Pages:
Actions
  • #1 by The_Iceman on 05 Oct 2017
  • Froholdt, Ragnow, and Gibson are good enough to make an Elite O-line. We just dont have the talent at tackle right now to match them.


  • #2 by GunnerHawg70 on 05 Oct 2017
  • Unfortunately that's the side AA gets clobbered by on the regular...Go back, watch some film and you can see the majority of AA's thumpin comes from the right side...I cringe every time that dude takes a snap from under center and has a 5-7 step drop - DOOM AND GLOOM!!!!
  • #3 by The_Iceman on 05 Oct 2017
  • Unfortunately that's the side AA gets clobbered by on the regular...Go back, watch some film and you can see the majority of AA's thumpin comes from the right side...I cringe every time that dude takes a snap from under center and has a 5-7 step drop - DOOM AND GLOOM!!!!

    This graded Gibson as an RG. The tackles need to improve, especially RT. Jackson is slowly getting better.
  • #4 by PorkRinds on 05 Oct 2017
  • Yep. CBB and Anderson have failed to get is a decent tackle.  It's terrible.
  • #5 by ricepig on 05 Oct 2017
  • Yep. CBB and Anderson have failed to get is a decent tackle.  It's terrible.

    Pittman didn't either, Kirkland and Skipper were guards playing OT.
  • #6 by PorkRinds on 05 Oct 2017
  • Pittman didn't either, Kirkland and Skipper were guards playing OT.

    Hard to disagree. Why the heck can't we get a tackle?
  • #7 by PorkSoda on 05 Oct 2017
  • Hard to disagree. Why the heck can't we get a tackle?
    because you need someone who is both big and nimble.  not a lot of those out there.

    granted it is their job to find someone who is capable of playing the position, but I feel like they settled for recruiting a lot of guards and hoping they can make the transition to tackle.
  • #8 by PorkRinds on 05 Oct 2017
  • because you need someone who is both big and nimble.  not a lot of those out there.

    Then how have others found them? Maybe we should change our offense if we can't get an OT that can perform in our offense.
  • #9 by GunnerHawg70 on 05 Oct 2017
  • Pittman didn't either, Kirkland and Skipper were guards playing OT.

    They had no choice but play OT...The size of recent Hog QB's (besides RM) poised a HUGE throwing lane window problem...Might have not been the Nations best OT's but they brought a level of "Tenasty" (tenacious / nasty) that I don't see with the current starters...Maybe CKA is a nice guy that helps the opponent up after a play and bleeds over into the mindset of the Hogs OL...Just a thought  :-\
  • #10 by ricepig on 05 Oct 2017
  • Then how have others found them? Maybe we should change our offense if we can't get an OT that can perform in our offense.

    LSU has a couple of 4* OT's, I think we wanted both of them, they aren't too much different from ours. We've given a couple of offers out to JUCO OT's recently, I think they are more pass pro guys, than run mailers. True OT's are as hard to find as true DT's.
  • #11 by PorkSoda on 05 Oct 2017
  • Then how have others found them? Maybe we should change our offense if we can't get an OT that can perform in our offense.
    well, I assume there are only so many to go around.  I agree though, its on the coaches to find them, and my point was that they settled for recruiting guards.  at least that is how it seems.

    another good point is that when CBB came here, he spent the first 2-3 years recruiting for a down hill running offense.  Then realized he needed more nimble / finesse guys to compete, so has only had a couple years to recruit those types.  that may be why we are seeing freshmen start over veterans.  and it may also mean it will be at least 2 more years before the change in philosophy produces veterans.

     
  • #12 by Al Boarland on 05 Oct 2017
  • Hard to disagree. Why the heck can't we get a tackle?

    Because the elite tackles are as few and far between as elite DL and we aren’t a destination school for the elite.
  • #13 by Wildhog on 05 Oct 2017
  • Because the elite tackles are as few and far between as elite DL and we aren’t a destination school for the elite.

