So I Did a Little Research (Re: Offensive Line)

[Ghost of]

Since about 2004, at various times and in various forms, the O-line or other aspects of the team have been blamed as equal or even primary contributors to team struggles.

More frequently in 2006, we've heard that the O-line isn't giving protection to Brunell this year and that this is why he is unable to make plays downfield. I had already taken the first step to see that we've given up 11 sacks in 5 losses (none in our wins.) But that doesn't tell us much unless we examine the numbers for other QBs.

In this thread, I would like to attempt to leave subjectivity aside, and discuss the statistics that some posters are so fond of throwing into the ring.

As many would have us believe that the offensive line has been a weak link and perhaps the reason for the losing record, I thought it only fair to look at teams with winning records and one loser, David Carr.

Before I continue I’d like to add that due to many teams having byes, I’m avoiding absolute numbers/rankings that are skewed by numbers of games played.

Sacked Rush YPG Rank Attempts Per Sack

McNabb 16 8th (one BEHIND Washington) 15.18

Bulger 19 (in six games) 21st 10.95

Manning 7 (six games) 15th 29.42

Delhomme 15 24th 15.93

Palmer 19 in SIX games 18th 10.32

Rivers 9 in 6 4th 20.78

Pennington 18 13th 10.56

E. Manning 11 in 5 games 2nd 16

Carr 16 (six games) 30th 10.75

Brad Johnson 11 in 6 games 11th 17

Brunell’s attempts per sack?

18.73

Even if we grant (and I by no means believe this to be the case) that through checking down or his bad habits (like backpedaling) that Brunell evades a certain number of sacks, do we really want to extrapolate from that assumption that he’s avoiding a 10 attempts per sack statistic? Let’s say it is. There are superior performers and teams right now with worse attempts per sack numbers than Brunell. In fact, only Manning and Rivers have better attempts per sack numbers. Oh, Drew Brees has 34.5 attempts per sack, which is a combination of his ability and an excellent outlet receiver in Bush.

I think Brad Johnson, being a QB that has no problem checking down and doesn’t take too many sacks looking for deep throws or attempting to force the ball, having a LOWER attempts per sack, illustrates that this is not an offensive line problem. The Vikings line is better than the Skins as they showed during that game at FedEx Field and yet they have a lower attempts per sack number than the Skins. Interesting…

Not only is Washington’s running game 8th in the league (per game) it also is tied for the third highest total (only off by 2) for rushing TDs and is FOURTH in Yards per carry!! Washington is SECOND in rushing first downs but since that is an absolute value, I plugged in a bunch of other teams and Washington is respectable (and outranks a team like Seattle) in rushing first downs per game.

It sounds like he’s getting plenty of support from the rest of the offensive unit, at least when compared to other quarterbacks.

Taking it further, it sounds like maybe the offensive line is being blamed in a manner disproportionate to its failings, at least at this point in the season.

[cyfar]

Excellent find Ghost. Great post!

[PeterMP]

Nice post. Also, if the defense were worried about the deep ball, that would help the OL. It would create more room for the running room. Also, throwing the ball deep discourages the blitz. What you are seeing (the Colts blitzed more then the normally do) and will start seeing is more blitzing from other teams because there is no fear.

[zoony]

I've always said it... the QB makes the o-line just as much as the o-line makes the qb. Ask yourself why a terrible offensive line has followed Bledsoe his entire career... while QB's like Marino NEVER got sacked, yet his offensive line couldn't run-block for ****.

With McNabb behind center, the front page of the Stadium would be filled with threads talking about how great our Oline is.

....

[jbooma]

you have lost it, just watch tv when their guys get to our qb in 3 seconds then yes it is the OL, when we can not rush against the worst rusing defense then yes it is the OL, it is simple Ghost no need for numbers that is saying our defense was so great because they were ranked in the top 10 last year, rankings mean nothing, what counts is what happens in the game and right now our OL is terrible

did you just waste 3 hours to explain your findings

[Hail Gibbs]

Very interesting assessment. The O-line has taken a good deal of blame, and while this breakdown doesn't tell the whole story or absolve them of fault it is somewhat revealing IMO.

[Ghost of]

you have lost it, just watch tv when their guys get to our qb in 3 seconds then yes it is the OL, when we can not rush against the worst rusing defense then yes it is the OL, it is simple Ghost no need for numbers that is saying our defense was so great because they were ranked in the top 10 last year, rankings mean nothing, what counts is what we happens in the game and right now our OL is terrible

I have not "lost it." This is a statistical rebuttal to those who've done nothing but assigned blame to the offensive line.

