No DL in this recruiting class? ...

[inWV]

On the DL front, it's 15 scholarships, per LJS piece on Banker. 41 spots reserved for the D.
http://journalstar.com/sports/huske...5-87ea-a6ba00a2041b.html#.VqYbsW_2anQ.twitter

 

[mpbrown27]

Yeah, I remember reading that article about scholarship allocation. In some regards, it makes sense. However, I think there are some flaws in a strict allocation of "defensive lineman". If you look at the scholarship players, it seems to be much more heavily weighted towards defensive ends as opposed to defensive tackles. Maybe a guy like Peyton Newell will bulk up enough so that he can play DT? Nevertheless, it still seems like we're awfully thin beginning in 2017 and beyond. Am I wrong about that?

Secondly, I think a strict allocation ignores the importance of the defensive line. Disrupting plays and getting the QB on the ground is a huge part of winning football games. It's right up there with having a good QB. Therefore, until you KNOW you have the players to accomplish this then you have to keep going after it. I would argue this should come at the expense of being short at other positions (like TE/WR/CB). I'm afraid the overall numbers at the DT in 2017 and beyond just doesn't lend a lot of confidence.

Obviously the coaches have a much better grasp of what our younger players are capable of, but I would argue that to a large degree these guys are largely unknown. I would feel much better if there was another 1-2 defensive tackles coming in this fall to develop and have a year under their belt when the next crop will be thrown fully into the fire.

And not to belabor the point or be argumentative, but I believe only one DT made an official visit to Lincoln this year. Jordan Elliott visited in September but committed to Michigan in late Nov. According to 247 data, we made 17 DT offers. For comparison sake, we made 45 WR offers. Just saying...

 

[inWV]

Yeah, I remember reading that article about scholarship allocation. In some regards, it makes sense. However, I think there are some flaws in a strict allocation of "defensive lineman". If you look at the scholarship players, it seems to be much more heavily weighted towards defensive ends as opposed to defensive tackles. Maybe a guy like Peyton Newell will bulk up enough so that he can play DT? Nevertheless, it still seems like we're awfully thin beginning in 2017 and beyond. Am I wrong about that?

Secondly, I think a strict allocation ignores the importance of the defensive line. Disrupting plays and getting the QB on the ground is a huge part of winning football games. It's right up there with having a good QB. Therefore, until you KNOW you have the players to accomplish this then you have to keep going after it. I would argue this should come at the expense of being short at other positions (like TE/WR/CB). I'm afraid the overall numbers at the DT in 2017 and beyond just doesn't lend a lot of confidence.

Obviously the coaches have a much better grasp of what our younger players are capable of, but I would argue that to a large degree these guys are largely unknown. I would feel much better if there was another 1-2 defensive tackles coming in this fall to develop and have a year under their belt when the next crop will be thrown fully into the fire.

And not to belabor the point or be argumentative, but I believe only one DT made an official visit to Lincoln this year. Jordan Elliott visited in September but committed to Michigan in late Nov. According to 247 data, we made 17 DT offers. For comparison sake, we made 45 WR offers. Just saying...

9 guys with two or more years left (Davis twins, Alex Davis, Daishon Neal, Freedom, King, Newell, Stoltenberg and AJ Natter). That doesn't count any walk-ons that may percolate up to the two-deep nor any of the new kids.

 

[mpbrown27]

9 guys with two or more years left (Davis twins, Alex Davis, Daishon Neal, Freedom, King, Newell, Stoltenberg and AJ Natter). That doesn't count any walk-ons that may percolate up to the two-deep nor any of the new kids.

With all due respect, I think you're missing my point. The defensive tackles for 2017 are Mick Stoltenberg, Carlos Davis, Khalil Davis, and maybe Peyton Newell, right? That makes your margin of error for DT razor thin. What happens if someone gets hurt or transfers or just isn't that good? The plan is for a walk-on to step up and shoulder what I feel is one of the biggest responsibilities on the team? Know what I mean?

 

[jay-cheese]

In general you are going to play at minimum 10 DL during the season. Walkon's are great and very important to depth, but the focus here is on scholarship players (and yes I realize that Dzuris and Gangwish were former walk on's)...

GBR

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

Yeah, I remember reading that article about scholarship allocation. In some regards, it makes sense. However, I think there are some flaws in a strict allocation of "defensive lineman". If you look at the scholarship players, it seems to be much more heavily weighted towards defensive ends as opposed to defensive tackles. Maybe a guy like Peyton Newell will bulk up enough so that he can play DT? Nevertheless, it still seems like we're awfully thin beginning in 2017 and beyond. Am I wrong about that?

