Glad to see we’re getting some big boys. Different approach than going after the “undersized” but quick OL. Can these guys run our scheme?

I’ll take a wait and see approach on all of these guys. One would hope that the staff wouldn’t take someone if they didn’t feel like they could perform in the scheme. I get that they are shiny new toys from P5 programs but what’s in the name on the back of the jersey that should level set expectations, if you are in to that sort of thing. One guy is a freshman that played 1 game last year. 1 guy had promise but sat out last year. 1 guy spent 4 years in the program and played 1 game. Are they starters or are they depth pieces, we will see.

Well one thing I know is it ain’t so easy for taller linemen. The other thing I know is I’ll take em and Coach ‘em up

AppSt94 wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 6:15 am

I’ll take a wait and see approach on all of these guys. One would hope that the staff wouldn’t take someone if they didn’t feel like they could perform in the scheme. I get that they are shiny new toys from P5 programs but what’s in the name on the back of the jersey that should level set expectations, if you are in to that sort of thing. One guy is a freshman that played 1 game last year. 1 guy had promise but sat out last year. 1 guy spent 4 years in the program and played 1 game. Are they starters or are they depth pieces, we will see.

And coming out of high school, we'd never signed any of the 3, the flip side to the portal. All of a sudden, we've bettered ourselves if we are trusting our staff.

I have faith in Clark to assess an offensive lineman. My comment is based upon our historical recruiting practices, which at times needed to trend to smaller/quicker players due to availability.

Would love for these three to mesh with the others and grind the opponent down in the 4th quarter even when they know we’re running!

Saint3333 wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 9:44 am

I have faith in Clark to assess an offensive lineman. My comment is based upon our historical recruiting practices, which at times needed to trend to smaller/quicker players due to availability.

Would love for these three to mesh with the others and grind the opponent down in the 4th quarter even when they know we’re running!

It seems the days of the 6’1 275 lb OL are over. Sun Belt has improved drastically over the past 5 years.

There is never a guarantee, but the up-side of these big guys looks amazing. I don't think we would have picked them up if they didn't move well. I can see that being "too" tall might create challenges getting up, but the height/weight ratio looks good. The Louisville kid could even pick up some weight and still be mobile. Hard to imagine that these two won't add some.

311neers wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 9:48 am

Saint3333 wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 9:44 am

I have faith in Clark to assess an offensive lineman. My comment is based upon our historical recruiting practices, which at times needed to trend to smaller/quicker players due to availability.

Would love for these three to mesh with the others and grind the opponent down in the 4th quarter even when they know we’re running!

It seems the days of the 6’1 275 lb OL are over. Sun Belt has improved drastically over the past 5 years.

I'd have to look back and confirm but we haven't had many 6'1" OL in a while now. Seem our line has been averaging 6'4" or more for several years. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong. We have played under-sized in terms of weight many times.

Yosef84 wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 9:50 am

311neers wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 9:48 am

Saint3333 wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 9:44 am

I have faith in Clark to assess an offensive lineman. My comment is based upon our historical recruiting practices, which at times needed to trend to smaller/quicker players due to availability.

Would love for these three to mesh with the others and grind the opponent down in the 4th quarter even when they know we’re running!

It seems the days of the 6’1 275 lb OL are over. Sun Belt has improved drastically over the past 5 years.

I'd have to look back and confirm but we haven't had many 6'1" OL in a while now. Seem our line has been averaging 6'4" or more for several years. I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong. We have played under-sized in terms of weight many times.

We’re definitely recruiting bigger now, especially in the portal. Hannon was about that size, but he was awesome for us. Center position is a little different. And I’m also sure I’ll be corrected, haha!

You can’t teach size. Got something to work with there.

Guys this size that are the portal this late are there for a reason. Just need to figure out the reaons(s).

It’s May, I’ll be optimistic. These fellas are gonna be absolute road graders. App State Oline is going to pass protect with the best, and allow 8 ypc LFG!!

GO APPS!!

We're also on our 14th offensive line coach in 3 years so I am sure that plays a role in the type of player we recruit too. Some coaches prefer footwork and speed to size. Others prefer size and strength.

It's not to say one way is better than the other, but I would imagine that has to play a role in the type of player we are recruiting now vs before.

704App wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 10:58 am

We're also on our 14th offensive line coach in 3 years so I am sure that plays a role in the type of player we recruit too. Some coaches prefer footwork and speed to size. Others prefer size and strength.

It's not to say one way is better than the other, but I would imagine that has to play a role in the type of player we are recruiting now vs before.

I do think you have to have some type of size at this level but they don't all have to be 6'7 320. The preference of speed or size really depends on the system you run. Alabama can get a line that is huge and all of them test freaks who run a 5.10 or better but that is much harder to do at a G5 so size might have to be sacrificed for most of OL.

One issue I have with some coaches is that when they take a job and current personnel is not exactly what they like they will just move on and replace them instead of trying to get the most out of the talent. I think that is one thing that Drink did a great job on was coming in and seeing the talent and getting the most out of it. His CB coach had a huge preference towards 6'0 or taller corners but our corners were not big. Instead of pushing them aside and get big corners to replace immediately he went out and recruited what he likes but got the most out of what we had.

Having the portal has made it very easy for a coach to just come in and immediately replace a position group. If not for the portal I wonder how our OL would have looked without it the last few years.

Improved pass protection is key. That is the weak link of our offense

Saint3333 wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 9:44 am

I have faith in Clark to assess an offensive lineman. My comment is based upon our historical recruiting practices, which at times needed to trend to smaller/quicker players due to availability.

Would love for these three to mesh with the others and grind the opponent down in the 4th quarter even when they know we’re running!

My beef has been everyone in our conference knows what and when we run it, hopefully we mix up our predictability this year.

We need depth in addition to starters. You want to be able to strategically rotate guys during the game, with hopefully little drop off, to keep the OL as fresh as possible. Get them on campus and on the field, and sort it out in off season workouts and camp.

There will be some that rise to be contributors and some that may not. It is like any other type of recruiting (high school, juco), etc. Jack Murphy did not play much at Marshall and was 3rd team SBC with App. St.
Time will tell. Evidently we have the schollys to give...and I would rather use them on OL and DL as the really good HS OL/DL recruits seem to go P5 more often times than not.

Guys go in to the portal for reasons. Coming from school x or school y doesn’t provide a predicative outcome. Being the player buried on a depth chart shouldn’t be assumed as a player is looking for playing time. They are buried on the depth chart in large part to their individual abilities and changing schools doesn’t change that.

AppSt94 wrote: ↑

Sun May 05, 2024 6:15 am

I’ll take a wait and see approach on all of these guys. One would hope that the staff wouldn’t take someone if they didn’t feel like they could perform in the scheme. I get that they are shiny new toys from P5 programs but what’s in the name on the back of the jersey that should level set expectations, if you are in to that sort of thing. One guy is a freshman that played 1 game last year. 1 guy had promise but sat out last year. 1 guy spent 4 years in the program and played 1 game. Are they starters or are they depth pieces, we will see.

Don't write them off either. Gentry and Scroggs had virtually no experience coming in last year and are both set to start this year. Same goes for Schrader who came in earlier this year. I know they're not as big as these three, but experience wise they're equal.