2011 UCLA Pre-Season Camp: Early Pointers from The Depth Chart
by Nestor on Jul 25, 2011 2:00 PM PDT
in Football
Email
Print
Last Wednesday UCLA released its official media guide for the 2011 football season. Many of us poured through it as you can see the discussions from the comment thread here. We also went back in and took another look. Based on all the great feedback we got from the comment threads and a second look, here are some of pointers that stand out for now. I am sure we will have more when we all go through the depth chart in the coming days:
- Jeff Baca as of right now is listed as the starter for weakside guard and Casey Griffiths is listed as his backup, but checking in at only at 284 lbs. Griffith's numbers are interesting because in the spring outlook he was listed at 292. Griffith is not the only OL who shed some lbs this of-season.
- Sheller at 302 is the starter at weakside tackle, backed up by Connor Bradford, who weighs in at 275. Interestingly both of them also lost weight compared to their spring numbers when respectively they were listed at 315 and 278.
- Mike Harris gets the starting nod at strongside tackle, weighing in at 326. Mike also shed 8 pounds of his spring numbers at 334. Chris Ward at strongside guard seems to be the exception at OL, moving up to 330 from spring weight at 325.
- At QB there is an "or" between Kevin Prince and Richard Brehaut, that undercut the off-season rumors about coaches writing Brehaut off. True freshman Brett Hundley went down from spring listed 225 to 210.
- Not a lot of noticeable difference in weight at the RB position. How the coaches divvy up playing time between Malcolm Jones and Jordan James should be another fun subplot to watch.
Moving over to defense after the jump.
- The loss of weight is also apparent on the defensive line. Cassius Marsh went down from 295 to 289. Nate Chandler wet down went down from 298 to 292. Donovan Carter went down from 305 to 295 and Justin Edison went down from 292 to 285. Seali'i Epenesa - a kid that I am really excited to see this coming season - went down from 323 to 308.
- It's at the DE position where we see some marginal gains. Damien Holmes was one of the few who gained lbs this off-season. The DE went up from 265 to 270. Similarly Datone Jones went up a little from 272 to 275. Owamagbe Odighizuwa went up from 264 to 266. Keenan Graham went up from 255 to 260. Wesley Flowers seems to be one of the few exceptions at DE who went down from 264 to 254. Still there seems to be a trend here. Doesn't it?
- Our DT/DE roster looks pretty deep. Don't think we have seen UCLA stocked up like this at this spot in a while. We will have more on this when we go through the rosters hopefully in the coming days.
- Not a lot of noticeable difference in the weight of LB corps. It appears that Jordan Zumwalt went up from 230 to 236. Zumwalt was really challenged by coaches during spring when he lost his starting spot. It will be interesting to see how he comes out during the upcoming camp. We should also keep an eye on Eric Kendricks to see if he can make a charge at Sean Westgate for the top spot at WLB.
- In the defensive backfield Dalton Hilliard went up from 189 to 200. That is an exciting development. Dalton is one of the most ferocious hitters in the team. So if he can pack more punch in his hits ... that is going to be very very nice. The battle between Sheldon Price and Anthony Jefferson is going to be interesting, Plus, anxious to have Brandon Sermons getting back in action.
- The depth chart does not include any FR who didn't participate in spring drills. Obviously, it's pretty tough to count on any FR to make any early impact, but I think we should all keep an eye on Devin Lucien, Kevin McReynolds, Ben Wysocki, and Raymond Nelson to make possible moves up the depth chart. Lucien and McReynolds are both very talented players, and Wysocki and Nelson really fill positions of need.
If you need to go back and take a look at spring weight/outlook you can do it here.
So there you have it. Seems like there is a trend wrt to weight. The OL and DTs seem to have gotten a little leaner, while the DEs have packed in some additional weight this off-season. Does this mean that our training regimen made these guys leaner and more athletic? I will certainly not make any conclusions until we see the results on the field.
