Do we really have the "lightest" O-Line in the league?

[Bobby S]

Heard this on one of the sports channels up in N NJ sometime in the fall. It seems pretty accurate. As I read in other posts, it seems this is only one of a few areas we need to build up. My observation is RG III running option in 2012 would be gone and the O-line was never an issue or even focused on. In 2013 it seemed the pocket would collapse very quickly and RG would be killed almost instantly every time he would drop back. Thoughts?

[jflow78]

They had all the same linemen both years so I don't think size had anything to do with it.  It seemed like Kyle did a terrible job setting up the play-action and the read-option because he ignored the run for long periods during the game.  However, our OL actually ranked very high (I believe it was pro-football-focus or the football outsiders who did the ranking), because we ran well and because the line wasn't responsible for every sack, some of that was because Robert held onto the ball too long.

 

However, I did go through and get an average of each team's starting 5 OL this season.  Here are the results.

 

1 - Miami - 325.4

2 - Bucs - 325

3 - Dallas - 323.6 per lineman (I'm only using the starting five for each team)

4 - Chargers - 323

5 - Bills - 322

(T) - Bengals - 322

7 - Falcons - 321.2

8 - 49ers - 317.4

9 - Steelers - 317.2

10 - Jets - 317

(T) - Rams - 317

(T) - Denver - 317

13 - Raiders - 316.6

14 - Colts - 316

15 - Bears - 314.8

16 - Browns - 314.6

17 - Panthers - 314

(T) - Titans - 314

19 - Pats 313.6

20 - Lions - 313.4

21 - Giants - 312.8

22 - Vikings - 312.6

23 - Cards - 312

24 - Eagles - 310.4

(T) - Seattle - 310.4

26 - Saints - 310.2

27 - Packers - 309.8

28 - Jags - 308.4

29 - Ravens - 307

30 - Chiefs - 306.4

(T) - Texans - 306.4

32 - Skins - 305.4

 

So, the short of it is, yes the Skins have the smallest OL in the NFL by weight (I assume you meant weight).

 

However, because Lich is only 284 (one of the smallest OL in the league), even if we got a small 300 pounder to replace him (300 is still small, average is probably around 303-6), then the Skins would rank 28th, at 308.6, just 1.2 pounds behind the Packers, more than the Ravens, and more than the Chiefs.

 

The long of it is that we just need to get GOOD linemen, not big lineman, GOOD linemen.  I don't think it's hard to find 300+ pounders to play OL, Shanahan was just focused on finding smaller guys.  Phil Loadholt was sitting there for us to take a couple years ago when we needed a RT, and we passed over him.  He's 343 or something, he's one of the biggest OL in the league.

 

So, we can get big easily, but I think it's really contingent on getting a better right side and RG3 getting rid of the ball faster.

[Fred Jones]

 

The long of it is that we just need to get GOOD linemen, not big lineman, GOOD linemen.

More specifically, we need Brown, Campell and BA to start acquiring talent.  Start hitting on draft choices at all rounds of the draft.

Nothing new and the biggest problem we have this off season.

[Thekyle1591]

I think the main problem was RG3 holding the ball too long. Yes the oline was god awful at times but alot of the sacks couldve been avoided. 

Bigger doesn't always necessarily mean better. Look at Miami..

[jflow78]

Bigger doesn't always necessarily mean better. Look at Miami..

I agree, you had great teams and awful teams peppered throughout.  The Cards, Eagles, Seattle, Saints, Packers, and Chiefs were all playoff teams, and in the bottom 10 with the Skins, Texans, and Jags.

 

So, I don't think there's any correlation really.  You've got one SB team tied for 10th and the other tied for 24th.

 

One of the interesting things was, Trent is about average size, maybe a little bigger for LT, and Montgomery is large for a Center.  It's really just Lich who's exceptionaly small, and Polumbus is a little smaller than the typical RT too.

[warskins65]

Strength is more important than weight in todays NFL. You don't see alot of overweight linemen like you did a couple of. decades ago. The ideal lineman is someone big enough not to get pushed around and stong enough to push back.

[Peregrine]

I feel like I did not watch the same offensive line some other people apparently watched the last 2 years.  Our offensive line from what I saw was attrocious in pass protection, BOTH of the last 2 years.  And if some random website had a terrible ranking system, so what?  The pocket this year collapsed incredibly quickly, the offensive line was NOTHING like you see in these playoff games.  Granted, some sacks WERE RG3 holding on too long, as a QB is prone to do when you are down 20 bazillion points.  But to say the offensive line was anywhere close to mediocre the last 2 years I think would be to totally ignore all that we saw for the sake of some talking head who doesnt have a clue.

