Jump to content

Linebackers


auburn4ever

Recommended Posts

Knowing that we had replace Kris Frost, Cassanova McKinzy and Justin Garrett, why did Gus and defensive staff only sign 1 linebacker, Tre Threat. Did Gus put all his eggs in 1 basket in the person Ben Davis? if so, that was crazy on his part. Just about everyone knew Davis was gonna sign with bammer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

yeah, i really didn't get what his strategy is from that article. Either i need to improve my reading comprehensive or else the article is mis-titled. Either way Gus seems to have not articulated his plan, maybe he as one but we are missing it somehow or want something better. Don't know, I love Gus as the coach and have supreme confidence in him, but he doesn't seem to disclose very many of his strategies to tie up some loose ends (personnel wise) from last years team. He is a very private person, maybe because he don't like to be criticized. If that is the case then he needs to remember where he is, coaches get ripped a new one every time they state a position different from the consensus. JMHO :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we all would have liked to have signed more LB's this class, the odds of any of the them having significant contributions to the 2016 season was slim. So if you give it your best and can't get the ones you want there is no point in signing a LB or 2 just to have them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

his strategy was to sign 3 last year so that they would have a year on the team to be ready to help fill the spots, but that is way to complicated for you to understand that you don't recruit freshman to replace graduating starters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So by your strategy...".So if you give it your best and can't get the ones you want there is no point in signing a LB or 2 just to have them.".....if we can't get the ones we want then we just don' t sign any??? I simply do not agree with that. And you don't expect kids to replace starters but if you continue to sign only one, you will be soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely Gus has a legitimate strategy, but it just seems hard to discern

already explained?

http://www.al.com/auburnfootball/index.ssf/2016/02/gus_malzahn_explains_why_hes_n.html

Not quite...

"The potential addition of Neal would help bolster the thinnest position group on Auburn's roster following the departures of starters Kris Frost, Justin Garrett and Cassanova McKinzy.

Steele said he wishes to run "both" 4-3 and 3-4 fronts, which would be quite difficult with the present linebacker corps. Last season at LSU, Steele ran mostly a 4-3 front or was in Nickel, which Auburn was predominantly in last season."

We are fine for certain formations it seems, but still thin at others. Especially if we have a few injuries. Last year's recruits will get heavy playing time though
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So by your strategy...".So if you give it your best and can't get the ones you want there is no point in signing a LB or 2 just to have them.".....if we can't get the ones we want then we just don' t sign any??? I simply do not agree with that. And you don't expect kids to replace starters but if you continue to sign only one, you will be soon.

If you can't get the ones you want, then you shouldn't sign somebody just to have them. Don't waste a spot on someone you don't feel will contribute just to have warm bodies at the position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you need immediate help that is when you go the JC route or get a graduate transfer, which I'm betting Gus and Steele are about to do. No use signing a freshman that won't help for 2 years if you think you might need immediate help. We are thin at the position, no doubt, and certainly don't need an injuries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Immediate help is not our main problem at LB. In five of the last six years both our quality and quantity of linebacker recruits has been well into the area of "dismal". If year in and year out the linebacker corps isn't maintained with enough good prospects then the heart and what's normally the leadership of the defense is missing.

To have an outstanding defense requires outstanding linebackers and we haven't been getting enough of them.

This year, four linebacker prospects listed in Alabama's top twenty players went to out-of-state power-5 schools. One to Florida, two to MSU and one to Louisville. We should have had some open lines of communication with these guys so that when we, predictably, whiffed on the top five in the nation types that we were after we could have brought some of these guys in here and worked with them. I'm not familiar with Louisville's linebacker situation. Both Florida and Mississippi State are better than us at linebacker and they wanted these kids. That tells me these in-state prospects would have helped us as well.

Another way to count is that seven of the state's top twenty players were linebackers and we managed to sign one. That's (1). Does anyone think that's just fine and dandy?

I often hear the comment (whine) that certain other schools "are loaded at linebacker and they just keep stockpiling them!" Yes "they" do. You'll also notice that the schools that keep on stockpiling linebackers have the outstanding defenses. The two factors are related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Immediate help is not our main problem at LB. In five of the last six years both our quality and quantity of linebacker recruits has been well into the area of "dismal". If year in and year out the linebacker corps isn't maintained with enough good prospects then the heart and what's normally the leadership of the defense is missing.

To have an outstanding defense requires outstanding linebackers and we haven't been getting enough of them.

This year, four linebacker prospects listed in Alabama's top twenty players went to out-of-state power-5 schools. One to Florida, two to MSU and one to Louisville. We should have had some open lines of communication with these guys so that when we, predictably, whiffed on the top five in the nation types that we were after we could have brought some of these guys in here and worked with them. I'm not familiar with Louisville's linebacker situation. Both Florida and Mississippi State are better than us at linebacker and they wanted these kids. That tells me these in-state prospects would have helped us as well.

