2016 vs 2017 roster

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Yeah, but how many of those players lost from the previous regime transferred as a result of the coaching change. Further, we typically takes 2-3 years to really see attrition of a class happen. So, the class of 2014 will probably see a few more leave this summer and '15 and '16 haven't had time to have any attrition yet.

Another factor is retention (and the quality of who you recruit) and not as it relates to going early to the NFL. One thing that Bielema has accomplished in the philosophy that they utilize to recruit players, is to decrease the attrition rate (or miss rate) of the players that we sign. Under BP, that was a huge negative factor.

From 2008 through 2012 we lost (or didn't pan out) 66 of the 140 players that we signed. A 47.1% attrition/miss rate.

For Bielema, by class starting with 2013:

2013: 8 of 23 for 34.8%
2014: 5 of 25 for 20%
2015: 2 of 23 for 8.7%
2016: 0 of 23 for 0.0%

Those numbers may go up after spring ball but they are nonetheless far below what we were experiencing and that certainly allows you to build and develop talent for the future whether using a R/S program or not.

As I said.

[bennyl08]

I know what you said. You've been making a lot of posts recently about how better Bielema's attrition rate is compared to Petrino's. You make a small disclaimer about how the numbers you are posting might not be perfect at the end of the post. However, what you really have is an extremely biased data set that isn't normalized whatsoever.

We have Funerburke, Gosha, Minor, Haman, Peters, Lowe, Holmes, Hines, McKay, and Buchanan Jr at least and I might be missing a few all left in part due to the coaching changes.

Remove those players and we are left with a 40% attrition rate for Petrino vs a 35% attrition rate for Bielema based on only having one that is actually comparable. We have to lose at least 4 players b/w now and summer of next year. The strongest candidates for those come from the 2014 class which would put the attrition rate there at 36% and counting.

That is a far cry from the "far below what we were experiencing" line that you are toting. Am I going to argue the two have experienced equal attrition? No. No matter how you slice it, CBB's has been lower, but on average, CBB's held on to an average of one extra player per year. Better yes. Far different? No remotely.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I know what you said. You've been making a lot of posts recently about how better Bielema's attrition rate is compared to Petrino's. You make a small disclaimer about how the numbers you are posting might not be perfect at the end of the post. However, what you really have is an extremely biased data set that isn't normalized whatsoever.

We have Funerburke, Gosha, Minor, Haman, Peters, Lowe, Holmes, Hines, McKay, and Buchanan Jr at least and I might be missing a few all left in part due to the coaching changes.

Remove those players and we are left with a 40% attrition rate for Petrino vs a 35% attrition rate for Bielema based on only having one that is actually comparable. We have to lose at least 4 players b/w now and summer of next year. The strongest candidates for those come from the 2014 class which would put the attrition rate there at 36% and counting.

That is a far cry from the "far below what we were experiencing" line that you are toting. Am I going to argue the two have experienced equal attrition? No. No matter how you slice it, CBB's has been lower, but on average, CBB's held on to an average of one extra player per year. Better yes. Far different? No remotely.

Petrino missed on players from every class at a much higher rate than Bielema has so far with the understanding that Bielema has had charge of the program since 2013.

2008-42.3%
2009-46.9%
2010-56%
2011-42.4%
2012-50%

I don't care how you want to look at it, twist it, turn it or make the data out to be something it is or isn't, those are big numbers.

Yes, as I said, we will probably see players not making the grade, not contributing, not staying with the team as we go forward. No doubt, there will probably be more casualties. But the miss rates are not anything like what we experienced under Petrino, at least to date.

[bennyl08]

Petrino missed on players from every class at a much higher rate than Bielema has so far with the understanding that Bielema has had charge of the program since 2013.

2008-42.3%
2009-46.9%
2010-56%
2011-42.4%
2012-50%

I don't care how you want to look at it, twist it, turn it or make the data out to be something it is or isn't, those are big numbers.

Yes, as I said, we will probably see players not making the grade, not contributing, not staying with the team as we go forward. No doubt, there will probably be more casualties. But the miss rates are not anything like what we experienced under Petrino, at least to date.