    Elite?  I would settle for "serviceable" or "somewhat competent."
  • #14 by Al Boarland on 05 Oct 2017
  • Elite?  I would settle for "serviceable" or "somewhat competent."
    OL is easy to whiff on in recruiting. That’s why you have to be able to recruitt at a high level every cycle.
  • #15 by razorbackfaninar on 05 Oct 2017
  • Hard to disagree. Why the heck can't we get a tackle?

    Truly elite tackles are hard to come by and they are very hard to identify coming out of high school.  What do Western Michigan, Troy, Bucknell, South Florida, Alabama State, and Vilanova have in common?  Of the 16 OT's drafted by NFL teams last year 6 of them came from these schools.  Now I don't know about you but I never thought of Vilanova as a football school.  These are players good enough to play in the NFL that other major schools who could have used them, missed on, and it's this way every year. There are a lot of OT's that will end up playing for smaller schools that we would have loved to have, but that most D1 schools including us missed on. 
  • #16 by PorkRinds on 05 Oct 2017
  • Elite?  I would settle for "serviceable" or "somewhat competent."

    I'd take "anything but garbage".
  • #17 by AugustaHog on 05 Oct 2017
  • I agree that Gibson has been much better at RG than at RT.  He's obviously playing out of position out of necessity.  It would be really nice if Wallace suddenly had the switch flip and was able to fill that spot that all have expected him to for 3 years now.  Enos is going to have to really be creative to keep Austin Allen's head attached to his body this month.  If we can't protect him better than we have, Cole Kelley is going to see the field in more than the "Steamboat" package.
  • #18 by EastexHawg on 05 Oct 2017
  • These grades will be interesting to follow as the season goes on and conference games become a larger portion of the sample size.
  • #19 by NoogaHog on 05 Oct 2017
  • These grades will be interesting to follow as the season goes on and conference games become a larger portion of the sample size.

    Yes, these grades are against exactly 1 good DLine and 3 not so good Dlines.
  • #20 by Al Boarland on 05 Oct 2017
  • Yes, these grades are against exactly 1 good DLine and 3 not so good Dlines.

    Those grades will tank with the teams coming after the SCar game.
  • #21 by The_Iceman on 05 Oct 2017
  • Those grades will tank with the teams coming after the SCar game.

    I don't believe so. Froholdt, Ragnow, and Gibson can hold up in the middle. Those guys are really, really good.

    Tackle is one of the more difficult positions to play, especially in the SEC.
  • #22 by Switchback on 05 Oct 2017
  • Congrats to Fronoldt and Gibson!  I'll bet they put in a lot of work to earn this grade.
  • #23 by Letsroll1200 on 05 Oct 2017
  • It's a shame that Gibson is playing out of position! If he could just have the same opportunity as Froholdt he would be one of the best. Gibson is a guard.
  • #24 by ballz2thewall on 05 Oct 2017
  • Then how have others found them? Maybe we should change our offense if we can't get an OT that can perform in our offense.

    i've often wondered if you could take a DE, perhaps not heavily recruited, and make him on OT....
  • #25 by PorkSoda on 05 Oct 2017
  • i've often wondered if you could take a DE, perhaps not heavily recruited, and make him on OT....
    or a TE.  wasn't Jason Peters originally a TE?
  • #26 by sickboy on 06 Oct 2017
  • Can we take a second to congratulate Froholdt for being a bad ass on making the move to O-line and grinding into a solid lineman. I know we have problems, but someone folks deserve credit for that development, including the young man.
  • #27 by Großer Kriegschwein on 06 Oct 2017
  • or a TE.  wasn't Jason Peters originally a TE?

    Recruited as a Defensive Tackle, converted to Tight End in college, that became an Offensive Tackle.

    That’s a journey.
  • #28 by Boss Hog in the Arkansas on 06 Oct 2017
  • Hard to disagree. Why the heck can't we get a tackle?
    We have a few on the roster including the guy starting at center
  • #29 by MuskogeeHogFan on 06 Oct 2017
  • Hard to disagree. Why the heck can't we get a tackle?

