BrianM

Christian Kirk 2019 Outlook

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, DerrickHenrysCleats said:

Why is this guy not returning punts?

 

He was absolutely electric returning punts in college.

 

 

 

 

That is why he does return punts cleats.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dmb3684 said:

 

That is why he does return punts cleats.

 

Yes, I noticed he had 163 return yards I guess I was just expecting more. I don't think he was the exclusive return man lats year though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2019 at 11:25 AM, DerrickHenrysCleats said:

 

Yes, I noticed he had 163 return yards I guess I was just expecting more. I don't think he was the exclusive return man lats year though.

 

Exclusive, no.  Returned 21 punts though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2019 at 6:25 PM, DerrickHenrysCleats said:

 

Yes, I noticed he had 163 return yards I guess I was just expecting more. I don't think he was the exclusive return man lats year though.

For the punts he had the majority. For Kick returns he was not involved.

image.png.ab7c8577f761fbb064bffd26ed1dea92.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Boudewijn said:

For the punts he had the majority. For Kick returns he was not involved.

image.png.ab7c8577f761fbb064bffd26ed1dea92.png

 

Most teams dont have the same person returning punts and kicks. Different skill set. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if was mentioned yet but Christian Kirk and Kyler Murray were teammates in college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big potential to really break-out in the new Kingsbury air raid offense.  I wish his ADP were lower (currently FFCalc WR33, MFL WR39) but still room for him to outperform and produce much better than anticipated #'s.  He could definitely lead ARI in TGT, REC and YDS in what should be a much better offense than it was last season.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/31/2019 at 8:58 AM, Dreams And Dwightmares said:

 

Going into 2018 season Fitz signed an extension but wouldn't commit to playing in 2018. Fitz has manned the middle of field AKA slot better than nearly everyone the last few years. 

 

I believe cards last regime drafted kirk in 2018 to take it over in 2019 because most thought he'd be gone.  Kirk was regarded as the best at this in the draft by most talking heads and those that watched A&M football. 

 

Fitz did what most players do though... Realize they still got enough left and $10+ M looks pretty good. So he signed another extension. Kirk is still a football player and a dang good WR, but I don't think he was drafted in the 2nd round to play out of position. I think Fitz getting cold feet is going to ultimately hold up his true breakout season. 

 

Also, now that KK is here, I'm actually waiting for this whole thing to implode on itself. I've been wrong before and we might see the rebirth of the greatest show on turf, but I think there's a real chance that we instead see Just a clown show on turf. 

 

 I meant their number one target.  Their top fantasy WR.  Kirk will probably be used all over the field and become their go to guy.  Limiting him to slot seems so early 2000s.  Thinking of guys like OBJ, Moore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, brakeyawself said:

 

 I meant their number one target.  Their top fantasy WR.  Kirk will probably be used all over the field and become their go to guy.  Limiting him to slot seems so early 2000s.  Thinking of guys like OBJ, Moore.

 

Can you explain to me in football reasoning why moving a guy that plays his best football inside (predominantly in the slot) to the outside benefits that player? 

Edited by Dreams And Dwightmares

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dreams And Dwightmares said:

 

Can you explain to me in football reasoning why moving a guy that plays his best football inside (predominantly in the slot) to the outside benefits that player? 

 

Yea sure, but first I would suggest Kirk has the ability to play anywhere on the field.  You are relegating him and suggesting his best football comes at the slot, that doesn't make it true.  I understand why you might think that.  In college he spent something like 97% of his time in the slot.  However, that is not the NFL.

NFL defenses read patterns and repetitiveness far better than most college defenses.  If a player with Kirk's dynamic abilities is relegated to one section of the field then Defenses will generally have a huge advantage reading and covering.  If you start to move that player around the field, Defenses become far less adept at reading the play and thus covering the player.  

How will this help Kirk?  Easily.  He is a very very good YAC receiver.  Get it into his hands and it won't matter much where he is on the field, he could break out for yards.  Now by mixing him up around the field, defenses would not be able to sit and clog the middle.  They will have to spread out and stay on their toes.  This leaves more room in between the defensive players and the wide receivers, specifically Kirk in this case.  That leaves Kirk the advantage as D players would not know where to intercept his running lane and would give him more time for separation before and after the catch.  