It's not a twisting the numbers to note than many of the players lost were due to coaching changes.

It is agenda driven posting to include those when comparing coaches, plain and simple.

Now, players who transferred due to the coaching change did hurt the depth of the program. When discussing depth alone, then obviously you must include those.

When referring to attrition of players from one coaching staff to the next, it is dishonest to include players who transferred because of the change in staff. The point of comparing attrition is to compare the quality of recruiting and the ability of that coach to create depth.

If Bielema was fired today and we hired Mike Leach to replace him, yeah, you can bet we'd see some RB's and TE's, and defensive players and OL players leave. Does that reflect on Bielema's ability to recruit depth to the program? No, that reflects on players who came here to do one thing, then we stopped doing that thing, and now the players leave.

[hawginbigd1]

Another factor is retention (and the quality of who you recruit) and not as it relates to going early to the NFL. One thing that Bielema has accomplished in the philosophy that they utilize to recruit players, is to decrease the attrition rate (or miss rate) of the players that we sign. Under BP, that was a huge negative factor.

From 2008 through 2012 we lost (or didn't pan out) 66 of the 140 players that we signed. A 47.1% attrition/miss rate.

For Bielema, by class starting with 2013:

2013: 8 of 23 for 34.8%
2014: 5 of 25 for 20%
2015: 2 of 23 for 8.7%
2016: 0 of 23 for 0.0%

Those numbers may go up after spring ball but they are nonetheless far below what we were experiencing and that certainly allows you to build and develop talent for the future whether using a R/S program or not.

This is a big part of why the program is in the best shape it has ever been, plus don't dismiss the 8-10 highly rated walk-ons we have that didn't really exist before now. I mean none of them may turn into Burlsworth, but they have potential.

[a0ashle]

15 have left in the last four years to 66 leaving from 2008-2012. We'd need 41 departures somewhere in the next 3-4 years to catch up. 10+ per year? That would be insane amount of loss. Tell me I missed something...

[factchecker]

15 have left in the last four years to 66 leaving from 2008-2012. We'd need 41 departures somewhere in the next 3-4 years to catch up. 10+ per year? That would be insane amount of loss. Tell me I missed something...

A lot of the 66 was in the 2010 class.  Our two highest recruits (247 composite 4 stars) transferred within a year or didn't make it to campus at all.

Calvin Barnett - highest rated recruit of 2010 class.  Never made it to Fayetteville.  Went JUCO and ended up at Okie Lite.

Cam Feldt - redshirt then transfer to North Texas

Jatashun Beachum - Big Tex redshirted and transferred in spring

Jeremiah Jackson - played in 2010 but disappeared afterwards.

Courtney Gaston - never made it to campus..... went JUCO and never got back

Brad Hefley - redshirt - transfer to JUCO

Denton Simek - redshirt - transfer to Central Oklahoma

Jacoby Walker - transfer to UCA after a couple seasons

LaCraig Brown - made it to camp but was off roster before first game

Eduardo Camara - transfer to UCA after losing kicking duties to Hocker

Marquel Wade, Maudrecus Humphrey (along with Andrew Peterson - not 2010 class) were arrested for burglary in 2012 and dismissed soon after.

[a0ashle]

A lot of the 66 was in the 2010 class.  Our two highest recruits (247 composite 4 stars) transferred within a year or didn't make it to campus at all.

Calvin Barnett - highest rated recruit of 2010 class.  Never made it to Fayetteville.  Went JUCO and ended up at Okie Lite.

Cam Feldt - redshirt then transfer to North Texas

Jatashun Beachum - Big Tex redshirted and transferred in spring

Jeremiah Jackson - played in 2010 but disappeared afterwards.

Courtney Gaston - never made it to campus..... went JUCO and never got back

Brad Hefley - redshirt - transfer to JUCO

Denton Simek - redshirt - transfer to Central Oklahoma

Jacoby Walker - transfer to UCA after a couple seasons

LaCraig Brown - made it to camp but was off roster before first game

Eduardo Camara - transfer to UCA after losing kicking duties to Hocker

Marquel Wade, Maudrecus Humphrey (along with Andrew Peterson - not 2010 class) were arrested for burglary in 2012 and dismissed soon after.

