Brian Schottenheimer mentioned moving several offensive linemen around, including Cooper Beebe

[America's Cowboy]

Tyler Guyton is on notice.

Nope.

Terence Steele is the one on notice.

 

[kskboys]

Nope.

Terence Steele is the one on notice.

Yup. One more injury, he's gone.

 

[kskboys]

Yeah, well the coaches think differently.

They do, do they? And what, praytell, brought you to this conclusion? You are aware that backups get reps in practice so they can be ready to play, right?

 

[kskboys]

Everyone just assumes this guy won't be a turnstyle. IMO, that's a bad assumption. There is a very good chance that moving Tyler to LT and Beebe to guard improves the line.

And there's an even better chance that it makes the line worse.

 

[TwentyOne]

One of my main center concerns is how well he maintain the offensive line 'V' integrity on passing downs after the snap. Both sides of the offensive line folds inward at the snap from defensive pressure, with the center at the point of the angle.

A stout center will hold their ground longer. He buys more time for the quarterback to scan the field in front of him, plus or minus 35 degrees to his left and right. The quarterback's pocket directly in front of him should always be the cleanest in getting this done.

For me, I would question which player best accomplishes that task at center: Cooper Beebe or Brock Hoffman? In my opinion, it is Beebe. I will change my opinion if Hoffman can demonstrate he can keep defenders from getting closer into Dak Prescott's face more routinely than Beebe.

Hoffman was better at it last time i watched. Beebe was really bad.

But thats one reason we drafted that guard. With his help and one more offseason maybe beebe can develop into a good Center.

 

[BlindFaith]

It's not really gimmicky though. It's a simple shift of the quarterback over one position. Everything else remains the same.

It's the equivalent of pulling a guard to the other side at the snap, except you have the advantage of already being in that position.

This is not like those stupid plays where you see the center line up and the guards/tackles are set out 10 yards away from the center.

It's literally just moving the quarterback (and running back) over one spot.

As I mentioned before, the whole point is to create a mismatch for the defense without allowing them time to substitute players.

It's not really much different than the tush-push concept. They take base personnel and use them differently to create a mismatch.

Just like the tush-push, when the defense adjusts to the more obvious play call for the formation, you simply go the other direction.

For example, if you run the ball to the overloaded side the first time or two, as soon as you see the defense line up more defensive players over on the overloaded side, you have your running back or tight-end roll out to the short side and you pass it to them.

Another option would be to have every player slide (angle) to the overload side at the snap, but have the running back go against the slide, then hand them the ball and let them run away from it.

It's not really a complicated concept because technically only two players change spots (or one if there is no RB in the backfield) and those are the QB and the RB.

The one thing I wish more NFL offenses did was focus more on offensive position instead of always using the same base positioning.

None of it has to be cute or revolutionary. It just needs to challenge some of the standard ways of doing things enough to create mismatches or at least second-guessing by the defense.

Teams have run it.
https://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/news/unbalanced-line-unveiled-by-offense-11135214

So it comes down to it probably not being overly successful if more teams dont use it.

 

[Awakened]

We have 2 topnotch OGs in Smith and Booker. Why in the world would you move a top C to a different position, and one of strength?

Because our best OL is Smith, and he could play OT if Guyton doesn't improve this year. So you'd slide Smith and Beebe over one spot.

 

[Rockport]

They do, do they? And what, praytell, brought you to this conclusion? You are aware that backups get reps in practice so they can be ready to play, right?

Because they’ve said so. Keep up with actual Cowboys news instead of trolling. Life’s better that way trust me.

 

[cowboyschmps3]

Good, get the best 5 out there, creating competition.

 

[doomsday9084]

And there's an even better chance that it makes the line worse.

As of last year, Hoffman was a better center than Guyton was a LT. Beebe would be a fine guard and Tyler does well at tackle.

If Guyton drastically improves than you are correct. If he is just a sack machine again then I don't see how playing him is good in any combination.

 

[Awakened]

I seem to recall that our running game was better last year when Hoffman and TJ Bass were starters.

Hoffman and Bass seem like the kind of OL that the Eagles have used to build some excellent offensive lines the last several years. I predict we will let both of them go in free agency when their contracts are up, and they'll both go on to have excellent careers as starting offensive linemen.

My guess as to why this is: Jerry lives in the past, remembering the great OL the Cowboys have drafted high over the years who have gone on to be All-Pros and contributed greatly to the Cowboy's past success. In his mind, that is the way you build a great OL. At the same time, I'm sure he regrets the massive contract he gave Terence Steele, who appeared to be an exception to the rule when he earned the starting RT job as an undrafted free agent.

 

[conner01]

This is true......he's a solid player for a game or two but the longer he plays, the more he's exposed.

Some of that I think is just a lack of experience. But I do like his effort. He’s versatile and is a good fit at swing G/C

 

[Jarntt]

I will try to post diagrams later but basically the idea is to emulate bringing in an extra linemen who reports as eligible but avoiding the substitution which would make the referees stop the play to give the defense time to bring in an extra defender to counter the extra lineman.

The full layout would be like this:

WR_______B__T__G__C__T___TE
_____WR__________QB___________WR
_________________RB

You now have 5 potential blockers (not counting RB) on the overloaded side and 3 (not counting RB) on the short-side.

The whole point though is to create a mismatch with already-on-the-field personnel.

Depending on whether the shift was to the weak or strong side, the line could slide on the snap away from the oncoming rush or the TE or RB could run interference. This would depend heavily on the defensive alignment.

With the TE on the edge covering the short-side (T)ackle, you could use him and/or the RB to create a barrier on the backside.

You could also let the rushers think exactly what you think, "Hey, I get an easy run to the quarterback" and have the running back swing around them and (again, depending on whether it's weak or strong side) could have a lot of open space to run after a pass.

It's not really about creating confusion on defense although that would probably happen every so often.

The goal is to overload one side like you would with bringing in an extra lineman, but doing it on the fly without giving the defense time to adjust.

So, for example, if you run to the overloaded side, you could essentially create your own variation of the "tush push", but again, that would depend heavily on how the defense lines up with their base personnel.

If the defense shifts over to match the overloaded side, then the QB slides to that side on snap, but then throws back to the RB or TE if the short-side rush passes by them trying to get to the QB.

That would also be a good line-up to run a WR jet sweep against the overload and slide.

It would be fun but I just don't think you get the advantage out of it you are thinking in reality. A lot to address so I'll just stick to a couple of things that jump out to me. If you line the TE up on the "weak side" as you are showing, then you have no more blockers than in your normal alignment where you always have and OG, OT and TE to that side (and that's ignoring times when you have a TE plus an HB (or 2 TEs) on the same side which would give you even more blockers than the above graph. You are just trading a TE for a "B". So you are creating all of this potential confusion and increased chances of penalties that comes along with it for what is probably very little gain. Sure on the inside an OL is gong to be a lot more effective of a blocker than a TE but the further they move out, the less of a difference because power becomes a little less important and movement becomes more important. So you are in a running formation but you have 3 WRs on the field and if you move the TE to the other side, again, you cannot pass out of this set and keep your QB from getting killed. Most importantly, the defense doesn't set until after the OL because a few of the defenders take their cue on where to set up from where the OL sets up and the OL cannot set and then all move over one spot and set again. The defense is just going to wait until you set and then line up however you do it. They start at the football and then count their gaps. They don't care if the player is listed as an OT or an OG or a Center, they lineup in their gap.