Golden stacked almost every position.

hawaiicane

Thunderdome
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
2,001
Looking at this roster, we really have very little holes left. Almost every unit is stacked numberswise. Of course, most of it is unproven primarily because they are mostly incoming FR, rs-FR, or true SO. But numberswise, to balance the roster and prep for future needs, we really dont have very many critical needs that must be filled this recruiting cycle.

QB - 5 kids, no seniors, 3 FR. Even if Olsen decommits, we dont need to panic.

RB - This is an exception. With injuries a major concern here, you want to go at least 5-6 deep here. Rotate 3 backs, have 3 backs to fill in case of injury. Two kids for 2013 would be ideal to go with Clements, Duke, Dillard, Crawford in 2013. Hagans looks to be a pure FB now. Can make do with just Collins if we dont get a stud to complement him (not sure i want a roster "filler" as the second.)

TE - 5 kids all return for 2013. Fine with just 1 kid, 2 kids max. I personally prefer Kerr to decommit just like Holifield did last year unless he can transition to OT.

WR - Stacked. 8-9 kids for 2013, only Hurns will be a SR in 2013. AJL coming in 2013. I would only take one more - either Coley or Whitfield. No need for anyone else this year - save those ships for RB, OL, S.

OL - Major exception. You dont want to be putting true FR OL into the rotation. We need OL now and right now to get them ready, not for 2013, but for 2014. 4 OL should be minimum. That gives us 11-12 kids for 2014, all with at least one year in the program, and gives us a much better chance to find 7-8 kids that can contribute.

DE - Stacked. We dont need a single DE this year. We have TEN DEs on the roster. Take only the cream of the crop here ie Williams.

DT - Stacked. We will have 7 or so DTs returning in 2013 unless we see attrition or nonqualifiers. We need only 1 DT, but cant turn away Bostwick and Bain. We've had so much trouble recruiting this spot in recent years, cant look a gift horse in the mouth.

LB - Stacked. 9 LBs return in 2013. Take 1 LB, 2 at most.

CB - Stacked. Hargreaves or Alexander is it.

S - Major exception. I'd take minimum 3 kids here.

Now, whether all these current kids will be JAGS or contributors is up in the air. I think Golden already has an idea of who will be let go since the max class prediction of 20 implies that we will say goodbye to at least 8 non-senior kids from the current roster (20 minus 12 graduating SRs = 8).
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
TE? I like Kerr right where he is.
DE?
DT? We need more than one!

Thing is, we may have a number of kids listed at certain positions, but we need some quality - to fill QUALITY gaps, not numbers gaps.
 
Looking at this roster, we really have very little holes left. Almost every unit is stacked numberswise. Of course, most of it is unproven primarily because they are mostly incoming FR, rs-FR, or true SO. But numberswise, to balance the roster and prep for future needs, we really dont have very many critical needs that must be filled this recruiting cycle.

QB - 5 kids, no seniors, 3 FR. Even if Olsen decommits, we dont need to panic.

RB - This is an exception. With injuries a major concern here, you want to go at least 5-6 deep here. Rotate 3 backs, have 3 backs to fill in case of injury. Two kids for 2013 would be ideal to go with Clements, Duke, Dillard, Crawford in 2013. Hagans looks to be a pure FB now. Can make do with just Collins if we dont get a stud to complement him (not sure i want a roster "filler" as the second.)

TE - 5 kids all return for 2013. Fine with just 1 kid, 2 kids max. I personally prefer Kerr to decommit just like Holifield did last year unless he can transition to OT.

WR - Stacked. 8-9 kids for 2013, only Hurns will be a SR in 2013. AJL coming in 2013. I would only take one more - either Coley or Whitfield. No need for anyone else this year - save those ships for RB, OL, S.

OL - Major exception. You dont want to be putting true FR OL into the rotation. We need OL now and right now to get them ready, not for 2013, but for 2014. 4 OL should be minimum. That gives us 11-12 kids for 2014, all with at least one year in the program, and gives us a much better chance to find 7-8 kids that can contribute.

DE - Stacked. We dont need a single DE this year. We have TEN DEs on the roster. Take only the cream of the crop here ie Williams.

DT - Stacked. We will have 7 or so DTs returning in 2013 unless we see attrition or nonqualifiers. We need only 1 DT, but cant turn away Bostwick and Bain. We've had so much trouble recruiting this spot in recent years, cant look a gift horse in the mouth.

LB - Stacked. 9 LBs return in 2013. Take 1 LB, 2 at most.

CB - Stacked. Hargreaves or Alexander is it.

S - Major exception. I'd take minimum 3 kids here.

Now, whether all these current kids will be JAGS or contributors is up in the air. I think Golden already has an idea of who will be let go since the max class prediction of 20 implies that we will say goodbye to at least 8 non-senior kids from the current roster (20 minus 12 graduating SRs = 8).
Whatever you're smoking, it must be strong.

You equate "stacked" with numbers alone. Talent and class year barely seem to figure in.

We NEED DTs. We have numbers but very little quality. I couldnt disagree more with your assessment.

Likewise TEs. White and Dye probably are in their last years, amd Clevelad has one more. Perry may never play the spot. E only guy we have who will contribute in '14 is Walford. And is is an OL-like strength spot where kids need time to develop. We need numbers at this spot. If we are relying on true frosh in '14, this is a mess. You need two kids this year to avoid that. If we take three differentiated kids in dobrd, kerr and TJ, i'm fine wth that.

Just two examples.
 
Advertisement
Agree 100 percent with Hawaii though think term stacked is misleading. Sands you are right talent is not where it needs at certain positions but can't create depth issues to solve problem (robbing Peter to pay Paul). Coaching needs to fix issues other wise drop the deadweight
 
Advertisement
Not one position looks the way it should. Golden will tell you that himself. You need 3 or 4 classes of great recruiting before you can be considered stacked. One and a class isn't going to do it.
 
stacked, no, we need quality in these positions for example at the DT position, I dont think D. Smith is that good and dont think highly of cory king. Thats just to name a few.
 
"Stacked" means something different, after a decade of Coker/Shannon and their knack for having zero players for a given position for years on end.

Yes, TALENT in depth is a requisite for
"Stacked", but having a one, two or three deep is a pre-requisite. :)
 
Advertisement
go look at FSU roster Alab, and everybody else's you will know the real meaning of stacked... we are no where near stacked... when you have about 15 OL, 20+ DL, and so on a so forth, then we are talking stacked... as of right now we need every position except RB and QB stacked to over 10-12. 5QB's and 5RB's and we will be str8..
 
Ok to the point of what qualifies as depth, IMO this is an ideal roster breakdown with a pro-style offense (I made it exact numbers not because it needs to be just so it will equal 85):

QB = 5
RB/FB = 7
WR = 9
TE = 6
OL = 16
DE = 8
DT = 8
LB = 9
CB= 8
S= 6
K/P = 3
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top