This is why Butch Barry is the most important position coach

Tee3000

Dropping Dick Off
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
2,352
Clemson's OL was the unsung MVP of the title game. They controlled Alabama's front. Miami's OL, by contrast, struggled to move Savannah St.

I took the starting lineup from the title game and the Pinstripe Bowl. Here's how it shakes out, via the 247 Composite rating:

Mitch Hyatt- 98.97
John Simpson- 93.32
Justin Falcinelli- 86.56
Gage Cervenka- 84.95
Tremayne Anchrum- 87.06

Average- 90.172

Tyree St. Louis- 90.01
Venzell Boulware- 88.72
Hayden Mahoney- 84.93
Navaughn Donaldson- 96.55
Delone Scaife- 93.78

Average- 90.798

We need to recruit better on OL, especially after last year. But it is much more important that we coach up the talented players we already have.
Imho, these numbers clearly speak only to coaching better on the OL.
 

Tee3000

Dropping Dick Off
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
2,352
The process BEGINS with S&C.........we cannot substitute for work, that should be done to develop strength, and substituting does not replace the effectiveness of the line, it depletes it's effectiveness as we found out ....
S&C starts with the HC...it's his vision that the S&C coach embodies.
 

canesdogo

Recruit
Joined
Jan 2, 2017
Messages
234
Tee.............conditioning was lacking....our guys looked depleted and gassed by the second quarter of games....they just did not know how to move 290-300 pounds without showing signs of fatigue....work in the weight room is sorely needed.
 

Ethnicsands

All-American
Joined
Nov 2, 2011
Messages
15,674
There are always exceptions both ways, but lighter and athletic appears to translate more to potential and I think recruiting services will start ranking as such. Heavier in highschool also attributes to sloppy technique just leaning into smaller kids. Again, if we signed a 320 lb kid with good feet alright. All I'm saying is Barry is preaching current trends.

You really need to consider probabilities and come back to this discussion. There are lots of kids who haven’t developed yet. In addition to predicting which ones will be good OL if they develop, you have to assess the risk they just won’t develop. And that risk is substantial. They might also become big fat guys down the road. It’s not at all clear that they’re all entirely different types of kids, as opposed to not yet big fat guys who could end up being just that. There are uncertainties around bigger kids, too, but they don’t include whether they’ll become big kids.

There’s a reason Alabama takes big OL prospects. But they would never take Cyrim Wimbs. Dykstra is an example of the slimmer, fit OL you seem to want, and it’ll be a pleasant surprise if he ever contributes at UM. We’ve taken Andrew Tallman, Jermane Barton, etc. The solution isn’t to focus on smaller, less developed guys. It’s to be great at evaluations, and to be great at recruiting.

And keep in mind, there is a pure mathematical drawback to trying to focus only on leaner guys on OL. One thing you know for sure is they’ll take time to be game ready. Another thing you know for sure is some won’t develop physically like you want. So you are immediately embracing a strategy that will leave you with a significant percentage of your OL roster being kids who aren’t contributors. Think about that. Miss on a couple evals, and you’re in Oh **** territory, searching the portal for transfers.

You’re always going to have to come back to evaluations. That’s what it’s about. Big, small, developed or not. Which kids do you want to bet on.
 
Last edited:

Tee3000

Dropping Dick Off
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
2,352
Tee.............conditioning was lacking....our guys looked depleted and gassed by the second quarter of games....they just did not know how to move 290-300 pounds without showing signs of fatigue....work in the weight room is sorely needed.
good points
 

gcane44

Junior
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
2,820
There are always exceptions both ways, but lighter and athletic appears to translate more to potential and I think recruiting services will start ranking as such. Heavier in highschool also attributes to sloppy technique just leaning into smaller kids. Again, if we signed a 320 lb kid with good feet alright. All I'm saying is Barry is preaching current trends.

Agreed -- When scouting these lighter athletic types, it's imperative to look at body composition. If a guy is light, he's got to have the frame to add weight and it's pretty important that he have a thick lower body. It's great to have a guy with the feet to get to the second level, pull, and mirror a passrusher, but if he cant sit in his stance and absorb/negate force at the point-of-contact, then he won't make it as a OL.

The prototype for the lean OL prospect is Tyron Smith in HS. He didn't have an ounce of fat on him and looked like a DE, but had the lower body to sit back in pass pro and not give an inch.
 
Top