The dominant storylines of last few years have been our issue at OL and at QB. When you look through the depth chart any obvious answers for those issues do not pop up yet. However, I still do not think our situation at OL is as dire as many think it is. I may turn out to be totally wrong on that but it appears to me that for the first time in a while we do have some options. I guess the question is whether Bob Palcic and Rick Neuheisel can manage around the attrition that may take place before the return of Baca.
As for QBs, no need to rehash tired stories (at least for now). We will see the results this fall. That said, I do think we have some depth at skill positions and on the defensive side, it's been a while for UCLA to have viable options at 2 and 3 deep.
While there are good reasons to be concerned about our program, looking at this depth, I also see many reasons to be intrigued about this upcoming season. Everyone and their mother is counting UCLA out, predicting the Bruins to finish either last or dead last in our division. These kids are not operating in a vacuum and I am sure they are reading all the clips. Collective this bunch has enough talent accumulated through good recruiting in last 3 years that I think they have the potential to regain the momentum from 2009-10 season. Excited to see how the story unfolds in next few weeks and months.
GO BRUINS.
27 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Anyone out there with any strength/conditioning experience? (or insider knowledge)?
Is the weight difference a good thing or a bad thing? Great if they’re getting more athletic, but bad if they’re losing muscle mass… (the old ‘muscle weighs more than fat’ argument)
The weight differences are too big in most cases (4-8 lb variation can be attributed to diet & such) but 10-20 lb differences are a little more significant in my uninformed opinion.
Weights can vary depending on a lot of factors.
It’s been my understanding that Mike Linn is very much a promoter of effective body composition. He wants almost all his players to be as low in fat as is useful. So I think when we see differences like Epanesa, Marsh, Chandler, etc., you’re seeing fat losses and muscle gains, as opposed to “weight gains”. I’ve always been a supporter of lean players, even on the DL.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
Also a sign that our D may be looking to penetrate more rather than just fill gaps.
Tresey said we’d have more of an attacking D, and these numbers back it up. At this age, these guys are naturally gaining weight. The fact that they’re staying the same or dropping despite intense workouts is definitely a sign of a concerted effort to have a leaner, quicker D line.
by AllHailMightyBruins on Jul 25, 2011 3:28 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
They're actually losing weight
so we’ll be more likely to be picked by the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl selection committee at year end.
'A pint's a pound the world around'
So these guys lose a few pounds in sweat each practice.
A difference of < 4 Lbs is probably not significant by itself.
It’s far more important if that weight is fat or muscle – and if
it’s muscle where is the muscle.
by KnudsenRockne on Jul 25, 2011 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Generally
you don’t lose fat without losing some muscle. I suppose you try and minimize this loss by eating the right foods. But that’s the general rule, even if they are maintaining the correct diet, you will lose some muscle mass by dropping weight. However, I think it’s better to drop one pound of muscle and 9 pounds of fat than being 10 pounds heavier because the loss tends to improve quickness and endurance.
EGO TROIORUM MALLEUS SUM
by Bruins102NCAA on Jul 26, 2011 4:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Are you sure?
Losing fat is tied to losing muscle? What if the fat is burned while exercising (which leads to building muscle)?
by KnudsenRockne on Jul 26, 2011 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions
I can only speak from experience and from what I have read
First you have to figure that these guys are pretty much in shape to begin with. Second, biologically, your body wants to maintain a certain % of fat. Depending on what that percentage is and how close they are to it to begin with, really matters in the calculation.
If they are replacing fat with muscle, I can see strength gains. Realize this is very hard to do while dropping fat when you are pretty much in shape to begin with. Like I said above, their diet is all important. If they are on a high protein diet while dropping, they can slow the rate of muscle loss as compared to fat. This is what bodybuilders and other athletes do when “cutting.”
I think the mass vs. fat argument is best demonstrated by looking at the world’s strongest men competition. All of those guys have guts. Most bodybuilders have guts when building but cut right before competition. They attempt to flush the water and fat out a few days before the competition. From what I understand, many are close to passing out when posing up on stage because they are so weak and dehydrated.
