Defensive Recruiting

[Rednilla 5,383]

I'm starting a new thread here to extend the discussion from the Beckner thread without furthering tangential posts that have little to do with him:

Of the four linebacker recruits, the talking heads on this forum insist that two will play either safety or star. That leaves two, with one (Williams) said to be waiting for a committable offer from UAT before he flips. I call that cause for concern. The fact that all current LB's are returning is a double-edged sword, excepting the two freshmen on whom the jury is still out.

There may well be a number of DL guys returning even after all the graduation. I still think it's cause for concern when we don't have a single player committed there. We have talent and depth at OL and are still signing multiple guys there. It's rather apparent that we'd line them up on D-line too if we could, but so far we have not been able to get 'em. So I'm concerned.

You are adamantly determined to maintain pessimism until the defense is partying like it's 1988, despite the fact that we are currently 15-2 under Gus Malzahn, aren't you?

Now, to eschew obfuscation, the Star position IS a safety, hence the reason the starter at that position is referred to as the 'star safety'. The fact of the matter is that the 4-2-5 defense is schematically pretty similar to the old 4-4 defense, just with safeties (generally of the bigger variety) taking the place of the outside linebackers (which is why the term 'hybrid' comes into play so often)...and the fact that two of our commits who are listed as linebackers by recruiting sites are being recruited to play that position doesn't mean we couldn't alter that plan if they beef up a little. Also, you shouldn't take what is being said about Williams as pure fact, as you seem to be.

Furthermore, the defense just gave up a total of 14 points and less than 300 yards to an exceedingly good offense (in their house, no less), but you jump to point out that their second score was because of linebacker play. Nevermind that this defense is set up to allow the safeties to come up and make plays (again, it is schematically similar to the 4-4 stack), meaning it isn't so unheard of for one of them to lead the team in tackles (especially when they are utilized for containment against a mobile quarterback), and that there is no way we could have played them as well as we did if the two guys at linebacker were really the liability you so often make them out to be. No, the LBs all suck, there is no chance of them ever being better, and only the two true freshman have a chance to be any good. (I am curious, however, when you might have seen Cameron Toney play enough to determine that he has no hope.)

BTW, we do have a commit on the defensive line, rated a 4 star by 247 (but only a 3 star on the composite ratings, which makes him a borderline 4 star in my book). We've also got one of the top recruiters in the nation coaching the position, so it doesn't seem all that unlikely to think we'll pick up at least a couple more solid recruits there, now does it?

Come on, man, you really need to brighten up a bit and not expect so little out of a coaching staff that has done so much, both on the field and in recruiting. I'm not saying to start pumping sunshine all over the place, I'm just asking you to not make such an effort at being a contrarian that you issue a rebuttal to any sunshine that does get through the cloud constantly hanging over your head...

[Rednilla 5,383]

One other thing, regarding the recruiting on offensive line vs. the recruiting on defensive line...did you happen to notice how many offensive linemen signed with Auburn last season? Hint: it's the same number as how many defensive linemen are committed this season. In fact, there are 15 offensive linemen on scholarship this year, or three times as many players as there are positions to play. Next year, even if we don't sign anyone along the defensive front, there will be 12 defensive linemen on scholarship...which is also three times as many players as there are positions to play. So did you ever think that maybe the coaches have a strategy that you aren't privy to with regard to which positions they focus on in recruiting each year?

And just in case you want to be stubborn and not make the connection, the fact that we signed six defensive linemen (two JUCOs) to just one offensive lineman in February suggests that there might be a pattern developing.

*Edit* Check that, Xavier Dampeer signed, as well as Braden Smith, so it was actually two OLs who signed in February. Nevertheless, the point remains that we won't be hurting a whole lot if we do nothing more than hold serve for the rest of the recruiting season...which I believe is less than the bare minimum, considering the level of recruiters we have on this staff.

[Mikey 16,553]

If you are happy with one DL commit and 1.5 LB commits at this time, rejoice! I'm not happy with those numbers.

If you are happy with our LB play, rejoice! I'm not happy with it. They may have advanced to the level of solid LB's at Ky or Vandy. They've got a ways to go before they'd start for another contender.

I'm not counting much on Toney because I feel that were he an "answer" we would have seen him last year, let alone on the field this season. His absence speaks for itself.

[Rednilla 5,383]

At the very least, I'm unconcerned with where we're at, and see no reason to be concerned, as you suggested initially. The fact that we have as many guys coming back on the D-line next year as we do, including nine from the previous two classes (meaning they were all signed by Malzahn and company), makes me feel okay that even if we DID only sign one guy there, we'd still be deep with talent...and that recruiting record buys a lot of confidence that they aren't done.

