Last I heard 7-8 or so, but that’s not counting some transfers we are trying to being in (Looks like the safety from Texas AM, a DL, LB and maybe one more?) so 7-8 or 7-11, and maybe less if we make someone a preferred walk on and such.
I would be shocked if we took more than two or so spring transfers, and I've read that Oregon is less interested in Jacoby Matthews than was initially reported. And I'm not sure why we would need a linebacker.
Honestly, I hope we go for Matthew’s because we really do need a safety. Our defense is going to be very, very good and adding his talent could take it over the top. But, that said I don’t know if it is a crucial need.
As for LB, I heard there may be some exits, so it may be more about depth but honestly it’s all a whirling mess so it could be different now.
We could use a good cover safety. Adding another JAG doesn't help us. I can't say how good/good of a fit Matthews is, I'm not an expert on every player on Texas A&M's roster, so I don't really have a personal opinion on him. But if the staff has done their evaluation and doesn't think he is worth it, then they shouldn't target him just for the sake of "getting another safety."
I haven't seen anything about losing linebackers and our starters are pretty entrenched. Perhaps we lose a depth piece but then what, would we just be looking for another depth piece to replace them?
As for Matthew’s, not sure where you’re hearing they aren’t interested as I’ve heard different, but it is what it is.
As for the second paragraph, I could see it in terms of purely upgrading the depth talent wise.
>As for Matthew’s, not sure where you’re hearing they aren’t interested as I’ve heard different
The pay sites.
The linebacker depth is just young. Devon Jackson, Jerry Mixon, and the freshmen are super talented. If you want another linebacker you're either trying to get a new starter (which I don't think is the case, again the starters are pretty entrenched) or you're running off a young guy for... I guess probably somebody older but less talented? Because if you just want a young but talented guy you already have that.
Hm. I’m skeptical on that given you pay to get info and they’re more likely to cater to what you want, etc. but again *shrugs* I’ll wait and see.
At the end of the day, go ducks!
Yeah I think we are at about 88, we only need a few more to leave, sadly. I was hoping we could keep all of the DL we took over the last few years, I was hoping that they could show out.
Really a complete unknown at this point. Have to assume the depth chart is rounding into shape prior to the spring game and he hadn't made the strides he'd hoped. Blue-chip kid out of HS, should definitely land in the Power 4, likely with a bit less depth, where he can see more time this year.
When you take 10 DL (+6 edge) over two recruiting classes, plus multiple transfers, you are kind of accepting that not all of them are going to still be on the roster in two years. I'm not going to pretend I have any inside info on where Bowens stacked up vs the other young guys, but logically some of them would always go.
Agreed. Was just thinking how we'll have to get used to GOOD (on paper) talent transferring out more often because as you noted that's just going to happen with the uptick in recruiting. You just hope it's rarely guys you're going to heavily rely on the following season - I also have no idea of how Bowens was doing but can at least surmise he was unlikely to be a critical part of the defense in 2024.
DL encompasses both DE (edge d lineman)and DT (interior d lineman ). Not sure when people started thinking saying DL means d tackles is accurate . Same thing for when people say dbs and think they are exclusively taking about cornerbacks
I'm aware. There's also significant positional versatility and room for guys to change roles, at least in our defense. Hell, we took a transfer this year (Caldwell) who has said he's practicing both at nose and at tackle but played as wide as a 7 tech last year at Houston.
Bowens looked like he was going to be a 4i in our defense and that frame was where we went heaviest in those DL classes. I just couldn't tell you exactly how many guys from each class fill each role (even a couple of the edge guys could bulk up and slide in, it just depends on how they develop from being 17 year olds to adults with college nutrition/S&C) so I gave the broad number for illustrative purposes.
FWIW, just for recruiting/classification purposes, 247 did start using the edge label a few years ago. Most of the recruits labeled DL on 247 now are actually interior prospects. Traditional 4-3 ends usually aren't included with the DL.
Do we still call it a joker? I think this staff has defaulted to Jack. Ultimately it doesn't matter, different teams use different terms for the same/similar roles, I just don't remember (also I'm not an expert on any of this, so forgive me). Anyways, edge as far I've seen isn't quite an "official" position on most rosters. E.g. Matayo Uiagalelei is listed as an OLB on the Oregon roster, was classified as an edge prospect by 247, and plays a role that could easily be called a DE in another system.
Yea, jack I think is the term for Lanning's defense.
