Guard possibilies?

[97AG]

We are very shallow at guard as has been stated before. After this season we have

John Kirk sr.
Quinten Holman so.
Aldo De La Garza so./Rfr.

Kirk Elder would be an incoming fish.

am I missing anyone right now?

Who would we move? (Besides Carriger jamey )

I would think maybe Alex Kotzur, and Cole Smith. With Oliver possibly coming in at center we should be okay there, and after this new class signs and if we can keep them all we will be loaded at Tackle.



[This message has been edited by 97AG (edited July 12, 2002).]

[Daddy]

Kirk will probably be the first to come off the bench but don't be surprized to see Aldo playing very quickly and HOlman as well. Bp, many have questioned may eventually be moved but probably not at first.

Carringer does not have the frame to be off line and those that think he will be a def line, I just don't see it, I see us moving Germany to def line before Carringer, Carringer has the perfect size for a tight end, he will end up in the low 270's by his senior year, he still runs low 4.7's and is needed too badly right now being our only exp tight end. His hands are not nearly as bad as some think and may even be pretty good, I think he is going to be a special talent. It does not hurt that he will have 4 years of exp, that tends to make you better.

Also don't be surprized to see not this year but the following year that Schuster or Flemming will be moved to guard, just a hunch but it depends on their strength and development.

I don' t see Kotzur or Flannigan playing this year but rs. Both have great frames and quick feet but still don't look strong enough unlike Aldo and BP, they need to work very hard in the weight room, gain strength, get better on their technique and develop.

Guards tend to come in and can play faster than tackles, most great tackles are usually a little lankier in HS and come in and need 2-3 years to put on the weight and gain strength. Most guards may already be developed as far as size and strength, but don't have the heighth to play tackle. Flannigan is 6'6" his dad I think is 7 ft. and Flannigan has like a size 20 shoe or 18, some unreal number, this kid is going to be giant when he leaves. He just turned 18 I think or may not even be 18.

Cole Smith has been injured and I am not sure his status. Since he has been injured i don't think he has gained enough weight or strength to be a full time player, he is only in the 260's right now and needs to gain 20+ pounds.

[Machew]

I look for Aldo to start at guard in 2003...I was that impressed with him on video.

I wonder if Steamer will move back to guard and battle Holman and Aldo for a spot next year.

[This message has been edited by Machew (edited July 12, 2002).]

[SuperDave]

Fleming is another possibility in '03(Patrick, not Oschlor ). Not this year, however, we need him at TE. Same situation for Schuster, although it wouldn't surprise me one bit to see both stay at TE.

It would be nice if we could count on Q to show up svelte and ready to live up to his potential, but that remains a work in (not much) progress. We don't have a ton of quality depth at OT either, so I'm not sure a fairly promising player such as Steamer can be moved from there (although it certainly is possible, especially if a Brian Patrick, for instance, were to look like a legit OT candidate early-on).

So, with the possibility that one of the above-listed scenarios could change things, the likely '03 depth chart at OG looks like (purely my conjecture) de la Garza and Kirk backed up by one of the '03 fish and Holman.

It's hard to overstate how important it was/is for us to sign a great OL class for '03.

Gig 'em


[This message has been edited by SuperDave (edited July 12, 2002).]

[chris93]

Machew -- I'm with you on Steamer. He might be one of our five best OL in '03, and I'd like us to get the 5 best in the game at the same time. He worked out at guard much of last year, so if one of the young tackles makes good progress, it would seem to be a viable move.

[nickel]

I think Fleming is the most likely TE to move to OL, if any ever move.

I'm with you Chris. If Big Steam's one of the best five OL, get him out there.

[Daddy]

Agree about Steamer, no points for being on the bench, if you are the best get out there.

[HHH]

Does anyone know about Holman's progress?

[cliff]

The offensive line is a problem for the future because we are behind the curve in recruiting for these poisitions and it takes time to develop these players. Someone could always emerge but (even if Holman reaches his potential) a personnel move is a possibility. I think any move would be after this season but if a move is necessary then, what are the best bets?
The most simple move would to take Patrick from defense and forget-about-it. I doubt this will happen and can't say I disagree.

The next option would be to move one of the TE's since we have some that may have the ability to do this. If Carriager has the ability to carry the necessary weight to move to offensive guard, this is one option. ( the kid progressed beyond my expectation as a blocker from the TE position )

The next TE that IMO could make the switch is Schuster to offensive tackle.( the video showed us an unbelievable ability to move his feet and stick to a block that is necessary to protect the edge from the offensive tackle position) The shortage is really at guard and if this move was made I would look for Steamer to move to guard or a more exterme move might be to move Brooks to guard for his senior year if the knee continues to limit his mobility.

Offensive line is a position that is seldom solved by an incoming freshman.( Oklahoma and A&M can testify to this).
All of this early recruiting has us looking further into the future but there is seldom a quick fix at the offensive line positions. I'm sure our coaches have already given in-depth thought to this.




[This message has been edited by cliff (edited July 12, 2002).]

[DallasAg]

Will RC maybe look to solve this next year by going the JC route??? Many other teams do this and are successful !!!

[jamey]

JUCO OL are kinda hard to come by but I'm sure the staff will look at that option.

I think we've got several options for a position change to gaurd too. That would be my first bet.

[nickel]

nm.

[This message has been edited by nickel (edited July 13, 2002).]