    We have landed OT's in recruiting. We’ve had some challenges on the O-Line in terms of getting the kids we signed to get to campus and then, develop to their full potential.

    In 2013 we signed the #9 OG in Kirkland who left a year early. The #18 OG in Koehler who never developed and the #47 OT in Skipper (1 leaves early, 1 was a bust).

    In 2014 we signed the #25 OG in Josh Allen (never panned out), the #8 OT in Wallace, the #25 OT in Ragnow and the #30 OT in Jovan Pruitt (never arrived). 2 of 4 were busts.

    In 2015 we signed the #15 OG in Merrick, the #26 OG in Rogers, the #65 OT in Jackson and the #173 OT in Klint Harvey. We are still waiting for Merrick to assert himself and Klint Harvey never made it, I guess?

  • #30 by The_Iceman on 06 Oct 2017
  • I saw a picture the UofA posted on Instagram of the O-line, and it looked like Wallace was on the right side with the starting O-line. I may be wrong, it was hard to tell. 
  • #31 by PorkRinds on 06 Oct 2017
  • We have landed OT's in recruiting. We’ve had some challenges on the O-Line in terms of getting the kids we signed to get to campus and then, develop to their full potential.

    In 2013 we signed the #9 OG in Kirkland who left a year early. The #18 OG in Koehler who never developed and the #47 OT in Skipper (1 leaves early, 1 was a bust).

    In 2014 we signed the #25 OG in Josh Allen (never panned out), the #8 OT in Wallace, the #25 OT in Ragnow and the #30 OT in Jovan Pruitt (never arrived). 2 of 4 were busts.

    In 2015 we signed the #15 OG in Merrick, the #26 OG in Rogers, the #65 OT in Jackson and the #173 OT in Klint Harvey. We are still waiting for Merrick to assert himself and Klint Harvey never made it, I guess?

    Not getting enough players if we are going to have that many busts.
  • #32 by The_Iceman on 06 Oct 2017
  • We have landed OT's in recruiting. We’ve had some challenges on the O-Line in terms of getting the kids we signed to get to campus and then, develop to their full potential.

    In 2013 we signed the #9 OG in Kirkland who left a year early. The #18 OG in Koehler who never developed and the #47 OT in Skipper (1 leaves early, 1 was a bust).

    In 2014 we signed the #25 OG in Josh Allen (never panned out), the #8 OT in Wallace, the #25 OT in Ragnow and the #30 OT in Jovan Pruitt (never arrived). 2 of 4 were busts.

    In 2015 we signed the #15 OG in Merrick, the #26 OG in Rogers, the #65 OT in Jackson and the #173 OT in Klint Harvey. We are still waiting for Merrick to assert himself and Klint Harvey never made it, I guess?

    Jake Heinrich was a 4-star out of Iowa. Listed at 6'4" and 293lb, he's probably only going to be a guard here. Only a redshift freshman and still has time to develop.

    We brought in 4 pretty good O-line prospects in the 2017 class: Clary (6'4", 286lb, OG), Wagner (6'9", 311lb, OT), Adcock (6'5" 288lb OT/OG), and Clenin (6'6" 300lb, OT/OG). I think as these 4 develop, they have really good potential.

    I like Luke Jones (6'5" 292lb, OT) and Noah Gatlin  (6'7" 300lb, OT) in the 2018 class, and we are targeting a big JUCO tackle as well. Looks like Bielema is trying to correct his recruiting mistakes on the O-line.
  • #33 by PorkRinds on 06 Oct 2017
  • Jake Heinrich was a 4-star out of Iowa. Listed at 6'4" and 293lb, he's probably only going to be a guard here. Only a redshift freshman and still has time to develop.

    We brought in 4 pretty good O-line prospects in the 2017 class: Clary (6'4", 286lb, OG), Wagner (6'9", 311lb, OT), Adcock (6'5" 288lb OT/OG), and Clenin (6'6" 300lb, OT/OG). I think as these 4 develop, they have really good potential.

