Jump to content
Null

Transfer Portal Targets/Commits (2022)


AUght2win
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Mikey said:

In spite of all the crybaby whining about O-line, this staff has signed a grand total of one high school O-line player each year. Either they can't get it done or the whiners are incorrect and the need isn't there. Which is it? PS: My day in the sun would be that AU had won at least 10 regular season games this year (the pieces of the puzzle were all there) and will finish 15-0 next year. This season must have been an eclipse?

Dang you caught me. Thought I hid my crybaby whining better than that? I know I can’t have a rational debate with you so it is what it is. The thing people don’t realize is two things can be correct at the same time, Gus left us in dumpster fire shambles on the o line and the current staff hasn’t set the world on fire in the o line recruiting aspect yet. As I’ve said 2023 will be telling whether they can or can’t get it done with O line recruiting. Good news is we have a few more HS prospects signing in February and have opportunities in the portal this year still. So again it’s a little premature to say this staff can’t get it done. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites





26 minutes ago, tbone1430 said:

Incorrect. The staff last year had no time to get HS players and was only able to try and snag a few transfer players with little to no relationships especially coming in after early NSD. This year is their first full cycle. After 2023’s signing class we’ll see what roster management looks like. If that class resembles Gus’ classes you can have your day in the sun. 

It's really not worth the effort with him. He's never wrong, just ask him. When he is wrong, he just pivots.

The guy should have just stuck with moaning about LB depth every year.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, selias said:

The guy should have just stuck with moaning about LB depth every year.

Cheer up. Apparently the LB depth and talent problem will be back in spades next season. Fear not, I'll let you know about it when the time comes.

5 minutes ago, tbone1430 said:

Good news is we have a few more HS prospects signing in February and have opportunities in the portal this year still. So again it’s a little premature to say this staff can’t get it done. 

The portal will have to tell the tale. Somebody on some site said that over 80% of the quality high school and junior college players have already signed. I didn't count that myself, so take it with a grain of salt. When that 5* O-line guy from Columbus, Ga. signed with bammer is when I started feeling less than good about the situation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mikey said:

In spite of all the crybaby whining about O-line, this staff has signed a grand total of one high school O-line player each year. Either they can't get it done or the whiners are incorrect and the need isn't there. Which is it? PS: My day in the sun would be that AU had won at least 10 regular season games this year (the pieces of the puzzle were all there) and will finish 15-0 next year. This season must have been an eclipse?

We are in a bind because we have 7 SR. OL. If we recruit a heavy freshman class full of reaches we'll be in this exact situation in four years again. Ideally, we grab Farmer and a Colby Smith type of developmental tackle to get a solid 3 man class.

Not to excuse Friend. He's whiffed and deserves his share of criticism. But supposedly the plan has always been to get portal guys that they believe can fulfill two things. First to play instantly or at least two deep. Second to help better balance the OL room. If they whiff on every portal guy, my criticism will grow louder

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, au302 said:

Not to excuse Friend. He's whiffed and deserves his share of criticism. But supposedly the plan has always been to get portal guys that they believe can fulfill two things. First to play instantly or at least two deep. Second to help better balance the OL room. If they whiff on every portal guy, my criticism will grow louder

I would have thought some portal guys would have been brought in last season. In spite of claims to the contrary, some were available and were picked up by other schools. Kentucky got their starting OT from the portal last cycle. Here's hoping we can get something done this time, or else convince some current players to return for year 6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Mikey said:

I would have thought some portal guys would have been brought in last season. In spite of claims to the contrary, some were available and were picked up by other schools. Kentucky got their starting OT from the portal last cycle. Here's hoping we can get something done this time, or else convince some current players to return for year 6.

Why would harsin need protal guys last year when Gus left us in amazing shape with so many Sr and Jr OL???

Especially these top ranked JUCO OTs

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, W.E.D said:

Why would harsin need protal guys last year when Gus left us in amazing shape with so many Sr and Jr OL???

Especially these top ranked JUCO OTs

You have answered your own question. Harsin didn't need OL portal guys last year. He needed DB's and got them. He needed DL guys and he got them. He needed a backup QB and he got him. Had he needed OL guys he could have got them too. As I pointed out above, there were OL transfers available.

They always say the "proof of the puddin' is in the eatin'" That the new staff didn't pursue any OL transfers last year very much proves the OL puddin on hand didn't need any embellishments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, W.E.D said:

 

Weird, right @bigbird

Read the entire set of comments, and apply comprehension.

In the meantime, explain why, if the staff believed there was a problem with the O-line last season, they chose to not even pursue any O-line transfers. The obvious answer is that they didn't think there was a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Read the entire set of comments, and apply comprehension.

In the meantime, explain why, if the staff believed there was a problem with the O-line last season, they chose to not even pursue any O-line transfers. The obvious answer is that they didn't think there was a problem.

I don't disagree we should have taken guys last year. 

But you've always ways we didn't need OL. So you were wrong??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, W.E.D said:

But you've always ways we didn't need OL. So you were wrong??

No. Though it's obvious we could use some now we didn't need any last year. If we had needed some then, we'd have gone and got them.

We currently have 17 signees and one of them is an O-lineman. This after signing only one last year. Our 2022 situation sits at the feet of Harsin& co. They are the ones who haven't pulled sufficient numbers to have backups on the roster now. Gus left a full stock of numbers. This is college ball, graduation happens and it should be planned for.

