Big Fish, Little Pond
Big Fish, Little Pond
His coach compares him to AJ Brown...
Been in that water since a young'un you just shark food.
- Lil Wayne, musician
It used to be the case that when high end prospects at Power Five (P5) programs couldn’t see the field, they would go down and spend a year in JuCo before ‘bouncing’ back up to the FBS. There was a name for these players. They were called ‘P5 Bounce Backs’… pretty straightforward, right?
The loosening of restrictions on the transfer portal post-Covid has resulted in a shift in that paradigm; now, these same players move down to the Group of Five (G5), and many of them stay there for the rest of their CFB careers. These players are often referred to as ‘Big Fish, Little Pond’ players in CFF circles because of the mismatch between their recruiting rankings and that of the average player in the G5.
However—in case you haven’t noticed—lately there is an increasingly large number of players who transfer multiple times throughout their careers, and some of these ‘Big Fish, Little Pond’ guys find their way back to the now so-called P4.
I don’t know what the future has in store for Tulane’s recent transfer WR, Shazz Preston (by way of Alabama), but I do know that he is going to be a big part of the Green Wave offence this year. Here’s a snippet from a beat report that I came across about a month ago on Preston:
Shazz Preston has a real chance to be the best receiver ever to put on a Tulane uniform when it’s all said and done. Receiver looks to be the deepest position on offense, with Preston as the number one option.
And here’s an excerpt from a different beat report on April 16:
Tulane wide receiver Shazz Preston was a high-profile transfer in January after spending two years at Alabama as a five-star prospect out of St. James High.
Preston, who did not catch a pass at Alabama, followed up his 56-yard catch-and-run in Saturday’s scrimmage with a strong practice Tuesday morning at Yulman Stadium.
“Shazz has started to stack days in a row,” Tulane coach Jon Sumrall said. “Instead of being just a one-hit wonder where he has a play or two each practice, he’s been more consistent throughout. I’ve challenged him, and he’s responding. He’s tracking the ball really well. He’s got strong hands. He’s physical.”
Sumrall said that Preston’s build reminds him of A.J. Brown, who was at Ole Miss when he was an assistant there and has put up four 1,000-yard receiving seasons in the NFL.
“You looked at A.J. and thought he could play running back or linebacker,” Sumrall said. “Shazz (6 foot, 203 pounds) has a strong, muscular build. He’s playing more physical and playing more confident.”
Comparisons to AJ Brown are certainly eye-brow raising. And considering that Preston was once one of the best WR prospects in America, I’d say he’s worth our consideration this offseason.
Coaching & System
WR1 PPG AVERAGE — HC: 11 — OC: 9.41 (half ppr)
Jon Sumrall and his OC Joe Craddock both joined the Tulane program this offseason by way of Troy. Sumrall was the head coach of the Trojans since 2022, after spending three seasons at Kentucky as the ILBs coach and defensive coordinator. He had previously served on the Trojan staff from 2015-17 as the associate head coach, among other duties (LBs and ST coach).
Craddock was with Sumrall at Troy, after spending two seasons as the TEs coach at UAB. He previously served as the OC at Arkansas (2018-19) and SMU (2015-17).
Below is a summary of each coach’s historical WR patterns dating back to 2018. As usual, ignore what the projections say.
I don’t know about you, but those averages aren’t really exciting me. One thing that stands out is that the averages for the first two WRs are basically blended. The WR2 as it’s defined in the above chart is based on the TD per game ratio, but in each case this player averages more targets and yards per game than the WR1. This is a testament to the fact that there is not typically one feature guy at WR under both coaches. Normally you look for coaches whose WR1s average over 20% target share in CFF. Historically both coaches average below that for their WR1s.
Craddock’s last 1000-yard receiver came during his time at SMU. In his three seasons there, he had three (two in 2017, one in 2016). 2017’s Trey Quinn went over 1200 yards on 114 receptions, scoring 13 times; while Courtland Sutton went over 1080 yards on 68 catches, scoring 12 times. In 2016, Sutton led the Mustangs with 76 receptions for 1246 yards and 10 scores.
