Our OL

[KentuckyBoiler]

Why has our OL been a question mark/problem for so long now?

This is not something that just started during the Hazell era. I think our line has been serviceable in certain years in the past 15 years or so, but this problem goes back even toward the end of Tiller’s tenure.

We used to have some great OLs, but none in recent memory. We have had several recruits that showed promise and were highly recruited, but did not pan out as expected. Is this position the hardest to evaluate in recruiting, recruits we need want a different offensive scheme, coaching, bad luck, etc.? Just wondering what others think, because it seems to be the one area on the team that has been the most inconsistent over the last several years.

I think pass rush would be second, but I think that was the recruiting of Hope and Hazell. With Karlaftis, Hunter, Hudgins, etc. it is looking like the Den of DEs is coming back.

 

[nat100]

Hope pieced a good line together in 2009. That was the last one that was homegrown that was any good.

Hardest position to evaluate and develop. Especially if you arent landing the no brainers that OSU, bama and clemson get.

 

[NVboiler]

My question would be why anybody would even want to play on the offensive line? Every other position has some measurement to easily evaluate a player, but good blocking results in someone else piling up the offensive statistics. What a lack of recognition for giving such valuable contributions.

 

[Bullwhip Griffith]

My question would be why anybody would even want to play on the offensive line? Every other position has some measurement to easily evaluate a player, but good blocking results in someone else piling up the offensive statistics. What a lack of recognition for giving such valuable contributions.

Because if you’re big and strong but slow you gotta play somewhere.

 

[MilwaukeeBoilerFan]

Because if you’re big and strong but slow you gotta play somewhere.

That somewhere in the Big Ten is usually Wisconsin. The in-state boys usually stay put as Madison seems to cast a net around this state & catch them frequently, then cherry pick from other states like Michigan getting one their best lineman to commit this past Spring is crazy to get one from underneath Michigan and Michigan State.
Hope our OL can be solid this Fall.

 

[KentuckyBoiler]

From my original discussion on DEs and Karlaftis, this was some nice preseason recognition.

@NCAAFNation247

DE Spotlight

George Karlaftis III - Purdue Breakout Watch - Karlaftis was a huge pickup for the Boilermakers last season. A player like him will instantly come in and contribute. He's 6'4 265 and excels rushing the passer, I think in a year or two he's a top DE in #CFB.

6:57 AM - 30 Jul 2019

 

[tenwest]

You nailed it NV. Take it from someone who played OL my whole life. Chicks dig the long ball. I did everything I could to speed up my game and get on the other side of the ball. Just never worked out.

 

[coolrockt21]

Why has our OL been a question mark/problem for so long now?

This is not something that just started during the Hazell era. I think our line has been serviceable in certain years in the past 15 years or so, but this problem goes back even toward the end of Tiller’s tenure.

We used to have some great OLs, but none in recent memory. We have had several recruits that showed promise and were highly recruited, but did not pan out as expected. Is this position the hardest to evaluate in recruiting, recruits we need want a different offensive scheme, coaching, bad luck, etc.? Just wondering what others think, because it seems to be the one area on the team that has been the most inconsistent over the last several years.

I think pass rush would be second, but I think that was the recruiting of Hope and Hazell. With Karlaftis, Hunter, Hudgins, etc. it is looking like the Den of DEs is coming back.

A very difficult position to evaluate. Many would say the most difficult. And these things are exacerbated now that colleges are offering kids much earlier in the process. Also, you need to plenty of them in each class to allow for depth and wash-outs. If you get behind in just one class and your program is not named Ohio State, you could be in trouble for a couple of seasons.

Take your post/complaint and you could paste it into just about any forum in the B1G conference, except maybe Wisconsin and Ohio State and it would fit right in.

 

[coolrockt21]

My question would be why anybody would even want to play on the offensive line? Every other position has some measurement to easily evaluate a player, but good blocking results in someone else piling up the offensive statistics. What a lack of recognition for giving such valuable contributions.

I get the feeling you'r primarily on the basketball forum.

