2015 Recruiting Board (Updated: 2/4/15)

[Mikey 16,545]

Lotta work! I reckon we are recruiting Holland at OLB, and not MLB like I mentioned in the Roquan thread. So sue me! May be selling him on playing next to Tre since he looks to be the future at MLB with his skill set.

Auto save.

Thanks WarEagleAU. What is pipeline?

A state which traditionally produces a lot of quality college football prospects. The most commonly mentioned states are Florida, Georgia and Alabama. I think Texas will result in a new pipeline state for Auburn in few years.

I'm curious why we are planning on taking just 2 LB commitments given that we continue to need big strong fast SEC type LBs. I realize that we have added some quality in 2014 but why wouldn't we look at adding 3 if the talent is there? Or is it a numbers limit.

Our defensive scheme with Mike and Will LB - Not a big need, though. Auburn would take a third LB if he was an elite prospect.

If we fail to sign at least four quality LB prospects, we have, well, failed. The position suffers an unusually high percentage of injuries and disappointments. We needed four last year and got two. AU MUST load up at LB in order to put even two successful ones on the field. I have spoken!

[AUbritt 611]

Wow. Wasn't expecting that from Mikey, at all.

[metafour 4,958]

If we fail to sign at least four quality LB prospects, we have, well, failed. The position suffers an unusually high percentage of injuries and disappointments. We needed four last year and got two. AU MUST load up at LB in order to put even two successful ones on the field. I have spoken!

Not this ******* s*** again....

[Mikey 16,545]

If we fail to sign at least four quality LB prospects, we have, well, failed. The position suffers an unusually high percentage of injuries and disappointments. We needed four last year and got two. AU MUST load up at LB in order to put even two successful ones on the field. I have spoken!

Not this ******* s*** again....

Yes again. And guess what? There will be more coming. If you don't know where the "ignore" button is, ask a mod.

[metafour 4,958]

Apparently Ellis Johnson and company need to consult Mikey for his expertise in recruiting/roster management of their own ******* defensive system. I'm going to continue blasting you because your posts on this subject are so freaking obtuse that they deserve their own rating on the AUFAMILY.com absurdity scale. It is one thing to suggest that you aren't comfortable with what we have on the roster and thus see a need to recruit more players. It is another thing completely to stoop to the level that you have managed to stoop to; in which you seriously believe that you seem to know more than the coaches that see these players in practice every single ******* day. To state that we will have "FAILED" if we dont meet your quota of linebacker signees is absolutely cringe worthy.

4 LB signees every year to fill a 2 LB system...I guess Alabama needs to sign 8 LBs a year then? LMFAO. Is that how it works?

[Mikey 16,545]

Obviously the coaches agree with me. They missed on two more big prospects late in the game so they intended to sign four. But I suppose you know more than the coaches so you say two is enough? LMAO!

Also, I didn't say sign four every year, as you claim. If you're going to be a total jerk in every post you make you need to get the facts straight. We do need to sign four a year, minimum, until we have sufficient depth and talent at the position. Since you brought the turds up (are you a saban worshiper?) check out how many LB's are on their roster.

PS: This post was in response to metafour's typical BS above, if anybody was wondering.

[WarEagleAU 0]

7 prospects added in the OP. Latest updates added on post #2.

[metafour 4,958]

Obviously the coaches agree with me. They missed on two more big prospects late in the game so they intended to sign four.

They missed on Evans. A 5-star hometown recruit who they would have taken regardless. Who else did they miss on? They absolutely did not intend to sign 4, you are lost. If they felt they needed 4 they would have kept backup plans in line which they absolutely did not do. They were perfectly happy with Williams and Davis. The kid from Daphne isn't even worth talking about because he never even had a shot in hell of qualifying. Notice how after NSD they had no problem bringing in a JUCO DB? If they were so flustered with the miss on Evans and felt they "needed" 4 LB's then they would have brought someone in. Period.

The exact same thing happened last year when you continually whined about it being an absolute must that we sign "4-5" LBs and we ended up signing 2. The coaches disagreed so much with you that they let Zach Cunningham go to Vanderbilt...remember?