[cef88]

First shot at the starting OG's in 2003 should be Kirk and Aldo.
If one of these guys can not get it done then Holman, Chesier & Smith probable get shots.
A different second option might be Rueber, Steemer, BP or Flanigan are ready to start at T. If they are then move Hightower to his natural position of G. A middle line of Hightower, Hang and Aldo could make for some serious road grading up the middle.

[Daddy]

Barrin injuries I think our starting 5 plays very well this year, with Aldo and Reuber getting most of the pt behind the starters. Yates and Whitney should be our leaders at line this year and Brooks is maybe our most valuable starter when he is healthy, he can really play and a tremendous pass blocker. Hightower is the question mark, he played last year because of talent not necessarily because of production. He needs to work hard this summer, (hopefully he is already doing this from the spring) and he needs to play well or we could be instore for a long fall with this being Farris weakside. I thik Geoff will man the center and do very well. I think that Seth was our best center in a lot of years although last year was not his best year for us. So I don't think we should taper off and actually be better.

The coaching staff seems okay with the 15 players on our roster and has only signed 3 for next year with only 3 players graduating, I would like to have maybe 16 which means we sign another off linemen this fall. I don't know how anyone could complain with a recruitment of the three we have and Ian. Oliver will man center, ELder guard, Wallace Tackle, and Ian either left or right guard. that is pretty spectacular. The only fish that could play this year at off line if we needed is Aldo and BP. Aldo def plays this year, and for some reason I see BP as well either on off line or def line. WE don't need him this year at def line inless injuries, but on off line, it could happen depending if Aldo is a tackle or guard.

I think it has to be encouraging that the coaches have not offerred a 4th off linemen yet with Ian waiting, then again, maybe they just want more assurance for the final off linemen committment if they get it.

[Serenitynow!]

I saw Steamer playing for his basketball team in HS last year and he is quick and agile enough to play the G spot, especially when pulling for sweep plays.

[Bobaloo]

If Oliver can handle the load at center in 2003 like Carter did at OU last year, Hangartner could be moved to guard.

[jjblaschke]

It's rare that I focus on the TE spot, but I did just that last year in the ND game.

I wanted to watch Carriger in particular and knew I would not get much of a chance to do that.

Often (about 5 or 6 times) Carriger would be lined up right across from Irons. I figured that they wanted to give help to block the very highly touted, All American Defensive End.

It was a total mismatch. Carriger threw Irons around like a freaking RAG DOLL!! I could not believe my eyes.

About the 3rd or 4th (I forget) time Carriger was up against Irons, Carriger blocked him, then shoved him to the ground, then literally JUMPED UP IN THE AIR and landed right on top of Irons. I was waiting for him to start punching him. It was one of the funnies things I've ever seen! Reminded me of something you would see in the WWF.

Before the season started, I thought that maybe Carriger would end up on the offensive side of the ball. After that game, at a MINIMUM, Carriger has the potential to be one hell of an offensive lineman. Probably more of a tackle than a guard though.

After the TCU game, I personally would not mind if he stayed at TE and became a 1st round draft pick at TE

[Daddy]

Carriger is right where he is supposed to be. The kid is in the 260-270's, solid muscle, not really tall, and has very good speed 4.7. I don't see him having the frame to get to 300 and let's be honest which linemen are below 300 besides centers today. Carriger is going to be right where he is. Dino said that he has a chance to play Sundays.

As far as Irons, he was a overrated player ever since he was out of school, did not have the upper body strength to play end, nor did he have the technique, he was a lb, but too big and too slow to be at middle lb. He was a product of name over talent.

That is not taking anything away from Carringer, you have a 5th year senior and a fish tight end, and the fish was whooping his a$$, gotta love that. We will see, Carriger still needs to get stronger and get better technique, but man, as a fish and not playing that position, he came in and did very well. I really look for big things this year from him. I don't see any fish upseating him as a starter and If Eric Winston was here, I don't think he would start ahead of Carriger, I think Carringer would beat him out.

[cliff]

I think Carriger is a guy that gives us some flexability in the future and has the ablility to stay at te or move inside. As a te he is going to be a great blocker but is not going to be a pass reciever like we saw at OU, tu, Neb., or Colorado. The pros have carried both types for years. ( every now and then that rare combination exist )We have some great young te prospects and one that could be that rare combination type in
Germany. The beauty is that our coaches have this year to evaluate and play the kid where he fits in the best. I think he is going to be a great player wherever he lines up.

[SuperDave]

If Carriger gets moved anywhere it will more likely be to DE than OG or OT. More likely than any of the above is that he stays at TE his whole career. He's going to make some good perimeter blocks for us this year, and catch a few balls to boot.

Gig 'em

[jamey]

RC said in the newspapers not so long ago that Carriger could move back to DL OR move to the OL.

[clearman]

He also said if he keeps improving like he did his first year he will be earning Sunday paychecks as a TE.

[jamey]

quote

Quote:

“He’s got a future as a college football player at a number of places,” Slocum said. “As a tight end or in the defensive line. Maybe as an offensive lineman some day.”

http://www.aggiesports.com/football/news/122701carrigerfeature.htm

I think the odds are like this from most likely to least in the long term. This year he's our starting TE.

1. OL
2. 2nd TE in 2 TE sets(not starting TE)
3. DL
4. Starting TE.

I think the bottom line is like RC said. He's got a future, just a matter of exactly where long term IMO.

[This message has been edited by jamey (edited July 16, 2002).]