Looking around the P12...

[CougSinceBirth]

Oregon only took 3 OL. Oooohhh boy, you think they'd learn?
OSU took 5 OL.
UW took 3.
Stanford took 3.
Cal took 2.
USC took 4.

Just food for thought.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Oregon only took 3 OL. Oooohhh boy, you think they'd learn?
OSU took 5 OL.
UW took 3.
Stanford took 3.
Cal took 2.
USC took 4.

Just food for thought.

I thought UO had a bunch of freshmen play for them this year on the OL. That might be why they went light.

I get the feeling Anderson is gonna take 25 kids every year until his roster is loaded with guys he likes. Just move the kids that don't make it on to other pastures.

Stanford took 3 but 2 of the 3 are humdingers. Im guessing Stanford doesn't lose many kids to academic issues.

Cal is f*cked.

SC is gonna be loaded for a bear hunt in the near future. Unless their coach completely screws it up.

uw sucks. Doesn't matter who or how many they take.

 

[CougSinceBirth]

I thought UO had a bunch of freshmen play for them this year on the OL. That might be why they went light.

I get the feeling Anderson is gonna take 25 kids every year until his roster is loaded with guys he likes. Just move the kids that don't make it on to other pastures.

Stanford took 3 but 2 of the 3 are humdingers. Im guessing Stanford doesn't lose many kids to academic issues.

Cal is f*cked.

SC is gonna be loaded for a bear hunt in the near future. Unless their coach completely screws it up.

uw sucks. Doesn't matter who or how many they take.

Biggs, I love everything about this post. I actually started laughing a bit when I got to Cal. I pretty much agree on all points.

I know a small minority of P12 schools can get away with taking 2-3 OL/year, but teams such as Oregon, I think they'd be smart to take 5. But what do I know?

 

[WASH ST A&M FAN]

Word out of Eugene =

There was a shortage of Offensive Line kids on the West Coast this year.

 

[froropmkr72]

I thought UO had a bunch of freshmen play for them this year on the OL. That might be why they went light.

I get the feeling Anderson is gonna take 25 kids every year until his roster is loaded with guys he likes. Just move the kids that don't make it on to other pastures.

Stanford took 3 but 2 of the 3 are humdingers. Im guessing Stanford doesn't lose many kids to academic issues.

Cal is f*cked.

SC is gonna be loaded for a bear hunt in the near future. Unless their coach completely screws it up.

uw sucks. Doesn't matter who or how many they take.

uo might be better off waiting a year....winning more and then taking a bunch of higher rated o-linemen. Their current development program doesn't seem to be working.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Biggs, I love everything about this post. I actually started laughing a bit when I got to Cal. I pretty much agree on all points.

I know a small minority of P12 schools can get away with taking 2-3 OL/year, but teams such as Oregon, I think they'd be smart to take 5. But what do I know?

After watching Coach T and his classes I came away with a few ideas. One of which is the following..

Going into year 4 or 5 of your tenure, you're probably staring down a contract year. Your first two recruiting classes are crucial. If there's one position you can't screw up, it's your offensive line. No blocking, no offense. In your contract year, the last thing you want to put on the field is an offense that can't score. You could explain away a defense that gives up 35 if your offense is scoring 38. You could explain away a few close losses of the 31-28 variety. What you can't explain away is 42-10, 35-14, 28-7. Administrators probably aren't gonna know much about football. They will know touchdowns and the lack thereof.

So, Cal taking 2 high school offensive linemen doesn't look good for the future. They might have a decent season early in Wilcox's career, they will have a second rebuild. What happens if one guy doesn't pan out and the other guy gets hurt and never plays? You have nothing to show for 50% of your offensive personnel for the 2017 class. That's the equivalent of taking no QBs, no WRs, no RBs for a recruiting cycle. Kiss of death.

 

[BiggsCoug]

uo might be better off waiting a year....winning more and then taking a bunch of higher rated o-linemen. Their current development program doesn't seem to be working.

You mean putting kids in the hospital??? Not a good idea.

 

[Fab5Coug]

uo might be better off waiting a year....winning more and then taking a bunch of higher rated o-linemen. Their current development program doesn't seem to be working.

I don't think you should ever wait on OL. Waiting till you're winning is a great way to never start winning.

Look at Leach's first, patchwork class ('12). Yea, Villarubia & Denzel Dotson were wastes, but Salmonson contributed a bit, Flor filled in very nicely while Sorenson was out and Middleton was a multi year starter and a pretty good one at that. Given the chance, I bet Leach would take that group again just to have Middleton.

The next class, after a disastrous debut season, he landed O'Connell, Madison & Riley Sorenson.

 

[froropmkr72]

I don't think you should ever wait on OL. Waiting till you're winning is a great way to never start winning.

Look at Leach's first, patchwork class ('12). Yea, Villarubia & Denzel Dotson were wastes, but Salmonson contributed a bit, Flor filled in very nicely while Sorenson was out and Middleton was a multi year starter and a pretty good one at that. Given the chance, I bet Leach would take that group again just to have Middleton.

The next class, after a disastrous debut season, he landed O'Connell, Madison & Riley Sorenson.

Apples and Oranges. UO can take a higher rated player every single year. They'll just have to wait to see if they do better before selling better recruits.

 

[Fab5Coug]

Apples and Oranges. UO can take a higher rated player every single year. They'll just have to wait to see if they do better before selling better recruits.

They didn't have any trouble landing talented kids this year. How much better is it going to get for them. I just can't see the justification in ever punting a class of OL. Maybe Stanford can do that because, as Biggs pointed out, they don't lose many to attrition.