Null



Sign in to follow this  
ellitor

2020 Recruiting Thread (OP Update 1/30/19)

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, triangletiger said:

After watching the Sheldon clips above, when I read this post, I  couldn't help but hear it in my head as if Sheldon were saying it.  Hilarious!

I did the same thing. Couldn't help it. And a great post by @Mikey btw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




18 hours ago, bigbird said:

3.6 per position...skill sets, body types, and abilities be damned!

I noticed that the guy who was .6 played more the the rest of the them.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, dyehardfanAU said:

3.6 scholarship players per position you say?

Yep. In addition to grossly mischaracterizing his argument at the time- that we had adequate depth at each position along the offensive line strictly because we had a certain number of scholarship offensive linemen on the roster- he continues to assert that Bill Taylor is considered an offensive lineman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Yep. In addition to grossly mischaracterizing his argument at the time- that we had adequate depth at each position along the offensive line strictly because we had a certain number of scholarship offensive linemen on the roster- he continues to assert that Bill Taylor is considered an offensive lineman. 

This guy? 

Image result for bill taylor auburn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dyehardfanAU said:

This guy? 

Image result for bill taylor auburn

For a second I had him confused with Jack Driscoll. But yeah, that's the guy. All 226 lbs of him. Center, guard, tackle- he's whatever you need him to be. Basically he's another Austin Golson, minus all the flab.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

For a second I had him confused with Jack Driscoll. But yeah, that's the guy. All 226 lbs of him. Center, guard, tackle- he's whatever you need him to be. Basically he's another Austin Golson, minus all the flab.

@Mikey, you counted this guy in your 18?  Where did you have him on your depth chart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bigbird said:

That's weird because you counted walk-ons on your list

I did not, and you know very well that I did not. Why you keep this up is weird because I took my win and let it go a long time ago. That you want to keep this thing going and come back with statements that are patently not true is a bit sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dyehardfanAU said:

3.6 scholarship players per position you say?

18 scholarship offensive linemen divided by 5 positions = 3.6.  Since some attempt to avoid embarrassment by deflecting the subject onto whether a scholarship long snapper is an offensive linemen or not, discount Taylor if it makes you happy. We still had 17 scholarship offensive linemen, which is not a significant difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Mikey said:

18 scholarship offensive linemen divided by 5 positions = 3.6.  Since some attempt to avoid embarrassment by deflecting the subject onto whether a scholarship long snapper is an offensive linemen or not, discount Taylor if it makes you happy. We still had 17 scholarship offensive linemen, which is not a significant difference.

So you still think that a 226 lb long snapper provides depth at center, guard and tackle. 

To focus on this is not to deflect, but to highlight that you are not of sound mind on the topic of offensive line depth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:popcorn:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been observing this continuing saga with interest and would like to make a small observation. Whatever the number on the OL is, 16, 17 or 18, we are giving these guys a free ride. If we are putting all these offensive linemen on scholly and cannot field a decent number of good players beyond the starters, we suck. If that is the case then we get what we deserve.

Edited by IronMan70
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mikey said:

No, you don't count. You aren't on a football scholarship at Auburn.

Sarcasm Sheldon.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mikey said:

18 scholarship offensive linemen divided by 5 positions = 3.6.  Since some attempt to avoid embarrassment by deflecting the subject onto whether a scholarship long snapper is an offensive linemen or not, discount Taylor if it makes you happy. We still had 17 scholarship offensive linemen, which is not a significant difference.

But how many of those 18 are offensive tackles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, triangletiger said:

But how many of those 18 are offensive tackles?

If Broderick Jones joins then I think it’ll be like 6 or 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, triangletiger said:

But how many of those 18 are offensive tackles?

7.2

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, triangletiger said:

But how many of those 18 are offensive tackles?

It doesn't matter to Mikey. He believes they are all the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bigbird said:

Easy remedy. Just show the list...

I already posted it for you, back in 2018. If you want to see the list again, just go back and look at it.

Edited by Mikey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, triangletiger said:

But how many of those 18 are offensive tackles?

That was never a consideration. The statement was made that we didn't have the o-line numbers. We did have the numbers. Beyond that is a different subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mikey said:

That was never a consideration. The statement was made that we didn't have the o-line numbers. We did have the numbers. Beyond that is a different subject.

FWIW, The statement was we don't have OL depth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mikey said:

I already posted it for you, back in 2018. If you want to see the list again, just go back and look at it.

I don't need to see it. Just thought you would like the opportunity to prove everyone on the board wrong and yourself right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Mikey said:

18 scholarship offensive linemen divided by 5 positions = 3.6.  Since some attempt to avoid embarrassment by deflecting the subject onto whether a scholarship long snapper is an offensive linemen or not, discount Taylor if it makes you happy. We still had 17 scholarship offensive linemen, which is not a significant difference.

There's our problem! We've been fielding the 0.6 linemen this whole time!

Need to start putting the whole lineman in the line-up...

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JBiGGiE said:

There's our problem! We've been fielding the 0.6 linemen this whole time!

Need to start putting the whole lineman in the line-up...

Well, seeing how's we're 3 deep at guard and center and .4 deep at tackle, that's not quite as silly as it sounds. 

Just kidding. The 226-lb long snapper means we're .6 deep at tackle. We have depth!

Bailey Sharp, Prince Sammons, Alec Jackson (who played on the other side of the ball the year prior but who was TOTALLY moved to offense because we TOTALLY already had plenty of depth there)... We were dripping with SEC caliber talent at that position. Because those guys had scholarships. Because if you have a scholarship, you are providing adequate depth. Even at positions you don't play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this