What you are suggesting is old school tactics.  Modern football is changing and there are a plethora of WRs that get used all over the field.

Again, I would point to AB, OBJ and DJ Moore.  All 3 have similarities with Kirk.  Look at how Moore was used last season.  Look at how OBJ has been used.  I would expect Kirk to be used similarly.  You are suggesting KIrk would not be good on the outside, but that is not based on him failing on the outside.  That is based on his college usage.  This isn't college.  NFL Coaches understand modern football and the changing of positional roles.  

Every few decades there are changes like this, some gradual, some not.  Just look at how TE and RB usage has changed since the early 2000s.  WR is no different.  That's why the tall outside WR is no longer the regular automatic number 1 WR on teams.  Look at Antonio Brown, also.  Shorter, quicker, more versatile WRs are becoming their teams top choices.  And while an archetypal WR like Moss, AJ etc... will still always be of value in the NFL, they too are used differently.  They too are used across he field and not simply relegated to one X, Y, Z.  Like how Fitz has moved into the slot in his latter years. And of course, those tall super athletes are versatile enough to be used all over the field as well. But that change has allowed shorter, more non typical WRs to be far more effective and be used as their teams top target.

Edited by brakeyawself
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, brakeyawself said:

 

Yea sure, but first I would suggest Kirk has the ability to play anywhere on the field.  You are relegating him and suggesting his best football comes at the slot, that doesn't make it true.  I understand why you might think that.  In college he spent something like 97% of his time in the slot.  However, that is not the NFL.

NFL defenses read patterns and repetitiveness far better than most college defenses.  If a player with Kirk's dynamic abilities is relegated to one section of the field then Defenses will generally have a huge advantage reading and covering.  If you start to move that player around the field, Defenses become far less adept at reading the play and thus covering the player.  

How will this help Kirk?  Easily.  He is a very very good YAC receiver.  Get it into his hands and it won't matter much where he is on the field, he could break out for yards.  Now by mixing him up around the field, defenses would not be able to sit and clog the middle.  They will have to spread out and stay on their toes.  This leaves more room in between the defensive players and the wide receivers, specifically Kirk in this case.  That leaves Kirk the advantage as D players would not know where to intercept his running lane and would give him more time for separation before and after the catch.  

What you are suggesting is old school tactics.  Modern football is changing and there are a plethora of WRs that get used all over the field.

Again, I would point to AB, OBJ and DJ Moore.  All 3 have similarities with Kirk.  Look at how Moore was used last season.  Look at how OBJ has been used.  I would expect Kirk to be used similarly.  You are suggesting KIrk would not be good on the outside, but that is not based on him failing on the outside.  That is based on his college usage.  This isn't college.  NFL Coaches understand modern football and the changing of positional roles.  

Every few decades there are changes like this, some gradual, some not.  Just look at how TE and RB usage has changed since the early 2000s.  WR is no different.  That's why the tall outside WR is no longer the regular automatic number 1 WR on teams.  Look at Antonio Brown, also.  Shorter, quicker, more versatile WRs are becoming their teams top choices.  And while an archetypal WR like Moss, AJ etc... will still always be of value in the NFL, they too are used differently.  They too are used across he field and not simply relegated to one X, Y, Z.  Like how Fitz has moved into the slot in his latter years. And of course, those tall super athletes are versatile enough to be used all over the field as well. But that change has allowed shorter, more non typical WRs to be far more effective and be used as their teams top target.

 

2 hours ago, Dreams And Dwightmares said:

 

Can you explain to me in football reasoning why moving a guy that plays his best football inside (predominantly in the slot) to the outside benefits that player? 

 

In other words, just because someone is better at one thing, doesn't make them bad  at other things.  Let's say just arbitrarily he's a 9 out of 10 in the slot and a 7 or 8 out of 10 in one or both of the other 2 regular WR positions.  The negatives of repeating that player, play after play at one of those 3 positions, have a greater negative effect than using that player in both or all 3 of those positions.  The reasons I think I stated above.  

