2018 4* RB Harold Joiner Commits to AU!!!

[ellitor 33,062]

 

Quote

 

Nation’s top-ranked uncommitted RB plans Auburn official visit after LSU mishap

 

Auburn will host Harold Joiner on an official visit.

Sam Spiegelman/SEC Country

Benjamin Wolk

 

SAN ANTONIO — Harold Joiner‘s recruitment hit a recent road block.

The 4-star running back from Birmingham, Ala., had called LSU for most of his recruiting process. In fact, Joiner — after telling the staff in December he was going to commit — planned to announce during the U.S. Army All-American Bowl broadcast. But the LSU staff cut off communication shortly after he informed them of his decision.

That forced Joiner, who is understandably disappointed with how this unfolded, to start looking elsewhere.

“It’s hard. Recruiting is hard, honestly. I just gotta sit down and focus on what I need to do with other schools now,” Joiner told SEC Country on Tuesday. “It was bad. I was pretty mad. I called them. Texted. Didn’t answer.”

Joiner thinks of it like going back to square one of his recruitment.

Auburn running backs coach Tim Horton (right) talks with Harold Joiner before a game. (Benjamin Wolk/SEC Country)

He revealed his preferred list of programs going forward, which includes Auburn, Alabama, Texas A&M, Florida, Florida State and UCLA. With that said, Joiner admitted “basically everybody” still has a shot with him after the LSU mishap.

Auburn will get the first crack at it. So far, his Jan. 12 scheduled trip to the Plains is his only official visit set in stone.

“I only have one set up right now with Auburn on the 12th,” Joiner said. “It’s close to home, so it makes sense to set up my official and go there first. Plus, Auburn’s one of my top schools I’ve been looking at forever. It’s the home-town team. They’re a great offense. They run a spread, and I think that fits me really well.”

Joiner admitted a slight change in his own perception of Auburn throughout the year.

The Tigers were always in it for Joiner, but part of him saw some value in looking at out-of-state programs. He still has interest in pursuing those offers, as well, but his two most recent visits to the Plains had an effect on him. Joiner attended for the Georgia and Alabama games, which showed him the kind of offensive improvements Auburn has shown.

It improved Auburn’s status in his mind — and he hopes to see that grow on his official.

“It has changed. I got back into them when they started back texting me,” Joiner said. “Last time I talked to them seriously about [position fit], they said they wanted me as a running back but would move me out wide sometimes, but that my main position would be running back. … They have all the things I want with the program and education-wise. I’m just going to be looking at how I fit in there and see if I’m cool with the players. I already kinda am right now, but I want to get to know them a little more.”

 

 

[AuburnNTexas 7,127]

With KJ and KP leaving this might be a good option. I know some say he is not physical enough but they use to say the same thing about KJ so if we have a spot I am all for taking him but having a spot with only 5 left means we lose on somebody else we may need also. 

[GwillMac6 20,607]

I will def take him as a  patch catching H back please!!!! If the KID WOULD JUST stop being so married to being a RB he would have a home waiting for him at AU. His best path to the NFL is being a TE. He is way better as a pass catcher than as a true bell cow rb.

[ellitor 33,062]

FWIW E's crystal ball pick....Joiner to AU.

[aujeff11 6,243]

1 hour ago, ellitor said:

FWIW E's crystal ball pick....Joiner to AU.

As a RB? Does that leave smoke out?

[Mikey 16,546]

5 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

As a RB? Does that leave smoke out?

I'm afraid that leaves several other prospects out, regardless of position. Right now we'll have 5 scholarship RB's on the roster next year. There are other positions of greater need and with more highly regarded recruits out there.

[ellitor 33,062]

34 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

As a RB?

Yes.

34 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Does that leave smoke out?

It would.

[Mikey 16,546]

1 hour ago, aujeff11 said:

As a RB? Does that leave smoke out?

Oops, I forgot Whitlow. We'll have six scholarship RB's next year. K. Martin, Miller, Barrett, Whitlow, A. Martin and Shivers. Don't see needing another one unless we just have a slot to throw away. I'd rather save the space for next year instead of taking a borderline RB.

