Sign in to follow this  
CameronCrazy

Auburn currently leads for...

Recommended Posts

ellitor    4,707

If the qb has any mobility at all ... And simply enough running ability to be a threat and keep a D honest then that can be an extra threat in this offense. Of course mike Vick running with manning/Brady passing would be ideal. Haven't seen that one yet though.

Best run/pass threat I've seen where he is very good at both is Steve Young from the 49ers and previously BYU. He would have been killer in a power-read-spread O.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




autan    74

Don't we lead for Carr as well?

yes

FWIW I don't think Carr ends up a take for AU. The staff always wanted him to commit early to help the class. With him taking things slow I think he will lose his spot. Plus just IMO I think he gets exposed at camps this Summer.

I think you're probably right E. But if anbody ever looked the part it's Carr, if you've seen that latest photo on Scout AU home page.

Maybe photographer touched it up but almost makes KKim look like a kid by comparison and we know that's not accurate.

Edited by autan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Auburnwad    0

Elitor and We84..

We84...yes..we had a balanced qb (thats what i was addressing..not the whole offense)last year with an exceptional runner at qb..check his passing vs running yardage...many games would have been lost if he hasn't thrown well...but a lot of the passing game would not have been there if not for the running threat. I don't really see what you can argue with there.

E...my guess is that we r not trying to reproduce the year we had with the qb that you mentioned. As far as comparing us with Tulsa..I don't think we want to copy that pattern either because the sec is more run oriented. On the offensive line comment...it looks like we have got a good one coming back, plus depth there for a year or two, plus I would argue that the running backs and a good Rb play into making an oline look good, though there is no doubt they were great. Personally I don't think we would have been playing in a national championship game without 2 good running qbs..and I would like to see that continue, so that is why I hope we keep recruiting good running qbs that can also throw...and not the other way around. Its just much easier to game plan someone that is not a running threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
McLoofus    3,609

Elitor and We84..

We84...yes..we had a balanced qb (thats what i was addressing..not the whole offense)last year with an exceptional runner at qb..check his passing vs running yardage...many games would have been lost if he hasn't thrown well...but a lot of the passing game would not have been there if not for the running threat. I don't really see what you can argue with there.

E...my guess is that we r not trying to reproduce the year we had with the qb that you mentioned. As far as comparing us with Tulsa..I don't think we want to copy that pattern either because the sec is more run oriented. On the offensive line comment...it looks like we have got a good one coming back, plus depth there for a year or two, plus I would argue that the running backs and a good Rb play into making an oline look good, though there is no doubt they were great. Personally I don't think we would have been playing in a national championship game without 2 good running qbs..and I would like to see that continue, so that is why I hope we keep recruiting good running qbs that can also throw...and not the other way around. Its just much easier to game plan someone that is not a running threat.

Welp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellitor    4,707

E...my guess is that we r not trying to reproduce the year we had with the qb that you mentioned. As far as comparing us with Tulsa..I don't think we want to copy that pattern either because the sec is more run oriented. On the offensive line comment...it looks like we have got a good one coming back, plus depth there for a year or two, plus I would argue that the running backs and a good Rb play into making an oline look good, though there is no doubt they were great. Personally I don't think we would have been playing in a national championship game without 2 good running qbs..and I would like to see that continue, so that is why I hope we keep recruiting good running qbs that can also throw...and not the other way around. Its just much easier to game plan someone that is not a running threat.

Staff plans to have a good throwing QB and running QB on roster at all times so Gus can use the best fit with the strengths of whatever skill players are around the QB. Ideally you want a guy that does both well but that does not happen often obviously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why we would move away from a balanced running/passing quarterback, when it is exactly this type of athlete that has led us to two national championship games recently. The running threat from qb is what makes the offense go. I just love what we are doing and hope we don't move away from the scheme to accomodate a good passing qb with mediocre wheels.... Even a great defense can not guess right every time when a qb can hurt you with his legs and is a threat on each play. It just makes everyone more effective. I think we need two more of these please.

I agree. I get complacent and think it is easy as it was last year. We had a great OL. I went back and watched the only game that didnt erase itself from my DVR the other day (Ole Miss). That was still an early game, but I started watching Greg Robinson every play. Long and short, he deserves to be a top 2 pick.

Im excited about this year for one main reason and that is Nick Marshall. We need as many like him we can get recruiting. I think CGM can do magic. You cant argue with the best O that Gus has every had. What CGM's O thrives most on is a running QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
McLoofus    3,609

You cant argue with the best O that Gus has every had.

You're right. Tulsa 2007: 576 points, 7,615 yards.

Paul Smith had 5,065 passing and 119 rushing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cant argue with the best O that Gus has every had.

You're right. Tulsa 2007: 576 points, 7,615 yards.

Paul Smith had 5,065 passing and 119 rushing.

At Tulsa, how would they do in the SEC? AU last season was one of the most dominate running teams of all time in a very strong defensive conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AUEngineer2016    126

You cant argue with the best O that Gus has every had.

You're right. Tulsa 2007: 576 points, 7,615 yards.

Paul Smith had 5,065 passing and 119 rushing.

At Tulsa, how would they do in the SEC? AU last season was one of the most dominate running teams of all time in a very strong defensive conference.