Now here we are in year 3 where you are once again pumping this "4-5 LB is a must" bullsh*t. For the THIRD year in a row. Guess what Mikey? They will sign 2-3 linebackers once again this year. And you will once again be wrong...for the third year in a row.

[Dixie1860 27]

We would happily have signed four LB's if there were four good enough. Some would argue that Moncrief is a third LB, so Evans could have made FOUR. Yes we signed a JUCO DB late, but only because we believe he can contribute. Had there been a similar type JUCO LB, he would have been signed. I certainly hope he is not being referred to as a backup plan. That would be stupid since he wasn't even available to us until he found out Wazzu wasn't going to sign him. Certainly anyone who would say such a thing is mis-informed, probably still a virgin (unless we are counting pets) and is most certainly the dumbest assertion I have heard all day!! But nobody is THAT dumb and socially awkward, surely!?!?

Given that we already accepted Sullivan at LB this year, and the number of kids we have offered, I bet we end up taking three minimum. Especially if Holland is waiting to NSD to announce. Guys like that, we would take FIVE if we could. Mikey, I feel your pain, I really do. So Meta, you can continue to disrespect WEAU and the thread he has worked hard on with your vitriol some more if you would like, we all all VERY impressed with your ability to cuss and call people names. You better hurry up, I hear your Mom coming!

[metafour 4,958]

We would happily have signed four LB's if there were four good enough.

There were plenty good enough linebackers. We just didn't make very many serious pushes after we locked down Williams and Davis and felt good about Evans. Hmm...why would that be? It was Evans or no one else. Ergo there was absolutely no push to "bring in 4 linebackers". If we wanted 4 linebackers we would have signed 4 of them. Do I need to help your stupid ass count?

We graduated 1 linebacker this year. We have 6 guys on roster who have two or more years of eligibility remaining. We brought in 2 more pure linebackers. Do the freaking math...we aren't carrying 10+ scholarship linebackers to run a defensive system in which we use 2 linebackers on the field at one time.

Some would argue that Moncrief is a third LB, so Evans could have made FOUR.

The Linebackers in this scheme are the MLB and the WLB. Moncrief is not recruited for either. When players do their position groupings in practice, "Stars" like Therezie and Garrett spend most of their time with Charlie Harbison. Harbison is the Safeties coach.

Certainly anyone who would say such a thing is mis-informed, probably still a virgin (unless we are counting pets) and is most certainly the dumbest assertion I have heard all day!! But nobody is THAT dumb and socially awkward, surely!?!?

The daily whippings are starting to take a toll, huh?

[TitanTiger 20,465]

Rein in the insults guys.

[TigerEye24 0]

Rein in the insults guys.

preach it

[Mikey 16,545]

Obviously the coaches agree with me. They missed on two more big prospects late in the game so they intended to sign four.

They missed on Evans. A 5-star hometown recruit who they would have taken regardless. Who else did they miss on? They absolutely did not intend to sign 4, you are lost. If they felt they needed 4 they would have kept backup plans in line which they absolutely did not do. They were perfectly happy with Williams and Davis. The kid from Daphne isn't even worth talking about because he never even had a shot in hell of qualifying. Notice how after NSD they had no problem bringing in a JUCO DB? If they were so flustered with the miss on Evans and felt they "needed" 4 LB's then they would have brought someone in. Period.

The exact same thing happened last year when you continually whined about it being an absolute must that we sign "4-5" LBs and we ended up signing 2. The coaches disagreed so much with you that they let Zach Cunningham go to Vanderbilt...remember?

Now here we are in year 3 where you are once again pumping this "4-5 LB is a must" bullsh*t. For the THIRD year in a row. Guess what Mikey? They will sign 2-3 linebackers once again this year. And you will once again be wrong...for the third year in a row.

************** <Deleted to comply with Titan's request.

The Fields kid has a committable offer, pending successful test scores. That tells us all we need to know about them being satisfied with two. According to you we didn't recruit McMillan? Last year we didn't recruit Foster? Also, they didn't "let" Cunningham go to Vandy.There were reasons we dropped him and both you and I know that.

