sincereag said:

---

He supposedly had a big growth spurt his freshman season at UH which caused him some soreness and limited his playing time. He's supposedly now 6' 3.5" and could be the next Mike Evans.

---

Next Mike Evans based on what? I swear you guys are so full of S. I'm not even sure if you believe what you're saying. Noah Thomas had better stats and was 6'6" and he isn't the next Mike Evans. Can some of you just stop and make realistic comments? Lol

vander54 said:

---

He's listed at 6'2" 200 lbs on ESPN and Brauny said he's 6'3" 205 lbs.

---

Point still stands. 6'1"

Bill Superman said:

---

Aggie Dad 26 said:

---

texag101 said:

---

sincereag said:

---

He's supposedly now 6' 3.5" and could be the next Mike Evans.

---

LOL….come on man. He had 11 catches for 118 yards in 2 years.

---

---

He redshirted his freshman year and was injured last year.

Check his offer list and get back to us.

---

I will get back to you. I'd be interested to know if those were commitable offers. A&M, tu, tOSU, LSU, Houston. Hmmmm!

vander54 said:

---

We only have 11. Not like we have a ton of WR. It was our biggest need followed closely by DL.

---

So we could put 11 out there.

vander54 said:

---

Well if you're positive you're automatically a sunshine pumper

But I agree. No need to bash a player before he sees a single snap here

---

Sorry Vanderpumper, but nobody is bashing him. We're simply wondering how a guy with 11 catches for 118 yards over two years could be considered the next Mike Evans or how he is going to help us beat ND, Texas, Bama, Georgia, etc.

He was committed to tu and as far as I know we would have taken him.

Not creative at all. But only one person mentione Evans and I'm fairly confident it was sarcasm.

Also he was inly a RS Fr. And yes there is bashing going on here.

AWP 97 said:

---

sincereag said:

---

He supposedly had a big growth spurt his freshman season at UH which caused him some soreness and limited his playing time. He's supposedly now 6' 3.5" and could be the next Mike Evans.

---

Next Mike Evans based on what? I swear you guys are so full of S. I'm not even sure if you believe what you're saying. Noah Thomas had better stats and was 6'6" and he isn't the next Mike Evans. Can some of you just stop and make realistic comments? Lol

---

Easy big guy... you're being "negative"

Since the CK Big12 offense sucks, we going Run N Shoot Baby!

texag101 said:

---

vander54 said:

---

Well if you're positive you're automatically a sunshine pumper

But I agree. No need to bash a player before he sees a single snap here

---

Sorry Vanderpumper, but nobody is bashing him. We're simply wondering how a guy with 11 catches for 118 yards over two years could be considered the next Mike Evans or how he is going to help us beat ND, Texas, Bama, Georgia, etc.

---

Thats how these snowflakes work. No one has said anything negative. We're just pointing out that the Mike Evans reference is ridiculous.

I was only joking about Jonah Wilson being the next Mike Evans, but according to a Houston Chronicle article, he did grow a lot his freshman year and had to have knee surgery after that season. Last year he only had 9 catches, so he still has a lot to prove. He had great offer list out of h.s., so maybe a change of scenery will help him develop into a good receiver.

sincereag said:

---

I was only joking about Jonah Wison being the next Mike Evans, but according to a Houston Chronicle article, he did grow a lot his freshman year and had to have knee surgery after that season. Last year he only had 9 catches, so he still has a lot to prove. He had great offer list out of h.s., so maybe a change of scenery will help him develop into a good receiver.

---

Only ones upset by your original post are the usual suspects. I think most saw your post for what it was.

Pumpers: "Noah sucks, he won't be a big loss"
<A&M signs a kid who has less career yards at UH than Noah had against Auburn this year>
Also pumpers: "Guy is Mike Evans 2.0. Pencil him in for the NFL HoF."

vander54 said:

---

Because we needed WRs and not RBs. We still need DTs and a pass catching TE.


If Bussey stays at WR we only have 11.

---

based upon our propensity to run up the middle at critical times, getting a bigger back is a necessity.

No it's not

vander54 said:

---

Well if you're positive you're automatically a sunshine pumper

---

That depends on what you are positive about. If you are positive about signing the top 8 DL in the country, that wouldn't make you a sunshine pumper. But if you are positive about signing a 115 pound guy to play LB, then you would be.

vander54 said:

---

Because we needed WRs and not RBs. We still need DTs and a pass catching TE.


If Bussey stays at WR we only have 11.

---

We takin UH scraps and passed on giving Noah his $$$?

Gonna be a rebuilding year. Incoming recruiting class seems solid. Need to sort some coaches out. Onward and upwards?

deer corn said:

---

vander54 said:

---

Because we needed WRs and not RBs. We still need DTs and a pass catching TE.


If Bussey stays at WR we only have 11.

---

We takin UH scraps and passed on giving Noah his $$$?

---

Noah didn't leave because of money

We have a wide receiver room full of previously injured players, how is it all these other teams have WR rooms at 80-100%?

How many WR of our are "previously injured" and what does that actually mean?

Missing a game, multiple games, season?

Outside of Concepcion, the WR room will be young and/or inexperienced. 3 - 5 star receivers (high school rating) and 6+\- 4-star receivers suggest talent but the position will be an unknown going into the season.

A guy being facetious has seriously triggered some pot-bangers on this one. I am so glad I have someone to ground me, else I too, may have believed this guy was Mike Evans

Craver has some experience and Wilson has been in College for 2 years. Plus we still have Bussey.

I really wanted to keep Noah for his experience but I also think he could thrive not being WR1

We just seem to be shuffling guys who didnt do much for guys who havent done much.