I remember most those, but its eye opening to see it all laid out.

[factchecker]

I remember most those, but its eye opening to see it all laid out.

The two who never made it to campus are two too many.  This is why Bielema usually doesn't mess with kids who can't get their academics straight.  I think we've had one kid who signed that didn't make it to campus under Bielema.  Jovan Pruitt was his name and he never made it out of JUCO.

That is why I had ZERO problem with not offering Byers.  Everyone knew, beyond the usual detractors, that he wasn't going to be eligible.  No reason to waste a spot on a kid who won't do the work needed to get eligible.  Bama could and did wait to pull the scholly.  Why? Because they have 5 stars waiting to take his offer.  We don't.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

It's not a twisting the numbers to note than many of the players lost were due to coaching changes.

It is agenda driven posting to include those when comparing coaches, plain and simple.

Now, players who transferred due to the coaching change did hurt the depth of the program. When discussing depth alone, then obviously you must include those.

When referring to attrition of players from one coaching staff to the next, it is dishonest to include players who transferred because of the change in staff. The point of comparing attrition is to compare the quality of recruiting and the ability of that coach to create depth.

If Bielema was fired today and we hired Mike Leach to replace him, yeah, you can bet we'd see some RB's and TE's, and defensive players and OL players leave. Does that reflect on Bielema's ability to recruit depth to the program? No, that reflects on players who came here to do one thing, then we stopped doing that thing, and now the players leave.

OK Benny, you keep pressing this, so tell us, who was it during the 5 recruiting classes from 2008-2012 that left or failed to develop and perform because of the change in HC's from HDN to Petrino? And how many years do you allow for kids to leave because of a change in HC's?

I can think of one from the 2008 class, Matt Hall, a transfer to Ole Miss when Nutt left.

[lakecityhog]

Muskee, in your anger you used the wrong years. I believe that you would be talking about the classes from 2005 to 2008, at least somewhere in that range.  I seem to remember something about a couple of Nutt's upper-classmen causing such a fuss on the plane ride home from USCe?? that BP kicked them off the team.

Plus it's kinda different comparing 2105 and 2016 to 4 and 5 years back. Look at 2015 and 2016 in 2 more years and you will have a much clearer picture of the situation. I do think that you should take into account that BB "helped" several kids find other opportunities simply because of the loyalty factor to Petrino and many of them did not fit his style.

HDN, BP and BB all coach to win and all had varying degrees of success at Arkansas. MANY of you seem to forget that we struggled with the likes of SMU and Memphis State before HDN arrived and like it or not he took us to the SEC Championship game. Like it or not BP gave us our best 2 year win totals EVER!

My hope is that BB passes both of them, not for BB's sake but for the sake of the program. I don't care if BB losses 8 players every year as long as he wins. I don't care if every 4th year we can only recruit 5 or 6 kids due to retention. I DON"T CARE as long as he wins.

I wonder sometimes if some of you realize that most of your own arguments bring into question BB's record. If we truly are recruiting at a higher level, retaining more players and bringing in top flight assistants, why aren't we winning more games? Shouldn't better players + better retention(depth) + better coaching = more wins?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Muskee, in your anger you used the wrong years. I believe that you would be talking about the classes from 2005 to 2008, at least somewhere in that range.  I seem to remember something about a couple of Nutt's upper-classmen causing such a fuss on the plane ride home from USCe?? that BP kicked them off the team.

Plus it's kinda different comparing 2105 and 2016 to 4 and 5 years back. Look at 2015 and 2016 in 2 more years and you will have a much clearer picture of the situation. I do think that you should take into account that BB "helped" several kids find other opportunities simply because of the loyalty factor to Petrino and many of them did not fit his style.

