Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Discussions on a heavily criticized OL


DaneSkin

Recommended Posts

I am mostly a reader of ES, and rarely take the time to comment; often I find that minds with greater football insight than mine prevail, and I enjoy the many great nuggets of wisdom and thorough-thought I i tend to find here. But the past many weeks, I have continuosly stumbled upon a statement that many ES'ers take to be gospel: our OL sucks. And not only does it apparently suck, it is one of the worst disasters in the NFL (to paraphrase gently).

Now, I am no great OL expert, and my knowledge of great guard and tackle play is in no means great. So I decided to randomly do some shallow research, and was looking to confirm this gospel "fact" by looking at PFF's OL rankings for the past season. Imagine my surprise, nay, genuine shock, at discovering that not only was our OL not the worst; no, PFF ranked us a very respectable 12 (!!) in their rankings, placing us as a team with an OL in the upper half of the NFL (https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/01/08/2014-pff-offensive-line-rankings/3/). And, to my further shock, they named Chester as having a not half bad year (and I belive I can safely say, that Chester is considered by many ES'ers as being less desirable than a 2 pound toddler at the position).

Granted, PFF rankings are by no means truth - but they do rank every single snap taken by the player. Something very few fans are likely to do. And we weren't anywhere near worst.

I have read that a lot of people expect the line to be "heavily upgraded", "must be invested in", and should be one of GMSM's top priorities. Some have been very critical towards the fact, that no FA help has been brought in. I don't nessesarily disagree, but I can't help but think, that maybe we as fans are seeing false smoke, focusing so much on the issue, that we overexagerate the faults. And that the FO and coaching staff are of a slightly different opinion as to what our main weaknesses are - granted though, that PFF also mention right tackle as a weak point (something they do for oh so many teams).

So I pose a question to you ES'ers (especially those of you with great OL knowledge): Was the OL truely horrible, or could Griffins indecisiveness, less than optimal play calling, and a truely horrible defense be more in line with our real worst woe's? Because even though PFF isn't perfect, I refuse to belive, that they could so blatantly miss a true disaster. And could this be one of the reasons, that GMSM is giving the line a lot less attention than many fans are crying out for? That the line simply wasn't as horrible, not even really truely bad by league standards, as we seem to belive?

And secondly: what kind of OL would it take to make us truely happy, if the 12th best is considered borderline disastrous?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talent wise last years offensive line was no worse than in 2012 when we won the division.  The difference between then and now is the QB play, the O line bashing is just an excuse to keep hope alive that you know who can be the QB we thought he was.

 

Kirk didn't end up on his back very much when he played last year so its proof that if you know what your doing pre-snap and you can read blitzes then we can move the ball with what we have even though its not perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll freely admit that I'm really unqualified to rate OL performance, myself. I'll also admit that I only got to watch some of the games. I stream the radio, for the other games.

But I think I am qualified to say that AlMo seemed to get hit two yards behind the LoS, almost every time he touched the ball. Now, AlMo is pretty good at not going down when he's first touched. But getting hit two yards back, and then getting three yards after contact, yields a gain of one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OL is bad and I say that as no supporter of Robert. He is terrible in the pocket but he's not the only reason they look bad.

In 2012 they looked a lot better but that was more to do with the scheme. Having DEs who have to sit at home and play contain makes life pretty easy on an OL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that RG3 made the OL look worse than it was, but if you had watched that OL all year, you would know that it was awful.  The FO, however, may feel like some of the replacements to last year's starting OL are already on the team (i.e., Long at RG and Compton at RT). 

 

I suspect they will be targeting an OL or two NLT the third round as long as they don't have to reach to get him/them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No GM here but I believe we can do much better. I have also been spoiled by our glorious Hogs of yesteryear. I firmly believe great play starts at the line on both sides of the ball. Good strong intelligent lines help the QB, RB and WRs.

Is that what we saw last year? IMO no. We need to improve at G and RT. I want nasty big maulers who play through pain and to the whistle blows. Smart guys that are a cohesive unit and go after the guy that gives a sucker shot at our QB or RB. Guys that are proud to be a Redskin and are always offering hands to help our guys off the ground. Guys still hustling in the 4th quarter at the end of the season.

I didnt see much of that last year...except Trent. He is a fine example IMO.

Can these guys we have be that? Maybe a few, I don't know. But I would love to see Scherff or Collins in B&G.

My two cents...HAIL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the problems go beyond the personnel there was definatly something missing in the general blocking schemes, the auxileries, playcalling and qb play that made it appear to the eye worse than it was .

