Hogville Info
• 9,220,914 Posts
• 380,894 Topics
• 21,233 Hogvillians
THE RULES (Read 'em!)
Quick Links
Pick'Ems:Football      Basketball      Baseball
Sister Sites:Gridiron HistoryFearless Friday
Listen NOW:Game ON 103.3 
  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison  (Read 2390 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« on: August 28, 2017, 06:40:27 pm »

With Bama's depth chart coming out today, here's an in depth comparison with how we compare to them. Why do this? Bama is the gold standard of football teams at the moment and we are somewhat similar in style, especially with the defensive switch. What is being compared? We have experience, size, recruiting (Bama's stars are based on 247, Ark players have a super score system (highest star that any of the major sites gave.) The numeric value is strictly from 247 for both), and statistical production.

By themselves, none of them really have much meaning. Together, they can come together and tell a picture. You could have a 4 year starter that wasn't rated very highly and didn't produce a whole lot, but the team just didn't have anybody else. A highly rated guy may not have produced a whole lot, but hasn't had the opportunity with a lack of experience. Etc...

EDIT: have to break this into two parts.

QB: Jalen Hurts (6'2 218 So 4* .923), Tua Tagovailoa (6'1 219 Fr 5* .984)
Allen (6'1 215 Rs Sr 4* .891), Kelley (6'7 268 RsFr 4* .849) OR Storey (6'2 212RsSo 4* .909)

Hurts is 240/382 (62.8%), 2780 yards (7.3ypa) 23 td, 9 int, 191 carries, 954 yards (5.0 avg) 13 td. Their backup is a true freshmen.

Allen is 245/401 (61.1%), 3430 yards (8.6 ypa), 25 td, 15 int, 65 carries, -126 yards, 2 td. Storey is 1/4 for 3 yards, Kelley has no stats.

size: About the same. Kelley's a big boy though.

Adv: Push. Hurts should improve a good bit as he definitely had training wheels on as a true freshmen. His passing was suspect, but the thought is that he will be better. Austin should drop the sacks and int's a good bit in year two, and is by far the superior passer. I'd take Allen over Hurts any day, but I give it a push due to different styles. Neither team has much experience in their backups, but Arkansas has 3 full years of their 2 backups at least being on campus.

RB: Scarbororugh (6'2 235 Jr 5* .992) OR D. Harris (5'11 221 Jr 5* .986), Jacobs (5'10 212 So 3* .873), N. Harris (6'2 227 Fr 5* .998)
Whaley (5'11 216 So 4* .952) OR Williams (6'1 229 Sr 4* .928) , Hayden (5'10 191 Fr 4* .89) OR Williams (5'11 218 Fr 3* .852)

Scarborough and Harris combined for 1849 yards on 271 carries (6.8 ypc) and 13 td's. Not much in the receiving game with 18 rec, 121 yards, and 2 td's combined. Jacobs, their 3rd stringer, had another 567 yards at 6.7 per pop with 4 td's and is the big receiving threat out of the backfield with 14 receptions and 156 yards by himself. The fourth back is a true freshmen who's rated even higher than their other backs.

Whaley had 602 yards at 5.5 ypc, 3 td's, and 6 catches for 139 yards. Williams last year at SC had 239 yards at 4.3 ypc and 3 td's to go along with 9 rec for 72 yards. Chase and Maleek are true freshmen.

size: Bama's backs are big this year. We have pretty normal size.

Adv: Bama and it isn't close. We should be fine in the run game for sure, but I doubt there's a backfield in the country that matches Bama's right now, and there's probably a couple NFL teams that would glady trade right now.

TE: Henteges (6'5 249 Jr 4* .933), Smith Jr (6'4 246 So 3* .867)
Cantrell (6'3 264 RsSo 3* .865) AND O'Grady (6'4 253 RsSo 4* .917), Patton (6'5 250 Jr 4* .905) AND Kraus (6'5 248 RsJr 3* .842) AND Gragg (6'4 254 RsSo 4* .916)

Henteges has 3 rec for 10 yards and that's it. Backup doesn't have any stats.

Cantrell and O'Grady combine for 16 rec, 183 yards, and 3 td's. Not a whole lot to hang the hat on, by a massive amount in comparison.

size: We're bigger. 

Adv: Arkansas. We outmatch Bama in recruiting pedigree here, and production, not to mention size and experience. Further, we have Patton to add to this mix as well.

H-back/FB: Smith Jr (6'4 246 So see above), Forristall (6'5 238 So 3* .882)
Jackson (6' 253 Jr 3* .84), Johnson (6'2/256 So 3* .838)

Smith Jr has no stats, Forristall has 5 rec for 73 yards.

Jackson and Johnson combine for 3 receptions for 26 yards.

size: Bama is taller, we are bigger, but comparing fb's to h-backs.

Adv: Push. A bit of an unfair comparison here, as Bama doesn't list a FB and instead has a TE and an H-Back while we list 2 TE spots and a FB spot. Even adding in the Forristall to the TE section, we still have the advantage there and I think it is advantageous to have dedicated fb's as well. I give it a push though just because Forristall's receiving stats are much better than our fb's.

WRZ: Ridley (6'1 190 Jr 5* .993), Kieff (6'4 204 RsJr 4* .912) OR Ruggs (6' 175 Fr 4* .964)
Cornelius (5'11 212 Sr 3* .844) OR Pettway (6'2 220 RsSo 4* .862), Hammonds (5'10 195 So 4* .907) OR Nance (6'1 182 Jr 3* .826)

Ridley has 72 rec, 769 yards 10.7 ypc, and 7 td's, which was a dip from his freshmen season. Also, 5 carries for 21 yards. Backup Kieff has 4 for 31 yards. Ruggs is a true freshmen.

Cornelius has 13 carries, 53 yards, and a td, along with 32 rec, 515 yards 16.1 ypc, and 4 td's. Hammonds has 15 carries, 88 yards and a td (no receptions) and Pettway has 1 for 10 and a td. Nance is a JUCO.

size: Bama has a bit more height, we have more weight.

Adv: Bama. Cornelius is a bit more explosive and if he can have a healthy back this season, he could challenge for best receiver in the country (check out the first part of last season where he was ripping it up). However, Ridley is a superior overall receiver for sure. While the advantage I give to Bama here, it is only a slight one. I think our depth is pretty close to theirs and we have more total yards of production behind the first guy.

WRX: Foster (6'2 194 RsSr, 5* .989), D. Smith (6'1 165 Fr 4* .972)
Stewart (5'11 162 RsSo 3* .854) OR Jones (6'1 185 RsFr 4* .867), Warren (5'10 181 Fr 4* .848) OR Jackson (6'2 214 Fr 3* .872)

Foster has 5 catches, 55 yards, 1 rush for -5. Backup is a true freshmen.

Stewart has 2 carries for 9 yards, and 2 receptions for 34 yards. Jones redshirted, Warren and Jackson are true freshmen.

size: Stewart and smith are comparable. Jones is smaller than Foster. Jackson is big for a freshmen. Push in terms of size here.

Adv: Ark. Foster has failed to live up to his potential while Stewart nearly matched him as a rsfr in total yards last year. Bama definitely has the recruiting edge, but with Foster being in his 5th year, the youth and potential gives us the edge.

WRH: Sims (6'5 214 Sr 4* .961) OR Jeudy (6'1 187 Fr 5* .988), Marks (5'8 174 Jr ?)
n/a but throwing in Martin as Bielema has said he will play Martin (6'4 219 So 4* .905)

Sims has 14 receptions 152 yards. Marks has no stats and Jeudy is a true freshmen.

Martin is just coming in as a JUCO.

Adv: Bama. Similar to the h-back, not a great comparison as we only listed 2 wr spots and not a third. However, it should be apparent that Bama, like us, lost a lot of their receiving yards. However, Jeudy is projected to be their next big thing in the long line of Julio, Amari, Ridley, and presumably Jeudy will be next.

LT: J. Williams (6'5 301 So 5* .987), Leatherwood (6'6 322 Fr 5* .998)
Jackson (6'5 298 RsSo 3* .864), Ramirez (6'5 308 3* .852)

Williams started all last season at RT and made freshmen all american by USA today and was 2nd team all sec. Leatherwood was one of the top prospects coming out of HS.

