OL numbers

[W.E.D 11,070]

There's some sense that Council might come back for a 6th year.  Wonder if the coaches have gauged interest in some of those other Srs and know they might take a 6th year in order to help them develop/get into the league?

[AUGoo 2,671]

2 hours ago, ToomersStreet said:

What makes you think that?  First off the last guy was an under appreciated offenseive genius that new the future was recruiting nothing but guards and was even more efficient by relying on transfers.  Harsin just needs to get with the times!

I think you got this wrong.  He was planning to turn the TE room into the OT room.  Why else would you have 7 TEs on a team that does not use TEs?

Anyone counted them on the OL list?

I think not!

[Mikey 16,781]

12 hours ago, bigbird said:

Was that the information that you refuse to admit to or the information that you have declared to be deliberately misleading and disingenuous?

 

Or 

 

Are you admitting that my OP is true and factual?

Your numbers may be accurate, they look close. Your inference that the current staff will be unable to have adequate numbers by the '22 season either demonstrates a lack of confidence in their abilities or you are simply trying to be an alarmist when there is no need for alarm. Which is it?

[Mikey 16,781]

13 hours ago, keesler said:

If this staff isn't concerned about the oline deficiencies each and every day they go to work and when they lay head to pillow at night, then this team is in serious trouble.  Because as we all know,  the last regime refused to place a high importance on oline recruiting and we see what their efforts have rendered which will be felt for years down the road. 

If actions speak louder than words, then this staff is more concerned with the defensive side of the ball. They've signed or taken commitments from, at last count, seven transfers. Six defensive players and one QB. There's the possibility of a RB in there too, though I don't think that's exactly settled yet.

If they thought the O-line was such a huge disaster, don't you think they'd have found some O-line guys by now?

[AUloggerhead 2,316]

[bigbird 60,624]

7 hours ago, Mikey said:

Your numbers may be accurate, they look close. 

Again, I'm happy to fix any issues. If it's not right, please correct me so I may fix it.  Accuracy is key, just let me know who I missed and I'll happily add them.

 

7 hours ago, Mikey said:

Your inference that the current staff will be unable to have adequate numbers by the '22 season either demonstrates a lack of confidence in their abilities or you are simply trying to be an alarmist when there is no need for alarm. Which is it?

Where did I ever imply any of that?

 

On 6/9/2021 at 8:07 AM, bigbird said:

As of now, this season we will only have 15 OL. After graduation and before incoming freshman, we will have 8 OL and only two are OT.

https://auburntigers.com/sports/football/roster/2021?&sort=position

Irvin - Jr
Brahms - Sr
Johnson - So
Coffey - Sr
Manning - Sr
Jernigan - rFr
Jones - So
Hamm - Sr
Stutts - Jr
Jackson - Sr
Troxell - Sr
Council - Sr
Langlo - tFr
Zierer - Jr
Smith - tFr

 

We're going to be in a world of hurt while we try to address the deficiency left behind.   

It's going to be interesting to see how CBH decides to address it. So far, his forward thinking and roster management moves have given some hope that he knows what he's doing and will get it taken care of, but it's a scary outlook and a steep climb for sure

I stated a truth, presented the proof, added my thought, then praised the staff on their abilities thus far. I never implied anything. I factually stated the situation.  Shockingly, the bad inference and pedantic act is on you.

 

To everyone, it looks as if you're more opposed to me rather than the actual facts of the matter.  In fact, I'm not sure you even know what it is you're trying to argue against. It just looks as if it's arguing against having a team that's built to compete. It's really strange, a little sad, and a lot silly.

[Hank2020 3,232]

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

Again, I'm happy to fix any issues. If it's not right, please correct me so I may fix it.  Accuracy is key, just let me know who I missed and I'll happily add them.

 

Where did I ever imply any of that?

 

I stated a truth, presented the proof, added my thought, then praised the staff on their abilities thus far. I never implied anything. I factually stated the situation.  Shockingly, the bad inference and pedantic act is on you.

 

To everyone, it looks as if you're more opposed to me rather than the actual facts of the matter.  In fact, I'm not sure you even know what it is you're trying to argue against. It just looks as if it's arguing against having a team that's built to compete. It's really strange, a little sad, and a lot silly.

Pedantic? Love it. We will assuredly see that one again in the threads. Thx Bird.

[McLoofus 35,182]

40 minutes ago, Hank2020 said:

Pedantic? Love it. We will assuredly see that one again in the threads. Thx Bird.

Keep that one handy for sure. Very useful in these hallowed halls.

[AuburnNTexas 7,239]

3 hours ago, Hank2020 said:

Pedantic? Love it. We will assuredly see that one again in the threads. Thx Bird.

Darn I thought Bird was a football coach and all this time he has hidden from us the fact that he is an English professor. LOL

[AuburnNTexas 7,239]

Mikey years ago when every other thread was about our weak LB recruiting. I tended to agree with you one because you are right that not all recruited LB's transition well to SEC Football and two that LB's are great special teams players.  But your insistence that we have enough O-line and there is no issue is hard to fathom.  Our O-Line has been our Achilles heal for a few years because just like your LB's many didn't make the transition to SEC football.  So just like your LB argument it is not just numbers but quality.  Now Bird has shown with the numbers of Seniors on this team next year numbers will be down in addition to quality at OT . We know the staff is working HS O-line hard as we have seen all the offers but an offer is not a commitment and even if they hit a home run on next years HS recruits we would be lucky if one was a SEC starter in year one. 