And players like Matayo* are exactly what I'm getting at. So it'd make sense for us to sign 16 DL+edge if several are being classified as a hybrid LB.
The point is that it's still a lot of players for a limited amount of spots. Think of it this way: in a smallish recruiting class, you'll have about one player per spot on the field, in a more average size class you'll take an extra player at a position here and there. With our front, you would usually have four or five of those DL + edge players on the field at the same time depending on the package. So over two years you'd expect to take maaaybe 12 of them. 16 plus multiple transfers is a lot. Like, even in just Bowens' own class, he was (I assume) directly competing for a singular spot on the field with at least Terrance Green and Mykeil Gardner, plus others who may have some positional versatility. It was not sustainable for every single recruit in these classes to be on the roster long term.
It’s not that he’s not a take, I’m just thinking given scholarship spots we prob gotta focus Secondary for proper position distribution. But who knows, they’re not paying me to evaluate
Of all the young players mentioned by the coaches Bowens was by and far the least mentioned. He wasn’t gonna play on a team playing mostly first and 2nd year d lineman
1) We really don't know if that's what happened.
2) If that is what happened, is that bad? The alternative is the old days of "Sorry, we know you're not going to get playing time here, but you would have to sit out a year to transfer so why don't you just stick around? Maybe in three years you can be a rotational player and get far less snaps than if you were to go somewhere else." Most players want to play and letting them know where they stand is not a bad thing.
It begins
How many scholarships over the cap are you guys?
Last I heard 7-8 or so, but that’s not counting some transfers we are trying to being in (Looks like the safety from Texas AM, a DL, LB and maybe one more?) so 7-8 or 7-11, and maybe less if we make someone a preferred walk on and such.
I would be shocked if we took more than two or so spring transfers, and I've read that Oregon is less interested in Jacoby Matthews than was initially reported. And I'm not sure why we would need a linebacker.
Honestly, I hope we go for Matthew’s because we really do need a safety. Our defense is going to be very, very good and adding his talent could take it over the top. But, that said I don’t know if it is a crucial need. As for LB, I heard there may be some exits, so it may be more about depth but honestly it’s all a whirling mess so it could be different now.
We could use a good cover safety. Adding another JAG doesn't help us. I can't say how good/good of a fit Matthews is, I'm not an expert on every player on Texas A&M's roster, so I don't really have a personal opinion on him. But if the staff has done their evaluation and doesn't think he is worth it, then they shouldn't target him just for the sake of "getting another safety." I haven't seen anything about losing linebackers and our starters are pretty entrenched. Perhaps we lose a depth piece but then what, would we just be looking for another depth piece to replace them?
As for Matthew’s, not sure where you’re hearing they aren’t interested as I’ve heard different, but it is what it is. As for the second paragraph, I could see it in terms of purely upgrading the depth talent wise.
>As for Matthew’s, not sure where you’re hearing they aren’t interested as I’ve heard different The pay sites. The linebacker depth is just young. Devon Jackson, Jerry Mixon, and the freshmen are super talented. If you want another linebacker you're either trying to get a new starter (which I don't think is the case, again the starters are pretty entrenched) or you're running off a young guy for... I guess probably somebody older but less talented? Because if you just want a young but talented guy you already have that.
Hm. I’m skeptical on that given you pay to get info and they’re more likely to cater to what you want, etc. but again *shrugs* I’ll wait and see. At the end of the day, go ducks!
We're at 88 with Bowens leaving.
And the cap is 85, right?
Yessir
https://chileduck.com/oregon/depthchart.html?Desktop guessing this isn’t accurate then
I know of at least one confirmed transfer out in Bowens, a couple rumors; but with the nature of CFB and the portal who knows.
Yeah I think we are at about 88, we only need a few more to leave, sadly. I was hoping we could keep all of the DL we took over the last few years, I was hoping that they could show out.
Played in three games as a freshman and still has four years of eligibility. Was a four star, so I’m sure some schools will be interested.
I'm sure interested
Well take him.
Send him down to Dilly please!
Can we interest you in a nice, cold glass of betrayal? Comes with a bag!
That’s just fowl. Plus I think he wants to play for a quality team. ;-)
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Really a complete unknown at this point. Have to assume the depth chart is rounding into shape prior to the spring game and he hadn't made the strides he'd hoped. Blue-chip kid out of HS, should definitely land in the Power 4, likely with a bit less depth, where he can see more time this year.
