My Slug Witucki Theory for Drafting O-Line Talent

[Oldfan]

fat boys win the game, Smoot does know what he is talking about, More Fatboys! Can't go wrong with fat boys.

Smootie should stick to talking smack. That's what he knows.

[Oldfan]

Size and performance in drills is given too much weight at every position right now IMO.

I think your statement has been true since the game was invented. Sure, he weighs 250 and runs a 4.3 forty, but can he block, tackle, run with or catch a football?

[Darth Tater]

Thing is, holding was illegal in Slug's day.

[TSO]

Hey! That gives me another idea.

That's the problem right there.

[Justsomeguy]

Definitely a very interesting theory. Don't know if it is time for a science experiment, but I still think that it might hold some water.

[Oldfan]

.. the idea being that there are a lot more 6' 300lb guys with good athleticism in late rounds than there are 330 pound guys with sufficient athleticism.

You summed up my theory better than I did.

[fnkdctr(007)]

Tell the skins to call me. 6-2 330 run a 4.9 great feet and lateral quickness. Lacks upper body strength to play in NFL but still tell them to call

[fnkdctr(007)]

You guys are funny

[Meatsnack]

Did Aaron Kampman (6-4, 265) injure both Heyer and Wade with bull rushes in 2007 Green Bay game because his arms were longer or because of leverage and power? Did Strahan (255), Tuck (274) and Kerney (272) wear our RTs out that year because of longer arms?

You are changing the subject from O-line to D-line. You can't compare DE to OT in terms of technique, full stop.

But to answer your question, the only DE in recent memory to succeed without the arm length to match an average OTs was Dwight Freeney, who fell in the draft precisely because of his build. All of the DE's you mention are between 6'4" and 6'6" with arms like an orangutan so that they can have some hope of hand fighting with an OT. Freeney is so quick at 268# that he can get into an O-linman's chest by beating the lineman getting his hands up to make up for Freeney's lack of arm length but he is a more rare physical specimen than even a normal DE. Kampman and company succeed because of quickness, strength and technique but the technique is predicated on having the physique to carry it out.

I'll make you a deal on the off chance that you have an actual interst in testing this theory of yours. Mitch King in this years draft is a 6' and change and 270# sack machine DT in college going up against guards and centers. If he gets moved to DE and has success, maybe you're on to something for D-linemen.

Long arms help in pass protection in today's game but leverage is still the most important factor. The rules haven't changed that.

The fact of the matter is, most line plays are decided by who establishes control of their man first and modern line techniques teach leading with the hands and "steering" the other player. Having long arms is so important to getting the first blow and establishing an advantage in terms of balance and , yes, leverage that the entire damned NFL has OT that are 6'4" and better with very long arms. Do you think that line coaches wouldn't notice if the 6'2" guy in training camp was wearing out the defense? Your premise makes a lot of sense in 1970 when linemen still blocked with their forearms but it doesn't now. Yes, leverage is still a big determinant of success but how you get it has changed.

Take him, then. Let him get those short, little arms under his man's pads.

You are missing the forest for the trees. Those little arms are not reliably going to touch the other person's pads because the defender will likely get into him first with his longer arms and turn him. Once he's turned, he is done protecting the QB or opening a run lane. Ask any front-7 defender in the last 30+ years and he will tell you that they are coached to play half a man, by getting the first blow onto the O-linman's shoulder pad and turning him. Once off balance he can be cast aside.

Then, obviously, he should get low, but not TOO low.

Have you never played basketball against a man much taller than you? Have you tried establishing position against a guy like that? Try giving up six inches of height or more and see what that does to how you obtain leverage. I'll wait...

There, now that you've picked yourself up off the hardwood, now you see why being substantially shorter than your opponent requires you to be substantially quicker and stronger than the other guy. The way a much bigger man can bear down on you with his height advantage makes you work much hard all other things being equal.

Lacking good leverage, the player's junk can be moved into the pocket.

Simple physics tells us that the extra junk means it is that much harder to get that man moving in a direction opposite that in which he started, leverage or no leverage.

