Roster breakdown

[upperdeck]

the best thing about bodies on the oline is you have enough to actually practice and run a scout team this yr.

 

[syrBossHogg]

the best thing about bodies on the oline is you have enough to actually practice and run a scout team this yr.

Same for QB, I think having Lamson run the scout team will help the defense

 

[kcsu]

I think that Ben and the transfer will both play significant minutes.

 

[money3189]

I like the potential in the secondary but I am cautiously optimistic with this group. Just keep in mind that it generally takes time to gel. Everyone is not going to come in and immediately contribute the way we have them contributing in our minds. Some will surprise us and be better than we thought. Some will disappoint. Some will regress and some will progress. Also keep in mind that our opponents get better too.

 

[Scooch]

Quick breakdown, includes walk-ons and incoming freshmen.

Super young team.

	SR	JR	SO	FR	Total
DL	4​	1​	1​	10​	16​
LB	0​	0​	3​	9​	12​
DB	0​	1​	3​	11​	15​
OL	2​	4​	6​	10​	22​
TE	0​	0​	1​	3​	4​
WR	0​	3​	3​	9​	15​
QB	0​	1​	1​	4​	6​
RB	2​	1​	1​	3​	7​
PK	0​	1​	0​	2​	3​
LS	0​	1​	0​	2​	3​
	8​	10​	19​	63​	103​

Since I've already made a couple posts pre-emptively pushing back against "young team" rationalizations for losing, I figured I should check myself before I wreck myself (note: that's a 90s hip hop reference, people under 30 can look it up).

I can't do the same kind of positional breakdown that Go started this thread with -- he's the king of that analysis -- but at a more topline level, here's how the roster looks by the number of years in the program.

I figured it'd be interesting to categorize it by the year each player is going into this season. So, for example, redshirt senior McKinley Williams will be in his 6th year starting this summer camp, due to his pre-2020 redshirt season and his bonus year of eligibility due to COVID...

6th year: 4
5th year: 12
4th year: 13
3rd year: 23
1st year or 2nd year: 33

This paints the experience level of the team in a somewhat different light. More than one-third of the roster (34%) is going into their 4th, 5th or 6th year in the program. Another 27% is going into the 3rd year.

That means 61% of the roster has at least 2+ full seasons of practice under their belt, which makes them at least nominally upperclassmen, in a traditional sense.

I didn't have the energy to break down the difference between true frosh entering school, and classified frosh due to COVID (e.g. the Dillon Markiewicz's of the program). But combined they make up 39% of the roster, which is probably a bit too much, but not as jarringly young as it may seem.

Soooo, I think we have more experience than the roster designations let on, but likely not quite as much as we'd prefer.

 

[AngryOtto]

Since I've already made a couple posts pre-emptively pushing back against "young team" rationalizations for losing, I figured I should check myself before I wreck myself (note: that's a 90s hip hop reference, people under 30 can look it up).

I can't do the same kind of positional breakdown that Go started this thread with -- he's the king of that analysis -- but at a more topline level, here's how the roster looks by the number of years in the program.

I figured it'd be interesting to categorize it by the year each player is going into this season. So, for example, redshirt senior McKinley Williams will be in his 6th year starting this summer camp, due to his pre-2020 redshirt season and his bonus year of eligibility due to COVID...

6th year: 4
5th year: 12
4th year: 13
3rd year: 23
1st year or 2nd year: 33

This paints the experience level of the team in a somewhat different light. More than one-third of the roster (34%) is going into their 4th, 5th or 6th year in the program. Another 27% is going into the 3rd year.

That means 61% of the roster has at least 2+ full seasons of practice under their belt, which makes them at least nominally upperclassmen, in a traditional sense.

I didn't have the energy to break down the difference between true frosh entering school, and classified frosh due to COVID (e.g. the Dillon Markiewicz's of the program). But combined they make up 39% of the roster, which is probably a bit too much, but not as jarringly young as it may seem.

Soooo, I think we have more experience than the roster designations let on, but likely not quite as much as we'd prefer.

Also I think a lot of teams have a similar percentage of freshman sophomores considering most schools bring in around 20 new players per class. That would be 40 of the 85 scholarships allowed.