Jackson started 3 games at RT and had 200+ total snaps.

size: Comparable

Adv: Bama. Williams has a full year starting and was already 2nd team all sec. Leatherwood would be starting right now for most teams I'd bet. I like the experience advantage that we have, and I think Ramirez could easily be starting for us, but definitely a talent disparity. 

LG: Pierschbacher (6'4 303 RsJr 4* .965 ), Casher (6'1 291 RsJr 4* .896) OR D. Warmack (6'2 308 Jr 4* .908)
Froholdt (6'5 311 Jr 4* .934), Raulerson (6'4 313 Sr 4* .943)

30 career starts for Piers. freshmen all american and 2nd team all sec last year. Highly rated depth behind him.

Froholdt struggled mentally, but did well when he got his hands on you. Now is some pre-season all sec lists and the outland watch list. Played on the DL as a freshmen and started all 13 at LG last year. Raulerson started many games for us last year before being replaced by Gibson.

size: We have a height and size advantage.

Adv: Ark. Not a huge advantage here, but I think Froholdt's rising faster than Piersbacher given how little experience he has in football and is already comparable. Raulerson gives us better depth than Bama has at the position.

C: Bozeman (6'5 314 RsSr 3* .0871), Kennedy (6'5 305 RsSo 4* .897)
Ragnow (6'5 317 Sr 4* .891), Rogers (6'1 309 Jr 4* .886)

Bozeman started all last year at center. On the remington watch list, but his bio didn't list a whole lot of accomplishments. Redshirted as a freshmen and was a reserve the next 2 years. Just going into his 2nd year starting. Kennedy is following the same path.

Ragnow is on his 3rd year starting, listed as the best center per pff, also pff all american first team, phill steele all american 4th team. Etc... Rogers is on par with the rating of Bama's players and was a threat to start in fall camp last year at RG before they settled on raulerson.

size: Rogers is shorter, but otherwise comparable.

Adv: Arkansas, and big time.

RG: Cotton (6'4 324 Jr 4* .973), Hassenauer (6'2 295 Sr 4* .926), Brown (6'4 350 RsFr 4* .924)
Gibson (6'4 333 Jr NR), Clary (6'4 286 Fr NR .783)

Cotton started 5 games last year before being replaced. Hassenauer's been a backup center for the tide, Brown redshirted.

Gibson is a former walkon, started about half the season last year replacing Raulerson. Clary is a true freshmen that's really impressed.

size: Comparable

Adv: Bama. Both teams have similar starting experience, but Bama's depth has a lot more experience here. In truth, if Gibson had to come out, Raulerson and Rogers would both be more likely to come in before Clary, but Bama definitely has more depth, experience, and the recruiting rankings edge.

RT: M. Womack (6'7 324 RsSo 3* .861) OR Wills (6'5 314 Fr 4* .983), Lashley (6'7 310 RsFr 4* .92)
Wallace (6'6 337 RsJr 4* .958), Merrick (6'4 322 RsSo 4* .906)

First year starting for Womack and he's in a battle with true freshmen Wills. Lashley, backup redshirted.

Wallace is into his second season starting, starting the last 10 games of the season last year. Merrick is a talented guy who's waiting in the wings.

size: Bama's definitely got the size advantage here.

Adv: Ark. Nobody on Bama's depth chart has actually started a game at RT. They have some big boys, but Wallace and Merrick are pretty big themselves. Plus, Bama doesn't even have very much of a recruiting advantage here.

OL Overall: We might actually have a better OL than Bama this year. They have the edge at LT and RG, but I like our depth chart at LG, C, and RT better. Recruiting wise, we aren't too far behind Bama either. They have a couple extra blue chippers, but overall, we've done pretty well.
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2017, 06:40:33 pm »

Defense: We can finally do a comparison on defense since we are both a 3-4 now.

DE: Hand (6'4 288 Sr 5* .998), Buggs (6'5 293 Jr 4* .955)
Agim (6'3 286 So 5* .987), Marshall (6'3 310 RsFr .838 3* .86) OR Watts (6'5 309 RsJr 3* .853)

21 tackles, 2.5 tfl, 1 sack, 1 ff for Hand. Backup has no stats.

20 tackles, 5 tfl, 2.5 sacks for Agim. 1 total tackle for Watts.

size: Comparable, arguably advantage us.

Adv: Definitely us. Hand has the pedigree, but behind their previous guys, hasn't actually done much. Agim as a true freshmen definitely outplayed hand and has the recruiting pedigree to match Hand as well. Marshall and Watts don't match Buggs for pedigree, but they technically combined for more production so last year.

NG: Payne (6'2 308 Jr 5* .987), Frazier (6'4 315 Sr 4* .961) OR Dwight (6'3 301 RsJr 4* .891)
Jackson (6'1 339 Sr 4* .962), Capps (6'4 300 So 4* .913) OR Hays (6'3 298 RsFr 3* .82)

36 tackles, 3.5 tfl, 1.5 sacks, 1 pbu, 1 fr for Payne. 8 tackles, 1 tfl, 1 sack for Frazier with Dwight having no stats.

9 tackles, 4.5 tfl, 2.5 sacks for Jackson. Caps had 12 tackles. 1.5 tfl, and 0.5 sacks. Hays redshirted.

size: Adv us.

Adv: Push. Payne started 15 games and that was the production that he had. Bijhon didn't even start and produced more big plays as a reserve. Capps also produced more than Frazier did. In all honesty, this should be advantage arkansas, but it just feels to weird to actually do that, so I'm giving it a push.

DE: Davis (6'7 306 So 4* .956) OR Frazier (6'4 315 Sr 4* .961), Q. Williams (6'4 285 RsFr 4* .928)
Smith (6'3 290 RsSo 3* .846), Hall (6'5 263 RsJr 3* .838) OR Guidry (6'2 279 RsFr 4* .898)

4 tackles, 1 tfl, 1 sack for Davis, Frazier's stats are above. Williams redshirted.

Hall has one tackle and that's it for this group.

size: Bama is definitely bigger here.

Adv: Bama, but it's not like anybody really has an advantage here. Both team's players on the depth chart have so far spent their careers behind some NFL players and haven't had much chance to show out until now.

DL overall: At worst, it's a push. Overall, they have the recruiting pedigree, but not the production. Our guys are for the most part, comparable in size and have more tfl and sacks. Agim started 5 games while Hand didn't, but Hand still played significant snaps.

Sam: Miller (6'4 240 RsJr 4* .98), Lewis (6'5 254 So 4* .966)
Eugene (6'1 240 Sr 3* .827), Roesler (6'1 252 RsSr NR 0.767)

16 tackles, 2.5 tfl, 2 sacks for Miller. 1 tackle for Lewis. Miller didn't start.

44 tackles, 1 tfl, 1 interception, 2 fr's for eugene, started 6 games. 7 tackles, 1.5 tfl, 1.5 sacks for Roesler.

size: We have size, but are much shorter.

Adv: Push: Bama has the length and the recruiting pedigree advantage. Our guys have the production, but weren't behind insane NFL talent until now either. Well, Roesler at DE was behind NFL talent.

Mike: Hamilton (6' 235 Sr 4* .917), Wilson (6'2 236 So 5* .995)
Harris (6' 242 So 3* .855), Morgan (5'11 220 RsFr NR)

64 tackles, 9 tfl, 2 sacks, 2 int, 1 pbu, 1 ff for Hamilton. 8 tackles and a rf for Wilson.

37 tackles, 2 tfl, 1 sack, 1 ff for Harris, Morgan redshirted.

size: comparable

Adv: Bama. Hamilton started 12 games last year, while Harris didn't start at all. If we were just comparing starters, I'd probably say at least a push, but Wilson has a lot of potential and has a major size advantage of Morgan.

Will: Evans (6'3 234 Sr 5* .992), Holcomb (6'4 236 RsJr 4* .895) OR Moses (6'3 232 Fr 5* .992)
Greenlaw (6' 229 Jr 3* .852), Walker (6'2 215 RsFr 3* .829)

52 tackles, 4.5 tfl, 4 sacks, 2 pbu, 1 ff, and 1 fr for Evans. 24 tackles, 1 tfl, 1 pbu for Holcomb.

43 tackles, 1.5 tfl, 1 int, 2 fr, 1 ff for Greenlaw. Walker redshirted.