Now if that player were only a 5/10 at those other 2 positions, it might be a closer call.  But in Kirk's case, I think he actually can be a 7 or 8 out of 10 at  both X, Y, if you can really even still consider those 2 positions as clearly defined as was the case 20 years ago and prior.  No, I don't think you can in many cases.  But that's a slightly different argument.

And yea, I think TE's are a great example.  For many years TE was a relatively insignificant offensive weapon in most cases.  The position itself I don't even think was as clearly defined as it is today.  But then teams started seeing the benefit of using the TE, where possible as far as ability, in ways more close to how they would use a WR.  In some cases today, I don't think you can tell the difference between some TE's and some WR's for the most part.  Where and how they block on the field probably being the major exception.

RB's have gone through similar changes. Teams no longer settle with one, very powerful but good RB the way they used too.  Of course teams still use these more typical bruising backs, but they use them differently or in a RBBC far more often than was the case even 15 years ago.  Thinking Michael Turner, with a more recent example perhaps being Blount and Lynch to an extent.  But Lynch still being the more versatile of the 3 imo.  

The main reason for these changes to TE and RB, as with WR are the same; more versatility means more options means less predictable and that is a tremendous advantage in life and in sport.  In fact, that tactical aspect, making it more difficult for the opposing defense to predict your plays is probably one of the most important aspects of the majority of sports, but that much more important in a sport like American Football.  Tactics are sometimes everything.  Surprise and variety being two of the most important weapons in the coaching toolbox.

Basically KIrk still might spend 50 to 70% of the time in the slot.  But even mixing it up a quarter or a third of the time would have huge benefits.  I think as is the case with a lot of these versatile WRs.  They will spend the majority of time at one of the 3 spots, often today in the slot.  But then will take out-routes or just line up on the sideline to mix it up.  That's all we are talking about here.   Like it might only be 20% of his targets coming from outside the slot.

Edited by brakeyawself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, brakeyawself said:

Let's say just arbitrarily he's a 9 out of 10 in the slot and a 7 or 8 out of 10 in one or both of the other 2 regular WR positions.  The negatives of repeating that player, play after play at one of those 3 positions, have a greater negative effect than using that player in both or all 3 of those positions.  

Typical use of Game theory :)

Here's an older link that also goes into the same topic:

http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2008/06/game-theory-and-runpass-balance.html?m=1

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, brakeyawself said:

 

Yea sure, but first I would suggest Kirk has the ability to play anywhere on the field.  You are relegating him and suggesting his best football comes at the slot, that doesn't make it true.  I understand why you might think that.  In college he spent something like 97% of his time in the slot.  However, that is not the NFL.

NFL defenses read patterns and repetitiveness far better than most college defenses.  If a player with Kirk's dynamic abilities is relegated to one section of the field then Defenses will generally have a huge advantage reading and covering.  If you start to move that player around the field, Defenses become far less adept at reading the play and thus covering the player.  

How will this help Kirk?  Easily.  He is a very very good YAC receiver.  Get it into his hands and it won't matter much where he is on the field, he could break out for yards.  Now by mixing him up around the field, defenses would not be able to sit and clog the middle.  They will have to spread out and stay on their toes.  This leaves more room in between the defensive players and the wide receivers, specifically Kirk in this case.  That leaves Kirk the advantage as D players would not know where to intercept his running lane and would give him more time for separation before and after the catch.  

What you are suggesting is old school tactics.  Modern football is changing and there are a plethora of WRs that get used all over the field.

Again, I would point to AB, OBJ and DJ Moore.  All 3 have similarities with Kirk.  Look at how Moore was used last season.  Look at how OBJ has been used.  I would expect Kirk to be used similarly.  You are suggesting KIrk would not be good on the outside, but that is not based on him failing on the outside.  That is based on his college usage.  This isn't college.  NFL Coaches understand modern football and the changing of positional roles.  

