William Gillean

this from Cj is what I'm referencing, not carrying 105. It's an aggressive change from what's worked for them in the past. I'm not confident it's right or wrong. But if you want evidence of "all-in", making aggressive changes (like firing PK too) are strong evidence of it.

Seems like we are less focused on retention, we might intentionally carry fewer scholarship players to have more money to fund the 2-3 deep directly. Less money on developmental guys than in the past. Which probably means bigger portal needs going forward. It seems like a step towards the Indiana/Ole Miss philosophy or an NFL philosophy. Since most of us think we were just 3-4 players away last year (RB, 2OL, and maybe a true no.1 WR), this is a relatively aggressive strategy of change more than a tweak. The guys have been saying all-in and this change does seem aggressive not cautious. And it's on top of letting PK go. Can't say it's bad or good yet IMO.

this is a pretty good question.

Seems like this is a tough issue. You can get experience in the portal like Indiana and Tech OR maybe talent in the portal like Marad Watson or Zion BUT Getting experienced, talent from big boy programs seems very hit or miss. Whatever strategy we employ going forward probably can’t lean on picking off good Big10 or SEC starters. We will have to count on filling our needs with developmental guys like Zion or UTSA/G5/Big12 callups. So why let a Barnes leave then??? I don’t know.

We shot our shot. Nothing wrong with that. Let's round up some OL.

This is a pretty plausible explanation for why it's not just $$$ to overpay a particular player. Team chemistry is a thing. There really are things to balance here. 3 OL 2 RB are the real needs for this team to make everything else work better.

I'm ready to hear "he's our lockdown corner, number 21 in your program, number one in our hearts." For years, the Blitz made my commute better. This made my week.

Great news!! I was a longtime listener to the podcast with Rod and I am thrilled y'all are back together. Very good news for OTF!!!!

I know Sark said he liked 12 personnel to address this 3 high defense issue but it didn't look great in practice. Any idea why the 6 OL package, which did work in the past, is off the table? Also, was Texas staff really surprised Arkansas ran it? Seemed reasonably likely they would in advance. Thanks.

Home run!!!