Offensive Line Thread

[dublinirish]

do boo birds drink kool aid?

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Did anyone watch the spring game or see tape from the spring?

Currently, ND has the highest recruit average rating, over five years, in the nation. If '16 Tommy and Liam, and '17 Dillon stick, the gap will widen.

It is easy to identify this with 20-20 hindsight. As far as last year, ND had some real limitations to succeed at the zone blocking scheme they attempted, while they had the overall talent to pull it off, and it shouldn't have been a big deal.

• At where Elmer was. Moving back and forth from guard to tackle, left to right.
• Christian Lombard's ceiling.
• In hindsight McGlinchey not being promoted over Lombard.
• Martin with injury and setback.
• Hegarty with health setback.
• Hanratty with concussions and injury.
• The loss of Martin and Watt from the previous year.

And this is a key point.

ND was in a lot different of a position that what they seemed. Self inflicted wounds? Maybe. Some. Best coaching decisions made? Probably, but a few key ones for the offensive line hurt.

In the spring game this year by comparison, everyone knew where they were at, what they were supposed to do, and how to do it. This includes substitutions and whole new lines, from down the depth charts.

The only player that didn't cut it for me was Hunter Bivin. He just didn't seem to have it, any of it.

The other players looked quick, big, strong, and had great footwork. They also played against a defense with the best hands of any I have seen at ND in recent years.

And they could execute the zone blocking on pulls (especially that quick guard pull). Hell, Saturday even the tackles pulled. In the past, Lombard never could pull. Hanratty, Martin, and Hegarty never had the strength to blow it wide open, in fact, Ronnie Stanley was the only lineman with the footwork to be able to tag a defender every time at the second level and beyond.

I mean really did you see the spring game? McGlinchey pulled and just flattened people. He also blocked straight ahead walled people off, released, and caught his share at the second level. Elmer, Nelson, and Barr just malled people on the inside. Fast and strong people. With Martin, they showed athleticism we have not seen across the middle of the interior line for a whole lot of years.

I think we are a lot closer to critical mass than most people think.

And besides, as far as O-line U, I will point to the most important single issue in my book. Top offensive linemen are committing to ND because of the coaching and how they perceive it will help them develop for their goals to reach the NFL. So, pardon me for helping stir up the hype . . .

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Whiskey (I believe) will be the first to point out that the "lack" of dominance on a consistent level from the OL as a group could be due to blocking scheme and play calling.

That is exactly what I would say. Kelly will never run a gap-blocking scheme predicated on brute force. Nor should we want him to, since: (1) none of the best offenses in CFB have utilized such a scheme in many years; and (2) our talent at WR would go to waste if we're not spreading the field regularly. Kelly's aiming for a power spread a la Meyer and Malzahn.

Anyways, my point is that the unit doesn't have to dominate in college to be considered OL-U. Recruit well, develop the talent, get the guys signed to a Sunday team and the label will take care of itself.

That's an important distinction. My impression is that the moniker "[Position Group] U" indicates elite recruiting and development which is reflected by success in the NFL. It's inarguable that our OL recruiting has been the best in the nation over the last several years, and as for NFL success, we've got a solid argument there as well (though that's a lagging indicator, so the current sample size is small). Put another way, I don't think it's premature to say that ND is emerging as OL U (which nicely complements our continuing status as TE U).

The skeptics here are correct to point out that ND's OL hasn't been as a dominant as some others in recent years. But we've clearly been elite at pass protection for several long stretches, and I'd attribute most of our run game struggles to QB-scheme incompatibilities. Those seem to be past us now, and Harry has set the table for several years of dominant OL play. Our unique recruiting advantages allow us to be multiple in ways that few other college programs can imitate. Assuming one of our QBs can finally get his sh!t together, we'll be able to spread and shred or smash mouth as the situation dictates, which will make us a nightmare to defend against.

 

[Rocket89]

We won't see an O-line as good as the 2011 squad's for awhile. Only 17 sacks allowed that season with a slow QB.. They gave Tommy time to throw with his accuracy and the offense was pretty tough in 2011 too. Don't know how that team dropped 5 games, all were close. With 2012's defense that could have easily been a BCS bowl team. Jonas gray and Ciere wood had great YPC averages that year too. Very please with the OL recruiting this year as well.

