Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Looking Toward The Fall


geaux_sioux
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, shep said:

But...each of them could put on another 10 pounds don't you think?

Then the numbers become quite similar.

Not sure. None of the guys have it in them to be built like Rattelle and move like he did. None of the guys have the thump that Rich Jr had either. Guys usually are pretty well filled out by their jr year. However, they can be the size they are if we have a dominant DL. We absolutely need to have DEs 270-290 and NGs 290-320. With that in front of them an average LB group could do a lot of damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do the players have to sign something to say if they are coming back or not? If so, wouldn’t this be done by now? Do we know which and how many players were cut? Seems Like we would have a better picture of who is in or out by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

Do the players have to sign something to say if they are coming back or not? If so, wouldn’t this be done by now? Do we know which and how many players were cut? Seems Like we would have a better picture of who is in or out by now.

I’m sure the coaches know/have a clear picture. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

Not sure. None of the guys have it in them to be built like Rattelle and move like he did. None of the guys have the thump that Rich Jr had either. Guys usually are pretty well filled out by their jr year. However, they can be the size they are if we have a dominant DL. We absolutely need to have DEs 270-290 and NGs 290-320. With that in front of them an average LB group could do a lot of damage.

Your last point is the ultimate. I don't recall who that group had on the front line (a young Tank?) but the NG in this D has to be a 300+ plug in the middle, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, shep said:

Your last point is the ultimate. I don't recall who that group had on the front line (a young Tank?) but the NG in this D has to be a 300+ plug in the middle, right?

Bingo.  NG has to eat up 2 blocks or push them into the backfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

Not sure. None of the guys have it in them to be built like Rattelle and move like he did. None of the guys have the thump that Rich Jr had either. Guys usually are pretty well filled out by their jr year. However, they can be the size they are if we have a dominant DL. We absolutely need to have DEs 270-290 and NGs 290-320. With that in front of them an average LB group could do a lot of damage.

Lets be honest, at this point, we would never recruit a LB built like Ratelle, he was a self made freak.  You obviously have a connection to that group and that is fine.  They were good and Ratelle was great, especially for his size.  When the offense can't sustain drives, at some point it doesn't matter who is on D.   Much different game when the O is controlling the clock and the defense has a lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, geaux_sioux said:

If you compare to our 2015 LBS we're a little light across the board. DL is too small as well, but that’s been well covered.

Idowu 6’2” 225        Turner 6’2” 225

Rattelle 5’11” 255    Larson 6’2” 240

Rich Jr 6’1” 240       Krzanowski 6’2” 235

Labat 6’3” 235        Haas 6’5” 230

We just don’t have the thump in the middle. I remember teams trying to run on us back in 2015 and getting stone walled. NDSU only rushed for 115 yards against that team and they were much better than the NDSU team that pounded our front 7 into dust this year.

Rich only played the first 4 1/2 games before he got hurt and was replaced by a 6'1", 225 lb O'Brien. There was obviously a lot of rotation but Disterhaupt (6'1", 210lb) was listed as the starter over Idowu the whole season. Not buying the whole undersized LB corps thing. 

The bigger difference was the front 3: Carrothers (6'2", 245) and Johnson (6'2", 275) at LDE. Harris (6'3", 300) and Woodsmall (6'4", 270) at NG and Dranka (6'2", 235) and Cieslak (6'4", 280) at RDE.

Two deep this year went 6'2", 245 and 6'3" 250 at LDE, 6'3", 275 and 6', 270 at NG and 6'4", 260 and 6'4", 260 at RDE.

That averages about 10lbs lighter per guy, with NG being the biggest difference. Tank was a huge part of that defense. Morrison going down without a big body to replace him was the nail in the coffin against NDSU (not that it was going stellar prior to that). Really need Orlando and Beach to be those dominant nose guards the defense needs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

Lets be honest, at this point, we would never recruit a LB built like Ratelle, he was a self made freak.  You obviously have a connection to that group and that is fine.  They were good and Ratelle was great, especially for his size.  When the offense can't sustain drives, at some point it doesn't matter who is on D.   Much different game when the O is controlling the clock and the defense has a lead.

You mean a shorter stubby LB like say...... idk...... Quinton Urwiler?

