6-foot-2, 175 pounds, WR/S, Clairton
About the same time Belle Vernon four-star left tackle Dorian Johnson stunned Pitt and West Virginia by making a verbal commitment to Penn State last Sunday, a future Nittany Lion was making an indelible impression on Clairton star Tyler Boyd.
Boyd played wide receiver on the Northeast team that won the seven-on-seven tournament at the Rivals100 Five Star Challenge at Lakewood Stadium in Atlanta and spent the weekend catching passes from Penn State recruit Christian Hackenberg.
After watching Boyd and Hackenberg work together, Rivals.com national recruiting analyst Mike Farrell went so far as to say, “I think Penn State is probably the team to beat for Tyler Boyd.”
“The worst thing in the world for Pitt could have been Tyler Boyd going down there and catching passes from Hackenberg,” Farrell said. “They worked together like they had been a pass-catching combination for years. It was an instantaneous connection.”
Boyd has 21 scholarship offers, including from Pitt, Penn State, West Virginia and Virginia Tech. He is making an unofficial visit to Southern Cal this weekend in hopes of adding a scholarship offer from the Trojans and plans to visit University Park soon.
Boyd admits playing with Hackenberg intrigues him.
“My first time meeting him, we had a connection,” Boyd said of the 6-foot-4, 215-pound four-star quarterback from Fork Union (Va.) Military Academy. “I love his arm strength. His balls were so on the money. He puts the ball where it should be on every pass. He was my closest friend there.
“It definitely has an impact on my recruitment.”
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.