2013 line though, just 8 sacks surrendered all year with Rees. Maybe not as good in run blocking but the talent/experience at running back wasn't as strong as 2011.

 

[Wild Bill]

Whiskey (I believe) will be the first to point out that the "lack" of dominance on a consistent level from the OL as a group could be due to blocking scheme and play calling. ND does, however, recruit really well and that size and talent has translated well into the NFL with nine or ten former players in the League along the OL (not sure if that number is up-to-date and accurate). Anyways, my point is that the unit doesn't have to dominate in college to be considered OL-U. Recruit well, develop the talent, get the guys signed to a Sunday team and the label will take care of itself.

That is exactly what I would say. Kelly will never run a gap-blocking scheme predicated on brute force. Nor should we want him to, since: (1) none of the best offenses in CFB have utilized such a scheme in many years; and (2) our talent at WR would go to waste if we're not spreading the field regularly. Kelly's aiming for a power spread a la Meyer and Malzahn.

You can be tough, smart, physical and dominant regardless of system. The late 90s Denver Broncos line is a good example. That group was nasty and all they did was zone block and pass block.

 

[ab2cmiller]

ND claiming to be O-Line U would be very similar to Stanford claiming to be Tight End U.

Just because we have had some decent success recently with putting guys into the NFL and we've done a great job of recruiting over the last few years gives us zero right to claim this title.

If Stanford claimed to be Tight End U, they would be laughed out of the building, and rightly so.

You have to consistently put guys in the NFL over a longer period of time then just a few years to try to claim a title like this.

 

[PANDFAN]

April 21, 2015
Chuck Kyle: Harry Hiestand Is Personable

Andrew Ivins
BlueandGold.com

Cleveland St. Ignatius head coach Chuck Kyle knows a thing or two about the college football recruiting process. The two-time USA Today High School Coach of the Year has spent the past 32 years watching the parade of college assistants coaches make the rounds at St. Ignatius.

He has had kids commit to Ohio State and he has had ones commit to Notre Dame. But in recent years, the trend has been favoring the Irish.

Sunday, St. Ignatius three-star offensive tackle Liam Eichenberg committed to Notre Dame.

Eichenberg, who was also considering Ohio State, is set to become the St. Ignatius product to sign with Irish in the past two years, joining former offensive tackle Jimmy Bryne, who like Eichenberg was considering the Buckeyes, before picking Notre Dame.

While it might seem like a bit of anomaly for the Irish to steal two top linemen from Ohio State's backyard in the span of just a few years, Kyle claims that there's a reason why his players are crossing state lines for school, and it starts with Notre Dame offensive line coach Harry Hiestand, who was the primary recruiter for both Eichenberg and Bryne.

"Harry is a very personable, caring and excellent teacher and I think our kids understand that's important at the next stage in their career," Kyle said. "They need [and wanted] someone that cares about them. Football is only for a certain number of hours a day, but at Notre Dame there are classes and things that impact their future, and I think Harry has a very good perspective on that."

Hiestand, who was hired by Notre Dame in 2012, has quickly developed a reputation as a top recruiter when it comes to the offensive line. Since the 2013 class, he has signed eight offensive linemen ranked as a four-star prospects or higher by Rivals.com. He's already set to add to that number this cycle with Cincinnati Elder four-star tackle Tommy Kraemer committed and he could double up if Eichenberg sees a jump up in the rankings.

"Harry's an excellent offensive line coach and he has shown that over the years," Kyle said. "I just think the kids realize that, and that they will develop and mature nicely with him."

Kyle Talks Eicheneberg…

While it's well documented that Ohio State offered Eichenberg before he even played a varsity snap of football, Kyle claims he always knew that the 6-4, 285-pound tackle had the talent to play at the next level.

Kyle first saw Eichneberg when he was playing basketball as an eight grader, and saw the potential right then and there to be an elite lineman.

"Liam is obviously a big strong guy, but the nice thing about him is that he's obviously athletic and that's why I think offensive tackle is a great place for him. He always offered to do some defense too, but we try to platoon, and he was just a natural fit at tackle," Kyle said. "He has played right, he has played left, but most of the time it has been on the left. If you're playing on that side of the line with a right-handed quarterback he's kind of important."