Do you HONESTLY think that Pennington getting sacked every 10 attempts is facing less pressure than Brunell? Are you serious, man?

[zoony]

you have lost it, just watch tv when their guys get to our qb in 3 seconds then yes it is the OL, when we can not rush against the worst rusing defense then yes it is the OL, it is simple Ghost no need for numbers that is saying our defense was so great because they were ranked in the top 10 last year, rankings mean nothing, what counts is what happens in the game and right now our OL is terrible

did you just waste 3 hours to explain your findings

I think you should actually read his post... and try and learn something about this game.

.....

[jbooma]

I think you should actually read his post... and try and learn something about this game.

.....

i read his post and I know football very well and understand that stats are misleading and can be interpreted however you want them to be, what Ghost refuses to acknowledge is the two games where our OL has played well (Houston and Jacksonville) we win and Mark and CP both have good games, in the games where the OL had trouble picking up the blitz or create running lanes we lose, it is as simple as that

our OL is built to run, the problem is we can not even open up running lanes because for some reason they are not playing well, maybe it is the new system or maybe it is they are just not good or the coaching, but i would say our OL is not playing up to their potential and your offense starts there

I agree Mark has not played well, but lets get real when we think he is the only problem on the offense or the biggest :doh:

[XxSpearheadxX]

Don't you know Chris Samuels sucks because he let Dwight Freeney get by him 4 times (and touch Brunell) without any TE help the whole time.

I mean its not like Dwight Freeney does that or worse to other teams All-Pro LTs

Actually, wait... they do... Dwight Freeney, 270, runs a 4.34 40, strong as hell, maybe as much a technician in the pass rush move as I've ever seen....

Maybe it isn't that Freeney dominated Chris, but it was just a match up against a great DE...

Maybe that first sack on the CB blitz was BRUNELL's fault for not either calling Cooley to chip in, or since it wasn't even on MB's blind side, how about noticing the blitz and quickly THROWING IT to Cooley, who was then uncovered because his man just blitzed.

Nah... Lets just blame it on the O-Line. Its not like MB is supposed to step up into the pocket so Chris can continue to ride his man around him, to give him more time.

(Great post BTW)

[jbooma]

Don't you know Chris Samuels sucks because he let Dwight Freeney get by him 4 times (and touch Brunell) without any TE help the whole time.

I mean its not like Dwight Freeney does that or worse to other teams All-Pro LTs

Actually, wait... they do... Dwight Freeney, 270, runs a 4.34 40, strong as hell, maybe as much a technician in the pass rush move as I've ever seen....

Maybe it isn't that Freeney dominated Chris, but it was just a match up against a great DE...

Maybe that first sack on the CB blitz was BRUNELL's fault for not either calling Cooley to chip in, or since it wasn't even on MB's blind side, how about noticing the blitz and quickly THROWING IT to Cooley, who was then uncovered because his man just blitzed.

Nah... Lets just blame it on the O-Line. Its not like MB is supposed to step up into the pocket so Chris can continue to ride his man around him, to give him more time.

(Great post BTW)

Freeney also did not have a sack all year till yesterday, you know other teams try a thing called max protect when they go deep like Peyton did to us on that 50 yarder, oh wait we have a bunch of small WR's to block :doh:

[hkHog]

The O-line is playing far better football than any other unit on this team!!!!!

[Buck812]

Im afraid our OL has taken the resemblance of our fearless leader.... Weak and Frail....Now the whole defense is following suit

[Hail Gibbs]

Freeney also did not have a sack all year till yesterday, you know other teams try a thing called max protect when they go deep like Peyton did to us on that 50 yarder, oh wait we have a bunch of small WR's to block :doh:

I think much of the blame should be on Saunders or whoever is deciding on the blocking assignments. Samuels was struggling all day, as he seems to have trouble w/ the smaller speed rushers, and never tried to solve the situation by chipping or having a TE assist him.

[jbooma]

I think much of the blame should be on Saunders or whoever is deciding on the blocking assignments. Samuels was struggling all day, as he seems to have trouble w/ the smaller speed rushers, and never tried to solve the situation by chipping or having a TE assist him.

I agree, for some reason we are turning back into the Spurrier O no chipping, no max protect, funny how no one mentions that and still expect Mark to be able to throw it deep on every play :doh:

[jbooma]

Ghost if our OL is so good and Mark can not throw deep at all the from your analysis we should just go after Drew Bledsoe :laugh: :laugh:

[illone]

Attempt per sack is a meaningless stat, especially when you consider Brunell finding the dump-off guy more times than any other QB in the NFL. I know it's frustrating, but you are wasting your time with this stuff, ghost. Nobody has said the oline is strictly to blame.