Every few decades there are changes like this, some gradual, some not.  Just look at how TE and RB usage has changed since the early 2000s.  WR is no different.  That's why the tall outside WR is no longer the regular automatic number 1 WR on teams.  Look at Antonio Brown, also.  Shorter, quicker, more versatile WRs are becoming their teams top choices.  And while an archetypal WR like Moss, AJ etc... will still always be of value in the NFL, they too are used differently.  They too are used across he field and not simply relegated to one X, Y, Z.  Like how Fitz has moved into the slot in his latter years. And of course, those tall super athletes are versatile enough to be used all over the field as well. But that change has allowed shorter, more non typical WRs to be far more effective and be used as their teams top target.

 

OBJ was an outside receiver moved inside to take advantage of matchups. 

 

No one moved inside to outside to take advantage of matchups. 

 

The reason is the best and most athletic DBs on the other defenses guard the outside if they aren't strictly on man defense where'd they follow a certain type A receiver. 

 

The same reason TEs see less results moving outside is the same reason slot receivers see less results moving outside. The outside CBs are generally the best defenders on the field. 

 

Larry Fitzgerald moved inside because he lost a step, but the cardinals still desired to get use out of one of the greatest. Fitzgerald 2018 playing strictly outside likely would've put up pedestrian numbers, but instead he was still a force. 

 

Don't be shocked when in 2020 all y'all day kirk doesn't have what it takes to succeed in the NFL and he's moved inside after Fitz retires and he has a career season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, brakeyawself said:

 

 

In other words, just because someone is better at one thing, doesn't make them bad  at other things.  Let's say just arbitrarily he's a 9 out of 10 in the slot and a 7 or 8 out of 10 in one or both of the other 2 regular WR positions.  The negatives of repeating that player, play after play at one of those 3 positions, have a greater negative effect than using that player in both or all 3 of those positions.  The reasons I think I stated above.  

Now if that player were only a 5/10 at those other 2 positions, it might be a closer call.  But in Kirk's case, I think he actually can be a 7 or 8 out of 10 at  both X, Y, if you can really even still consider those 2 positions as clearly defined as was the case 20 years ago and prior.  No, I don't think you can in many cases.  But that's a slightly different argument.

And yea, I think TE's are a great example.  For many years TE was a relatively insignificant offensive weapon in most cases.  The position itself I don't even think was as clearly defined as it is today.  But then teams started seeing the benefit of using the TE, where possible as far as ability, in ways more close to how they would use a WR.  In some cases today, I don't think you can tell the difference between some TE's and some WR's for the most part.  Where and how they block on the field probably being the major exception.

RB's have gone through similar changes. Teams no longer settle with one, very powerful but good RB the way they used too.  Of course teams still use these more typical bruising backs, but they use them differently or in a RBBC far more often than was the case even 15 years ago.  Thinking Michael Turner, with a more recent example perhaps being Blount and Lynch to an extent.  But Lynch still being the more versatile of the 3 imo.  

The main reason for these changes to TE and RB, as with WR are the same; more versatility means more options means less predictable and that is a tremendous advantage in life and in sport.  In fact, that tactical aspect, making it more difficult for the opposing defense to predict your plays is probably one of the most important aspects of the majority of sports, but that much more important in a sport like American Football.  Tactics are sometimes everything.  Surprise and variety being two of the most important weapons in the coaching toolbox.

Basically KIrk still might spend 50 to 70% of the time in the slot.  But even mixing it up a quarter or a third of the time would have huge benefits.  I think as is the case with a lot of these versatile WRs.  They will spend the majority of time at one of the 3 spots, often today in the slot.  But then will take out-routes or just line up on the sideline to mix it up.  That's all we are talking about here.   Like it might only be 20% of his targets coming from outside the slot.

 

False statement about TEs. I feel like you're getting bad information. TEs on the outside covered by a CB don't succeed as much as they do lining up as a typical TE covered by a LB or S. 

 

This isn't Antonio brown. Defensive coordinators aren't saying "we gotta move our best coverage all over the field to stop Christian kirk". They just line him up against who he lines up against. 

 

He's a good receiver outside. In college he Dominated inside and was expected to dominate inside in the pros too. 

 

On the outside he's JAG, wait until Fitz retires and he moves inside. 

