The Offensive Line

[SCP]

Just look at how long it took Justin Hartwig to heal up from the groin. Not that he is all-pro now, but it was a good 2 years to get back to 100%.

[bleys]

To answer all your questions with one statement. It is what it is.......... Naw just kidding but its just a combo of things. Little things that make a big problem. You have the fact that Our WRs cant get open. That was obvouse on the 2 min Drill cause Delhomme had to throw to the dump off man. Using Rasario has helped this problem and prob should be done more. Then you have the fact that Delhomme dose not step up. Yes he dose have somewhere to step up most of the time. Then there is the Prob with the run game. 8\9 in the box makes it hard to run the ball but we also dont change formations that much so that helps the D out too. Want see much 8 in the box if you go single back 4 wide. Or I hope not. All these things play into why our Offense sucks.

Not changing formations could be something I didn't think about... I'll have to pay more attention to that.

I noticed a lot throughout the past few games that the pocket is never a nice solid pocket. It's more like a crippled, odd shaped pocket and a defender usually finds his way through.

Like the Eagles game, I have to say we don't face the blitz too well and haven't been picking them up well. Fox/Davidson never adjusted, or if they did- none to efficient, and so we kept getting pummeled in that game.

Overall, I think there is more to it than just a simple explanation given of many little things. To which I add, am I the only one who cannot view how the WR's look in getting open when all I can see is the OLine, opposing DLine, and very short routes?

I'm curious because I always hear these things about DB's or WR's, and unless you're at the game, how do you know this as fact? (besides when the color commentator goes back to view a play, which isn't that much. Showing 1 player here and there, doesn't show the overall success/failure)...

I'm just curious if what I'm reading from folks come from over the TV or from at the game... If it's from over the TV, well damn, you must have a big fuggin screen.

In general, when you have a massive o-line, they are good at run blocking, and lacking in pass protection. This has to do with their natural lack of speed, quickness, footwork... ect. Their advantage is the increased power that comes with their massive weight and additional muscle mass. Our offense requires a lot of deep shots down field when we do pass. Teams are loading up on the run, and hoping to force a 3rd and long. Our jumbo linemen will never be good in pass protection. The burden falls on Jake to have excellent pocket awareness, and move or get rid of the ball to aviod sacks and fumbles.

Last year, we were ranked 6th in the league for pass protection and only allowed 20 sacks.. So I can't really see you're point as valid. Logically, it would make sense, but this was clearly not the case since our guys were athletic enough to still protect the passer at a ranking of 6th in the league..

In other words, this doesn't explain why we have fallen off so drastically...

I think the root of a lot of it goes to Vincent not beingt he same guy he was last year.

Kalil was regularly getting to the second level last season at least in part because Vincent was doing a better job inside. Getting second level blocks was whet sprung a load of those long runs.

At this point, I'm ready to give Robinson a try, but obviously the coaching staff doesn't think he's ready.

(and he legitimately may not be)

This would explain our issue somewhat since there is an obvious weak link on the line. But I would think one guy wouldn't have such a drastic effect on the OLine as a whole. Wouldn't that only show up on the right side?

It seems to me then the case should be to adjust and offer more blockers to defend and protect..

4 or 5 seconds in the pocket should be plenty unless they are throwing way down field. You only have about 3 or so seconds to get rid of the ball with how fast the DE's are these days.

You're right, but many times I've seen 3 seconds hard to come by... Plus, we do not run very many short routes. I think Washington was one of the 1st times we've seen that. Most times we need 4 or 5 seconds for a route to develop, and by that time, the pocket is collapsing.

Now we do call plays that do not require that much time to develop.. but like the smoke route, teams are fairly effective at stopping it now. Or we do get it to a RB. Minus those, the WR's take a little more time for the route to develop...

Maybe the sacks are just sticking out in my mind..

IMO, their splits are very small for an NFL o-line this year. This comes from lack of confidence in yourself or lack of confidence in the play call and scheme. Go back and look at the Skins game. Our splits were measured in inches when they should be measured in feet. It's hard to run up the gut when you are craming everything into a small box. I will be looking at this again against the Bucs. If you don't see 2-3 foot splits, we will continue to have problems.

This... This I haven't thought about at all.. Never even considered them playing close to be an issue. Looking back, it's not so clear in my memory, but I do seem to remember the splits being very close. Extremely close. We'll have to see on Sunday to confirm I guess. But this is one of the better reasons I've heard that would make sense (if my memory is even half as good as it's telling me. lol)

[kornicova]

I know its probably not the best idea to be moving people around a lot but maybe putting wharton on the right side to help otah out could be an option.

Then vincent could play on the left with gross b/c hes a a more established tackle. Or even duke could play the left where he played in college.