Size: Bama by far.

Adv: Bama. Evans started 2 games last year to Greenlaw's 7, and you can see the production differential. Greenlaw missed out completely for 6 games, but Evans was a backup for most of his games, snaps at worst cancel out. Bama has the size, recruiting pedigree, and depth here.

Jack: Jennings (6'3 262 RsSo 4* .924), Mosely (6'5 248 RsJr ?) OR Allen (6'4 239 Fr 4* .952)
Ramsey (6'4 228 Jr 3* .815), Henry (6'1 209 Fr NR .796)

19 tackles 2 tfl for Jennings. No stats for others.

Ramsey had 23 tackles, 5.5 for loss and 2.5 sacks. Henry is a true freshmen.

size: Bama by far.

Adv: This is Bama's designated pass rusher position, and according to biggus, the razor is supposed to be ours. However, the size disparity is huge here. Ramsey had 3 starts compared to Jennings starting none. Bama has the size, recruiting pedigree, and depth here that we don't.

CB: Averett (6' 185 RsSr 4* .90), Wallace (6' 183 Sr NR? former walkon)
Pulley (5'11 196 Jr 3* .832), Curl (6'1 193 Fr 3* .862)

48 tackles, 3 tfl, 1 sack, 8 pbu and 2 ff's for averett. 11 tackles and 2 pbu's for wallace.

47 tackles, 0.5 tfl, 2 int, 1 td, 12 pbu's, 1 fr for Pulley. Curl is a true freshmen.

size: Push

Adv: Push. Pulley was more of a cover type corner for us than Averett, but he did a bit more behind the line as well. Bama has an experience advantage, but recruiting wise, I'd say we are comparable.

CB: Diggs (6'2 195 So 4* .949), Carter (6' 195 So 4* .964)

Toliver (6'1 185 Sr 3* .87), Tutt (6'1 179 RsSo 3* .837) OR Calloway (5'10 188 Fr 4* .936)

11 receptions, 88 yards, 1 td, 5 tackles, 1 ff, on defense for Diggs. 7 tackles for Carter.

45 tackles, 1 tfl, 1 int, 1td, 6 pbu's for toliver. Tutt was injured, Calloway is a true freshmen.

size: slight advantage to bama.

Adv: Ark. Diggs is a great athlete but doesn't have a lot of experience at CB. Neither does Carter. Toliver's been starting for quite some time, including shutting down Amari Cooper. Bama has the recruiting pedigree edge here, but I like Arkansas depth and experience.

S: Fitzpatrick (6'1 202 Jr 5* .987), Jones (6'2 215 Sr 4* .975)
Ramirez (6'2 198 Jr 3* .848), Liddell (6'1 211 Sr 3* .834) OR Miller (5'9 201 RsJr NR)

Fitz has 66 tackles, 5.5 for loss, 1.5 sacks, 6 int's, 2 td's, 7 pbu's, and a ff. Jones has 20 tackles, 4 pbu's, and a forced fumble.

Ramirez has 43 tackles, 1 int, 1 td, 2 pbu's and 2 ff's. Liddell and Miller combine for 72 tackles, 2 tfl, 2 int, 4 pbu, and 1 ff.

size: comparable

Adv: Bama, but not by as much as I expected. Fitzpatrick is one of the best safeties in the country and they have a really good backup in Jones. Liddell being listed as the backup is a bit misleading since he's also listed as a starter. However, Ramirez in comparison only started 7 games last year, so there's a lot of room for improvement.

S: Harrison (6'3 214 Jr 4* .918), Thompson (6'2 194 RsSo 4* .98)
Liddell (6'1 211 Sr 3* .834), Coley (6'1 211 Sr 3* .80) OR Richardson (5'11 185 RsSr NR)

Harrison has 83 tackles, 1.5 for loss, 2 int, 1 td, 7 pbu's and 2 frs. Thompson adds 9 tackles.

Liddell has 63 tackles, 2 tfl, 2 int, 4 pbu, and 1 ff. Coley adds 36 tackles, 0.5 for loss, 1 ff, and 2 fr's. Richardson was injured last year.

size: Bama

Adv: Bama. Both teams are comparing starter to starter, and both teams have good depth. However, Harrison is noticeably more productive on the field, along with the size and recruiting pedigree advantages. We have a bit more experience, but not enough to compensate.

Star: Brown (6' 198 Sr 5* .995), Carter (6' 195 So 4* .964)
n/a

This is Bama's nickel position, but since we don't separate that out, can't say exactly who ours is. I know Richardson and Liddell are in play for it.

Brown had 32 tackles, 2.5 tfl, 0.5 sack, and 2 int. Carter's stats are above.

PK/KO: Pappanastos (5'11 190 RsSr NR), Bulovas (6' 212 Fr 3* .932), Scott (6'6 204 Sr 3* .833)
Hedlund (5'10 164 RsJr 3* .835), Mazza (5'8 173 Fr NR) (PK), Limpert (6'1 180 So NR), Mazza (" ") (KO)

Papp's was 6/6 in XP and 1-1 in FG's.

Hedlund was 25/25 in XP and 5-7 in FG's.

size: irrelevant

Adv: Push. Hedlund has the experience over Pappa. Hard to say what P will do with more opportunities. Touchback stats for kickers are hard to come by.

Hold: Scott (6'6 204 Sr 3* .833)
Miller (5'9 201 RsJr NR), Morgan (5'11 220 RsFr NR)

Adv: Have to go with Bama here. I think having the punter be the holder is good because they can work with the long snapper pretty much all practice long unless special teams is directly being worked out. Reid and Morgan have to do defensive drills.

P: Scott (6'6 204 Sr 3* .833)
Johnson (6'1 185 RsSo 3* .811), Kelley (6'7 268 RsFr 4* .849)

64 punts, 47.2 average for Scott.

2 punts, 47 average for Blake.

Adv: Bama. Consistent, very experienced punter. Blake has the talent and has shown in games that he can be good, but consistency is a question.

LS: Meyer (6'2 233 RsFr NR), Flectcher (6'2 220 Fr 2* .785)
Decker (5'11 253 Sr NR), Silver (6'1 236 Fr NR)

Adv: Ark. Experience. Also size.

PR: Diggs (6'2 195 So 4* .949), Marks (5'8 174 Jr ?) OR Ruggs (6' 175 Fr .964)
Toliver (6'1 185 Sr 3* .87), Cornelius (5'11 212 Sr 3* .844)

Diggs has 13 returns for 130 yards. Marks has 5 for 105 and a td.

Toliver has none, Cornelius has 12 for 85 yards. Had a td called back due to penalty.

Adv: Bama.

KR: Diggs (6'2 195 So 4* .949) OR Marks (5'8 174 Jr ?) OR Ruggs (6' 175 Fr .964)
Stewart (5'11 162 RsSo .854), Nance (6'1 182 Jr)

Diggs has 7 for an average of 23.7 yards. Marks has 7 returns for an average of 17.6.

Stewart has 21 returns for an average of 20.

Adv: Push.
Logged

Sponsored Ad



Hogville encourages you to do business with the following...

Mike_e

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4,463
  • May the woo be with you
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2017, 07:06:15 pm »

Wait, this can't be right, I thought (from reading on here) that we had been getting the dregs of the SEC for recruits.
Logged

ModestoHOG63

  • Bench Warmer
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 89
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2017, 07:10:09 pm »

Interesting take on things and MUCH closer that I thought.  Of course there is one big thing they have.....SABAN.  I would love nothing better to put an end of that dominance starting this year on National TV, spoiling their Homecoming.
Logged

Al Boarland

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1,436
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2017, 07:16:45 pm »

Wait, this can't be right, I thought (from reading on here) that we had been getting the dregs of the SEC for recruits.

Benny is a true magician. He can pull the data however he wants, but when the two teams are on the field you will see the difference. We are not close from a talent perspective.
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2017, 07:59:14 pm »

Benny is a true magician. He can pull the data however he wants, but when the two teams are on the field you will see the difference. We are not close from a talent perspective.

I'm not pulling the data in any direction. Simply presenting the data. If you think that 247 sports is pulling the data in Arkansas's favor, take that up with them. Look at just the recruiting and it's pretty easy to see why Arkansas is one of the top NFL talent producing colleges in the SEC, but why we've also struggled to have players drafted in the top 3 rounds.

