Newark (Del.) High football coach Butch Simpson said you don't hear the ball hit David Grinnage's hands when Grinnage catches a pass.
"He has incredibly soft hands," Simpson said. "Catching the ball is probably the best thing that he does best."
The 6-foot-5, 243-pound senior committed to N.C. State on Tuesday.
"I think that N.C. State is looking at him as a tight end, but we run a spread and he was more of a slot back, an H-back for us," Simpson said. "We had four good receivers ahead of him at the start of last season, but he kept getting better and better and started catching passes and scoring touchdowns."
Newark finished 6-4 in 2010, but averaged 37 points per game.
Grinnage is a great athlete, Simpson said. Grinnage was a wrestler and hit clean up for the Newark baseball team.
Comments
Carolina BLOWS!
Tue, 07/05/2011 - 13:58 — bradleyb123Big ole chunks
That might be...
Tue, 07/05/2011 - 14:49 — UNC1998your opinion. On this day after our nation's birthday... I'm thankful for your right to have one.
Therapy
Tue, 07/05/2011 - 14:14 — SurferCommon Brad, tell us how you really feel. Let me guess, State fan?
Sure has been quiet around
Mon, 07/04/2011 - 18:57 — mad_maxSure has been quiet around here the past few days. Hope everyone's having a great 4th of July!
Too quiet
Mon, 07/04/2011 - 23:25 — Heels20Happy 4th to both of y'all. Been pretty quiet in the sports world with the exception of the American hero that is Joey Chestnut.
happy 4th max
Mon, 07/04/2011 - 20:28 — JPDOhioSummers usually are quiet until pre-season rolls around in mid-August. Russell's move and UNC's problems have made this summer the exception to the rule so far.
correct
Tue, 07/05/2011 - 14:07 — SurferExcept the same two issues were highlighted last year, as well: Russell's move (coming back from summer leage baseball) and the tip of the iceberg that was the beginning of the UNC FB investigation.
Of course it is only a matter of time before we get a heavy dose of, "Glennon feels comfortable with his receivers" and the like. I will go ahead and step out on a limb and project that we will see a story along the lines of, "Both Glennon and Renner are ready to fill big shoes on the gridiron this Fall".
Can't wait, for that and the NCAA ruling/penalties to finally be put in the rearview mirror.
glennon and renner
Tue, 07/05/2011 - 14:52 — JPDOhioHow they perform will be followed and reported on closely. If you replace star rankings with question marks, you would have ????? next to each of these guys. It's going to be very interesting to see how well they handle the pressure.
NCSU...
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 11:29 — UNC1998certainly has been busy gaining football commitments in June. It seems TOB is getting settled in nicely there, as evidenced by the previous season. I read today that UNC gained an OT commitment from a Fla player, and it made me start to wonder. How is it that UNC has garnered 12 football commitments for 2012 in light of the issues around the program? Is it possible UNC already knows the penalty from the NCAA, is confiding in potential recruits to ease their concern? Certainly, I've read a lot about the NCAA process. Although the legitimacy of some of the statements certainly is in question.... it would seem there's been no hint of the NCAA's potential recommendation for penalty. UNC's hardly even had time to form it's rebuttal to the assertions in the NOA.
No doubt
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 11:39 — bradleyb123There's no doubt Butch Davis is telling recruits everything will be fine. But the truth is, he doesn't know that and he can't know that. Recruits are no doubt hoping for the best, but when the hammer falls, we will see a mass exodus of players transferring out of Carolina.
I simply...
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 11:49 — UNC1998disagree. I think it simple to believe HS football players are like kittens lapping up whatever milk you feed them. That too is very unlikely. Just as BD may be "telling them everything will be fine.", other coaches are surely saying UNC will receive the death penalty, a bowl ban, TV ban, or some other unlikely event. I just don't believe one is possible without the other. The fact is UNC's penalty will likely be determined before NSD. If it goes as some are suggesting (probation, minimal scholarship reductions, perhaps voided wins) I believe UNC may accrue even more players... some of them highly rated and recruited by traditionally strong programs. My question was geared more to the fact that so far 12 players have commited with what is probably no idea what may hapeen with respect to the NCAA.