Dude, your {deleted to comply with Titan's request} act is not getting any more believable with time. Take a chill pill, act like a decent human being and maybe people will do more than laugh at your posts.

[metafour 4,958]

The Fields kid has a committable offer, pending successful test scores. That tells us all we need to know about them being satisfied with two.

He is not qualifying and he was never going to qualify. He wasn't even worth talking about yet somehow someone built him up as some sort of real recruit that was inches away from signing. If we weren't satisfied with two linebackers we wouldn't be hitching our ride to a kid that had a 1% chance of qualifying, they would have been out actively recruiting kids that you know....could actually qualify.

According to you we didn't recruit McMillan? Last year we didn't recruit Foster?

Those are 5-star recruits that are too good to pass up regardless of how many you think you need to take. Funny you brought up Foster because Ellis Johnson pretty much explained that one for you. Read it and weep Mikey...WEEP:

“We had the two that we needed, and we held for Reuben just because we knew he was good enough we were going to hold for him,” Johnson said. “We got your ‘X’ number of positions, and we always keep a couple wild cards. He was going to get one of those if he wanted it, and that’s fine.”

What else did Ellis Johnson go on to say? Read this one closely. Dont just read it, maybe write it on your forehead so you dont forget and maybe then I wont have to read your stupid ass opinion on this subject every other day:

Johnson shed light on Auburn’s recruiting philosophy for linebackers, saying there is no problem with only having two in the class. “We probably won’t sign more than that next year,” he said. “It is not a system that you need 12 linebackers on the roster. You need about 12 safeties on the roster. You don’t need but about eight linebackers on the roster. “So if we’re in this system, you won’t see three, five, four, five, four linebackers signed every year. There’s nowhere for them to play.”

I'm right. As always.

Lets count the LB's on roster together:

1) Frost - JR

2) McKinzy - JR

3) Swain - JR

4) Mitchell - SO

5) Flowers - JR

6) Toney - RSFR

7) T. Williams - HS FR

8) D. Davis - HS FR

"You don’t need but about eight linebackers on the roster"

[AUbritt 611]

The Fields kid has a committable offer, pending successful test scores. That tells us all we need to know about them being satisfied with two.

He is not qualifying and he was never going to qualify. He wasn't even worth talking about yet somehow someone built him up as some sort of real recruit that was inches away from signing. If we weren't satisfied with two linebackers we wouldn't be hitching our ride to a kid that had a 1% chance of qualifying, they would have been out actively recruiting kids that you know....could actually qualify.

According to you we didn't recruit McMillan? Last year we didn't recruit Foster?

Those are 5-star recruits that are too good to pass up regardless of how many you think you need to take. Funny you brought up Foster because Ellis Johnson pretty much explained that one for you. Read it and weep Mikey...WEEP:

“We had the two that we needed, and we held for Reuben just because we knew he was good enough we were going to hold for him,” Johnson said. “We got your ‘X’ number of positions, and we always keep a couple wild cards. He was going to get one of those if he wanted it, and that’s fine.”

What else did Ellis Johnson go on to say? Read this one closely. Dont just read it, maybe write it on your forehead so you dont forget and maybe then I wont have to read your stupid ass opinion on this subject every other day:

Johnson shed light on Auburn’s recruiting philosophy for linebackers, saying there is no problem with only having two in the class. “We probably won’t sign more than that next year,” he said. “It is not a system that you need 12 linebackers on the roster. You need about 12 safeties on the roster. You don’t need but about eight linebackers on the roster. “So if we’re in this system, you won’t see three, five, four, five, four linebackers signed every year. There’s nowhere for them to play.”

I'm right. As always.

Lets count the LB's on roster together:

1) Frost - JR

2) McKinzy - JR

3) Swain - JR

4) Mitchell - SO

5) Flowers - JR

6) Toney - RSFR

7) T. Williams - HS FR

8) D. Davis - HS FR

"You don’t need but about eight linebackers on the roster"

That should be: 'Let's count the LBs together'.

