PonyFans.com

ponyswim wrote:Just out of curiosity, I looked at the Rivals classes of 2010-2014 to see how many O lineman were signed during those 5 years. SMU: 18 Baylor:17 TCU: 15 A&M:21
So it does not seems like it is as much about the numbers signed, as much as the quality/longevity of those that are signed - sort of like what Jason was saying. That does not include any position changes. So it seems, like it is not about the numbers as much as it is about the quality - those who have the ability/work ethic/character to stay in school.
Don't read into this any excuses - I just was curious about SMU's numbers compared to the others.

As far as the totals are concerned, we have signed a ton of linemen in the last three classes to play catchup. But at OL, that doesn't make up for the void of upperclassmen.

Losing big isn't the problem (that's a sad commentary in and of itself)- looking completely disfunctional and incompetent in the process is.

Okay, so here is another point...

Three years ago, going out to practice you could watch Leribius maul everyone and knew the o-line would be pretty good.

Two years ago, Hunt, etc destroyed the line in practice, and you could see we were going to be in trouble.

Last year, you could tell the UT transfer couldn't move well and would be a disaster. And you could see we were too small at certain positions and we were going to struggle a bit.

This year, we know we have a decent d-line. I saw reserves struggle against them, but the starters looked okay. It certainly wasn't the free-for-all we saw on Saturday.

If the starting o-line doesn't get humiliated in practice against our own defensive line, does that infer that we aren't doing enough in practice to be able to properly evaluate/test the line? It seemed like you could get a good feel in the past, but maybe something changed this year?