You are using the play of one player, Slug Witucki, and broadly assuming that anyone his size could do the same. It's just not true. Why doesn't every DE use Reggie White's Hump Move? Because they are not strong enough. Why didn;t every O-lineman look like Slug Witucki after a few years? My guess is its because Slug was so strong that he could succeed despite his handicap rather than because of it.

It's the biggest players in the league who are short-winded and need to take plays off.

Pure B.S. The biggest players in the league are all OTs and they never come out, period. Try again.

The Denver zone-blocking schemes used lighter more athletic, O linemen. Most teams, including the Skins, now use zone-blocking. Denver's stretch plays have replaced Gibbs's counter trey.

The Denver teams used to run much smaller linemen but that is changing because the league has passed rules disallowing the chop blocks that made that possible. Go ahead and check their roster, all but one of the older, smallerlinemen are gone. They drafted Ryan Clady at 6'6" and 325 to play OT for them last season. It is not Zone blocking per se that encouraged smaller players, it was the ability to turn quickly and hit a man behind his knees that was necessary in Alex Gibbs' blocking schemes and thank the Almighty they are illegal now. They crippled a lot of men.

And for the record, all teams have used zone blocking off and on since its inception in the league, some more than others. We still run the counter tre and are still primarily a man blocking team. We ran a lot more zone-stretch plays last season because Portis likes them, they allow the offense to wear out short, fat, Nose Tackles playing the 3-4, and they set up the bubble screen. We ran zone plays under Gibbs II, and it was ironically this that that the 6'6" 325# Derrick Dockery was best at before he left for Buffalo. His size did not prevent proper technique but helped it since he has the agillity to complement his size.

The WCO isn't associated with any particular run-blocking scheme. That's why Zorn had no problem going with the one already in place when he got here. We do use a lot of Denver's zone-blocking, though.

If you are talking about the original West Coast Offense as designed by Walsh, there is a certain type of running scheme because it emphasized agile backs who can catch. Even as late as Roger Craig, the WCO was not a power running offense.

I do agree that as Walsh's disciples have morphed it to fit their inherited rosters and own personal predilictions that the WCO doesn't really have any single running style associate with it. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

To close, I think the correct statements you have made in all of this is emphasizing the importance of technique and leverage. The problem is as I stated in my first response, to get leverage, a player has to be able to reach the other man first. When 6'8" Orlando Pace puts his 37" arms out and punches you in the chest, the odds of you getting leverage decrease exponentially. Unless the defender is:

1)so unnaturally strong as to be able to shrug off that punch or

2)so gifted a hand-fighter that he can block that punch on a dead run and get into the other player, or

3) has very long arms himself he is going to fail repeatedly.

Offensive linemen are asked to pass block at least as often as run block in the modern league. They are going backward and cannot attack the hands of the defender. They must punch out going backward and assume a position of control "driving the car" on the defenders pads. Having longer arms helps so much that scouts look for this and arm length is measured at the Senior Bowl and the Combine. The league is not measuring these guys for suits.

[wvtbred]

If we wait until the 3rd round to draft OL who would be the best to look at?

[Bigredskin77]

If we wait until the 3rd round to draft OL who would be the best to look at?

Herman John RG LSU

Vasqyez RG texas Tech

[Skinsfor4]

I agree with this, but if you look at what Oldfan is suggesting (or at least how I interpreted it), it's not so much Rabach's weight (296) but his height and build that is the problem (6'4" and pretty slender for an OL). Maybe a center who is the same weight but only 6' tall, with the proper athleticism and form, could handle those huge NTs better because of leverage... the idea being that there are a lot more 6' 300lb guys with good athleticism in late rounds than there are 330 pound guys with sufficient athleticism.

If the Center got any shorter,JC would be taking a knee to get the snap.He looks like the most uncomfortable QB under center in any type football I have ever seen.Is it just me or does everyone see this as well?

[wvtbred]

If the Center got any shorter,JC would be taking a knee to get the snap.He looks like the most uncomfortable QB under center in any type football I have ever seen.Is it just me or does everyone see this as well?

How tall was Bostic?

