forums

The disparity of line play between Miami and the Elites

B

BoxingRobes

Junior
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
11,595
Lets take a look at Miami on the lines and compare it to that of the elites. For this quick study, lets look at Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State.

First, lets take a look at the offensive lines and the run game. Next to the school is the number of attempts per game each team had in 2017. The elites run the ball at a high clip and stay on the field on average more their their opponent. Miami does not. On the field for a bottom third in the nation time, can't stay on the field and they do not establish the run.

The disparity between the line depth and quality especially with Alabama and Ohio State versus the ACC is evident. Clemson, however, closes the gap elsewhere. We'll look at them below. However, it is notable that OL play in the ACC is a step back from the SEC. Only two Clemson OL made All-ACC Preseason honors this year (Hyatt and Falcinetti).

Alabama (43.5) - 5* (2), 4* (11), 3* (2)
247 Average - .9383
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 60, 35, 86
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 31m10s

Clemson (42) - 5* (2), 4* (3), 3* (8)
247 Average - .8904
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 7, 8, 13
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 31m20s

Ohio State (42) - 5* (2), 4* (6), 3* (5)
247 Average - .9279
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 6, 17, 57
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 30m15

Miami (32) - 5* (0), 4* (6), 3* (9)
247 Average - .8858
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 126, 99, 107
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 27m50s

Looking at the defensive line. Next to the team is the number of down linemen that often employ in their base package. Again, looking at teams with high yield on the DL that consistently get their opponent off the field on the third down. The disparity between Miami and the aforementioned three is cavernous. Only Nesta Silvera and Gerald Willis would rank in the aforementioned three teams Top 5 DL recruits over the past 4+ years.

Alabama (3) - 5* (2), 4* (11), 3* (0)
*I added in the players that are listed currently in the two deep at their EDGE spots.
247 Average - .9518
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 30, 8, 7

Clemson (4) - 5* (4), 4* (10), 3* (1)
247 Average - .9415
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 6, 4, 4

Ohio State (4) - 5* (3), 4* (10), 3* (2)
247 Average - .9465
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 17, 11, 29

Miami (4) - 5* (0), 4* (5), 3* (7)
247 Average - .8925
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 75, 53, 67

I'm going to leave this without much analysis...I think the point I am trying to make is clear. Line play is an arms race and Miami continues to fall behind, especially on the defensive line.

To be fair, OL recruiting has picked up in the past year, but its only gotten Miami to a place where in 2-3 years, they could be considered at the top of the ACC in line play, not nationally. Not without a significant investment in OL evaluations and recruiting. Scaife and Reed are great prospects, but it will require 2+ more cycles of getting more Scaifes, Donaldson, and Reed type prospects to hang with the defensive lines we will see nationally and even in conference.

Defensive Line Recruiting is so far behind the status quo at the top of college football, its unfair to say Miami is even playing the same game. Its pedestrian and the results speak for themselves. While sack numbers and TFL numbers are strong, they are a product of the scheme Miami is playing and the result is a sacrifice on short yardage situations as well as on pass downs where Miami often allows easy passing conversions.

This isn't a thread to start talking QB recruiting or DB recruiting...those are completely different discussions to be had. Worthy conversations for their own thread. This is to dissect Miami's line recruiting and play...which is substandard and so poor nationally, it begs a analytical look statistically.
 

Advertisement
BoxingRobes said:
Lets take a look at Miami on the lines and compare it to that of the elites. For this quick study, lets look at Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State.

First, lets take a look at the offensive lines and the run game. Next to the school is the number of attempts per game each team had in 2017. The elites run the ball at a high clip and stay on the field on average more their their opponent. Miami does not. On the field for a bottom third in the nation time, can't stay on the field and they do not establish the run.

The disparity between the line depth and quality especially with Alabama and Ohio State versus the ACC is evident. Clemson, however, closes the gap elsewhere. We'll look at them below. However, it is notable that OL play in the ACC is a step back from the SEC. Only two Clemson OL made All-ACC Preseason honors this year (Hyatt and Falcinetti).