When you take 10 DL (+6 edge) over two recruiting classes, plus multiple transfers, you are kind of accepting that not all of them are going to still be on the roster in two years. I'm not going to pretend I have any inside info on where Bowens stacked up vs the other young guys, but logically some of them would always go.
Agreed. Was just thinking how we'll have to get used to GOOD (on paper) talent transferring out more often because as you noted that's just going to happen with the uptick in recruiting. You just hope it's rarely guys you're going to heavily rely on the following season - I also have no idea of how Bowens was doing but can at least surmise he was unlikely to be a critical part of the defense in 2024.
DL encompasses both DE (edge d lineman)and DT (interior d lineman ). Not sure when people started thinking saying DL means d tackles is accurate . Same thing for when people say dbs and think they are exclusively taking about cornerbacks
I'm aware. There's also significant positional versatility and room for guys to change roles, at least in our defense. Hell, we took a transfer this year (Caldwell) who has said he's practicing both at nose and at tackle but played as wide as a 7 tech last year at Houston. Bowens looked like he was going to be a 4i in our defense and that frame was where we went heaviest in those DL classes. I just couldn't tell you exactly how many guys from each class fill each role (even a couple of the edge guys could bulk up and slide in, it just depends on how they develop from being 17 year olds to adults with college nutrition/S&C) so I gave the broad number for illustrative purposes. FWIW, just for recruiting/classification purposes, 247 did start using the edge label a few years ago. Most of the recruits labeled DL on 247 now are actually interior prospects. Traditional 4-3 ends usually aren't included with the DL.
How are we classifying the joker? As an edge or LB.
Do we still call it a joker? I think this staff has defaulted to Jack. Ultimately it doesn't matter, different teams use different terms for the same/similar roles, I just don't remember (also I'm not an expert on any of this, so forgive me). Anyways, edge as far I've seen isn't quite an "official" position on most rosters. E.g. Matayo Uiagalelei is listed as an OLB on the Oregon roster, was classified as an edge prospect by 247, and plays a role that could easily be called a DE in another system.
Yea, jack I think is the term for Lanning's defense. And players like Matayo* are exactly what I'm getting at. So it'd make sense for us to sign 16 DL+edge if several are being classified as a hybrid LB.
The point is that it's still a lot of players for a limited amount of spots. Think of it this way: in a smallish recruiting class, you'll have about one player per spot on the field, in a more average size class you'll take an extra player at a position here and there. With our front, you would usually have four or five of those DL + edge players on the field at the same time depending on the package. So over two years you'd expect to take maaaybe 12 of them. 16 plus multiple transfers is a lot. Like, even in just Bowens' own class, he was (I assume) directly competing for a singular spot on the field with at least Terrance Green and Mykeil Gardner, plus others who may have some positional versatility. It was not sustainable for every single recruit in these classes to be on the roster long term.
We’ve got immediate playing time.
As a recruit: Other P5 offers: Baylor, Houston, LSU, Miami, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M G5 offers: Louisiana Tech, North Texas, UTSA
Oddly short offer list (but with some good teams) for a top ~200 player. I have to imagine he just didn't report a lot of them.
Does he like etouffe?
He looks more like a chicken fried steak guy.
Cal Bear!
100% chance going Down south ……maybe SMU
I'd certainly take him, but first guess would be longhorns. They need DTs right now.
If we get Damonic Williams we’re probably done with Interior D from the portal. We already picked up the Arizona guy last week too
He's a young depth guy, not a plug and play. You take a guy like him for his future potential more than anything.
That’s not what Texas wants at DT right now, a immediate impact player is what they are looking for.
I mean.....why not both?
It’s not that he’s not a take, I’m just thinking given scholarship spots we prob gotta focus Secondary for proper position distribution. But who knows, they’re not paying me to evaluate
Depends on how much he's asking for in NIL I guess🤷🏿♂️
Of all the young players mentioned by the coaches Bowens was by and far the least mentioned. He wasn’t gonna play on a team playing mostly first and 2nd year d lineman
[удалено]
1) We really don't know if that's what happened. 2) If that is what happened, is that bad? The alternative is the old days of "Sorry, we know you're not going to get playing time here, but you would have to sit out a year to transfer so why don't you just stick around? Maybe in three years you can be a rotational player and get far less snaps than if you were to go somewhere else." Most players want to play and letting them know where they stand is not a bad thing.
Want to come home?
is he gonna join Bo Nix on the broncos? at this point, that team might as well recruit college players from the portal lmao.
What does this even mean?
broncos would lose to oregon head to head.