Eichenberg is ranked by Rivals.com as the No. 37 offensive tackle in the country and No. 16 player in Ohio for the class of 2016.

 

[NDinL.A.]

ND claiming to be O-Line U would be very similar to Stanford claiming to be Tight End U.

Just because we have had some decent success recently with putting guys into the NFL and we've done a great job of recruiting over the last few years gives us zero right to claim this title.

If Stanford claimed to be Tight End U, they would be laughed out of the building, and rightly so.

You have to consistently put guys in the NFL over a longer period of time then just a few years to try to claim a title like this.

Thank you. That is the post that should put this to bed (but it won't of course bc one poster won't let it go).

Can't wait for us to become O-line U, but we ain't there yet.

 

[ThePiombino]

ND claiming to be O-Line U would be very similar to Stanford claiming to be Tight End U.

Just because we have had some decent success recently with putting guys into the NFL and we've done a great job of recruiting over the last few years gives us zero right to claim this title.

If Stanford claimed to be Tight End U, they would be laughed out of the building, and rightly so.

You have to consistently put guys in the NFL over a longer period of time then just a few years to try to claim a title like this.

Thank you. That is the post that should put this to bed (but it won't of course bc one poster won't let it go).

Can't wait for us to become O-line U, but we ain't there yet.

Spot on, gents.

 

[irishfan]

We won't see an O-line as good as the 2011 squad's for awhile. Only 17 sacks allowed that season with a slow QB.. They gave Tommy time to throw with his accuracy and the offense was pretty tough in 2011 too. Don't know how that team dropped 5 games, all were close. With 2012's defense that could have easily been a BCS bowl team. Jonas gray and Ciere wood had great YPC averages that year too. Very please with the OL recruiting this year as well.

This team was STACKED. I made a thread about it when bored last off-season, but that was the most talented team BK has had here. That team would be 12-0 if we had 2012-Golson on it.

6 Offensive starters drafted
-- Floyd (1st)
-- Eifert (1st)
-- Martin (1st)
-- Watt (3rd)
-- Riddick (6th)
-- Jones (6th)
-- Gray/Robinson kicking around the NFL still

13 (!) defensive players in the 2-deep drafted
-- Smith (1st)
-- Te'o (2nd)
-- Tuitt (2nd)
-- Niklas (2nd--he was LB and started a game)
-- Nix (3rd)
-- Shembo (4th)
-- Fleming (5th)
-- Blanton (5th)
-- Lynch (5th)
-- Jackson (6th)
-- KLM (6th)
-- Slaughter (6th)
-- Motta (7th)

Sorry to hijack the thread with that, but the 2011 team was just sadly stacked and had top-5 talent that year.

 

[kmoose]

Too all the boo birds... You know how I know I'm right? Because Whiskey didn't show up with a spreadsheet breaking down any quantitative disadvantages the Irish have compared to any other program out there. Actually he rep'd me. Crusader 1, Boo birds 0.

.

Careful now. All of that patting yourself on the back is how people hurt their shoulders.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

That is exactly what I would say. Kelly will never run a gap-blocking scheme predicated on brute force. Nor should we want him to, since: (1) none of the best offenses in CFB have utilized such a scheme in many years; and (2) our talent at WR would go to waste if we're not spreading the field regularly. Kelly's aiming for a power spread a la Meyer and Malzahn.



That's an important distinction. My impression is that the moniker "[Position Group] U" indicates elite recruiting and development which is reflected by success in the NFL. It's inarguable that our OL recruiting has been the best in the nation over the last several years, and as for NFL success, we've got a solid argument there as well (though that's a lagging indicator, so the current sample size is small). Put another way, I don't think it's premature to say that ND is emerging as OL U (which nicely complements our continuing status as TE U).

The skeptics here are correct to point out that ND's OL hasn't been as a dominant as some others in recent years. But we've clearly been elite at pass protection for several long stretches, and I'd attribute most of our run game struggles to QB-scheme incompatibilities. Those seem to be past us now, and Harry has set the table for several years of dominant OL play. Our unique recruiting advantages allow us to be multiple in ways that few other college programs can imitate. Assuming one of our QBs can finally get his sh!t together, we'll be able to spread and shred or smash mouth as the situation dictates, which will make us a nightmare to defend against.