[ellitor 33,062]

12 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Oops, I forgot Whitlow. We'll have six scholarship RB's next year. K. Martin, Miller, Barrett, Whitlow, A. Martin and Shivers. Don't see needing another one unless we just have a slot to throw away. I'd rather save the space for next year instead of taking a borderline RB.

If we take another one that unfortunately tells me the staff is not comfortable as of now with any of the RBs on roster being the lead cat RB for the 2018 season. We all know how important it is in Gus's mind to have a lead cat RB.

[McLoofus 35,182]

I don't agree that we have enough RBs already, but I do agree that we shouldn't add an RB to this class unless we really love him as an every-down type RB. We can't afford any more projects at the position, especially not at the expense of other areas of need.

[AUApostle 7,648]

20 hours ago, ClaytonAU said:

It’s funny to me seriously because like why wouldn’t AU take this kid? He’s got so much potential and we wouldn’t take him because he runs like a finesse back? Don’t buy that. There’s a reason LSU dropped him and there’s a reason we did too for a time. Seems like Gus wants him because he’s pretty much taken over his recruitment as of late. He will probably end up being in our class. Gus is selling the Lutz/Fannin role to him.

I can see the Lutz role...but there was nothing finesse about Fannin until his shoulder got hurt.

[Mikey 16,546]

13 hours ago, McLoofus said:

I don't agree that we have enough RBs already, but I do agree that we shouldn't add an RB to this class unless we really love him as an every-down type RB. We can't afford any more projects at the position, especially not at the expense of other areas of need.

If six isn't enough, how many players do you want on scholarship to fill one position? Would eight be enough? Ten? At this point in time, any sure fire difference makers are gone. We haven't been pursuing any other top of the line RB's. Projects are what's left available to us.

[McLoofus 35,182]

9 hours ago, Mikey said:

If six isn't enough, how many players do you want on scholarship to fill one position? Would eight be enough? Ten? At this point in time, any sure fire difference makers are gone. We haven't been pursuing any other top of the line RB's. Projects are what's left available to us.

First, I didn't say we should go after another guy and I didn't say there's another guy out there. I said we should *only* go after another guy *if* there's another guy out there.

Second, remember when all our linebackers sucked? We had plenty of bodies, but I don't remember you saying we shouldn't sign more because we already had plenty. In fact, you argued against everyone on the board that we needed more because of a lack of quality.=

Remember when you said we shouldn't go after Davis Webb because we had enough quarterbacks? And then we ended up playing a hurt Sean White against uga?

We showed this season that 3 of  next year's 6 RBs (pending any transfers or dismissals) probably aren't going to be feature backs at Auburn. The 2 guys coming in look a lot like a couple guys already on the roster who our coaches refused to give meaningful reps to this year. I like Martin and Shivers a lot, but I also liked K. Martin, Miller and Barrett a lot. A lot of people said Barrett is a star, yet he could barely sniff the field this year at a position that was 1 deep starting in September.

If the staff loves Joiner, we should sign him. Hard not to look at his metrics and project something special. But this isn't a program for projects at the skill positions.

 

[Mikey 16,546]

23 hours ago, McLoofus said:

I don't agree that we have enough RBs already, but I do agree that we shouldn't add an RB to this class unless we really love him as an every-down type RB. We can't afford any more projects at the position, especially not at the expense of other areas of need.

I was pretty much responding to the highlighted portion, above. About those linebackers, back when they were a concern: There was never a time when we were six deep at LB positions, which is what we now have at RB. We had been consistently undersigning both numbers and quality at LB and that needed correcting. With six deep, clearly, undersigning hasn't been the case at RB. Starting with Spring practice the staff will be forced to identify some acceptable players from what's on hand. I have confidence that a couple of them will step up. While there may not be a 30-carry per game guy in the bunch, according to the whiners and complainers here that will be a good thing.