You may also want to consider amending the other statements I highlighted, since their occurrence in such proximity to your grammatical mistakes is too funny.

I often -- though not always -- agree with the content of your posts, assuming I can cut through the arrogance successfully enough to arrive at an understanding of the content. In this case, I think you're probably right, or at least closer to the truth of the matter than Mikey. But I wonder whether the optimal number of linebackers on the team is really of any concern to you. I know that's Mikey's concern. I think maybe you just want to be right ... as always...?

[AUTUmike 79]

The Fields kid has a committable offer, pending successful test scores. That tells us all we need to know about them being satisfied with two.

He is not qualifying and he was never going to qualify. He wasn't even worth talking about yet somehow someone built him up as some sort of real recruit that was inches away from signing. If we weren't satisfied with two linebackers we wouldn't be hitching our ride to a kid that had a 1% chance of qualifying, they would have been out actively recruiting kids that you know....could actually qualify.

According to you we didn't recruit McMillan? Last year we didn't recruit Foster?

Those are 5-star recruits that are too good to pass up regardless of how many you think you need to take. Funny you brought up Foster because Ellis Johnson pretty much explained that one for you. Read it and weep Mikey...WEEP:

“We had the two that we needed, and we held for Reuben just because we knew he was good enough we were going to hold for him,” Johnson said. “We got your ‘X’ number of positions, and we always keep a couple wild cards. He was going to get one of those if he wanted it, and that’s fine.”

What else did Ellis Johnson go on to say? Read this one closely. Dont just read it, maybe write it on your forehead so you dont forget and maybe then I wont have to read your stupid ass opinion on this subject every other day:

Johnson shed light on Auburn’s recruiting philosophy for linebackers, saying there is no problem with only having two in the class. “We probably won’t sign more than that next year,” he said. “It is not a system that you need 12 linebackers on the roster. You need about 12 safeties on the roster. You don’t need but about eight linebackers on the roster. “So if we’re in this system, you won’t see three, five, four, five, four linebackers signed every year. There’s nowhere for them to play.”

I'm right. As always.

Lets count the LB's on roster together:

1) Frost - JR

2) McKinzy - JR

3) Swain - JR

4) Mitchell - SO

5) Flowers - JR

6) Toney - RSFR

7) T. Williams - HS FR

8) D. Davis - HS FR

"You don’t need but about eight linebackers on the roster"

That should be: 'Let's count the LBs together'.

You may also want to consider amending the other statements I highlighted, since their occurrence in such proximity to your grammatical mistakes is too funny.

I often -- though not always -- agree with the content of your posts, assuming I can cut through the arrogance successfully enough to arrive at an understanding of the content. In this case, I think you're probably right, or at least closer to the truth of the matter than Mikey. But I wonder whether the optimal number of linebackers on the team is really of any concern to you. I know that's Mikey's concern. I think maybe you just want to be right ... as always...?

Well said, AUbritt. Although I often disagree with metafour, assuming I am able to sort through his fumbling of basic grammar and spelling. And metafour, stop being a prick for no reason at all.

[mcgufcm 4,096]

meta, the one thing I'd say, on careful reading of Ellis' comments is: you very well could see three or four LBs signed in a particular class. He said you won't see that year after year because it's unnecessary in this system, but he didn't say you won't see it. I've had the (enjoyable for me) LB conversation with Mikey a number of times, and I don't think he's contending we should sign four every year. I think he's saying we need to have a big class of quality LBs at some point to raise the quality level of the position and ensure at least two starting caliber LBs in a given year. I don't think Coach Johnson's comments really disagreed with that. He just said you won't see us bring in big LB classes every year (in comparison to, say, Alabama).

Personally, I don't know if we need a year with four LBs, but we could use a year with more than two LBs. So I guess my target is three, especially given the fact that we have 3 Juniors plus potentially Justin Garrett in the mix at LB. We could lose a LOT of bodies from the LB rotation all at once. That's going to require a big class to compensate sooner or later.

