2014 Recruiting Board (Updated 2/14/14)

[WarEagleAU 0]

Updated (7/19 & 7/20)

Profiles added:

RB Tony James

LB Raekwon McMillan

Position Needs added with brief note.

Hey buddy. I know it's a lot of work but would you add the position ranking for each recruit by all for sites? I think it will be bery interesting to see how players move up and down their position boards through the whole process. If you add that in there I will help you edit it when new rankings come out.

247Composite or 247Sports/Rivals/Scout/ESPN?

[ellitor 33,113]

247/Rivals/Scout/ESPN but keep the star rating composite as it is now. Maybe put the position rank in parenthesis by the linked profiles by each site for each recruit.

[WarEagleAU 0]

247/Rivals/Scout/ESPN but keep the star rating composite as it is now. Maybe put the position rank in parenthesis by the linked profiles by each site for each recruit.

Done.

[WarEagleAU 0]

Updated - position rank added.

[ellitor 33,113]

Updated - position rank added.

Thanks. Just what I thought. Scout has half the prospects underrated. Especially Sean White #60 at QB.

[augolf1716 21,253]

Good job WarEagleAU much appeciated

[aupops2 9]

Terrific work, my good man!! Even I can comprehend this format.

[WarEagleAU 0]

Updated (7/21/13):

WR D'haquille Williams and DT Devaroe Lawrence (three-star from 247Composite) committed to Auburn.

2:03 PM - Auburn is the leader for Blair.

Auburn, Florida and Tennessee battle for Lambert.

2:55 PM - New orange star updated. Thanks to RedInRun!

[IronMan70 3,277]

Updated (7/19/13):

New layout updated

You do a great job with this list and it's much appreciated. I definitely like the new format, well ok, except for one thing. When we are finished recruiting a certain position, I miss your cool check marks.

[WarEagleAU 0]

Updated (7/19/13):

New layout updated

You do a great job with this list and it's much appreciated. I definitely like the new format, well ok, except for one thing. When we are finished recruiting a certain position, I miss your cool check marks.

Well, I like it better right now.

[IronMan70 3,277]

Updated (7/19/13):

New layout updated

You do a great job with this list and it's much appreciated. I definitely like the new format, well ok, except for one thing. When we are finished recruiting a certain position, I miss your cool check marks.

Well, I like it better right now.

Yah ? Oh yah ? Well I got your check mark, right here bro.

( no cool check marks :'()

[WarEagleAU 0]

Updated (7/19/13):

New layout updated

You do a great job with this list and it's much appreciated. I definitely like the new format, well ok, except for one thing. When we are finished recruiting a certain position, I miss your cool check marks.

Well, I like it better right now.

Yah ? Oh yah ? Well I got your check mark, right here bro.

( still miss the cool check marks :'()

[im4au 44]

This list is the most informative, and the best format I've seen. Thanks for the work.

[IronMan70 3,277]

Updated (7/19/13):

New layout updated

You do a great job with this list and it's much appreciated. I definitely like the new format, well ok, except for one thing. When we are finished recruiting a certain position, I miss your cool check marks.

Well, I like it better right now.

Yah ? Oh yah ? Well I got your check mark, right here bro.

( no cool check marks :'()

At least I have new cool big stars now.

[aupops2 9]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

[ellitor 33,113]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

It would no be a good idea to use that wiggle room IMO given we are losing 26 next year.

[WarEagleAU 0]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

It would no be a good idea to use that wiggle room IMO given we are losing 26 next year.

25 for now per BM from 247.

[ellitor 33,113]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

It would no be a good idea to use that wiggle room IMO given we are losing 26 next year.

25 for now per BM from 247.

I am counting DQ as 1 and done.

[WarEagleAU 0]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

It would no be a good idea to use that wiggle room IMO given we are losing 26 next year.

25 for now per BM from 247.

I am counting DQ as 1 and done.

DQ? JUCO WR, right?

[aupops2 9]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

It would no be a good idea to use that wiggle room IMO given we are losing 26 next year.

25 for now per BM from 247.

I am counting DQ as 1 and done.

DQ? JUCO WR, right?

That shouldn't have anything to do with how many we sign in 2014, BTW, E didn't you just recently tell me that 28 is the right number at this point? Still think that's closer to correct. BTW, don't ever hold back on schoolies from one year to next, especially if we are in the mix for quality prospects. You never know what the situation will be this time next year.

[IronMan70 3,277]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

It would not be a good idea to use that wiggle room IMO given we are losing 26 next year.

???? I would think as far as roster management is concerned you would want to get them on the roster in '14. Then they will be in training so they will be a year older and stronger by the time we lose those 26 at the end of the '14 season.

[ValleyTiger 2,894]

That shouldn't have anything to do with how many we sign in 2014, BTW, E didn't you just recently tell me that 28 is the right number at this point? Still think that's closer to correct. BTW, don't ever hold back on schollies from one year to next, especially if we are in the mix for quality prospects. You never know what the situation will be this time next year.

I agree with pops. 3 to count back and as close to 25 as you can get, key being likely qualifiers.

[ellitor 33,113]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

It would no be a good idea to use that wiggle room IMO given we are losing 26 next year.

25 for now per BM from 247.

I am counting DQ as 1 and done.

DQ? JUCO WR, right?

That shouldn't have anything to do with how many we sign in 2014, BTW, E didn't you just recently tell me that 28 is the right number at this point? Still think that's closer to correct. BTW, don't ever hold back on schoolies from one year to next, especially if we are in the mix for quality prospects. You never know what the situation will be this time next year.

Guys I am talking about the 2015 class not 2014. I thought WEAU was too when he replied to me saying BM said 25.

[WarEagleAU 0]

http://auburn.247sports.com/Board/42/How-many-recruits-can-Auburn-sign-in-this-class-20039805

"I expect Auburn to sign close to 25 b4 all is said and done."

[ellitor 33,113]

I think it is relevant to note that WarEagleAU's list of needs totals 25 (assuming 3 OLs), and we can sign 28 at this point (3 EEs+25), so there is wiggle room for increases at some positions. Perhaps 4 LBs instead of 3? Think Williams, Davis, Evans, and McMillan). Or 4 DEs? Think Thornton. Kennion, A Williams, and Carter.

It would not be a good idea to use that wiggle room IMO given we are losing 26 next year.

???? I would think as far as roster management is concerned you would want to get them on the roster in '14. Then they will be in training so they will be a year older and stronger by the time we lose those 26 at the end of the '14 season.

If you could sign as many as you want then yes. But let's say we sihn the max of 28 this year. Then we get to 2015 class and lose the 25 seniors plus 5 or 6 to attrition. Because we signed the max in 2014 then we would only be able to sign 25 in 3015. That would leave us 5 or 6 short because of what we signed in 2014. I just think with losing 25 seniors plus DQ (oh and 27 if G-Rob goes pro after his junior year as most think) it would be a good idea to have a 5 scholly buffer in 2015 to maintain at max capacity after we reach it after this class.