O-Line Recruiting Last 5 Years

[UConnJim]

Many have complained about the O-line play this year, but we haven't analyzed the recruiting the last 5 years. Here are the recruits:

2008
Adam Masters - starter
Jimmy Bennett - starter, healthy this year, but injured most of career.
Eric Kuraczea - gone

2009
Kevin Friend - starter
Steve Greene - starter
Tyler Bullock - 2nd team

2010
Mark Hansson - gone
Greg McKee - gone
Bryan Paull
Gus Cruz - 2nd team

2011
Xavier Hemingway - 2nd team
Dalton Gifford - 2nd team
Paul Nwokeji
Alex Mateas - starter, transfer from Penn St.

2012
Drew Ghio
Richard Levy
Rennick Bryan - gone to juco
Zach Rugg
Tyler Samra - 2nd team


In 2008, we brought in 3, but 1 left and 1 was injured for most of his career. In 2009, we brought in 3 and all are solid contributors. In 2010, we brought in 4, but 2 are already gone and only 1 is on the 2 deep. Thus, from the 3 recruiting classes between 2008 and 2010, we only have 7 players left and one has been injured for most of his career. (In case you were wondering, we brought in 3 OL in both 2006 and 2007.)

2011 was really Edsall's last recruiting class and had three committed. PP added Mateas. In 2012, PP recruited 5, but Bryan has had to go to juco.

The problem I see with UConn's O-line recruiting is that you need to bring in 4 to 5 recruits every year due to attrition and to create competition. This could help explain some of the O-line problems.

 

[Carl Spackler]

What you see here, is why the coaching staff on offense, spent the first few weeks of the season rotating OL's to develop players.

I think that based on what I've seen at the line of scrimmage so far, when it comes to simply playing smashmouth football, this OL needs to start running some oklahoma drills to either start, or end practices, or both - mid season......for the offensive lineman to start getting some meanness and control at scrimmage.

The coaches won't run drills like that, for this OL, because if somebody gets hurt in practice...just can't have that with our current state of affairs on the roster. Things will be better next year on the OL, with another recruiting cycle in the books. FWIW - PP brought in 6, with Mateas.

Right now we've got another OG and OT lined up that are very nice players coming out of high school for 2013, and we should be getting Rennick back I think.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The problem I see with UConn's O-line recruiting is that you need to bring in 4 to 5 recruits every year due to attrition and to create competition. This could help explain some of the O-line problems.

This in a nutshell is what is necessary. Ideally, we need four scholarship and one walkon offensive lineman in each recruiting class (this also will allow for some attrition). In order to have sufficient depth, give kids enough time in the system to bulk up and learn proper technique before being thrown to the wolves and always have a quality kid coming in to replace a graduating senior, we need these numbers.

 

[businesslawyer]

Two points. First, if you take, say, 5 OL every year, you have to give something else up. We have tended to take disproportionately high numbers of kids in speed positions (DBs, TBs and WRs). I'm not saying more OL is good or not, but you can't rob Peter without paying Paul.

More importantly for this year, we probably don't mention enough how big of a loss the Bus having left the program was. There is a kid who would be our best OL now, at an all league level, and instead we are playing a guard (most likely Steve Greene) who is just not consistently getting the job done.

 

[Excalibur]

Also, given that Nowejki and Hemmingway appear to have not "filled out" as expected, there looks to be a good chance that this problem will get worse before it gets better. We need to get a JUCO or two on our radar to plug the holes.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Two points. First, if you take, say, 5 OL every year, you have to give something else up. We have tended to take disproportionately high numbers of kids in speed positions (DBs, TBs and WRs). I'm not saying more OL is good or not, but you can't rob Peter without paying Paul.

More importantly for this year, we probably don't mention enough how big of a loss the Bus having left the program was. There is a kid who would be our best OL now, at an all league level, and instead we are playing a guard (most likely Steve Greene) who is just not consistently getting the job done.

Yes BL, the loss of EK was significant, as was the loss of McKee. There will be some attrition and some cases where a kid doesn't pan out (I won't mention any names but there have been a few) and ends up a career backup.

