Offensive Line Troubles

[jonjeff]

Well fellas, if you saw last nights game you must now realize we are in big trouble up front. Sammuals and Jansen are solid, but the rest of these guys leave alot to be desired. The Steelers manhandled our overmatched O-line. Wurffel had no time to pass, Davis had no room to run. How many yards rushing do we have in three exhibition games? 100? This just isn't going to cut it come regular season time. Teams saw how to disrupt Spurrier's offense. Apply great pressure through the middle, and lock down on the wideouts. I will say this, the Steelers have one of the best defenses in the NFL, but I was very disturbed at what I saw last night. Rod Jones, and Ross Tucker aren't the answers at gaurd. Anybody with any football knowledge can see that. With Ray Brown gone, to the Lions for Christ's sake, where do we go now? Three weeks to opening day and we still are in the same situation we were three or four months ago. It's sad because we have a great defense, but with the length of time they will be on the field this season, they won't hold up. The clock is ticking Steve. Sh*t, or get off the pot. Get us a solid gaurd!

[Art]

Sweet Jon.

I didn't see last night's game, but it's cool to hear that Samuels and Jansen did well. I was particularly concerned with how Samuels would play at left tackle and how Jones would play at left guard last night.

I now understand that Samuels played ok outside and Jones didn't inside. Thanks for the observant look at things. .

[DC_Clone]

:laugh:

[@DCGoldPants]

umm, we're throwing a lot in preseason because that's harder to learn in the offense. You get the pass going to set up the run in this system. Wait till week one before you start going nuts.

[NavyDave]

With our supposed line troubles how many times have we been sacked this year?

With the defenses knowing we are going to pass alot and the "woeful O line you would expect 5 sacks a game right?

So can some one tell us how many we have given up?

[Mad Mike]

Uhhh... who wants to tell these people that Samuels didn't play?:doh:

[Art]

Ding Mike .

Thank you sir.

Wait. If Samuels didn't play outside and Jones did, and not inside, then, after watching the game, it seems hard to come to the conclusion he played badly inside and Samuels played well outside.

We have 1100 passing yards right now. Will that cut it in the regular season?

[Henry]

But ... that would mean Jones played LT, not inside ... I'm so confused.

[Mad Mike]

NavyDave

Sacks aren't the only indication of line play. How often were we hurried? Looked to me like almost every time when you consider we never had enough time to get receivers open. QBs were limited to 3 step drops for the most part and it wasn't enough. It also looked to me like more effort was made to run the ball without much success.

The way I see it, the first half last night was the closest we have come to actual game conditions and while it is true that every down did not result in a sack. We didn't exacty handle the pressure well ether.:doh:

[GatorRob]

Originally posted by NavyDave

With our supposed line troubles how many times have we been sacked this year?

With the defenses knowing we are going to pass alot and the "woeful O line you would expect 5 sacks a game right?

So can some one tell us how many we have given up?

Dave, I believe that there are other factors besides sacks. In the first quarter, Danny never was in the pocket for three seconds. He was flushed out of the pocket for 4 of 6 throws. Although he never was sacked, he WAS hurried...and he reads the defenses faster than anyone else.

Sage was harried quite a bit as well. I don't think the pass defense was terrible. I think the pass rush was extremely strong.

HTTR!

[Montilar]

fellas, jonjeff's a skin fan. BE nice. :laugh:

I wouldn't be so concerned over Ross Tucker starting if the other positions were settled. But I still see the guards setup as being unsettled due to Rod Jones not stepping it up as hoped for.

It will take kipp Vickers about a full season to earn trust after his last stint here.