EGO TROIORUM MALLEUS SUM
by Bruins102NCAA on Jul 26, 2011 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Nice summary
My first thought in looking at the weight loss from the O-Line is a possible precursor to a much more uptempo offense. Coach Johnson has talked a lot about running some sort of pistol/spread hybrid, and I anticipate that he’ll be running things with a quicker pace.
by AllHailMightyBruins on Jul 25, 2011 2:40 PM PDT reply actions
I wouldn't worry about 5-10lbs
I wouldn’t worry about 5-10lbs difference to much, because like mentioned early these guys can shed up to 4-10 lbs in one practice. There are a lot of factors that should be considered food intake, fiber intake, water intake, sodium intake, and caloric needs for sports performance and recovery.
What you really would like to see is the power to weight ratio and how a guy can control his body weight. If a guy is playing heavier than his frame can handle than he will be sacrificing speed, agility, or the ability to accelerate or decelerate which is everything thing in sports. Another reason why these numbers might be coming down is the player is finally becoming dedicated to the sport and has changed his diet and put in the hard work to change fat to muscle. After all most of these kids have probably never been on any structured strength & conditioning and nutrition programs before and realize now it’s a full time job on top of all their other jobs.
The biggest issue
with playing heavier than your frame is injuries. Carrying extra weight is hell on ankles/knee joints.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
Yep, I agree.
It’s really the ligaments and tendons that can’t take the shearing forces. when you want to go one direction and your body goes in another direction it puts to much force on tendon, ligament, or muscle and something has to give. That’s how most injuries occur. Of course I’m not speaking of direct trauma to a location from a hit.
A few things
I wouldn’t put too much stock on the listed weights of the guys. I don’t believe Hundley came in at 225 and shed 15 pounds.
Wesley Flowers came in last year as a guy who would eventually grow into a DT so his apparent weight loss is interesting. Maybe the coaches like him as a DE more?
One of the guys on the OL I’m intrigued by is Greg Capella. JG recently said that he looked like a new person from previous years so hopefully that translates onto the field.
by Bruins#1 on Jul 25, 2011 4:56 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Maybe we got a new scale in the weight room?
We're havin' too much fun today. We ain't thinkin' 'bout tomorrow.
since we're talking football
Hopefully the lockout didn’t hurt some of our undrafted NFL guys and they’ll get signed soon. Hopefully the great Kai Forbath, Ryan Taylor, Eddie Williams, Darius Savage, etc. Will get signed.
by Bruins#1 on Jul 25, 2011 5:53 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Owa on the end of the D line at 266 is exciting
He came out of highschool at 235, built solid. He’ll be fun to watch this year.
About the weight loss
I’ll bet these guys would drop 5 pounds after taking a big dump.
by RWCBruin on Jul 25, 2011 9:07 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Losing weight is overweighted
The Denver Broncos of 1997 and 98 had the lightest O Line in the NFL by far. They also led the league in rushing, produced a 2,008 yd season for Terrell Davis, and won two Super Bowls.
I don’t care about the weight. I care about a quick first step, quick hands, good technique, good schemes, and an desire to absolutely bury the guy across the line from him. Oh, and staying healthy would be pretty good, too.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
+1
mv^2 ftw, speed>mass ….. now some weight is needed, but quickness even in the trenches is huge. Those Denver lines were a fun group to watch.
Oh-oh the "F-word" (Fysics)
When talking about a shoving match, and ability to gain yards after contact, probably momentum (mv) is more important than energy (mv^2). Energy is probably more related to how much it takes to get up to speed. So high weight (mass) is a plus for shoving and pushing on for more yards but a minus for getting up to speed (and changing direction… F=ma and all dat)
I’ll stop now, lest I go on and on …
by KnudsenRockne on Jul 26, 2011 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