This is why it gets very dangerous when the Peter we rob is on the OL and it also is a large part of the reason it is imperative to bring in a walkon or two in each class (something that would be far easier if we were a state U in a football state).

 

[Carl Spackler]

I'll say this, and never mind why I say it, the run in 2010 when we we're 3-4 and in the tter, started with the OL taking ownership, and starting to crank up the practices, and intensity, and aggression and transferring it to the field, and taking control of that line of scrimmage. If we're going to do somethign similar this year, this year's crew up front, needs to do the same thing. You dont just turn it on game day. Pass protection, is improving dramatically, but pass protection is not smashmouth football, and we are going to be running based team, and to be a running based team - starts up front.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

What you see here, is why the coaching staff on offense, spent the first few weeks of the season rotating OL's to develop players.

I think that based on what I've seen at the line of scrimmage so far, when it comes to simply playing smashmouth football, this OL needs to start running some oklahoma drills to either start, or end practices, or both - mid season......for the offensive lineman to start getting some meanness and control at scrimmage.

The coaches won't run drills like that, for this OL, because if somebody gets hurt in practice...just can't have that with our current state of affairs on the roster. Things will be better next year on the OL, with another recruiting cycle in the books. FWIW - PP brought in 6, with Mateas.

Right now we've got another OG and OT lined up that are very nice players coming out of high school for 2013, and we should be getting Rennick back I think.

Here's a thought . . . UConn isn't a "smashmouth" team, period. Good thing, that's so old school - Oakland Raiders defense of the 70's, GB Packers offense of the 60's, Steelers offense of 70's, etc. Modern football, probably started with Bill Walsh's West Coast Offense. Lotta high scores coming out of the Big 12, exciting football. And in case folks want to criticize them for no defense, think again. . . West Virginia probably would have piled up many of the same points against UConn. And most of those Big 12 teams would handle UConn no problem, simply because UConn can't match 'em on offense. Something about an insistance on "bare knuckle" brawling . . . er, meant "smashmouth" offense. How nostalgic.

 

[Husky25]

Two points. First, if you take, say, 5 OL every year, you have to give something else up. We have tended to take disproportionately high numbers of kids in speed positions (DBs, TBs and WRs). I'm not saying more OL is good or not, but you can't rob Peter without paying Paul.

More importantly for this year, we probably don't mention enough how big of a loss the Bus having left the program was. There is a kid who would be our best OL now, at an all league level, and instead we are playing a guard (most likely Steve Greene) who is just not consistently getting the job done.

I don't think it is a robbing Peter to pay Paul situation. I'd said from my first post on this site, as well as with D.C. on the Courant, the game is won and lost in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Most DB's cannot stay with a WR for more than 4 seconds. Most yards in successful running attacks involve a 2-3 yard push by the O-Line before the TB is touched. The Line is the foundation for how the skill positions develop. It is my opinion that the O-Line Coach is the most important assistant after the coordinators, even ahead of the speacial teams coach.

 

[businesslawyer]

Here's a thought . . . UConn isn't a "smashmouth" team, period. Good thing, that's so old school - Oakland Raiders defense of the 70's, GB Packers offense of the 60's, Steelers offense of 70's, etc. Modern football, probably started with Bill Walsh's West Coast Offense. Lotta high scores coming out of the Big 12, exciting football. And in case folks want to criticize them for no defense, think again. . . West Virginia probably would have piled up many of the same points against UConn. And most of those Big 12 teams would handle UConn no problem, simply because UConn can't match 'em on offense. Something about an insistance on "bare knuckle" brawling . . . er, meant "smashmouth" offense. How nostalgic.

Thank God we never had to play a Big XII team with a weapon like RG3. We probably wouldn't have had a chance.

 

[cryjeremiah]

I thought Hanssen was moved to Tight End, but then was ineligible for this season due to grades. Is he gone or off the team now? if so, i guess i missed that.

 

[Husky25]

Thank God we never had to play a Big XII team with a weapon like RG3. We probably wouldn't have had a chance.