Alabama (43.5) - 5* (2), 4* (11), 3* (2)
247 Average - .9383
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 60, 35, 86
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 31m10s

Clemson (42) - 5* (2), 4* (3), 3* (8)
247 Average - .8904
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 7, 8, 13
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 31m20s

Ohio State (42) - 5* (2), 4* (6), 3* (5)
247 Average - .9279
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 6, 17, 57
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 30m15

Miami (32) - 5* (0), 4* (6), 3* (9)
247 Average - .8858
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 126, 99, 107
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 27m50s

Looking at the defensive line. Next to the team is the number of down linemen that often employ in their base package. Again, looking at teams with high yield on the DL that consistently get their opponent off the field on the third down. The disparity between Miami and the aforementioned three is cavernous. Only Nesta Silvera and Gerald Willis would rank in the aforementioned three teams Top 5 DL recruits over the past 4+ years.

Alabama (3) - 5* (2), 4* (11), 3* (0)
*I added in the players that are listed currently in the two deep at their EDGE spots.
247 Average - .9518
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 30, 8, 7

Clemson (4) - 5* (4), 4* (10), 3* (1)
247 Average - .9415
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 6, 4, 4

Ohio State (4) - 5* (3), 4* (10), 3* (2)
247 Average - .9465
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 17, 11, 29

Miami (4) - 5* (0), 4* (5), 3* (7)
247 Average - .8925
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 75, 53, 67

I'm going to leave this without much analysis...I think the point I am trying to make is clear. Line play is an arms race and Miami continues to fall behind, especially on the defensive line.

To be fair, OL recruiting has picked up in the past year, but its only gotten Miami to a place where in 2-3 years, they could be considered at the top of the ACC in line play, not nationally. Not without a significant investment in OL evaluations and recruiting. Scaife and Reed are great prospects, but it will require 2+ more cycles of getting more Scaifes, Donaldson, and Reed type prospects to hang with the defensive lines we will see nationally and even in conference.

Defensive Line Recruiting is so far behind the status quo at the top of college football, its unfair to say Miami is even playing the same game. Its pedestrian and the results speak for themselves. While sack numbers and TFL numbers are strong, they are a product of the scheme Miami is playing and the result is a sacrifice on short yardage situations as well as on pass downs where Miami often allows easy passing conversions.

This isn't a thread to start talking QB recruiting or DB recruiting...those are completely different discussions to be had. Worthy conversations for their own thread. This is to dissect Miami's line recruiting and play...which is substandard and so poor nationally, it begs a analytical look statistically.
Click to expand...
being pre-season ranked 8 was a fraud of epic proportion misleading the fan base.
 
Donaldson is a great guard. He’s no tackle and we saw it last night. Maybe he needs more time. The LSU front was ferocious and we were exposed. I’d like to see Scaife kick to RT and Donaldson move back inside. But I’m preaching to the choir here
 
Ive been banging this drum for what seems like forever at this point.

Richt recruited zero OL his first class (oka, tre johnson, who was rated a DE on rivals and no one thought was good). This was disastrous. He should have known better after inheriting a roster reflecting years of Kehoe and Swasey.

His second class gave us dykstra, hillery and herbert, along with gaynor and donaldson.

That’s one good prospect and one solid one in two years. (Herbert has a shoulder issue and maybe he gets there, but every team deals with injuries. Hillery, hard to be surprised by his career so far - he’s tracking his ranking.) On top of a line that had huge talent issues and holes. Hard to recover from that. And yet we only took three kids last year, and have two commits right now for ‘19. Line recruiting doesn’t seem like a priority for richt.

We need to get to the point where most OL redshirt, except for the really top prospects who are physically ready as frosh.

With our skill position kids, we don’t need the best OL prospects in the country. We do need physical legit OLs, along with a QB who can make plays and get the ball to the right kids.

As far as DL, just sigh. The program that produced Jerome Brown, Russell Maryland, Cortez Kennedy, Warren Sapp and Vince Wilfork now gets excited when our two-deep is full of guys on scholarship.

