Page 2 of 3

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:08 pm
by duck541
Both Nelson and Tony James are going to get looks at CB, whether either of them ends up there is still up in the air.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 2:13 pm
by dd10snoop28
Nelson would be an all-american safety IMVHO.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 2:14 pm
by dd10snoop28
Yeah, that is a crazy statement but his explosiveness, anticipation and hitting ability are perfect for the position.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:08 am
by srsmiley007
dd10snoop28 wrote:Nelson would be an all-american safety IMVHO.
He won't be playing Safety. That is one position that typically requires height/weight due to the run support requirements, additionally, we look decent at those positions. At issue is who can turn, run and close and provide decent run coverage. His 4.4 speed, burst and fluidity make him a natural at this position. While height is nice, the latter is more essential for this position. Ugo / Ifo they were all virtually the same size. This could be a good get for us. Merritt and Malik will likely push for PT backing up Marshall.

It sounds a lot like a done deal. Neal has wanted him at DB all along...... This move would explain why they didn't fixate on DB's after the locked up Ugo.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:22 am
by lukeyrid13
Bob Sanders was a Pro-Bowl safety and he was only 5-8. Jarius Byrd is only 5-10. Both those guys are closer to 200 lbs though.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:44 am
by squintsdd
It's too bad he most likely won't stay on the offensive side. He's one of those kids who you know can make a big gain out of nothing, and can potentially get to the end zone almost anytime

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:51 am
by lukeyrid13
squintsdd wrote:It's too bad he most likely won't stay on the offensive side. He's one of those kids who you know can make a big gain out of nothing, and can potentially get to the end zone almost anytime
We just got 3 of the top 4 APB in the country though. With: Marhsall, James, Lovette, Merritt and Griffin all fighting for reps I think we can afford to move him over.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:59 am
by GrandpaDuck
The Nickel DB is a tweener position between a Corner and Safety anyway. You are often covering the other teams smallest and shiftiest receiver yet you're also in the middle of the field on run plays. In the past Oregon has sometimes flipped an outside corner to the slot in Nickel packages depending on the type of slot receiver the other team has and whether you are bringing in more of a safety or corner as the Nickel. And in zone coverage you are more safety like than corner in your responsibilities.

I think the trial is on, but he'll be moved back if he doesn't make regular rotation on the depth chart. Or they play him 2 way (an Oregon first in decades?) if they just need him for insurance on defense.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:03 am
by pezsez1
I think he should move to defense. Nelson's ability to tackle in space (from what we've seen on special teams) is fantastic. I don't think you need to be huge to be a great defender; if you have good instincts and tackle like a missile, you should do well at the college level.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:03 am
by squintsdd
lukeyrid13 wrote:
squintsdd wrote:It's too bad he most likely won't stay on the offensive side. He's one of those kids who you know can make a big gain out of nothing, and can potentially get to the end zone almost anytime
We just got 3 of the top 4 APB in the country though. With: Marhsall, James, Lovette, Merritt and Griffin all fighting for reps I think we can afford to move him over.
Agreed. I'm not saying we can't afford to move him. It was just fun to watch him when he had the ball in his hands.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:03 am
by Duck07
Short DBs usually don't play Safety unless they carry a Dump Truck in their shoulder pads and Nelson has that. I think his best fit would be at Nickel to start.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:27 am
by woundedknees
pezsez1 wrote:I think he should move to defense. Nelson's ability to tackle in space (from what we've seen on special teams) is fantastic. I don't think you need to be huge to be a great defender; if you have good instincts and tackle like a missile, you should do well at the college level.
The other important factor is the ability and willingness to tackle properly... Hit the ball carrier hard, but wrap up and don't let go, or get shrugged off by going too high.

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:55 am
by fpsduck
So who returns punts this year, Nelson or Addison?

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 11:04 am
by lukeyrid13
I wouldn't be surprised to see a frosh back there even. Whether it be: James, Merritt, Amadi, Lovette etc. We have plenty of options of top return guys. Just make sure whomever it is has Fotu Leaito as their lead blocker ;)

Re: Charles Nelson Question, NOT based on fact

Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2015 11:13 am
by Duck07
fpsduck wrote:So who returns punts this year, Nelson or Addison?
I think once we have a guy return them for TDs, he becomes less effective as teams stay away from them. Seems a good spot to put a young guy who has worked his tail off to get a chance to stand out. Addison is too important at WR imo to use as a returner, especially with the young talent.