 

I think more could be squeezed out of the group we had, but then that requires the coaches to realize the limitations of the team and how to put them in better positions to win. We did not do that last season .  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that RG3 made the OL look worse than it was, but if you had watched that OL all year, you would know that it was awful.  The FO, however, may feel like some of the replacements to last year's starting OL are already on the team (i.e., Long at RG and Compton at RT). 

 

I suspect they will be targeting an OL or two NLT the third round as long as they don't have to reach to get him/them.  

 

I am trying to convince myself of that theory.  that we didn't to anything about our OL in FA, because our Talent Evaluator Guru looked at the film of the people we've already got, and decided that they aren't as bad as all of us think they are. 

 

Sure would be nice if what seems like the first draft in forever where we drafted linemen, if they actually turned out to be pretty good linemen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see much in the way of viable options in FA. I think Scot figured he was better off looking to the draft (as well as in-house) for solutions for the oline.

And the oline definitely needs solutions. Yes, you can argue the qbs and (lack of) blocking from the other positions made the line look worse than it is, but the amount of penetration teams got against both the run and pass was a clear problem.

A talented G/T would help immensely while still giving Long and/or Moses (and possibly Compton/LeRibeus/etc.) an opportunity to earn a spot. I'd also take a long look at the centers. Lichtensteiger is capable or better, but it would be nice to find an upgrade/heir.

A G/C like Erving coupled with paired with drafting a T could work.

Point being, drafting "just" two olinemen could provide immediate and longer term impacts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gruden's offense is power football, right? We don't have the personnel to run it and we didn't have a play caller that was comfortable with the zone scheme that made Robert into RGIII. With Callahan on board we will see a much improved blocking scheme and maybe Robert can reclaim some of his rookie magic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gruden's offense is power football, right? We don't have the personnel to run it and we didn't have a play caller that was comfortable with the zone scheme that made Robert into RGIII. With Callahan on board we will see a much improved blocking scheme and maybe Robert can reclaim some of his rookie magic.

 

Gruden like the power game more than zone, correct.

 

Here's the point that is missed so far that I've read.  Shanahan would probably lead the NFL in rushing with this O'line, but would have no use for Lauvao.  We would still be in trouble in 3rd and long.

 

We weren't able to run Jay's offense with the line we had last year, so...

 

Lets make it better while we make it different.  Then we can run, pass, play action, roll out, and drop back on 3rd down.  Like a real team.

 

Stats don't show what the film does.  It's pretty cheap on NFL.com I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The interior line is junk. Both guards and center. Good offensive lines don't get pushed back and have several plays a game where their QB seemingly has all day. The redskins interior line was constantly pushed back in the passing game, not allowing the formation of a real pocket and in the run game.... See my earlier post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The interior line is junk. Both guards and center. Good offensive lines don't get pushed back and have several plays a game where their QB seemingly had all day. The redskins interior line was constantly pushed back in the passing game, not allowing the formation of a real pocket and in the run game.... See my earlier post.

 

Did I disagree with you though? I'm assuming you're directing this to me. I do have an issue with the interior OL, but also as someone who's watched almost all OL eligible for this draft worthwhile, the best value is in that 3rd/4th range. It really is. If you want to go ahead and waste your top 15 pick on Scherff, go ahead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OL is bad and I say that as no supporter of Robert. He is terrible in the pocket but he's not the only reason they look bad.

In 2012 they looked a lot better but that was more to do with the scheme. Having DEs who have to sit at home and play contain makes life pretty easy on an OL.

I wouldn't object to the O-line getting bolstered. I especially agree RG3 made the line look worse than it was. Even if The Hogs, in their prime, was blocking for him he would have 6-10 ticks to hold the ball to long, look confused then dump it off to the nearest reciever at the LOS or take off and run (which he claims he doesn't want to do anymore). Or get sacked for several loss of yards.

Lets get the BPA whether by dradt or FA without worrying about one player, at the expense of the rest of the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No excuses: The personnel is sub-par and in a league driven by QB success, not having a solid line is a huge waste of resources. We can do so much better and this failing deserves attention in the draft.

Thankfully, we now have a skilled OL coach to help with talent acquisition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No excuses: The personnel is sub-par and in a league driven by QB success, not having a solid line is a huge waste of resources. We can do so much better and this failing deserves attention in the draft.

Thankfully, we now have a skilled OL coach to help with talent acquisition.

 

What's funny is that for every Dallas OL that has 3 1st round picks, theres another OL like GB where they have a 4th round OT at LT doing just well. QB play has a funny way of fixing many issues

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's funny is that for every Dallas OL that has 3 1st round picks, theres another OL like GB where they have a 4th round OT at LT doing just well. QB play has a funny way of fixing many issues

It mostly comes down to coaching and I'm confident that we have improved there.

Problem is that our personnel doesn't match what Gruden likes to do in the running game. Our men are leftovers from Shanny and a bit undersized for a power running scheme. Something is going to be done about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The perceived suckage of the OL in pass protection is primarily attributable to the fact that for 10 of our 15 games, we had QBs who simply take lots and lots of sacks (based on past and current history).

 

Fact: Behind the same lineman and in the same season that Robert Griffin and Colt Mccoy were on pace to set NFL records for sacks taken in a single season, Kirk Cousins was on pace to have one of the lowest sack rates in Redskins history.

 

Cousins' 3.8% sack rate in 2014 was the 8th lowest sack rate in Redskins history among QBs who played 5 or more games.  The Redskins rankings go like this:

 

1. Mark Rypien 1991 (1.6%)

2. Mark Rypien 1990 (1.9%)

3. Doug Williams 1988 (2.6%)

4. Jason Campbell 2006 (3.3%)

5. Mark Rypien 1989 (3.3%)

6. Shane Matthews 2002 (3.7%)

7. Billy Kilmer 1972 (3.8%)

8. Kirk Cousins 2014 (3.8%)

 

Half of the people ahead of Cousins on the list were protected by the hogs.  So essentially, Cousins had the 3rd lowest sack rate among Redskins QBs since Rypien's 1991 season.  In the same season that the other 2 QBs on his roster, who played behind the same line, had sack rates of 11.7% and 13.4%.  Griffin's 2014 sack rate of 13.4% places him 2nd to last all time in Redskins history in sack rate among QBs who played in at least 5 games (Mccoy didn't play 5 games, but among QBs who played 4 games his was 4th worst all time).  Note that Cousins played more than half of his games against defenses ranked #6 or better in total sacks.  The Eagles, Giants, and Jaguars average approximately 3.0 sacks per game.  Cousins gave up just 4 sacks combined in his 3 games against those defenses, including 0 sacks in against the Eagles' #2 sack defense.

 

Sacks are always primarily attributable to the QB.  Sack-takers gonna sack-take.  Peyton Manning's career sack rate is 3.07%, and he's only had 1 season in his entire career where he took more than 3.9% sacks.  Marino's second all-time, and never had a 5% sack rate season.  Brees has a 3.87% career sack rate and has never strayed above 5.6% except for his rookie season.  On the other end of the spectrum, Mike Vick has a career sack rate of 8.85% and has only had one season where he achieved below 7.3%.  Alex Smith is at 8.1% for his career and has only had 1 season below 6.8%.  Roethlisberger is a career 7.8% guy and had never achieved below 7.2% until these past few seasons.

 

Similarly, Griffin is a career 8.7% guy and has never been below 7.1%.  Mccoy is a career 8.4% guy and has never been below 6.5%.  You either take sacks or you don't.

 

That's not to say that the Oline doesn't need improvement.  We need to get back (or find a new) our identity in the run game.  We need to be able to run the ball better.  It would really be nice to have an OL like Dallas and Philly have right now, and I wouldn't be opposed to dedicating a pick or maybe two to it during the draft.  But this isn't the horrendous Oline that fans have been making it out to be, and is not in need of the, "Yo let's spend all of our picks on Oline this year brah cuz it sucksss" that you see so often from the fans.

 

You should look at it like this, generically speaking:

 

QB's sack rate = OL Sack Base Rate + QB Specific Sack Rate

 

The OL Base Sack Rate is the rate of sacks that the offensive line would have given up regardless of who was behind center.  For OLs like the hogs, this was incredibly low - probably something like 1%.  For our oline in 2014, it was probably more like 2.5% or 3%.  The QB Specific Sack Rate is the amount of sacks that are taken due to either poor QB play or calculated risks taken by the QB.  You would expect QBs who make good presnap reads, make quick decisions, and throw with anticipation to generally have a low QB Specific Sack Rate.  You would expect QBs with bad presnap reads, slow decision making, or who can't throw with anticipation to have higher QB Specific Sack Rates.  However, the fact that you have a low QB Specific Sack Rate does not automatically mean you're a good QB - you can make crappy decisions very very quickly.  Joey Harrington is #9 all time in fewest sack %.  Josh Freeman is #26 all time.  The crappy QBs with low QB Specific Sack Rates generally have some combination of low yards per attempt, low TD rate, and high interception rate that indicates poor decision making.  The opposite is also true - see Aaron Rodgers and Ben Roethlisberger.

