Early look at the 2013 Depth Chart

[Kramer116]

Originally Posted by quhawks12

Wow...2007 and 2008 we had double digit washouts. That is unacceptable.

22/85 = 25.88% of the roster

That is not acceptable.

[Groundhogday]

Originally Posted by quhawks12

Wow...2007 and 2008 we had double digit washouts. That is unacceptable.

2009: 22 signees, 9 washouts
2010: 23 signees, 5 washouts (so far)
2011: 28 signees, 6 washouts (so far)

Zook's last two classes, with a new staff to help with evaluation, had fewer washouts but unfortunately also fewer good players. The 2011 class might well have over 10 washouts by the end of this spring.

[quhawks12]

So far in the 2012 class we have 19 signees and 2 washouts.

[Juice]

Sorry guys, but what do you mean by "washouts"? Just players that were kicked off/never made it to campus due to grades, etc?

[quhawks12]

Originally Posted by Juice

Sorry guys, but what do you mean by "washouts"? Just players that were kicked off/never made it to campus due to grades, etc?

Exactly. Guys who never made it to campus (Jones/Kirby) or transferred before we even knew it (Fuller). Basically players who don't complete their eligibility and not because they left for the NFL.

[Juice]

Originally Posted by quhawks12

Exactly. Guys who never made it to campus (Jones/Kirby) or transferred before we even knew it (Fuller). Basically players who don't complete their eligibility and not because they left for the NFL.

Okay, right, thanks. Yeah Zook did a terrible job of thoroughly evaluating players that were borderline eligible/maybe not capable of getting past admissions which in the end led to his downfall here. Just horrible

[Groundhogday]

Originally Posted by quhawks12

Basically players who don't complete their eligibility and not because they left for the NFL.

That was also the criteria I used.

[Groundhogday]

Originally Posted by Juice

Okay, right, thanks. Yeah Zook did a terrible job of thoroughly evaluating players that were borderline eligible/maybe not capable of getting past admissions which in the end led to his downfall here. Just horrible

Most didn't leave due to academics, though that was a problem in some classes. The bigger issue was that guys didn't fit athletically/personally, and/or weren't mentally ready to play college football.

[Juice]

Originally Posted by Groundhogday

Most didn't leave due to academics, though that was a problem in some classes. The bigger issue was that guys didn't fit athletically/personally, and/or weren't mentally ready to play college football.

Agree.

[Warriors1994]

I did not realize there were that many washouts. That is just ridiculous

[I Hate Lemonier]

Wash Outs happen at most schools, especially teams that are not traditional powers who are competing with the nation's elite for recruits. Zook had to take chances to significantly upgrade the talent level. Unfortunately Illinois is never going to be in the position to absorb a big number of washouts like Ohio St, Florida, Bama etc.

I stand by the original premise that the 2009 season had very little to do with recruiting misses

http://cfn.scout.com/2/874920.html

While not perfect, this is a depth chart that i think most coaches would feel pretty good about

[TexasIllini]

Originally Posted by quhawks12

Exactly. Guys who never made it to campus (Jones/Kirby) or transferred before we even knew it (Fuller). Basically players who don't complete their eligibility and not because they left for the NFL.

Does anyone know where Tarjarvis ended up transferring to?

[DrewD007]

Originally Posted by I Hate Lemonier

Wash Outs happen at most schools, especially teams that are not traditional powers who are competing with the nation's elite for recruits. Zook had to take chances to significantly upgrade the talent level. Unfortunately Illinois is never going to be in the position to absorb a big number of washouts like Ohio St, Florida, Bama etc.

I stand by the original premise that the 2009 season had very little to do with recruiting misses

http://cfn.scout.com/2/874920.html

While not perfect, this is a depth chart that i think most coaches would feel pretty good about

That secondary was awful, LBs weak (especially once Martez got hurt), Liuget lone bright spot on D-line.

What surprised me most about that year was the offense. I thought even though the defense would be bad, the offense would be able to out score most teams, but it was pretty awful too. Maybe due to the pack of mediocre RBs (until Mikel emerged in the 2nd half).

[I Hate Lemonier]

Originally Posted by DrewD007

That secondary was awful, LBs weak (especially once Martez got hurt), Liuget lone bright spot on D-line.

What surprised me most about that year was the offense. I thought even though the defense would be bad, the offense would be able to out score most teams, but it was pretty awful too. Maybe due to the pack of mediocre RBs (until Mikel emerged in the 2nd half).

Corners were good but i agree the safeties were bad. Bellamy didnt bounce back until VK.