As for the when the 2 teams are on the field

2014: Final score, 14-13 for Bama. Can totally see that we were were not close on the field of play...
2015: 47 minutes into the game, the score was 10-7. They score 17 points over 55 total yards due to a turnover on downs, an interception, and a big punt return. We end up losing by 13 points. We probably still lose that game, but if not for unforced errors, the final score would have been closer, and a 13 point loss is still pretty close.
2016: 19 point loss, 49-30. Our defense couldn't stop them, but they had no answer for our offense either. However, all signs point to this game being even closer. 2 of Austin's 3 int's led to 14 points for the tide. They only won by 19.

Our qb, OL, TE, and RB group should be better based on returning experience. Their QB, and RB group should also be better. However, their WR, TE, and OL groups took some hits this year. Our offense should thus improve from last year, an offense that put up 30 points, and their offense should be about the same depending on how much important you give to the OL.

On the flip side, their DL/OLB group and CB group took huge hits. Our DE group took a bit hit, but that was it on defense for us. Further, given that our best players were true freshmen, we should expect to have a significant improvement in year 2. Their ILB group and Safeties are still top notch though.

Or, looking at it from a matchup standpoint, Our OL should face a lot less pressure this year from last. Bama's struggled sacking the qb under Saban with the last 2 seasons being huge anomalies with all the success coming from 2 players no longer there. Bama has done nothing to earn a benefit of the doubt that they will reload there considering the lack of success beforehand. Allen is throwing to new receivers this year and Bama has new cornerbacks. The corner's these players couldn't beat out before gave up 400 yards to Allen. Unlikely these will do any better, and likely worse. Our RB's have a much improved OL going up against a brand new DL for Bama. Bama has always been top 10 at stopping the run, so I'm not expecting us to go for 200 or something, but should be a noticeable improvement over last year. Our TE's will be improved over last season as well. However, Bama's ILB's and Safeties are improved and that should cancel out. Hurts should be a better qb this year than he was last year. His OL, however, you can see above that they will not be as good as they were before. He'll be throwing to some new guys as well. Against our defense, our DL is bigger and based on returning experience, should be better than they were last year. We couldn't do much to stop them on offense last year, but the LoS should be tipping closer, if not in our favor this year. Our LB'ers are young and new for the most part save for our ILB's. Based on who we return in the front 7, we should be much better at stopping the run. How our OLB's will do getting pressure on the qb is up in the air, however, our DL has shown a good knack for rushing the passer in limited reps. Much more so then Bama's DL players have in their limited reps. Our CB's and safeties should be a strength in terms of returning experience and talent. Hurts should be a better passer, but with the drop in receiver experience and possibly talent combined with our increased experience and talent, that should at least cancel out any improvements he makes, and probably will be harder on him passing. Their RB's will get yards. As good as they are, that's just going to happen. However, hard to win another shoot out on a running game alone, especially with their substantial losses on the OL.
Logged

MuskogeeHogFan

  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 39,375
  • Nadine Coyle shakin it for the Hogs!!!!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2017, 08:53:23 pm »

I write a lot but Benny...wow!

Abbreviated Version =

QB: Favors Arkansas.
RB: Favors Alabama
TE: Favors Arkansas
LT: Favors Alabama
RT: Push (at this point, still waiting for an Arkansas player to separate themselves)
RG: Advantage Alabama
LG: Maybe an advantage to Arkansas, need to see what Froholdt produces.
C: Advantage Arkansas...Ragnow has no peer at this point.
H-Backs/FB's: Really two different animals depending upon the offensive set and intent for utilization, so hard to compare.
WR's: Favor Alabama

Defense Overall: Favors Alabama, been in it longer, higher rated recruits, Saban coaching defense.
Logged

IMABIELEMA

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2017, 09:05:20 pm »

Agree that they are the gold standard but, Odd way to waste ALOT of time.
Logged

Hook 'em Hogs

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1,397
  • Macchio or just plain Macho?
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2017, 09:07:25 pm »

I love threads like this.  If I don't have that itch inside me that says we could win every game at the beginning of each year, I'm just not ready for football season. Thanks, Benny. Can't wait to see how our team performs!
Logged

GoHogs1091

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,101
  • Hogville.net Rocks!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #9 on: August 28, 2017, 09:11:33 pm »

Scarborough, Harris, or Jacobs better be able to run the ball against Florida State.

Florida State's Secondary may be one of the top 3 Secondaries Saban has faced (FSU has 2 All-Americans in their Secondary).

Hurts and the Alabama WRs may have a very difficult time with passing.
Logged

bphi11ips

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13,070
  • I need help with my footwork, too.
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2017, 09:17:38 pm »

Good effort.
Logged

woodrow hog call

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2,073
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #11 on: August 28, 2017, 09:18:00 pm »

That's darned impressive benny, very good details.
Logged

GoHogs1091

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,101
  • Hogville.net Rocks!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2017, 11:11:04 pm »

Bama is the gold standard of football teams at the moment and we are somewhat similar in style, especially with the defensive switch.

I wouldn't necessarily call them the gold standard of football teams.  They got beat this past January in a game in which they got out-coached, and they got out-talented at some key positions (Clemson was more talented than Alabama at QB, WR, LT, RG, and DT).

Alabama may not be a gold standard this week for their game against Florida State.  For instance, here is the number of 5 Stars and 4 Stars for Alabama's defensive starters, and the number of 5 Stars and 4 Stars for Florida State's defensive starters.

Alabama Defense                      Florida State Defense

5 Stars   4                                    5 Stars   5   
4 Stars   7                                    4 Stars   5
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #13 on: August 29, 2017, 12:31:33 am »

I wouldn't necessarily call them the gold standard of football teams.  They got beat this past January in a game in which they got out-coached, and they got out-talented at some key positions (Clemson was more talented than Alabama at QB, WR, LT, RG, and DT).

Alabama may not be a gold standard this week for their game against Florida State.  For instance, here is the number of 5 Stars and 4 Stars for Alabama's defensive starters, and the number of 5 Stars and 4 Stars for Florida State's defensive starters.

Alabama Defense                      Florida State Defense

5 Stars   4                                    5 Stars   5   
4 Stars   7                                    4 Stars   5

When Clemson or FSU win 3 championships in 4 years, or appear in 6 championships in 8 years, then you can make an argument that they are the golden standard. Alabama has made the playoffs all three years. Clemson has only made 2 our of 3 and FSU has only made 1. I'd compare Ohio St as a gold standard before I'd even think about labeling Clemson as one. Back to Bama, they lost to Ohio State by 7 points in what was the defacto championship game (Oregon lost by 22 in the championship), they beat Clemson by 5 points the next year and lost by 4 points the following year.

Bama has had 41 players drafted over the past 5 years with 26 of those players in the top 3 rounds, 10 of those in the 1st round and 2 in the top 10.

Clemson has had 29 players drafted over the past 5 years, 12 in the top 3 rounds, 7 in the first round and 3 in the top 10.

FSU has had 35 players drafted over the past 5 years, 19 in the top 3 rounds, 7 in the first round and 2 in the top 10.

Ohio St has had 33 players drafted over the past 5 years, 21 of those in the top 3 rounds, 10 in the first round and 3 in the top 3.

Florida has had 35 players drafted over the past 5 years, 17 in the top 3 rounds, 8 in the first round and 2 in the top 10.

LSU has had 35 players drafted over the past 5 years, 1 in the top 3 rounds, 6 in the first round and 2 in the top 10.

So, success of the team in terms of championships in one way to look at it, success of the team in terms of overall talent is another. Here, Bama is obviously at the top of the rankings with Ohio St close behind. Clemson is arguably at least 6th, which isn't even close.

I think the core of the subject here is a misunderstanding of what it means to be a standard. Being good for one year isn't a standard. The 49'ers weren't the standard under Kaepernick/Smith, they were a flash in the pan that quickly fizzled. The Patriots probably won't have the best team this year. However, they are still the gold standard. Why? Because they are reliably the best and no other team comes close. That is Bama in the NCAA. A standard is something you use to get consistent results. A gold standard is something that is consistently the best.