[BigRedskinDaddy]

Oldfan, I agree. The current trend of drafting earthmover-sized OL based primarily on physical dimensions, many of whom lack even the basic athleticism to compete at the NFL level, will of course die out, just as all trends do.

It has been my experience as a lifelong fan of the game that these things tend to be cyclical; to wit, Joe Gibbs' Hogs wrote the blueprint on a power running game blocked up front by mammoth, space-eating linemen who would through sheer weight alone wear down their opposite numbers by the 4th quarter. All of a sudden teams started looking to draft bigger DL to counter that.

About a decade or so later, Mike Shanahan puts his own twist on a WCO and builds HIS O-line with smaller, athletic guys who can pull, trap and zone block with precision rather than power. They start running circles around these massive DL and by the 4th had them so winded and sucking air that the end result was the same as the Hogs. Accordingly, teams began looking at tweeners for their D-lines, guys who could play a couple of positions equally well -- which allowed of course for more variety in their looks.

The current vogue has been in place for longer than it should have, IMHO. As such if the competitive balance works the way I've seen it work in the past, we should be past due for a shift back to the smaller, fitter, quicker linemen you alluded to in your OP.

:2cents:

[Going Commando]

Well your typical NFL guard isn't going to be 6'6". But he does have to be heavy. When they block a 340 pound baby moose NT with a center, they need to be able to hit him with a combined 600 pounds of weight in order to move him.

The Offensive Tackles have to be 6'5 and up because they need the arm length to cover the edge. Defensive ends are tall now, 6'4" and up. Those long arms win the battles.

Edit: Damn Meatsnack just said it so much better than my feeble attempt ever could. Cheers to an exemplary post Meatsnack. You know your stuff.

[Going Commando]

Herman John RG LSU

Vasqyez RG texas Tech

Herman Johnson is too fat. He is a situational player. I don't think he'd have the stamina to play every offensive series. The Vasquez guy is interesting because he's so strong. What did he do like 40+ reps at the combine? But if we are picking a late round OL prospect let it be a center. There are so many good ones in this class that could go on to start one day, lets grab one:

Andre Caldwell, Alabama

A. Q. Shipley, Penn State

Eric Wood, Louisville,

Jonathan Luigs, Arkansas

[Going Commando]

People are just listening to to many stupid Reporters. If a lineman looks a certain way like tony mandrich then all lineman should look that way. Just idiots. All lineman are going to be fat. There are not going to be any skinny lineman. That is a big boy position.

Not to mention Mandarich used steroids to get his build. Shouldn't it concern us a little if our lineman looks like Mandarich?

Actually not really though, because Jake Long and Jason Smith both have that similar body type and steroid abuse doesn't seem to be their MO.

[Oldfan]

Meatsnack: You are changing the subject from O-line to D-line. You can't compare DE to OT in terms of technique, full stop.

My theory was about a leverage disadvantage.

From my OP: Yes, the typical man six-six can add more muscle mass on his frame than a man six feet tall, but if he's frequently at a leverage disadvantage, what good is it?

You countered with the arm length and weight advantages of the O linemen in pass protection. My argument is that these advantages do not outweigh the leverage factor. I gave you examples of four DEs, none taller than six-five, none weighing more than 274 pounds, capable of bull rushing, and even causing injuries to, our taller, bigger RTs.

Your claim that these four DEs have longer arms than our taller RTs defies the odds. Can you support your claim?

Simple physics tells us that the extra junk means it is that much harder to get that man moving in a direction opposite that in which he started, leverage or no leverage.

I think we've discovered the root of our problem. Your "leverage or no leverage" statement indicates a lack of understanding of "simple physics" and the principles of leverage.

You are using the play of one player, Slug Witucki, and broadly assuming that anyone his size could do the same.

No, I'm not. I merely used Slug as an example to help explain the theory.

The biggest players in the league are all OTs and they never come out, period. Try again.

Nose tackles? Ngata, Ted Washington, Shaun Rogers and Aaron Gibson are are examples of defenders 350 -400 pounds and known for their lack of stamina. I honestly don't know how you can argue with a straight face that bigger players have more stamina.

