Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
dang we need more and more OLs
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 84
| visibility 1

dang we need more and more OLs


Jan 7, 2015, 3:09 PM

It seems every year we are short and every year we have to shovel. It is a theme that is going on since 2008. Last year, I remember we had to have guys play in different positions on the offensive line.

It seems this is a rare commodity that we should just keep a stack of them. Even with the 4 coming in, I am still concerned that we don't have enough.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Clemson Is Coming" says Stephone Anthony (Class 2011)"
"Why NOT Clemson"
"Why Not Dabo"


We have also lost several to injury/transfer.


Jan 7, 2015, 3:11 PM

I agree with you.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: dang we need more and more OLs


Jan 7, 2015, 3:17 PM

We also have one coming in as a preferred walk on . So hopefully he can do something in 3 or 4 years. At Wisconsin they also seem to have one work at and start

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I'm having a little trouble with your math


Jan 7, 2015, 3:20 PM

We have 10 returning offensive linemen and are adding 4.

That puts us at 14. Most teams carry somewhere between 14-16 O-Linemen. I think we have learned that having filler offensive linemen on the roster don't help because they can never see the field. If you have extra DB's or LB's they can at least contribute on special teams. Having 2 more OL on the roster just for the sake of having them doesn't do us any good.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I'm having a little trouble with your math


Jan 7, 2015, 3:21 PM

odd, at times it seems like our starters are fillers.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That will be changing soon enough


Jan 7, 2015, 3:24 PM

We just shored up our tackle position for the next few years with the incoming class.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

the target is 17-18***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:21 PM [ in reply to I'm having a little trouble with your math ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Nope, it's not***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:22 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

OK , whatever you say***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:25 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We get to 18-19 with walk-ons


Jan 7, 2015, 3:28 PM

If you have to play your 15th best offensive linemen things have gone terribly wrong. If Region was sitting on the bench next year would it make you feel better?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Oh , so now 17-18 seems about right?***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:29 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Oh , so now 17-18 seems about right?***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:31 PM

DUDE YOU BETTER BE WORRYING ABOUT THE DUMPSTER FIRE GOING ON OVER AT USC, YOUR SCHOOL

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You are pretty dense


Jan 7, 2015, 3:32 PM [ in reply to Oh , so now 17-18 seems about right?*** ]

We get to 17-18 with walk-ons. The last 3 or 4 guys on the bench don't have scholarships.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Oh , so now 17-18 seems about right?***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:43 PM [ in reply to Oh , so now 17-18 seems about right?*** ]

no moron it is still 14-16 SCHOLARSHIP linemen.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


How many of the coot decommits are OL?***


Jan 7, 2015, 4:46 PM [ in reply to the target is 17-18*** ]



badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

1 so far


Jan 7, 2015, 4:50 PM

It was a JuCo they had slotted in as their starting LT next year. Pellage is all but gone as well.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Wait, no it's 2 so far


Jan 7, 2015, 4:54 PM

With 3 on the way. They lost 2 4* O-linemen and are on pace to lose a 3rd. GOOOOOO Cooooocks.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Thanks but have you checked within the last 30 minutes?


Jan 7, 2015, 4:55 PM [ in reply to 1 so far ]

You can never say you are up to date if not.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Here is some Dabo's quotes from last year and it has


Jan 7, 2015, 3:26 PM [ in reply to I'm having a little trouble with your math ]

has nothing to do with numbers...


1) Help is coming (referring to the OL).
2) We will find enough bodies to play on the OL.
3) The coach of the year award (Or something like this) needs to go to Caldwell for coaching up the boys to play different positions on the OL.

Enough said...

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Clemson Is Coming" says Stephone Anthony (Class 2011)"
"Why NOT Clemson"
"Why Not Dabo"


We sign the kids we want.