Name me another team that more consistently than Bama been the best?
Logged

GoHogs1091

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,101
  • Hogville.net Rocks!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #14 on: August 29, 2017, 01:50:09 am »

When Clemson or FSU win 3 championships in 4 years, or appear in 6 championships in 8 years, then you can make an argument that they are the golden standard. Alabama has made the playoffs all three years. Clemson has only made 2 our of 3 and FSU has only made 1. I'd compare Ohio St as a gold standard before I'd even think about labeling Clemson as one. Back to Bama, they lost to Ohio State by 7 points in what was the defacto championship game (Oregon lost by 22 in the championship), they beat Clemson by 5 points the next year and lost by 4 points the following year.

Bama has had 41 players drafted over the past 5 years with 26 of those players in the top 3 rounds, 10 of those in the 1st round and 2 in the top 10.

Clemson has had 29 players drafted over the past 5 years, 12 in the top 3 rounds, 7 in the first round and 3 in the top 10.

FSU has had 35 players drafted over the past 5 years, 19 in the top 3 rounds, 7 in the first round and 2 in the top 10.

Ohio St has had 33 players drafted over the past 5 years, 21 of those in the top 3 rounds, 10 in the first round and 3 in the top 3.

Florida has had 35 players drafted over the past 5 years, 17 in the top 3 rounds, 8 in the first round and 2 in the top 10.

LSU has had 35 players drafted over the past 5 years, 1 in the top 3 rounds, 6 in the first round and 2 in the top 10.

So, success of the team in terms of championships in one way to look at it, success of the team in terms of overall talent is another. Here, Bama is obviously at the top of the rankings with Ohio St close behind. Clemson is arguably at least 6th, which isn't even close.

I think the core of the subject here is a misunderstanding of what it means to be a standard. Being good for one year isn't a standard. The 49'ers weren't the standard under Kaepernick/Smith, they were a flash in the pan that quickly fizzled. The Patriots probably won't have the best team this year. However, they are still the gold standard. Why? Because they are reliably the best and no other team comes close. That is Bama in the NCAA. A standard is something you use to get consistent results. A gold standard is something that is consistently the best.

Name me another team that more consistently than Bama been the best?

If Alabama was truly the gold standard, then they wouldn't have lost to Utah in the Sugar Bowl, they wouldn't have lost to Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl, they wouldn't have lost to Ohio State in the playoff semifinal, and they wouldn't have lost to Clemson in this past NC game.

It should be remembered that Oklahoma team that beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl was basically the same Oklahoma team that Clemson crushed the following season (Clemson crushed that Oklahoma team while Clemson was using their back-up QB, Stoudt; Watson was injured before that game and he did not play against Oklahoma).

It should also be remembered that Alabama had to have extreme luck twice just to get to a NC game (Iowa State beating Oklahoma State in 2011 and Hunter Henry's heave at Ole Miss).  Without that extreme luck just to get to the NC game, Alabama would have 2 less recent NCs.

Other than the win against Clemson in the NC game before the last NC game, Alabama's other recent NC wins have been against garbage opponents.  Alabama has only beaten 1 good team to get their recent NCs (the 5 point win against Clemson).

Doesn't look like Alabama is the "gold standard."  Alabama's 4 losses in big games that I listed first above is enough of an explanation that shows they should not necessarily be considered as the "gold standard."
Logged

presidenthog

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,164
  • beer
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #15 on: August 29, 2017, 01:56:13 am »

Bama lost to that Oklahoma team because they didn't give 2 craps about the sugar bowl you reject. They literally went from the NC to the sugar bowl over a fluke kick 6. Even stoops has admitted over time that bama didn't care about that game.

We know you have a hard on for klempson, FSU, and all things ACC.

BAMA is the gold standard. Period. They are on an unprecedented run in CFB. Clemson literally has had 2 years of being relevant. FSU has 1 NC in recent history. They played against an auburn team that shouldn't have really been there. They caught lightning in a bottle and was not dominant defensively like a NC team should have been.

That Utah game was a decade ago when bama hadn't had 7 #1 classes in a row. You are completely deluded if you think otherwise. You prove every day that you are a guy who tries to sound smart, but you are borderline handicapped.
Logged

GoHogs1091

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,101
  • Hogville.net Rocks!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #16 on: August 29, 2017, 02:20:32 am »

Bama lost to that Oklahoma team because they didn't give 2 craps about the sugar bowl you reject. They literally went from the NC to the sugar bowl over a fluke kick 6. Even stoops has admitted over time that bama didn't care about that game.

We know you have a hard on for klempson, FSU, and all things ACC.

BAMA is the gold standard. Period. They are on an unprecedented run in CFB. Clemson literally has had 2 years of being relevant. FSU has 1 NC in recent history. They played against an auburn team that shouldn't have really been there. They caught lightning in a bottle and was not dominant defensively like a NC team should have been.

That Utah game was a decade ago when bama hadn't had 7 #1 classes in a row. You are completely deluded if you think otherwise. You prove every day that you are a guy who tries to sound smart, but you are borderline handicapped.

Still counts as a loss for Alabama in a big game.  A loss is a loss.

If the totally garbage narrative that gets tossed around that "Alabama didn't care to be in that Sugar Bowl game against Oklahoma" is truly correct, then that further shows that Alabama is not a true gold standard.  A true gold standard would care no matter the title/name of the game, period.
Logged

UABAlum

  • Band Nerd
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2017, 03:01:28 am »

I wouldn't necessarily call them the gold standard of football teams.  They got beat this past January in a game in which they got out-coached, and they got out-talented at some key positions (Clemson was more talented than Alabama at QB, WR, LT, RG, and DT).

Alabama may not be a gold standard this week for their game against Florida State.  For instance, here is the number of 5 Stars and 4 Stars for Alabama's defensive starters, and the number of 5 Stars and 4 Stars for Florida State's defensive starters.

Alabama Defense                      Florida State Defense

5 Stars   4                                    5 Stars   5   
4 Stars   7                                    4 Stars   5

The difference in the Bama/Clemson game came down to a true freshman QB working with a one-game OC coordinator vs. a 3rd year starter QB playing in the playoff final game for his second consecutive year.     As for Florida State/Bama, I think FSU's advantage is experience where they return 18 starters including 9 defenders from one of the nation's top units.  I am not a betting man but if I was, I'd put my money on FSU and the points!

In regards to the OP., good write-up.  But Bama & Arkansas don't play until mid-Oct.  By then, Bama's lack of experience in various positions will be somewhat mitigated.  But still, its a nice to have posts like these to tie us all over until the games begin.     I'm hoping you guys do in TCU, Bama tops FSU, Tennessee beats Georgia Tech, A&M handles UCLA, Auburn beats Clemson, LSU beats BYU, South Carolina takes NC State, Georgia tops Notre Dame and Florida gets their revenge against Michigan!
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2017, 03:13:43 am »

If Alabama was truly the gold standard, then they wouldn't have lost to Utah in the Sugar Bowl, they wouldn't have lost to Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl, they wouldn't have lost to Ohio State in the playoff semifinal, and they wouldn't have lost to Clemson in this past NC game.

Name a single other team that over the past decade has been to that many high profile games in the first place. 8 years of the past 9, they been to either the playoff or a BCS game. The one year they didn't was a 10-3 year where they still finished ranked 10th in the BCS. 10th is literally their worst ranking the past 9 seasons with 4 first place and 6 in the top 5.

Care to tell me how Clemson has done? Don't worry, I'll do it for you. Alabama has more first place finishes in the past 9 years than Clemson has top 10 appearances. Twice as many to be exact. Just 6 years ago, Clemson had a losing record and was unranked. Clemson has only made the playoff 2 of the possible 3 years. Bama has as many national championships in the past 9 years as Clemson has BCS/Playoff appearances since the BCS began in 1998, so 19 years. How is that a recipe for a gold standard?

Quote
It should be remembered that Oklahoma team that beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl was basically the same Oklahoma team that Clemson crushed the following season (Clemson crushed that Oklahoma team while Clemson was using their back-up QB, Stoudt; Watson was injured before that game and he did not play against Oklahoma).

It should be remembered that Kentucky truly won the national championship in 2007 too, by that logic. Arkansas and Kentucky were the only two teams to beat LSU that year when they were crowned the national championship. But Kentucky beat us.

Quote
It should also be remembered that Alabama had to have extreme luck twice just to get to a NC game (Iowa State beating Oklahoma State in 2011 and Hunter Henry's heave at Ole Miss).  Without that extreme luck just to get to the NC game, Alabama would have 2 less recent NCs.