The Denver teams used to run much smaller linemen but that is changing because the league has passed rules disallowing the chop blocks that made that possible. Go ahead and check their roster, all but one of the older, smallerlinemen are gone.

Denver's line is getting bigger because their pure zone-blocking scheme failed in power situations, notably in the redzone.

And for the record, all teams have used zone blocking off and on since its inception in the league, some more than others.

All teams adopted it since its inception? Did you really mean to say that? I've never heard of ANY scheme adopted by all teams when introduced into the league.

We still run the counter tre and are still primarily a man blocking team.

Al Saunders said we were primarily a zone blocking team since 2006 (the Betts year). The counter trey is probably still in the playbook, but I haven't seen it much since the first half of 2004.

We ran a lot more zone-stretch plays last season because Portis likes them...

We started running them for Clinton in the second half of 2004.

If you are talking about the original West Coast Offense as designed by Walsh, there is a certain type of running scheme because it emphasized agile backs who can catch. Even as late as Roger Craig, the WCO was not a power running offense.

How often Walsh used his RB in the passing game is not relevant to his choice of scheme in run-blocking.

I have read that Walsh switched from power to finesse blocking, or the other way around. I'm not sure which; but it really doesn't matter because the WCO is not defined by any particular run-blocking scheme.

The WCO is mostly about the passing game. It's about the QB throwing on rythym, about shorter drops, shot quick passes, bigger receivers who can get YAC to move the chains and using the pass along with the run to achieve ball control.

I do agree that as Walsh's disciples have morphed it to fit their inherited rosters and own personal predilictions that the WCO doesn't really have any single running style associate with it. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

You brought up the topic. I didn't. You said:

A guy like Max Unger who can bend and run and carries 300# with ease on his 6'5" frame and can pull and trap and zone block is an ideal pure WCO guard/center.

Since the WCO doesn't associate with a particular style of run-blocking, an "ideal pure WCO guard/center" can't logically exist.

Having longer arms helps so much that scouts look for this and arm length is measured at the Senior Bowl and the Combine. The league is not measuring these guys for suits.

My OP argues that NFL scouts undervalue the leverage factor thus overrating tall O linemen. So, how would my argument be undermined by the way NFL scouts measure factors less important than leverage like the player's arm length? If those longer arms can't get underneath the pads and exert leverage, they're almost useless.

[Oldfan]

Oldfan, I agree. The current trend of drafting earthmover-sized OL based primarily on physical dimensions, many of whom lack even the basic athleticism to compete at the NFL level, will of course die out, just as all trends do.

You're probably right.

Meanwhile, there are some good athletes to be had at the bottom of these drafts for the teams with a little foresight.

[BigRedskinDaddy]

You're probably right.

Meanwhile, there are some good athletes to be had at the bottom of these drafts for the teams with a little foresight.

Absolutely there are. Problem with that is a team needs somebody or two who really knows the college players who declared, and can winnow out the chaff to unearth the few gold nuggets to be found.

I'm still not sure we have those guys, even with Campbell as DOPP. I would love to be proven wrong about that starting this year, however.

[TSO]

Honestly, I don't know why so many are so down on our scouting. It seems the hate so many have for the FO has gone to "blind" levels. Sure, our FO deserves to be lambasted for its lack of valuing draft picks, but one thing I actually feel good about has been our scouting. We're not so bad at picking up starters through the draft.

[Oldfan]

Honestly, I don't know why so many are so down on our scouting. It seems the hate so many have for the FO has gone to "blind" levels. Sure, our FO deserves to be lambasted for its lack of valuing draft picks, but one thing I actually feel good about has been our scouting. We're not so bad at picking up starters through the draft.

I'm withholding judgment on the scouting -- not enough evidence yet to give them a grade. I'm patient about the 2008 rookies. I see raw talent that needs time to develop.

Trading away too many picks in the 2,3,4 range with too little return has been the main problem. We shouldn't lay that on the scouting dept.

