- This topic has 10 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated by Butlereer.
September 12, 2020 at 5:28 pm #122708
Did they do enough to deserve another start? IMO it looked like they did a very good job. Doege just said they did a great job and didn’t let the D touch him.
Soooo….. Start both for at least the first possession and send a deeper message? These kids really stepped up.September 12, 2020 at 11:58 pm #122744
Especially Frazier. This makes the team deeper and shows those suspended they can lose their jobs if the don’t take it serious. You get better with better guys behind you.September 13, 2020 at 8:24 am #122767
Interesting question – part philosophical. Does a guy lose a starting job because he’s suspended, or injured, if his backup plays well?
Judging from HCNB’s postgame comments, that they were off suspension the second the game ended, I would expect to see Behrndt and Uzebu as starters against OSU. Not discounting your points, just trying to read the tea leaves a bit. We’ll ask and watch the depth chart.
Also, I am just getting into game rewatch, but I’m not sure how well the OL played. How much of that was EKU, and WVU’s backs just being faster and better than most EKU defenders? That’s always the most difficult thing to judge.September 16, 2020 at 12:22 am #122978
Butler, been wanting to ask you for some time now how you feel about the offensive line, numbers wise. Had some hardware issues with my computer and, while I have a smart phone, I stubbornly continue to use it as a phone and to text. So my posts have been on hold for awhile.
Looking at the roster they list 21 players for OL. Only 3 are seniors and they all could return if they wanted to. And, of course, if WVU could realistically have them return.
Zach Davis has not played much up to this point so let’s assume he will not return. But both Brown and Behrndt might decide another year of development could give them a better shot at a look in the pros. Certainly could not hurt WVU to have them back for another year.
There are only 2 juniors. One is a starter and the other a first year player from the JC ranks. The latter, Stewart, has Michael Brown size.
After that you have 5 RS sophs, 6 RS freshmen, and 5 true freshmen. Out of this last group I am pretty sure at least 10 either saw action against EKU or would have seen action if not suspended. That’s a hopeful sign.
I have no way of knowing how good the group is or will become. But I continue to be generally impressed with the talent level of the young recruits NB is bringing in as well as the talent of the transfers that have come in. And there are several in the latter category in the OL group.
Time will tell but I think we have potentially laid a nice foundation for at least adequate numbers and size across the OL and possibly good talent as well.September 16, 2020 at 7:41 am #122987
Cincy, we are by no means where we should be on the OL in numbers, depth and quality. But …. we are much better than we’ve been in years. It will still take a couple years to get to where we should be.
By my count we have 19 OL. 15 schollies, 4 walk ons. 3 RSR’s, include 1 WO. Chase is the only one that has a slightest bit of a chance of going to the NFL next year and hope he opts for a 6th year.
2 JR’s both JC transfers. 1 starter and 1 deep in the depth chart. Hughs shows promise. Stewart is questionable at this point.
5 RSO’s include 1 WO. Uzebu and Gmiter starting showing promise but they are still young.
9 RFR/FR include 2 WO’s. Frazier, true FR, Yates RFR did admirably last week but it was against a very bad team.
What I see with other P5 teams is that they normally have 18-20 Schollies and 5+ WO’s. We have a ways to go here.
Overall, I like what I see from Brown on the OL ….. AND DL.September 16, 2020 at 12:18 pm #123016
We can discuss depth and quality, but I don’t see any way WVU is going to carry many more scholarship OLs than it has now. That’s just not feasible given the current scholarship limits.
I don’t have time to examine every P5 roster, but a quick glance shows Alabama with 17 total and 15 on scholarship. I see Ohio State with 16 scholarship OLs. Clemson with the same number. Gerogia aims to have 15, according to an analysis of a couple of years ago, and has 15 this year.
How many scholarships do you want to spend on OLs, and what positions do you take them from?September 16, 2020 at 5:32 pm #123055
Bama 18, UGA 24, LSU 19, Clemson 21, UNC 23, tOSU 19, Michigan 20, Oklahoma 24,
We’re as close as we’ve been for years in total numbers. This includes WO’s. Where we do fall behind is 1. upperclassmen …. because only in the last couple years has Brown brought in more OL. 2. quality of recruits. Lost 3 of the best recruits in WV to other P5 schools last year because of crappy in-state recruiting by Holgs.
Looking deeper into the roster, those teams have anywhere from 5 to close to 10 TE’s on their team. Granted, many are WO’s, but we have 3 listed.September 16, 2020 at 6:31 pm #123057
If you go to the roster list on this site and click on “position” it will sort the list by position. I count 21 listed as “OL”.
I am assuming, and could be wrong, that Oxley, See, Drummond, Davis, and Malone are all WO’s. They also are all WV kids. Tyler Connally is not listed in the scholarship count but he sure played a lot of snaps last Saturday, at least in my recollection. Maybe he is a WO as well? If so congrats to him for getting on the field as much as he did.
There are 15 listed as on scholarship.
Those numbers seem comparable to the other schools, both in scholarships numbers and walk ons. Can’t do anything about the distribution across classes at this point except to try and get it more balanced.
Not sure why you are leaning toward classifying Stewart as questionable. Frequently, not always, JC OL recruits need strength work, weight loss, and coached up before they can contribute. Seemed like Stewart should have had 3 years to play 2 as a JC. With the waver it seems he should have 4 to play 2. That can’t hurt.
I’m don’t follow things close enough to know anything about the quality of our recruits or their potential. It does appear we have increased the size of our OL a bit over previous years.
But I confess to looking at things thru gold and blue tinted glasses.September 16, 2020 at 7:11 pm #123059
Not sure how comparing OL numbers, or any position numbers for that matter, to other teams has any meaning without adding quality to the equation? Have to ask, do numbers in themselves add quality to the team? After the first two units, which rarely are of equal quality, other than practice and or injury along with possible future potential, what’s the point? It might be better to add numbers where you can also add quality to other positions within the scholarship limits.
It’s the old “law of diminishing returns”!September 16, 2020 at 8:13 pm #123062
Issue is quality not quantity.September 16, 2020 at 9:40 pm #123066
On the OL and the guys that we usually land, it normally takes a couple years for them to develop to get to the level of play needed against better P5 teams. A few years to add the muscle, develop footwork and technique needed. Because we aren’t landing many kids that hit the ground running we need more bodies so they have time to develop skills. By the time they are JR’s or SR’s they are ready to handle a 2 deep spot.
Right now we are throwing kids into the fire early. Some make it, most struggle….. even the JC’s take a year to adapt. It showed last year and for years prior against B12 teams. Especially in short yardage downs where we couldn’t move the D off the ball and open holes. We just didn’t have the strength and technique to move the D back off the ball.
If we had quality we wouldn’t need quantity. Quantity gives you extra years to develop the younger kids. Landing in state kids like Milum and Frazier helps a lot. Should have landed Nester, Wright, Williamson, Ross and Locklear from years past. Best teams we’ve had in the past have all had talented and deep OL’s.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.