I'm hoping that the last two games will show spurrier installing more of a game plan and building up to opening season. That he was just using the first three to work on the passing game, both for QB's, WR's, and OL. Now should come some mixing of runs and passes.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by jonjeff

Well fellas, if you saw last nights game you must now realize we are in big trouble up front. Sammuals and Jansen are solid, but the rest of these guys leave alot to be desired. The Steelers manhandled our overmatched O-line. Wurffel had no time to pass, Davis had no room to run. How many yards rushing do we have in three exhibition games? 100? This just isn't going to cut it come regular season time. Teams saw how to disrupt Spurrier's offense. Apply great pressure through the middle, and lock down on the wideouts. I will say this, the Steelers have one of the best defenses in the NFL, but I was very disturbed at what I saw last night. Rod Jones, and Ross Tucker aren't the answers at gaurd. Anybody with any football knowledge can see that. With Ray Brown gone, to the Lions for Christ's sake, where do we go now? Three weeks to opening day and we still are in the same situation we were three or four months ago. It's sad because we have a great defense, but with the length of time they will be on the field this season, they won't hold up. The clock is ticking Steve. Sh*t, or get off the pot. Get us a solid gaurd!

jonjeff, I'll respond to the jack@sses who ripped you for this post.

Hello jack@sses. You must be feeling very smug now that you implied that jonjeff thought Samuels was playing last night. He didn't say that. He said Samuels and Jansen "are solid" -- not "were solid last night". He is correct.

When your little smug clique of spitball-throwing morons can finish cackling, you might see that jonjeff has a point: namely, the QBs were harrassed most of the time they played against the starting defense. (Again, Art, why are you even involving yourself in this discussion? I realize it's disappointing that you didn't see the game, but must you dispute pass protection when you didn't see it?)

Also, if you bothered to review the Osaka game in any detail (yes, Art, with Tivo -- I can hear the tittering), you'd see that the notable strength of Wuerffel over Sage was his rhythm. He executed the offense with textbook precision, dropping back the prescribed steps, planting, stepping, throwing -- no hesitation. Sage didn't do that, and so the timing of the offense was off. Spurrier's system seems to depend on precise QB/WR timing. Last night, the QBs facing the starting defense couldn't execute the precise timing because the line was breaking down around them. Just having to sidestep and move outside the pocket absolutely breaks the Spurrier system, and at that point it's just whatever the QB can freelance with the WRs.

Similarly, it *is* disturbing that the team has not demonstrated any ability to establish the run. You can make silly arguments about rushing average, but that's a meaningless stat when runs are tossed in as a lark once per drive -- and are still stuffed on frequent occasions. This team looks afraid to establish the run, because they know they can't. (If you can't run on nickel defenses, what can you run on?)

I'm a huge Spurrier fan, so please don't think anything I'm saying is a direct criticism of Spurrier. But our starting interior OL just sucks, and it doesn't help to deny it, or worse, ridicule the few people who admit the truth. (I don't want to expand this can of worms, but it looked like Larry Moore was being blown back at times last night. I need to review the tape to be sure.)

[Mad Mike]

ASF

A-freekin'-men!

No matter what else changes in the NFL. Run to pass or pass to run. MartyBall or fun-n-gun. The one thing that will always hold true is "whoever controls the line of scrimage has the best chance to win the game"

Anyone who thinks we are set on the O line is sippin' too hard at the coolaid. SOS may find a way to win even with the guards we have but that does not mean we are fine.

OT: It must be wonderfull to be so brilliant that you don't even have to watch the game to know what happened better than everybody else. (Cough, cough, ART!) :dunce:

[RiggoDrill]

I think we'll be making some trades soon, if only because Snyder sees the same weaknesses on the OL.

If I had to guess, I'd say Mendes has been waiting for the supply of OL Free Agents to increase after cut-downs, because the greater the supply, the more reasonable the contract.

If we try to trade for someone right now, we'll get shafted, as it's obvious to the rest of the league we need help.

Does anyone know when the various mandatory cut-downs are?

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

I realize we're talking about the starting OL in the first half, but here's a gem from John Keim about the first offensive play of the 3rd quarter:

"Quarterback Shane Matthews had a rough start in his FedEx Field debut, throwing an interception on his first snap. On the first play after halftime, Matthews, under pressure on a rush through guard David Loverne, tried to throw the ball into the ground. Instead he stuck it in the gut of a defensive lineman for an interception."