Top DL are hard to find and get. Always been the case. But we used to find them, and get them.
 
Advertisement
Dwinstitles said:
We not back
Click to expand...

Nope. We're not.

The sobering reality is...we're not even really close. The DL recruiting is alarming. One thing the ACC does have, is, at the top, strong DL recruiting and DL play. Clemson currently. Florida State when they were a contender had excellent DL recruiting. Even if we are to contend for the ACC Championship...DL recruiting needs to keep up.
 
BoxingRobes said:
Nope. We're not.

The sobering reality is...we're not even really close. The DL recruiting is alarming. One thing the ACC does have, is, at the top, strong DL recruiting and DL play. Clemson currently. Florida State when they were a contender had excellent DL recruiting. Even if we are to contend for the ACC Championship...DL recruiting needs to keep up.
Click to expand...
DL recruiting is brutal and DB
 
Dwinstitles said:
DL recruiting is brutal and DB
Click to expand...

DB is brutal only because of the misses. We've had some really bad misses with five star players that border on embarrassing. With that said, who we do have, is a pretty solid group that rates well in-conference and if I pulled the numbers, probably nationally (don't hold me to that). You could **** out of your window and hit a All-Conference DB in South Florida though, so I am not sure having simply an All-Conference unit merits praise. You could extend that narrative to Wide Receiver if we are getting complex, but that is for another thread.
 
BoxingRobes said:
DB is brutal only because of the misses. We've had some really bad misses with five star players that border on embarrassing. With that said, who we do have, is a pretty solid group that rates well in-conference and if I pulled the numbers, probably nationally (don't hold me to that). You could **** out of your window and hit a All-Conference DB in South Florida though, so I am not sure having simply an All-Conference unit merits praise. You could extend that narrative to Wide Receiver if we are getting complex, but that is for another thread.
Click to expand...
they felt those misses at db in that game
 
Advertisement
Dwinstitles said:
they felt those misses at db in that game
Click to expand...

Definitely.

Just based on who the team has at DB, missing Malek Young was evident. Dean doesn't sniff the rotation if Young is there. Jackson/Young/Bandy likely holds Burrow to some horrendous passing numbers (that are already pretty bad). Losing Young and Bandy getting ejected leave us with Dean, a player I don't think is Power 5 quality is a bad spot. In a better spot, you never see him outside of special teams. Even as a recruit he was poorly regarded (low 3*). Knowles, too. A low end 3* that in a better spot with a better recruiting plan at DB, never sees the field outside of special teams. Yet, here we are, essentially forced to play a grad transfer from The Citadel and two very low 3* players in our DB rotation the past two seasons. This SHOULD be over after this year, with an increase in DB talent, but still, these five star misses at the volume we've missed them are becoming a problem. If Bandy is ejected and we're trotting out Campbell, Surtain, Samuel(s), things are just fine. Even Al Blades Jr. was outplaying Dean in the game.

Miami needs to bite the bullet and just play the young kids and have them learn trial by fire. LSU did this last year and look what happened. They took their lumps defensively and were able to re-stock the cupboard pretty quickly. They dont have a single senior in the front seven rotation and numerous Sophomores. The only senior that plays any sizable number of snaps was John Battle IV, a SoFla kid.

I feel this is the year, underwhelming upperclassmen need to take a seat and let the youth play it out. Not just at DB, but Demetrius Jackson, Tito, etc need to take deeper bench roles and let Nesta, Garvin, Ford, Rousseau figure it out.
 
BoxingRobes said:
Lets take a look at Miami on the lines and compare it to that of the elites. For this quick study, lets look at Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State.

First, lets take a look at the offensive lines and the run game. Next to the school is the number of attempts per game each team had in 2017. The elites run the ball at a high clip and stay on the field on average more their their opponent. Miami does not. On the field for a bottom third in the nation time, can't stay on the field and they do not establish the run.

The disparity between the line depth and quality especially with Alabama and Ohio State versus the ACC is evident. Clemson, however, closes the gap elsewhere. We'll look at them below. However, it is notable that OL play in the ACC is a step back from the SEC. Only two Clemson OL made All-ACC Preseason honors this year (Hyatt and Falcinetti).

Alabama (43.5) - 5* (2), 4* (11), 3* (2)
247 Average - .9383
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 60, 35, 86
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 31m10s

Clemson (42) - 5* (2), 4* (3), 3* (8)
247 Average - .8904
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 7, 8, 13
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 31m20s

Ohio State (42) - 5* (2), 4* (6), 3* (5)
247 Average - .9279
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 6, 17, 57
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 30m15

Miami (32) - 5* (0), 4* (6), 3* (9)
247 Average - .8858
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 126, 99, 107
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 27m50s

Looking at the defensive line. Next to the team is the number of down linemen that often employ in their base package. Again, looking at teams with high yield on the DL that consistently get their opponent off the field on the third down. The disparity between Miami and the aforementioned three is cavernous. Only Nesta Silvera and Gerald Willis would rank in the aforementioned three teams Top 5 DL recruits over the past 4+ years.

Alabama (3) - 5* (2), 4* (11), 3* (0)
*I added in the players that are listed currently in the two deep at their EDGE spots.
247 Average - .9518
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 30, 8, 7

Clemson (4) - 5* (4), 4* (10), 3* (1)
247 Average - .9415
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 6, 4, 4

Ohio State (4) - 5* (3), 4* (10), 3* (2)
247 Average - .9465
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 17, 11, 29

Miami (4) - 5* (0), 4* (5), 3* (7)
247 Average - .8925
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 75, 53, 67

I'm going to leave this without much analysis...I think the point I am trying to make is clear. Line play is an arms race and Miami continues to fall behind, especially on the defensive line.

To be fair, OL recruiting has picked up in the past year, but its only gotten Miami to a place where in 2-3 years, they could be considered at the top of the ACC in line play, not nationally. Not without a significant investment in OL evaluations and recruiting. Scaife and Reed are great prospects, but it will require 2+ more cycles of getting more Scaifes, Donaldson, and Reed type prospects to hang with the defensive lines we will see nationally and even in conference.

Defensive Line Recruiting is so far behind the status quo at the top of college football, its unfair to say Miami is even playing the same game. Its pedestrian and the results speak for themselves. While sack numbers and TFL numbers are strong, they are a product of the scheme Miami is playing and the result is a sacrifice on short yardage situations as well as on pass downs where Miami often allows easy passing conversions.

This isn't a thread to start talking QB recruiting or DB recruiting...those are completely different discussions to be had. Worthy conversations for their own thread. This is to dissect Miami's line recruiting and play...which is substandard and so poor nationally, it begs a analytical look statistically.
Click to expand...
accurate!! 💯
 
The DT recruiting isn't changing anytime soon either. This cycle we have a low 3 star in Munoz committed with no other impressive offers and Blissett from NY is about to commit to us. Another guy that nobody is after.
 
Advertisement
This all falls flat on its face when you remember that stars don't matter, and that the evaluation services are rating kids to appease large fan bases. The fact that those units ended up dominant, and those teams have been the three best over the last 5 years or so is coincidental.

signed, someone substantiating richts poor recruiting with outlier evidence and homerism.
 
Advertisement
BoxingRobes said:
Lets take a look at Miami on the lines and compare it to that of the elites. For this quick study, lets look at Alabama, Clemson, and Ohio State.

First, lets take a look at the offensive lines and the run game. Next to the school is the number of attempts per game each team had in 2017. The elites run the ball at a high clip and stay on the field on average more their their opponent. Miami does not. On the field for a bottom third in the nation time, can't stay on the field and they do not establish the run.

The disparity between the line depth and quality especially with Alabama and Ohio State versus the ACC is evident. Clemson, however, closes the gap elsewhere. We'll look at them below. However, it is notable that OL play in the ACC is a step back from the SEC. Only two Clemson OL made All-ACC Preseason honors this year (Hyatt and Falcinetti).