Exactly!

First, let me go on record. My only use of a slogan like "O-line-U" is for recruiting. The above quoted article is the substance to back it. High school players and coaches, very talented ones no less, are starting to recognize what Harry has to offer and are responding to that! Any school that wants to win better think of themselves as "O-line-U," no mater how good their skilled players.

So now back to something of relevance to this tangled discussion. Several have stated that you need to run your offensive scheme in a more sophisticated manner to maximize utilization of your interior five, just so you can get as many of your skill players directly involved in the proposition of advancing the ball with any spread type of offense. Correct!

Someone said zone blocking is the best way to do that. I don't disagree.

What I say, have said, and will continue to say, is that it is tough to make a success out of a zone blocking scheme without the exact right players, coached correctly, and the balance of the offense executing just as sharply. A lesser scheme, gap or even man does not have all of the skill requirement of its offensive linemen that a zone scheme does. For example against a zone scheme, if you have a plethora of mountainous linemen, you can jam the middle against an offense that doesn't execute the zone gap scheme correctly.

With a simpler scheme, you just block down and run where the defense isn't. It's as easy as pie. Not so with a zone scheme. Stacking the middle can be negated, but it requires a lot more skill, technique, and sophistication.

We saw this last year. Remember, more than any other scheme the zone requires every man to be perfect on assignment. Last year Christian Lombard got better, but never really knew which man, or was physically able to get to the correct man when pulling inside. Unless he could, there was always one man in perfect position to make a tackle after minimum yards gained. And this was only one issue.

Could we have run the offense that Kelly has evolved with another blocking scheme? No, I don't see how.

This year, from the tape from spring, and the spring game it seems as this has really been addressed and there is about eight guys that can play assignment correct every time in a zone blocking scheme.

My big reason for stepping in to this conversation was because of the over simple assertion that OSU's line blocked better or was in some way better than ours. That it was related to an inherent weakness in our players or coaching. The reason I believe that is false is that OSU's blocking scheme is fundamentally easier to execute for their linemen. So they may look better, and they may even have appeared to do more for their team over the season, but if you talk to those that coached against the ND line, they would tell you that it was a war!

And to really finish sinking the nail, the things that affect the success of a zone blocking scheme no matter whether the line blocks correctly every time are :

• Running backs ability to provide good pass protection, then release (how, where, and when!)
• Depth of the quarterback on zone read, and certain passing plays is critical.
• Cadence and timing of quarterback play calling.
• Coaching change-ups (and or predictability) to avoid defenses stacking the middle and just sitting there. (with out the ability to make and execute crucial adjustments, this is like giving the defense a two man advantage.)

My point would be more that as ND fans we are in a position to see a major output in production due to the kind of fine tune changes that it appears the team has made. And secondarily bit with every bit of the same importance, that Kelly's teams historically falling short on less obvious things like this are why we have had "bad luck," or had "inexplicable losses."

 

[dublinirish]

This team was STACKED. I made a thread about it when bored last off-season, but that was the most talented team BK has had here. That team would be 12-0 if we had 2012-Golson on it.

6 Offensive starters drafted
-- Floyd (1st)
-- Eifert (1st)
-- Martin (1st)
-- Watt (3rd)
-- Riddick (6th)
-- Jones (6th)
-- Gray/Robinson kicking around the NFL still

13 (!) defensive players in the 2-deep drafted
-- Smith (1st)
-- Te'o (2nd)
-- Tuitt (2nd)
-- Niklas (2nd--he was LB and started a game)
-- Nix (3rd)
-- Shembo (4th)
-- Fleming (5th)
-- Blanton (5th)
-- Lynch (5th)
-- Jackson (6th)
-- KLM (6th)
-- Slaughter (6th)
-- Motta (7th)

Sorry to hijack the thread with that, but the 2011 team was just sadly stacked and had top-5 talent that year.

Weis guys huh?

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Weis guys huh?

Not all. Far from it!

