Yep. I wouldn't bet on either pair, its literally 50/50 in my head. Either way, that's great news. If we land them, Bleich, Goodrich, and Roberts, you can call my happy ass content.
Jordan Moore
- Thread starter big red22
- Start date
Yep. I wouldn't bet on either pair, its literally 50/50 in my head. Either way, that's great news. If we land them, Bleich, Goodrich, and Roberts, you can call my happy ass content.
Did he give any indication of class number? Did he say 15, more, didn't address it?
What's the draw to Roberts? 3-star with mediocre offers. Runs more like a fullback and we have those.
Yeah his highlights aren't stellar but it never hurts to bring N a brother of a current player. If Barney can offer all of his sons then we can at least offer a brother with some actual talent. But next year, we have to land a big time RB; no excuses, Reggie needs to step up the recruiting and get after a few top prospects.
Too bad this is such a small class. Not sure you use a scholarship on him though.
That sounds about right. We should be starting the transition back towards a running/spread team by then or 2020.
Yeah, my thought is exactly what was just said: I know Grahm Roberts is much more of a big back/fullback and his talent level is decent but not outstanding right now, but why not just take a back for the class, let him develop, and keep the family N? we aren't starved for a back right now, and we can easily shoot for the moon next year on the position.
My only concern with this is if it takes the scholarship from a better prospect wanting N
I mean, I think that explains why he isn't already N, I'm just saying, I don't view it as a loss to just take him and be done with the position for the year.
I see where you are coming from, but we have more needs than we can fill with 15 or even 18 scholarships. Taking a guy to fill a position is just as bad as taking a Top 300 player, for a position that is "full", just because he is a Top 300 player.
We have 3 RB that have played, that will be back for 2 more years.
I know.. let's get yet another wideout! 
I don't know who will block from the '18 class, but I guess we got an OL and a TE and that will be enough.
I don't know who will block from the '18 class, but I guess we got an OL and a TE and that will be enough.
I know.. let's get yet another wideout!
There are 15 OL on scholarship right now. We lose 1 in Knevel, replaced with Farniok. We have 4 RS freshmen OL and 4 true freshmen OL. We will take 1 more this year potentially Bleich.
How many OL do you want on scholarship?
We have 5 TE on scholarship right now, if Jurgens stays at TE we will have 6. The oldest being a RS sophomore again, not sure how many TEs you want on scholarship.
It's always best to look at the big picture and not simply 1 class.
This is absolutely true. By the way Tuco, do you think Gebbia's impressive showing during the spring game is why we're not hot on a QB for this class? That's my thought.
I will throw this out. I don't remember the specific source; because some have blurred together. But they tried to get HCMR to say they would go beyond 15, and he wouldn't bite. Sure loose talk might upset some
So you want 20-25 scholarship offensive linemen? 1 out of every 4 scholarships should be OLinemen?
Riley is staying on message with the 15 number and it is working as intended along with his hypothetical 7/1 class finish date
I don't think the coaches were at all surprised by Gebbia's performance. If anything, the addition of Bunch may have allowed the coaches to be selective, and not reach, in this class.
Possibly, but I don't think it's ever too late in this day of age of recruiting. OU lost some big time recruits so that may have put a damper on that class as of now which could intrigue Pledger to keep his option open. Especially if we continue on our hot streak which can intrigue a player to be a part of something great. I'm sure Bookie is in his ear too.
Its pretty obvious that no matter how many times it is repeated, even folks who reportedly following recruiting don't understand the difference between recruiting to the roster spread you have in the 85, vice just having a standard dream template that needs to be filled every year.
well last season it was all complaints about line depth, but keep recruiting those wideouts... I see nothing wrong with recruiting 4-5 scholarship offensive lineman every year. You will have about 16-20 on scholarship at any given time, which to me, is about right.
I see 4-5 guys who catch the ball, and 1 true blocker. What part of that don't you understand?
Your template makes a big assumption that every class will have four to five OL leave. I believe the only one leaving this year is Knevel.
You can't backfill one position with four or five guys. Especially not in a class of 15-18 players.
Your template would work well if we started out with an even distribution of OL across the age groups. We do not have that.
Part of the reason we have 4-5 guys who catch the ball is we are thin at WR, we just had a bunch of older bubbas leave, and we probably undersigned by 1 each of the last two classes at that position.
If I am not mistaken, every offensive linemen on the roster has redshirted. Those players redshirting still count against the 85. If you recruit 4 (x5 years) that's 20. If you recruit 5 (x5 years) that's 25. If you split the middle, it's 22. 1 out of 4 is 25% 85/4 is 21.25.
It's simple math and use of historical data. Your dislike of the Riley hire and disbelieve in the system he runs is clouding your ability to compartmentalize.
The lack of OL depth complaints from last year had to do with the fact that there were 5 junior or senior offensive linemen. 1 senior was originally a walkon the other was a 2 star that should have never sniffed the campus. Of the 3 juniors, one was beaten out by a walkon and the other two never developed under Pelini and continued to struggle under Riley.
Riley's solution was to get 3 OL in his transition class and 4 in each of his first two full classes. Time will tell if his plan will work.
Not so much compartmentalize as do basic arithmetic.
And yes, according to this roster...every OL we have has redshirted (pending the decisions of this latest class of course).
http://www.ourlads.com/ncaa-football-depth-charts/roster/nebraska/91303
Riley has already stated he doesn't see a way to ethically get rid of "dead weight". Folks who keep hoping for that should know by now that dog won't hunt in the B1G.
There is always attrition, but there is no indication now it will be as large as normal, considering the extreme youth of our overall roster. Riley cannot in good faith offer positions to kids we don't have a somewhat viable path to pay out.
Otherwise, why not just take 20 kids? Why wonder about whether a QB will fit or if we go another position group.
I personally feel Riley's a smart enough cookie to keep a couple kids on the line in case he sees some inkling he might lose a kid or two on the roster to attrition along the way. But he's not going to say "sprinkles for every recruit" in May, and then start backpedaling come signing day.
no, the attrition argument is how I said one recruits 4-5 OL every year, and always end up with approx 16-20 on scholarship. The "math" problem that you talk about, is where I'm saying the attrition is. I'm not talking about this specific class when i give that blueprint.
In this class, I fully understand that we can't take that many OL. But 1 OL and 4 WR and a TE, seems out of balance.
No I understand perfectly. Riley has recruited 11 offensive linemen in 3 recruiting cycles, all 11 are still on the roster going into year 3. Roughly 4 per year.
Ok that's fine, but you are still left dealing with this specific class as an outlier.
There's no way to get to 4-5 OL without hobbling another position group when you are looking at 15 total. And at this time, there doesn't seem to be enough attrition on the horizon from the normal assumed template to accept 33% of your class as OL and then start cutting bait later if a couple folks don't transfer.
Its fairly obvious this specific class irks you, noting the 1 true blocker and the 5 pass catchers. This one class is indeed a little strange.
Perhaps next year there will be more than normal attrition and we can fish more OL without impacting other position groups. I haven't looked at the roster a whole lot, but I'd expect probably 3-4 next year.
Just depends on if every year you have to see 4 or 5 next to OL on the commit list. Or you can you be happy with "about 4 average" in years where there are 2.
Evidence indicates the latter is not doing it for you.
Similar threads