Edited by Mikey
  • Haha 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mikey said:

You have answered your own question. Harsin didn't need OL portal guys last year. He needed DB's and got them. He needed DL guys and he got them. He needed a backup QB and he got him. Had he needed OL guys he could have got them too. As I pointed out above, there were OL transfers available.

They always say the "proof of the puddin' is in the eatin'" That the new staff didn't pursue any OL transfers last year very much proves the OL puddin on hand didn't need any embellishments.

Did you even watch us play this year? The OL Gus left was a joke. Maybe you could critique the current staff for underestimating the need, but denying the need is straight up foolish. Even for you. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mcgufcm said:

Did you even watch us play this year? The OL Gus left was a joke. Maybe you could critique the current staff for underestimating the need, but denying the need is straight up foolish. Even for you. 

But according to some on here the O line was not that bad , but it was our QB who made them look bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mcgufcm said:

Did you even watch us play this year? The OL Gus left was a joke. Maybe you could critique the current staff for underestimating the need, but denying the need is straight up foolish. Even for you. 

The numbers were there, the majority of them former 4* high school recruits. If the current staff couldn't either make a good stew with that or see a need for additional help, then what else needs to be said?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, 80Tiger said:

But according to some on here the O line was not that bad , but it was our QB who made them look bad.

They weren't nearly as bad in pass pro as folks tried to say they were.

They were absolutely that bad at run blocking.

We absolutely need more stronger, meaner, more talented dudes.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mikey keeps saying because we didn't get any O-Linemen in the Transfer Portal last year it is because the staff didn't think we needed any and they didn't try and recruit any.  This staff unlike previous staffs does not leak a lot to the media so we could have been trying to get some O-linemen last year but did not succeed. 

Just like recruiting HS players relationships count. True Kentucky got a starting OT out of the Portal  they had an established staff that had a reputation of having good O-lines.  The problem with the Portal is you have less time to convince a player to come and not having any relationship and being unknown is a disadvantage.  DB's we had a new coach Mason who has had a national presence and already well known plus some of the kids we got last year and this year in the Portal had Alabama root Fair from UAB, Harris from Alabama, Jones this year from Alabama.

Because we didn't get any O-Line in the Portal doesn't mean staff didn't see a need last year and didn't recruit any all it means is starting late we didn't get any.

This years HS class so far has been better than expected but would have been bad without the late switches and commitments where this staff kept on players for a year. They had something to sell a very good defense a well know Defensive Coordinator a d-line coach with NFL experience and a Defense that stopped the bama offensive juggernaut in the Iron Bowl.  At this time sadly on Offense we basically have PT to see but no accomplishments with the exception of Caddy with the RB's.  With new OC coming in with an NFL background we are all hoping he can help recruit both HS and Portal O-Linemen.

Mikey this staff has been one of the most organized driven staffs I have seen at Auburn in a long time that has made recruiting success a business as seen by all the people they have hired who work behind the scenes to evaluate talent and make initial contact. This staff knew about the O-line weakness everybody but you realized how bad our O-Line was especially with so many seniors and I am sure they have been trying to recruit Portal O-Line last year and this year.

Mikey I am not a Gus Hater I think he ran a very clean program, he was a good man, he was an Auburn man who loved Auburn, but his recruiting even when he had  highly ranked classes left something to be desired because of its imbalance and because of how many players left early without contributing.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Mikey said:

The numbers were there, the majority of them former 4* high school recruits. If the current staff couldn't either make a good stew with that or see a need for additional help, then what else needs to be said?

That they had had all of 15 practices to evaluate the ability of the guys, and they thought the players in the portal were at least as big a risk as the ones on the team? That maybe the coaches hadn't gotten their bearings in a new job yet? That you need to learn to admit that you aren't the only person in the history of humanity who is never wrong? Take your pick.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rednilla said:

That they had had all of 15 practices to evaluate the ability of the guys, and they thought the players in the portal were at least as big a risk as the ones on the team? That maybe the coaches hadn't gotten their bearings in a new job yet? That you need to learn to admit that you aren't the only person in the history of humanity who is never wrong? Take your pick.

15 spring practices and a fall camp is fully adequate for a staff getting paid millions of dollars to figure out what they had or needed. They could have learned that from film and watching the bowl game.

If they did their proper evaluations and decided they didn't need help, that puts the lie to the idea that the cupboard was bare when they arrived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 80Tiger said:

But according to some on here the O line was not that bad , but it was our QB who made them look bad.

These two things are not mutually exclusive. The OL was not bad in pass pro. Bo made it look like there was pressure a lot of times when there was an absolutely clean pocket to be stepped up in to. 

The OL was abysmal at run blocking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mikey said:

15 spring practices and a fall camp is fully adequate for a staff getting paid millions of dollars to figure out what they had or needed. They could have learned that from film and watching the bowl game.

If they did their proper evaluations and decided they didn't need help, that puts the lie to the idea that the cupboard was bare when they arrived.

Since when were they able to add anything after fall camp?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rednilla said:

Since when were they able to add anything after fall camp?

Fall camp was used, or should have been used, to polish. (The much longed for "development") Obviously they had the group they wanted already on campus. If not they'd have gone after replacements earlier,  when replacements were available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Fall camp was used, or should have been used, to polish. (The much longed for "development") Obviously they had the group they wanted already on campus. If not they'd have gone after replacements earlier,  when replacements were available.

You’re right that warm bodies were available. But name the specific players that became available after spring practice (when coaches couldn’t meet face to face with recruits) who we should’ve gone after. What school did those players end up at and what proof do we have that they would've been better than what we had? 

Edited by Gowebb11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...