 

[dublinirish]

Not all. Far from it!

Tuitt and Lynch?

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Tuitt and Lynch?

Nix, Shembo, Jackson, Niklas . . .

 

[dublinirish]

Nix, Shembo, Jackson, Niklas . . .

you got me on Niklas
Nix was a Weis recruit who committed (to Alford) after he left and Shembo originally committed to Weis and stayed committed when BK took over no?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

What I say, have said, and will continue to say, is that it is tough to make a success out of a zone blocking scheme without the exact right players, coached correctly, and the balance of the offense executing just as sharply. A lesser scheme, gap or even man does not have all of the skill requirement of its offensive linemen that a zone scheme does. For example against a zone scheme, if you have a plethora of mountainous linemen, you can jam the middle against an offense that doesn't execute the zone gap scheme correctly.

With a simpler scheme, you just block down and run where the defense isn't. It's as easy as pie. Not so with a zone scheme. Stacking the middle can be negated, but it requires a lot more skill, technique, and sophistication.

My understanding has always been that spread teams rely on zone blocking schemes because they're heavily dependent on option concepts; not just the classic Dive/ Keep and Keep/Pitch options in the running game, but increasingly packaged plays with Run/ Pass options as well. Zone blocking is well suited to such plays because the OL doesn't have to know the QB's decision beforehand in order to correctly execute its assignments.

Gap blocking schemes are, as you mentioned, much simpler and faster to develop. And there's much to recommend them if you're bigger and faster than your opponent; but their simplicity also makes it much easier for the defense to anticipate based on personnel and formation tendencies, so when a gap blocking team goes toe to toe with an evenly matched opponent, offensive efficiency can grind to a halt...

My big reason for stepping in to this conversation was because of the over simple assertion that OSU's line blocked better or was in some way better than ours. That it was related to an inherent weakness in our players or coaching. The reason I believe that is false is that OSU's blocking scheme is fundamentally easier to execute for their linemen. So they may look better, and they may even have appeared to do more for their team over the season, but if you talk to those that coached against the ND line, they would tell you that it was a war!

... but I'm starting to question that orthodoxy based on OSU's recent success. Warinner utilizes both zone and gap blocking schemes, as ND fans know from the success of our own 2011 rushing attack. I'm open to correction on this, but that seems like a difficult thing to do well (as evidenced by the lack of (any?) other coaches doing so*) which gave the Buckeyes some unique advantages. Then you've also got Meyer's schematic innovation/ genius for spread rushing attacks, by which he managed to package option-like constraint plays into classic gap-blocking power runs. That potent combination is what allowed the Buckeyes to run over everyone on their way to a title last year.

Regardless, I think the explanation above for why we utilize zone blocking still holds. But teams that rely only on zone blocking tend to be much more finesse-oriented, whereas those that also utilize gap blocking schemes can play MANBALL when necessary. I hope we're going to look more like the latter.

*I wonder if Malzahn does something similar.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

My understanding has always been that spread teams rely on zone blocking schemes because they're heavily dependent on option concepts; not just the classic Dive/ Keep and Keep/Pitch options in the running game, but increasingly packaged plays with Run/ Pass options as well. Zone blocking is well suited to such plays because the OL doesn't have to know the QB's decision beforehand in order to correctly execute its assignments.

Gap blocking schemes are, as you mentioned, much simpler and faster to develop. And there's much to recommend them if you're bigger and faster than your opponent; but their simplicity also makes it much easier for the defense to anticipate based on personnel and formation tendencies, so when a gap blocking team goes toe to toe with an evenly matched opponent, offensive efficiency can grind to a halt...



... but I'm starting to question that orthodoxy based on OSU's recent success. Warinner utilizes both zone and gap blocking schemes, as ND fans know from the success of our own 2011 rushing attack. I'm open to correction on this, but that seems like a difficult thing to do well (as evidenced by the lack of (any?) other coaches doing so*) which gave the Buckeyes some unique advantages. Then you've also got Meyer's schematic innovation/ genius for spread rushing attacks, by which he managed to package option-like constraint plays into classic gap-blocking power runs. That potent combination is what allowed the Buckeyes to run over everyone on their way to a title last year.