Another way to count is that seven of the state's top twenty players were linebackers and we managed to sign one. That's (1). Does anyone think that's just fine and dandy?

I often hear the comment (whine) that certain other schools "are loaded at linebacker and they just keep stockpiling them!" Yes "they" do. You'll also notice that the schools that keep on stockpiling linebackers have the outstanding defenses. The two factors are related.

Mikey I love you to death but there is a reason AU and uat passed on these kids.

AU only signed 1 Lber because 2016 Lber class sucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also I read in a couple places that our defensive line class ranked 1st. But let's not let that interfere with the 'Gus is incompetent' narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will see much better play from this position moving forward. Like wde stated the 2016 LB class was one of the worst in recent history. 2017 will be much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Gus said is called "spin", folks. We stunk it up (again) in getting LB's in-house and he's not wanting to sound negative about it. And the narrative that Alabama didn't have good HS LB talent (outside of 2 FIVE star players - which I guess would be an absurd thought to most on here that we could actually land a FIVE star LB) is a red herring since, at last check, there are 49 other states that we could have gone into and probably found another one or two LB recruits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No red herring. Just ask every other recruiting service that has a clue. Bryan Matthews and Jason Caldwell both back this up themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Immediate help is not our main problem at LB. In five of the last six years both our quality and quantity of linebacker recruits has been well into the area of "dismal". If year in and year out the linebacker corps isn't maintained with enough good prospects then the heart and what's normally the leadership of the defense is missing.

To have an outstanding defense requires outstanding linebackers and we haven't been getting enough of them.

This year, four linebacker prospects listed in Alabama's top twenty players went to out-of-state power-5 schools. One to Florida, two to MSU and one to Louisville. We should have had some open lines of communication with these guys so that when we, predictably, whiffed on the top five in the nation types that we were after we could have brought some of these guys in here and worked with them. I'm not familiar with Louisville's linebacker situation. Both Florida and Mississippi State are better than us at linebacker and they wanted these kids. That tells me these in-state prospects would have helped us as well.

Another way to count is that seven of the state's top twenty players were linebackers and we managed to sign one. That's (1). Does anyone think that's just fine and dandy?

I often hear the comment (whine) that certain other schools "are loaded at linebacker and they just keep stockpiling them!" Yes "they" do. You'll also notice that the schools that keep on stockpiling linebackers have the outstanding defenses. The two factors are related.

Mikey I love you to death but there is a reason AU and uat passed on these kids.

AU only signed 1 Lber because 2016 Lber class sucked.

Why did we waste a scholarship on the one LB that we did sign? I will concede that coaches' evaluation > recruiting site evaluation but three of the LBs who sucked too badly to even get an offer were rated higher than the guy we signed. The staff really thought that much more highly of Threat?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Gus said is called "spin", folks. We stunk it up (again) in getting LB's in-house and he's not wanting to sound negative about it. And the narrative that Alabama didn't have good HS LB talent (outside of 2 FIVE star players - which I guess would be an absurd thought to most on here that we could actually land a FIVE star LB) is a red herring since, at last check, there are 49 other states that we could have gone into and probably found another one or two LB recruits.

The response to that was to Mikeys question on the top players in Alabama that were LB's that went somewhere else and neither bama or Auburn offered. We did put in effort for LB's from other states, but not to use it as an excuse we have had constant turnover in the LB coaching area and lost both LB Coaches again this recruiting cycle.

I will further say that we will see a greater improvement in this area in the next couple of years as CTW is gonna kill it on the recruiting trail beginning with next year and we will finally have the LB depth that Mikey has been speaking about for the last several years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If pressed I suppose I could go back and dig up the posts from this time last year that spoke about all the top linebackers we were "in on" for the 2016 class, and how our main recruiting areas were overflowing with quality 2016 linebackers. But we signed one.

Not to dispute anybody's opinion, in particular my on-line friend WDE but I'm going to believe all the next year stuff when or if the letters roll in off the FAX machine. Signing day and before signing day disappointments in the linebacker area for five of the last six years leave me being a cautious old skeptic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If pressed I suppose I could go back and dig up the posts from this time last year that spoke about all the top linebackers we were "in on" for the 2016 class, and how our main recruiting areas were overflowing with quality 2016 linebackers. But we signed one.

Not to dispute anybody's opinion, in particular my on-line friend WDE but I'm going to believe all the next year stuff when or if the letters roll in off the FAX machine. Signing day and before signing day disappointments in the linebacker area for five of the last six years leave me being a cautious old skeptic.

Seems the easy explanation about why bama did not recruit the guys under discussion is they had nailed down two 5* guys which means this coming season they will have four 5* LBs and a hand full of 4* guys too.

They did not pursue them because they did not need them...but that sure doesn't mean that the guys were not capable of playing SEC football.

Also seems that AU trying to sign guys who are being actively pursued by UAT is not a profitable process.....JMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...