"...rush through guard David Loverne..."

That must be one of our outstanding interior OL that Art & Co. studied closely last night, yes?

[bulldog]

you have to give the front office credit for seeing the same things we do each week, so there are only a couple of answers for the OL situation, none of which are ones we are going to like:

1. The Redskins are willing to stand pat and go with the players they have, hoping that when Samuels comes back Jones can switch back to guard and perhaps team with Tucker to provide decent production inside. As a 23 year old the feeling may be that Tucker is improving rapidly and given reps and a chance to start he will be better than the alternatives.

2. The Redskins sold themselves a pig in a poke in Rod Jones, who came into camp way out of shape and who hasn't looked comfortable at either RG or LG. Because we signed Jones earlier in free agency and I think really counted on him to make the transition to guard a relatively smooth one, the team passed up other opportunities to land a player that they may now need.

3. The Redskins realize they need to make a move for a lineman but nobody else in the NFL seems to be obliging, either in terms of releasing a veteran or offering us a younger player at a reasonable price. It appears as if there are a number of veteran linemen on the fringe of being cut around the NFL after having been beaten out for jobs, but those teams seem to be hanging onto these guys until the last minute/ cutdown.

[SB33]

ASF, MM, and RD the o-line is not as bad as you think. Last night they kept the Steelers 1st String D without a sack. The Steelers had 55 to lead the league last year. The Steelers were rushing 5 or more at least 30% of the plays. The 1st string o-line held its own against the best front seven in the league last year. What else do you want.

I too have wanted the skins to get additional O-linemen, but the present crew is adequate. My main concern is getting better backups, but those released at this time are not any better than what we have.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by SB33

ASF, MM, and RD the o-line is not as bad as you think. Last night they kept the Steelers 1st String D without a sack. The Steelers had 55 to lead the league last year.

Maybe I should program my response here as a macro. Apparently I'll be typing it a lot.

Fellow fans:

Sacks are not the only measure of pass protection. In Spurrier's system, disrupting the QB's rhythm is more generally important.

The Spurrier passing system depends on precise QB/WR timing, which is set by the QB drop-back planned for the play. The QB is supposed to drop back 3, 5, or 7 steps, plant, step forward and throw. The WR routes are keyed to this timing so the WRs come open at the moment of the throw (or while the ball is in the air).

If the QB has to sidestep or is flushed from the pocket, or if Spurrier is forced to call only 3-step passing plays because of broken protection, the system isn't working. Good results can happen from broken plays or repeated 3-step passing plays, but that's not maximizing the Spurrier system.

If the QBs cannot repeatedly drop back 5 or 7 steps, plant, step forward and throw, then the OL is dragging down the Spurrier system. Sacks are just one possible outcome of a play that is already broken. Don't get hung up on sacks: just watch the QB's rhythm and footwork.

[Mad Mike]

What ASF said

SB33 seems to miss the fact that we didn't score against the Steelers first string ether.:doh:

Ever notice the one constant through the skins Superbowl years? (besides Gibbs) THE HOGS. They made everyone else on the offense better by punching big holes for the running game and giving the QBs all day to find the open receiver. :notworthy

[bulldog]

when you look at the three games so far put together the conclusion you come to is the Redskins need better production from the offensive line to win ball games in the regular season.

hurries count as much as sacks in my book because they often cause interceptions or change of possession incompletions on third downs.

the Redskins SECOND string offensive and defensive lines actually did a very good job of beating their counterparts on the Steelers in the second half. Wilbert Brown and Melvin Paige and even our old boy David Loverne won their matchups.

but it would be a stretch to say that we have found a solution up front when it comes to starters versus starters.

when you play a starting group for one quarter a lot of the real problems that exist don't get exposed.

you put those same players out there for FOUR quarters and defenses learn the weaknesses and tendencies of the guys out there and take advantage.

remember a couple of years ago how Jay Leeuwenburg was effective for 2-3 weeks but as teams learned how to get inside of him and push him he became somewhat of a liability as a starter inside at guard?