We've beaten OM how many times now? Yes, that play required extreme luck, but it also required luck for OM to take us to OT and us not win in regulation. However, name me a single team that made it to the championship game that didn't get some extremely lucky breaks?

For example, Clemson in 2016. Auburn game. Won by 6 points. Two lucky 4th down stops inside your own 10. Either of which would have lost you the game and the two fg's would have taken you to OT where your offense had stalled. Same year, barely beat Troy by 6 points. Had a very controversial win over Louisville by 6 points. Extremely lucky to even go to OT against also ran NC-State. Lucky to beat FSU by 3. Barely beat VT in the championship game by 7. Six out of the 13 games Clemson played to get to the playoffs were decided by 7 points or less and you are complaining that Bama got lucky?

Quote
Other than the win against Clemson in the NC game before the last NC game, Alabama's other recent NC wins have been against garbage opponents.  Alabama has only beaten 1 good team to get their recent NCs (the 5 point win against Clemson).

That 2015 Clemson wasn't a garbage team? What good teams did they beat? They beat ND who was one of those trash teams that Bama won a natty against. They beat a very average FSU team that was without their starting qb. And they beat a tarheels team who had Trubisky on the bench that was ranked #10 despite having #23 Pitt be the highest ranked team they faced until Clemson in the acc champ.

Further, if the teams that Bama beat were "garbage", and Clemson did worse than those "garbage" teams, my god, what does that make Clemson? A gold standard?

Quote
Doesn't look like Alabama is the "gold standard."  Alabama's 4 losses in big games that I listed first above is enough of an explanation that shows they should not necessarily be considered as the "gold standard."

Again, show me another team that has been to as many big games as Bama. Show me a better gold standard. You are telling me that over the past decade, there exists a team that has done better than Bama? I'm talking one or two years of success. I'm talking years upon years. 5 at the very least.

No other team to my knowledge has consistently finished as high in the polls, consistently been in the biggest bowl games, consistently produced as many draft picks and high end draft picks.

You are basically saying that Patriots aren't the gold standard because nobody has lost as many superbowls in the past decade as the Patriots, thinking that in some way is an insult. Patriots have lost more superbowls recently than any other team has even sniffed a superbowl, not to mention they've still won more bowls than anyone else as well.
Logged

onebadrubi

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13,148
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #19 on: August 29, 2017, 06:40:11 am »

Name a single other team that over the past decade has been to that many high profile games in the first place. 8 years of the past 9, they been to either the playoff or a BCS game. The one year they didn't was a 10-3 year where they still finished ranked 10th in the BCS. 10th is literally their worst ranking the past 9 seasons with 4 first place and 6 in the top 5.

Care to tell me how Clemson has done? Don't worry, I'll do it for you. Alabama has more first place finishes in the past 9 years than Clemson has top 10 appearances. Twice as many to be exact. Just 6 years ago, Clemson had a losing record and was unranked. Clemson has only made the playoff 2 of the possible 3 years. Bama has as many national championships in the past 9 years as Clemson has BCS/Playoff appearances since the BCS began in 1998, so 19 years. How is that a recipe for a gold standard?

It should be remembered that Kentucky truly won the national championship in 2007 too, by that logic. Arkansas and Kentucky were the only two teams to beat LSU that year when they were crowned the national championship. But Kentucky beat us.

We've beaten OM how many times now? Yes, that play required extreme luck, but it also required luck for OM to take us to OT and us not win in regulation. However, name me a single team that made it to the championship game that didn't get some extremely lucky breaks?

For example, Clemson in 2016. Auburn game. Won by 6 points. Two lucky 4th down stops inside your own 10. Either of which would have lost you the game and the two fg's would have taken you to OT where your offense had stalled. Same year, barely beat Troy by 6 points. Had a very controversial win over Louisville by 6 points. Extremely lucky to even go to OT against also ran NC-State. Lucky to beat FSU by 3. Barely beat VT in the championship game by 7. Six out of the 13 games Clemson played to get to the playoffs were decided by 7 points or less and you are complaining that Bama got lucky?

That 2015 Clemson wasn't a garbage team? What good teams did they beat? They beat ND who was one of those trash teams that Bama won a natty against. They beat a very average FSU team that was without their starting qb. And they beat a tarheels team who had Trubisky on the bench that was ranked #10 despite having #23 Pitt be the highest ranked team they faced until Clemson in the acc champ.

Further, if the teams that Bama beat were "garbage", and Clemson did worse than those "garbage" teams, my god, what does that make Clemson? A gold standard?

Again, show me another team that has been to as many big games as Bama. Show me a better gold standard. You are telling me that over the past decade, there exists a team that has done better than Bama? I'm talking one or two years of success. I'm talking years upon years. 5 at the very least.

No other team to my knowledge has consistently finished as high in the polls, consistently been in the biggest bowl games, consistently produced as many draft picks and high end draft picks.

You are basically saying that Patriots aren't the gold standard because nobody has lost as many superbowls in the past decade as the Patriots, thinking that in some way is an insult. Patriots have lost more superbowls recently than any other team has even sniffed a superbowl, not to mention they've still won more bowls than anyone else as well.

This post stuck a fork in gohogs cause he's done! 
Logged

Deep Shoat

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,615
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #20 on: August 29, 2017, 06:45:31 am »

If Alabama was truly the gold standard, then they wouldn't have lost to Utah in the Sugar Bowl, they wouldn't have lost to Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl, they wouldn't have lost to Ohio State in the playoff semifinal, and they wouldn't have lost to Clemson in this past NC game.

It should be remembered that Oklahoma team that beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl was basically the same Oklahoma team that Clemson crushed the following season (Clemson crushed that Oklahoma team while Clemson was using their back-up QB, Stoudt; Watson was injured before that game and he did not play against Oklahoma).

It should also be remembered that Alabama had to have extreme luck twice just to get to a NC game (Iowa State beating Oklahoma State in 2011 and Hunter Henry's heave at Ole Miss).  Without that extreme luck just to get to the NC game, Alabama would have 2 less recent NCs.

Other than the win against Clemson in the NC game before the last NC game, Alabama's other recent NC wins have been against garbage opponents.  Alabama has only beaten 1 good team to get their recent NCs (the 5 point win against Clemson).

Doesn't look like Alabama is the "gold standard."  Alabama's 4 losses in big games that I listed first above is enough of an explanation that shows they should not necessarily be considered as the "gold standard."
You are wrong, and your argument is stupid.
Logged

jkstock04

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 11,688
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #21 on: August 29, 2017, 07:01:43 am »

I find it tough to swallow that our offensive line is better than Alabamas. If that's the case though this will probably be a 10 plus win year.
Logged

zane

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3,372
  • Go Hogs!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #22 on: August 29, 2017, 07:49:25 am »

Great post Benny!
Logged

RagingHawgOn

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #23 on: August 29, 2017, 07:51:02 am »

Benny is a true magician. He can pull the data however he wants, but when the two teams are on the field you will see the difference. We are not close from a talent perspective.

Your act is growing very tiresome.
Logged

Deep Shoat

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,615
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #24 on: August 29, 2017, 07:51:02 am »

I find it tough to swallow that our offensive line is better than Alabamas. If that's the case though this will probably be a 10 plus win year.
Do you remember the last good thing someone said about the Razorbacks that you didn't find tough to swallow?
Logged

Deep Shoat

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,615
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #25 on: August 29, 2017, 07:51:53 am »

Your act is growing very tiresome.
Al decides the outcomes for the following season on signing day.
Logged

Launcellous

  • Walk-On
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #26 on: August 29, 2017, 09:00:50 am »

I don't post much, but have read for years. Benny at times has made some slightly crazy comments, but his comments are always backed up by good data driven rational thoughts. He makes obvious effort and takes a lot of his time compiling the data. Most on here just speak from the gut. Benny at least does what he can to make a case for himself.
Logged

FineAsSwine

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3,485
  • Hogville think tank
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #27 on: August 29, 2017, 10:13:05 am »

I have seen a mother beam with pride at the homely face of her baby. I have even lied when asked about the features of said ugly baby. I know God hates liars and that all liars shall have their part in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone but I couldn't bring myself to dash that mothers sweet little fib and when I told that lie I could have sworn that, for a brief instant, I smelled smoke.