UConn beat a Big XII team with a weapon like RG3 twice. I think it was Baylor and the player in question was named Robert Griffin III....Wait a minute....

Disclaimer: IIRC, RG3 was hurt for one of the games.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Thank God we never had to play a Big XII team with a weapon like RG3. We probably wouldn't have had a chance.

Woody Hayes' critics faulted "3 yards and a cloud of dust for coming up 4th and one too often". UConn's best offensive season (since Dan O) was 2009 and, interestingly enough, it was the year of Easley and the sudden appearance of a passing game.

 

[SubbaBub]

Not an Oline expert by any stretch but I though PP changed the blocking scheme from fire-out smashmouth to a more finesse zone blocking.

I can't tell if the problem is trouble adjusting to the scheme or a poor talent fit or just a loss of talent overall.

I would very much like to see us put someone on the ground once in a while, for old time's sake.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Husky25]

I can't tell if the problem is trouble adjusting to the scheme or a poor talent fit or just a loss of talent overall.

A bit of all three is probably the correct answer. If you are correct in stating a change in scheme to zone blocking, then UConn also needs an effective one-cut runner. I don't know if it is his size, but McCombs is dancing before and in the hole too much. Hyppolyte's size lends itself to zone blocking much better. McCombs should be a 3rd down back in this scheme. Just my $0.02.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Here's a thought . . . UConn isn't a "smashmouth" team, period. Good thing, that's so old school - Oakland Raiders defense of the 70's, GB Packers offense of the 60's, Steelers offense of 70's, etc. Modern football, probably started with Bill Walsh's West Coast Offense. Lotta high scores coming out of the Big 12, exciting football. And in case folks want to criticize them for no defense, think again. . . West Virginia probably would have piled up many of the same points against UConn. And most of those Big 12 teams would handle UConn no problem, simply because UConn can't match 'em on offense. Something about an insistance on "bare knuckle" brawling . . . er, meant "smashmouth" offense. How nostalgic.

Funny, I recall being on the road in the third quarter against a WVU team and ready to go up on the scoreboard, before a young and undermanned offense had a tidal wave of momentum shift that we couldn't get over.

No - you're right, there's no such thing as a complimentary football team, playing all three phases of the game, hardnosed and aggressive, that could beat a one dimensional program like that.

Hey guys. Pack it all up. We're going to throw on every down, even on defense and special teams now.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Here's a thought . . . UConn isn't a "smashmouth" team, period. Good thing, that's so old school - Oakland Raiders defense of the 70's, GB Packers offense of the 60's, Steelers offense of 70's, etc. Modern football, probably started with Bill Walsh's West Coast Offense. Lotta high scores coming out of the Big 12, exciting football. And in case folks want to criticize them for no defense, think again. . . West Virginia probably would have piled up many of the same points against UConn. And most of those Big 12 teams would handle UConn no problem, simply because UConn can't match 'em on offense. Something about an insistance on "bare knuckle" brawling . . . er, meant "smashmouth" offense. How nostalgic.

You know, maybe it's because I"m feeling nostalgic, but your comment made me think of something happened Sat. Who else around here was at UConn in the 80s, early 1990s? There was a big dude, bartender at Ted's, that was a bare knuckle fighter, cash fights down in the at the time, new foxwoods casino, back alley neighborhoods. Everybody knew him as the bartender/bouncer at Ted's but the bruises weren't from dealing with drunk college beer muscle knuckleheads. For the life of me I can't remember his name, which worries me about my memory, but I swear, I saw him across the lot on Saturday when we were walking in, but with these new walk patterns, I would have had to cross a ravine and hop a fence to get into that lot

 

[sdhusky]

Here's a thought . . . UConn isn't a "smashmouth" team, period. Good thing, that's so old school - Oakland Raiders defense of the 70's, GB Packers offense of the 60's, Steelers offense of 70's, etc. Modern football, probably started with Bill Walsh's West Coast Offense. Lotta high scores coming out of the Big 12, exciting football. And in case folks want to criticize them for no defense, think again. . . West Virginia probably would have piled up many of the same points against UConn. And most of those Big 12 teams would handle UConn no problem, simply because UConn can't match 'em on offense. Something about an insistance on "bare knuckle" brawling . . . er, meant "smashmouth" offense. How nostalgic.