As for linebacker, your argument is getting just as weak as it is old regarding the play on the field. You see what you want to see; anytime something goes wrong, it was clearly the linebackers' fault. The defense holds Kansas State to less than 50 yards rushing and a total of 14 points--and before you start about how many points the Wildcats left on the field, putting them in a situation where Waters had to throw the ball as hard as he could to fit it in a five yard passing lane to a receiver using his body to catch the ball, then catching it when it bounces up for grabs, is just good defense, as is killing two drives short enough to force a field goal attempt of over 40 yards--but you're STILL bashing the linebacker play?

Another thing: the one touchdown they did score before the 57th official minute of the game came after a turnover inside our own territory, so while the defense didn't hold, it's not like they were in particularly good shape to begin with. And by the way, somehow I doubt that Kentucky or Vandy could have held an offense that had scored more than 30 points in its previous nine contests to under half of that total quite so easily.

As for Toney, maybe he's not playing because the players we have out there are better than you are giving them credit for being, hmm? You've been rather strangely quiet about the fact that a unit featuring McKinzy and Frost has given up 10 points in the second half of games this year, 7 of which came to the prolific offense of a top 20 team with less than four minutes to play and winning by 13...but it's STILL not good enough for you? Is your motto '85 Bears or Bust?

[Mikey 16,553]

My motto is: We need better linebacker play and the best way to achieve that is to raise the level of recruiting at the position, both quality and quantity, over what we've done for the past seven recruiting classes.

[ellitor 33,062]

This does not go with Red and Mikey's conversation but it does go with the thread title so I will highjack their convo to post this.

Niebuhr was told Garner

Was staying in Kansas after the game to check out some JUCO players, according to an Atlanta-area high school coach.

[gctiger 924]

I realize that our immediate and near term needs appear to be fairly well met, but my concern is the potential impact of a down year on the pipeline of talent that we have to maintain. Example: Not many years ago we had 6 QBs on scholarship but back in 2012 we didn't appear to have a capable QB on the roster, although we also had many other serious problems.

[oldeagle 0]

Is it too late to convert Heath Evans to a DT? Next years recruiting class is reported to be overflowing with DLinemen. Julian R. Looked like a stud last night against Lovejoy.

[Randman5000 4,224]

This does not go with Red and Mikey's conversation but it does go with the thread title so I will highjack their convo to post this.

Niebuhr was told Garner

Was staying in Kansas after the game to check out some JUCO players, according to an Atlanta-area high school coach.

Any ideas on who it might be?

[ellitor 33,062]

This does not go with Red and Mikey's conversation but it does go with the thread title so I will highjack their convo to post this.

Niebuhr was told Garner

Was staying in Kansas after the game to check out some JUCO players, according to an Atlanta-area high school coach.

Any ideas on who it might be?

Likely Marquavius Lewis.

[CameronCrazy 1,058]

I think we get a flip from a USCe commit. They currently have commits from 5 - 4* DE's (Shameik Blackshear, Sherrod Pittman, Marquavious Lewis, Arden Key, & Dante Sawyer). They also have commitments from a 3* DE & a 3* DT. So it'll be it'll be interested to see if they sign all 7 DL commits. Here's hoping that we flip Lewis or Key!

[ellitor 33,062]

I think we get a flip from a USCe commit. They currently have commits from 5 - 4* DE's (Shameik Blackshear, Sherrod Pittman, Marquavious Lewis, Arden Key, & Dante Sawyer). They also have commitments from a 3* DE & a 3* DT. So it'll be it'll be interested to see if they sign all 7 DL commits. Here's hoping that we flip Lewis or Key!

Lewis is the only one that ia known we are actively recruiting.

[mom2kid 216]

Muschamp has to be going. Are we turning up recruiting the Florida talent?

[CameronCrazy 1,058]

Muschamp has to be going. Are we turning up recruiting the Florida talent?

The best situation may be for them to have a decent season where Muschamp keeps his job. If they have another terrible year, then they may really get a top notch coach in there that can save their recruiting class. But yes, we definitely need to be turning up the heat on Holland & Ivey to go ahead and get them locked up.

[JFDTiger80 790]

Muschamp has to be going. Are we turning up recruiting the Florida talent?

The best situation may be for them to have a decent season where Muschamp keeps his job. If they have another terrible year, then they may really get a top notch coach in there that can save their recruiting class. But yes, we definitely need to be turning up the heat on Holland & Ivey to go ahead and get them locked up.

