Samuel Peacock, 2020 3* OL, Gig Harbor (HS), WA (Committed)

1to392831weretaken

This seems like a lot of OL for one class.

RoadDawg55

Houhusky said:

Im fine with taking one or two flier guys on the back end of the class as long as they arent going to be relied upon.

Worst case for this guy is he portals out after a few years

Best case is he is actually a huge diamond in the rough and plays for 2 years after being in the program for 3 years.

This. They are fine for filler. All of our current OL recruits were highly recruited except Gaard, and he’s been committed since his junior year. Someone posted he had a bunch of offers and interest too.

You can’t just go by the ratings and other offers. Some guys simply aren’t known so they don’t get evaluated by coaches. That’s why there are guys from tiny schools that are drafted every year.

It’s why the camps have some use. They are stupid football wise, but they do put players on coaches radars. If you don’t go to camps and don’t play for a high profile high school team, it’s easy to slip thru the cracks.

Obviously you want more highly rated players than not, but living and dying by stars gets you nowhere. I’ll take a lightly recruited 2/3 star over a three star with a bunch of shitty offers.

RaceBannon

O line is the least predictable position by stars

Emoterman

1to392831weretaken said:

This seems like a lot of OL for one class.

@sonics1993 told me we'd rather have 5 WR this class than add another OG in Levi Rogers, and now we're offering this likely inferior gentleboy. I think OL numbers should always get stacked, since it's so hard to predict who will be a success.

I'm glad to take another OL, but why did we pass on Rogers?

PostGameOrangeSlices

We need more in state kids so this is good

1to392831weretaken

Emoterman said:

1to392831weretaken said:

This seems like a lot of OL for one class.

@sonics1993 told me we'd rather have 5 WR this class than add another OG in Levi Rogers, and now we're offering this likely inferior gentleboy. I think OL numbers should always get stacked, since it's so hard to predict who will be a success.

I'm glad to take another OL, but why did we pass on Rogers?

The more I look at the numbers, the more it's not so bad. Assuming 25 starters counting specialists, the OL represents 20% of the starting lineup, so you'd think 16 to 17 would be the right number to carry. UW's losing 4 this offseason and have 4 committed. That would put them one or two men shy of a balanced number, with 15 scholarship OL even if they take a fifth. I don't know, maybe they really like this new guy.

HuskyJW

I know you are guys are being sarcastic about Idaho

But Mike Iupati is better than any OL the Huskies have in the league right now

dnc

HuskyJW said:

I know you are guys are being sarcastic about Idaho

But Mike Iupati is better than any OL the Huskies have in the league right now

Was.

He's not very good anymore.

McGary >

backthepack

Noorgard med retirement

bananasnblondes

backthepack said:

Noorgard med retirement

This is most likely the case. I'm sure Peacock is fine but I would have liked to see them pull out the big dick and go after a bigtime guy rather than just offer a lightly recruited local kid to fill the spot. It will be interesting to see in december if the coaches move on to 2021 and phone in the rest of this class or if they start to get aggressive.