Just a thought if it is vincent thats the main problem

[fignewty314]

The O-line is fine,we need a little more push on the run plays.They need to be putting LB's on their terd cutters

[bleys]

The O-line is fine,we need a little more push on the run plays.They need to be putting LB's on their terd cutters

extremely disagree... but okay.

[pantherj]

Not changing formations could be something I didn't think about... I'll have to pay more attention to that.

I noticed a lot throughout the past few games that the pocket is never a nice solid pocket. It's more like a crippled, odd shaped pocket and a defender usually finds his way through.

Like the Eagles game, I have to say we don't face the blitz too well and haven't been picking them up well. Fox/Davidson never adjusted, or if they did- none to efficient, and so we kept getting pummeled in that game.

Overall, I think there is more to it than just a simple explanation given of many little things. To which I add, am I the only one who cannot view how the WR's look in getting open when all I can see is the OLine, opposing DLine, and very short routes?

I'm curious because I always hear these things about DB's or WR's, and unless you're at the game, how do you know this as fact? (besides when the color commentator goes back to view a play, which isn't that much. Showing 1 player here and there, doesn't show the overall success/failure)...

I'm just curious if what I'm reading from folks come from over the TV or from at the game... If it's from over the TV, well damn, you must have a big fuggin screen.

Last year, we were ranked 6th in the league for pass protection and only allowed 20 sacks.. So I can't really see you're point as valid. Logically, it would make sense, but this was clearly not the case since our guys were athletic enough to still protect the passer at a ranking of 6th in the league..

In other words, this doesn't explain why we have fallen off so drastically...

This would explain our issue somewhat since there is an obvious weak link on the line. But I would think one guy wouldn't have such a drastic effect on the OLine as a whole. Wouldn't that only show up on the right side?

It seems to me then the case should be to adjust and offer more blockers to defend and protect..

You're right, but many times I've seen 3 seconds hard to come by... Plus, we do not run very many short routes. I think Washington was one of the 1st times we've seen that. Most times we need 4 or 5 seconds for a route to develop, and by that time, the pocket is collapsing.

Now we do call plays that do not require that much time to develop.. but like the smoke route, teams are fairly effective at stopping it now. Or we do get it to a RB. Minus those, the WR's take a little more time for the route to develop...

Maybe the sacks are just sticking out in my mind..

This... This I haven't thought about at all.. Never even considered them playing close to be an issue. Looking back, it's not so clear in my memory, but I do seem to remember the splits being very close. Extremely close. We'll have to see on Sunday to confirm I guess. But this is one of the better reasons I've heard that would make sense (if my memory is even half as good as it's telling me. lol)

It's a bad idea to compare last seasons sack stats versus this seasons sack stats thus far. For one, the Eagles game was not a clear representation of our o-lines pass blocking ability. I believe that game was more of a fluke due to mental errors by the o-line, and not physical pass blocking ability. Also, our first 3 games were against stiff competion, while last season's schedule was much easier as a whole. I suppose we could look at the sack stats from the Falcons (home) game from last season, and compare them to this season's game. I don't care to look it up, but I'd guess there isn't a big difference.

[fignewty314]

extremely disagree... but okay.

so you don't want them to block better?Ok

[Snake]

Not changing formations could be something I didn't think about... I'll have to pay more attention to that.

I noticed a lot throughout the past few games that the pocket is never a nice solid pocket. It's more like a crippled, odd shaped pocket and a defender usually finds his way through.

Like the Eagles game, I have to say we don't face the blitz too well and haven't been picking them up well. Fox/Davidson never adjusted, or if they did- none to efficient, and so we kept getting pummeled in that game.

Overall, I think there is more to it than just a simple explanation given of many little things. To which I add, am I the only one who cannot view how the WR's look in getting open when all I can see is the OLine, opposing DLine, and very short routes?

I'm curious because I always hear these things about DB's or WR's, and unless you're at the game, how do you know this as fact? (besides when the color commentator goes back to view a play, which isn't that much. Showing 1 player here and there, doesn't show the overall success/failure)...

I'm just curious if what I'm reading from folks come from over the TV or from at the game... If it's from over the TV, well damn, you must have a big fuggin screen.

I watch from TV and No you dont get a good look at the WRs. The thing is you do get a good look at Delhomme. You can see him checking down his options and most of the time dumping it to the TE or whoever the short route is. But you can see him looking at all his options. I will say this though the Pocket has not been great and that is because of the fall off with Vincent. Still if your WRs are getting open then you dont need 6 sec in the pocket. I still would like too see some 4 WR sets and 5 WR sets. Even if you have only 3 sec you should have a man open with that many WRs.