I will say now that Rod Jones to me doesn't look like he can make it for 4 quarters of NFL football. He is just too far out of shape.

When this guy gets into at least the shape he was last season for the Rams the Skins may have already played 5 or 6 games.

Now who's fault is that?

At least with Tucker you are talking about a second year player who is trying to learn how to play in the NFL.

What he lacks are things he couldn't just reach out and grab for, namely experience and know-how of technique. Those things only come over time.

All Jones had to do was stay away from the drive through window and get on the damn bike once in awhile, but that was evidently too much for him :mad:

[TheShredder]

This is not the regular season people.

Quit it with the stats quotes...it doesn't matter.

I know you have been without football for serveral months, but so have I. But, If the skins were 0-3 and had decent stats against the first stringers, than would we be so enlightened by the totals?

Please face reality and stop it with the bloated yardage quotes and points totals, because WHO THE **** CARES!!!!!:gus:

PRE SEASON FOOTBALL doesn't count for much more than a scrimmage. Big practice. The War isn't on yet. This is scenario based training.

[Cskin]

I'm going to put my two cents worth in here. First off, I saw the game from the comfort of a rather sparse bar here in Chesapeake.

I saw an OL performance that was adequate at the very least. ASF, you can scream at the top of your lungs about the shoddy play of the OL...... but I just don't believe you watched the game from a perspective condusive to evaluating the line play.

Although I agree that there was pressure on the QB at times, it had less to do with the interior lineman not taking care of their respective assignments as it was that the Steelers were stunting and blitzing rather heavily. Yes, LT Jones missed his block that led to Sage's fumble. And Yes, there were times that the defensive rush pushed back our OL pocket, but I didn't see individual match-ups that were indicative of poor individual line play. We were solid, not spectacular, and our QB's finished the game uninjured. I saw our DL win more individual match-ups than that of the Steelers. I believe Cowher wanted to send a message, and he sent blitzes pretty regularly to get the effect.

The "David Loverne" example you presented was simply wrong. The reason his man got pressure on SM was because the play was designed to be a screen or short dink to the center of the field. Loverne was supposed to only "chip" his man and then take his position to form the screen "wall". I personally think the back misread the play and was no where near the screen's original intent....hence the interception. Should SM have thrown the ball into a mass of OL and DL lineman......NO!

As for the running game, how many times do we have to explain this? Steve Spurrier is simply not concentrating on the running game. He is, however, trying to establish a continuity between the QB's and the WR's. Getting the WR's to run the precise routes, getting the QB to recognize the defense pre-snap and make the right decision with the ball or change the play. He is NOT totally abandoning the running game as an intregal part of the REGULAR SEASON offensive attack.

An more specific analysis:

If the steelers are going to blitz, either from the corner with defensive backs or from the middle with linebackers, S2's offense has a place to throw the football to combat that. It's the execution of the QB, and the route running of the WR, that will ultimately stop the opposing defenses from continuing that ploy. THAT, IN A NUTSHELL, is WHY S2 CONTINUES TO WORK WITH THE PASSING GAME AT THE EXPENSE OF THE RUNNING GAME DURING PRESASON GAMES. These are things the QB/WR must execute perfectly because we're going to see it alot from opposing defenses. Why on earth would we practice turning and handing off to a running back?

And finally...I'll take a 5.6 avg per running play just about any game.

[Art]

Well, this ought to at least be interesting, eh Atlanta?