Not looking good for Boom after the game yesterday

[Rednilla 5,383]

My motto is: We need better linebacker play and the best way to achieve that is to raise the level of recruiting at the position, both quality and quantity, over what we've done for the past seven recruiting classes.

Yes, we are well aware that's how you feel. Of course, you ignore anything that suggests linebacker play has even been adequate and continually push your agenda that nothing is right with the unit. You also maintain that we are to continue signing high numbers at linebacker despite the NCAA's restriction on the number of players allowed on scholarship. But, then, I suppose we should start releasing those you don't find worthy from their scholarships to make room, right?

[Mikey 16,553]

My motto is: We need better linebacker play and the best way to achieve that is to raise the level of recruiting at the position, both quality and quantity, over what we've done for the past seven recruiting classes.

Yes, we are well aware that's how you feel. Of course, you ignore anything that suggests linebacker play has even been adequate and continually push your agenda that nothing is right with the unit. You also maintain that we are to continue signing high numbers at linebacker despite the NCAA's restriction on the number of players allowed on scholarship. But, then, I suppose we should start releasing those you don't find worthy from their scholarships to make room, right?

I have continually said we have linebackers that are "barely adequate". "Ordinary" is another term I've used. I wouldn't argue with "run of the mill" either. If a defense is to be exceptional, it starts with the linebackers being exceptional. If a person is satisfied with an ordinary defense, then he can be satisfied with ordinary linebacker play. I'd like to see Auburn with an exceptional defense and that means exceptional linebackers.

35,41,38,28,42,34. What are those numbers? They are the points we gave up to our six best opponents last year. That's ordinary defense at best.

Since when is signing three or four LB's a year until we have top level LB's on the field going to run us over the 85 limit? If it does, then yes, there's nothing wrong with processing the non-producers. This ain't no rec league where every kid gets a chance to bat. You can ask Bruce Pearl about how that works, he's got the processing thing going full tilt in the basketball program and the reaction has been "Great Recruiting!".

[aubearcat 2,132]

I looked at the last two signed classes. Defensive recruiting looked pretty solid. There were a few guys that will probably have to red shirt and be contributors down the road, particularly at linebacker. However, several young guys on the line and in the back that look solid according to how many big time teams were recruiting them.

[ellitor 33,062]

Muschamp has to be going. Are we turning up recruiting the Florida talent?

He's not going but the new staff is recruiting Florida pretty hard.

[aujeff11 6,243]

http://auburn.247sports.com/Article/Former-Georgia-DT-Jonathan-Taylor-wants-second-chance-31370214

What's the scoop on this kid, E?

[CadillacCone 0]

Was wondering the same

[Rednilla 5,383]

My motto is: We need better linebacker play and the best way to achieve that is to raise the level of recruiting at the position, both quality and quantity, over what we've done for the past seven recruiting classes.

Yes, we are well aware that's how you feel. Of course, you ignore anything that suggests linebacker play has even been adequate and continually push your agenda that nothing is right with the unit. You also maintain that we are to continue signing high numbers at linebacker despite the NCAA's restriction on the number of players allowed on scholarship. But, then, I suppose we should start releasing those you don't find worthy from their scholarships to make room, right?

I have continually said we have linebackers that are "barely adequate". "Ordinary" is another term I've used. I wouldn't argue with "run of the mill" either. If a defense is to be exceptional, it starts with the linebackers being exceptional. If a person is satisfied with an ordinary defense, then he can be satisfied with ordinary linebacker play. I'd like to see Auburn with an exceptional defense and that means exceptional linebackers.

35,41,38,28,42,34. What are those numbers? They are the points we gave up to our six best opponents last year. That's ordinary defense at best.

Since when is signing three or four LB's a year until we have top level LB's on the field going to run us over the 85 limit? If it does, then yes, there's nothing wrong with processing the non-producers. This ain't no rec league where every kid gets a chance to bat. You can ask Bruce Pearl about how that works, he's got the processing thing going full tilt in the basketball program and the reaction has been "Great Recruiting!".

As has been repeatedly recited on this board, Ellis Johnson has a reputation for making a leap from year one to year two with regard to defensive efficiency. This is year 2. It is also the first year that either of the current starters have been counted amongst the upperclassmen.

As for recruiting that many linebackers and processing out the ones that don't play as well (provided, of course, that the coaches agree with you about the linebackers...and Johnson's comments following the K-State game don't suggest that they do), this isn't basketball, nor is it a brand new coaching staff implementing their own philosophies. On the hardwood a team is limited to, what, 13 scholarship players at a time? That's two strings plus 60% of a third. Football, on the other hand, offers enough scholarships to have nearly 4 deep at every position. So we can recruit as best as possible and try to coach up the players who need it, or we can throw players under the bus if they don't immediately perform up to expectation. Seems obvious which you prefer.

