The House of Blue

What? What's your problem? You mean guys like Miller and West, both were highly rated coming out of HS! Also who knows what Eatmon and Love will do? Now there's six more coming in. You need to get off your high horse and do some research!

Sometimes I think minter wonderland and vh are the same poster.

Its convenient to stop at the last 2 classes, the ones who will be true freshmen, redshirt freshmen, and sophomores this year, but go back further than that and try convincing yourself UK has recruited adequately along the OL. In 2010 we brought in ONE player for the OL and that was a TE being converted. The class before that brought in Warford. U think (but I could be wrong) his point is that if we had recruited the OL more appropriately in 2008-2010, we wouldn't be having to sign upwards of 6 per class now and hoping 2 or 3 can step in and play as freshmen. If that is what he meant, he us 100% correct.

I think putting the quotes in the proper context sorts this out a bit:

****
footballcat65 posted:

Well one thing is for sure, It shows this staff can recruit. That makes six quality O-linemen in the class.
****

then...

****
vhcat1970 put the above post in quotes in posted

We wouldn't be in the shape we're in there had they recruited sufficient OLmen the previous two seasons.
****

then ....

****
IamRV's post started with (before listing the recruits from the last two seasons)

This is such complete and utter horsecrap that I have seen repeated ad nauseum here and elsewhere.

THIS STAFF HAS RECRUITED AND SIGNED TWO CLASSES (2011 & 2012), ONE OF WHICH JUST REPORTED LAST FRIDAY.
****

In that context, this staff wasn't around before the past couple of seasons. There have been a lot of changes to the staff made explicitly for the purpose of improving recruiting. However, I will agree with the post being replied to and differ with the statements from JDHLaw that appeared to justify the prior recruiting...

"As a matter of fact, a quick glance at the roster from the 2010 season (the one the coaching staff would have been basing their numbers on) shows that there were 8 OL in 2010 sophomores or younger."

Eight players in two years roughs out to four players per year. If a staff will bring in four players every year and one of them is good enough to play as a true freshman every other year with some attrition then there will most likely be adequate depth along the OL with the actual starters at any time being determined by who plays and develops the best. But, if walk-ons are depended upon to constitute that list of four per year the team will end up depending upon walk-ons to contribute and play throughout the year as injuries occur or to fill gaps from transfers and "retirees" (such as Ulinski and Simpson). I don't think one can get good and consistent SEC line play that way.

With four brought in every year (and every other year one being good enough to play as a true freshman, Warford and then Miller two years later) the make-up of the OL would alter year to year (assuming there really is one OL every other year good enough to play as a freshman)...

a)
year one: four freshmen red-shirting
year two: three red-shirt freshmen and one true sophomore playing (who really was good enough to play as a true freshman)
year three: four red-shirt sophomores playing
year four: three redshirt juniors playing and one true senior playing (who really was good enough to play as a true freshman)
year five: four redshirt seniors playing
This gives four freshmen red-shirting (who clearly need to red-shirt) and sixteen OL to play.

b)
year one: three freshmen red-shirting and one true freshman playing (who really was good enough to play as a true freshman)
year two: four red-shirt freshmen playing
year three: three red-shirt sophomores playing and one true junior playing (who really was good enough to play as a true freshman)
year four: four red-shirt juniors playing
year five: three true seniors playing
This would give three true freshmen red-shirting (who need to red-shirt) and sixteen OL to play.

If over a five year period there are a total of three players lost (or the equivalent from differing players sitting out from grades here and there, a pretty conservative estimation, IMO) then the three deep (starting five plus second and third string) will either have some players covering two spots in the depth chart or have to depend upon some walk-ons or have to depend upon bring in in players who really should red-shirt if things go from bad to worse. That would allow those actually starting (not necessarily all seniors and juniors) to be chosen based upon a combination of experience and talent.

I think that if in any year fewer than four OL are brought in a serious kink develops in the ability to put a good product on the field. If a lot are pulled in in one year and fewer the next (we appear to still be bringing in a solid four after a big haul last year) then there will be a hole that is difficult to fill later also.

JMO with all this.

Edit spelling