The B12 (XII) Forum, home of the 'Front Porch, y'all' at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

so far our current recruiting class has 7 OL 1 three star, 4 four star and 2 five star

so it looks like we are trying to reload

its just going to take a little time and these guys will have to grow up fast

We've had other highly recruited olines, though.  Nothing quite like this, but still rated far superior to what their onfield production ever became.

I guess I'll believe it when I see it.  But I'm not holding out much hope.  I think our football program is just cursed.

The frame is a good place to start. In the 6'4"-6'6" or so range. We like arm length particularly. Crucially, does the frame look like it can support muscle mass?

How big is the kid? If he's a "skinny" 280 or so, then a collegiate strength coach can put 30lbs of muscle on him in a year. Some 290lbs high school players have lived in the gym, and are at their maximum muscle build.

"Get off" speed: How quickly does he get from "hand in the dirt" to "set"? LOS battles come down to who gets their hands placed first. The DL wants to get in tight, grab jersey, and throw the OL out of the way. The OL wants to keep their interior clean by getting hands high and arms extended (see arm length above). Fast twitch muscle fibers are a thing. I can't grow or develop those. A kid is either quick out of the blocks or he isn't.

Demeanor: OL is an ugly, painful, thankless position. Your name is only called when you screw up. However else the kid lives, when he gets between the lines of a football field, I need him to enjoy shoving people over. Angry people still win football games. After your initial assignment, work to the next one. Look for opponents to flatten, and keep doing it until the whistle dies out.

I haven't said much about mechanics, and OL is all about mechanics. I'm taking it as accepted that the kid will have a decent base (feet squared underneath the body) and have an idea about how to move. An OLineman must move through an unpredictable tangle of bodies while keeping his feet on the ground underneath him for as long as possible (even though this sounds mutually exclusive). This is where a great OL coach can turn a 3-star project into an All-American. Foot technique. Balance. Leverage. Hand placement. Committing these to muscle memory so they happen without thought sets the player up for success.

A safety that exceeds his body type can be a LB. LBs can spin down to DE/DL. Since OL players don't usually get lighter, there's no real place for them to go. Committing scholarships to 16-17 year old males who you hope grow into useful OL players is definitely a voodoo science.

Anyway, back to the original topic, I think the B12 will certainly "survive."  And I actually think it will be a competitive and fun conference to watch.  Lots of contrasting styles, lots of geographical differences.  I think it'll be more interesting and compelling than the entire PAC, and all of the ACC aside from maybe Clemson.

If I were the commissioner, I'd really focus on branding it as "The Fun Conference" and I'd also explore engaging every possible streaming route to market-- Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, YoutubeTV-- whoever bites, try it out.  Don't even attempt to follow the same models as the B1G and SEC.  The PAC tried that and failed miserably.  So you know it won't work for the B12, and you go the opposite direction.

Just my thoughts.

We may be seeing two super conferences, three middlin conferences, and the G5s.  Money makes money.UGA is a 17.5 point favorite over Oregon, who is one of the conference favorites out there.  That shouldn't happen.  Yes, the game is here, but two TDs?  Oregon may well win, I'm shocked at the line.  But if they lose say 34-17, well, it's not a great look.

The ACC should be more competitive, they have FSU and Miami and VT, all programs fallen on harder times.  UNC and NCSU should be decent, Pitt, even Tech.

But when I see them play a B1G/SEC team, I often see poor tackling and bad line play.

The ACC is nearly unwatchable, and the TV ratings prove that out.

Competitively it's the worst, with the PAC being slightly better.  In recent years, only Clemson has saved the ACC from basically being a G5.  

its the SEC and the Big Ten

after that there's a cornsiderable drop

and I'm talking post Texas/Oklahoma to the SEC

once the Big 12 loses those two, the energy just won't be there on a national scale

Fair enough.  Compared to the SEC and B1G, I'd agree with that.

I think the B12 is still going to have more energy than the PAC or ACC, who simply play bad football outside of one or two teams at the top.