• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Next Year's FB Team + Scholarship Tracker |

liveanddiedeac said:
You realize the Oline and Dline guys that are big enough and skilled enough to play right away are probably the most sought after recruiting targets, probably after quarterbacks, right? We are always going to be a developmental program especially for the lines. Sure, there are probably big slobs we could recruit, but just going after "big" guys doesn't mean they can play a lick. You watch some of the lower division football and you'll see some "big" guys that are really just fat. I'm not saying I'm not on board with trying to get bigger guys through recruiting, but it's not easy to get good ones. What you call Clawson's "old" policy, is not a policy at all, it's one of the constraints of the job here. You don't think if we could get bigger lineman that are good players we wouldn't?
Click to expand...
The problem is our "developed" guys who start on the DL are still 225-245. Majority of OL under 300.
 
80deacon said:
The problem is our "developed" guys who start on the DL are still 225-245. Majority of OL under 300.
Click to expand...
Really and who would those starters be? We got 22 guys listed as DL (DT's and DE's) on the this past season's roster and only about 5 are listed less 245lbs or less and maybe one of those guys actually played at all. You can make a legitimate argument we are undersized, but no need to exaggerate it to the point of making yourself look foolish.
 
Last edited:
80deacon said:
The problem is our "developed" guys who start on the DL are still 225-245. Majority of OL under 300.
Click to expand...
This is just factually wrong. Our rotating DTs are 282, 281, 282, and 284 which is 35 pounds over your incorrectly suggested size of the DL. Not to mention our 2 starting DEs are 255 and 260 which are good size for DEs.

Our starting OLs are 295, 295, 311, 310, 313 which averages to 305 pounds which is above 300 (not under, which suggest)
 
liveanddiedeac said:
Really and who would those starters be? We got 22 guys listed as DL (DT's and DE's) on the this past season's roster and only about 5 are listed less 245lbs or less and maybe one of those guys actually played at all. You can make a legitimate argument we are undersized, but no need to exaggerate it to the point of making yourself look foolish.
Click to expand...
Maybe some guys gained weight during the season, which is rare. It's usually the other way around. Secondly, I have to say I don't trust a lot of the heights/weights listed. I had a friend in the A D. tell me he was 5'10" and looked down at Mitch when speaking to him. If our guys are 250-300, they sure don't pass the eye test when setting up on the LOS at ground level. How many times did our DL pressure a QB or sack him this year? How many 3rd down conversions running over us? Our abysmal stats include terrible marks in such areas. Maybe we are just that under-talented and that's why we weren't competitive on the lines.
 
80deacon said:
Maybe some guys gained weight during the season, which is rare. It's usually the other way around. Secondly, I have to say I don't trust a lot of the heights/weights listed. I had a friend in the A D. tell me he was 5'10" and looked down at Mitch when speaking to him. If our guys are 250-300, they sure don't pass the eye test when setting up on the LOS at ground level. How many times did our DL pressure a QB or sack him this year? How many 3rd down conversions running over us? Our abysmal stats include terrible marks in such areas. Maybe we are just that under-talented and that's why we weren't competitive on the lines.
Click to expand...
great post 80. I've said all along we are usually over-matched on both the ol and the dl.
 
Some of the current weights are quite different from spring and beginning of the season. I stand corrected if we are really that big

Seems even during our TV games this year when they listed line players with a ht/wt, none had those high weights.

If we are truly that big, was the Syracuse OL and rest of team that much stronger than us? I think they punted once. It was an absolute ram the ball down our throat exhibition the entire game. We really looked like a lower MEAC team, if that good. It was quite embarrassing given the playground sets Syracuse ran with their head coach fired.

Syracuse QB drawing play on the ground..."Hey Mikey, you run here, Danny I pitch the ball to you, you throw to Timmy on a fly route for a 50 yard TD. Now that we've run the ball from the 10 to the 50, it should be wide open."
 
80deacon said:
Some of the current weights are quite different from spring and beginning of the season. I stand corrected if we are really that big

Seems even during our TV games this year when they listed line players with a ht/wt, none had those high weights.

If we are truly that big, was the Syracuse OL and rest of team that much stronger than us? I think they punted once. It was an absolute ram the ball down our throat exhibition the entire game. We really looked like a lower MEAC team, if that good. It was quite embarrassing given the playground sets Syracuse ran with their head coach fired.

Syracuse QB drawing play on the ground..."Hey Mikey, you run here, Danny I pitch the ball to you, you throw to Timmy on a fly route for a 50 yard TD. Now that we've run the ball from the 10 to the 50, it should be wide open."
Click to expand...
They don’t change the weights on the team roster once games start, so the listed weights are the same as they were on our game 1 depth chart.

The average OL on the 2-deep was 306 (8 of 10 at 300 or greater).

The average DL on the two deep was 269. 282 at DT and 257 at DE.
 
I'll accept your research of the weights but I bet more fans would say we just don't pass the eye test when matching up with an opponent listed at the same weight.

This guy is listed at 6'3" 305. Please post a picture of a comparable Wake O lineman.

1703282550568.png
 
Haros said:
They don’t change the weights on the team roster once games start, so the listed weights are the same as they were on our game 1 depth chart.

The average OL on the 2-deep was 306 (8 of 10 at 300 or greater).

The average DL on the two deep was 269. 282 at DT and 257 at DE.
Click to expand...
The thing is I don’t know why 80deacon feels the need post that our lineman are 15-40 lbs smaller than they are because guess what, even at 280-285lbs, our defensive tackles are undersized. There is no need to completely misrepresent it. Our defensive ends and most of the Oline are not really all that undersized, but do at times do appear overmatched. Being overmatched up front is not always the result of being too small. 80deacon should take Kevin Pointer out to dinner and see if he eats like he only is 245lbs.
 
80deacon said:
I'll accept your research of the weights but I bet more fans would say we just don't pass the eye test when matching up with an opponent listed at the same weight.

This guy is listed at 6'3" 305. Please post a picture of a comparable Wake O lineman.

View attachment 7343
Click to expand...
1703282764347.jpeg
1703284388367.jpeg
That was easy 6’5” 310
 
Last edited:
I wish we could play like we're just as big as our ACC opponents.
 
liveanddiedeac said:
The thing is I don’t know why 80deacon feels the need post that our lineman are 15-40 lbs smaller than they are because guess what, even at 280-285lbs, our defensive tackles are undersized. There is no need to completely misrepresent it. Our defensive ends and most of the Oline are not really all that undersized, but do at times do appear overmatched. Being overmatched up front is not always the result of being too small. 80deacon should take Kevin Pointer out to dinner and see if he eats like he only is 245lbs.
Click to expand...
You make a good point. I should have listed a realistic range vs the lower weights. But it sounds like you agree we are smaller. I swear I saw DEs listed as 225 in some game(s) this year. Maybe the TV folks had old data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top