Secondly, I think a strict allocation ignores the importance of the defensive line. Disrupting plays and getting the QB on the ground is a huge part of winning football games. It's right up there with having a good QB. Therefore, until you KNOW you have the players to accomplish this then you have to keep going after it. I would argue this should come at the expense of being short at other positions (like TE/WR/CB). I'm afraid the overall numbers at the DT in 2017 and beyond just doesn't lend a lot of confidence.

Obviously the coaches have a much better grasp of what our younger players are capable of, but I would argue that to a large degree these guys are largely unknown. I would feel much better if there was another 1-2 defensive tackles coming in this fall to develop and have a year under their belt when the next crop will be thrown fully into the fire.

And not to belabor the point or be argumentative, but I believe only one DT made an official visit to Lincoln this year. Jordan Elliott visited in September but committed to Michigan in late Nov. According to 247 data, we made 17 DT offers. For comparison sake, we made 45 WR offers. Just saying...

With all due respect, I think you're missing my point. The defensive tackles for 2017 are Mick Stoltenberg, Carlos Davis, Khalil Davis, and maybe Peyton Newell, right? That makes your margin of error for DT razor thin. What happens if someone gets hurt or transfers or just isn't that good? The plan is for a walk-on to step up and shoulder what I feel is one of the biggest responsibilities on the team? Know what I mean?

Appreciate the responses, post more often.

P.S.
I'm 99% sure Newell is a DT.

 

[Archie Graham]

With all due respect, I think you're missing my point. The defensive tackles for 2017 are Mick Stoltenberg, Carlos Davis, Khalil Davis, and maybe Peyton Newell, right? That makes your margin of error for DT razor thin. What happens if someone gets hurt or transfers or just isn't that good? The plan is for a walk-on to step up and shoulder what I feel is one of the biggest responsibilities on the team? Know what I mean?

It's very likely that McMullen moves inside all year. I'd be shocked if that didn't happen.

 

[inWV]

Just providing the numbers and I don't feel knowledgeable enough to comment on whether or not the staff should grab a DT. And while I follow recruiting to some degree, I am not following to the extent that I know whether they took a shot at some kids and missed. They have some roster holes to fill and seem to want some fast big kids to rush the QB. They must feel good about the Davis twins. Maybe they beat the bushes for a JUCO next year. I think they will be able to make the case with a JUCO that playing time will be there for the taking.
Any number of posts have pointed to the fact that DT is perhaps the hardest position to recruit. Recruiting a guy just cause you think you need to get a DT is a good way to fill the roster with dead wood.

 

[dinglefritz]

Just providing the numbers and I don't feel knowledgeable enough to comment on whether or not the staff should grab a DT. And while I follow recruiting to some degree, I am not following to the extent that I know whether they took a shot at some kids and missed. They have some roster holes to fill and seem to want some fast big kids to rush the QB. They must feel good about the Davis twins. Maybe they beat the bushes for a JUCO next year. I think they will be able to make the case with a JUCO that playing time will be there for the taking.
Any number of posts have pointed to the fact that DT is perhaps the hardest position to recruit. Recruiting a guy just cause you think you need to get a DT is a good way to fill the roster with dead wood.

Back in the glory days, we used to talk about making safeties in to linebackers and DEs and LBs in to DTs. Heck maybe one of our best DEs ever was a high school QB. We are taking big framed athletic DEs. I would bet a dollar that at least one of those kids outgrows the DE position.

 

[jflores]

It's very likely that McMullen moves inside all year. I'd be shocked if that didn't happen.

With the additions of the "hybrids" this seems likely. In effect this makes our active DE's 2 down players and then you can substitute in some combination of DE/hybrid guys on passing downs.

Since most of DE/pass rush is youthful and looking to expand skillsets, this doesn't seem like too bad a way to mask the fact we aren't six deep at everydown players at DE. In another season or so, this will be less necessary.

 

[Archie Graham]

With the additions of the "hybrids" this seems likely. In effect this makes our active DE's 2 down players and then you can substitute in some combination of DE/hybrid guys on passing downs.

Since most of DE/pass rush is youthful and looking to expand skillsets, this doesn't seem like too bad a way to mask the fact we aren't six deep at everydown players at DE. In another season or so, this will be less necessary.

This is why I'm not overly concerned about not taking a DT this class. If we don't make it a top priority next year then we're in serious trouble.