 

[CbusCuse]

Since I've already made a couple posts pre-emptively pushing back against "young team" rationalizations for losing, I figured I should check myself before I wreck myself (note: that's a 90s hip hop reference, people under 30 can look it up).

I can't do the same kind of positional breakdown that Go started this thread with -- he's the king of that analysis -- but at a more topline level, here's how the roster looks by the number of years in the program.

I figured it'd be interesting to categorize it by the year each player is going into this season. So, for example, redshirt senior McKinley Williams will be in his 6th year starting this summer camp, due to his pre-2020 redshirt season and his bonus year of eligibility due to COVID...

6th year: 4
5th year: 12
4th year: 13
3rd year: 23
1st year or 2nd year: 33

This paints the experience level of the team in a somewhat different light. More than one-third of the roster (34%) is going into their 4th, 5th or 6th year in the program. Another 27% is going into the 3rd year.

That means 61% of the roster has at least 2+ full seasons of practice under their belt, which makes them at least nominally upperclassmen, in a traditional sense.

I didn't have the energy to break down the difference between true frosh entering school, and classified frosh due to COVID (e.g. the Dillon Markiewicz's of the program). But combined they make up 39% of the roster, which is probably a bit too much, but not as jarringly young as it may seem.

Soooo, I think we have more experience than the roster designations let on, but likely not quite as much as we'd prefer.

Interesting. Thanks for doing this. Only being 33 first or second year guys seems low to me. I count 34 first or second year guys but I guess I could have miss counted. But this doesn't include the additional freshman that will be arriving in summer/fall. Considering we bring in close to 25 guys a class I assumed that was the case.

(12) 5th year guys seems kind of expected but only (13) 4th year guys is not a good number. Really like that there are (23) 3rd year guys. That is a good sign that we aren't losing guys from that class anyway. Bodes well for the future there.

Side note: Keep forgetting Anthony Red is still a freshman eligibility wise. I really like that. Hopefully he can stay healthy and get on the field and contribute on the OL some this year.

 

[money3189]

Since I've already made a couple posts pre-emptively pushing back against "young team" rationalizations for losing, I figured I should check myself before I wreck myself (note: that's a 90s hip hop reference, people under 30 can look it up).

I can't do the same kind of positional breakdown that Go started this thread with -- he's the king of that analysis -- but at a more topline level, here's how the roster looks by the number of years in the program.

I figured it'd be interesting to categorize it by the year each player is going into this season. So, for example, redshirt senior McKinley Williams will be in his 6th year starting this summer camp, due to his pre-2020 redshirt season and his bonus year of eligibility due to COVID...

6th year: 4
5th year: 12
4th year: 13
3rd year: 23
1st year or 2nd year: 33

This paints the experience level of the team in a somewhat different light. More than one-third of the roster (34%) is going into their 4th, 5th or 6th year in the program. Another 27% is going into the 3rd year.

That means 61% of the roster has at least 2+ full seasons of practice under their belt, which makes them at least nominally upperclassmen, in a traditional sense.

I didn't have the energy to break down the difference between true frosh entering school, and classified frosh due to COVID (e.g. the Dillon Markiewicz's of the program). But combined they make up 39% of the roster, which is probably a bit too much, but not as jarringly young as it may seem.

Soooo, I think we have more experience than the roster designations let on, but likely not quite as much as we'd prefer.

Thanks for doing this

 

[Scooch]

Interesting. Thanks for doing this. Only being 33 first or second year guys seems low to me. I count 34 first or second year guys but I guess I could have miss counted. But this doesn't include the additional freshman that will be arriving in summer/fall. Considering we bring in close to 25 guys a class I assumed that was the case.

(12) 5th year guys seems kind of expected but only (13) 4th year guys is not a good number. Really like that there are (23) 3rd year guys. That is a good sign that we aren't losing guys from that class anyway. Bodes well for the future there.

Side note: Keep forgetting Anthony Red is still a freshman eligibility wise. I really like that. Hopefully he can stay healthy and get on the field and contribute on the OL some this year.

I worked off the roster on cuse.com, which had 85 players on it (I think). I definitely could have missed someone.