"Hello jack@sses. You must be feeling very smug now that you implied that jonjeff thought Samuels was playing last night. He didn't say that. He said Samuels and Jansen "are solid" -- not "were solid last night". He is correct. "

That's not what he said at all ASF. He said that after watching the game last night he's come to conclude that Samuels and Jansen are solid and that Tucker and Jones are not quality guards. So again, how is that observation made based on a game last night in which Jones played tackle to start for Samuels?

"When your little smug clique of spitball-throwing morons can finish cackling, you might see that jonjeff has a point: namely, the QBs were harrassed most of the time they played against the starting defense. (Again, Art, why are you even involving yourself in this discussion? I realize it's disappointing that you didn't see the game, but must you dispute pass protection when you didn't see it?)

Wuerffel was harrassed so much only four of his five passes hit receivers hands. I'm terrified with this. Further, I'm not debating the line play. You could well be completely accurate with your assessment, though I've found you not to be with other assessments on the Osaka game. I'm simply pointing out the questionable statement that AFTER watching last night's game it's his conclusion we're ok on the outside but Jones and Tucker aren't ready on the inside. Jones played outside for Samuels. So, how did seeing the game bring about that conclusion?

What I know about the game is similar to what you knew about the Carolina game when you started your attack on Helton and the players. You saw the stats from the game and used that as evidence something was amiss. Until I view the game I am not going to say with any finality how we "looked". But, in limited rushing attempts, we averaged 5.6 yards a carry. Our starting QB had four of his five passes hit receiver hands. The outcome of our atrocious line play last night was just that. It may be that was pure happenstance and we were beaten so badly it was lucky to even enjoy that limited amount of success. But, we do know that despite your take, and now Jon's, on last night's line play, the information provided is what happened.

Don't kick the chair away yet. How'd we do in the preseason last year against Atlanta? Let me know how that came into play when the year came around. Thanks. The preseason is simply not usually a good time to come to conclusions on what you'll see.

Look at Denver. They ran 42 times last week for like 200 yards. But, they only passed for 134 yards. Think they are in a panic about their passing game at the moment? Or do you think they are attempting to measure who can be their primary runner? It seems clear to me we're attempting to measure who our QBs and receivers will be. Davis is the least of our concerns.

"Also, if you bothered to review the Osaka game in any detail (yes, Art, with Tivo -- I can hear the tittering), you'd see that the notable strength of Wuerffel over Sage was his rhythm. He executed the offense with textbook precision, dropping back the prescribed steps, planting, stepping, throwing -- no hesitation. Sage didn't do that, and so the timing of the offense was off. Spurrier's system seems to depend on precise QB/WR timing. Last night, the QBs facing the starting defense couldn't execute the precise timing because the line was breaking down around them. Just having to sidestep and move outside the pocket absolutely breaks the Spurrier system, and at that point it's just whatever the QB can freelance with the WRs."

Ok. And again, let me point to the fact that Wuerffel wasn't sacked. Yes, I KNOW sacks aren't the only part of the game. So, let's go to the part of the game that mattered. His passing. He threw five passes. Four were on the hands of receivers. Two were dropped. Another play was called back, but, ignoring that, he had five passes and four were on the hands of receivers. Once again, if I don't hang myself over having four of five passes on target because of our dismal offensive line, forgive me. I'm happy to pull the rope from your neck as soon as you're ready.

"Similarly, it *is* disturbing that the team has not demonstrated any ability to establish the run."

The team hasn't attempted to establish the run. Is it your contention that five carries, by your count, excluding plays you don't like in favor of the five you will recognize, is enough to establish the running game? We had 22 yards on those five plays. Did Spurrier attempt to establish the running game or might he figure he knows what Davis can do, but he doesn't know what his QBs can do and it's not really something he's going to spend a lot of time on in evaluating the QB handoff technique?

If you are disturbed by our lack of effort at establishing a running game, then jot off a note to Spurrier saying that you'd like him to tell you why he hasn't called more running plays. My guess is he'll write something along the lines of, "Davis is the NFC's leading rusher for three years. We have unproven QBs and receivers and need to see what they can do pitching it around since they didn't really have a chance to last year."