 

I disagree with almost everything you said. It sounds like someone who doesn't watch the game but just reads things from ESPN who know very little. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dreams And Dwightmares said:
8 hours ago, brakeyawself said:

1) And yea, I think TE's are a great example. 

2) For many years TE was a relatively insignificant offensive weapon in most cases. 

3) The position itself I don't even think was as clearly defined as it is today. 

4) But then teams started seeing the benefit of using the TE, where possible as far as ability, in ways more close to how they would use a WR. 

5) In some cases today, I don't think you can tell the difference between some TE's and some WR's for the most part.  Where and how they block on the field probably being the major exception.

False statement about TEs. 

Which of the statements you consider false? I numbered them for your benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Boudewijn said:

Which of the statements you consider false? I numbered them for your benefit.

 

1,2,3,4, and 5.

 

The TE position was used to block when the NFL was run heavy and when they became pass heavy every team started focusing on a pass catching TE. 

 

The TE position changed because the players did and how they were used. They started going with faster, better receiving TEs to utilize another pass catcher on the field. Whereas one or 2 teams had a Tony Gonzalez or a Sharpe now 32 teams have a pass catching TE. 

 

Sometimes they move around at their detriment but their most effective situations come when lined up with a LB or S over them. Not thrown in the edge to be guarded by a CB. 

 

Yeah, you can absolutely tell the difference from a TE to a WR. Doesn't mean TEs don't catch a ton more today than they used to. 

 

And none of this relates to a guy that is a WIDE RECEIVER that dominated in the middle moving outside to be JAG in the pros. 

Edited by Dreams And Dwightmares

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Dreams And Dwightmares said:

 

False statement about TEs. I feel like you're getting bad information. TEs on the outside covered by a CB don't succeed as much as they do lining up as a typical TE covered by a LB or S. 

 

This isn't Antonio brown. Defensive coordinators aren't saying "we gotta move our best coverage all over the field to stop Christian kirk". They just line him up against who he lines up against. 

 

He's a good receiver outside. In college he Dominated inside and was expected to dominate inside in the pros too. 

 

On the outside he's JAG, wait until Fitz retires and he moves inside. 

 

I disagree with almost everything you said. It sounds like someone who doesn't watch the game but just reads things from ESPN who know very little. 

 

You missed, everything.

 

no one said AB, OBJ etc were all the same.  Point is versatility, the get used in different positions.  You attempting to limit the reasons for that happening doesn’t change that from happening.  It doesn’t matter if OBJ started outside then got moved inside, or started in China and then moved to the middle.  The point was usage. It also doesn’t matter that teams move their CBS for AB. I’m talking about the ability to play all over the field to different degrees.  Defenses lining up their best CBS on the outside also doesn’t matter.  What a weirdo.

 

as far as TE goes, the guy that criticized the argument went on to say the same thing but then disagree?  Your argument proved my argument, not your disagreement.  Are some simpletons? 

 

I explained everything so even even if you disagree about TE everything else said about Kirk explains why.

Edited by brakeyawself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2019 at 11:24 AM, Dreams And Dwightmares said:

 

Can you explain to me in football reasoning why moving a guy that plays his best football inside (predominantly in the slot) to the outside benefits that player? 

This offense is known for it's 4 WR sets.  It's actually possible that it breaks the previous NFL record for # of 4 WR sets.  There will be plenty of sets with 2 slot WR's.

 

Evan Silva seems to think that Kirk and Isabella will man the slots and Fitz will be back on the outside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RMJ_12 said:

This offense is known for it's 4 WR sets.  It's actually possible that it breaks the previous NFL record for # of 4 WR sets.  There will be plenty of sets with 2 slot WR's.

 

Evan Silva seems to think that Kirk and Isabella will man the slots and Fitz will be back on the outside.

 

I'll believe that when I see that (Fitz outside). 

 

No one's gonna win with 4 WR sets if that's true lol. 

 

Take one of the leagues worst OL in 2018. Give it the shortest QB in the NFL who's gonna have trouble seeing over the top of the line. Remove a blocking TE. Send a RB into the flats or on a route instead of staying into block... 

