Duane Long (Blog Discussion)

[DontHateOState]

Solid points for sure, but to spur on some discussion, is tOSU really recruiting more 'Borens' or is the staff looking at a prototype and recruiting in that fashion? Im talking about the possible OT frame that is then pushed to other positions if needed. Sometimes a bull like Boren is needed...and he was recruited as such. Connor Smith may have had an effect on this philosophy since he has not panned out and cannot truly fit in multiple positions. Dunno, I see the logic, but the results are not fulfilling the promise right now.

I don't know the answer to what OSU is specifically looking for in linemen. What I do know, and can see, is the difference in overall quality that OSU is recruiting according to people who have seen them play (B. Greene, D. Berk, etc.) and their offer list. I think that's the biggest difference.

I do agree with Duane that more true tackles are needed in the program, though. Watching Bryant Browning play RT last year was painful at times. But I can't entirely be sure that the staff hasn't already fixed that problem with the last class.

 

[RB07OSU]

Ultimately, my point stands. Taking more linemen that may be less talented just for the sake of numbers is foolish. It is not as good of a fix as recruiting better linemen. Which Ohio State has in the last two years.

True but I'm sure the staff isn't going to reach too far. We can get 3-4 OSU caliber OL in nearly every class if we try. At this point if we only take 2 "high caliber" OL, then that is foolish. We have such great talent over the last two years, now we need the depth to support them. I'm all for getting classes like Brew, Shugarts, and Adams, or '09 for that matter, but not every year is going to go like that. However, that doesn't mean we aren't getting OSU caliber players, just not dream classes.

I do agree with Duane that more true tackles are needed in the program, though. Watching Bryant Browning play RT last year was painful at times. But I can't entirely be sure that the staff hasn't already fixed that problem with the last class.

Me too but I think the Bryant Browning stories are a tad exaggerated. He had some embarassing moments but so did the whole OL. If you want to look at who consistently played poorly, look at Rehring...this is not bashing, I went back on my DVR to see where the problem was coming from. Rehring was just getting blown up. Boone was fairly consistent but still underachieved. Person got embarrased at times, Cordle looked outmanned, and Brewster was intense but had freshman moments . I don't think Browning really stood out in the grand scheme of the OL's performance. Additionally, Browning held Orakpo at bay in the bowl game and played well all night. That being said, I think Browning is best suited at guard, we just need someone to step up at RT (I think it's Shugarts job if healthy). I also agree that recruiting tackles that can slide down is the best approach. I think you can look at Shugarts, Mewhort, Brewster, Hall, and Longo and say that all of those guys could play on the interior or exterior line. On top of that, they are all top notch players that are also athletic. I like the potential of the '08+'09 class together...only Linsley and Adams are limited to a certain position.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

It makes other offensive linemen more expendable which doesn't necessarily lead to a higher quality of play. Just more linemen.

So, you complain about the quality of play of our OL, but yet think we should keep recruiting a limited number of them.

If an OL is "expendable" because he can't cut it, then so be it...it's no different than any other position in that regard.

Depends. Adequately for you, not necessarily adequately according to the staff's desire.

Oh. So, when did they pull the offer for Henderson? Or Kouandjio? Or Linder? Oh, they didn't?

I'll bet you we take at least two more OL this class, which would bring us to 17 for 2010, and 18 if Fragel moves to OL as many predict.

Ultimately, my point stands. Taking more linemen that may be less talented just for the sake of numbers is foolish. It is not as good of a fix as recruiting better linemen. Which Ohio State has in the last two years.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? When did I say anything about taking less talented OL or taking OL just for the numbers? You take as many OL that you can while preserving needs at other positions, while keeping the quality of OL as high as you can.

And again, evaluating talent at OL is the hardest of any position, so if there is any position where you'd be most willing to take a flier, it's at OL. You can't always count on having three monster 5-stars in each class like we had with Adams, Brewster, and Shugarts in the 2008 class. Also, you don't want to run short of OL due to injuries/non-performance because you wanted to save schollies for other positions.

 

[OregonBuckeye]

I'll bet you we take at least two more OL this class, which would bring us to 17 for 2010, and 18 if Fragel moves to OL as many predict.

Where are you getting 17-18? According to the scholly breakdown we'll have:

73-Kerr
55-Miller 3
77-C. Smith 5
70-Browning 3

68-Blankenship 3
74-Adams 5
50-Brewster 5
76-Shugarts 5

79-Hall 4
71-Linsley 4
74-Mewhort 4
59-Longo 3

Norwell 5

That's 13. Fragel would make it 14. I think the coaches would love to add another couple OL but right now there are no OL who are rumored to be tOSU leans with offers. Even if we do take 2 more, that's 16.

 

[OSUBuckeye4Life]

Where are you getting 17-18? According to the scholly breakdown we'll have:

73-Kerr
55-Miller 3
77-C. Smith 5
70-Browning 3

68-Blankenship 3
74-Adams 5
50-Brewster 5
76-Shugarts 5

79-Hall 4
71-Linsley 4
74-Mewhort 4
59-Longo 3

Norwell 5

That's 13. Fragel would make it 14. I think the coaches would love to add another couple OL but right now there are no OL who are rumored to be tOSU leans with offers. Even if we do take 2 more, that's 16.

Boren.

 

[Taosman]

Yea. That Boren kid. They say he's fat and lazy! If he is, then I hope the whole offensive line becomes that fat and lazy!

 

[BigJim]

He's probably counting McQuaide too.