[BigRedskinDaddy]

Honestly, I don't know why so many are so down on our scouting. It seems the hate so many have for the FO has gone to "blind" levels. Sure, our FO deserves to be lambasted for its lack of valuing draft picks, but one thing I actually feel good about has been our scouting. We're not so bad at picking up starters through the draft.

I'm not sure if you were responding to my post right before yours, submitted, but let me just say for the record (which is borne out in my posts from Day 1) that I am in the minority of FO supporters here at ES. I believe Vinny will eventually get it, and that the Dan will eventually figure out how NOT to meddle just enough to get himself a ring, hopefully two or three.

Just out of curiosity, why is it that if someone proffers criticism they're labeled a 'hater,' while if they offer words of support they're blanketed with the term 'homer?' Seems like two extremes to me -

oh wait. EXTREMEskins. I get it now...

nevermind.

[Meatsnack]

My theory was about a leverage disadvantage.

From my OP: Yes, the typical man six-six can add more muscle mass on his frame than a man six feet tall, but if he's frequently at a leverage disadvantage, what good is it?

You countered with the arm length and weight advantages of the O linemen in pass protection. My argument is that these advantages do not outweigh the leverage factor. I gave you examples of four DEs, none taller than six-five, none weighing more than 274 pounds, capable of bull rushing, and even causing injuries to, our taller, bigger RTs.

Your claim that these four DEs have longer arms than our taller RTs defies the odds. Can you support your claim?

So, your answer to why men 6’ tall are better offensive linemen due to leverage advantage is to use DE’s between 6’4” and 6’5” as an example? YOURS is the extraordinary claim demanding extraordinary proofs. Every bit of actual reality, that is, the men who start in the league and the men who scout and draft them at O-line favors the view that size matters.

Let’s re-examine your original post:

From your OP:

…If my theory is correct, there is a way to find very good O linemen in the bottom of the draft and among the UDFAs.

... It was in this setting at one particular game that I pretty much forgot to watch the runner and the quarterback and became fascinated by the good work of RG Casimir "Slug" Witucki.

It amazed me that day how low to the ground the man could operate in rooting out bigger defensive linemen. There was just no way in hell for the defender to get under his pads for leverage.

NFL.com has Slug listed at five-eleven, 245 pounds. No way was he five-eleven. Five-nine maybe with no fat roll and built like you'd expect a guy nicknamed Slug to be built.

So, my theory is that NFL teams have gone way overboard on the size factor in evaluating O line talent. Yes, the typical man six-six can add more muscle mass on his frame than a man six feet tall, but if he's frequently at a leverage disadvantage, what good is it? I think the Skins could find excellent O line talent by looking for the shorter, lighter, narrow-waisted, wide-body types overlooked by most NFL teams.

Your theory, in your own words, is that there are men six feet tall available at the bottom of the draft who are able to start and excel in the NFL at O-line due to a superiority in gaining leverage. You then fail to provide a single example of this relevant to the last 50 years. You can see what every Scout, GM, and Line Coach in the NFL has missed!

You then go on to give examples of this “leverage advantage” in your response to my post using D-lineman, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF WHOM IS UNDER 6’4”!

Then, you ask me to justify “my” theory as if the entire NFL didn’t draft according to a formula that precludes OTs from being shorter than 6’4” and damned few OGs shorter than 6’3”.

DE’s are drafted with length as a primary criterion for the position due to exactly the kind of hand-fighting issues I have discussed. So are most offensive line positions, even center, a position in which height is less emphasized but which will see AQ Shipley slide to late day 2 or go undrafted for exactly these reasons. Any draft pundit, scout, draft publication, or GM on the planet will confirm this.

I think we've discovered the root of our problem. Your "leverage or no leverage" statement indicates a lack of understanding of "simple physics" and the principles of leverage.

You know, the tactic of deriding the poster rather than the content of the post is a sign of weakness and is intellectually bankrupt. When you can come up with a physics based explanation as to why mass does not mitigate leverage, I’ll be happy to read it. Otherwise your insults are just grasping at straws.

No, I'm not. I merely used Slug as an example to help explain the theory.

And, yet, an actual living example who has played the game in the last decade does not seem to be forthcoming.