HDN, BP and BB all coach to win and all had varying degrees of success at Arkansas. MANY of you seem to forget that we struggled with the likes of SMU and Memphis State before HDN arrived and like it or not he took us to the SEC Championship game. Like it or not BP gave us our best 2 year win totals EVER!

My hope is that BB passes both of them, not for BB's sake but for the sake of the program. I don't care if BB losses 8 players every year as long as he wins. I don't care if every 4th year we can only recruit 5 or 6 kids due to retention. I DON"T CARE as long as he wins.

I wonder sometimes if some of you realize that most of your own arguments bring into question BB's record. If we truly are recruiting at a higher level, retaining more players and bringing in top flight assistants, why aren't we winning more games? Shouldn't better players + better retention(depth) + better coaching = more wins?

Nope, those are the years I mentioned above that he was speaking of. And, I wasn't, nor am I now, angry at all.

[bennyl08]

OK Benny, you keep pressing this, so tell us, who was it during the 5 recruiting classes from 2008-2012 that left or failed to develop and perform because of the change in HC's from HDN to Petrino? And how many years do you allow for kids to leave because of a change in HC's?

I can think of one from the 2008 class, Matt Hall, a transfer to Ole Miss when Nutt left.

Probably none since Petrino would have been the ones to recruit those players. You mention Matt Hall who upon some digging, committed to us in September of '06 way before Petrino was hired. The guy gave Petrino 2 years, played in 11 games including the bowl game in 2009, before transferring to OM and eventually spending a few years in the NFL. So there's one. Outside of him, I'd be surprised if there were any since they would have all committed to Petrino and have been recruited by Petrino. Another poster asked you if you accidentally posted the wrong time frame, and while you say you didn't, I still don't understand why you posted the years that you did. There's not a single player from the 13-17 classes who I have said transferred due to the transition from Petrino to Bielema since they were Bielema's recruits to begin with, so I don't why you are asking me about Petrino's own recruits leaving Petrino's team because Petrino wasn't Nutt. It really does not make any sense to me and apparently others as well.

What about transfers during Petrino's early years from Nutt's players? There were a few, but not many. Mostly because almost all the players with talent from the Nutt years left and Petrino was given a pretty empty roster save for a few like DJ Williams, Bequette, Franklin, and some OL. Bielema, on the other hand, received a roster with significantly more talent. Thus, there were more players who transferred out after the coaching changes.

Finally, to your question about what do I consider transferring due to coaching change/how long does it still count? Well, there's a few things. First and foremost, is the transfer something you would normally expect to see? Somebody who hasn't received playing time, buried on the depth chart with younger players surpassing them? If so, then that is probably a normal transfer. If you have somebody who has actually been getting increased playing time, somebody still expected to play a big role for this team who then transfers within 2 seasons of a coaching change, then that is very likely a transfer due to the coaching change. Further, you can add coach's commentary on the transfer or what the player himself says as evidence.

However, players tend to transfer for 3 reasons. They aren't getting the playing time they feel they deserve based on how good they think they are. They don't think they will be getting much playing now or in the future. They don't fit in with the culture of the team. When you have players that have currently been getting a lot of playing time transfer after a coaching change, they were probably a good sign from the previous coach, but just didn't fit with the new team. When you have a player that was expected to play a good role for the team and transfer out after a coaching change despite having many years of eligibility left and only being behind upperclassmen, that is a very rare transfer to happen under normal circumstances and is likely again due to the culture change.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Probably none since Petrino would have been the ones to recruit those players. You mention Matt Hall who upon some digging, committed to us in September of '06 way before Petrino was hired. The guy gave Petrino 2 years, played in 11 games including the bowl game in 2009, before transferring to OM and eventually spending a few years in the NFL. So there's one. Outside of him, I'd be surprised if there were any since they would have all committed to Petrino and have been recruited by Petrino. Another poster asked you if you accidentally posted the wrong time frame, and while you say you didn't, I still don't understand why you posted the years that you did. There's not a single player from the 13-17 classes who I have said transferred due to the transition from Petrino to Bielema since they were Bielema's recruits to begin with, so I don't why you are asking me about Petrino's own recruits leaving Petrino's team because Petrino wasn't Nutt. It really does not make any sense to me and apparently others as well.