Jan 7, 2015, 3:31 PM

We wanted Bailey, but he didn't want to be a part of a winning program. We won't sign a kid because we just want to have an extra body on the O-Line practice squad. That's what we use walk-on's for. Panic recruiting never works out.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I'm having a little trouble with your math


Jan 7, 2015, 3:33 PM [ in reply to I'm having a little trouble with your math ]

What are you talking about we need more filler guys did this last year not teach you anything . We will be back at 10 OL after this year and only have about 20 scholarships for next years class so hopefully its guard heavy.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Last year did teach me something


Jan 7, 2015, 3:35 PM

Having guys on the bench that don't play doesn't help the product on the field. We put the 5 best available O-linemen on the field. If our 5 best linemen include the 15th guy on the depth chart, we're in big trouble. Did having Region on the bench last year improve our team?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

would this same theory apply to ,


Jan 7, 2015, 3:37 PM

let's say the corner back position?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No


Jan 7, 2015, 3:38 PM

Mainly because the CB position can contribute on special teams.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: No


Jan 7, 2015, 3:39 PM

Think region was on the FG team

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Last year did teach me something


Jan 7, 2015, 3:38 PM [ in reply to Last year did teach me something ]

The thing with OL is they are so hard to tell which one is going to transition good from High School to college which is why you take more

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You take the ones you want


Jan 7, 2015, 3:40 PM

We've tried the shotgun method to O-line recruiting and it has consistently failed.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You take the ones you want


Jan 7, 2015, 3:43 PM

So what do we do when the linemen we want don't pan out ?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That's why we cross train linemen


Jan 7, 2015, 3:46 PM

If one guy can play more than one position it takes care of that problem. How far down the depth chart do you want to go? We put the 5 best guys on the field.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: That's why we cross train linemen


Jan 7, 2015, 3:53 PM

Just because he can play another position doesn't mean he is good at it and we saw a lot of that this year .

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

So you don't think we put the best 5 linemen on the field?***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:56 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: So you don't think we put the best 5 linemen on the field?***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:58 PM

I do but that doesn't mean they are any good

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Ask USCe and Oklahoma if they were "any good"


Jan 7, 2015, 4:03 PM

Their equipment managers are still trying to get the grass stains off the backs of jerseys. We had injuries and we dealt with injuries. The offensive line really gelled in the back 1/2 of the schedule. We ran the ball well, and when the QB didn't hold it for an inordinate amount of time, the pass protection was good.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ask USCe and Oklahoma if they were "any good"


Jan 7, 2015, 4:09 PM

Did you watch the same Oklahoma game as me we couldn't run on them 68 yards rushing . South Carolina we could well because they suck and everybody ran on them

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Evidently YOU didn't watch the OU game


Jan 7, 2015, 4:13 PM

We didn't have to run the ball.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Evidently YOU didn't watch the OU game


Jan 7, 2015, 4:17 PM

But we ran it 46 times .

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We ran it almost exclusively in the 4th quarter


Jan 7, 2015, 4:21 PM

We were up 40-0 and were using our 2nd, 3rd, and 4th string backs and mostly back up linemen.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: We ran it almost exclusively in the 4th quarter


Jan 7, 2015, 4:32 PM

Wayne Gallman ran the ball 19 times for 55yards at 2.9 yards a carry and a long of 14

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

not fair using facts and all***


Jan 7, 2015, 4:34 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: We ran it almost exclusively in the 4th quarter


Jan 7, 2015, 4:38 PM [ in reply to Re: We ran it almost exclusively in the 4th quarter ]

You are also doing a great job of ignoring the fact that Scotts long "passes" were basically sweeps aka runs.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: We ran it almost exclusively in the 4th quarter


Jan 7, 2015, 4:40 PM

So we should thank the WRs for blocking on those not the OL try again

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You have to have excellent line blocking to run a sweep


Jan 7, 2015, 4:43 PM

On a sweep the D-End is responsible for containment. Generally speaking you have to block him or the play gets destroyed in the backfield.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You have to have excellent line blocking to run a sweep


Jan 7, 2015, 4:50 PM

The South Carolina DE suck like I said before . Battle blocked him which is our best oLinemen. But I seem to remember the big play by Scott in the Bowl game being a wr screen .
http://espn.go.com/ncf/video?gameId=400610208

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: We ran it almost exclusively in the 4th quarter


Jan 7, 2015, 4:45 PM [ in reply to Re: We ran it almost exclusively in the 4th quarter ]

GJ showing you know not a gd thing about football. Linemen have to set the edge and keep penetration from happening for that play to be successful.

