OL play against Bucs -- hmmm...

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by RiggoDrill

Would Zone-blocking explain why Moore was standing in open space?

It surely would. I was going to mention that Moore was almost certainly zone blocking. On both plays where Vickers gets spun (to the inside), you see Moore watching it happen and not helping. (OK, on one play he nudged the DT and then went back to zone blocking in space.)

By contrast, I noticed on at least one of the Buc offensive plays shown in the highlights, the center was used with the left guard to double team. Buc blocking assignments:

left TE - on Bruce Smith

left T, left G - on our RT

C, right G - on our LT

right T (and maybe TE?) on our left DE

The double-teaming on both our DTs helped to neutralize our inside rush (on the play I was watching).

By contrast, Moore was essentially uninvolved in two out of three of the highlight plays I cited.

I'm sure there are advantages to strict zone blocking, such as picking up late blitzes. But I would prefer a more flexible system where a zone blocker with no one to block helps the other OL, especially when the neighboring lineman is losing his block. Maybe someone who has coached the OL can comment about this -- I don't claim to be an OL scheme expert.

[spanishomelette]

Well, if SD was gaining 8 or 9 yards on a carry, then some part of the line was doing the job I think. If he could find those yards, wouldn't that show that there was enough of a hole to pound into. The line doesn't always have to plow ahead, but just let the d lineman overrun or just hold the position, and hope some other part of the line is getting the benefit.

What about the failed plays? Do lineman get credit for keep their assignments (whatever we think they may be) on those plays?

[The Sisko]

"This is gonna be another one of those long ones, isnt it? "

My thoughts exactly.

[Art]

Sham,

If you are going to be realistic, please try to at least address what we're speaking on here. I think the consensus is the offensive line got crushed as our depth or cut players got in. This is doubtless true. It's been true much of the preseason. Specifically though, we're discussing the players in particular that Atlanta pointed out, and of late, debating one, in which we scored on.

I'd like to ask though, while you are so real and all, when you wrote, "I have the entire game taped. Yea, Vickers and Jones are bums as guards," how it can be. Jones didn't play guard. No matter how many times you watched the taped game against the Bucs, he won't be at guard. No matter how many times you watched the taped game against the Steelers he won't be there either.

Now, have you watched the taped Panthers game, where he WAS at guard? Let me know. Every play he was in wrote down and took notes. Largely he was killing the Panthers both in pass blocking and run blocking. The San Francisco game was one where the line got very few snaps and none of us have watched it all that closely.

Jones has great value to this team as a quality backup player at both left and right offensive tackle. In a little over two quarters play against two of the better defenses in football, he surrendered one sack. That sack was on a play action pass against the Steelers in which Sage had four seconds to throw and didn't.

The ability to play that spot in a pinch is crucial. Vickers can do that in a pinch. The ability to hold the spot down over a period of weeks is great. Jones can do that. Now, if Jones can't win out at the guard spot at some point, the team may look at his cap number and figure it's not worth it, especially if a younger proven guard came free.

The offensive line as a starting group has surrendered exactly one sack the entire preseason. That the Jones sack against the Steelers. The offensive line, again, remains five parts of whatever offensive unit we have on the field. That offense appears to be doing an adequate job in the preseason, if scoring and yardage records are any measure.

And they are a measure.

[Art]

Atlanta,

Here's another thing to mull over.

Right now we are testing out players at the guard spot. Against the Bucs, we had a great opportunity to pit our guards against a dominating pass rusher. Against Carolina, our center and left guard (Jones) worked in tandem much of the night, allowing Tucker to go man up almost all night.

So, like you saw with Tampa, we did the same thing at Carolina. I wonder how much of the games we're playing now is designed to test these players out in matchup situations they will be faced with in the regular season. Remember in 2000 when the Giants first figured out how to get man blocking matchups with Fischer and they CRUSHED us as every team did the rest of the year.

Right now we've seen both guards in a good deal of man blocking situations against very capable defensive lines. I wouldn't be surprised if this was at least part by design, though, a great deal of it has to be zone blocking responsibility.

Further, on the pass play you cited, Sapp got on the outside tackle shoulder of Vickers. Moore had better not slide out to help the guard in those situations because if he does, we're going to see delayed inside blitzing that will give free runs at the QB. When the defensive tackle is on the far shoulder of either guard, the center can't do anything on that type of play.

The running backs have inside out responsibility to handle that, or the tackle can pinch down if the tight end is outside. But, it is almost a physical impossibility to have the center cross the guard's body to help out when the rusher is tackle side without leaving a gaping hole in the interior.