The point isn't the results that Gus got at Tulsa or how they theoretically would have done in the SEC. The point was that Gus adapts his offense to fit around the personnel that he has. Auburn last year was an extremely potent rushing team, but had some problems (mostly just inexperience and lack of time in the system/with the coaches) throwing the ball. Result? Almost 72% of the plays we ran were running plays and we had the best rushing offense in the nation, but we were 97th in passing. 2007, Tulsa had a good QB and receiver corps, as well as an OL set up for pass blocking, but their running game wasn't so strong. Result? 5000+ passing yards (Paul Smith was #2 in passing yards in the nation) and the #1 overall offense, #2 passing offense, but the #32 rushing offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
McLoofus    3,609

You cant argue with the best O that Gus has every had.

You're right. Tulsa 2007: 576 points, 7,615 yards.

Paul Smith had 5,065 passing and 119 rushing.

At Tulsa, how would they do in the SEC? AU last season was one of the most dominate running teams of all time in a very strong defensive conference.

The point isn't the results that Gus got at Tulsa or how they theoretically would have done in the SEC. The point was that Gus adapts his offense to fit around the personnel that he has. Auburn last year was an extremely potent rushing team, but had some problems (mostly just inexperience and lack of time in the system/with the coaches) throwing the ball. Result? Almost 72% of the plays we ran were running plays and we had the best rushing offense in the nation, but we were 97th in passing. 2007, Tulsa had a good QB and receiver corps, as well as an OL set up for pass blocking, but their running game wasn't so strong. Result? 5000+ passing yards (Paul Smith was #2 in passing yards in the nation) and the #1 overall offense, #2 passing offense, but the #32 rushing offense.

Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely. I really think a running QB is the best CGM's O can be. It cuts out on turnovers (Ints) and allows you to manage the game more thoroughly. It will be nice to have a legit passing game to open up the running (if we even need to) and to score in a minute or less. I was amazed during the Iron bowl how we went into 2 min offense and just kept running the ball. We drove the ball for a score right before half if Im not mistaken. That might have been the most impressive drive we had all season. Has to dishearten the D as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aujeff11    1,172

Since there has been no commitments lately, I figured that we could use a positive thread. This will also help consolidate this information into one thread. Auburn currently leads for...

2015

5* LB Jeffrey Holland

5* RB Jovon Robinson

4* QB Kai Locksley (co-leaders with FSU)

4* OG Tyler Carr

4* S Jordan Colbert

4* LB Darrell Williams

4* LB Richard McBryde

4* DB Darius Slayton

4* WR Jayson Stanley

2016

5* LB Lyndell Wilson

4* WR Nate Craig

4* S Stephen Davis, Jr

With colbert in good hands, there is plenty of auburn leans left... This should be one interesting year! Wde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellitor    4,707

Bumping this thread by saying we likely do not lead for Jayson Stanley anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JFDTiger80    239

Bumping this thread by saying we likely do not lead for Jayson Stanley anymore.

Heard this too. If he is not committing until sometime late in the season, and our WR's show out like we hope this year, I think we may still be OK here.

Edited by JFDTiger80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CameronCrazy    199

Bumping this thread by saying we likely do not lead for Jayson Stanley anymore.

Updated. I also removed Lyndell Wilson since the comments that he made about us being the leader were before he received his "dream offer" from Alabama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw on a free post from a pay site that we are in great shape with a lot of WRs we want but no one wants to commit until they see our WRs perform this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
war eagle6    0

Bumping this thread by saying we likely do not lead for Jayson Stanley anymore.

Updated. I also removed Lyndell Wilson since the comments that he made about us being the leader were before he received his "dream offer" from Alabama.

Just like I said on another thread, most bama fan athletes commit to AU just to get a dream offer from bama, especially LB'ers!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellitor    4,707

Bumping this thread by saying we likely do not lead for Jayson Stanley anymore.

Updated. I also removed Lyndell Wilson since the comments that he made about us being the leader were before he received his "dream offer" from Alabama.

Just like I said on another thread, most bama fan athletes commit to AU just to get a dream offer from bama, especially LB'ers!!

Does not apply to any situation you posted that in except maybe SDH. Wilson was not committed to AU before the Bama offer. Foster was committed to Bama first. And as much as I don't like the way things happened Evans made himself a must have for Bama because the kid worked his arse off and made himself a 5 talent.The Bama interest was not due to taking one from AU. That was just a huge bonus for them. He has an attribute that Saban for the most part has not had in his Bama tenure, a pass rushing machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
war eagle6    0

Bumping this thread by saying we likely do not lead for Jayson Stanley anymore.

Updated. I also removed Lyndell Wilson since the comments that he made about us being the leader were before he received his "dream offer" from Alabama.

Just like I said on another thread, most bama fan athletes commit to AU just to get a dream offer from bama, especially LB'ers!!

Does not apply to any situation you posted that in except maybe SDH. Wilson was not committed to AU before the Bama offer. Foster was committed to Bama first. And as much as I don't like the way things happened Evans made himself a must have for Bama because the kid worked his arse off and made himself a 5 talent.The Bama interest was not due to taking one from AU. That was just a huge bonus for them. He has an attribute that Saban for the most part has not had in his Bama tenure, a pass rushing machine.

Remember the kid atchison and Eric smiths little brother? It happens, I've seen it more than once Edited by war eagle6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellitor    4,707

Remember the kid atchison and Eric smiths little brother? It happens, I've seen it more than once

No on Eric Smith's brother and If I remember correctly Atch committed under Tubs but parted when the new staff came in. That is a usual in those situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
war eagle6    0

Remember the kid atchison and Eric smiths little brother? It happens, I've seen it more than once

No on Eric Smith's brother and If I remember correctly Atch committed under Tubs but parted when the new staff came in. That is a usual in those situations.

Ah yes, I forgot about the turn over in new staff, true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this