Kaleb McGary
Comments
-
That was the guy...Eifler. Yeah, DDY has a huge boner for him and I thought he was a very highly thought of prospect. Hopefully he is the future...NEsnake12 said:
Patience is key. Bierria got some rotational work as a redshirt frosh, but both of the Victor/Bierria didn't really do anything spectacular until they were redshirt sophomores... 3rd year in the program. None of those 2nd string LBs are further than 2 years into the program, most came in the 2015 recruiting class (BBK, Tevis, DJ Beavers). Too early to completely write them off based on the pattern we saw with Victor/Bierria... though I do think that Wellington and Eifler are the future of that position.dnc said:
Fuck it you're right, I am pretty concerned about LB. There's nobody that inspires confidence behind Bierria and Victor right now. I think we'll be okay next year with Bierria likely holding it down (and Victor likely in the league), but after that it's scary. Thankfully I like the talent they redshirted this year. The way those two developed makes me think somebody will step up, but I agree we haven't seen anyone do anything that inspires confidence yet.Swaye said:
Anyone at all concerned about LB post Bierra and Victor? When the JV squad is on there seems to be a pretty big drop off. Don't we have some stud LB red shirting though? I drink too much to remember all this shit.dnc said:OL is the one area where I have always thought production correlates least to recruiting rankings. Very few linemen are ready to start as true frosh, most of them need development and weight room and nutrition (yes I know that's true for every position but I've always thought it more about OL than anywhere else).
If we're going to have an area where recruiting struggles but coaching excels OL would be the one I would pick.
Given Strausser's track record and the results we're seeing now, I'm fine with him staying. I'd bet anything recruiting OL's picks up based on the success of the program and his OL anyway. Whoever the sophomore/junior Foster Sarrell's are right now are going to be much more open to UW. That will help every position of course, but I'd bet anything the combination of development/ability to spot talent/program success is going to make the OL excellent going forward.
There's not really a position I'm concerned about long term other than QB post Browning. And there's plenty of time to address that. -
Cuogs have 3 starters from the State of Washington and 2 more on second string. None of them were above a three star.
Development matters -
About LBs, we were having the exact same conversation about Victor and Bierria in the 2015 preseason.
-
taking the chance to quote my favorite @RoadDawg55 post of all time:RoadDawg55 said:
It's a shame there is so much concrete in Seattle. Is the kid looking into Oregon State? In Corvallis you can shoot a bobcat from your dorm window when you wake up and take a 4 wheeler through the forest to class.dnc said:Let me guess, he loves fishing and the outdoors and wants to get away from a rough family situation?
-
Not to rehash, but the only way it doesn't match what we have been seeing elsewhere is for the current class, which is, you know, not complete yet.Tequilla said:No, recruiting actually matters ... the current state of OL recruiting is concerning ... it's the one area where the recruiting doesn't match what we see elsewhere
-
I don't think we have anybody that I feel really good at playing ILB. I think longer term things look really bright at BUCK and OLB, but I haven't seen anything to make me feel great about the inside guys.dnc said:
Fuck it you're right, I am pretty concerned about LB. There's nobody that inspires confidence behind Bierria and Victor right now. I think we'll be okay next year with Bierria likely holding it down (and Victor likely in the league), but after that it's scary. Thankfully I like the talent they redshirted this year. The way those two developed makes me think somebody will step up, but I agree we haven't seen anyone do anything that inspires confidence yet.Swaye said:
Anyone at all concerned about LB post Bierra and Victor? When the JV squad is on there seems to be a pretty big drop off. Don't we have some stud LB red shirting though? I drink too much to remember all this shit.dnc said:OL is the one area where I have always thought production correlates least to recruiting rankings. Very few linemen are ready to start as true frosh, most of them need development and weight room and nutrition (yes I know that's true for every position but I've always thought it more about OL than anywhere else).
If we're going to have an area where recruiting struggles but coaching excels OL would be the one I would pick.
Given Strausser's track record and the results we're seeing now, I'm fine with him staying. I'd bet anything recruiting OL's picks up based on the success of the program and his OL anyway. Whoever the sophomore/junior Foster Sarrell's are right now are going to be much more open to UW. That will help every position of course, but I'd bet anything the combination of development/ability to spot talent/program success is going to make the OL excellent going forward.