What about transfers during Petrino's early years from Nutt's players? There were a few, but not many. Mostly because almost all the players with talent from the Nutt years left and Petrino was given a pretty empty roster save for a few like DJ Williams, Bequette, Franklin, and some OL. Bielema, on the other hand, received a roster with significantly more talent. Thus, there were more players who transferred out after the coaching changes.

Finally, to your question about what do I consider transferring due to coaching change/how long does it still count? Well, there's a few things. First and foremost, is the transfer something you would normally expect to see? Somebody who hasn't received playing time, buried on the depth chart with younger players surpassing them? If so, then that is probably a normal transfer. If you have somebody who has actually been getting increased playing time, somebody still expected to play a big role for this team who then transfers within 2 seasons of a coaching change, then that is very likely a transfer due to the coaching change. Further, you can add coach's commentary on the transfer or what the player himself says as evidence.

However, players tend to transfer for 3 reasons. They aren't getting the playing time they feel they deserve based on how good they think they are. They don't think they will be getting much playing now or in the future. They don't fit in with the culture of the team. When you have players that have currently been getting a lot of playing time transfer after a coaching change, they were probably a good sign from the previous coach, but just didn't fit with the new team. When you have a player that was expected to play a good role for the team and transfer out after a coaching change despite having many years of eligibility left and only being behind upperclassmen, that is a very rare transfer to happen under normal circumstances and is likely again due to the culture change.

It's not a twisting the numbers to note than many of the players lost were due to coaching changes.

It is agenda driven posting to include those when comparing coaches, plain and simple.

All I was pointing out was that there was a lot of attrition and recruiting misses during the Petrino years and that trend has been slowed (so far). I would think that it would be fair, at least in terms of offensive linemen and LB's, to say that this slowed the development of the program under Bielema.

Now I'm not letting Bielema off here because he is still responsible for recruiting and developing his team, but the situation that he inherited was less than ideal.

[lakecityhog]

"OK Benny, you keep pressing this, so tell us, who was it during the 5 recruiting classes from 2008-2012 that left or failed to develop and perform because of the change in HC's from HDN to Petrino?"

Why would any of those players leave due to HC change? All were recruited by the then current HC. Players recruited BY HDN that left when BP became coach would fall under the category of coaching change attrition. That doesn't seem very hard for me to understand, why can you not understand?
I tend to agree with Benny, agenda driven post!

I guess I just don't understand your point at all. You seem to want to blame BB's record on Petrino's lack of retention yet you don't want to acknowledge that MANY of the key players over the last 4 years were Petrino recruits.

Again, I ask if recruiting is so much better, retention is so much better and the overall staff is so much better WHERE ARE THE RESULTS???

[MuskogeeHogFan]

"OK Benny, you keep pressing this, so tell us, who was it during the 5 recruiting classes from 2008-2012 that left or failed to develop and perform because of the change in HC's from HDN to Petrino?"

Why would any of those players leave due to HC change? All were recruited by the then current HC. Players recruited BY HDN that left when BP became coach would fall under the category of coaching change attrition. That doesn't seem very hard for me to understand, why can you not understand?
I tend to agree with Benny, agenda driven post!

I guess I just don't understand your point at all. You seem to want to blame BB's record on Petrino's lack of retention yet you don't want to acknowledge that MANY of the key players over the last 4 years were Petrino recruits.

Again, I ask if recruiting is so much better, retention is so much better and the overall staff is so much better WHERE ARE THE RESULTS???

Have you checked to see what other schools have done over the same time period? As was stated either earlier in this thread or another, we don't live in a vacuum, everything is always changing. While our recruiting has improved to some degree, other teams in our division have recruited better. I make no bones about that. Now add in the fact that Bielema inherited what was pretty much a mess and you can begin to understand the slow climb back.

And as I also said, it isn't as if I am cutting Bielema a break. Like a lot of you I expected more, sooner, despite the crap sandwich that he was handed. I'm not taking up for Bielema, I just choose to observe the facts of the situation. There is no agenda on my part.

