Three Major Problems with this class

1. Zero Offensive Lineman- Really shouldn't need an explanation. Every SEC team signed three or more except for UF, which only signed two. Dooley's biggest recruiting mistake to date IMO.
2. Linebacker's- Losing Santos and Peters was a major blow. We have King, who mostly played offense during HS and Latroy Lewis, a kid who missed his senior season and will likely be limited to being a rush OLB.
3. Lack of HS Defensive Lineman- In a conference where DL play is key to winning championships and is a position we're still lacking, we only signed two guys out of HS. The JUCO guys are nice, but we're set up for being in a similar situation in a year or two.

Thoughts? Opinions? STFU OP?

 

Losing Santos was no more Dooley's fault than Hunter blowing his knee out. Texas comes calling, it's game set match. We all knew that.
As for Peters, pretty disappointing that this staff couldn't hold on to a key recruit days before NSD.
Patterson has me excited for the other side of the ball though.

 

Really only issue is the LB issue, which has been beat to death. Would like O-linemen, but quite honestly, they line is still young enough that it wasn't a necessity and doesn't bother me.

As for the D-linemen, we got 4. Right now I'm too concerned on the immediate present.

 

The LBs skipping out 3 days before signing day sucks but it's part of it. The only thing I fault Dooley on is telling Henderson to he didn't have a scholly and then sign what they signed at LB.

I can't understand why they didn't really even attempt to get on any OL other than Jelks and Humphries.

I'm glad Tennessee was finally able to get a high ranking DT regardless of age. It would have been nice if Kirven would have came too, but after using converted DEs for 3 seasons at DT, it's nice to finally sign someone there that's talented.

 

Anyone else notice that we have done worse in every facet of the game since Doofus got here? Atleast he taught the team how to shower properly. Gotta have something to hang his hat on. [uck fay] Dooley!

 

Peters first and foremost. You're right about a lineman. At least get one, especially since we don't have a full class. Did we pursue the kid from Brentwood that went to Michigan?

 

I think the lack of LBs is the main issue. Not taking an OL might be a mistake, but with the youth of our line, I wouldn't classify it a "major problem."

 

It doesn't matter if it was out of Dooley's control or not, the LB haul in this class is a problem. As far as having young OL, young OL can have injuries, transfer, discipline issues, or be an all around bust. Not a single OL taken is a [uck fay] up IMO jmo. The DL class as a whole is solid, but another HS kid or two was needed.

 

Agreed. Also, none of the RBs strike me as sure things. That will be a must for the next class.

 

He made it clear he was committed to Michigan very early.

 

Not so worried about HS DL. We had to prioritize, and immediate DL help was more important than HS DL. We did get three HS DL (for a 4-3, two for a 3-4), so it's not like we got nothing there. Sure it's not a strength, but I wouldn't call it a problem.

#1 and #2 are obvious (although I'd flip them) major problems. If you need a 3rd, I'd say gamebreaking RB.

 

Looking at this class has to make you wonder how Doofus supposedly learned from Saban and was his recruiting coordinator at one time.

 

I tend to agree with this opinion the most. If we take Bynum at LB it really softens the blow big time. This class is a a disaster for us LB wise otherwise. The class does what it needed to do.

We already have one O-linemen committed for next year. And next year is the big O-line year. We need 4-5 next year so they can get one year in before having to play in year 2. We took so many the last two years it really is not a big deal. I would prefer to if had one stud but it is hard to convince a kid to come to a 5-7 school when you have to say likely you will not play for two years. Bama can do that you are offerring rings in all likely hood.

I really like this Dline class it is good not great as it would of been with Kirven but good.

 

yeah absolutely. It has nothing to do with him basically starting from scratch at 80% of the positions on the field, if not more.

 

this sums it up perfectly. An injury plagued team that finished a dismal 5-7 had a pretty freaking good recruiting class. If they can convince Bynum to come, this class could jump a spot or two more up the rankings and fill just about every major hole. Seeing as UT was already flirting with the 85 rule, not signing a full class isn't that big of a deal, if anything it's a plus and as Jewbaccah said, next year is the year to pick up OL. We already have enough depth there. There were too many holes on the defensive side of the ball to worry too much about a spot that doesn't need much, if any more depth. Regardless of your opinion of Dooley and what happens to him after this year, the team is finally stocked to become competitive again. Now we just need to make sure the right coaches are in place to get the players. This year will answer whether or not we need to do something there.

 

Just looking at LSU and Bama over the last five years, the fewest OL they've taken in a year was two and three. I just have nightmares about our '09 OL.

 

I bet no one has ever done that and been successful...

 

In what time frame?

 

Not a good excuse for Poole, a bunch of OL, Teague, and the DL. No one has really gotten a lot better since enrolling at UT.

 

3 years. Most good coaches will atleast make strides in year 2.