TDH - who has won more recent championships - Alabama or OK?

 

[Duncan Idaho]

Here's a thought . . . UConn isn't a "smashmouth" team, period. Good thing, that's so old school - Oakland Raiders defense of the 70's, GB Packers offense of the 60's, Steelers offense of 70's, etc. Modern football, probably started with Bill Walsh's West Coast Offense. Lotta high scores coming out of the Big 12, exciting football. And in case folks want to criticize them for no defense, think again. . . West Virginia probably would have piled up many of the same points against UConn. And most of those Big 12 teams would handle UConn no problem, simply because UConn can't match 'em on offense. Something about an insistance on "bare knuckle" brawling . . . er, meant "smashmouth" offense. How nostalgic.

Its a mindset, you can still throw having it! Teams have won Super Bowls in the 21st century with it..

 

[pj]

The roster is light on OL, so we can recruit 5 a year for a few years just to get up to the normal number of OL on a FBS roster.

Of course you don't want to spend too many roster spots on projects who may not develop. They have to be good players.

I suspect we bring in a few JUCO/DII players this year for the OL.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

TDH - who has won more recent championships - Alabama or OK?

and Meyer didnt win at UF with high power passing games, in 06 they ran for more than they passed.

 

[Srqhusky]

Guys go and look at the film of hypolytes run Saturday. Guards are pulling and defenders are getting leveled. We don't do zone blocking all the time. The problem with the offense is more consistancy in execution on the run plays

 

[Carl Spackler]

Guys go and look at the film of hypolytes run Saturday. Guards are pulling and defenders are getting leveled. We don't do zone blocking all the time. The problem with the offense is more consistancy in execution on the run plays

I agree!! It's frigging maddening to me, because it would be one thing if they simply weren't able to do it., but they can. They need to do in on EVERY Down!

I woke up this morning, thinking that if I was coaching this team, the OL would be doing pit drills in practice this week. THen - there's an OL recruiting thread here, that talks about our depth on the line, and it became clear as to why the coaches won't do that. This team simply can't afford a practice injury. AS I write now, I recall Coach P talking, back in the spring I think, about how he would need to do things differently this year with the OL to make sure everyone was healthy through the year.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

On the pregame show far the Maryland game (which was among the things I DVR'd that day) Sean Mulcahey (who I imagine those on this board would agree has some knowlege of football, blocking schemes, etc) stated that he felt our offensive lineman were running into trouble as they appeared to be at times confused about their assignments and far from comfortable in what they were doing.

Whether it is right or wrong for the long term progression of this program and specifically, our offense, we have altered our basic OL philosophy, blocking schemes and assignments and there will be a learning curve involved with this. I happen to be a member of the "if it isn't broke, don't fix it" school of thought but unfortunately, I am not running the show here.

The one saving grace that the current staff has is that there is still an entire conference schedule to make up for many errors in the non-conference schedule.

 

[businesslawyer]

I agree!! It's frigging maddening to me, because it would be one thing if they simply weren't able to do it., but they can. They need to do in on EVERY Down!

I woke up this morning, thinking that if I was coaching this team, the OL would be doing pit drills in practice this week. THen - there's an OL recruiting thread here, that talks about our depth on the line, and it became clear as to why the coaches won't do that. This team simply can't afford a practice injury. AS I write now, I recall Coach P talking, back in the spring I think, about how he would need to do things differently this year with the OL to make sure everyone was healthy through the year.

We are at least seven deep. Eight if you count Samra. OL is not a position with a high risk of injury, and we've gone 5/12 of the season without one. And we know Jimmy Bennett's knee has stood up.

If you want to use lack of depth as an excuse for how you prepared the OL coming into the season, we are now deep enough in where it has to stop being an excuse.