Eklund
- Thread starter longtimecoug
- Start date
I thought Dillard did a decent job for being put in a tough situation.
I think the broadcasters stated that he is a RS freshman.
Coug O-line is really something.
Leach is getting his guys finally and it's showing in results.
I think the broadcasters stated that he is a RS freshman.
Coug O-line is really something.
Leach is getting his guys finally and it's showing in results.
I guess that means in the first half, there was no depth for the offensive line. In the second half, since Dillard was backup LT and played, there is depth for the offensive line.
It's almost as if there are more than 3 scholarship lineman, and somehow we find a guy off the bench who is the best fit and and make the best line we can. I really don't know how that's possible when we can't recruit lineman to WSU...where oh were can we find them...
A true 2 player depth chart has not existed for decades. Coaches mix and match now to put the best players on the field. No team has five true backup lineman that can replace the starter across the line.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dillard was very impressive. He was Scott Sanderson third round or better impressive. The last young kid to play like that at LT (yes only one game) was Calvin Armstrong.
Not at all. You are correct, including tis team the back ups at this point are numbers. We have zero clue how they will perform. Dilllard showed great stuff, and I am fairly certain he will get beat like a drum before the year is out. So when it is said we have great depth, as you aptly point out that is not true. We have more bodies.
And there was logic in a point being made because the unit is based on continuity, and there was a reason they moved everyone back to their familiar spot and rolled the dice Dillard would play well.
Last edited:
Dillard was impressive because he was put into a situation, though pressure filled, which he had the tools to handle. We badly needed someone at LT with some quicker feet to handle the speed rush from that end, which was killing us. Dillard filled that bill impressively.
It also allowed them to move Eklund back inside, where he is better suited, and move Middleton back to RG. Seydel was having a tough night and he was the odd man out.
If he was playing against a bigger, stronger "bull rush" DE type, instead of a speed rusher, Dillard may have had more trouble. He's at least another year's worth of training table and weight room work before he's where he needs to be to play regularly at LT. But he was GREAT on Saturday, when thrown into the fire!
It also allowed them to move Eklund back inside, where he is better suited, and move Middleton back to RG. Seydel was having a tough night and he was the odd man out.
If he was playing against a bigger, stronger "bull rush" DE type, instead of a speed rusher, Dillard may have had more trouble. He's at least another year's worth of training table and weight room work before he's where he needs to be to play regularly at LT. But he was GREAT on Saturday, when thrown into the fire!
Interesting spring ahead along the OL. Dilliard is a talent but still needs to add size, Bigge-Duren is young, does Madison or Middleton move over the left side, and then there's the mountain of O'Connell? There have been posts they are looking to the JCs for OL help. The pool of potentials should only be increasing at this point.
As one would expect, he did let a guy blow through untouched to hit Falk on one play. But it's funny how those who dismissed Falk altogether - and even ranked him lower than Bercovici and Luifau - going into this season are now anointing a redshirt frosh as the next Scott Sanderson after JUST ONE HALF OF FOOTBALL. I do think he's talented, fwiw.
I think he'll end up at guard eventually and some one like Bigge-Duren will be OT.
I said they apparently don't trust the LT yet because they rather move everyone around than play him. Thus they have bodies, yet we don't know about the depth. Depth isnt bodies, it is players who can play at this level now. They certainly don't have experienced depth. But Dillard held up well.
Last edited:
Not really. I am not saying he is in the top three LT's in three league with one half of play, or three after three games, one great, one ok, and one poor. And as I wrote about those two I asked the question why Fro put him above two other qb's. Berc beat USC, Stanford and set a school recrod against UCLA. He had more impressive wins and like I wrote that day, not that I had a string opinion one way or another.
I also said in week one Rosen will be the first pick in the 2018 draft, that doesn't mean I would place him above Luke Falk after one game, but clearly the potential is there. Dillard has the potential to be Scott Sanderson like. We will see.
Last edited:
Related to your point, I anointed Falk the next beast QB at WSU after his OSU road performance last year. I had seen enough to say that. Of course, he had some bumps in the road after that game vw ASU and UW and some were jumping all over that. Boy, it's hard being so right.