BTW watch Rattelles HS film. If we aren’t trying to find guys like that every year we’re failing at recruiting.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

Rich only played the first 4 1/2 games before he got hurt and was replaced by a 6'1", 225 lb O'Brien. There was obviously a lot of rotation but Disterhaupt (6'1", 210lb) was listed as the starter over Idowu the whole season. Not buying the whole undersized LB corps thing. 

The bigger difference was the front 3: Carrothers (6'2", 245) and Johnson (6'2", 275) at LDE. Harris (6'3", 300) and Woodsmall (6'4", 270) at NG and Dranka (6'2", 235) and Cieslak (6'4", 280) at RDE.

Two deep this year went 6'2", 245 and 6'3" 250 at LDE, 6'3", 275 and 6', 270 at NG and 6'4", 260 and 6'4", 260 at RDE.

That averages about 10lbs lighter per guy, with NG being the biggest difference. Tank was a huge part of that defense. Morrison going down without a big body to replace him was the nail in the coffin against NDSU (not that it was going stellar prior to that). Really need Orlando and Beach to be those dominant nose guards the defense needs. 

These are valid points. My main point is, at the point of contact, with a strong RB, our LBs tend to get moved backwards. That generally didn’t happen to the group I reference as the body type and thump standard. In fact they regularity blew backs up in the hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:

You mean a shorter stubby LB like say...... idk...... Quinton Urwiler?

BTW watch Rattelles HS film. If we aren’t trying to find guys like that every year we’re failing at recruiting.

I don't know that much about Urwiler.  If we want to win the MVFC and FCS we aren't going to do it with 5'10 linebackers or 6'0" lineman or 5'7' db's,  which is why we generally recruit bigger guys.  IMO you don't win nattys with taking chances on outliers.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:

These are valid points. My main point is, at the point of contact, with a strong RB, our LBs tend to get moved backwards. That generally didn’t happen to the group I reference as the body type and thump standard. In fact they regularity blew backs up in the hole.

I’ll go with others...dline size is a much bigger issue right now than LB size...that being said our run fits were very poor against ndsu and jmu. If you are in the right spot it is much easier to make a solid tackle than if you are diving at the rb as he runs through the hole. If we can get a little bigger at dline and have our LBs in the right spot we will be just fine. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, siouxfb said:

I’ll go with others...dline size is a much bigger issue right now than LB size...that being said our run fits were very poor against ndsu and jmu. If you are in the right spot it is much easier to make a solid tackle than if you are diving at the rb as he runs through the hole. If we can get a little bigger at dline and have our LBs in the right spot we will be just fine. 

I would agree, in both those games we needed to make some big plays on defense to help the offense get started.  We did vs JMU on the first series of each half.  We need a to create a TO or two on D.  Against NDSU we looked like deer in the headlights, which I would say could be traced to the staff.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

I don't know that much about Urwiler.  If we want to win the MVFC and FCS we aren't going to do it with 5'10 linebackers or 6'0" lineman or 5'7' db's,  which is why we generally recruit bigger guys.  IMO you don't win nattys with taking chances on outliers.  

Like the EWU LB who won the Buchanan the year they won a natty? He was like 5’10”. Look, I’m not advocating we look for short guys, that’s stupid. I’m advocating we don’t overlook studs because they’re a couple inches short. A lot of times those guys would go to the B1G if they we those couple inches taller. I also never said anything about going for short DBs or DL do I’m not sure where you’re coming from for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that everyone agrees you need big defensive linemen to be successful???

If so, why don’t we have them year in year out? 

maybe the coaches don’t understand and agree???

or, we can’t recruit them??

Or, we don’t develop them??

why don’t we have bigger defensive linemen - especially at nose???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:

Like the EWU LB who won the Buchanan the year they won a natty? He was like 5’10”. Look, I’m not advocating we look for short guys, that’s stupid. I’m advocating we don’t overlook studs because they’re a couple inches short. A lot of times those guys would go to the B1G if they we those couple inches taller. I also never said anything about going for short DBs or DL do I’m not sure where you’re coming from for that.

I get it and I agree we should never discount anyone based on height.  Just far harder for a 5'10" linebacker or a 6'0" lineman to compete at the top of the FCS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

It seems to me that everyone agrees you need big defensive linemen to be successful???