[bennyl08]

All I was pointing out was that there was a lot of attrition and recruiting misses during the Petrino years and that trend has been slowed (so far). I would think that it would be fair, at least in terms of offensive linemen and LB's, to say that this slowed the development of the program under Bielema.

Now I'm not letting Bielema off here because he is still responsible for recruiting and developing his team, but the situation that he inherited was less than ideal.

That isn't all you were pointing out. You were very consistent in saying that the difference was very large, and were very adamant about how that would have played out for Petrino's future.

If this post was all you were pointing out, then you would have gotten a +1 out of me and nothing more because what was in this post of yours is absolutely accurate. Bielema has been better with retention than Petrino, and he came in with a very weak OL and LB group that was very detrimental to our program under Bielema in a less than ideal situation.

However, Bielema came in to a team with a lot of talent at other positions. In his first 2 seasons, Bielema's team had 9 draft picks, of which 7 of them were already here on the team and Robert Thomas and Herndon have had solid multi-season NFL careers undrafted as well. 6 of the 7 spent either a majority or at least half their time on campus not under Bielema. Philon is the exception who redshirted during an injury year under Smiley and spent the only 2 years playing being played under Bielema.

While the situation was less than ideal, it was very much an above average situation for a new head coach to walk into as far as talent goes. How many coaches have that much NFL talent already on their team when they take over?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

That isn't all you were pointing out. You were very consistent in saying that the difference was very large, and were very adamant about how that would have played out for Petrino's future.

If this post was all you were pointing out, then you would have gotten a +1 out of me and nothing more because what was in this post of yours is absolutely accurate. Bielema has been better with retention than Petrino, and he came in with a very weak OL and LB group that was very detrimental to our program under Bielema in a less than ideal situation.

However, Bielema came in to a team with a lot of talent at other positions. In his first 2 seasons, Bielema's team had 9 draft picks, of which 7 of them were already here on the team and Robert Thomas and Herndon have had solid multi-season NFL careers undrafted as well. 6 of the 7 spent either a majority or at least half their time on campus not under Bielema. Philon is the exception who redshirted during an injury year under Smiley and spent the only 2 years playing being played under Bielema.

While the situation was less than ideal, it was very much an above average situation for a new head coach to walk into as far as talent goes. How many coaches have that much NFL talent already on their team when they take over?

Benny, we will have to agree to disagree on some points. He inherited some talent but my point was that key positions were woefully lacking depth and needed to be rebuilt, as you agree.

Seems like some of you guys have a problem with facts being stated, like a higher attrition/miss rate under Petrino than under Bielema, if it doesn't fit your viewpoints. It is just a fact, that is all. I have no agenda. There was a lot I liked about the Petrino years, there was a lot I didn't like. Same can be said of the years under Bielema so far. A plus for the program is that he seems to be keeping more kids around and developing them. Like any other program that aspires to something better, he just need "more better athletes" that have a higher potential for development because no one else in the conference is sitting still and waiting for us to catch up to higher talent levels.

[bennyl08]

Benny, we will have to agree to disagree on some points. He inherited some talent but my point was that key positions were woefully lacking depth and needed to be rebuilt, as you agree.

Seems like some of you guys have a problem with facts being stated, like a higher attrition/miss rate under Petrino than under Bielema, if it doesn't fit your viewpoints. It is just a fact, that is all. I have no agenda. There was a lot I liked about the Petrino years, there was a lot I didn't like. Same can be said of the years under Bielema so far. A plus for the program is that he seems to be keeping more kids around and developing them. Like any other program that aspires to something better, he just need "more better athletes" that have a higher potential for development because no one else in the conference is sitting still and waiting for us to catch up to higher talent levels.

Who is 'you guys'?

Maybe I missed the post but I haven't seen anybody claiming that Petrino didn't have higher attrition than Bielema. At least not in this thread.