As far as offering OL that are buckeye caliber goes, I don't think that is the issue. They have been keeping in touch with a few OL every year just incase they missed on someone. I would consider those players as "buckeye caliber" in the eyes of the OSU staff. These are the guys that Duane and others wish the staff would offer early on in some years to keep the total number of scholarships higher. As has been metioned already, Zerbie Sanders was in that exact position in the 2008 class. Jenkins chooses someone else and we end up with only three in the class instead of already having Zerbie aboard.

 

[OregonBuckeye]

Boren.

He's probably counting McQuaide too.

Boren isn't on scholarship and McQuaide is a long snapper, not an OL. I guess we'll see what happens in the future but 16 seems like the max for scholarship OL.

 

[BigJim]

Boren isn't on scholarship and McQuaide is a long snapper, not an OL. I guess we'll see what happens in the future but 16 seems like the max for scholarship OL.

Boren is a scholarship level player. That's what this number is all about. If we could get 8 Boren's to walk on then I'm sure all of the 18 scholarship OL supporters would be willing to settle for 10.

Long snappers are part of the 18 the Mili came up with in the thread http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/football-recruiting/21670-ideal-distribution-scholarships.html that he referenced two pages ago.

 

[OregonBuckeye]

Boren is a scholarship level player. That's what this number is all about. If we could get 8 Boren's to walk on then I'm sure all of the 18 scholarship OL supporters would be willing to settle for 10.

How so? We're talking about scholarship breakdown. Boren doesn't count and he is a freak situation unlikely to happen again for a long long time. We aren't spending 18 scholarships on OL. 16 is probably the max.

I don't think McQuade counts as an OL. He counts as a walk-on who is given a scholarship on a year-to-year basis. If someone who actually knows that isn't the case, feel free to correct me.

 

[BayBuck]

How so? We're talking about scholarship breakdown. Boren doesn't count and he is a freak situation unlikely to happen again for a long long time. We aren't spending 18 scholarships on OL. 16 is probably the max.

The ideal distribution concept is not about making sure you are allotting a certain amount of scholarship money to each position group, it's about making sure you have the depth of serviceable bodies necessary to cover each group. Boren may be a freebie for the scholarship totals, but he most definitely counts when you're deciding whether you have enough OLs for the year.

PS - Plus, in Mili's original scholarship thread, most people seem to think 18 is more than necessary anyway, so even with 16 we seem to be in pretty good shape with the OL numbers.

 

[ant80]

I'll bet you we take at least two more OL this class, which would bring us to 17 for 2010, and 18 if Fragel moves to OL as many predict.

And I will bet you that it won't be any of the OL we've offered up to this point.

 

[smithlabs]

I don't think McQuade counts as an OL. He counts as a walk-on who is given a scholarship on a year-to-year basis. If someone who actually knows that isn't the case, feel free to correct me.

Walk on long snapper getting a scholarship seems to happen quite a bit. Too often for me to think it doesn't/shouldn't count. I think it is something JT does on purpose. It makes sense to me. There are 8sh walk on o-lineman now. I can imagine these kids played in high school but lack to "frame" to be OSU caliber lineman. Here are the walk ons from the 2008 roster (per ozone)-
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]52 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Chappelear, Gar [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]LS [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6-2 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]250 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Fr. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Grove City, Ohio (Grove City) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]65 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Ebner, Doug [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]OL [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6-3 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]271 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sr. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hershey, Pa. (Hershey) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]53 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Howe, Patrick [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]LS [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6-2 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]204 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cincinnati, Ohio (St. Xavier) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]57 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Malone, Chris [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]OL [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6-1 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]268 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Gahanna, Ohio (Lincoln) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]96 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]McQuaide, Jake [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]LS [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6-2 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]219 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cincinnati, Ohio (Elder) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]66 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Moses, Andrew [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]OL [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6-3 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]280 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Jr. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Dublin, Ohio (Bishop Watterson) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]72 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sika, Scott [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]OL [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6-2 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]280 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Strongsville, Ohio (Strongsville) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]69 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Slagle, Zach [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]OL [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6-1 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]297 [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canton, Ohio (McKinley) [/FONT]

3 of the 8 are designated LS to begin with (one of them earning a scholarship this year) and no LS'ers were recruited out of high school.

McQuaide gaining a scholarship as an upperclassman reduces the scholarship loading on the LS position. You don't tie up 1/18 scholarships waiting for the guy to play. However, the promotion to scholarship LS appears to be an accapted path and not a special circumstance for McQuaide. Mili stated his number of 18 included the LS position. McQuaide is a LS on scholarship. It counts.

 

[OregonBuckeye]

Mili stated his number of 18 included the LS position.

And I'm not sure that's right. LS is a ST position. LS don't generally take reps at any of the 5 OL positions. They LS exclusively. At least here they have. And they don't take up a scholly for 4 years. They're usually rewarded to upperclassmen who have worked hard and earned the starting job.

So, I agree the schollie counts. It takes away from the 85 you're allotted that year. But I count it as part of the 2-3 awarded to walk-ons per year. LS don't provide depth for your OL. Maybe grad21 can weigh in here.

 

[OSUBuckeye4Life]

How so? We're talking about scholarship breakdown. Boren doesn't count and he is a freak situation unlikely to happen again for a long long time. We aren't spending 18 scholarships on OL. 16 is probably the max.

I don't think McQuade counts as an OL. He counts as a walk-on who is given a scholarship on a year-to-year basis. If someone who actually knows that isn't the case, feel free to correct me.

If you do not think Boren being on the roster does not affect the number of schollie OL we have/they pursue then I think you are being naive.

I understand your stance and what you are saying though. For example though, let's say the target for the staff is 17. If you have a player like Boren fall in your lap then the number goes down to 16 until he leaves...