[CameronCrazy 1,054]

I think we can still win with the Linebackers that we have. They will need some developing and improving, but I think a few of those guys have some potential. With that said, I definitely agree with Mikey. We need to seriously upgrade our talent level at LB. And we need to take however many LB's it takes to do that. I personally count the star position as more of Linebacker who can cover rather than a safety who can tackle. Therezie has played well, but I would much rather see him as a safety. Rashaan Evans would have been perfect. And yes, we would have gladly taken four LB's last year. Tre Williams, Deshaun Davis, Raahaan Evans, & SDH or Raekwon McMillian.

[Mikey 16,545]

metafour falls back on statements recruiters made after they missed on guys? LMAO! I've got some beachfront property in Arizona I'd like to sell to this metafour dude.

According to metafour Fields has an offer but we don't want him...we didn't try to keep A.J. Johnson and Foster last year, heck didn't really even want 'em...we only recruited Evans this year because he's from Auburn High... we never spent a minute's time recruiting McMillan or SDH this year... I do believe metafour lives on some planet in an alternate universe.

If Auburn has a roster of solid, proven, SEC quality LB's built up then two in any given year may well be enough. Until we hit that point, and we're a long way from getting there, four a year is a pretty good idea. In each of these last two years we'd have gladly taken four if we had been able to land the ones we wanted. That's the proof of the pudding right there. The staff wanted four quality players at LB and we weren't able to land four. Look for them to shoot for four again this year while metafour, uh, weeps.

[AUTiger2012 84]

I have to assume Mikey and metafour are not two grown men who are having this fight on a family message board. Especially two Auburn fans. I wonder if it is laziness or ignorance that causes people to cuss and insult others when they try to make a point.

[IronMan70 3,277]

The Fields kid has a committable offer, pending successful test scores. That tells us all we need to know about them being satisfied with two.

He is not qualifying and he was never going to qualify. He wasn't even worth talking about yet somehow someone built him up as some sort of real recruit that was inches away from signing. If we weren't satisfied with two linebackers we wouldn't be hitching our ride to a kid that had a 1% chance of qualifying, they would have been out actively recruiting kids that you know....could actually qualify.

According to you we didn't recruit McMillan? Last year we didn't recruit Foster?

Those are 5-star recruits that are too good to pass up regardless of how many you think you need to take. Funny you brought up Foster because Ellis Johnson pretty much explained that one for you. Read it and weep Mikey...WEEP:

“We had the two that we needed, and we held for Reuben just because we knew he was good enough we were going to hold for him,” Johnson said. “We got your ‘X’ number of positions, and we always keep a couple wild cards. He was going to get one of those if he wanted it, and that’s fine.”

What else did Ellis Johnson go on to say? Read this one closely. Dont just read it, maybe write it on your forehead so you dont forget and maybe then I wont have to read your stupid ass opinion on this subject every other day:

Johnson shed light on Auburn’s recruiting philosophy for linebackers, saying there is no problem with only having two in the class. “We probably won’t sign more than that next year,” he said. “It is not a system that you need 12 linebackers on the roster. You need about 12 safeties on the roster. You don’t need but about eight linebackers on the roster. “So if we’re in this system, you won’t see three, five, four, five, four linebackers signed every year. There’s nowhere for them to play.”

I'm right. As always.

Lets count the LB's on roster together:

1) Frost - JR

2) McKinzy - JR

3) Swain - JR

4) Mitchell - SO

5) Flowers - JR

6) Toney - RSFR

7) T. Williams - HS FR

8) D. Davis - HS FR

"You don’t need but about eight linebackers on the roster"

Really ? I'm not sure who you think you are but you need to get yourself in check. It's one thing to disagree but quite another to constantly stoop to the level of immaturity you do. There is no need for that whether you think you are right or wrong on any given issue.

As far as the football issue at hand, your point is we only need 2 LBs a year. I assume you mean 2 a year that can play the position at a D1 level. In 4 years, a team taking 2 LBs each year, has to hit on every one of them if they want to end up with 8 LBs playing at a D1 level on its roster. Coach Johnson knows that too by the way.