 

Last year the only reason the offensive line seemed okay was because they rarely had to pass block.  THeir run blocking was great, their pass blocking was terrible.  When the read option was run all year half the plays they didnt have to pass block, the other half the defense was slow and confused, and couldnt give a full rush.  Good scheme covered up for bad players.  Why, if the offensive line was so capable do you think we rarely threw downfield this year?  Why did we rarely go to a full drop?  Surely THAT cant be RG3s fault for holding onto the ball long enough to throw it downfield.

[jflow78]

I feel like I did not watch the same offensive line some other people apparently watched the last 2 years….Surely THAT cant be RG3s fault for holding onto the ball long enough to throw it downfield.

You'll have to read through my post again.  I never said our line was good, I just said they were ranked high because the run game was very successful and because not every sack was their fault.  I think the OL needs good linemen, and I guess I didn't say it but I thought it was implied that if we need good linemen, what we're lacking is good linemen.

 

I agree with you.  I hated our OL and I think the ZBS covered lots of weaknesses, but I'd really love to have dominant OL who I can have confidence in being good regardless of the scheme.  I find it difficult to think that we can't find someone better than Lich, Montgomery, Chester, and Polumbus.  (If I had to keep one of those four, I'd probably keep Lich and move him to Center).  

 

Montgomery took a big step back last season, as he was regularly pushed back, I felt like the entire right side was terrible most of the time, and perhaps Lich would have been better if he had more strength and, in his unique situation, size.  He's the smallest starting OL in the NFL at 284.  Normally I don't think being smaller is a huge drawback, but 284 isn't small, it's tiny.

 

Anyway, I hope I was clearer there.  I do think Griffin made some huge mistakes, like in the 2nd half of the Denver game.  He had been pummeled during the first half, so I would have thought he'd have gotten rid of the ball faster, but it seemed like the opposite happened.  He held onto the ball a lot longer, and in the 2nd half the line actually did a decent job of pass blocking (whereas in the first they were nonexistent).

 

I don't think Griffin not throwing the ball downfield was his problem, I also don't think the fact that Kyle would abandon an effective running game when the Skins had the lead was his fault.  But the coaching staff did zero to solve the OL problem.  I'm fairly sure that if anyone thought it needed to be fixed, Kyle and Mike would have seen eye to eye here and done whatever they had to to fix the situation.  Apparently they were delusional and thought it was just great.

 

I'd like to see the stat that shows a drop in long passing attempts from last year to this year though.  I don't think it would be that much different if we actually looked at the numbers.

[Tatankgough]

Yes we are thus the trouble with Pass Pro. It works with the ZBS and the stretch blocking schemes, as reflected in our success running the ball.

[Stadium-Armory]

Looking at that list tells me that there isn't a direct correlation between average line size and success. Other factors weigh in.

[Darth Tater]

Yes we are thus the trouble with Pass Pro. It works with the ZBS and the stretch blocking schemes, as reflected in our success running the ball.

As has been shown, the trouble was not that we were light.  Pass pro is the most athletic part of being a lineman anyway.  You have to react as opposed to act (and do this while moving backward), maintain technique and keep your head on a swivel.  Our biggest OL problems in pass pro did not occur because those guys were light but because they lacked the athleticism to properly form the pocket and move out of the way of the QB when it broke down.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Can I just say that we live in a really odd world when we call a guy who's 284 lbs "exceptionally small?"

[Fan since a Fetus]

The long of it is that we just need to get GOOD linemen, not big lineman, GOOD linemen.

Agreed, this seems to escape many people. It is not all about measurables.

Still say Shanny relied on Gibbs for most of his success. While trying to replicate the offensive line acquisitions after Shanny and Gibbs split, Shanny failed. I really do believe it is that simple.

I don't think this would be an issue if we didn't have a lot of QB pressures and sacks. Now sacks are no way any indicator if the offensive line or line coach are doing a good job or not. There are a ton of other factors, QB quality, play calling and injuries to name a few.

But for giggles, I decided to look back at Foerster's sack history. Just curious. There are a lot of correlations that can be made from this, but remember correlation does not mean causation.

I am not implying anything here. Just giving information.

1996 – 30 sacks – 7th in league - Trent Dilfer – 21st in pass attempts

1997 – 32 sacks – 5th in league - Trent Dilfer – 30th in pass attempts

1998 – 28 sacks – 7th in league - Trent Dilfer – 29th in pass attempts

1999 – 42 sacks – 18th in league - Trent Dilfer – 31st in pass attempts

2000 – 38 sacks – 16th in league - Shaun King – 30th in pass attempts

2001 – 47 sacks – 24th in league - Brad Johnson – 3rd in pass attempts

2005 – 42 sacks – 21st in league - Kyle Boller/Anthony Wright – 8th in pass attempts

2006 – 17 sacks – 2nd in league - Steve McNair – 13th in pass attempts

2007 – 39 sacks – 21st in league - Kyle Boller/Steve McNair – 13th in pass attempts

2008 – 55 sacks – 32nd in league - Shaun Hill/J.T. O’Sullivan – 18th in pass attempts

2009 – 40 sacks – 22nd in league - Alex Smith/Shaun Hill – 21st in pass attempts

2010 – 46 sacks – 28th in league - McNabb/Grossman –– 4th in pass attempts

2011 – 41 sacks – 21st in league - Grossman/Beck – 5th in pass attempts

2012 – 33 sacks – 12th in league - Griffin/Cousins – 30th in pass attempts

2013 – 43 sacks – 17th in league - Griffin/Cousins – 9th in pass attempts

[NoCalMike]

People forget how much the read option stopped the ability of defenses to really "attack" the QB in 2012.  They were usually too worried about being faked out and giving up something big, so they were forced to always play containment defense, which then would turn around and get them burned on a Morris run.  If they weren't running all the fakes who knows how much Robert would have been sacked that season.

 

In 2013 when the read option left, then Defenses could attack the QB position and it exposed the O-line much more.

[Voice_of_Reason]

People forget how much the read option stopped the ability of defenses to really "attack" the QB in 2012.  They were usually too worried about being faked out and giving up something big, so they were forced to always play containment defense, which then would turn around and get them burned on a Morris run.  If they weren't running all the fakes who knows how much Robert would have been sacked that season.

 

In 2013 when the read option left, then Defenses could attack the QB position and it exposed the O-line much more.

And 3 other things factored into the lack of production in 2013:

 

1. Both QBs held the ball too long.  Without the quick throws off of the run-action, and with Griffin coming back from injury, QB play was poor at best. 

2. Chris Chester completely regressed to being basically a matador. 

3. Defenses stacked the box, and did a much more effective job stopping the running game on first and second downs, forcing a lot of 3rd and longs.  

 

I still think, if you replace Chester, who just was BAD, and kept the other 4, and had good to great QB play, the line would look so much better.  You cannot tell me that the elite QBs wouldn't be able to operate behind this line.  Peyton Manning averaged (AVERAGED) 2.21 seconds per pass attempt in one of the games against the chiefs.  Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Rivers, and even to some extent Dalton, could get the ball out quickly enough that the OL didn't have to hold blocks, and it helped the entire operation.

 

And when the QBs are getting the balls out quickly, they are throwing to the spot that the receiver is going, generally before they make a cut or a break.  Robert and Kirk are not there yet. Also makes the WRs better, because if they just get position, they don't need a lot of separation. 

 

Anyway, there's no question the OL needs more talent.  Chester probably is the #1 guy who needs to be replaced, followed (in order) by Polumbus, Monty and Kory.  

 

I don't think they are able to do all of the in one season.  

 

But if Robert is able to play better, at least at the level of an above-average passer, it's going to seriously help the OL.  And personally, I think he'll be able to do that.  Just a hunch. 

[daveakl]

Was Chester that bad or was he being asked to help our RT first and then getting beat up the middle by his man when he tried to recover?

[Laron Burgundy]

 

The long of it is that we just need to get GOOD linemen, not big lineman, GOOD linemen.  I don't think it's hard to find 300+ pounders to play OL, Shanahan was just focused on finding smaller guys.  Phil Loadholt was sitting there for us to take a couple years ago when we needed a RT, and we passed over him.  He's 343 or something, he's one of the biggest OL in the league.

 

So, we can get big easily, but I think it's really contingent on getting a better right side and RG3 getting rid of the ball faster.

 

 

Absolutely, some of the lightest lines are among the better ones, so size doesn't have that much to do with it.  Plus our line wasn't as bad as we imagine.  Rewatching the season you see a lot of rg3 holding the ball too long, if he became more decisive, even at just throwing it away, we would look so much better.  Chester is bad and needs to go, and maybe Polumbus if he reverts back to his 2012 self, but overall they were solid.

[RandyHolt]

There are many ways to build an OL.  We gave the lightest OL two straight years. It had a fair chance. 

 

It could not afford Robert confidence in his pocket, and we could not even run a QB sneak.

