• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Duane Long (Blog Discussion)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
matcar;1498625; said:
Duane has clearly had it w/ our OL recruiting now that Donnal has commited to Iowa. He's waiting for Bollman to exit...
Click to expand...

We may only have 1 Ohio OL so far, but he is the best in Ohio (and among the best in the nation), so I'm really not too concerned about losing a few others that didn't even get offered. We've landed some tremendous OL recruits the past couple years, only 1 senior starter this season, and a small '09 recruiting class: trust the coaches :tongue2:
 
Upvote 0
buckeyboy;1498641; said:
I'm certainly not Bollman's biggest fan but is it really his fault that Donnal did not commit? He did not even have an offer.
Click to expand...

I can only guess that it's Bollman's "fault" that Donnal didn't have an offer...

I don't have a problem with that because I don't know whether someone should be offered or not, but certainly Bollman has a lot of input as to whether an OL gets an offer.

I think his blog on this offers some lively debate and I can see why some sympathize with Duane's take. I think we all feel that our OL has not been as strong as we'd prefer. Again, I'm not qualified to suggest that this is Bollman's fault, but most of us feel that our OL can do better.

There's strange catch-22 here w/ Bollman though. The thing is that folks are bashing him for not offering Donnal (and others), but folks also feel that OL play hasn't been strong. If you feel that OL play hasn't been strong...well the usual culprit here is the level of talent you bring in. So it's a strange paradox to bash Bollman for not producing enough on the field and then bash him for not offering someone they don't think will make them better.
 
Upvote 0
matcar;1498655; said:
I can only guess that it's Bollman's "fault" that Donnal didn't have an offer...

I don't have a problem with that because I don't know whether someone should be offered or not, but certainly Bollman has a lot of input as to whether an OL gets an offer.

I think his blog on this offers some lively debate and I can see why some sympathize with Duane's take. I think we all feel that our OL has not been as strong as we'd prefer. Again, I'm not qualified to suggest that this is Bollman's fault, but most of us feel that our OL can do better.

There's strange catch-22 here w/ Bollman though. The thing is that folks are bashing him for not offering Donnal (and others), but folks also feel that OL play hasn't been strong. If you feel that OL play hasn't been strong...well the usual culprit here is the level of talent you bring in. So it's a strange paradox to bash Bollman for not producing enough on the field and then bash him for not offering someone they don't think will make them better.
Click to expand...

Duane's issue, as I have understood it, is that OL are very hard to project to the next level. It is better to have a lot of them, because a few aren't going to pan out. OSU usually stays on the low side of the number of OL, so when a few don't pan out, there is no depth. OL depth has been an issue for the past 6 or 7 years it seems. Therein lies Duane's frustration. He wants OSU taking a larger volume of OL recruits.
 
Upvote 0
NastyNatiBuck;1498664; said:
Duane's issue, as I have understood it, is that OL are very hard to project to the next level. It is better to have a lot of them, because a few aren't going to pan out. OSU usually stays on the low side of the number of OL, so when a few don't pan out, there is no depth. OL depth has been an issue for the past 6 or 7 years it seems. Therein lies Duane's frustration. He wants OSU taking a larger volume of OL recruits.
Click to expand...

bam

He has mentioned that it would be a different story if they were recruiting such a low volume at OL yet still producing great offensive lines as a whole.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
NastyNatiBuck;1498664; said:
Duane's issue, as I have understood it, is that OL are very hard to project to the next level. It is better to have a lot of them, because a few aren't going to pan out. OSU usually stays on the low side of the number of OL, so when a few don't pan out, there is no depth. OL depth has been an issue for the past 6 or 7 years it seems. Therein lies Duane's frustration. He wants OSU taking a larger volume of OL recruits.
Click to expand...

BigJim;1498712; said:
bam

He has mentioned that it would be a different story if they were recruiting such a low volume at OL yet still producing great offensive lines as a whole.
Click to expand...

I mentioned in this thread that we should have around 18 OL on scholarship. Right now we have 14. That extra four schollies could find one more solid starter...
 
Upvote 0
What positions are you withdrawing those 4 scholarships?

QB is too low, if anything.
HB is too low heading into this year, should be fine come 2010.
FB Martin/Homan would be just right. Zach Boren's scholarship is for our starting LG.
WR They can't afford to lose any here, they arguably need a few more, particularly in the 2010 class.
TE They have 3 + 1 that might be a tackle.

When I look at the defense, I don't see many positions overstocked (maybe LB), I see a few players who were reaches, but not mistakes numbers wise.
 
Upvote 0
da37fe8221d4a516.jpg
 
Upvote 0
The '08 and '09 approach I loved...Brewster, Shugarts, Adams, Hall, Longo, Linsley, and Mewhort...that is a ton of talent for 2 years. I think this year 3 should be the number...that's 10 over 3 years and at that rate you have somewhere near the 16-18 mark with redshirts. We have Norwell (best OL in the country outside of Seantrel Henderson imo) but beyond him, I'm really curious to see how our OL recruiting pans out. We aren't likely getting Henderson and the prospects look bleak with James. If we could pull off Koujando and Linder, that would be a heck of a haul...but that's possible, not likely. I thought an offer to one of Donnal and/or Shoefner was inevitable. I'm still hoping for a Shoefner offer, who I liked just as much as Donnal. In any event, I never thought we would offer Donnal and I'm okay with it...great prospect though.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyboy;1498641; said:
I'm certainly not Bollman's biggest fan but is it really his fault that Donnal did not commit? He did not even have an offer.
Click to expand...

Eh, as much as Bolls tore it up on the recruiting trail over the last few years, the Donnal situation was handled poorly and there ended up being some hard feelings.

It happens in recruiting...but it is something you always want to avoid especially in-state.
 
Upvote 0
osugrad21;1498835; said:
Eh, as much as Bolls tore it up on the recruiting trail over the last few years, the Donnal situation was handled poorly and there ended up being some hard feelings.

It happens in recruiting...but it is something you always want to avoid especially in-state.
Click to expand...

Is it Boll's choice to have fewer schlorship lineman? And if so can you please explain his reasoning.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top