If so, why don’t we have them year in year out? 

maybe the coaches don’t understand and agree???

or, we can’t recruit them??

Or, we don’t develop them??

why don’t we have bigger defensive linemen - especially at nose???

It is probably the hardest position to recruit at the FCS level and probably the FBS level too.  I think we are close on the DL, again if you look at the teams who played in the final 8 we are close.  NDSU had better depth, SDSU has one stud and better depth, SHSU had one stud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

It is probably the hardest position to recruit at the FCS level and probably the FBS level too.  I think we are close on the DL, again if you look at the teams who played in the final 8 we are close.  NDSU had better depth, SDSU has one stud and better depth, SHSU had one stud.

On the DL we haven’t done a good job of recruiting guys with large enough frames to easily carry the necessary weight. Blair is a good example from a few years ago. If you’ve ever seen him on street clothes you’d notice he’s very slender with narrow shoulders. Really tough to get a guy like that to 300 lbs. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, SiouxFan100 said:

It seems to me that everyone agrees you need big defensive linemen to be successful???

If so, why don’t we have them year in year out? 

maybe the coaches don’t understand and agree???

or, we can’t recruit them??

Or, we don’t develop them??

why don’t we have bigger defensive linemen - especially at nose???

They are tough to find and there were a few misses. I think the two young guys that are coming up have the size and agility to be successful at the NG position once they get some experience. Might be trial by fire this fall though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

They are tough to find and there were a few misses. I think the two young guys that are coming up have the size and agility to be successful at the NG position once they get some experience. Might be trial by fire this fall though.

A better option IMO, is to go 9 deep across the DL and sub a bunch, it works for our neighbors to the south.  Very, very difficult to find guys like Tank who don't end up in the B1G.  Don't forget this springs UND DL was good enough to shut down SDSU, who with a healthy QB was easily the best overall team this spring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

A better option IMO, is to go 9 deep across the DL and sub a bunch, it works for our neighbors to the south.  Very, very difficult to find guys like Tank who don't end up in the B1G.  Don't forget this springs UND DL was good enough to shut down SDSU, who with a healthy QB was easily the best overall team this spring.

9 deep on the DL would be a dream. SDSU subbed all the time on the DL and it gave them huge advantages in the 4th quarter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree the coaches definitely know who will be back and who will be moving on. Until we hear and can really start digging into the roster, expectations, let's take a look at this team if no Seniors come back.

Going off of the JMU 2-deep. Number of Seniors.

Offense

  • TE: 2 (1)
  • OL: 2 (2)
  • WR: 1 (1)
  • RB: 1 (0)

Defense

  • OLB: 3 (2)
  • Safety: 2 (2)
  • CB: 1 (1)

The # in parenthesis would indicate how many starters. More important for some positions (O-Line) than others (D-Line). Of course Canady was listed, but was injured, but for this purpose and looking ahead I kept him as a starter. I also removed Gee as he was the clear cup #3 RB even though he showed up 1st on the depth chart. 

There's a lot of nuance, but my rule of thumb is you lose 1 player from a positional group and you'll be better the next year. Power in numbers type of thought process (ex: losing only Bennett from the D-Line). 

The spotlight right now is on the O-Line / OLB / Safety's. The O-Line Grad transfer pickup is big, but the O-Line is still on the list. Preliminary word from @jon28 is good on the OLB Seniors, which is almost a necessity. Safety is a concern. For the most part, this roster is in a good spot. Need the right guys to come back in a few key positions / get some key transfers.

Here's to hoping we get some clarity soon on who is coming back and who is moving on.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Midwestern Hawk said:

I don't know that much about Urwiler.  If we want to win the MVFC and FCS we aren't going to do it with 5'10 linebackers or 6'0" lineman or 5'7' db's,  which is why we generally recruit bigger guys.  IMO you don't win nattys with taking chances on outliers.  

I don’t think people realize how many nfl and college players are shorter, lighter, and in some cases heavier than their listed numbers. Speed, quickness, strength, intelligence, and work ethic are worth a lot more than a couple of inches or 10-15 lbs on paper. Certainly if you get the same qualities in guys who are 6’3” or bigger that’s even better. I don’t believe height or even 10-15 lbs in weight are as important as the other attributes, they are just easier to measure and easier to compare. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...