    I like Luke Jones (6'5" 292lb, OT) and Noah Gatlin  (6'7" 300lb, OT) in the 2018 class, and we are targeting a big JUCO tackle as well. Looks like Bielema is trying to correct his recruiting mistakes on the O-line.

    He better hurry. The wolves are circling.
  • #34 by The_Iceman on 06 Oct 2017
  • He better hurry. The wolves are circling.

    Tomorrow will tell us a lot about that. If we win, a bowl game looks almost for sure, and he will keep his job.
  • #35 by Wildhog on 06 Oct 2017
  • In the preseason, the general consensus was that this is the year CBB needs to win 9 games (with a bowl), and anything less would be disappointing. 

    I wonder how that narrative changes over the course of the season.
  • #36 by PorkRinds on 06 Oct 2017
  • In the preseason, the general consensus was that this is the year CBB needs to win 9 games (with a bowl), and anything less would be disappointing. 

    I wonder how that narrative changes over the course of the season.

    I always thought 8 was the likely win total. With as bad as the SEC seems to be that may still be possible.
  • #37 by Wildhog on 06 Oct 2017
  • I always thought 8 was the likely win total. With as bad as the SEC seems to be that may still be possible.

    Sucks that we're not very good, because this is one of those years we could make a run.
  • #38 by ballz2thewall on 06 Oct 2017
  • or a TE.  wasn't Jason Peters originally a TE?

    indeed, at TE, too.
  • #39 by ricepig on 06 Oct 2017
  • In the preseason, the general consensus was that this is the year CBB needs to win 9 games (with a bowl), and anything less would be disappointing. 

    I wonder how that narrative changes over the course of the season.

    General consensus?? Where, certainly not on HV, you couldn't even get a general consensus on Frito pie on here.
  • #40 by PorkRinds on 06 Oct 2017
  • Sucks that we're not very good, because this is one of those years we could make a run.

    Yep.
  • #41 by outlawhogeywells on 06 Oct 2017
  • because you need someone who is both big and nimble.  not a lot of those out there.

    granted it is their job to find someone who is capable of playing the position, but I feel like they settled for recruiting a lot of guards and hoping they can make the transition to tackle.
    Do what switzer did at blow u.  Take DL and make them tackles.  DL are usually more nimble. 
  • #42 by Reservoir Hogs on 06 Oct 2017
  • In the preseason, the general consensus was that this is the year CBB needs to win 9 games (with a bowl), and anything less would be disappointing. 

    I wonder how that narrative changes over the course of the season.

    I think there is a difference in being disappointed in the results and deserving to be fired.
  • #43 by bennyl08 on 06 Oct 2017
  • In the preseason, the general consensus was that this is the year CBB needs to win 9 games (with a bowl), and anything less would be disappointing. 

    I wonder how that narrative changes over the course of the season.

    Agree with others that 9 wins wasn't the consensus on here, but I was one of the posters pretty steady in the 9 win department.

    I thought the first game didn't look out of the world great, but that our defense did well, our OL was better, but the receivers weren't where we hoped they'd be.

    Against TCU, our defense played much better than I expected and played quite well. Our OL did their jobs, but our WR's flat out didn't show up. Austin was holding the ball for 5 seconds because the receivers could not get open in that much time and thus TCU was able to load the box to stop the run. The team overall did not show up to that game. They were going through the motions. Bielema looked like a dead man walking after that game.

    Against the aggies, we played better than I expected coming off the embarrassing TCU game. We lost that game, but our offense clicked for the first time this season. Our defense played well for most of the game, but despite all the hype about how TCU had this amazing receiving corp (they didn't), the aggies were the first team capable of really testing our defense and exploited a handful of breakdowns that were big breakdowns. The 3-4 is built to be a complicated defense. You need players that can handle that level of complexity on defense, otherwise, if you keep things simple for the players, then things will be simple for opposing offenses as well.

    NMST, played out as expected. Our offense did well. Their offense was going to put some points and keep things somewhat close at halftime before falling away in the 2nd half.