Nose tackles? Ngata, Ted Washington, Shaun Rogers and Aaron Gibson are are examples of defenders 350 -400 pounds and known for their lack of stamina. I honestly don't know how you can argue with a straight face that bigger players have more stamina.

What do any of these men have to do with your theory on O-line play? Even if they did, defensive line players all rotate out, Andre Carter of 4% body fat who Gregg Williams called the best conditioned athlete he’d ever seen in his life. It takes more energy to react and attack. Again, your theory fails when actual offensive linemen, like Orlando Pace, Jon Ogden, Jon Runyan are used and they are all 6’7 and 350# and over. They don’t come out unless injured. I don’t know how you can claim with a straight face that they do. But keep trying irrelevant examples, maybe there are punters out there who are short and get better leverage on punts.

Denver's line is getting bigger because their pure zone-blocking scheme failed in power situations, notably in the redzone.

Their lack of height did not empower them to “root out” much bigger D-linemen?

All teams adopted it since its inception? Did you really mean to say that? I've never heard of ANY scheme adopted by all teams when introduced into the league.

Well, as if it had anything to do with your theory, a better wording would have been, all teams have used it at one time or another starting pretty quickly after had proved its usefulness in the league. Which is why, if your theory had any merit, short O-linemen would have persisted into the modern era.

Al Saunders said we were primarily a zone blocking team since 2006 (the Betts year). The counter trey is probably still in the playbook, but I haven't seen it much since the first half of 2004.

Keep looking. We run the counter tre almost every game. Ask Joe Bugel

How often Walsh used his RB in the passing game is not relevant to his choice of scheme in run-blocking.

That might be true if the smaller, more agile backs typically used for running routes and pass catching were capable between the tackles runners as well but they are not.

I have read that Walsh switched from power to finesse blocking, or the other way around. I'm not sure which; but it really doesn't matter because the WCO is not defined by any particular run-blocking scheme.

The WCO is mostly about the passing game. It's about the QB throwing on rythym, about shorter drops, shot quick passes, bigger receivers who can get YAC to move the chains and using the pass along with the run to achieve ball control.

Walsh didn’t switch blocking schemes, his schemes were forced upon him by small offensive linemen: see this history of the WCO.

…Since the WCO doesn't associate with a particular style of run-blocking, an "ideal pure WCO guard/center" can't logically exist.

Didn’t you just talk about the more agile linemen being used in Denver to zone block? And, yes, they can and do exist because of the moving pocket and the need to block on the move in the WCO. Heavy footed men of whatever size need not apply, since the QB and all of his blockers must be able to rollout or block a moving pocket.

My OP argues that NFL scouts undervalue the leverage factor thus overrating tall O linemen. So, how would my argument be undermined by the way NFL scouts measure factors less important than leverage like the player's arm length? If those longer arms can't get underneath the pads and exert leverage, they're almost useless.

If you refuse to admit the most basic and visible aspects of modern line play then it is clear that logical discourse with you is impossible. I will close with this: A taller, longer-armed man can get into a smaller man before he can get his arms into the bigger man. Therefore, the smaller man cannot exert any significant force on the larger man at all before smaller man takes the initial blow that slows and/or knocks him off balance. Given the speed at which plays are over, it matters little what a smaller man might do in Greco-Roman wrestling. By the time a hand punch is delivered and control is established by the bigger man, the play is over.

Further, the types of leverage that a man the size of a typical OT can exert on a man 6’ tall allow the larger man to bear down on the smaller man’s pads from above in such a way to drive him to the ground. Reversed, a short-armed O-lineman is greatly hindered because a larger defender will usually deliver the first blow, turning the smaller man and creating a gap for penetration. With men of equal height/length, such as a 6’5” DE and a 6’5” OT like Strahan and Jansen, most snaps are a race to establish hand position on the other man’s pads.

[HapHaszard]

Hey! That gives me another idea. Is there an NFL rule stating that a player must be human?

Actually the rule states humanoid, not human. I remember several linemen from the old days that needed a certificate to certify they were humanoid. :hysterical: