Who doesn't have Oline issues?

[dfense]

Listening to all the commentators about the Cowboys Oline problems makes me wonder why they don't seem concerned about any other NFC East team's line

NY Giants line has been getting knocked around. Eli's bleeding all over the turf.

Washington is afraid to play McNabb because he may get killed.

And I watched Kolb run for his life for a good part of the game the other night. Philly's got interior line issues, they had their 7th string center in there.

 

[Stash]

Sure looked to me like the Texans don't!

:laugh2:

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I've mentioned this before, but the idea that you need a dominating O-Line to win a Super Bowl is a silly one. I think part of the issue is that for Dallas, the dynasty was built on dominating O-Line. Even still, I think Emmitt, Troy, Irvin and Moose had more to do with those dominating O-Lines because they made the O-Line's job easier.

Let's look at the last 5 Super Bowl games:

Saints vs. Colts
Steelers vs. Cardinals
NYG vs. Patriots
Bears vs. Colts
Steelers vs. Seahawks

Out of those 10 teams, I'd say that the '06 Colts had the best O-Line of the bunch, but hardly anything to write home about with 'stars' like Tarik Glenn. The '05 Seahawks had 2 great OT's in Walter Jones and Sean Locklear, but the interior was nothing to brag about. The rest of the teams had very average O-Lines.

And out of all of those teams, only 2 of them had good blocking TE's (Pittsburgh with Heath Miller and NYG with Boss).







YR

 

[Stautner]

Sure looked to me like the Texans don't!

:laugh2:

In fairness, we didn't blitz or stunt. I was still disappointed we didn't put some pressure on Schaub because a team can't be successful if blitzes and stnts are the only way they can generate pressure, but we stayed very basic in our pass rushing.

 

[Stash]

In fairness, we didn't blitz or stunt. I was still disappointed we didn't put some pressure on Schaub because a team can't be successful if blitzes and stnts are the only way they can generate pressure, but we stayed very basic in our pass rushing.

Very true.

But that still doesn't make me feel better about getting gashed by Arian Foster.

 

[SDCowboy]

There is a difference between oline issues and our oline disaster.

 

[SkinsandTerps]

I've mentioned this before, but the idea that you need a dominating O-Line to win a Super Bowl is a silly one. I think part of the issue is that for Dallas, the dynasty was built on dominating O-Line. Even still, I think Emmitt, Troy, Irvin and Moose had more to do with those dominating O-Lines because they made the O-Line's job easier.

YR

Are you serious ?

You do not need an all-star OL, but you certainly need a great one. The Colts alone should show you that.

Moose was pretty much an OL player. That is what fullbacks are most of the time.

Novacek must have just been lucky. Oh, yeah he was an extension of the OL.

 

[Stautner]

Very true.

But that still doesn't make me feel better about getting gashed by Arian Foster.

No. Can't really blame that on lack of pass rushing gimmicks

 

[theebs]

among all this talk of vanilla offense etc.....I have yet to hear anyone bring up all the blitzing from teams this preseason.

This is the most blitzing I can ever remember in the preseason for the 20 something years I can remember watching.

and in turn I think some of the teams that like to come out and run the same formations every 3rd down like we did are just sitting ducks. Its not an excuse not to block, catch, run or make a throw....but I think if a team wants to look at your tendency right now in the preseason on film and then pick away to attack that knowing that you wont adjust they can have a ton of success.

and I think we have seen that. I have cut about 20 plays from the preseason and last years regular season where we go 3 wide, witten and barber with romo in the shotgun. Nearly every 3rd down this preseason that has been the alignment. We have run almost the same play on 3rd down every single posession this preseason......

think about that. IF we keep running a similar play out of the same formation every 3rd down how easy would it be to just come out and create a way to attack it.

and after looking at some of the regular season plays from last year, we did all kinds of stuff out of that 3 wide shotgun set, but in this preseason it has been almost identical every time.

again, its not an excuse to not catch a ball, block or make a good throw. But in terms of all this vanilla nonsense that everyone and their brother is throwing around like it doesnt mean something, there is alot of merit to it.

I was listening to the musers this morning and they were goofing on the vanilla comments from wade, saying he was making excuses again because he doesnt want his team critiqued. I picked up my phone dialed the number and then said all the hell with it. I dont have it in me to try and get into a debate about it.

I just think people are using the vanilla term sarcastically, and I think the better term that should be used regarding the offense this preseason is Strategy. And I think the strategy was to be basic and run some simple stuff out of formations they used last season so teams will basically have nothing new to look at.