Sumrall averages about a 46.5/53.5 split in favour of the run, while Craddock averages closer to 48/52 in favour of the run. Troy was one of the slower moving offences last year with an average of 26.6 second per play, which ranked 80th across all FBS programs.
WR Shazz Preston (5’11, 202)
2023 STATS: NA
I get that players like this usually come in with a pretty sparse track record of production, but Preston literally had zero statistics from his two seasons at Alabama. The former four/five star (depending on the service you use) was a heralded recruit in the class of 2022. As Alabama had done so many times during the Saban era, they slurped out of the proverbial Louisiana milkshake beating the in-state Tigers for Preston’s services.
247 Sports’ Gabe Brooks compared Preston to former Oklahoma State WR Tylan Wallace, and wrote this in his evaluation of Preston during his senior year in high school:
Strong build with good overall size and enough space to add more mass, though not necessarily needed. Developed well physically over high school career. Natural football player with good instincts and spatial awareness as a receiver.
Flashes impressive body control and adjustment ability on contested throws. Wins 50-50 situations with those traits and a high compete level. Effective to all levels, whether screen game, short-to-intermediate, or vertical. Tracks the ball well on deep shots.
Owns a strong overall athletic profile that includes a three-sport background with track and basketball. Ran a 22.30 200 as a junior and long jumped 20-3 as a freshman and sophomore. Posted encouraging testing numbers as a freshman (4.61 40, 4.39 shuttle), but has not tested since.
Play strength and dexterity show on the gridiron and the basketball court. Presents a run-after-catch threat with the vision and finishing ability of a back. Comes from a football family. Sometimes more fluid than twitchy, which hinders separation.
Good functional athlete with above average speed, but can still squeeze more out of the top end. Ball occasionally gets into his body. Productive receiver with a body type that could be used around the formation if desired.
Natural athlete and competitor with strong athletic profile. Projects as a high-major recruit who could become a multi-year impact starter with long-term NFL Draft potential.
Preston was given a three star rating as a transfer prospect this offseason.
Closing
The quotes from the Tulane beat writers are exciting, however the concerns with a profile like this are also quite extensive. Below are a summary of the primary concerns from where I stand:
Staff has a bad track record of production at WR — This has been demonstrated to some degree in the previous section. Troy’s offences in the previous two seasons were led by a receiver with 999 yards, and 850 yards. Those outputs are pretty good by themselves. The issue with each of those players was that another WR outscored them (10 to 5 in 2023, 7 to 5 in 2022). In each case, the WR1 by yardage scored only five TDs.
Lack of production from Preston — A lot of times in CFF, we are projecting players with little to no prior production, that in itself is fine. In Preston’s case, he literally did nothing in two years at Alabama, which is a bit alarming.
Question mark at QB — It has yet to be determined who will be throwing passes to Preston and co. this season. Kai Horton and Oregon transfer Ty Thompson are said to be the top two contenders. Neither of those players themselves have much of a track record to show either.
Other WRs could claim WR1 role — Namely Mario Williams, by way of USC, should have a say in who ends up being the primary target man in this offence. It could end up being a classic case of how this staff operates where one of those WRs leads in yardage, the other in scores, rendering both as useless in most CFF formats.
Despite problematic numbers in the recent sample size, we saw that the OC was around an offence that produced three 1000-yard receivers at SMU. The question will be: does Craddock’s Tulane operate more like the mid-2010s SMU programs, or more like what we’ve seen from him recently? I would guess the latter.
Preston currently has an ADP of NA according to Campus2Canton. The inventory of concerns presented above relegates Preston to a late round dart throw in CFF drafts. While he is more appealing in a bestball, I would still say he is worth a shot in very deep standard leagues as well. ◾
If you enjoyed this content and would like to read more, I recommend joining the Pigpen, a community of over 600 degenerate college football fans:
Sample of data from 2018-2023.