Regardless, I think the explanation above for why we utilize zone blocking still holds. But teams that rely only on zone blocking tend to be much more finesse-oriented, whereas those that also utilize gap blocking schemes can play MANBALL when necessary. I hope we're going to look more like the latter.

*I wonder if Malzahn does something similar.

The other advantage of zone blocking is that you don't need to block everybody, just the guys that don't take themselves out of the play. So you can effectively do more with the front five, if everybody does their job.

The whole part of your post about mixing zone and gap, along with manball, is exactly what I was trying to express. With ND the last couple of years you had a machine that wasn't operating quite right. Kind of like having a lawnmower with a bent shaft and uneven wheels. No matter how perfect and sharp your blades, you are just not going to get an even cut.

Reasons the line could be kicking ass and not looking like it the last couple of years :

• Running backs could not pass block.
• Running backs often didn't hit the right hole, see the hole they had, or work the run like CJ does. (Why do you think the coaches are making such a big deal about this?)
• Quarteback flattens out his zone read play, removing his option, defeating the play.
• Quarterback's drops on passes are equally mysterious.
• Tommy was flat to the line, and for part of his last year he corrected it and did better. But this indicates an ongoing, longterm problem. Which is significant, being that the basic mechanics of this are central to any success with this kind of offense.
• Blocking was at time inconsistent at the ends.
• Elmer moved, was more than confused and his footwork suffered, makes problems for the other four linemen.
• Lombard couldn't consistenly find the right man to block, which does the same thing; it automatically puts a tackler in position to make the play that no other lineman can block, not even if he is Superman.
• AND, other teams would just jam up the middle, where the inside zone read starts from and we would do nothing to effectively counteract that. The best example of the way an offensive line needs to adapt during a game is the last Navy game with Diaco as DC. He just had his d-linemen playing soft, waiting to diagnose the option. What did Navy do? They stopped running the option altogether and put in a straight ahead man blocking scheme, and giving up forty-five pounds a man, crushed us!!!

All of the listed has no effect on whether your linemen are knocking the crap out of the other side. You could grade all your linemen B+ or better and still just barely win, against a lesser opponent! Remember all the games that people commented on how the other team looked gassed at the end, but none of us thought the Irish finished off their opponents?

I just don't expect us to be working against ourselves as much this year. And it may be fun!

 

[Bogtrotter07]

you got me on Niklas
Nix was a Weis recruit who committed (to Alford) after he left and Shembo originally committed to Weis and stayed committed when BK took over no?

My criterion was, who was coach when the player faxed his letter in. And who had to close the sale.

 

[BobbyMac]

Whiskey and Bog,

Your last 4 posts were the best exchange I've ever read on this site. Proud my silly lil thread spawned it.

.

 

[phgreek]

Not until we commit to pounding the rock and being a team nobody wants to play because of our toughness in the trenches.

yea...at least.

EG had issues in 2014, and at least part of the responsibility for those issues resides with the O-line. ...they were leaky, and allowed penetration to the point where read option was impacted at the mesh point...yes EG rode it too much, but come on. He got smashed from the back side...he had people at his feet, he had people in the play on read option...In my recent memory of game performance ND o-line had one really good game...happens to be the last game...please note they were in two tight end sets....not totally, but fairly frequently. I don't think two tight end sets will suit Kelly for very long....

This O-line might be good...even great, but they have a TON to prove before this particular O-line is considered elite, and then that PERFORMANCE needs to be duplicated over 3 or 4 years with 1st and 2nd rounders in each...then I'd buy it.

 

[BobbyMac]

How many of the 5 guys who weree responsible for giving Penn St the title, Linebacker U were high draft picks or ever Pro Bowlers?
Next, compare your findings to the original Position U and their success in the NFL and then tell why I can't have a different set of criteria than others... when the programs that made Position U popular had different criteria.

.

 

[NDinL.A.]

How many of the 5 guys who weree responsible for giving Penn St the title, Linebacker U were high draft picks or ever Pro Bowlers?
Next, compare your findings to the original Position U and their success in the NFL and then tell why I can't have a different set of criteria than others... when the programs that made Position U popular had different criteria.

.

I'll let you do it.

.