Offense was awful because of Schultz. It should have been lethal

We were 3rd in the Big 10 in rushing yards and led conference in ypc. Both Leshoure and Ford averaged over 6 yards per carry. Should have been more than enough to open up passing for Benn etal

[Groundhogday]

Originally Posted by I Hate Lemonier

Wash Outs happen at most schools, especially teams that are not traditional powers who are competing with the nation's elite for recruits. Zook had to take chances to significantly upgrade the talent level. Unfortunately Illinois is never going to be in the position to absorb a big number of washouts like Ohio St, Florida, Bama etc.

I stand by the original premise that the 2009 season had very little to do with recruiting misses

http://cfn.scout.com/2/874920.html

While not perfect, this is a depth chart that i think most coaches would feel pretty good about

Originally Posted by DrewD007

That secondary was awful, LBs weak (especially once Martez got hurt), Liuget lone bright spot on D-line.

What surprised me most about that year was the offense. I thought even though the defense would be bad, the offense would be able to out score most teams, but it was pretty awful too. Maybe due to the pack of mediocre RBs (until Mikel emerged in the 2nd half).

The problem in 2009 was the problem throughout: some terrific talent but not enough depth, too much inexperience, and holes in the roster. NFL talent at one position doesn't make up for complete ineptitude at another.

As for all teams losing guys, I did an analysis last month showing that we have have the most turnover of any B1G team.

[Juice]

GHD or qu, could you guys do an updated O Line depth chart?

[Groundhogday]

DL Depth chart:
Leo:_Caldwell (rs-SO), Bates (JR), Smoot (FR)
DT:__Powell (SO), Teitsma (rs-JR), Clements (FR)
NG:__Bain (RS-FR), Williams (rs-FR), Howe (rs-JR), Jackson (FR), Douglas (FR)
DE:__Kynard (rs-SR), Cajuste (JR), Nelson (rs-SO), James(FR), Woods (rs-JR)

[CUWPC]

Originally Posted by Groundhogday

DL Depth chart:
Leo:_Caldwell (rs-SO), Bates (JR), Smoot (FR)
DT:__Powell (SO), Teitsma (rs-JR), Clements (FR)
NG:__Bain (RS-FR), Williams (rs-FR), Howe (rs-JR), Jackson (FR), Douglas (FR)
DE:__Kynard (rs-SR), Cajuste (JR), Nelson (rs-SO), James(FR), Woods (rs-JR)

So Bain to NG has been confirmed?

[Juice]

GHD, I'm still hung on why the move of Bain to DL. It's just not making a whole lot of sense to me. We finally get a guard with quick feet/power and then we move him. What is your logic on that? No depth at DT? Is it because of the move of Cajuste to DE, that they don't want to rely on a fresh such as Clements? Which would be basically the same thing with Bain, as he has never played on the d line before.

[CUWPC]

Originally Posted by Juice

GHD, I'm still hung on why the move of Bain to DL. It's just not making a whole lot of sense to me. We finally get a guard with quick feet/power and then we move him. What is your logic on that? No depth at DT? Is it because of the move of Cajuste to DE, that they don't want to rely on a fresh such as Clements? Which would be basically the same thing with Bain, as he has never played on the d line before.

Agreed. But I will say that is a stout D-Line.

[Groundhogday]

Originally Posted by Juice

GHD, I'm still hung on why the move of Bain to DL. It's just not making a whole lot of sense to me. We finally get a guard with quick feet/power and then we move him. What is your logic on that? No depth at DT? Is it because of the move of Cajuste to DE, that they don't want to rely on a fresh such as Clements? Which would be basically the same thing with Bain, as he has never played on the d line before.

First of all, it seems clear now that Cajuste was never 305 lbs and was never going to play NG. He is a guy who can swing between DE and 3-technique DT. Clements is also a a guy who will swing between 3-tech DT and DE, and will never play NG.

So who is going to play NG? Howe has a hard time holding the point of attack. Powell might be better off at DT. Not sure Vontrell Williams will be ready to play (and might be more of a DT than NG), and the two big guys we signed this year will need some time on weights and conditioning.

So we need someone strong enough to take on double teams at NG, and Bain is probably stronger than the other available prospects. So in a nutshell, I think the key point is that Bain can potentially play NG and most of the other guys are DT or DE.

[Ander1345]

Is this move purely out of necessity or is it strategic? Both?

[Juice]

Originally Posted by Ander1345

Is this move purely out of necessity or is it strategic? Both?

More so necessity it sounds like.

[Ander1345]

That's what I was thinking, but if he's the only true NT we'll have on the roster for the time being I imagine he'll see the field in short yardage situations mostly, if for no reason other than to keep him healthy.

[Groundhogday]

Originally Posted by Ander1345

That's what I was thinking, but if he's the only true NT we'll have on the roster for the time being I imagine he'll see the field in short yardage situations mostly, if for no reason other than to keep him healthy.

I'm not sure he is the only true NG. Powell and Williams are both pretty big and are only going to get stronger.

But yes, ideally Jackson and/or Douglas will be 325+ lb monsters in a couple of years.