[McLoofus 35,182]

31 minutes ago, Mikey said:

I was pretty much responding to the highlighted portion, above. About those linebackers, back when they were a concern: There was never a time when we were six deep at LB positions, which is what we now have at RB. We had been consistently undersigning both numbers and quality at LB and that needed correcting. With six deep, clearly, undersigning hasn't been the case at RB. Starting with Spring practice the staff will be forced to identify some acceptable players from what's on hand. I have confidence that a couple of them will step up. While there may not be a 30-carry per game guy in the bunch, according to the whiners and complainers here that will be a good thing.

I know what you were responding to. And I think you're wrong.

I notice that you sidestepped the QB issue, on which I said this same thing. I was right. You were wrong.

We've now lost extremely important games 2 years in a row in large part because we had quantity but not quality there and at RB. So I and probably a lot of others are just going to keep whining and complaining about that while you keep whining and complaining about us other things.

[kd4au 1,145]

I say sign the kid give him a shot at RB and if it doesn't work move him to TE.  What I don't understand is why we can't get the top RB's. Is it our recruiters or do we just not do a good job of evaluating them. Lets face it we ain't got no Bo Jackson's on the team, so give him a shot.

[Beaker 2,457]

I bet Auburn looks totally different to him now that KJ is gone.   I know Joiner looks different to me!

 

[McLoofus 35,182]

6 minutes ago, Beaker said:

I bet Auburn looks totally different to him now that KJ is gone.   I know Joiner looks different to me!

I think Auburn has always looked the same to him. I think it's been more about how we looked at him. And while it's okay if he looks different to us with KJ gone, I'd be very concerned if he looked any different to the staff because of it.

[mustache eagle 2,388]

this kid has wanted to be a 6'3" sec RB.  he hasnt been very physical against high school kids.  ive watched him play.  he was hurt and missed games this year.  he spent the last few years being fawned over by his rich high school classmates and nobody got into his head to point out objectively, where he really stands as a recruit.  (i'll put blame on his high school coaches and to a lesser extent, the recruiting services for helping fill this kids head up)

very few sec schools trot out a non-physical 6'3" RB.  LSU and the turds have put big RB's on the field, but they are physical runners.  This kid would need to change alot.  he is a gifted athlete - although I don't think he is fast enough or quick enough to make up for his lack of physicality.  i will admit he was more elusive this year, however i doubt enough to get around sec defenses.

if UCLA is really in the mix and he is ok with going across country then he needs to commit to them as quickly as possible.  west coast offenses would probably suit him better.  otherwise he needs to realize he is destined as some kind of hybird HB/TE/slot who will seldom get the ball thrown to him.  even less so based on Auburn's recent use of those positions and his tools.

[JMassie11 1,610]

I'd rather have smoke

[ellitor 33,062]

1 hour ago, McLoofus said:

I think Auburn has always looked the same to him. I think it's been more about how we looked at him. And while it's okay if he looks different to us with KJ gone, I'd be very concerned if he looked any different to the staff because of it.

He does look different to the staff now that KJ & KP are gone. Whether he becomes a take is the question now. Odds seem very high now we take 1 of him or Smoke. Remember we still haven't offered Smoke yet.

[ellitor 33,062]

1 hour ago, JMassie11 said:

I'd rather have smoke

We know. Lol

[McLoofus 35,182]

2 minutes ago, ellitor said:

He does look different to the staff now that KJ & KP are gone. Whether he becomes a take is the question now. Odds seem very high now we take 1 of him or Smoke. Remember we still haven't offered Smoke yet.

That bums me out a little. It makes me feel like we're lacking a bit both on evaluations and foresight.

Thanks as always for the info, though, sir.

[JMassie11 1,610]

9 minutes ago, ellitor said:

We know. Lol

Lol have to call talent like I see it......just has that cut ability I think we need mixed with power and speed. Could easily be 225lbs and a true every down back

[WFE12 9,191]

5 hours ago, kd4au said:

I say sign the kid give him a shot at RB and if it doesn't work move him to TE.  What I don't understand is why we can't get the top RB's. Is it our recruiters or do we just not do a good job of evaluating them. Lets face it we ain't got no Bo Jackson's on the team, so give him a shot.

But...we do have a top RB.