[jonjeff]

Didn't we beat this subject to a pulp last week! I respect the opinions of every Redskin fan on this board, wether it be negative or positive. Everyone see things in a different light. Both Atlanta Skins Fan, and Art are very knowledgable football fans. They both have supplied great input on our offensive line play the past few games. The final verdict will start to come in about 13 days. Once Brendan Stai joins the fray, and Chris Sammuals is back, I feel we will have a decent, not great offensive line. I still look for us to pick up another starting caliber gaurd in the upcoming 10 days to fill the other gaurd spot. Let's face it, the o-line isn't one of our teams strong points. I just hope whoever we end up with up front can jell together as a unit and provide a solid front for our passing and running attack. I think with the players we have in the skill positions, our o-line needs only to be adequate, not great, for us to put points on the board. This offense is a quick look, fast decision offense. We don't need linemen that have to hold their blocks for over five seconds for the QB to be sucessful. Just control the point of attack and let our skilled players take over. I too have some doubts, but don't all teams have some doubts right now? I'll wait and give these guys the benifit of the doubt until the regular seasons gets going. Then I hope all the doubts will fade away!

[jonjeff]

Art,

On another subject other than the offensive line, what's with the time shown when we make our posts. It isn't even close to what time it actually is where I live. My clock now says: 6:05 pm eastern time. Look what time it says I posted. What's with this?

[Yomar]

Originally posted by jonjeff

but don't all teams have some doubts right now?

YES...yes they do, and most have many more than the Skins...

:high:

[Art]

Go to the USERCP link at the top of your page. Hit EDIT OPTIONS and check for the time offset. That should fix you up.

[jonjeff]

Thanks Art! I just read about the loss of Rod Jones. This really hurts our o-line depth. Although not starting material, Jones would have made a decent backup at all positions other than center along the offensive front. Where do we go frome here Art? Just wait on the upcoming cutdowns, or do you see another trade in the making?

[Art]

As I mentioned, my preference is to go with a center/guard variety and leave Vickers to handle any primary tackle problem we have, unless Coleman comes along nicely. This loss is a big one for us and hits us at, essentially, three of five spots on the line as starter or primary backup.

John Jackson could also be a consideration as a free agent, but he'd ONLY be left or right tackle I believe.

[redman]

I continue to like Ben Coleman, who can play RT, RG and likely LG. In an emergency, he might even be able to hold his own at LT. I just don't know what he wants in terms of $.

[Art]

Redman, if he could do that, I'd like him too. But, by accounts, he has a very bad knee in terms of bone on bone rubbing some or some such. He is not likely to have the mobility at this point to play right tackle, much less left tackle. If the team felt he could, then, sure, I'd sign him in a heartbeat.

He is striking me though as one of those guys, like Watters and Sam Adams, that won't play for league minimum. They'd rather retire than do that. Let me be honest with you. These guys bother me. You either love the game of football or you don't. These guys should have made enough money by this point that they should want to end their careers with a team they like and ride off in the sunset. If they enjoyed playing, they'd care less about the money.

But, like James said in ESPN Magazine, he was told to dive into the line at the end of a game once. But, he said, he wouldn't do that because he's got incentives and all. So, he broke through the line for a touchdown and he heard the cash register the whole way. These people are in it until the money starts to dry up. Then they walk away. Coleman may not be this type. But, he seems like it .

Also, interestingly, I watched the touchdown pass to Gardner on ESPN last night. What I noticed is that not only was the play good, but Matthews wasn't hit. He was rubbed late, and nudged well after the ball was gone and you couldn't see him, but, you could see the ball released and the defenders easing back before he left the screen.

[GURU]

It seems completely unrealistic, to me, to expect perfection as a yardstick of offensive line excellence.

On teams with the very best offensive lines, quarterbacks get hit, running backs get blown up in the backfield, etc. They pay the other guys to play, too, and some of them are pretty damn good. You just can't expect to go up against defesive fronts like those in Pittsburg and Tampa Bay and expect positive plays every snap. That's downright silly.

I can remember a game in 1985, I think, when the Hogs were in their prime, and they gave up 9 sacks in one game. When the Skins knocked the Bears out of the playoffs in '87 and '88, the running game went nowhere and both Schreoder and Williams got knocked around like rag dolls. But the O-line held just enough plays to win the game. That's reality.

What you want is to make enough room for your RBs to make some plays, and keep pass rushers off your QB long enough to complete passes. Ragging on O-linemen on 8 and 9-yard runs and on a TD pass is downright petty, in my book. I also think it's silly to try and project what is actually going to happen with starters in the game for 4 quarters based on what we are seeing in preseason.

It's going to take a little time for the entire team to gel, not just the O-line. I think that things are going to go well once that happens. The real question is whether or not there is enough talent to carry the team until they get completely on the same page. But I stand by my statement that this offensive line has more talent than the last two Super Bowl champions, who had very questionable lines going into those title runs.

[2cents]

Too many people judge our lines against the 1991 line, and that is unfair.