You are a moron congrats.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Oklahoma stopped the run


Jan 7, 2015, 4:41 PM [ in reply to Re: We ran it almost exclusively in the 4th quarter ]

We took advantage of that by torching their secondary.

Gallman averaged over 5 yards a carry in our last 4 games and broke 100 yards rushing 3 out of our last 5 games.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

because using the 117th and 49th


Jan 7, 2015, 4:11 PM [ in reply to Ask USCe and Oklahoma if they were "any good" ]

worse defense in the nation is a #### poor measuring stick.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ask USCe and Oklahoma if they were "any good"


Jan 7, 2015, 4:12 PM [ in reply to Ask USCe and Oklahoma if they were "any good" ]

This is not a good stat line

Rushing-68

Rushing Attempts-42

Yards per rush- 1.6

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

How about this "stat"


Jan 7, 2015, 4:14 PM

Clemson 40 Oklahoma 6

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: How about this "stat"


Jan 7, 2015, 4:16 PM

But we aren't talking about the overall game we are talking about how good and not so good the o-line is so please stay on subject

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: How about this "stat"


Jan 7, 2015, 4:18 PM

You also are not fooling anyone.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: How about this "stat"


Jan 7, 2015, 4:20 PM

Hey these are the facts these aren't made up.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=400610208

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: How about this "stat"


Jan 7, 2015, 4:40 PM

You are still not fooling anyone #### lover.

Here is the fact that matters 40-6 and for you 35-17.

You ignore the fact that pass protection is also a part of the game along wiht the fact that Scotts long "passes" were basically runs. Good job you pathetic #### loving troll.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


I think recruiting a 5* OT


Jan 7, 2015, 4:20 PM [ in reply to Re: How about this "stat" ]

and 3 4* O-linemen adressed that, don't you? Would throwing an extra 2* panic guy like a Maybank make the team any better? We can work with 14.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I think recruiting a 5* OT


Jan 7, 2015, 4:22 PM

No we did good this year . I'm saying we should have more like this . Meaning 4 or more each year

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Brad Scott agrees 4 Oline every year***


Jan 7, 2015, 4:23 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Is that what he did at USuC?***


Jan 7, 2015, 4:27 PM



badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Assuming most O-linement RS


Jan 7, 2015, 4:23 PM [ in reply to Re: I think recruiting a 5* OT ]

4 each year would put us around 20 O-linemen. That doesn't leave much room for any other position, but I guess our bench would be secure in a wind storm.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I think recruiting a 5* OT


Jan 7, 2015, 4:24 PM [ in reply to Re: I think recruiting a 5* OT ]

OLinemen typically redshirt. 4 a year would be 20 of your 85 scholarships.

Good lord you are a moron and neither you or your buddy 4fngrzngr are fooling anyone.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: I think recruiting a 5* OT


Jan 7, 2015, 4:27 PM

Most OL don't stay all 5 years . Which is what you are seeing with region and others that get hurt

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We had 1 O-linemen on last years squad that didn't RS


Jan 7, 2015, 4:47 PM

So there is that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The OL was good enough


Jan 7, 2015, 4:21 PM [ in reply to Re: How about this "stat" ]

to allow the offense to score 33 points. That's the only stat that matters.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

what happens when highly recruited players


Jan 7, 2015, 3:58 PM [ in reply to That's why we cross train linemen ]

get injured or don't pan out ? I'll try to give you a few examples. JK Jay , Kenneth Paige , Shaq Anthony , Jerome Maybank, Spencer Region , Oliver Jones ,Gifford Timothy. Now do you see why 14 is a terribly low number for the Oline?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No, I don't see


