OL enrollees

[Uncle Ruckus]

So we're 1 week into fall camp and we still have no word on Suggs or Richardson. You know, the only HS OL that we may have for last years class. There's a chance we will not have 1 HS OL enroll. What the actual 17. When is the cutoff date for these guys?

 

[57stratdawg]

Pretty disappointing. But Suggs is expected to make it las to heard as is our DT from CO.

 

[Uncle Ruckus]

Disappointing is an understatement. 3 should be the minimum. And I mean 3 guaranteed qualifiers plus a couple guys who may or may not qualify. We signed 3 OL and all 3 were risks.

 

[HD6]

And I don't ever remember hearing Suggs was a risk prior to this summer.

 

[Leeshouldveflanked]

Meanwhile .... Hevesy making it rain at the Country Club!

 

[Junction John]

Clarification question for the board crootin experts...

I have always been under the impression that our recruiting staff is assigned territories to recruit; i.e. DJ Looney may have one region, Billy Gonzalez would have one region, and John Hevesy would have a different area. I am sure this has been the case in the past, because I know very specific stories about former coaches' connections and successes in certain states. And those coaches recruited any and all positions within those states.

Is this still the case, or did I miss a switch where each coach is now only allowed to recruit players for his position? So Billy G covers the whole country in search of wide receivers, Brian Baker is combing 50 states plus Canada for D linemen, Hevesy is solely responsible for OL, etc...?

I just get the feeling there might be some misplaced blame around here.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

I have always been under the impression that our recruiting staff is assigned territories to recruit; i.e. DJ Looney may have one region, Billy Gonzalez would have one region, and John Hevesy would have a different area. I am sure this has been the case in the past, because I know very specific stories about former coaches' connections and successes in certain states. And those coaches recruited any and all positions within those states.

Is this still the case, or did I miss a switch where each coach is now only allowed to recruit players for his position? So Billy G covers the whole country in search of wide receivers, Brian Baker is combing 50 states plus Canada for D linemen, Hevesy is solely responsible for OL, etc...?

I just get the feeling there might be some misplaced blame around here.

You are confusing logic with agenda my friend.

Report to the crowd for re-education immediately!

 

[Dogariffic]

If I was a recruit and really liked, valued, had a connection with my recruiting coach but did not care for my position coach.... you know the one I will spend 80% of my time with..... I would pick another school!!!
Just sayin!

 

[KurtRambis4]

But it's

so much easier to just make **** up, then actually know what's going on.

 

[maroonmania]

I have always been under the impression that our recruiting staff is assigned territories to recruit; i.e. DJ Looney may have one region, Billy Gonzalez would have one region, and John Hevesy would have a different area. I am sure this has been the case in the past, because I know very specific stories about former coaches' connections and successes in certain states. And those coaches recruited any and all positions within those states.

Is this still the case, or did I miss a switch where each coach is now only allowed to recruit players for his position? So Billy G covers the whole country in search of wide receivers, Brian Baker is combing 50 states plus Canada for D linemen, Hevesy is solely responsible for OL, etc...?

I just get the feeling there might be some misplaced blame around here.

As I understand it, each assistant does normally have a specific recruiting area when going out and identifying and making initial contact with recruits but obviously when it comes to campus visits and determining who gets offered, the assistant over any particular area of the football team is the key guy that determines who the priorities are, who are eventual takes and the one that spends the most time with them on their on campus visits. Hevesy should and does have the priority say on who he wants on his OL as would make sense. If I was an assistant, I sure wouldn't want to be evaluated on how well I performed my job if I didn't have the majority influence on determining who I had playing under me.

 

[Leeshouldveflanked]

The assistant coaches do have assigned areas to evaluate players and initiate the recruiting process. But when it gets to the end of the cycle, the position coach is the guy who closes the deal.... The Head Coach only gets one in home visit with a recruit and that is usually with the position coach. if a position group is lacking, it falls on the position coach.

 

[engie]

8 years, 20+ different assistant coaches, and only one position group that we really struggle to recruit. What is the constant factors?

4* composite OL commitments 8 years: Martinas Rankin, Damien Robinson, Tommy Champion(as a sign and place). Likely to have a fourth this year in dolla bill.

4* composite OLs in the state of MS the last 8 years: Damien Robinson, Shon Coleman, Aaron Morris, Rod Taylor, Tommy Champion, Javon Patterson, Scott Lashley, Saahdiq Charles. If I start going through the 4* Juco OTs that have come through our back yard, the number gets truly staggering. We have successfully brought in only one of the last 7 school qualifying 4*s in the state of Mississippi and that one was clearly a misranking based on size and early offers. What other position group do we fail to get at least 50% of the talent from in the state of MS?