 

Goodness gracious man, I'm actually excited that there's a real chance someone's gonna break David Carr sack record and remove that shame from the Texans franchise. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Dreams And Dwightmares said:

 

I'll believe that when I see that (Fitz outside). 

 

No one's gonna win with 4 WR sets if that's true lol. 

 

Take one of the leagues worst OL in 2018. Give it the shortest QB in the NFL who's gonna have trouble seeing over the top of the line. Remove a blocking TE. Send a RB into the flats or on a route instead of staying into block... 

 

Goodness gracious man, I'm actually excited that there's a real chance someone's gonna break David Carr sack record and remove that shame from the Texans franchise. 

This offense is designed to get the ball out of the Quarterbacks hands in a hurry.  The oline was very banged up last year and they added J.R. Sweezy and Marcus Gilbert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kirk and Murray were teammates at Texas A&M. Actually RSJ too. KK was at Texas A&M before Kirk’s time, but I believe KK was involved in Murray’s recruitment and possibly Kirk’s too. Murray and Kirk will already have a connection, and Kirk is familiar with this type of system.

There’s been comments that KK must not like Kirk because he drafted two WRs and Kirk was drafted by the old regime. That can certainly be true in some cases, but in this case I believe it’s overlooking KK, Murray, and Kirk’s history. I highly doubt KK doesn’t like Kirk (in fact I suspect just the opposite). He was just bringing in offensive fire power in the draft for a system that runs a lot of plays.

Don’t sleep on Kirk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RMJ_12 said:

This offense is designed to get the ball out of the Quarterbacks hands in a hurry.  The oline was very banged up last year and they added J.R. Sweezy and Marcus Gilbert.

 

JR Sweezy lol. 

 

Different isn't always "improvement". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, gufomel said:

Kirk and Murray were teammates at Texas A&M. Actually RSJ too. KK was at Texas A&M before Kirk’s time, but I believe KK was involved in Murray’s recruitment and possibly Kirk’s too. Murray and Kirk will already have a connection, and Kirk is familiar with this type of system.

There’s been comments that KK must not like Kirk because he drafted two WRs and Kirk was drafted by the old regime. That can certainly be true in some cases, but in this case I believe it’s overlooking KK, Murray, and Kirk’s history. I highly doubt KK doesn’t like Kirk (in fact I suspect just the opposite). He was just bringing in offensive fire power in the draft for a system that runs a lot of plays.

Don’t sleep on Kirk. 

 

Kirk and Murray were recruited by Sumlin. KK was losing at Tech already when they started college. 

 

No connection there. 

 

Murray hated A&M so much he sat out a full year of football to leave their school and go to OK even after becoming the unquestioned starter after Kyle Allen's deoarture. 

 

They aren't all intertwined in this great history together like you make it sound IMO. 

 

BTW... Kirk dominated primarily in the slot while at A&M since we brought up A&M. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Dreams And Dwightmares said:

 

Kirk and Murray were recruited by Sumlin. KK was losing at Tech already when they started college. 

 

No connection there. 

 

Murray hated A&M so much he sat out a full year of football to leave their school and go to OK even after becoming the unquestioned starter after Kyle Allen's deoarture. 

 

They aren't all intertwined in this great history together like you make it sound IMO. 

 

BTW... Kirk dominated primarily in the slot while at A&M since we brought up A&M. 

 

KK was absolutely involved in Murray’s recruitment while he was at A&M. Looked it up and same with Kirk. See both below.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.espn.com/nfl/draft2019/story/_/id/26562522/could-kliff-kingsbury-seven-year-recruitment-kyler-murray-pay-off%3fplatform=amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.azcentral.com/amp/2618961002

Murray left A&M because Sumlin was an a** in the way he handled Murray and Allen. Nothing to do with KK. 

I’m not saying this automatically means some fantastic connection between these players and KK. I’m just debunking the myth that Kirk is from the old regime and KK has no allegiance to him. KK has had a connection with both Murray and Kirk since their sophomore years of high school. 

Edited by gufomel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dreams And Dwightmares said:

 

JR Sweezy lol. 

 

Different isn't always "improvement". 

He's actually a good run blocker.  It helps David Johnson more then anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...