We run that 3 wide shotgun barber/witten set all the time, it is a staple of the offense. Yet the stuff we did out of that formation in the regular season last year was much more involved than in the preseason. We never used motion at all this preseason and we rarely moved witten into a position to become an extra blocker to chip like last year.

So to me, I think the basic strategy or vanilla concept is pretty legit and I think that with the increased amount of blitzing in these games it has caused all kinds of problems for us and other teams.

again, I dont think its an excuse to not run, block or throw better but I do think it is a major symptom of why it has looked so rough. I think if teams sat in a nickel cover 2 and rushed 4 romo would have taken them apart, but that is not the option most teams took. They attacked and it was almost like a turkey shoot.

I have all the video clip comparisons sitting here, if my daughter falls asleep I will make a video showing the differences of the plays and reactions from our same offensive set to the different defensive looks in the preseason and then the regular season last year.

Hopefully I am not technically misunderstanding what is going on with each team on each side of the ball.

 

[noshame]

We've got to make people pay, and I'm hoping beyond hope that the grand plan is to roll Romo out, or hit guys like Bennett and Felix with ultra short stuff with the potential to make big RAC.

Slap a DC in the mug a couple times on blitzes and he'll change his game plan real quick.

If we continue to drop Romo back and try to hit normal routes, we'll be staring 8-8 in the face.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Are you serious ?

You do not need an all-star OL, but you certainly need a great one. The Colts alone should show you that.

1. You honestly think that the Colts O-Line is 'great' or is it Peyton Manning that makes them great? In fact, they went to the SB last year and the Colts front office was none too pleased with the O-Line play.

2. Were any of those O-Lines that I mentioned 'great?' Perhaps the Seahawks in '05 becasue their OT's that year were great. But the interior was nothing to write home about. The '07 NYG could run block, but were not great in pass protection. LT David Diehl led the league that year in sacks allowed.

Obviously, you're a Skins fan and your experience with team success has revolved around those historically great O-Lines as well.

I think that's the issue that many fans and writers don't understand.....the game has completely changed schematically and you don't need a great O-Line to win a Super Bowl anymore. Remember, illegal chuck rules are more strictly enforced, much more use of the shotgun, a lot more 3 step drops, etc. But back in the 90's and earlier on when teams still didn't use a ton of shotgun and used a lot of 7 step drops and relied on the running game much more, O-Line play was much more important.

Now I feel you just need a decent enough O-Line with one OT that can handle defenders most of the time without any help and a good supporting cast.





YR

 

[casmith07]

The game is changing. With defensive linemen and the transition to OLBs than run like safeties, the offensive line needs to evolve.

Instead of bigger, fatbodies, I wouldn't be surprised to see more offensive linemen begin look more similar to today's defensive linemen - more athletic guys that are more agile and not just a gap-plug.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[Stash]

The game is changing. With defensive linemen and the transition to OLBs than run like safeties, the offensive line needs to evolve.

Instead of bigger, fatbodies, I wouldn't be surprised to see more offensive linemen begin look more similar to today's defensive linemen - more athletic guys that are more agile and not just a gap-plug.

But that's just my opinion.

I'd tend to agree with you.

Especially considering the increasing use of the passing game.

In the 'old days', the Cowboys traded size and power for athleticism and smarts.

I don't think you can do that anymore, especially when the 'size' element doesn't result in your running game being any better.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I disagree. The O-Linemen are getting bigger and bigger. Teams have always tried to use faster (and smaller) pass rushers. More teams are going to the 3-4 because with the college spread offense, they can only defend against it with smaller, but faster personnel...opting for 3-3-5 and other type of nickel packages. In the NFL the spread just doesn't work as well. So if you want to go with smaller and faster defenses, the opposing team can counter it by being far more physical. I have yet to see anything show me that O-Lines are going to get smaller and more athletic. I don't think you'll see big stiffs out there, but I think sub-300 lb linemen, even at center...are a thing of the past.






YR

 

[Stash]

I disagree. The O-Linemen are getting bigger and bigger. Teams have always tried to use faster (and smaller) pass rushers. More teams are going to the 3-4 because with the college spread offense, they can only defend against it with smaller, but faster personnel...opting for 3-3-5 and other type of nickel packages. In the NFL the spread just doesn't work as well. So if you want to go with smaller and faster defenses, the opposing team can counter it by being far more physical. I have yet to see anything show me that O-Lines are going to get smaller and more athletic. I don't think you'll see big stiffs out there, but I think sub-300 lb linemen, even at center...are a thing of the past.