12 players
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 12:19 — bradleyb123Twelve players believe what Carolina recruiters/coaches are telling them. Publicly, they say they will possibly vacate some past wins, lose some scholarships, etc. Does a recruit even care about that? My guess is no, except for the recruits that DON'T get an offer because of the reduced number of available scholarships. The players that DO get offers believe what they are telling them, that there will be no postseason ban, no loss of televised games, the things that would be important to the players. That is what I believe Butch and company are telling recruits, when they really have no clue. To me, that makes it a lie.
Sure, other coaches are probably on the opposite extreme, like you suggested, telling recruits Carolina will be sanctioned back to the stone age. But this isn't about that. Those recruiting games always happen. This is about what the Carolina coaches are no doubt telling the recruits, and some of them are buying it. It's one thing to play the typical recruiting game, but it's something else entirely to B.S. a player into thinking there will be no sanctions that will affect them. Because there is a high likelihood that there will be.
It's also the media's fault for not getting after this the way they should. I hear outside the Triangle, there is little coverage of this whole scandal. And certainly nothing much that is hard-hitting. Even the local coverage doesn't seem to be doing enough, only reporting what they know, but not pushing for more. They're not (at least not yet) going after bigger fish like Butch's 216 phone records. On PackPride, they are digging and finding where Baddour also called Butch on that other phone (with a Cleveland area code). If there is something there, it WILL be found by the "haters", and when that happens, it will be reported on. The problem is the media folks aren't the ones getting after this. They're sitting back and letting the "haters" do their jobs for them.
My point about the media is that, unless you're digging on these hater websites, you're probably not seeing that there's still more out there. If one just watches the news or reads the newspapers, they would think this scandal is in cruise control and will all be over soon. I think Carolina's recruits must be in that category, and/or they're buying what Butch is selling them.
Try again
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 16:15 — Heels20"Sure, other coaches are probably on the opposite extreme, like you suggested, telling recruits Carolina will be sanctioned back to the stone age. But this isn't about that. Those recruiting games always happen. This is about what the Carolina coaches are no doubt telling the recruits, and some of them are buying it."
You basically just said that it's okay for everyone to lie except Carolina...
"Even the local coverage doesn't seem to be doing enough, only reporting what they know, but not pushing for more. They're not (at least not yet) going after bigger fish like Butch's 216 phone records. On PackPride, they are digging and finding where Baddour also called Butch on that other phone (with a Cleveland area code)."
So the local media should jump to unknown conclusions and report stuff that they don't know? And PackPride is a joke. Might as well rename it "EveryoneIsOutToGetState."
What was said in the phone calls on the 216 area code? What kind of things did the text messages consist of? I would like to so hard, proven facts. Not speculation from a guy who can do nothing but guess.
Recruits have been interviewed about this stuff, and they say that while it does impact their decision to a certain extent, most of them really just don't want to see a bowl ban or TV ban. It's looking extremely unlikely that there won't be a TV ban. A bowl ban is up for debate, but I sitll think that's unlikely. Do you have evidence to present that suggests otherwise?
TV ban
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 19:33 — bradleyb123If I'm not mistaken, I believe in the NOA, the NCAA has requested Carolina's TV schedule for a number of years. So I'm not entirely convinced that is off the table.
But how can there be "evidence" at this stage in the game? There is just speculation, but if Carolina gets off without a postseason ban, with their nine MAJOR infractions, the NCAA is sending a message I don't think they're planning to send. That the risks for cheating do not outweigh the benefits.
If they get off light, I'm thinking State needs to fire TOB and hire a cheater of our own.
That is done in every NCAA
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 22:26 — UNC1998investigative situation. The fact is with the money being thrown about now.. the NCAA has very little say on who can be on TV. If a network or sponsor wants them... they are shown. That is why the NCAA has not limited TV games for a team since the early 90's. Conference TV contracts have literally exploded since then.
Ignorant comment
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 19:49 — Heels20It's called precedent. There hasn't been a TV ban since 1996. Why, if there have been more serious cases since then, would the NCAA suddenly whip it out on UNC?
Again, it's not the number of infractions as much as it is the severity. I said it before, and I'll say it again. More serious situations have occurred in which there were not as many infractions. Is it too hard to wrap your mind around that?