You do understand that no teams have experienced depth. It is an illusion to say they do.
I never said that at all. I said history has shown it is the most difficult position to recruit, and we have had great coaches walk the halls and we have struggled to get lineman on campus. We have always had a few players, and there has been on team I witnessed that had depth an that was he 02 team. It had numbers and players with experience. All other years they have scrambled if they had injuries.
ED, talent often trumps experience. Just because a player has not played much or not much does not mean that there is no depth.
Generally, having experienced backup o-linemen, means your OL aint very good.
I'm just fine not knowing how most of our backups would be as starters.
And before Ed jumps in with some example of WSU's OL from the early 90s to disprove my point, I said "generally".
1990...Sale was supposedly the most talented player in that first class. His addition did not help depth. He was a body. How many times have we heard any coaching staff say "this player is really having a camp" only to get on the field and be a dud.
They felt more compelled to move three players around (and there was reason Ecklund was moved from tackle after the 2013 Apple cup) when dahl went down. If they truly felt comfortable playing Dillard they would have started him. While talent can trump experience, lack of experience gets your QB killed. Fortunately Dillards biggest mistake where he blocked the wrong guy Falk saw it quick enough and side stepped a huge hit.
There is no position on the field that requires you to work more in continuity, more in unison than the oline. There was a reason Micah Hannam was on the all freshman team...cause no other Pac 10 team started an offensive tackle as a freshman.
Or haven't suffered an injury. Next year, when we play the teams we are suppose to blowout in the non conference schedule you will see that depth get experience. We will have that run where we start layering depth.
you have used that as an excuse for coaches failing to get o lineman for years, we have been thin on the o line until now because previous coaches ignored the position. Leach has invested in the o line and the effort is paying off
Such BS...other coaches didn't ignore it.
Until I am n the recruiting room I will never make the claim they ignored the position. We have zero idea how many kids were really offered my Mike Price and any other coach who coached here.
That position is a premium because the pool of candidates are smaller. You think when Price signed 7 olineman in 94 he didn't emphasis the position? They were all busts.
Price finally was able to get depth along the oline after he made it to the Rose Bowl in the 1999 class. As I said the day Leach was hired is he will be able to get that oline class that Price got in 1999 by year three or four. And that is because of his resume, not because other coaches thought of the position as an afterthought.
If I said Moritz Christ doesn't change the narrative. The good thing is by the conference games of next year we should be 8 deep with experience. That is a good thing and a positive thing.
Not true at all. Didn't say Leach wasted his time at all. Matter of fact, sale was flushed right away. It goes to the greater point until we actually see them we don't know what they will do on the football field. Dillard was very impressive.
Until I am in the recruiting room I will never make the claim they ignored the position. We have zero idea how many kids were really offered my Mike Price or any other coach who coached here.
That position is a premium because the pool of candidates are smaller. You think when Price signed 7 olineman in 94 he didn't emphasis the position? They were all busts.
Price finally was able to get depth along the oline after he made it to the Rose Bowl in the 1999 class. As I said the day Leach was hired is he will be able to get that oline class that Price got in 1999 by year three or four. And that is because of his resume, not because other coaches thought of the position as an afterthought.
I fondly recall hearing that there was a lack of linemen on the west coast. Fondly. It felt like Christmas morning when you were a little kid.
I know, rival coaches who said there was a lack of lineman (I believe 2010) said that so we would have something to talk about on CZone.
Until they play we don't know if they are a body like Christ or (name a wulff lineman) or they truly provide depth.
Last edited:
Strangely, for WSU it went from 2008 through 2010. Yet, somehow Nevada, Utah State, Fresno State and bunch of other schools were able to field functional offensive lines.
Let me know when we change conferences and compete with those teams for Pac 12 bodies. I know the lie problem only started in 2008. We had tons of bodies from 81 to 2008 and suddenly we went dry on the oline. The lack of lineman in the program and the difficulty getting quality lineman in those years are a figment of my imagination.
Similar threads