 

[RiverCityDawg]

I think the last day to register for classes is 8/23, so I imagine they have until then to join. They were going to redshirt anyway, so as long as they make it we're fine. Three weeks is a long time, so maybe the freak out should wait.

 

[Uncle Ruckus]

Don't you come in here and ruin the Hev circle jerk

 

[DudyDog]

Both have completed all coursework and are awaiting act scores and clearance from clearinghouse. Both were going to redshirt. Expecting to hear this week.

 

[philduckworth]

so much easier to just make **** up, then actually know what's going on.

In a recent poll of recruits, the no. 1 reason they gave for choosing a school was their position coach and the relationship they had with their position coach.

 

[Uncle Ruckus]

Aaaaand boom goes the dynamite.
This was not intended to be a Hev bashing thread though. This is on Mullen as much as it is Hev. I'm not pissed about the quality of our OL, I'm pissed off at the quantity.

 

[kired]

I'm just the opposite - I've normally been satisfied with the quantity, but think the quality is the problem.

This is the first time under Mullen we haven't enrolled at least 3 highschool OL (excluding 2009). Even if you include 0 this year, he's signed 24 HS OL in 8 classes. We typically enroll 3 HS OL and 1 or 2 JUCO. I don't like maybe only getting 1 this year, but if there's a year we could stand to not enroll any HS OL it was this year --- we only lose 1 senior.

My concern is the quality of players we are signing. We've had about 20 OL recruited, signed, & graduate under Mullen. Not 1 of them was drafted or has taken a snap in the NFL that I'm aware of, and I don't even think 1 has made an active roster (Clausell may have been activated last year... not sure). Those guys have made ~50% of the starts for us the last 8 years, and none of them were NFL quality. But they were going up against future NFL DL almost every week. If your OL is consistently worse than the DL they are facing... I don't know how you expect to win games. I'm not looking for us to have an offensive line full of NFL prospects... but having a few good enough to get drafted after 8 years would be nice.

 

[johnson86-1]

I'm just the opposite - I've normally been satisfied with the quantity, but think the quality is the problem.

This is the first time under Mullen we haven't enrolled at least 3 highschool OL (excluding 2009). Even if you include 0 this year, he's signed 24 HS OL in 8 classes. We typically enroll 3 HS OL and 1 or 2 JUCO. I don't like maybe only getting 1 this year, but if there's a year we could stand to not enroll any HS OL it was this year --- we only lose 1 senior.

My concern is the quality of players we are signing. We've had about 20 OL recruited, signed, & graduate under Mullen. Not 1 of them was drafted or has taken a snap in the NFL that I'm aware of, and I don't even think 1 has made an active roster (Clausell may have been activated last year... not sure). Those guys have made ~50% of the starts for us the last 8 years, and none of them were NFL quality. But they were going up against future NFL DL almost every week. If your OL is consistently worse than the DL they are facing... I don't know how you expect to win games. I'm not looking for us to have an offensive line full of NFL prospects... but having a few good enough to get drafted after 8 years would be nice.

The HS OL we are signing now aren't to replace the seniors, they're to replace the juniors, at best. We're just not signing the type of OL that can play as a true freshman and not be a disaster. So you need to look at how much attrition we're going to have in the next two years (and even then, you're asking a lot to expect a guy to start as a RS Freshman or true sophomore).

We're going to lose Rankin, Champion (if he doesn't RS), Jenkins, Phillips (if he doesn't redshirt), and Calhoun.

We'll have Story, D. Williams, S. Reese, G. Eiland, D. Parker, Wilkerson and Moon. Based on the fact that we've seen Story and Williams play, and S. Reese is going to start as a RS Freshman, we should have three serviceable to good OL. I'm guessing we shouldn't feel confident that moon or Wilkerson will be contributors. Dont' know about Parker and Eiland yet.

 

[Msubulldogfan1]

What other 2018 OL croots are we after?

 

[KurtRambis4]

Who's

circle jerkin' Hev? Some of us just tend to not make up ****.

 

[KurtRambis4]

Ok.

I'm not sure that refutes the point that coaches are assigned regions.

 

[Junction John]

I never want to be a Hevesy apologist, but here's my theory:

This may be too simple, but if our staff had to choose between a 3* OL recruit with a great work ethic and desire, or a 4* premadonna who has all the talent in the world but needs to be coddled during recruiting, you know which one they are choosing. I'm not saying it always comes down to that clear of a choice, but I do think Hevesy (and Mullen) take the hard worker/underdog guy all day every day, and that they can develop that guy into a solid lineman.