The fact that we haven't found and gotten any commitments in Transfer Portal doesn't mean they aren't looking and trying it just means at this point we have no commitments. There are a myriad number of reasons we might not have signed a Transport OT and many people have pointed out those reasons. O-Line is tough to fill, we have one thing going for us and that is a great shot at PT for the right player or players, we also have not proven that we can build a solid O-Line.  I really would like at least one stud OT in the transfer Portal ideally one with more than 1 year eligibility but if not better than what we have why go after the player. If we don't sign 1 or 2 this year then next Years Transfer Portal becomes paramount.

[keesler 5,934]

I too used to side with Mikey about the LB recruiting a few years ago.  But his relentless drive to make the most glaring deficiency on this team appear as if it's no big deal OR to state that the current staff isn't concerned with that deficiency is silly.   It's the same as the years some posters spent defending the previous staff while they pulled in top salaries and consistently threw mediocrity in our faces every year.  Some of us called a spade a spade and voiced the opinion that a change was needed.  Others would've still given those guys another year or two to prove themselves. 

 

[bigbird 60,624]

2 hours ago, AuburnNTexas said:

Darn I thought Bird was a football coach and all this time he has hidden from us the fact that he is an English professor. LOL

[augolf1716 21,564]

2 hours ago, bigbird said:

[Mikey 16,781]

19 hours ago, AuburnNTexas said:

The fact that we haven't found and gotten any commitments in Transfer Portal doesn't mean they aren't looking and trying it just means at this point we have no commitments.

When we have, at last count, found five transfer DB's and zero O-linemen, it doesn't appear that O-line was their top priority. That could be a fluke due to availability but those are the current numbers. It seems to me that if the staff was all that concerned with O-line numbers they could have turned one or two up by now.

[DAG 34,118]

I can’t believe comprehension is this hard 

[gr82be 14,570]

16 minutes ago, DAG said:

I can’t believe comprehension is this hard 

 

[augolf1716 21,564]

35 minutes ago, DAG said:

I can’t believe comprehension is this hard 

It is for some people

[AuburnNTexas 7,239]

1 hour ago, Mikey said:

When we have, at last count, found five transfer DB's and zero O-linemen, it doesn't appear that O-line was their top priority. That could be a fluke due to availability but those are the current numbers. It seems to me that if the staff was all that concerned with O-line numbers they could have turned one or two up by now.

You are drawing conclusions based on no facts. You yourself say could be a fluke due to availability. With the loss of E as a regular contributor and what appears to be a staff that doesn't do a lot of leaking we don't have the type of insider information we were used to under old regime.  Bobo and Harsin have said that O-Line is a priority and that is verified by number of HS Offers. The fact that we have no Transfer Portal commits in O-Line means we have none so far not that they are not trying to find somebody in the Portal. 

[bigbird 60,624]

When did availability become a fluke?

[Mike4AU 1,744]

Guys, give it a rest.  The dude is just a troll and you are just inflating his obstinate way of life.  Nothing meaningful is coming from this thread with his nonsense. 

[McLoofus 35,182]

30 minutes ago, Mike4AU said:

Guys, give it a rest.  The dude is just a troll and you are just inflating his obstinate way of life.  Nothing meaningful is coming from this thread with his nonsense. 

Yup. It's a conversation worth having, but it would go better if we all pretended he wasn't participating. 

[bigbird 60,624]

47 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Yup. It's a conversation worth having, but it would go better if we all pretended he wasn't participating. 

Just start a thread titled LB depth and he'll be distracted for a good while.

[steeleagle 2,945]

1 hour ago, McLoofus said:

Yup. It's a conversation worth having, but it would go better if we all pretended he wasn't participating. 

Just wait till W.E.D gets back on this too, it will be a 4 alarm fire for sure thread. 

[W.E.D 11,070]

1 hour ago, steeleagle said:

Just wait till W.E.D gets back on this too, it will be a 4 alarm fire for sure thread. 

Considering I've agreed with pretty much everything ITT regarding low OL numbers that doesn't make sense.

But on the other topic you're referring to, it's OK to wonder and question what our coaches plan currently is.  I get we just want to close our eyes and hope everything will be fine.

[steeleagle 2,945]

1 hour ago, W.E.D said:

Considering I've agreed with pretty much everything ITT regarding low OL numbers that doesn't make sense.

But on the other topic you're referring to, it's OK to wonder and question what our coaches plan currently is.  I get we just want to close our eyes and hope everything will be fine.

No, i know many including you mostly know our numbers are low, and lack quality and I agree with that assessment. 

But it's the questioning a new staff just bc the numbers we are adding up through the TP are skewed for the D. And when you add in that our weakest area based on recent history and results is the OL and we don't see us getting them through the TP, it messes with the mind.

But since I don't have anything to compare it to with this new staff, and we don't have any inside scoop guiding us as to the 'WHY no OL', then I just tend to take a wait and see how it unfolds attitude.