There's not really a position I'm concerned about long term other than QB post Browning. And there's plenty of time to address that. -
Wellington is an inside guy, he'll be very good and will likely replace Bierria when he leaves, and Eifler is waiting in the wings behind Victor.AIRWOLF said:
I don't think we have anybody that I feel really good at playing ILB. I think longer term things look really bright at BUCK and OLB, but I haven't seen anything to make me feel great about the inside guys.dnc said:
Fuck it you're right, I am pretty concerned about LB. There's nobody that inspires confidence behind Bierria and Victor right now. I think we'll be okay next year with Bierria likely holding it down (and Victor likely in the league), but after that it's scary. Thankfully I like the talent they redshirted this year. The way those two developed makes me think somebody will step up, but I agree we haven't seen anyone do anything that inspires confidence yet.Swaye said:
Anyone at all concerned about LB post Bierra and Victor? When the JV squad is on there seems to be a pretty big drop off. Don't we have some stud LB red shirting though? I drink too much to remember all this shit.dnc said:OL is the one area where I have always thought production correlates least to recruiting rankings. Very few linemen are ready to start as true frosh, most of them need development and weight room and nutrition (yes I know that's true for every position but I've always thought it more about OL than anywhere else).
If we're going to have an area where recruiting struggles but coaching excels OL would be the one I would pick.
Given Strausser's track record and the results we're seeing now, I'm fine with him staying. I'd bet anything recruiting OL's picks up based on the success of the program and his OL anyway. Whoever the sophomore/junior Foster Sarrell's are right now are going to be much more open to UW. That will help every position of course, but I'd bet anything the combination of development/ability to spot talent/program success is going to make the OL excellent going forward.
There's not really a position I'm concerned about long term other than QB post Browning. And there's plenty of time to address that. -
Nobody made an argument that recruiting doesn't matter.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yes, he was. McGary was a 4 star T from Scout. But he wanted to play DL, so we recruited him at DL, then flipped him. Strausser didn't get McGary. Kawasaki did.dnc said:
Of course the Seahawks wouldn't take that approach.Tequilla said:@dnc I don't really disagree with you on your points about OL being the position where development matters, you normally are waiting 2-3 seasons before they enter the rotation, etc.
That being said, when you have guys like Adams and McGary showing what they've shown earlier in their career, there is something to be said to getting a high end prospect, then coaching them up, and then look at what you have. And that's really the point that I would make and part of the reason why the TSIO podcast crew really can go off on our OL recruiting from time to time because when you're working predominately with projects, there's always the risk that they don't pan out ... but if you get the guys that already have the tools, now it's a matter of polishing them into huge gems
Another way to look at it is that if you're constantly taking guys that you have to develop and are backup plan guys and/or projects, you're taking the OL approach similar to what the Seahawks do. The Hawks do that because of the salary cap and they are confident in Cable being able to do a job to get them competent and their trust in Wilson to get out of bad spots (which he was unable to do this year) ... do you think that the Hawks would take that approach if they didn't have to worry about the salary cap and instead could just go after and "recruit" the best players possible?
It's not the same thing though. A. Strausser has proven the ability to take shit and make something awesome out of it. Cable for all his rep has not. B. I believe Strausser's going to be getting better talent going forward thanks to the progress of the program.
Obviously I'd rather have better talent than worse.
Was McGary really a high end OL prospect though? I remember people being excited about him but I don't remember thinking he was highly recruited like Adams, let alone Sorrell. I have no doubts Strausser can get kids like McGary.
Also - if it's so hard to translate rankings into production, how come Josh Garnett wan an All American and McGary and Adams are studs early in their careers?
It's a fucking nonsensical argument that never has any evidence, but still...
Yeah, rankings are slightly 'LESS' predictive at OL (the big article a few years ago analyzing all this showed it was slightly lower for OL), but that does not mean 'NON' predictive (FUCKING DUH). And for top end prospects, prediction was very good. So what the fuck is the point of all of this?