I'm not saying they're always right, but I don't think they give 2 ***** if they recruit high profile guys or not, as long as they get the ones they like. In fact, I think if you asked Hevesy, he would say he's an ******* up front so he runs the guys off that can't hack it early, then he can then focus on the other ones. So, the "Hevesy can't recruit" thing just seems like a lazy way to complain about missing on a kid. It's just way oversimplifying it.

Teams miss on guys all the time. I like 5* recruits too, but we can't all be Bama.

 

[engie]

I'm fine with getting guys that are priorities regardless of their starz. Mullen and Hev are good evaluators. The problem is that we miss on a tonnnnn of OL that we make priorities. Then we miss on their backup plans that fall in our lap(these are the ones that usually actually come visit). The recruiting along the OL has cost us multiple seasons under Mullen. I'm happier with where our OL is right now than I have been any other time outside of 2014 and 2010. We've got an elite LT who they beat a bunch of guys for. But it's still a fair criticism until something changes, and it's fair to say it probably hasn't successfully changed after last week's fiasco. I think having Looney on staff puts Hev on notice. But that's just my opinion. Getting Reese was a huge pull IMO. Will see what happens with his brother.

We've missed on 21 OL since the beginning of the 2012 class just among players that actually took OVs. 3.5 per class among guys we think we have a great chance with in January. Keeping in mind that these are just the guys that were interested enough in us to come visit. I believe the last 4 and 5 of the last 7 in-state 4*s didn't even take official visits to MSU.

 

[Uncle Ruckus]

And some of us can take off our maroon glasses and see we have a problem

 

[o_Hot Rock]

The sky is not falling! I just looked at Louisville. They have 13 total lineman and not a single one of them is better than a 3 star. They have 3Sr, 5Jr, ZERO Soph and 5Fr with only one recruit so far in 2018. They went 9-4 last year and lost by six to Clemson. Not a bad year, uh?

I say we are in better shape than them on the O-Line going forward. Way better in fact.

You can go the Arkansas way. Go get 25 OL on the roster and try to out muscle everyone which is what Bama does but even they lost to Clemson with the best OLIne recruits that can be gotten.

This is Mullen's way, either embrace it or hate it but the numbers are probably right on top of his plan. I do think the quality can be a tad better but hey, you always are tryin' to improve.

 

[Go Budaw]

8 years, 20+ different assistant coaches, and only one position group that we really struggle to recruit. What is the constant factors?

4* composite OL commitments 8 years: Martinas Rankin, Damien Robinson, Tommy Champion(as a sign and place). Likely to have a fourth this year in dolla bill.

4* composite OLs in the state of MS the last 8 years: Damien Robinson, Shon Coleman, Aaron Morris, Rod Taylor, Tommy Champion, Javon Patterson, Scott Lashley, Saahdiq Charles. If I start going through the 4* Juco OTs that have come through our back yard, the number gets truly staggering. We have successfully brought in only one of the last 7 school qualifying 4*s in the state of Mississippi and that one was clearly a misranking based on size and early offers. What other position group do we fail to get at least 50% of the talent from in the state of MS?

To your first point, we have also sucked pretty badly at recruiting WR's over the past 8 years (or even the last 21 years...no draft picks since Moulds in '96). Granted, WR isn't as critical of a position as OL in the SEC, but it's not just a single position group problem with recruiting.

 

[Palos verdes]

The sky is not falling! I just looked at Louisville. They have 13 total lineman and not a single one of them is better than a 3 star. They have 3Sr, 5Jr, ZERO Soph and 5Fr with only one recruit so far in 2018. They went 9-4 last year and lost by six to Clemson. Not a bad year, uh?

I say we are in better shape than them on the O-Line going forward. Way better in fact.

You can go the Arkansas way. Go get 25 OL on the roster and try to out muscle everyone which is what Bama does but even they lost to Clemson with the best OLIne recruits that can be gotten.

This is Mullen's way, either embrace it or hate it but the numbers are probably right on top of his plan. I do think the quality can be a tad better but hey, you always are tryin' to improve.

Playing in the ACC means you get several weekends off every season. Look what LSU did to them in their bowl.

 

[o_Hot Rock]

ACC was the best conference in the land last year. They had the best teams and kicked SEC *** almost every time they faced them. Weekends off? Hardly

Try TN... They have 3 SR 2 Jr and 3 Soph with a bunch of FR. State is set up better than them over the next couple years (1 SR; 5 Jr; 5 Soph). Still hoping to get 3 FR in this year as well. Plus, they usually find a JuCo's or two that contributes along the way.

I say State is setup pretty darn well on the OLine as far as numbers are concerned. Can we get better quality? Sure. I just disagree that we are in terrible shape. Lot's of teams have a year where they miss the numbers but that's why you end up with 5/6 in one class vs another year.

 

[engie]

I just find it impossible to believe that "Mullen's way" is to miss on the first 15-20 prospects that he calls every year. We are not doing that at any other position. Not even WR.

 

[engie]

To your first point, we have also sucked pretty badly at recruiting WR's over the past 8 years (or even the last 21 years...no draft picks since Moulds in '96). Granted, WR isn't as critical of a position as OL in the SEC, but it's not just a single position group problem with recruiting.

No one is saying OL is the only recruiting problem that we have, just the biggest and longest termed problem. This year our lack of outside WR recruiting and development might very well cost us games.

 

[57stratdawg]

WR recruiting issues start early in the cycle IMO. We just don't target enough players at that position. Look at BDC a few weeks ago, Malik Heath might be the only WR in attendance who signs with a P5 school.

This isn't the first time that's happened either.

 

[kired]

I hope we're in better shape than Louisville. Did you watch their bowl game? Did you see how good that offensive line was? Good enough to limit LSU to only 8 sacks...

 

[Junction John]

Serious question --

I believe the last 4 and 5 of the last 7 in-state 4*s didn't even take official visits to MSU.

Doesn't this contradict the theory some people are putting forth above that it's when they get to campus and meet Hevesy that he runs them off?


PS I agree with most of what you're saying. I think our staff does a good job coaching on the field, and I think our OL gets better during the season almost every year. We just have to get more guys in the boat. Maybe that's where DJ can help.

 

[o_Hot Rock]

Agreed, that was a bad choice of words by me... "Mullen's way"

I don't think he is any happier about only getting 1 in so far than you. I am just saying we still can get the other two in class this year and have 3 HS this year. But..one class can be overcome with heavier before and after classes if we don't get them all in. State has 5 in both Soph and JR classes. That's not shabby, especially if we get all three HS in this year and have a decent year recruiting this year and next year.

I don't see this as a numbers problem at all. I do see it as a quality issue of not getting them to the NFL. We aren't going to compete at the top of this league without a few more NFL types. Hopefully, that is improving. I know that I have liked a lot of the guys that has been brought in the past couple years and I have high hopes.

Bottom line is this: Whatever happens, Mullen either makes happen or he lets happen. I for one am damn proud to have him and hope he continues to get better in all areas that need improvement. The OL is just one of them. Hopefully, the much bigger problem has been solved now the Grantham is aboard. I hope he stays awhile.

 

[engie]

Doesn't this contradict the theory some people are putting forth above that it's when they get to campus and meet Hevesy that he runs them off?

Not really. Those are two different groups of guys being discussed. The elite ones have not been coming to campus at all in an official visit capacity. I'm sure most of them camp with us as JRs, ect.

Their backup plans are the second group. The ones we chase the whole cycle, that come for official visits, we "like our chances" with, but end up signing elsewhere a high percentage of the time.

One thing I've been very happy with Mullen about is his ability to introspect shortcomings. Hevesy is really the only one that hasn't ever been addressed, and bringing in an OL coach and recruiter to coach TEs effectively puts him on notice IMO. Gonzo has to be on a short leash at this point as well after starting out so great. But you also have to think our situation is going to start selling itself from the overflow of the Dak effect with guys wanting to hitch their wagons to the next 3 4* QBs coming.

 

[KurtRambis4]

So because

I believe the truth is in the middle, I have maroon glasses?

 

[StatesboroBlues]

Agreed, that was a bad choice of words by me... "Mullen's way"

I don't think he is any happier about only getting 1 in so far than you. I am just saying we still can get the other two in class this year and have 3 HS this year.e.

We have zero in so far. We signed 3 HS OL after failing to get one of 3 OL late. One is already a grade casualty, one was a surprise risk, and the other was taken from Georgia State after we looked at his grades in August(or so).

"Eat a Peach"

 

[Palos verdes]

ACC was the best conference in the land last year. They had the best teams and kicked SEC *** almost every time they faced them. Weekends off? Hardly

Try TN... They have 3 SR 2 Jr and 3 Soph with a bunch of FR. State is set up better than them over the next couple years (1 SR; 5 Jr; 5 Soph). Still hoping to get 3 FR in this year as well. Plus, they usually find a JuCo's or two that contributes along the way.

I say State is setup pretty darn well on the OLine as far as numbers are concerned. Can we get better quality? Sure. I just disagree that we are in terrible shape. Lot's of teams have a year where they miss the numbers but that's why you end up with 5/6 in one class vs another year.

Louisville was 0-2 vs SEC. Other than FSU, Louisville didn't have any outstanding wins last year. Not saying they weren't good, but they absolutely get weekends off playing in the ACC. They don't face the same animals we do, unless you really like BC, Virgina, NC State, and Syracuse to the SEC west.