He started 11 out of 12 games last year, his junior year, at guard playing next to a guy who started 27 games over his final three seasons at center. It seems the staff found him useful at guard and I would hardly call starting all but one game in your junior year "unproductive" or an abject failure as to seem apt to label him.
And in terms of the recruiting rankings, which mean nothing once a kid puts on pads on campus, Helms is nearly the same. It seems you should be singing his praises because this staff that is so inept that they cannot develop talent finally has one that they don't have to develop. He came ready and cannot be wasted in a similar manner.
I recognize that, but thank you for taking the opportunity to point that out to me.He's starting. He hasn't stepped on the field yet. Way too early to claim he doesn't need development.
You just said that a player stood around with his dick in his hands while our coaching staff did the same for 4 years and even "gave up" on him. All of this because the kid hasn't started at the position he was projected to play coming out of high school. That's sort of "jumping ugly" as you say.Helms steps right into the starting spot. Barnes was equally herald but has yet to start at center. Was he over rated, under developed, physically flawed, or doesn't have the "it" factor that Helms seems to have. This is why I won't jump ugly on the staff for not recruiting like Vandy. You can tell by looking the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog won't come forth until tested.
You just said that a player stood around with his dick in his hands while our coaching staff did the same for 4 years and even "gave up" on him. All of this because the kid hasn't started at the position he was projected to play coming out of high school. That's sort of "jumping ugly" as you say.
Barnes started nearly every game last year and has another year to continue to contribute. Meanwhile, we also have a kid who might have the potential to be a 4 year starter at a crucial position. Yet you've turned that into a negative.
These recruiting rating services aren't perfect. They get the heights and weights wrong. Are influenced by coaches and parents and the HS's reputation. The kid works hard for his scholarship and after signing day can put it on cruise control. Some get themselves in trouble with the NCAA clearing house because they don't follow through the spring of their senior year. When they get on campus, they settle into a routine, in both the classroom,practice field, weight room, keg parties, etc. Some will have or develope better habits than others, (see Dr Lou frazier vs a drop-out). A player can't live off his press clippings (as J Harris did '11). He has to prove himself everyday, every time he has too. I go back to Skinner. A third string nobody who took us to the Orange Bowl. If Hodges was better prepared, we might have beat Nebraska. Some players get 4 years of experience,others get 1 year of experience 4 times.
Camp is probably the most well-regarded recruit we've had post OB. He played in the Under Armour All-American game.
I agree with everything you said here. Why,then, did you use the Whit Barnes - Corey Helms situation to say "The biggest problem I have with the program is development"? You confuse me.
The staff pays absolutely no attention at all to recruit stars or ratings. They see their own players and judge them accordingly.
And Grobe's model was effective due to redshirting and being very selective about which true frosh saw the field.
Pick an approach, Lectro.