Jan 7, 2015, 4:01 PM

Again, we put the 5 best O-linemen on the field. I'm not sure why this is a difficult concept. Having extra scholarship bodies as the 15th, 16th, 17th, and 18th linemen just doesn't make sense. Did having extra #'s on the roster help last year? No, it didn't because we still put the best 5 on the field.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: No, I don't see


Jan 7, 2015, 4:05 PM

What so hard to understand about O-Line being so hit or miss. It's the hardest position to recruit

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

So to you McClain and Norton played well


Jan 7, 2015, 4:06 PM [ in reply to No, I don't see ]

replacing injured starters?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Norton was a starter


Jan 7, 2015, 4:16 PM

I thought McClain did what he needed to do to help us win football games.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Guillermo is the starting center.


Jan 7, 2015, 4:20 PM

broke foot.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Norton and Guillermo have both started in their careers***


Jan 7, 2015, 4:24 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Your tigernet pulse vs. your football IQ


Jan 7, 2015, 4:06 PM [ in reply to what happens when highly recruited players ]

Your pulse is much higher. The reasons you indicate above are the reasons you have 14 on scholarship, not 5. Because some of them don't pan out. Would you suggest we have 10 QBs on the team just in case DW didn't turn out to be as good as expected? 3-4 is perfect. Just like for OL.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Your tigernet pulse vs. your football IQ


Jan 7, 2015, 4:15 PM

Please never question anybody's football IQ. With the crap you just wrote

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Can I question your IQ?


Jan 7, 2015, 4:49 PM

With the crap you just wrote

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Can I question your IQ?


Jan 7, 2015, 7:57 PM

Please good look at the teams winning championships and see how many Linemen they have or gotten rid of on a 5 year span

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Coots sign about 30 players a year. Why would they be


Jan 7, 2015, 4:48 PM [ in reply to Re: I'm having a little trouble with your math ]

back at 10 except for a lot of decommits or transfers?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

14 OL and 12 LB***


Jan 7, 2015, 8:50 PM [ in reply to I'm having a little trouble with your math ]



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Trapp can play left guard***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:20 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Didn't you guys just have another player decoot


Jan 7, 2015, 3:21 PM

I would worry about Pellage decooting. We're OK with what we have.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Losing a lineman that wasn't going to play is a good thing.


Jan 7, 2015, 3:24 PM

Check out the scholarship breakdown on the front page. We are looking pretty good along the line.

http://www.tigernet.com/view/scholarships/football.do

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

ok you may have a point then***


Jan 7, 2015, 3:55 PM



badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Clemson Is Coming" says Stephone Anthony (Class 2011)"
"Why NOT Clemson"
"Why Not Dabo"


Not to mention


Jan 7, 2015, 4:11 PM [ in reply to Losing a lineman that wasn't going to play is a good thing. ]

when you miss on other positions there is typically somewhere that they can contribute. Think Vic Beasley, Duane Coleman, Ty Hill, Tyler Shatley, Rod Byars, etc.

You miss on an OL and you are stuck with a roster spot that is worthless until they quit, transfer, or graduate because there is nowhere else to move them.


Honestly, if it were up to me I would recruit more DL with the intention of moving them to the OL later on if they can't crack the two deep rather than recruiting additional OL just for numbers.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

you give perfect reasons


Jan 7, 2015, 4:13 PM

to recruit more Oline .

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: you give perfect reasons


Jan 7, 2015, 4:26 PM

lol. Lost Key. Losing Fields to us. Losing Pellegre or whatever his name is very soon. Isnt it time you crossed the road back to cluckville???

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Yea it looks like even the fans are decommitting now...


Jan 7, 2015, 4:34 PM

... and muckn up this bored!

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Not fans


Jan 7, 2015, 4:35 PM

a pair of chickens

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We DEFINITELY don't want them.***


Jan 7, 2015, 4:51 PM [ in reply to Yea it looks like even the fans are decommitting now... ]



badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Lol. Nice try though***


Jan 7, 2015, 8:29 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 84
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic