Louisiana: No offensive lineman in top 100

quote:

---

Louisiana: No offensive lineman in top 100

---

According to whom? These services are getting more and more political. Most of these sites, Rivals, 247, espn, are just a bunch of jackasses that wouldn't know a good football player from a cheerleader. I agree, Louisiana doesn't put out a lot of known olinmen, but there are some that are worthy of top 100 billing, these services just don't give them any credit.

This is not a new trend. LA produces quality WR, RB and DBs but we struggle with QB and the big guys up front which is why Saban had to look out of state for linemen in his LSU run. We just have to havevstring enough roots in other areas to get enough solid big guys to put together a quality o-line. Luckily O is doing just that so I think we are in good shape.

Why so triggered? It's not like he's dogging SVP here.

That said, you named ONE OL who could possibly be in the top 100. We typically need 4-6 OL per class.

Yes, the player rankings are fallible, but so are coach evaluations, and OL is probably the hardest position to project.

I don't doubt that most coach evaluations are better than recruiting service evaluations, but in any given cycle, take a look at the top guys at a position and see which schools signed them. I guarantee it's the top schools/coaches.

Fortunately for us, it looks like Orgeron is really busting his arse to recruit on a national level, so we're not so heavily reliant on Louisiana linemen. Again, this isn't dogging the linemen we do get from Louisiana, but there's simply not enough of them each year.

quote:

---

Why so triggered?

---

People put way too much emphasis on what these recruiting services have to say. And with each year they get more and more political. This season they are giving more credence to Clemson recruits. In the past it was alfrickingbama. But since Clemson just whipped their arse with a team filled with recruiting classes that barely broke into the top 10 and a couple that didn't break into the top 10, they are giving Clemson recruits higher ratings. While other recruits are being lowered in their ratings. CamRon Jackson was a middle to high 4 star after his jr season, now he is a 3 star. If he'd of committed to Clemson he'd be a 4 star. It's just getting more and more political instead of realistic. I wasn't trying to dog the dude out, just making a point that these services are not correct. They are more fallible than the average fan that knows something about players at the HS level and have seen enough to know who has potential and who doesn't.

quote:

---

Ok nostra-fricking-domas who should we ask then?

---

LOL
My comment was rather rude, so I took care of it and apologized. That being said I was just trying to make a point that these services are more and more political each season. And depending on which schools are recruiting which players has more of an impact on a recruits ratings than these evaluators actually watching video and making an evaluation of their own. There's people on this site I'd trust their evaluations much more than these recruiting sites.

Patience dear child.

In a few years one high school alone in North Louisiana will produce the best two offensive tackles in the nation in back to back years.

Neville High School. It happens. Everything is in cycles.

My thoughts, traditionally La. Has not produced great OL because offenses were simple and run focused. So we often had raw OG type players with poor technique. Talented OTs are a premium, so our raw OGs are not valued. Hopefully as more teams develop passing attacks we will improve.

quote:

---

Tigers eyes

---

quote:

---

Rivals, 247, espn, are just a bunch of jackasses that wouldn't know a good football player from a cheerleader. I agree, Louisiana doesn't put out a lot of known olinmen, but there are some that are worthy of top 100 billing

---

No not really this year

Sederick Van Pran (OG), 6'4", 305, Warren Easton seems not interested in LSU, maybe just wanting to get out of state. What is the story on this recruit

I agree. That is one area that has haunted us for years and years. I understand that ratings are overrated, but at some point LSU has to land some big time OL to compete consistently at the highest level.

quote:

---

CamRon Jackson

---

I think this is a bad example. Guys like Jackson, and Rosenthal a couple of years ago, drop because they're being ranked at positions they don't project to play at the next level. I think they'd be rated more properly if they focused on OT rather than clinging to the idea that they're d line prospects.

Also, I don't get too caught up in early rankings. Most of time, these are based on measurables and potential.

I think the recruiting service rankings can be ok when looking at at the big picture. Like top 10 or top 20 at a particular position. Where I think it gets dumb is when people start getting worked up about a guy being ranked a spot or two too high or low, or a team finishing 6th instead of 4th and stuff like that. When you start splitting hairs like that, you're setting yourself up for frustration. Like, are we really going to get upset over finishing, say 10th instead of 7th in the team rankings? That's where you start putting way too much emphasis on the services, because the difference between 10 and 7 could be just a couple of guys they got wrong. It's not that big of a deal.