Russell Shepard

Then you would have people bitching why use him as a decoy...... They would be saying "the coaches are stupid for not giving him the ball."

 

Well I'm eating my crow and loving it because I really thought the youngsters that have supposedly been playing so well in camp would contribute early and often (to a degree they did...i.e Josh Downs).

But I kind of like the idea of not throwing the high profile guys (Shep, Randle) in the mix in a nationally televised game in front of a hot crowd for their first significant action. It's easy to work in your linemen because their mistakes aren't noticed by the casual fan. Everyone sees a receiver drop a pass...some even know when they run the wrong route. Everyone sees the gadget QB produce no yards. I would understand the argument for easing them in. This could be totally off base, but maybe they want to work the marquee guys in under less pressure...and it makes sense. Maybe they start to get worked in next week against Vanderbilt.

Either argument makes sense to me. But, I would hope if we're in the position of needing a spark...or more help sustaining a long drive to keep the defense off the field...that the superfroshes will get a quicker look.

 

I didn't think Randle got any p.t. either but apparently he did see the field. Here is my question, what kind of message does it send to recruits that it doesn't matter how good you are, you are more than likely not going to be a big part of the team unless something drastic happens. Patrick Peterson should have started every game last year and didn't for some reason. Sheppard should have at least got a touch or two from the slot, a reverse whatever, you can't tell me that Trindon Holliday is a better football player than Shep is. Is Chris Mitchell better than Randle? Julio Jones and AJ Green were a huge reason why both of those teams beat us last season. Jordan Jefferson last year, what would it have hurt to work him in earlier? It really does not make sense to me.

so question, are recruits going to start looking at LSU as a place that they cannot play in their rookie season, unless the wheels fall off?

 

1st......I don't see how anyone can predict what path Miles will take in ANY given game. I think he's proved that over and over.

2nd.....Our knowns (players that have previously been on the field) had a tough enough time playing Washington. I'm guessing that Miles was as surprised as all of us at the fight we had on our hands. With that said, where is the room for an unproven freshman? I know RS is all-world coming out of highschool, but the field Saturday night was quite a bit different from a highschool game.

3rd.....We won the game. We didn't drop in the polls. Our young QB will gain in confidence and be better for it. I just can't see putting a load on a freshman in a game that we had to bust our ass to win.

4th.....We're playing Vandy Saturday night. They've almost always been a tuneup game for a better opponent. If that holds true, my guess is Shepard will see some playing time. I'm not all that disappointed with our offense. If our defense holds Vandy in check, I'm gonna feel a whole lot better about our effort against Washington.

 

His his latest lunch conference. He talks about Russel Shepard among other things:

Watch Lunch with Les Now - LSUsports.net—The Official Web Site of LSU Tigers Athletics

 

Curtis Taylor made an NFL roster so apparently a lack of talent was not the reason he didn't play well last season. Maybe CJ is having other problems as well.

 

My problem with the "knowns" argument is that very few, if any, of our "knowns" got really significant playing time the last time this defense was truly great. The juniors and seniors were around but they weren't playing because they were behind some "knowns" that had been killing it. Charles Alexander has unfortunately been injury riddled. Harry Coleman got spot duty and performed well in the title game when Steltz went out. I believe Riley and Sheppard played some in 2007 as well.

Our current "knowns" have proven nothing based on 2008 and game one of 2009. Their advantage doesn't seem to be skill wise. Their advantage is being around the program longer. Miles knows them. You can't really say they know the playbook better(like on offense) because the defense is mostly different.

People always say we should trust the coaches...and I do. But at the same time, we KNOW Miles, and most coaches for that matter, have an aversion to playing freshmen even when their readiness is shining through in practice. I know practice is not the same as games...but they're freshmen. You can't know how they'll perform in the spotlight if you don't put them in it. Sometimes you just know when a guy isn't affected by that stuff and is itching to contribute. Let's hope Miles doesn't ignore it.

And I'm from Bastrop, so naturally I defend Bastrop kids, but I promise you, the Bastrop kids at LSU, Arky, Ole Miss, Miss. St., and Auburn know pressure and adversity well. They played for an ******* of a coach who didn't give two ****s about their futures, only his own legacy. Nothing Miles, Petrino, Nutt, Chizik, and staffs, etc. say will phase those kids after life under Bradshaw. But that's strangely a credit to Bradshaw, because all of the kids who played for him then played in college did extremely well. Every single one. Playing for him and dealing with the things adults put them through (stripped titles, bad reps, rival coaches) toughened them up. That's not to say kids from other schools aren't ready. But I know these kids. The typical stuff you try to shield freshmen from just won't phase these guys. They're use to it. If they're doing it big in practice, I guarantee they'll do it big in the game too!