2009 tOSU Recruiting Discussion

[alpo]

Guys the point is...We need

rbs(2)...OL(4)...QB(1)...DL(4-5)...WR(2-3)...DB(6)...FB(2)...TE(1-2)...LB(3)...

That adds up to 25-28 players...If you add a LB it takes away from other spots we need to fill up...We have already brought in 2 LB type athletes if you count Boren and Homan that will move else where to the FB spot...

If we bring in Newsome we have one that could play a little LB or DE...If we bring in 6 DB's there is no need for a LB that might play S...

It has nothing to do with not liking depth at LB...3 to go along with the 5 that are already on the roster and we will have just as many as we have this year and you have to think that we have good depth, especially losing 1 the year after in Spitler and we can bring in 2 or 3 next year...

OK, got it, sold here. All of this assuming we get Bell or perhaps Jenkins, etc. Like to see your CBF40thread updated w/all of this a little more often, too. :)

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Guys the point is...We need

rbs(2)...OL(4)...QB(1)...DL(4-5)...WR(2-3)...DB(6)...FB(2)...TE(1-2)...LB(3)...

Uh, why do we need six DBs? In 2009 (after the four current senior DB depart), we'll still have at least 15-16 DBs (Moeller keeps bouncing from DB to LB), counting the two 2009 commits we have (Barnett and Wood). You may argue that five will be seniors in 2009, but even if we take only 4 for 2009 we'll have 12-13 DBs for 2010 and that's before we take any DBs from the 2010 recruiting class. Four DBs in this class would be more than sufficient.

 

[crazybuckfan40]

Uh, why do we need six DBs? In 2009 (after the four current senior DB depart), we'll still have at least 15-16 DBs (Moeller keeps bouncing from DB to LB), counting the two 2009 commits we have (Barnett and Wood). You may argue that five will be seniors in 2009, but even if we take only 4 for 2009 we'll have 12-13 DBs for 2010 and that's before we take any DBs from the 2010 recruiting class. Four DBs in this class would be more than sufficient.

Well some of the depth on the roster ain't quite getting the job done and we only took 2 last year in Howard and Domicone...And we play many 5 db sets, and at time 6 and they play alot of special teams as well...With losing 4 this year and 5 next year that is 9 in two year span...We brough in 2 last year, and 6 this year makes 8...Then we bring in maybe 3 in 10...

Moeller is getting the first look at LB right now with Terry playing some fullback...His safety experiment didn't work out...

What about Washington, O'neal, Clifford...What is going on with them...

Also the guys we are in on are top tier guys, and a couple of them could get look at WR...They can double as WR, DB, S...Torrence is getting a look at DB this offseason from lack of depth, when many have said he is having a great spring at WR...

And you find room for guys like McGee, Hall, Hunter, Vlad...We could obviously go with 5 or 4, but it looks like with the wide net cast the staff wants about 6...

 

[osubucksfan2]

makes sense............CB40

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Well some of the depth on the roster ain't quite getting the job done and we only took 2 last year in Howard and Domicone...And we play many 5 db sets, and at time 6 and they play alot of special teams as well...With losing 4 this year and 5 next year that is 9 in two year span...We brough in 2 last year, and 6 this year makes 8...Then we bring in maybe 3 in 10...

Moeller is getting the first look at LB right now with Terry playing some fullback...His safety experiment didn't work out...

What about Washington, O'neal, Clifford...What is going on with them...

Also the guys we are in on are top tier guys, and a couple of them could get look at WR...They can double as WR, DB, S...Torrence is getting a look at DB this offseason from lack of depth, when many have said he is having a great spring at WR...

And you find room for guys like McGee, Hall, Hunter, Vlad...We could obviously go with 5 or 4, but it looks like with the wide net cast the staff wants about 6...

Most of the "ones not getting it done" are in their last year (Lane, Patterson, O'Neal). Even with Moeller not at S, we still have a ton of DBs. As for the status of Washington, O'Neal, Clifford, none have been kicked off so until that happens you can't really use that as a reason for taking additional DBs. Torrence getting a look at CB is more a function of his talent rather than a lack of depth...he simply may be better at CB than WR (Chris Gamble ring a bell?). We also have six freshmen (four true, two RS) DBs, one of whom already has already proven his worth (Clifford) and was fortunate enough to get a med redshirt. Sorry, but no matter how you rack and stack, you cannot say we "need" six DBs this class...no way, no how. Now, with the way we recruit (speed, big speed, power) we surely can take a ton of guys who play primarily DB in high school with the thought that we may move them to other positions (much as we can take kids who are primarily WRs and move them once on campus). But, our current roster depth in the secondary does not require six DBs in this class. Instead of saying we need 2-3 WRs and 6 DBs, it would be more accurate to say we should take 8-9 non-RB speed recruits. Actually, we're hurting more depth-wise at WR than at DB (nine WRs who are junior or younger vice 13 DBs who are junior or younger).

 

[crazybuckfan40]

Most of the "ones not getting it done" are in their last year (Lane, Patterson, O'Neal). Even with Moeller not at S, we still have a ton of DBs. As for the status of Washington, O'Neal, Clifford, none have been kicked off so until that happens you can't really use that as a reason for taking additional DBs.

I agree to some extent here, but the staff might not be seeing it with guys like Pentello, Oliver, Evege (surgery how will he come back), and IMO we don't have the superstar back there at the S postion...Clifford possess the potential, but hasn't put it together yet...