 

But its not blindly the heaviest OL is the best, even though thinking as such may be in the DNA of a few old school fans. But if the OL aren't moving early and often all year long, chances are the lightest OL is not going to succeed. 

 

Having the lightest OL seems makes us too one dimensional, and too predictable. 

 

I think its short sighted to pin most of the blame on Chester, and then on RG3. The entire interior pretty much all year was horrible. Trent and Polumbus did very well in the first half of the year, second half... not so much. 

[jflow78]

2012 – 33 sacks – 12th in league - Griffin/Cousins – 30th in pass attempts

2013 – 43 sacks – 17th in league - Griffin/Cousins – 9th in pass attempts

Those two kill me.  I don't think people recognize the unnecessary amount of pressure that was put on Griffin this season.  Kyle, by all accounts, abandoned the running game this year.  We were 13th (453) in carries this season, and Albert, who had and 3rd the year before (519, 32.3 carries per game).

 

Alfred had more effective production this year 276 carries for 1,275 yards at 4.6 ypc (5th out of RBs with over 1,000 yards).  Last year he had 335 carries (nearly 2 games worth more), 1,613 yards at 4.8 ypc (again 5th out of RBs with over 1,000 yards).

 

And if it had been only when the team was down that Kyle stopped running, I'd have understood it more, but he frequently did it in the 2nd half when the team had the lead.

 

None of that assists the passing game, and none of it helped Griffin.  It only made things harder on him, and allowed teams to blitz more often because they knew Kyle was likely going to pass the ball 6 out of every 10 plays.  (611 passes and 453 rushes in 2013 vs 442 passes and 519 rushes)  When you throw the ratio in reverse like that, sacks are going to go up and passing production is going to take a drastic dip.  I thought Griffin did pretty well considering he was put in those situations.

 

Here's how Griffin, Kaepernick, Wilson, and Luck's teams offensive balance was:

 

Griffin and Cousins

2012 - 442 passes (30th) and 519 rushes (3rd)

2013 - 611 passes (9th) and 453 rushes (13th)

 

Luck

2012 - 628 (6th) passes and 440 rushes (14th)

2013 - 582 (15th) passes and 409 rushes (23rd)

 

Kaepernick

2012 - 436 passes (31st) and 492 rushes (7th)

2013 - 417 passes (32nd) and 505 rushes (3rd)

 

Wilson

2012 - 405 passes (32nd) and 536 (1st)

2013 - 420 passes (31st) and 509 rushes (2nd)

 

Obviously a strong running game helps out your QB, but people act like Wilson and Kaepnerick are carrying these teams using their arms, and clearly they've never had to do that.  Robert was put in that position this year, and Luck has been doing it the entire time in Indy (and for that I say he's a beast).  Robert's year wasn't remarkably worse than any of these guys, but he gets slaughtered in the media for having an "off" year.  

 

Seattle required less of Wilson this year than they did last season, and they're in the SB.  We should have followed suit, and I'd bet we would have given ourselves a better chance of keeping defenses off balance.  I do think Griffin has things to work on, but I'd still take him over Wilson or Kaepernick.

[ddub52]

Funny that the Texans had the 2nd smallest. 

[MartinC]

Was Chester that bad or was he being asked to help our RT first and then getting beat up the middle by his man when he tried to recover?

 

He was bad.

 

A game that sticks out to me is the Giants game - first half we were looking good on offense and RGIII was having a very very good game. Second half the Giants adjusted seeing Chester as our weak link and lined Tuck up inside on him. Tuck had been credited with 3.5 sacks in the 18.5 games before that switch - he had 4 sacks in that second half all over, around and through Chester. We could not get a pass off and it was not because RGIII was holding the ball ....

[darrelgreenie]

^^That's when I started refering to Chester as 'insta-sack' he was giving up pressure so fast it was unreal. Justin Tuck somehow morphed into Suh.

[planter]

Nice stats.

Skins must "bulk up" thru draft, free agency, trades etc.

[RandyHolt]

Take away that Giants game. Half.

 

How many other games was Chester the sole problem with our OL?

 

It seems more often than not it was equally all 3 interior OL versus just CC

[Riggo-toni]

Looking at that list tells me that there isn't a direct correlation between average line size and success. Other factors weigh in.

Well the 2 worst teams in the NFL were the Texans and the Skins, and they had the smallest lines.

DL are much more athletic now than they were in Denver's heyday back in the 90s. it used to be the best pass rushers came from around the ends. Nowadays interior stunts and such make the old Alex Gibbs style lines a huge liability in pass protection.