Offensive Line Player Development Question

[Verdict]

Is it easier (or more likely successful) to draft a:

1. strong but technically flawed player and try to make him better, or

2. weak but technically proficient player and make him stronger?


Additionally, why do you guys think that Free has regressed so badly/been exposed this year?

[Apollo Creed]

Wanna learn how to evaluate, draft, and develop linemen - do the exact opposite of the Dallas Cowboys and you'll be straight.

[jayhouston12]

Originally Posted by Verdict

Is it easier (or more likely successful) to draft a:

1. strong but technically flawed player and try to make him better, or

2. weak but technically proficient player and make him stronger?


Additionally, why do you guys think that Free has regressed so badly/been exposed this year?

number 2
Being a Lineman isn't all about being strong, however you do need to be strong but it's more about your technique than anything else. You have a lineman that only benches say 350(which would be terrible for an NFL lineman, but just using as an example) but he stays low and gets underneath of the defenders pads he can use leverage to take that defender out of the play.

on pass blocking its all about your footwork can you move your feet enough to be consistantly infront of that defender pushing him away?

option number 1 leads to a horrible football player. coming out of college if a lineman isn't technically sound but strong he'll be a bust its not much to teach him, you can but i would not risk it. If your strong but your technique is wrong your going to fail, A lineman can't use strength if he pops up all the time and never gets low or can't shuffle his feet

[Verdict]

Originally Posted by jayhouston12

number 2
Being a Lineman isn't all about being strong, however you do need to be strong but it's more about your technique than anything else. You have a lineman that only benches say 350(which would be terrible for an NFL lineman, but just using as an example) but he stays low and gets underneath of the defenders pads he can use leverage to take that defender out of the play.

on pass blocking its all about your footwork can you move your feet enough to be consistantly infront of that defender pushing him away?

option number 1 leads to a horrible football player. coming out of college if a lineman isn't technically sound but strong he'll be a bust its not much to teach him, you can but i would not risk it. If your strong but your technique is wrong your going to fail, A lineman can't use strength if he pops up all the time and never gets low or can't shuffle his feet

Any thoughts on why Free has regressed?

[CCBoy]

Originally Posted by Verdict

Is it easier (or more likely successful) to draft a:

1. strong but technically flawed player and try to make him better, or

2. weak but technically proficient player and make him stronger?


Additionally, why do you guys think that Free has regressed so badly/been exposed this year?

Just target Warmack this next draft, and don't worry about contrasting differences.

As to Doug Free, if he keeps grading out as high as the past two games....don't worry, be happy.

[jobberone]

Technique and strength. One can help shore up the other. Both makes a very good OL. For an OT you need a good punch, feet, agility, strength, balance and hands. I haven't really watched Free this year. I wish someone who knows OL would tell us what the problem is.

[CCBoy]

Originally Posted by jobberone

Technique and strength. One can help shore up the other. Both makes a very good OL. For an OT you need a good punch, feet, agility, strength, balance and hands. I haven't really watched Free this year. I wish someone who knows OL would tell us what the problem is.

Pad levels, bent knees, mobility, and the ability to extend and punch. Mix in an aggressive nature and he has the base level evaluation.

[CowboyRoy]

Originally Posted by Verdict

Any thoughts on why Free has regressed?

When was he good? He has always sucked. He had like one decent season and they thought he was going to improve. He sucks.

[jrumann59]

Free took people by surprise early on but they got film on him and he always get by the same type of pass rusher. He is only slightly better than Colombo when Colombo was good for use but he lacks the "meanness" hell our whole line lacks the nasty attitude. They are starting to gel though and that at least gives you hope for the whole unit.

[erod]

Free hasn't regressed. He was just the only young guy we had worth a crap and Jerry panicked.

[Marktui]

Originally Posted by Verdict

Is it easier (or more likely successful) to draft a:

1. strong but technically flawed player and try to make him better, or

2. weak but technically proficient player and make him stronger?


Additionally, why do you guys think that Free has regressed so badly/been exposed this year?

I think you have to draft line specific to your scheme. Man vs zone. Do you want quick agile guys that can pull and run screens. Road graders that can go straight ahead and maul.

Doug Free is a waist bender. He gets so upright on his pass sets that guys get underneath his pads and push him straight back. He needs to get his arse lower so he can anchor properly.

[Chocolate Lab]

I think one is much easier. It's much easier to correct technique problems than to take an undersized guy and build him up physically.

[MizzouCowboy]

Technique over strength. All OL/DL in the NFL are strong, technique is what separates the all-pro from the UFAs.

As an example, I present to you Mark Stepnoski.

[Hostile]

Originally Posted by Verdict

Is it easier (or more likely successful) to draft a:

1. strong but technically flawed player and try to make him better, or

2. weak but technically proficient player and make him stronger?


Additionally, why do you guys think that Free has regressed so badly/been exposed this year?

I'd say 1 is easier. Think about Tuinei, Newton, Gesek, Gogan, and a lot of others we have had.

OL, more than any other position corps, has to have guys who sense what each other are going to do and how each other will react. I would say only QB is more cerebral than OL. Many other positions you can rely strictly upon your aggression and talent. Not so on OL, because you might have to aid your linemate while still engaging the guy you are blocking. They not only read the Defense, but each other.

Now, you may be asking, aren't the technical flaws harder then since it is so involved? No, for one major reason, pure power can hide a lot of flaws. There is no way to hide a lack of power though. That is why some guys get bull rushed every time. They can't handle the power and they can be worn down.

It is easier to let the guy rely on his power and grow into the position and the chemistry than it is to have his linemates watching for when they have to bail him out.

[xwalker]

Originally Posted by Verdict

Is it easier (or more likely successful) to draft a:

1. strong but technically flawed player and try to make him better, or

2. weak but technically proficient player and make him stronger?


Additionally, why do you guys think that Free has regressed so badly/been exposed this year?

Good question, but I don't think there is enough detail to really give an answer.

How quick is the strong player?

How quick is the weak player?

Hand usage, footwork and these types of technical issues can be corrected.

Waist bending is difficult to correct; although, you could make an argument that it is more of a physical issue than a technical issue.

Strength and athleticism can offset technical deficiencies and vise vera to a degree.

Larry Allen was not know as a technician, but it didn't matter because he was extremely strong AND quick/athletic. Everybody remembers him for his great strength, but it was the combination of strength/athleticism that made him great.

Mark Stepnoski was undersized, but played with excellent technique. He might not be the best example here because he had great strength for his size.