- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Who has/had more potential: Clayton or Randle?
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:28 pm
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:28 pm
i mean entering as a true frosh
This post was edited on 4/5/09 at 9:01 am
8
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
michael clayton
marcus randall
marcus randall
This post was edited on 4/4/09 at 6:30 pm
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
It's almost impossible to play this game knowing how Clayton's career turned out. I'll take a stab and say Randall might be more athletic, but I don't know that there's ever been a better "football player" at LSU than Clayton.
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:32 pm to Hot Carl
quote:
but I don't know that there's ever been a better "football player" at LSU than Clayton.
eh
i don't know if bowe wasn't as good/better than clayton
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i don't know if bowe wasn't as good/better than clayton
I love Bowe(I compared him to T.O. before you, btw
), but I don't think he was even a better receiver than Clayton in college. He definitely wasn't a better football player.Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
Amp Hill
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:36 pm to Hot Carl
quote:
He definitely wasn't a better football player.
in what way?
bowe was an accomplished blocker also, if that's what you mean
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
Randle Slow
I would say RR, being that MC came in and played significantly as a true frosh without us having as many receivers as we do now. If RR really can come in and be a solid #3 with the talent we have here, then I would say he is destined to be better. Carl is right on though in that Clayton was so much more than a good receiver. Without him, who's to say the receivers behind him don't take blocking down field as seriously? He showed that being a hard-nosed football player coupled with talent can turn you into a 1st rounder.
I would say RR, being that MC came in and played significantly as a true frosh without us having as many receivers as we do now. If RR really can come in and be a solid #3 with the talent we have here, then I would say he is destined to be better. Carl is right on though in that Clayton was so much more than a good receiver. Without him, who's to say the receivers behind him don't take blocking down field as seriously? He showed that being a hard-nosed football player coupled with talent can turn you into a 1st rounder.
This post was edited on 4/4/09 at 6:41 pm
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
bowe was an accomplished blocker also, if that's what you mean
He was. Bowe was a great blocker. But Clayton kicked arse on special teams and even played safety in '02 when he needed to. And he never dropped the balls Bowe did. Bowe did get more open though.
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
bowe was an accomplished blocker also, if that's what you mean
Clayton had some to do with that IMO
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:40 pm to Hot Carl
quote:
and even played safety in '02
other than the UT game (when he was burned, fwiw), when else did he play safety?
i always thought this stuff was more of a myth than a real statement (outside of that 1 half)
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:41 pm to PrattLSU
quote:
Clayton had some to do with that IMO
good point. He set the standard.
Posted on 4/4/09 at 6:51 pm to Hot Carl
Hard to deny what Clayton meant to LSUs program.
Posted on 4/4/09 at 7:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
Both were really highly touted coming out of HS. I think MC has/had more potential to be a great "college" player b/c of his talents on both sides of the ball coming out of HS (It was pretty clear that he was going to be a beast on STs from the beginning). I think RR has more "Pro" potential b/c he has higher end speed IMO.
I think Clayton's greatest attribute was his signing to play at LSU in the first place. The class of Clayton, Hill, Spears, Addai, etc... is the class that put LSU back on the map as a national power.
I think Clayton's greatest attribute was his signing to play at LSU in the first place. The class of Clayton, Hill, Spears, Addai, etc... is the class that put LSU back on the map as a national power.
This post was edited on 4/4/09 at 7:16 pm
Posted on 4/4/09 at 7:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
If you really want to compare, how about Josh Reed vs RR?
Posted on 4/4/09 at 7:25 pm to MrJimBeam
2 very different types of WRs
Posted on 4/4/09 at 7:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
True, i guess i was thinking more of impact WR's.
Posted on 4/4/09 at 7:30 pm to MrJimBeam
it's easier with RR (and bowe) b/c they're all in the 6-2 to 6-3 range
Posted on 4/4/09 at 7:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
some points about clayon (I used to go to school with him):
- he had a mean streak
- he was a very physical receiver
- he used to play QB, WR, and CB in highschool.
- he was very cocky, but could back it up
- he was fearless over the middle and could pick up first downs
I HOPE randall can do all that in his LSU career.
- he had a mean streak
- he was a very physical receiver
- he used to play QB, WR, and CB in highschool.
- he was very cocky, but could back it up
- he was fearless over the middle and could pick up first downs
I HOPE randall can do all that in his LSU career.
Posted on 4/4/09 at 7:45 pm to Hot Carl
quote:
good point. He set the standard.
quote:
If you really want to compare, how about Josh Reed vs RR?
he set the standard.. for his size Josh was probably the most physical reciever to come out of LSU
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News