Ohio Football Topic
Topic: If so, is Brian Smith going to coach the bowl game?
Page: 2 of 2
mail
person
BillyTheCat
12/9/2024 6:23 AM
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
A football roster size should be no more than like 80. The fact that going to 105 is a big cut is wild.
And basketball only needs 8-9. 15 is ridiculous. When was the last time 15 played in a game?
mail
LuckySparrow
12/9/2024 8:19 AM
To answer the question posed by the OP: Yes.

https://x.com/OhioFootball/status/1866106232643211421
mail
person
L.C.
12/9/2024 8:55 AM
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
A football roster size should be no more than like 80. The fact that going to 105 is a big cut is wild.

Well, we could go back to the old days. What is old is new, right? Would you feel more comfortable with a roster size of, say, 65 on the football team, and a roster size of 40 on a JV team?
mail
person
Victory
12/9/2024 9:12 AM
It feels like if we are going to promote internally that we'd see that hapoen very soon. Of course, I don't know much about these things.
mail
M.D.W.S.T
12/9/2024 10:15 AM
LuckySparrow wrote:expand_more
To answer the question posed by the OP: Yes.

https://x.com/OhioFootball/status/1866106232643211421
Following the announcement of Tim Albin's departure, Ohio Director of Athletics Julie Cromer named associate head coach and offensive coordinator Brian Smith interim head coach for the Bobcats' StaffDNA Cure Bowl appearance.

"We want to thank Tim for his almost two decades of service to Ohio University, first as an assistant coach and then four years as our Head Coach, during which he led us to a Mid-American Conference championship this past weekend," Cromer said. "Our program has a strong foundation because of Tim, his staff and our student-athletes, and we wish him, his wife, Brooke, and their family all the best at their next stop."

"Our search for a new head football coach has begun and we have already received interest from strong candidates with exceptional experience," Cromer added. "We are a championship program with a proud history, incredible fans, institutional alignment and a commitment to excellence. I am confident we will identify a new head coach who will continue our success."
mail
Andrew Ruck
12/9/2024 10:24 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
And basketball only needs 8-9. 15 is ridiculous. When was the last time 15 played in a game? [/QUOTE]Not quite. There are 24 starters if you include K & P, hell let's make it 25 for a long snapper. We aren't gonna count other special teams guys, which mold in with bench guys at other positions. 105 is over 4x that amount, meaning most rosters are currently 5x or more the amount of starters. To have that in basketball would mean a roster of 25. 15 in basketball is alright, football equivalent number would be about 75-80.

[QUOTE=L.C.]
Well, we could go back to the old days. What is old is new, right? Would you feel more comfortable with a roster size of, say, 65 on the football team, and a roster size of 40 on a JV team?
Yes I actually would think that would be a much better set up and those guys waiting in the wings would get some meaningful game reps outside or practice.
mail
person
L.C.
12/9/2024 12:39 PM
That really is what you have now, but without a JV schedule. The travel squad is 60, and those are the only players who are likely to play, other than an occasional few minute stint, in a crushing victory at home.

So, why are rosters so much bigger in football than other sports? One reason is that the developmental time is so much greater. At offensive line, for example, you almost never see a Freshman play, and you don't often see a Sophomore. Most players spend a few years developing, lifting weights, etc, before they are ready to play. So, realistically, at OL, you want maybe 8-10 guys who can play, and another 15 who are developing. That, right there, is nearly 1/4 of your 105.

Another reason is that the injury rate is higher, so you need more depth. How many starters on a basketball season are lost in a typical year? It does happen, but it's not that common. In football it is a given that every year you will probably lose 3-4 players to injury.

The NFL gets by with a smaller roster for several reasons. First they have few players in development. Second, they have a "Practice squad" which effectively increases their roster. Third, they have a large pool of free agents that they can pick up instantly to fill a void. They could do the same thing in College football. The more mobility you have, the smaller the rosters can be. If they leave the portal open all season, and allow mid-season transfers, they could cut the roster size to 60-70. Be careful what you wish for, though. In that system, some team, mid-season, could make a $700k offer to Navarro because they need a QB.
Last Edited: 12/9/2024 12:53:29 PM by L.C.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
12/9/2024 4:29 PM
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
And basketball only needs 8-9. 15 is ridiculous. When was the last time 15 played in a game?
Not quite. There are 24 starters if you include K & P, hell let's make it 25 for a long snapper. We aren't gonna count other special teams guys, which mold in with bench guys at other positions. 105 is over 4x that amount, meaning most rosters are currently 5x or more the amount of starters. To have that in basketball would mean a roster of 25. 15 in basketball is alright, football equivalent number would be about 75-80.

Well, we could go back to the old days. What is old is new, right? Would you feel more comfortable with a roster size of, say, 65 on the football team, and a roster size of 40 on a JV team?
Yes I actually would think that would be a much better set up and those guys waiting in the wings would get some meaningful game reps outside or practice.
You have to practice and people get hurt. But go ahead,explain your vast knowledge of the sport! It’s 1933, you’ve got various personnel packages and groupings on both sides of the ball.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
12/9/2024 4:31 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
That really is what you have now, but without a JV schedule. The travel squad is 60, and those are the only players who are likely to play, other than an occasional few minute stint, in a crushing victory at home.

So, why are rosters so much bigger in football than other sports? One reason is that the developmental time is so much greater. At offensive line, for example, you almost never see a Freshman play, and you don't often see a Sophomore. Most players spend a few years developing, lifting weights, etc, before they are ready to play. So, realistically, at OL, you want maybe 8-10 guys who can play, and another 15 who are developing. That, right there, is nearly 1/4 of your 105.

Another reason is that the injury rate is higher, so you need more depth. How many starters on a basketball season are lost in a typical year? It does happen, but it's not that common. In football it is a given that every year you will probably lose 3-4 players to injury.

The NFL gets by with a smaller roster for several reasons. First they have few players in development. Second, they have a "Practice squad" which effectively increases their roster. Third, they have a large pool of free agents that they can pick up instantly to fill a void. They could do the same thing in College football. The more mobility you have, the smaller the rosters can be. If they leave the portal open all season, and allow mid-season transfers, they could cut the roster size to 60-70. Be careful what you wish for, though. In that system, some team, mid-season, could make a $700k offer to Navarro because they need a QB.
Travel squad is 70 now,has been for awhile
Showing Messages: 26 - 34 of 34
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)