Quick comment
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 17:48 — mad_maxIMO, I do believe that UNC will get either a one or two year bowl ban. Just think there is too much out there...if the only thing going on was the John Blake stuff (which is bad and unprecedented), I would expect a wrist slap. But since there is quite a bit of other stuff, a one year bowl ban seems pretty likely to me. Of course, I'm not with the NCAA, and I'm not claiming to know what will happen...just my opinion/prediction.
The TV ban was never really a possibility IMO. I'm sure I'm not educating you on anything here, but a TV ban would hurt all the other schools that are on UNC's schedule. As a Pack fan, I would be outraged if I couldn't watch the State/Carolina game on TV. I don't think we will ever see that kind of punishment again.
Keep in mind
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 18:00 — Heels20That the NCAA will take under consideration the way that Carolina has reacted. Players were held out of games as soon as they were being investigated, and were not allowed to play until they were cleared. Guys like Draughn, Searcy and Ramsey were held out for no reason. The NCAA takes that into consideration in comparison to situations like USC where they openly mocked the fact that there was an investigation.
I think people are making too much of the benefits and academic stuff. The amount of improper benefits accepted is really not all that much compared to several other instances that have even been seen in recent history. More is being made of the academic stuff than is there because that kind of thing is seen in so many cases, and it's the type of situation where the school leads the investigation, contrary to cases of agents and benefits where the NCAA leads the investigation.
Blake is the outlier here. If you want to assume that could lead to a bowl ban, then that's fair. But I don't see how one can jump to the conclusion that it is a likely scenario. If the Blake stuff, combined with the other stuff, was so significant, then why did we see no LOIC? I know that there's no set penalty to go along with LOIC, but the NCAA determined that the Blake stuff wasn't worthy of being hit with that serious of an allegation. That's part of the reason why I find it unlikely that we'll see a bowl ban.
On point as usual, 20
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 22:30 — gvillegatrBut the ABC Crowd doesn't want to hear or admit a lick of what you just wrote.
They want their pound of flesh. Case in point Bradley's post. Something along the lines that the ncsu fan site won't rest till they've looked everywhere. He goes as far to say they are doing more leg work than the media is. Unbelievable.
It just leaves me scratching my head
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 22:51 — Heels20when I see how many people try to weigh in on the situation without doing any research at all whatsoever. And in bradleyb's case, once proven wrong, they continue to make themselves look even dumber.
1) I don't see it that
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 18:38 — mad_max1) I don't see it that way. UNC held out those players because they basically had to. I can't imagine that any other school would have let all these guys play while being involved in an investigation that started a couple of months before the season. Also, for the millionth time, where has it EVER been reported that Draughn and Searcy were held out for no reason?! That's pure UNC spin. In fact, I thought there was something in the NOA implying that an ineligible player participated in the 2010 season. How could that be, if UNC went above and beyond in holding out potentially ineligible players? We've been told that Ramsey was clean, and now Coples...why not the other guys? -because they weren't!
2) I thought the NCAA had to take over the academic investigation, because they weren't satisfied with the way it was being handled. Right? Anyways, you're right in the fact that nobody appeared to be getting Reggie Bush type money, but with so many instances (however small), I think it's a case of "death by a thousands cuts".
3) I don't know. I would think that getting rid of Blake last September is probably why there was no LOIC in that instance. Who knows what the NCAA is really thinking though. UNC may get off with no bowl ban, but about 75% of me thinks that they will get it.
Living under a rock?
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 20:03 — Heels201.
Searcy: http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article409178.ece
There was a story on Draughn that I can't find at the moment. Nothing suggests he was guilty of any wrongdoing. He was a part of the academic investigation, and sat out one game. How many players get suspended one game for an academic violation? That doesn't even make sense.
2. Either you misunderstood what I said, or you don't know how these things work. Schools lead academic investigations, and the NCAA sits in on those meetings, as opposed to agent-related investigations where the NCAA leads the investigation, and the school sits in on the meetings. You're entitled to your opinion, but the NCAA has recently made a habit of going after small money. Coples is the perfect example. He's seen in a picture at a party with Austi and Quinn, and suddenly the NCAA feels the need to investigate. A year ago, they would've had no problem with such a picture. But once they find that one idiot (Austin), then they dig for every little thing they can find (Deunta staying at his girlfriend's beach house, Charles Brown's $86 of benefits). Were you ever at a party at State where an athlete was drinking keg beer? That's a violation right there, and the type of thing the NCAA finds out when they dig for such things.
