010 at 2:24 PM ^

I can't agree with this post more. If Kovaks was a 4 star recruit everyone would be raving about his instincts, solid tackling ability, and how he broke into the lineup in his first year on the team. We would be forgiving his errors as "freshman mistakes" and be excited to have a returning player with that much game experience. Kovaks was a very effective FS and will only get better. His glaring mistakes occured at SS which is not his true position. Seriously, the kid was at the BOTTOM of the depth chart when practice started and worked his way into starting at two different positions. He is my hero. I will be surprised if he is not starting at FS when the season starts.

umichzach

February 11th, 2010 at 8:44 AM ^

personally i love the way he plays. i was at the sparty game and after one of the great plays he made i was like, holy shit kovacs! to which the gentleman in front of me turned around and showed me his jersey, #32 KOVACS, and gave me a high five (i'm assuming he's a relative as idk why anyone else would have a Kovacs jersey). he's got great instincts and plays with a lot of heart. despite what people say about his physical tools i think he'll be even more productive down the road. maybe they can toy with putting him in for different packages or even OLB if he is just too slow to cover deep.

IBleedMaizeNBlue

February 11th, 2010 at 9:04 AM ^

I was much more comfortable with Kovacs at safety than anybody else on our roster, as did the coaches. I think he played extraordinarily well for such a young kid, walk-on or not! I'm a big fan of Kovacs, and I think he starts next year as well.

Like you said, he's only a redshirt freshman, so he can only get better (unless you're Obi Ezeh... ZING!).

cfaller96

February 11th, 2010 at 9:34 AM ^

I'd like to see Kovacs move down to OLB, because I think he's a good tackler and he's athletic enough to be able to handle RBs and TEs (as opposed to WRs).

Of course I say this without knowing how hard it is to move someone down from S to LB, so this could be the stupidest idea ever.

jg2112

February 11th, 2010 at 10:15 AM ^

The reason GERG didn't use nickel packages last year was because in a number of games Teric Jones was the nickel cornerback.

This year, Cullen Christian, Demar Dorsey, JT Floyd, or Courtney Avery COULD be the nickel defensive back.

Victory Collins

February 11th, 2010 at 10:24 AM ^

This is why I have nightmare visions of PSU WRs torching Kovacs and Brown repeatedly -- we simply did not have the personnel to run a nickel defense and had to do the best we could, which was to use Brown and Kovacs mismatched against WRs. In most base defenses (and even many nickel defenses) the safety does not have one-on-one coverage responsibilities for WRs (unless there is a massive blitz), so I think we can be confidant that if Kovacs was one of our starting safeties, he would be able to play more to hsi strengths.

Magnus

February 11th, 2010 at 10:23 AM ^

In my opinion, yes, it is. I wouldn't be surprised to see Robinson install a nickel package because of all the talent we're stockpiling in the defensive backfield, but I'm not expecting it. That being said, this is the guy who utilized small-ish, fast linebackers in the NFL like Ian Gold and John Mobley, and I don't know how far he wants to stray from his base package.

Magnus

February 11th, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^

I don't think it's as much about disguise as it is getting out of your comfort zone and making all kinds of substitutions, which can be problematic. Rather than having guys running on and off the field all the time and causing confusion by playing different packages, sometimes it's better to stay in a base defense and play to your strengths.

Basically, is it better to run a nickel package that operates at 75% of its ability, or is it better to run a base package that operates at 90% of its ability? That's one way to look at it, anyway, although obviously there are different schools of thought.

Dientrous

February 11th, 2010 at 12:38 PM ^

its going to be another LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG season if i see jordan kovacs' 4.7+ speed out there starting for the whole season...i still have nightmares about that atrocious defense on that deep pass by purdue

HAIL 2 VICTORS

February 11th, 2010 at 2:38 PM ^

Although he might have been a leap or two slow Kovacs gave a very gutty performance last year. Yes he was exposed in the secondary when isolated but at least he showed up on run support and tackled better then some of our linebackers. Kovacs deserved his scholarship.