Didn't realize yesterday was media day... but watched the interviews up on the WMU website:
http://www.wmubroncos.com/ViewArticle.db...=209606625
A few things stuck out at me...
Celiscar said, "I truly believe this team has the potential to go from worst to first. This is a conference where you can go from worst to first at any given time, and I definitely feel like we have the team that can do it this year."
"We needed to create competition" - Fleck kind of noting the lack of depth and overall talent we had to work with last year. This is something that's definitely going to make us a better team for the long-term IMO.
Fleck also noted last year's team was cliquey, there were groups and sub-groups, etc. Very important that this team has good chemistry and it sounds like they do, and things are improving on that front. That's SO important, as the WMU MBB has shown us over the last several years.
"The running back battle is different this year" comment. It sounds like this is a position Fleck is secretly very excited about. I knew we had some good horses come in at tailback, but I will be really excited to see just how good these kids are and how quickly they can contribute and help our running game.
Fleck eluded to the fact that there are still 12 scholarships that haven't been filled. I'd curious to do the math on that number and confirm... jubbasubba - have you looked into that? I bet if one guy here has that number, it's you.
"When Chance Stewart walked into the huddle on day one, it was like he had been there for 10 years." THIS is very encouraging.
Judging by Fleck's comments if you read between the lines a little bit, sounds like O-line is still a concern and progressing along slowly.
It also sounds like Fleck is considering red-shirting Jakevin Jackson and Jason Sylva (Sylva especially if it's true that he's walking around in a boot). That could make some sense if we are deep enough at LB to do it and save those guys for 2015 and 2016 when we might need them even more. We could end up being a little thin at LB though (relatively).