Mikey's point is we need 3-4 a year to get those 2 good ones each year. Mikey is basing his opinion on the wash out rate we have had on LBs, which is a valid point. Both of you agree on the final number of 8 LBs we need playing at the D1 level in this system. All the rest of this stuff is a distinction without a difference.

[Dixie1860 27]

I can not believe the crap that a certain person spews on this board in nearly every post, yet the only time a Mod chimes in it's to lump us all in with him?? How many times is he going to be allowed use profanity and crudely insult other posters? He gets insulted back and it is then that someone steps in? I am far more insulted by that than I am by him! What a joke!

[metafour 4,958]

I can not believe the crap that a certain person spews on this board in nearly every post, yet the only time a Mod chimes in it's to lump us all in with him?? How many times is he going to be allowed use profanity and crudely insult other posters? He gets insulted back and it is then that someone steps in? I am far more insulted by that than I am by him! What a joke!

Says the guy stooping to sexuality jokes LMFAO. I'm pretty sure you've called me gay and a virgin on multiple occasions, but please cry some more about me calling someone's opinion "stupid", or "dumb ass".

You do nothing but follow me around in every thread because I've whipped your ass so many times you may as well call me daddy. You're obsessed.

[tbone4jc 2,238]

Rein in the insults guys.

preach it

I kinda need some entertainment to pass some time away on my lunch break so if their note insulting a recruit let the the daytime drama continue, but keep it clean

[metafour 4,958]

According to metafour we didn't try to keep A.J. Johnson and Foster last year, heck didn't really even want 'em...we only recruited Evans this year because he's from Auburn High... we never spent a minute's time recruiting McMillan or SDH this year... I do believe metafour lives on some planet in an alternate universe.

I didn't say a single one of those things but you've been destroyed so badly on this argument that I'm not surprised at all at the elite level of spin you are trying to employ in an effort to save whatever is left of your miniscule football rep on this board.

You may want to re-examine your recollection of the SDH recruitment BTW. Thanks for bringing him up, as he makes my point. To re-jog your senile memory, like Josh Casher he tried to rekindle the Auburn relationship once we started winning but the staff told him to stick with Alabama because they were tired of playing the game with him.

In each of these last two years we'd have gladly taken four if we had been able to land the ones we wanted. That's the proof of the pudding right there.

You seem to have a serious inability to understand how recruiting works. You repeatedly bring up 5-star elite recruits that fall under their own set of rules and then try to work their recruitment as some sort of proof that the staff wanted 'X' number of players when it flat out does not work like that. The numbers game of recruiting first and foremost starts with how many scholarship athletes they want at each position each year. For linebackers that number is about 8. After that number is filled (which we DID fill with 2 signees) you then get into the recruitment of elite players that are takes no matter what as long as you can make the numbers work, which in our case we could make work because we had slots open.

Yes we would have happily taken McMillon. We would have taken him because he is too good to pass up like any other elite-level recruit. That doesn't help your argument one iota. The staff would probably take three 5-star QBs in one class if it was possible, does that therefore mean that they "wanted 3 QBs"? Absolutely not.

You are grouping special cases (elite recruits that are takes no matter what) with the actual needs of a class and pretending like its the same thing when it absolutely is not.

The staff wanted four quality players at LB and we weren't able to land four.

...and here we ****ing go again.

The staff wanted 4 but you're telling me that after coming a minute short of winning a National Championship we could "only" land 2? Seriously?

No. The staff WANTED 2-3 but would have taken 4 if those other 2 were kids that were too good to pass up. There is a freaking difference.

That is why they would have taken McMillon but yet made absolutely zero attempt to recruit Kevin Mouhon after he was a numbers-casualty at Tennessee. Get it Mikey? We could have easily taken Mouhon if we wanted him. He wasn't elite so there was no reason to push over our NEED number to take him. Our NEED number to fit 8 on roster was 2. Anything after that only goes to elite level recruits...hence McMillon, Evans.