3. Well some of your fan base is 100% sure we'll get the death penalty. I won't lump you into that category, but the opinion of anyone outside the NCAA doesn't matter. They are pretty consistent with the way they treat the same violations in different cases. Blake is the only part of this case that stands out. Because he was forced to resign, and because they didn't feel that it called for LOIC, I doubt there will be a bowl ban. Especially because there were no allegations that Butch or Baddour lied.
Really?
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 20:14 — mad_maxThat link doesn't tell us anything!!
It has quotes from Searcy saying that he was innocent and quotes from a scout of the NFL team that signed him saying that he agrees with Searcy. Are you kidding me?!
Nothing from the NCAA has EVER said that Searcy and Draughn were innocent. Only the players and their supporters have declared innocence.
Again, if the NCAA has told us that Ramsey and Coples were innocent, then why not the other guys?
You don't get it
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 20:20 — Heels20The NCAA never comments on the specifics. The university also doesn't comment on specifics when the investigation is academic-related.
Coples never faced allegations or suspension. He was never even "cleared," because he was never formally accused of anything.
Ramsey was ruled permanently ineligible, appealed it, and was then cleared. We only have his word to go by, as well.
When members of the media are openly saying that the players were innocent of no wrongdoing, then that's a pretty good indication that it's true. They're not going to just come out and assume that. Just about any radio host you hear has told Searcy's story. They haven't said "Searcy said this." They say "he was held out because of this." The little things make a big difference.
Where are the media members
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 20:35 — mad_maxWhere are the media members saying that Searcy was innocent? I'm not seeing that anywhere.
Even in the link you provided, it quotes Searcy's opinion. It doesn't just come out and announce these things as facts.
What media members..
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 22:36 — UNC1998have done anything but call for Butch Davis' job? There is no interest in getting the truth in this entire saga on anyone's part. The media wants the sensational side of the story. Look at the tickets!!! They didn't mention last year UNC raised $1.6 million on parking fines alone. The football portion of that was miniscule. Look at the tutor!!! They didn't mention the actual type of work done for the player(s). Look at the party pics!!! They didn't bother to investigate whether or not Coples paid anything. It was all about presumption. There's a faction of people (namely NCSU folks) who want to find anything damning and scream it from a mountain top. There's a group of people (UNC folks) who say "this is all not a big deal. Don't even bother paying attention." The truth is it's a big deal because it's UNC. Stuff like this doesn't happen there. This explodes any time anyone even brings it up. The probability as reported by impartial observers who have experience in such matters is that UNC will receive probation, minimal scholarship reductions, and perhaps vacated wins (as far as I'm concerned they can take the losses, too (haha)), Anyway, won't we all be glad when football season starts? That will be swell.
Sure is funny
Tue, 07/05/2011 - 13:56 — bradleyb123... and extremely ironic to see Carolina fans complaining about how they are being treated by the media.
LOL
I'm not complaining...
Tue, 07/05/2011 - 17:38 — UNC1998Simply stating facts. The "media" hasn't worked nearly as hard to provide coverage of information that exonerates a player or gives a hint that they may be cleared. Just look at Coples to see that. To that end I spoke to the medias desire to report the sensational, not always factual. Or rather to omit some factual, if boring information. I for one appreciate any media coverage. To me there's no such thing as too much sports news. Although, I don't quite understand you're laughter at the incorrect interpretation. Is there a media conspiracy against NCSU? I couldn't really say, as I generally do not follow that school's athletics.
Reading Comprehension
Thu, 06/30/2011 - 20:40 — Heels20"Just about any radio host you hear has told Searcy's story."
The ones you see writing about it are going to quote him because that's the quickest support.
Furthermore, remember how Bruce Carter and Quan Sturdivant were cleared the night before the game? That's another case where two guys were cleared, and the specifics of their case were never commented on by the NCAA or the university. If you're going to believe that every guy who was held out was guilty, then how can you ever take any athletes word for anything?
lol
Wed, 06/29/2011 - 16:02 — JPDOhioYou got that right!
Let's make sure he's
Wed, 06/29/2011 - 15:42 — ProwlingWoofieLet's make sure he's focusing on football at NCSU !