    So, what's the overall assessment, even with my 9-3 prediction, TCU and Aggie games were both toss-ups for me pre-season. That we lost both of them doesn't guarantee that we can't still win. However, with how poorly the coaching staff had the team prepared for the TCU game, my faith in them was lost. Decent chance IMO that we might have a new coach for 2018, but I definitely believe we will, barring some miraculous turnaround for 2019. Nonetheless, the defense has shown flashes of potential so far and the offense is finally starting to click. So, what are the hogs looking at for the rest of the season?

    SC: Even if they were healthy and even with the disappointments of this season for us so far, we should still beat this team. That we've performed better over the past two games overall and their program is reeling is just icing on the cake to give our program a road SEC win.
    Bama: Projected that this was a loss since last year, no need to change that now. Meaning, if this team is to go 9-3, we would need to win out. My thoughts on us having the talent to do so hasn't changed since the pre-season, but my thoughts on the coaching staff has.
    Auburn: Auburn is absolutely beatable. They barely beat Mercer. Their wins over Mizz and MSU were big, but as will be discussed later, it's possible Mercer is legitimately a better team than those two. I'd guess we lose this game right now, but i'm like 60:40 on us losing at the moment. By no stretch guaranteed.
    OM: I actually think this game will be easier for us since the season has started than I thought it would be in the pre-season. It still sets up as a trap game for us, but OM team is pretty bad and getting worse.
    LSU: Similar to OM above, but even more surprising. Let's look at LSU so far. They beat BYU nicely, but BYU struggled against FCS Portland State and has lost every other game since. LSU beat Syracuse. They beat Central Conn and Central Mich and have lost to every other team so far. Ignoring Chatanooga, LSU has then lost, and lost badly, to Miss St who has shown to not be very good themselves, and lost to Troy. While this rivalry game is always a coin flip b/w the two, I'm guessing this rivalry aspect will be to the benefit of LSU who may easily be the underdog to us by the time we play.
    MSU: Speaking of Miss St, their only signature win was an LSU team who just lost to Troy. They have since been blown out by UGA and Auburn. Defending Fitzgerald will be tough for us, but he is pretty much the only aspect of their team that signifies they could beat us. With the game at our place, we should beat them, and if he's injured at all, we should wipe the floor with them.
    Mizz: Their offense will still pose a struggle for us and give them an outside shot, but this game looks to be a lot easier post season starting than pre-season starting.

    I think 8-4 is more realistic now than 9-3. However, losing to anybody else than the two alabama teams would still be disappointing. It's disappointing already that we lost to both TCU and aggies.
  • #44 by Al Boarland on 06 Oct 2017
  • Agree with others that 9 wins wasn't the consensus on here, but I was one of the posters pretty steady in the 9 win department.

    I thought the first game didn't look out of the world great, but that our defense did well, our OL was better, but the receivers weren't where we hoped they'd be.

    Against TCU, our defense played much better than I expected and played quite well. Our OL did their jobs, but our WR's flat out didn't show up. Austin was holding the ball for 5 seconds because the receivers could not get open in that much time and thus TCU was able to load the box to stop the run. The team overall did not show up to that game. They were going through the motions. Bielema looked like a dead man walking after that game.

    Against the aggies, we played better than I expected coming off the embarrassing TCU game. We lost that game, but our offense clicked for the first time this season. Our defense played well for most of the game, but despite all the hype about how TCU had this amazing receiving corp (they didn't), the aggies were the first team capable of really testing our defense and exploited a handful of breakdowns that were big breakdowns. The 3-4 is built to be a complicated defense. You need players that can handle that level of complexity on defense, otherwise, if you keep things simple for the players, then things will be simple for opposing offenses as well.

    NMST, played out as expected. Our offense did well. Their offense was going to put some points and keep things somewhat close at halftime before falling away in the 2nd half.

    So, what's the overall assessment, even with my 9-3 prediction, TCU and Aggie games were both toss-ups for me pre-season. That we lost both of them doesn't guarantee that we can't still win. However, with how poorly the coaching staff had the team prepared for the TCU game, my faith in them was lost. Decent chance IMO that we might have a new coach for 2018, but I definitely believe we will, barring some miraculous turnaround for 2019. Nonetheless, the defense has shown flashes of potential so far and the offense is finally starting to click. So, what are the hogs looking at for the rest of the season?