If anyone is over preaching a point, it's you continuing to only blame Brunell. Clearly the oline has struggled as well, which in turn causes other areas of the team to struggle. That's the main point that you continue to miss. You've missed it for a few years now simply because you don't like Brunell. Football is a team sport. Even Jansen said so on Monday Night Live tonight. He said the team believes in Brunell, and I'm sticking with that for now. As much as I want to see what Campbell can do, the players still think they can salvage the season this year.

[DjTj]

Great work, Ghost. I agree that our offensive line isn't playing as bad as we think. Nobody is saying they're playing great, but I think there's a lot of reason to be optimistic about the offensive line getting better as this season progresses.

They're going through some growing pains while learning a new scheme, but we had a pretty good rushing yards per carry in several games and, as you point out, we're not giving up many sacks. We probably should have left some more guys in to block against a good pass rushing team like the Colts, but we were probably also trying to go deep more ... and you really can't do both.

Our offensive personnel is solid, especially on the line, but we are just out of synch a lot of the time. I don't think we're as bad as the results have shown, and hopefully we'll start turning things around soon.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

Did you see Bledsoe take the one sack? He actually tucked the ball away and closed his eyes at LEAST 2 or 3 seconds BEFORE Contact. It looked like he was expecting the hit to come from the the DT in front of him and instead of was Strahan from the blindside.

Now that's horrible pocket presence.

[Ghost of]

Nobody has said the oline is strictly to blame.

That is absolutely not true. First of all 'strictly' is a subjective term because no one, not even me, is saying one player or unit is STRICTLY to blame. If our D was at 2004 level, even with the underperforming O we're .500 right now. But there have been more than a few posts about Brunell 'not being able to do anything without blocking.' Just check out the infamous JB, he said explicitly to me in another thread "It's the O-line, silly." And there are plenty who want to deflect blame from the one position by throwing it towards the O-line. I also wanted to point out the running stats because often we hear about Brunell not getting the help from the other facets and it's too anecdotal for me to point to individual games over the season where Qbs played well and threw for yards in spite of 'lack of support' from the run game.

YOu also said that attempts per sack is meaningless but it's not. BRunell does dump off more often but he also dumps off when he HAS time to throw. And other QBs do that as well--Brad Johnson?!?! Maybe not as often as Brunell but you are, I believe, falsely attributing his decent number att/sack to his checkdowns, when game tape shows that he often does this simply because it's what he does. IF anything, blame the receivers (not really, of course) because Brunell is doing this on plays where he has time.

I don't think you can just dismiss this, nor would I read too much into Jansen's comments about sticking with Brunell.

[JimmiJo]

Ghosty - You are taking a very narrow view my friend.

What about hurries and knocked downs? Brunell is quick to throw the ball away under pressure. Yes it avoids the sack, but it also kills the play.

[illone]

My point is that this oline needs to play at a high level to give Brunell the time he needs, and he needs more than most NFL qb's from the games I have seen this year. We are not too far removed from the Jax game where he was firing lasers down the field. The difference in that game: solid oline play.

Sure, Brunell could play much better than he has the past few weeks, but so could the oline. I can't say the team in this case because we haven't really had turnover problems like 2004, or dropped passes. We're just out of synch on many plays and the timing is just off. Part of that is Brunell, and part of that is the oline.

You're trying to compare Brunell to other QBs in the league who have the ability to throw down the field under pressure. Brunell simply can't do that. It's not his strength at all, hasn't been for years now. He needs at least 4-5 seconds to make his reads and that isn't happening. That and some roll outs so he can see down the field. I'd guess that the line would have to step up in order to make this happen, though, because I don't think Brunell is going to morph into a more able QB. Too old and fragile at this point in his career.

[inevitable]

jbooma = :doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

lets ignore any interpretation of fact shall we?

[ronnix]

the offensive line is good at run blocking, because it does not expose our tackles, that get beat regularly by quicker, smaller def end pass rushers. without a blocking back in the backfield to help, it is up to the qb to throw the short pass. that is why we cannot throw the deep ball. we have no depth in the offensive line. when was the last time you saw a sub for the tackles or center. the team is just bad, and it will take a lot of rebuilding, and changes to make it good.

[bubba9497]

first off other than Dallas & NY the OL has played very well, among the best in the league. 4 games with zero sacks is impressive no matter who you play, and the YPC is around 4.7 also impressive

now I realize this is just another "bench Brunell" thread... but if you really want to accurately blame something for the losing.... maybe you should start with the defense.