Would that be so disturbing?

"You can make silly arguments about rushing average, but that's a meaningless stat when runs are tossed in as a lark once per drive -- and are still stuffed on frequent occasions."

I see. Once again your hypocritical nature shines ASF. Last week you used rushing average with Davis as proof the Redskins were utterly without concept in the running game. Now when it's pointed out we averaged 5.6 yards a carry on the limited efforts we made, it's meaningless? Why was it more meaningful when you pointed it out? Because you did it, is why?

"This team looks afraid to establish the run, because they know they can't. (If you can't run on nickel defenses, what can you run on?)"

This team hasn't tried to establish the run becasue that's not what it's doing right now. I fail to see the look of fear you think you see, but, again, I don't freeze frame TIVO over the coaches heads and analyze their looks of fear as you do.

"I'm a huge Spurrier fan, so please don't think anything I'm saying is a direct criticism of Spurrier."

Oh no. Of course not. The head coach is getting a pass in your world because you've got the demon Helton to blame. The head coach has nothing at all in the world to do with the personnel we have presently. The offensive line coach has EVERYTHING to do with it. I gotcha chief. This is where you hear the tittering .

"But our starting interior OL just sucks, and it doesn't help to deny it, or worse, ridicule the few people who admit the truth. (I don't want to expand this can of worms, but it looked like Larry Moore was being blown back at times last night. I need to review the tape to be sure.)"

I'm sure we'll both review the tape and see how she looked. But, again, our interior line sucked this time last year. And the year before. And the year before. And with player changes on the level we make them, that's kind of to be expected until the unit gets reps together. By all camp reports we've seen, the team is very focused on passing the ball. The head ball coach has to devote time to the running game and getting the necessary reps. It's HIS world. Not one other person's world. When Spurrier wants to, he'll work on the running game. Until he wants to, he won't. Our effectiveness will be on him to improve and focus on. Not Helton.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Art

(1.) What I know about the game is similar to what you knew about the Carolina game when you started your attack on Helton and the players. You saw the stats from the game and used that as evidence something was amiss....

(2.) Yes, I KNOW sacks aren't the only part of the game. So, let's go to the part of the game that mattered. His passing. He threw five passes. Four were on the hands of receivers. Two were dropped. Another play was called back, but, ignoring that, he had five passes and four were on the hands of receivers.....

(3.) I'm sure we'll both review the tape and see how she looked.

Art, your points are reasonable enough overall. I'll respond here where I have something to add.

1. Good point. Your objection to my posts then is the same objection I have to your posts now. You should listen to yourself more.

2. Glad you are not sack obsessed. As for Wuerffel's passing, all I can say is that he *looked* harrassed much of the time (unlike Osaka). If he completed passes or put passes on the hands of receivers, that may be more credit to the "Favre" in Wuerffel than the "Grimm" in the interior OL. Also, don't forget that we're also talking about Sage in the 2nd quarter. Do you think that Sage had a brain transplant during halftime, and that explains the disparity between his 2Q and 4Q performances? Or could it be that Sage is effective when he has time to throw and develop drop-back rhythm, and ineffective when he doesn't?

3. This preseason (except Osaka) is driving me crazy. I can't stand arguing about all this when no one in the discussion is offering hard evidence (tape review), one of us saw the game in a loud sports bar, and the other didn't see the game at all. It tends to lead to a low-quality argument. (I'm always happy when you at least resort to tape review when taking me to the woodshed. Nothing is more boring than being beaten with rhetoric alone. I've fallen asleep during some of those beatings!)

See ya in the film room.

[MRMADD]

I find it hard to believe that anyone who's watched any of the preseason games is comfortable with the interior line play.

But don't bother arguing with them. Just watch the waiver wire -- the Skins will. I'd be willing to bet that the Skins will pick up a cast-off lineman or two in the next two weeks.

Anyone want to take that bet?