 

[Rocket89]

How many of the 5 guys who weree responsible for giving Penn St the title, Linebacker U were high draft picks or ever Pro Bowlers?
Next, compare your findings to the original Position U and their success in the NFL and then tell why I can't have a different set of criteria than others... when the programs that made Position U popular had different criteria.

Well, Penn State's Linebacker U moniker really stretches back to Paterno's earliest days coaching. 13 linebackers made first team All-American. 17 total seasons from those players resulting in first team All-American honors.

From 1999 to 2007 four different players brought 6 seasons of first-team All-American honors. So that would seem to qualify PSU for the title, even if you ignore the lack of NFL success.

But it's not like ND really has something amazing right now. Awesome recruiting yes, but not lines who have dominated in college, not much NFL success, and we haven't had a first-team All-American on the line in 20 years--although Martin probably should have been one in 2013.

Anyway, isn't the whole ____ U kind of dumb anyway? Seems like it was cool in 2001, not so much anymore. Especially when so many fan bases start yelling it at the first hint of success at any position.

 

[ab2cmiller]

Anyway, isn't the whole ____ U kind of dumb anyway? Seems like it was cool in 2001, not so much anymore. Especially when so many fan bases start yelling it at the first hint of success at any position.

BINGO

 

[BobbyMac]

Well, Penn State's Linebacker U moniker really stretches back to Paterno's earliest days coaching. 13 linebackers made first team All-American. 17 total seasons from those players resulting in first team All-American honors.

From 1999 to 2007 four different players brought 6 seasons of first-team All-American honors. So that would seem to qualify PSU for the title, even if you ignore the lack of NFL success.

But it's not like ND really has something amazing right now. Awesome recruiting yes, but not lines who have dominated in college, not much NFL success, and we haven't had a first-team All-American on the line in 20 years--although Martin probably should have been one in 2013.

Anyway, isn't the whole ____ U kind of dumb anyway? Seems like it was cool in 2001, not so much anymore. Especially when so many fan bases start yelling it at the first hint of success at any position.

That part you have correct. Linebacker U was first used in the mid 70's to describe PSU's run of LB's from '68 through '75. Of the 5 players who "earned" that moniker, you've heard of one, Jack Ham. The later LB's from PSU starting with Shane Conlon in the late 80's have nothing to do with what I'm talking about here and that is the criteria in which the title _______ U is designated.

PSU swiped the Position U idea from Purdue. They were the original Quarterback U in the 60's. Their QB's were not only All American's but NFL stars as Len Dawson and Bob Griese QB'd about half of the first 10 Super Bowls.

So what is the definition of Position U? There is none. There are many facets to what can make up the definition. The game has changed, college football used to be king, then the pro's picked up steam with the Cowboys and Steelers in the 70's and eventually passed CFB. Now, fantasy football and recruiting have industies completely devoted to just that aspect of the sport. I'm just trying to keep up with the times and include the importance of recruiting to the overall moniker of O Line U.

I asked who would you trade the current ND O-line starters for in the country. Only one person responded with an answer... Alabama and USC. I have no problem with that, he has his opinion and it is no doubt defensible. Now throw in the rest of the depth chart, the incoming freshman and what's committed in the pipeline and I'll ask again, who would you trade places with in the country?

Plus, who are a bunch of college football fans to start defining words and phrases? We all wait on pins and needles for a guy to "commit" only to get back on the pins and needles as he continues visiting other schools.

.
Lastly, yes it's silly. That's why I wrote it. To start a discussion knowing that some guys would get completely bent out of shape and not even try to defend their position. That being said, I won't be printing O Line U t-shirts anytime soon. I think the NFL component has to be weighed into the equation. Top ten OL recruits pick schools where they think they will be prepared for Sunday paydays. That shows up with guys on NFL rosters. That's why ND is doing so well recruiting because Coach Hiestand is teaching Sunday School at ND.

.

 

[BobbyMac]

I wonder what part of the 116 guests are butt hurt OSU creepers?

Someone do an IP snap shot and lets check it out.

.

 

[Irish YJ]

Harry Hiestand Building a Legacy at Notre Dame // UHND

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Look at the recruit list, it is ridiculous!