You play the position because it is a team sport - the lineman get to win games, just like everyone else. In football, about 9 out of 11 guys have to block on every play, and like the linemen, they don't play if they cannot block. It isn't as if it is unique to offensive linemen. Also, left tackles get paid a crap load of money in the NFL and likely have a lot longer average career span than a running back.

And if that someone else who is "piling up the offensive statistics" is not grateful for your work, there ways of educating that someone. Accidentally allowing a linebacker a clear path to the backfield often does the trick.

Being a lineman isn't a bizarre and lonely existence, like a hockey goalie, where you can only give up scores and the very best you can do, on your own, is break even. Now, that is a position where I question why you'd volunteer for it.

 

[SDBoiler1]

Hope pieced a good line together in 2009. That was the last one that was homegrown that was any good.

Hardest position to evaluate and develop. Especially if you arent landing the no brainers that OSU, bama and clemson get.

Yes, but those were Tiller recruits.

 

[FirstDownB]

Hope pieced a good line together in 2009. That was the last one that was homegrown that was any good.

Hardest position to evaluate and develop. Especially if you arent landing the no brainers that OSU, bama and clemson get.

Hard to evaluate and develop. Hard to project what kind of body transformation a 17 year old with baby fat will undergo in 3-4 years. Speed is speed and you either have it by age 17 or you won't. Muscle takes time and serious committment and development (early bloomers vs. late bloomers) varies one person/child to the next.

This is why I've long been a believer in over-recruiting the "strength" positions. If I can't get the blue chip, can't miss big uglies, give me a couple extra ones each year to create competition. Weed out the 2* and 3* players who might come in with some work to do but are willing to dedicate 4 years to their craft from the guys who want to parlay their size into a free ride and parties every weekend. Of course this also means recruiting fewer skill position players, which I am fine with, but that doesn't quite match our recruiting philosophy.

I also think there is an opportunity for JuCos and transfers here. I don't have the stats, but I would guess we've had a higher percentage of transfers who contribute at the "strength positions" than at the skill positions. By age 20 you have a pretty good idea of what you are going to get from them physically. Your hit rate on linemen transfers should be much better than your hit rate on freshmen linemen. Brohm made good use of this his first two years here.

And lastly, unfortunately most offensive linemen traditionally prefer to run block, which makes our program less attractive to them than a Wisconsin or Iowa.

 

[coolrockt21]

Hard to evaluate and develop. Hard to project what kind of body transformation a 17 year old with baby fat will undergo in 3-4 years. Speed is speed and you either have it by age 17 or you won't. Muscle takes time and serious committment and development (early bloomers vs. late bloomers) varies one person/child to the next.

This is why I've long been a believer in over-recruiting the "strength" positions. If I can't get the blue chip, can't miss big uglies, give me a couple extra ones each year to create competition. Weed out the 2* and 3* players who might come in with some work to do but are willing to dedicate 4 years to their craft from the guys who want to parlay their size into a free ride and parties every weekend. Of course this also means recruiting fewer skill position players, which I am fine with, but that doesn't quite match our recruiting philosophy.

I also think there is an opportunity for JuCos and transfers here. I don't have the stats, but I would guess we've had a higher percentage of transfers who contribute at the "strength positions" than at the skill positions. By age 20 you have a pretty good idea of what you are going to get from them physically. Your hit rate on linemen transfers should be much better than your hit rate on freshmen linemen. Brohm made good use of this his first two years here.

And lastly, unfortunately most offensive linemen traditionally prefer to run block, which makes our program less attractive to them than a Wisconsin or Iowa.

I tend to agree. Big time skill players can have a huge impact. But it is usually on a particular game. The dudes at the line of scrimmage drive the entire season. Most schools can get a few really, really good skill players. There are enough of them that the top 5 or so programs cannot offer all of them. You seem them in the group of 5 all the time. But being 3 deep with talent at the line of scrimmage is the primary way the top 5 programs win every year.

And to your point about competition, that is another reason the haves are always ahead of the have-nots. If you end up with one 5 star offensive lineman among a bunch of 2 stars, that dude can coast, to a degree, and it can cause problems. Meanwhile Alabama has 5 star Olinemen who have to compete against other 5 star linemen. Letting the better 2 and 3 stars rise to the top can sometimes be more efficient - totally with you on that.