YR

My thinking was closer to 300lbs than to 350lbs.

 

[links18]

The game is changing. With defensive linemen and the transition to OLBs than run like safeties, the offensive line needs to evolve.

Instead of bigger, fatbodies, I wouldn't be surprised to see more offensive linemen begin look more similar to today's defensive linemen - more athletic guys that are more agile and not just a gap-plug.

But that's just my opinion.

In other words, the NFL will start to look more like the CFL. Real great......

 

[sonnyboy]

1. You honestly think that the Colts O-Line is 'great' or is it Peyton Manning that makes them great? In fact, they went to the SB last year and the Colts front office was none too pleased with the O-Line play.

2. Were any of those O-Lines that I mentioned 'great?' Perhaps the Seahawks in '05 becasue their OT's that year were great. But the interior was nothing to write home about. The '07 NYG could run block, but were not great in pass protection. LT David Diehl led the league that year in sacks allowed.

Obviously, you're a Skins fan and your experience with team success has revolved around those historically great O-Lines as well.

I think that's the issue that many fans and writers don't understand.....the game has completely changed schematically and you don't need a great O-Line to win a Super Bowl anymore. Remember, illegal chuck rules are more strictly enforced, much more use of the shotgun, a lot more 3 step drops, etc. But back in the 90's and earlier on when teams still didn't use a ton of shotgun and used a lot of 7 step drops and relied on the running game much more, O-Line play was much more important.

Now I feel you just need a decent enough O-Line with one OT that can handle defenders most of the time without any help and a good supporting cast.





YR

I agree. It's why I think it's the one position group that benefits the least from a star player and the most from quality depth.
If I were to have one legit star all pro type, it would be at LOT.

But you have to have depth. Really need to go 8 deep. It's the most injury prone position on the field and the one that suffers most from just one subpar player.

 

[7footer]

The game is changing. With defensive linemen and the transition to OLBs than run like safeties, the offensive line needs to evolve.

Instead of bigger, fatbodies, I wouldn't be surprised to see more offensive linemen begin look more similar to today's defensive linemen - more athletic guys that are more agile and not just a gap-plug.

But that's just my opinion.

Very good observation...I wholeheartedly agree with you.

Just look at the nose tackle position, one of the last positions on the defense where it is still en vogue to seek out a squatty, wide framed bulldozer who can clog the point of attack up the middle. Then look at the 7th round DE who Dallas just happened to plug in at the NT position during an injury, who many people believed was not big enough to play the position.

Now Ratliff is highly regarded as one of, if not THE BEST NT in the league, because of his quickness and athleticism...qualities not usually sought after from that position. Will this change the way some coaches look to fill the NT position?...I bet it already has.

I believe it's inevitable that we will begin to see big, athletic offensive linemen as well who can handle these ever more athletic defensive linemen...in fact, Doug Free probably fits that bill more so than any other o-lineman we currently have.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

In other words, the NFL will start to look more like the CFL. Real great......

It could in the next few years, but the league has a funny way of changing back to the way it was. Teams start getting pass happy and may have great success with it and others will try to copy it and the league will become a very pass happy league. But then one coach decides to take advantage of smaller defenses and start pounding the rock at them and then they have great success with it and teams start to follow their blueprint.

Remember in the 90's, particularly the early 90's, when everybody tried to go to the West Coast offense? Or how about the Run n Shoot. Now what you see is teams with WCO and Run N Shoot plays in their playbook that can work or that are tweaked to work, but a bunch of plays that are nothing like the WCO or the Run N Shoot. Every team in the league has the WCO 'sprint option right' play in their playbook because it's a quality goal line passing play. Every one. But I wouldn't claim that every offense is a WCO just because of that play.

That's one of the neat, exciting things about the NFL...over time good coaches can add certain fads to their playbook and create more of an extensive style of team





YR

 

[Yakuza Rich]

But you have to have depth. Really need to go 8 deep. It's the most injury prone position on the field and the one that suffers most from just one subpar player.

Not sure about it being mandatory to have 8 deep.

The Pats could go 7 deep and be fine. Kaczur could play either tackle position and Russ Hochstein could play either guard or center position. I do think it's important to have at least one OT that can be left by himself and do a good job. If you have to protect both OT's, then you're minimizing too much of what you can do on offense.






YR