OT Branson Yager

To which school will Yager commit?

  • Nebraska

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Iowa State

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • BYU

    Votes: 7 100.0%
  • Total voters
    7
Seems to me that there is a point at which guys can be too big and therefore slow to be effective - especially in pass blocking as speed blitzers just run around them.  

 
BigRedBuster said:
The word "average" is a key word in my post.  Yes, that would mean there would be 25 on the roster.  But, there is always attrition with injuries, transfers, off the field problems...etc.  It's unrealistic to think that every lineman is going to be here for 5 years.

So, if you have 5 per year over 5 years, that's 25.  If you want to really have 17, that means 8 of the 25 don't make it 5 years.  Heck, sometimes they don't even make it to campus.  I think that's a reasonable expectation.  

Also, if we have 5 this class, that means the last three classes would be 6,3,5.  Or....an average of 4.66.  I don't think it's unreasonable to think we would take 5 in this class.  
Click to expand...


You said "minimum average".  Our average for the last three years isn't even to that number and that's starting with 11 on the roster.  I think the average will be less than that going forward.

As @HS_Coach_C said, I don't think we lose OLinemen at nearly the rate as everyone else.  At five per class and losing 20% of them that's still 20, which still appears to be high by 2-3.  I think four per class is probably closer going forward and I wouldn't be surprised it the average isn't quite that.

It's not unreasonable to think we might take five in this class.  I even said so in my previous post.  But I think that's the ceiling, not the floor.

 
84HuskerLaw said:
Seems to me that there is a point at which guys can be too big and therefore slow to be effective - especially in pass blocking as speed blitzers just run around them.  
Click to expand...
This kid is gonna be a weight room project for a few years. I don’t think anyone is denying that. 

 
Just reading a report that they had only planned on take three OL in this class but now it appears four is still on the table.  Five would seem to be unlikely.

 
.... except for the part where the other recruiting service says they are probably going for four and maybe five.

So really no one knows.  I think they'll take four.  And maybe five if they can't say no.

 
Mavric said:
.... except for the part where the other recruiting service says they are probably going for four and maybe five.

So really no one knows.  I think they'll take four.  And maybe five if they can't say no.
Click to expand...
Yep, the 5th one might be someone so good they can't pass up, or get to February and they have a spot left and a lineman is interested, so why not throw him a scholarship.

 
flatwaterfan said:
I like to budget scholarships out.   I figure at most you would ever do is 3 scholarships for Special teams.  (Punter,Kicker,Long snapper)  and hopefully you have less than that so you can use them elsewheres but for budgeting count it is 3.   That gives you 82 to divide between offense and defense so that's 41 for each side.    For defense if you gave out 4 scholarships to each position you would have 44 allocated or 3 too much so take 1 away at each level.  So we run a 3-4.  So that (3*4)- 1 = 11 DL

(4LB*4) -1 = 15 LB's and same with DB's 15.    

Offense is a little harder as there are more formations and personnel groups so I figure off of 11 personnel and start with a 3 deep.   That gives 15 Ol, 3 qb, 3 rb, 9wr,3 te with 8 left over to award.   I then allocate an extra scholarship to each of those 5 groups so now you have 16 OL,4 QB, 4 RB, 10 WR, 4 TE with 3 left to divvy up.   At this point it's kind of a choice.   I throw one to the RB's as that's a high injury position.  It can be a RB/WR type,  you can throw one on the OL and the final one is either a WR or a TE.   That becomes my starting point for an idea number.   Then I figure + or -1 for each group as you can't always hit your target and rosters are fluid.

I agree it's not unreasonable to do 5 for this class.  It also depends on where you are at for other positions and they should be able to be pretty selective now. 
Click to expand...


Hi Coach Frost, thanks for the insight into your program :D

 
Toe said:
Remember when Riley said his goal was to have a running game in the top three of the Big Ten?
Click to expand...
I think you missed the part where he said "abandoned" running game in the top 3. :lol:

I think a good nickname for this guy is the Yagermeister. That would definitely be an intimidating name to go up against. Hopefully this guy brings some nasty so teams are intimidated by us again. 

 
Listen to an interview.  Kid is smart and knows it will be a couple years for him to get ready.  Small school, 70 kids on the team & he played almost every down.  He said that his HS does have much of a weight program, so he needs to get stronger & faster.  This is a good pickup.

 
Toe said:
I think it's safe to say this staff is putting a premium on size. You can teach a dude to play football, but you can't teach him to be 6'8".
Click to expand...
They are looking for big guys with long arms, who can move. That enables the linemen to jab the defenders and keep them at a distance in pass blocking.  The taller guys also allow a bigger frame to add on muscle and weight without getting too slow. 

 
Cavanaugh (shudder) once recruited a #143 offensive tackle from California and this board nearly exploded.

Greg Austin actually knows what to look for. This guy at least is likely a depth guy for OT and at most a day 3 NFL prospect and I’m perfectly fine with that.

 
Per Yager, three OL is our number for this year.  Although we may take one more guy who could play either OL or DL.

 
Back
Top