I'm sorry, but it doesn't make a good argument that recruiting doesn't matter when the two tackles on your team trucking people were both highly rated, beasting people as Sophs and both talked about as future NFL players.
All the rest of this crap is dawgman level discourse.
hth -
YOU KNOW WHAT I FUCKING MEANT. CHRIST.dnc said:
Nobody made an argument that recruiting doesn't matter.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Yes, he was. McGary was a 4 star T from Scout. But he wanted to play DL, so we recruited him at DL, then flipped him. Strausser didn't get McGary. Kawasaki did.dnc said:
Of course the Seahawks wouldn't take that approach.Tequilla said:@dnc I don't really disagree with you on your points about OL being the position where development matters, you normally are waiting 2-3 seasons before they enter the rotation, etc.
That being said, when you have guys like Adams and McGary showing what they've shown earlier in their career, there is something to be said to getting a high end prospect, then coaching them up, and then look at what you have. And that's really the point that I would make and part of the reason why the TSIO podcast crew really can go off on our OL recruiting from time to time because when you're working predominately with projects, there's always the risk that they don't pan out ... but if you get the guys that already have the tools, now it's a matter of polishing them into huge gems
Another way to look at it is that if you're constantly taking guys that you have to develop and are backup plan guys and/or projects, you're taking the OL approach similar to what the Seahawks do. The Hawks do that because of the salary cap and they are confident in Cable being able to do a job to get them competent and their trust in Wilson to get out of bad spots (which he was unable to do this year) ... do you think that the Hawks would take that approach if they didn't have to worry about the salary cap and instead could just go after and "recruit" the best players possible?
It's not the same thing though. A. Strausser has proven the ability to take shit and make something awesome out of it. Cable for all his rep has not. B. I believe Strausser's going to be getting better talent going forward thanks to the progress of the program.
Obviously I'd rather have better talent than worse.
Was McGary really a high end OL prospect though? I remember people being excited about him but I don't remember thinking he was highly recruited like Adams, let alone Sorrell. I have no doubts Strausser can get kids like McGary.
Also - if it's so hard to translate rankings into production, how come Josh Garnett wan an All American and McGary and Adams are studs early in their careers?
It's a fucking nonsensical argument that never has any evidence, but still...
Yeah, rankings are slightly 'LESS' predictive at OL (the big article a few years ago analyzing all this showed it was slightly lower for OL), but that does not mean 'NON' predictive (FUCKING DUH). And for top end prospects, prediction was very good. So what the fuck is the point of all of this?
I'm sorry, but it doesn't make a good argument that recruiting doesn't matter when the two tackles on your team trucking people were both highly rated, beasting people as Sophs and both talked about as future NFL players.
All the rest of this crap is dawgman level discourse.
hth
#leginjuriespreventmefrombeingclear -
Wellington is gonna be a nice player, same with Eifler..dnc said:
Fuck it you're right, I am pretty concerned about LB. There's nobody that inspires confidence behind Bierria and Victor right now. I think we'll be okay next year with Bierria likely holding it down (and Victor likely in the league), but after that it's scary. Thankfully I like the talent they redshirted this year. The way those two developed makes me think somebody will step up, but I agree we haven't seen anyone do anything that inspires confidence yet.Swaye said:
Anyone at all concerned about LB post Bierra and Victor? When the JV squad is on there seems to be a pretty big drop off. Don't we have some stud LB red shirting though? I drink too much to remember all this shit.dnc said:OL is the one area where I have always thought production correlates least to recruiting rankings. Very few linemen are ready to start as true frosh, most of them need development and weight room and nutrition (yes I know that's true for every position but I've always thought it more about OL than anywhere else).
If we're going to have an area where recruiting struggles but coaching excels OL would be the one I would pick.
Given Strausser's track record and the results we're seeing now, I'm fine with him staying. I'd bet anything recruiting OL's picks up based on the success of the program and his OL anyway. Whoever the sophomore/junior Foster Sarrell's are right now are going to be much more open to UW. That will help every position of course, but I'd bet anything the combination of development/ability to spot talent/program success is going to make the OL excellent going forward.
There's not really a position I'm concerned about long term other than QB post Browning. And there's plenty of time to address that.