Only people saying that it is best to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

An agenda driven post would comparing dental hygiene between an adult and a child and using the number of teeth that they have lost in the past 5 years as the benchmark. Both the adult and the child are capable of losing teeth due to decay and cavities from bad hygiene, but the child will also be losing teeth due to being a child and having adolescent being replaced by mature teeth.

Just like with recruiting, the number of lost teeth for each individual is simply a fact. Nothing more and nothing less. There is no inherent agenda in listing that the child lost more teeth than the adult. However, when using that data to compare the hygiene of the two individuals, it does become agenda driven if you do compensate for their being more than one way to lose a tooth (i.e. bad dental hygiene is not the only way). Sure, the kid who has lost teeth due to natural aging process is going to be at an eating disadvantage for a time same as the adult, and it doesn't really matter whether it was natural or due to bad hygiene.

Now, replace teeth with players. Yeah, the team is going to be disadvantaged by losing players whether it is because they weren't good enough physically, whether they are kicked off due to legal trouble, whether they don't like the cultural fit, or if they are forced to leave the team for medical reasons. The team has lost depth no matter the reason. However, in determining the recruiting of a coach, like determine the hygiene of an individual, it is best to compare losses based on bad recruiting rather than compare losses that are a natural result of a transition.

[Pork Twain]

Biggus,
Why on earth would we burn a redshirt on Clenin? O'Line is my #1 concern and it is stuff like this that keeps me wondering what is going on up there. We have what, 15 other O'Linemen on the roster and we can't find 5 guys capable of playing back-up without wasting a year on a true freshman?

Sometimes I think that BB is like a kid with a new toy when it comes to O'Linemen. What happened to Heinrich? Did he just turn to crap during his redshirt year? This is the stuff that has to be dis-heartening to players! Spend a couple of years busting your hump and in walks a kid that hasn't even seen Razorback field and boom, he is being talked about as a back-up??? What could this kid have possibly done to deserve any such accolades? Motivation??? Hardly!!

It has happened every year, with every coach.  There are always a few boys that step on campus, ready to play like men.  Not really sure it has ever been or ever will be that big of a deal or that outside of the norm.

[rzrbkman]

That's the one I couldn't recall. That is a great example of a blown redshirt.

Paul Ramirez only played in 3 games last season.

[a0ashle]

Paul Ramirez only played in 3 games last season.

Jury still out on that isn't it? People are trying to predict the future, it's futile.

[a0ashle]

You can certainly argue details, I'm still floored that we'd have to lose 10+ players a year for 3-4 years to catch up.

[rzrbkman]

The worst redshirt burning that I have ever seen documented for a Razorback football player was Jose Valdez in 2005. He played 9 Snaps in the blowout opener against Missouri St. and never played again that season. He was not injured. Valdez was a key reserve in 2006 and a starter at OT in 2007 and 2008. 2005 just wound up being a wasted year of eligibility.

[Arthur pigby sellers.]

 Is Clenon  high on the depth chart because we are pretty thin at tackle this year? Who are the back up tackles on the team.   It seems like one of those positions where we can't afford an injury kind of like linebacker was last year.

[bennyl08]

Is Clenon  high on the depth chart because we are pretty thin at tackle this year? Who are the back up tackles on the team.   It seems like one of those positions where we can't afford an injury kind of like linebacker was last year.

We play a lot of our OL players many places. Ramirez has been a tackle at most of his career and is playing at backup guard. Merrick is the other backup tackle though he seems more of a guard-like player.

In short, there's a reason why we have guys listed as OL on the roster rather than T-G-C. The guys we have that could play tackle include Wallace, Jackson, Merrick, Ramirez, Clenin, Heinrich, Ragnow, Adcock, and Wagnor and maybe even some others. Other than the true freshmen who haven't been here long, Jackson is the only one of those who hasn't played guard here as well at some point. Recall, Skipper started at one of the G's, RT, and LT during his time here. Kirkland at both guards iirc and then LT.

Similarly for other positions. We don't have any listed CB's or S's, just DB's. In part because guys like Dalton and KR3 are suited for both. We only have LB's on the roster without any designations there either.