Torrence getting a look at CB is more a function of his talent rather than a lack of depth...he simply may be better at CB than WR (Chris Gamble ring a bell?). We also have six freshmen (four true, two RS) DBs, one of whom already has already proven his worth (Clifford) and was fortunate enough to get a med redshirt. Sorry, but no matter how you rack and stack, you cannot say we "need" six DBs this class...no way, no how. Now, with the way we recruit (speed, big speed, power) we surely can take a ton of guys who play primarily DB in high school with the thought that we may move them to other positions (much as we can take kids who are primarily WRs and move them once on campus). But, our current roster depth in the secondary does not require six DBs in this class. Instead of saying we need 2-3 WRs and 6 DBs, it would be more accurate to say we should take 8-9 non-RB speed recruits. Actually, we're hurting more depth-wise at WR than at DB (nine WRs who are junior or younger vice 13 DBs who are junior or younger).

All reports had Torrence impressing at WR...so why move like you say we are better off at DB than WR...Once again I can agree with all of this...I was just giving a reasoning as to why we take 6...We also have Hall who could fit in the RB/DB category...and we all know how Tress recruits with the speed/big speed/power...Just lots of good prospects out there that we don't seem to be slow playing any of them and seem to have 6 guys that we are looking good for...Heck there has even been talk about taking 7 dbs at some point...

 

[Oh8ch]

rbs(2)...OL(4)...QB(1)...DL(4-5)...WR(2-3)...DB(6)...FB(2)...TE(1-2)...LB(3)...

That adds up to 25-28 players...If you add a LB it takes away from other spots we need to fill up...We have already brought in 2 LB type athletes if you count Boren and Homan that will move else where to the FB spot...

It doesn't necessarily take away from TE (Brandon Smith), FB (as cited), or DL (Thad Gibson).

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Bottom line is that Bell is the top LB on our board, but if we can get another blue-chipper LB to go along with Dorian we go for it. We have Klein and Whiting as other blue-chippers (Homan likely will move to FB or DL). Taking four top-notch LBs with 25 ships to give is not excessive at all.

 

[RB07OSU]

Bottom line is that Bell is the top LB on our board, but if we can get another blue-chipper LB to go along with Dorian we go for it. We have Klein and Whiting as other blue-chippers (Homan likely will move to FB or DL). Taking four top-notch LBs with 25 ships to give is not excessive at all.

I agree with that and even though this all should probably get moved to '09 recruiting discussion, if we can get Jenkins or Telfort (maybe Fletcher) I think there is no way we pass. I think it's a moot point on them anyways since I think both are longshots.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

I agree with that and even though this all should probably get moved to '09 recruiting discussion, if we can get Jenkins or Telfort (maybe Fletcher) I think there is no way we pass. I think it's a moot point on them anyways since I think both are longshots.

Done...

 

[westbuck04]

JMO, but I don't think Jenkins is a realistic possibility at this point. Telfort is being recruited as a safety, so he doesn't really factor into the LB discussion; neither does Fletcher. I think it's Whiting, Bell and Klein unless someone surprises at camp.

 

[HotMic]

I fully expect 6-7 DB's in this class.

 

[crazybuckfan40]

Bottom line is that Bell is the top LB on our board, but if we can get another blue-chipper LB to go along with Dorian we go for it. We have Klein and Whiting as other blue-chippers (Homan likely will move to FB or DL). Taking four top-notch LBs with 25 ships to give is not excessive at all.

I have no problem with taking another blue chip prospect, if they want to come, but we don't need another prospect, because of what I mentioned above...

 

[brutus2002]

I expect 12-13 DB's,LB's, and FB's. We need at least 2 FB's especially with Olson's career ending. There are wayyyyy too many studs considering us to turn any DB or linebacker we have offered away if they commit. I expect 4 LB'ers and around 5-6 DB's. IMO tressel will take 1-2 guys as "athletes"...early kick and punt returns and maybe they will be converted to WR later. Tress loves to do that with stud athletes.

 

[gracelhink]

Well some of the depth on the roster ain't quite getting the job done and we only took 2 last year in Howard and Domicone...And we play many 5 db sets, and at time 6 and they play alot of special teams as well...With losing 4 this year and 5 next year that is 9 in two year span...We brough in 2 last year, and 6 this year makes 8...Then we bring in maybe 3 in 10...
Also the guys we are in on are top tier guys, and a couple of them could get look at WR...They can double as WR, DB, S...
And you find room for guys like McGee, Hall, Hunter, Vlad...We could obviously go with 5 or 4, but it looks like with the wide net cast the staff wants about 6...

Love your analysis, CB40! Would love to see 6 DB's in this class with the assessment you make about the current roster situations.
I only count 6 2009 offers so far for DB position.
We have 3 corners offered:
Givens, Mc Gee, and Barnett (verbal)
Supposedly the next 2 high on the board are Pat White and Corey Brown, who do you believe may get the next offer(s)?
Recruiting services have Brown rated higher than all the names listed.
Any idea of a hold up/reluctance to offer Brown after Bell's appeal?

Then by my count we aso have 3 safety offers, (not including Jordan Hall, RB?):
Wood, Vlad, Hunter (verbal)
Who else might get an offer here (Mike Jones, E. J. Banks) or are we semiconfident that these six will be commits?