Alabama (43.5) - 5* (2), 4* (11), 3* (2)
247 Average - .9383
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 60, 35, 86
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 31m10s

Clemson (42) - 5* (2), 4* (3), 3* (8)
247 Average - .8904
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 7, 8, 13
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 31m20s

Ohio State (42) - 5* (2), 4* (6), 3* (5)
247 Average - .9279
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 6, 17, 57
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 30m15

Miami (32) - 5* (0), 4* (6), 3* (9)
247 Average - .8858
Past 3 Years 3rd Down Conversion Nat'l Rank - 126, 99, 107
Past 3 Years TOP Avg. - 27m50s

Looking at the defensive line. Next to the team is the number of down linemen that often employ in their base package. Again, looking at teams with high yield on the DL that consistently get their opponent off the field on the third down. The disparity between Miami and the aforementioned three is cavernous. Only Nesta Silvera and Gerald Willis would rank in the aforementioned three teams Top 5 DL recruits over the past 4+ years.

Alabama (3) - 5* (2), 4* (11), 3* (0)
*I added in the players that are listed currently in the two deep at their EDGE spots.
247 Average - .9518
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 30, 8, 7

Clemson (4) - 5* (4), 4* (10), 3* (1)
247 Average - .9415
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 6, 4, 4

Ohio State (4) - 5* (3), 4* (10), 3* (2)
247 Average - .9465
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 17, 11, 29

Miami (4) - 5* (0), 4* (5), 3* (7)
247 Average - .8925
Past 3 Years Opp 3rd Down Conv. Nat'l Rank - 75, 53, 67

I'm going to leave this without much analysis...I think the point I am trying to make is clear. Line play is an arms race and Miami continues to fall behind, especially on the defensive line.

To be fair, OL recruiting has picked up in the past year, but its only gotten Miami to a place where in 2-3 years, they could be considered at the top of the ACC in line play, not nationally. Not without a significant investment in OL evaluations and recruiting. Scaife and Reed are great prospects, but it will require 2+ more cycles of getting more Scaifes, Donaldson, and Reed type prospects to hang with the defensive lines we will see nationally and even in conference.

Defensive Line Recruiting is so far behind the status quo at the top of college football, its unfair to say Miami is even playing the same game. Its pedestrian and the results speak for themselves. While sack numbers and TFL numbers are strong, they are a product of the scheme Miami is playing and the result is a sacrifice on short yardage situations as well as on pass downs where Miami often allows easy passing conversions.

This isn't a thread to start talking QB recruiting or DB recruiting...those are completely different discussions to be had. Worthy conversations for their own thread. This is to dissect Miami's line recruiting and play...which is substandard and so poor nationally, it begs a analytical look statistically.
Click to expand...

Great post. Thank you for this. We need more guys like you on here...that was spectacular and informative.
 
My bro esfnyc hit it. It’s simple - OL and DL. As for DL, these elite schools typically recruit 5-6 DL per year including big 290-300 pound DTs. We, otoh, typically recruit DL that need a few years of weight room and seasoning - the elites recruit kids that are just about college ready.
 
westcoastcanes said:
This all falls flat on its face when you remember that stars don't matter, and that the evaluation services are rating kids to appease large fan bases. The fact that those units ended up dominant, and those teams have been the three best over the last 5 years or so is coincidental.

signed, someone substantiating richts poor recruiting with outlier evidence and homerism.
Click to expand...

How can you still have this false opinion with the bevy of evidence we have that teams that recruit at a higher average composite in the rankings tend to fare better.
 
westcoastcanes said:
This all falls flat on its face when you remember that stars don't matter, and that the evaluation services are rating kids to appease large fan bases. The fact that those units ended up dominant, and those teams have been the three best over the last 5 years or so is coincidental.

signed, someone substantiating richts poor recruiting with outlier evidence and homerism.
Click to expand...

Please, Let’s put that fake news to bed forever. Stars do matter most of the time. Stars represent consensus of coaching interest. If a kid is being recruited by a lot of schools his ranking goes up. They probably mattered less years ago but there are very few gems in the rough today. Recruiting is much more sophisticated.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top