By the way: 3, 0, 7. What are those numbers? The points given up in the second half this season, and two of the games were against teams that figure to be pretty danged good. How about 16 and 13? Those are the overall points given up per game by the Auburn D thus far, and the national ranking of that particular statistic, respectively.

Furthermore, the game has changed, whether you are willing to accept it or not. According to the article linked below, before 2007, the overall national scoring average had been higher than 26.9 only twice since the statistic began being tabulated in the 30s. Over the past six seasons, however, scoring has been over 27 every year, and over 28 twice.

Now, please, post more stubborn redundancies that make you believe you have superior insight into linebacker play and recruiting than the guys on our coaching staff who get paid 6-7 figures a year for those very analyses.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2012/11/15/college-football-fbs-point-scoring-on-record-pace/1704623/

[aujeff11 6,243]

My motto is: We need better linebacker play and the best way to achieve that is to raise the level of recruiting at the position, both quality and quantity, over what we've done for the past seven recruiting classes.

Yes, we are well aware that's how you feel. Of course, you ignore anything that suggests linebacker play has even been adequate and continually push your agenda that nothing is right with the unit. You also maintain that we are to continue signing high numbers at linebacker despite the NCAA's restriction on the number of players allowed on scholarship. But, then, I suppose we should start releasing those you don't find worthy from their scholarships to make room, right?

I have continually said we have linebackers that are "barely adequate". "Ordinary" is another term I've used. I wouldn't argue with "run of the mill" either. If a defense is to be exceptional, it starts with the linebackers being exceptional. If a person is satisfied with an ordinary defense, then he can be satisfied with ordinary linebacker play. I'd like to see Auburn with an exceptional defense and that means exceptional linebackers.

35,41,38,28,42,34. What are those numbers? They are the points we gave up to our six best opponents last year. That's ordinary defense at best.

Since when is signing three or four LB's a year until we have top level LB's on the field going to run us over the 85 limit? If it does, then yes, there's nothing wrong with processing the non-producers. This ain't no rec league where every kid gets a chance to bat. You can ask Bruce Pearl about how that works, he's got the processing thing going full tilt in the basketball program and the reaction has been "Great Recruiting!".

As has been repeatedly recited on this board, Ellis Johnson has a reputation for making a leap from year one to year two with regard to defensive efficiency. This is year 2. It is also the first year that either of the current starters have been counted amongst the upperclassmen.

As for recruiting that many linebackers and processing out the ones that don't play as well (provided, of course, that the coaches agree with you about the linebackers...and Johnson's comments following the K-State game don't suggest that they do), this isn't basketball, nor is it a brand new coaching staff implementing their own philosophies. On the hardwood a team is limited to, what, 13 scholarship players at a time? That's two strings plus 60% of a third. Football, on the other hand, offers enough scholarships to have nearly 4 deep at every position. So we can recruit as best as possible and try to coach up the players who need it, or we can throw players under the bus if they don't immediately perform up to expectation. Seems obvious which you prefer.

By the way: 3, 0, 7. What are those numbers? The points given up in the second half this season, and two of the games were against teams that figure to be pretty danged good. How about 16 and 13? Those are the overall points given up per game by the Auburn D thus far, and the national ranking of that particular statistic, respectively.

Furthermore, the game has changed, whether you are willing to accept it or not. According to the article linked below, before 2007, the overall national scoring average had been higher than 26.9 only twice since the statistic began being tabulated in the 30s. Over the past six seasons, however, scoring has been over 27 every year, and over 28 twice.

Now, please, post more stubborn redundancies that make you believe you have superior insight into linebacker play and recruiting than the guys on our coaching staff who get paid 6-7 figures a year for those very analyses.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2012/11/15/college-football-fbs-point-scoring-on-record-pace/1704623/

I'm glad you pointed out his stubbornness because he ain't gonna let you get the last say. Whether you are right or wrong...

[ellitor 33,062]

http://auburn.247spo...chance-31370214

What's the scoop on this kid, E?

Not sure. He seems interested in AU but 1 site says there's no chance. If he does OV like he wants to then we will know there is some real consideration.

[mattarcara 0]

Recruiting LBs hasn't been that big of a problem. We have 2 5 star LBs on our roster plus some highly rated 4 stars. We have been beaten by UAT on a couple of recruits that we wanted, but that doesn't mean we lack the talent to have good LBs