 

Cousins has a very low QB Specific Sack Rate.  Griffin has a very high QB Specific Sack Rate.  If you're going to drop RG3 back 500 times per season, you need to be ready to live with the fact that he will take 35 to 50 sacks regardless of how much you beef up the O line.  With Cousins, you would expect something more along the lines of 20-30.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody that actually watches the games can tell you our O-line is terrible, no matter who is behind center.  Consistently blown up and man-handled right up the middle.

 

The difference is, one QB gets the ball out quick, but makes poor decisions/throws resulting in turnovers.  The other holds the ball too much, trying to be too careful with the ball, and takes sacks.  But ultimately, the line is what it is; poor.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Anybody that actually watches the games can tell you our O-line is terrible, no matter who is behind center.  Consistently blown up and man-handled right up the middle.
 
The difference is, one QB gets the ball out quick, but makes poor decisions/throws resulting in turnovers.  The other holds the ball too much, trying to be too careful with the ball, and takes sacks.  But ultimately, the line is what it is; poor.

 

(I apologize if this is derailing the thread, but as I mentioned in my above post Oline play is highly dependent on QB play, and therefore I believe a discussion of QBs is extremely relevant to the evaluation of our line)

 

Upon actual scrutiny, the above explanation does not hold up.

 

Maybe I'm putting words in your mouth, but this argument is basically that Cousins should have actually taken more sacks - he avoided taking sacks by carelessly throwing the ball up, and this carelessness resulted in more INTs.  When faced with pressure, he threw the ball up instead of eating the sack.  This is a popular explanation among the RG3-is-good camp because it turns one of RG3's greatest weaknesses - his propensity to take sacks - into a strength.  He doesn't take sacks because he's a bad QB, he takes them because he's a smart QB that knows that a sack is better than an interception.  You should be thankful that he takes the sacks instead of being like Cousins and throwing a 50/50 ball up in the air for a potential pick like Cousins!

 

My goal with this post is to put that argument to rest once and for all.  A few of the many problems with the we-should-thank-RG3-for-taking-sacks argument are as follows:

 

(1) Cousins' interceptions came in bunches rather than spread throughout.  If he were avoiding sacks by chucking the ball in the air, that's a consistent behavior that we would expect to result in turnovers in most of his games.  So why did 7 of his 9 interceptions come in just 2 quarters of football?  Was he only trying to avoid sacks during those 2 quarters?  Also, why did his 2 best games come against the #2 and #6 ranked defenses in sacks (Philly and Jacksonville)?  You would think that those would be his worst two games.

 

(2) Cousins generally does not make poor decisions with the football.  If he were just chucking the ball up in the air in hopes of avoiding sacks, we would expect this to be reflected in low TD%, low completion percentage, low yards per attempt, etc.  Returning to the 7 QBs in Redskins history who had a better sack rate than Cousins did in 2014, Cousins ranked #1 in completion %, #4 in TD%, #2 in YPA, #1 in yards/game, #3 in QB rating, and #3 in adjusted net yards per attempt.  Considering he's going up against Rypien's 1991 season, it's pretty amazing that he was able to rank #1 in any of those categories at all, let alone the 2 that he did.  His interception % was the second worst among the 7 other QBs, but this is reflected in his lower adjusted net yards per attempt (which is still very impressive).  Other evidence that Cousins generally makes good decisions is the discussion that we had in another thread regarding the fact that 60% of his passes are completed in 2.5 seconds or less - when you combine that with him being tied for #2 in the league in yards per attempt, #1 in yards per game, etc. it indicates that he makes quick decisions that are generally very good (i.e. not just chucking the ball willy nilly).

 

(3) Even if we were to believe the argument that RG3 is smart and therefore knows that taking a sack is better than throwing a pick, it's clearly not working.  RG3 took 227 yards in sacks versus only 176 yards rushing.  He threw only 4 TDs versus 6 interceptions and 9 fumbles.  If taking sacks instead of picks is a conscious decision that RG3 is making - and trust me, it isn't - then he needs to try something different because the status quo is unacceptable.  Only 4 QBs in the NFL who played as many games as RG3 in 2014 had lower adjusted net yards per attempt (yards per attempt, but penalizes the QB for the sack yardage taken and docks the QB 45 yards per interception).  Those QBs were a combined 10-43 (roughly equivalent to 3-13 for a 16 game season).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...