Reading Benny's post reminds me of that dilemma. We are almost as good as Bama. Go Hogs.  ;)
Logged

hogcard1964

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 28,287
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #28 on: August 29, 2017, 10:18:44 am »

Good effort.

+1000

It was

I disagree with a good portion of it, but it's a nice write-up.
Logged

jkstock04

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 11,688
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #29 on: August 29, 2017, 10:21:12 am »

Do you remember the last good thing someone said about the Razorbacks that you didn't find tough to swallow?
Yes, actually. Positive talk of Austin Allen and Dan Enos. I have seen actual proof with my own eyes that we have some good things there...not just wild blind faith stuff like we hear every preseason about having an all world O-line.

But if we ever do have a break out year of 8 plus wins under Bielema...I predict it'll be on the backs of a dominant offensive line.
Logged

redleg

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 962
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #30 on: August 29, 2017, 11:23:53 am »

I am not 100% positive, but I am pretty sure there was at least one recruiting service that had Ryan Pulley, Colton Jackson, and Austin Cantrell as a 4* recruit.
Logged

hogsanity

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 41,705
  • Is there a problem here?
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #31 on: August 29, 2017, 12:29:11 pm »

Nice work in the OP, BUT the real comparison is how does the Hog O stack up vs the Bama D and vice versa. Can the Hog ol beat the Bama DL/lbs? Can the Hog Wr's beat the Bama db's? Can the Hog db's stop the bama receivers?
Logged

Boss Hog in the Arkansas

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1,470
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #32 on: August 29, 2017, 12:50:47 pm »

I love threads like this.  If I don't have that itch inside me that says we could win every game at the beginning of each year, I'm just not ready for football season. Thanks, Benny. Can't wait to see how our team performs!
They make pills for that
Logged

Boss Hog in the Arkansas

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1,470
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #33 on: August 29, 2017, 12:52:58 pm »

I find it ironic that a player can spurn the homestate team for bama, but never show up on the depth chart until their senior year...as a backup. I wont say any names though  :P
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #34 on: August 29, 2017, 01:11:47 pm »

I find it tough to swallow that our offensive line is better than Alabamas. If that's the case though this will probably be a 10 plus win year.

I wouldn't bet much money that we will, but I do think we can all agree that we have a better center than they do. That's 1/5. The national media thinks we have a better LG than they do. That's 2/5. I definitely believe they have the edge at LT and RG. So, it all comes down to the RT. Their RT has never started before. Ours has. It just becomes a question of whether their player who hasn't played much (or at all if the freshmen ends up winning the battle) becomes better than Wallace. IIRC, Bama wanted Wallace pretty badly so I don't think it's crazy to say that Wallace would be starting for them this year.

However, let's say that Bama is better at RT than we are. That's still just a 2-3 advantage they'd have at the OL, which is pretty close and I think that's the bigger takeaway more than who has the edge.
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #35 on: August 29, 2017, 01:19:02 pm »

+1000

It was

I disagree with a good portion of it, but it's a nice write-up.

Do you disagree with the stats listed? Do you disagree that 247 rated players as I listed them? Do you disagree with who started games last year or not?

Only a very small portion of that post was opinion with who has the advantage or not. If you disagree with a good portion of it, then it must mean that you disagree with more than just my own opinions of what the facts mean and you disagree with the facts. That, or your definition of a good portion is like 5-10% of something.
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #36 on: August 29, 2017, 01:39:30 pm »

Nice work in the OP, BUT the real comparison is how does the Hog O stack up vs the Bama D and vice versa. Can the Hog ol beat the Bama DL/lbs? Can the Hog Wr's beat the Bama db's? Can the Hog db's stop the bama receivers?

That factors in X's and O's whereas this is just comparing Jimmy's and Joe's.

As I recall, Bama, under Saban, has had a top 10 rushing defense every single year. Their passing defense, however, varies quite a bit from season to season and it isn't uncommon to find their ranking of passing yards to be 50th or worse. Normally, they are not very good at getting sacks, with the last two years being anomalous. I don't think Saban just recently decided pressure on the qb was a good thing either.

I expect it will be tough to run on them. I expect them to have physical corners. Austin tore up their secondary last year. I expect he'll tear them up again this year. Our receivers are younger, but a lot faster. Their secondary is younger, but highly rated in recruiting and I expect will be talented.

Austin had 61 dropbacks in last year's game. 42 of those he was under pressure despite only being blitzed 29 times on a dropback. With the loss of Allen and Williams and Tomlinson, they are unlikely to get near as much pressure. Combined with the improvement of our OL, and Austin should do much better. 2 of his interceptions last year led to 14 points in a game Bama won by 19 against a historically bad Arkansas defense. If we can improve our defense by just 30 yards per game, become more efficient in the red zone, and not commit as many turnovers, we have a chance.

In terms of their offense vs our defense, it's just really hard to say. Agim, Harris, and Pulley give us blue chip caliber players at each level of our defense. We have some talented players around them as well. However, we've seen how important scheme is as well. There wasn't a whole lot of difference in the secondary from 13 through 15. Yet, '14 had vastly different results. The front 7 in 2013 was pretty much the same as in 14, but again, with very different results. 2016 had some good NFL level defenders, and it ended up being the worst of the bunch. To make a long story short, I think we definitely have the players this year to have a defense that ranks in the top 30. However, we were 70 something last year in total and 80 something in scoring. While there was a huge jump from 13 to 14, I don't think it's realistic to count on that happening this year. I think we can realistically jump back up to a top 50 defense in both major categories and wouldn't be surprised if we go higher, but with a new DC, and an even newer scheme we are trying to do, one that is often more complex than the 4-3, I don't think we should expect a huge improvement. Significant improvement, but not huge.
Logged

gchamblee

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3,409
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #37 on: August 29, 2017, 01:43:51 pm »

Do you disagree with the stats listed? Do you disagree that 247 rated players as I listed them? Do you disagree with who started games last year or not?

Only a very small portion of that post was opinion with who has the advantage or not. If you disagree with a good portion of it, then it must mean that you disagree with more than just my own opinions of what the facts mean and you disagree with the facts. That, or your definition of a good portion is like 5-10% of something.

Hogtard doesn't have any actual data or understanding of what you are discussing, he is just disagreeing with you because your data was kind to Arkansas. He is very anti current administration and will protest it at every turn, regardless of what is being said or presented. You know this so I am not sure why you are asking him that lol.
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #38 on: August 29, 2017, 01:46:11 pm »

Hogtard doesn't have any actual data or understanding of what you are discussing, he is just disagreeing with you because your data was kind to Arkansas. He is very anti current administration and will protest it at every turn, regardless of what is being said or presented. You know this so I am not sure why you are asking him that lol.

I know, it's just fun call him out.
Logged

GoHogs1091

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,101
  • Hogville.net Rocks!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #39 on: August 29, 2017, 02:57:23 pm »

The difference in the Bama/Clemson game came down to a true freshman QB working with a one-game OC coordinator vs. a 3rd year starter QB playing in the playoff final game for his second consecutive year.     As for Florida State/Bama, I think FSU's advantage is experience where they return 18 starters including 9 defenders from one of the nation's top units.  I am not a betting man but if I was, I'd put my money on FSU and the points!

In regards to the OP., good write-up.  But Bama & Arkansas don't play until mid-Oct.  By then, Bama's lack of experience in various positions will be somewhat mitigated.  But still, its a nice to have posts like these to tie us all over until the games begin.     I'm hoping you guys do in TCU, Bama tops FSU, Tennessee beats Georgia Tech, A&M handles UCLA, Auburn beats Clemson, LSU beats BYU, South Carolina takes NC State, Georgia tops Notre Dame and Florida gets their revenge against Michigan!

It has the potential of being a difficult game for Alabama to win.  Three of Florida State's five 5 Star defensive starters are in their Secondary (both of their CBs and a Safety).  Two of them are All-Americans (McFadden and James).  If FSU Safety Derwin James is the same that he was before his injury, then he has the ability to defensively take over a game.  He is regarded by some as the best overall player in all of College football.

FSU's two other 5 Star defensive starters are Linebackers (they use a 3-4).  One of them is Josh Sweat, who is basically a DE they have playing at LB.  It will be tough for Alabama to block him.