    SC: Even if they were healthy and even with the disappointments of this season for us so far, we should still beat this team. That we've performed better over the past two games overall and their program is reeling is just icing on the cake to give our program a road SEC win.
    Bama: Projected that this was a loss since last year, no need to change that now. Meaning, if this team is to go 9-3, we would need to win out. My thoughts on us having the talent to do so hasn't changed since the pre-season, but my thoughts on the coaching staff has.
    Auburn: Auburn is absolutely beatable. They barely beat Mercer. Their wins over Mizz and MSU were big, but as will be discussed later, it's possible Mercer is legitimately a better team than those two. I'd guess we lose this game right now, but i'm like 60:40 on us losing at the moment. By no stretch guaranteed.
    OM: I actually think this game will be easier for us since the season has started than I thought it would be in the pre-season. It still sets up as a trap game for us, but OM team is pretty bad and getting worse.
    LSU: Similar to OM above, but even more surprising. Let's look at LSU so far. They beat BYU nicely, but BYU struggled against FCS Portland State and has lost every other game since. LSU beat Syracuse. They beat Central Conn and Central Mich and have lost to every other team so far. Ignoring Chatanooga, LSU has then lost, and lost badly, to Miss St who has shown to not be very good themselves, and lost to Troy. While this rivalry game is always a coin flip b/w the two, I'm guessing this rivalry aspect will be to the benefit of LSU who may easily be the underdog to us by the time we play.
    MSU: Speaking of Miss St, their only signature win was an LSU team who just lost to Troy. They have since been blown out by UGA and Auburn. Defending Fitzgerald will be tough for us, but he is pretty much the only aspect of their team that signifies they could beat us. With the game at our place, we should beat them, and if he's injured at all, we should wipe the floor with them.
    Mizz: Their offense will still pose a struggle for us and give them an outside shot, but this game looks to be a lot easier post season starting than pre-season starting.

    I think 8-4 is more realistic now than 9-3. However, losing to anybody else than the two alabama teams would still be disappointing. It's disappointing already that we lost to both TCU and aggies.

    MS St. is going to give us fits.
  • #45 by Inhogswetrust on 06 Oct 2017
  • Unfortunately that's the side AA gets clobbered by on the regular...Go back, watch some film and you can see the majority of AA's thumpin comes from the right side...I cringe every time that dude takes a snap from under center and has a 5-7 step drop - DOOM AND GLOOM!!!!

    You forget there is more than one person on that side..........................and both sides.
  • #46 by bennyl08 on 06 Oct 2017
  • MS St. is going to give us fits.

    Fitzgerald is barely above 50% completion and not even pushing the ball far at that with not even 6 ypa. Their rushing game has been pretty good, but we've been a lot better this year at stopping the run. Their receivers are pretty small, too.
  • #47 by BigE_23 on 06 Oct 2017
  • I don't understand why Wallace can't get on the field...he was far more solid than Jackson last year. He's big, athletic, and strong. For some reason he can't seem to get out of the doghouse.
  • #48 by Al Boarland on 06 Oct 2017
  • Fitzgerald is barely above 50% completion and not even pushing the ball far at that with not even 6 ypa. Their rushing game has been pretty good, but we've been a lot better this year at stopping the run. Their receivers are pretty small, too.

    A&M gashed the D on the ground and in the air. I guess you could say “we’re a lot better” at stopping the run. We’ve gone from abysmal to just crappy.
  • #49 by MuskogeeHogFan on 06 Oct 2017
  • MS St. is going to give us fits.

    And the Zen Master said, "we'll see".
  • #50 by rzrbackramsfan on 06 Oct 2017
  • Froholdt, Ragnow, and Gibson are good enough to make an Elite O-line. We just dont have the talent at tackle right now to match them.

    Golly Anderson, put in Wallace already.
Pages:
Actions