It has a potential of being a low scoring game.  Francois is a better passer than Hurts, and Jimbo Fisher is a better offensive play caller than Brian Daboll.  Fisher also probably knows enough about Saban's defense to figure out how to keep FSU's offense on the field by converting key 3rd Downs.  Those aspects could be the difference that enables FSU to win.
Logged

Cinco de Hogo

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,070
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #40 on: August 29, 2017, 09:12:29 pm »

Very good work, as far as agreeing or disagreeing, I'll get back with you at the end of the season, haha!
Logged

Al Boarland

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1,436
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #41 on: August 29, 2017, 09:23:33 pm »

Your act is growing very tiresome.

Were you tired of my act when is stated CBB was a great fit for the program or when I applauded him for writting letters to the players?  I call em like I see em and you know...Im never far off.
Logged

lakecityhog

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 355
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #42 on: August 29, 2017, 09:38:38 pm »

IF Benny is correct and we really are pretty close to Bama talent wise why on earth are we arguing over 7 wins or 8 wins? Shouldn't we realistically be expecting to compete for the SEC Championship with that type of talent on the field???

How many of you think that Bama is worried about MSU or USCe? Do you think that ATM concerns Bama?
Logged

factchecker

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,309
  • RAZORBACKS OR NOTHING!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #43 on: August 29, 2017, 09:42:59 pm »

IF Benny is correct and we really are pretty close to Bama talent wise why on earth are we arguing over 7 wins or 8 wins? Shouldn't we realistically be expecting to compete for the SEC Championship with that type of talent on the field???

How many of you think that Bama is worried about MSU or USCe? Do you think that ATM concerns Bama?

Do you think the Ole Miss team that we beat 30-0 in 2014 concerned Bama?  Maybe it should have.
Logged

bennyl08

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,836
  • Ever since the war I've had a drinking problem
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #44 on: August 29, 2017, 10:11:27 pm »

IF Benny is correct and we really are pretty close to Bama talent wise why on earth are we arguing over 7 wins or 8 wins? Shouldn't we realistically be expecting to compete for the SEC Championship with that type of talent on the field???

How many of you think that Bama is worried about MSU or USCe? Do you think that ATM concerns Bama?

I think you and some others are mis-hearing what I'm saying.

For example, let's look at the offense. Our QB is a push with there's due to different skill sets. Our OL is either close behind, right with, or very slightly ahead of theirs week 1. They have a significant edge at RB. We have the edge at TE. While I like our WR2's over theirs, overall, their WR group gets the edge to ours.

We have no significant edges over them like they do over us with RB. We are comparable more or less with OL and QB. They have an overall edge at WR and we have an overall edge at TE. That still gives Bama the edge on offense over us in terms of overall talent. I think our current roster of offense will be close to theirs in terms of total # of draft picks, and I think with our coaching staff, we'll be in the argument for best offense in the SEC, but they'll have more first round picks than us.

On defense, they have a huge advantage overall. We don't come close at S or most of the LB spots. I give use a push or slight edge at CB for week 1. Same thing for the DL. However, they will likely have 3+ first round picks in this coming draft on defense right now while we will not. Maybe Agim, Harris, or Pulley will get there in the 2019 drafts, but they aren't there now while players like Fitzpatrick and Foster could be starting on NFL rosters right now.

Yes, I think our team has the potential to pull an upset on Bama this year, but if we play that game 10 times, I'd say Bama wins at least 8 of those games.

So, are we close to Bama in terms of talent? At a lot of positions, I think that answer is yes. I think that 7 wins would be a major underachievement for this team. 9-3 is what I think we should do. 10 wins with some good luck, 8 wins with some bad. I also think this will be the weakest Bama team since 2010 when they lost 3 games, but will be a bit better than that and probably only lose 1 in the regular season. 2 tops. The big difference is that in the positions where we aren't close to them in talent, we are very much not close.
Logged

Cinco de Hogo

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,070
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #45 on: August 30, 2017, 06:52:57 am »

Oh and also Benny, that kind of work puts you up there with Biggus and Musk, rarified air!
Logged

MuskogeeHogFan

  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 39,375
  • Nadine Coyle shakin it for the Hogs!!!!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #46 on: August 30, 2017, 07:08:32 am »

I think you and some others are mis-hearing what I'm saying.

For example, let's look at the offense. Our QB is a push with there's due to different skill sets. Our OL is either close behind, right with, or very slightly ahead of theirs week 1. They have a significant edge at RB. We have the edge at TE. While I like our WR2's over theirs, overall, their WR group gets the edge to ours.

We have no significant edges over them like they do over us with RB. We are comparable more or less with OL and QB. They have an overall edge at WR and we have an overall edge at TE. That still gives Bama the edge on offense over us in terms of overall talent. I think our current roster of offense will be close to theirs in terms of total # of draft picks, and I think with our coaching staff, we'll be in the argument for best offense in the SEC, but they'll have more first round picks than us.

On defense, they have a huge advantage overall. We don't come close at S or most of the LB spots. I give use a push or slight edge at CB for week 1. Same thing for the DL. However, they will likely have 3+ first round picks in this coming draft on defense right now while we will not. Maybe Agim, Harris, or Pulley will get there in the 2019 drafts, but they aren't there now while players like Fitzpatrick and Foster could be starting on NFL rosters right now.

Yes, I think our team has the potential to pull an upset on Bama this year, but if we play that game 10 times, I'd say Bama wins at least 8 of those games.

So, are we close to Bama in terms of talent? At a lot of positions, I think that answer is yes. I think that 7 wins would be a major underachievement for this team. 9-3 is what I think we should do. 10 wins with some good luck, 8 wins with some bad. I also think this will be the weakest Bama team since 2010 when they lost 3 games, but will be a bit better than that and probably only lose 1 in the regular season. 2 tops. The big difference is that in the positions where we aren't close to them in talent, we are very much not close.

I agree with most of this. We are improving but at this point we aren't anywhere close to having the overall talent that Alabama possesses. I think this will be one of the more challenging years that Saban has had in coaching-up his defense. He lost 7 starters off his defense to the NFL Draft this year. 5 of those went in the first two rounds. Even if you are talking about those in the two deep rotation stepping up, that's a lot of highly rated/developed/experienced talent to have to replace. And let's keep in mind that since Saban has arrived it hasn't been a record setting offenses that have won championships for him, it has been excellent defenses.

So is Alabama vulnerable this season? They could certainly be less dominating than they have been the last 3-4 years and that might be enough of an opportunity for the right team with the right mental attitude that plays a turnover-free game.
Logged

ChitownHawg

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17,863
  • Head Hog coaching from above now.
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #47 on: August 30, 2017, 07:18:09 am »

I agree with most of this. We are improving but at this point we aren't anywhere close to having the overall talent that Alabama possesses. I think this will be one of the more challenging years that Saban has had in coaching-up his defense. He lost 7 starters off his defense to the NFL Draft this year. 5 of those went in the first two rounds. Even if you are talking about those in the two deep rotation stepping up, that's a lot of highly rated/developed/experienced talent to have to replace. And let's keep in mind that since Saban has arrived it hasn't been a record setting offenses that have won championships for him, it has been excellent defenses.

So is Alabama vulnerable this season? They could certainly be less dominating than they have been the last 3-4 years and that might be enough of an opportunity for the right team with the right mental attitude that plays a turnover-free game.

That will Auburn with the great Gus Malzhan as head coach. That dang Jeff Long, spit, should have hired Gus not Bert, spit.  >:(
Logged

MuskogeeHogFan

  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 39,375
  • Nadine Coyle shakin it for the Hogs!!!!
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #48 on: August 30, 2017, 07:24:03 am »

That will Auburn with the great Gus Malzhan as head coach. That dang Jeff Long, spit, should have hired Gus not Bret, spit.  >:(

What in Sam Irwin-Hill evoked or merited that response?
Logged

hogcard1964

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 28,287
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: Ark-Bama week one depth chart comparison
« Reply #49 on: August 30, 2017, 07:34:09 am »

I know, it's just fun call him out.

Our offensive line is comparable to Bama's?  I agree that it is, but you need to consider comparing our offensive line to Bama's defensive line and vise versa.

Yea you really called me out there Spunky.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
 

KARK
KWNA
Fox 16 Arkansas