Discussions on a heavily criticized OL

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

You can only blame RG3 for so much when it comes to the O-line...I am not saying he knows what's going on down field by no means, but, one of the reasons he is looking to run as soon as he set's up in the pocket is because he has absolutely no confidence that the line will hold up to the defensive pressure....I saw Cousins sailing passes downfield because he wasn't afforded the ability to step up into the pocket...does RG3 deserve some blame in that area? Yes! Is our O-line putrid? Absolutely!

 

 

Let's face it; not every QB is P. Manning, or T. Brady, who dictate what the defense can do because of their superior football intellect!!!
 

RG3 will never be that type of QB, but he should be able to keep defenses off balance with his ability to run, and a good running game with Almo...which comes with a good O-line...

 

[Bonez3]

Would you consider our current Oline as 'big'. Looked at their height and weights, seemed pretty sizable? Where do they currently rank? And if you throw Long in as starter, which I'm hoping he has the talent level to supplant Chester, he's listed 6'5''

[cakmoney61]

I don't see Schreff as a top 5 pick for sure and actually not top 10. But if we traded back and took him 11-15 range I'd be happy with that personally. I think calling it a waste at that range is hyperbole.

 

The OL desperately needs an upgrade of real talent.  If the Redskins trade down to 10 or 12, I would draft Scherff in a heartbeat and not look back.  He appears to have the potential to dominate at the next level.

[RedBeast]

I HIGHLY doubt Scherff makes it to 11. He is a sure fire pick and other teams might reach for him. I would take him at 5 to 8 and plant him at RT. If he doesn't make it push him into Guard.

EDIT: If GMSM itends on oline. He may take many routes. To be honest I dont have a clue where he is going to go. He inherited the scouting staff and does not have much experience with them (read this as trust). Plus it's his first draft here. We need as many solid picks as possible.

just my opinion

[PlayAction]

I'm sure the GM will closely review the film for the first round pick options. He can't review film for every player in rounds 2-7 and will have to rely on his scouting team for that.

The coach and GM both want big power guys to be able to succeed on running plays in the colder months. So we know that zone scheme-only guys aren't going to cut it long term. Lichtensteiger will be around until they find a replacement but he's not a five year player. Chester is older and expensive. Skins overpaid for Lauvao but that contract is pre-GM. There's no question, in my mind, that the GM is looking to overhaul the OL OVER TIME. He's not going to pay for overpriced free agents. It would be nice if one of the three third round picks from previous drafts is able to succeed. But, I'm not optimistic. I'm not saying they won't but I'm tired of hoping. I expect Morgan Moses to open the season on IR. In any case, I'm one of the few that wasn't impressed with his play - I remember speed rushers just blowing by him with ease. I think LeRibeus is camp fodder. He couldn't succeed in the zone and got pan caked by DTs on a couple of plays since he's been here. Maybe Long will show something. Skins have a good OL coach so we will either be rooting for newly drafted rookies to step up or turn around one of these backups.

The problem that I see is that inexperienced QBs (RG3 pocket, and Cousins #starts) have an easier time developing into the type of QB you want when they have more time to scan the field. That would argue for some immediate help on the OL. That might mean anywhere from rounds 1 -3 though.

[s0crates]

I think what gets lost in any discussion about the Oline is that they are actually good at zone blocking in the run game. I think a lot of the positive ratings by PFF are because of that, but I'm only assuming that's the case.

Too often we only focus on pass blocking and seek to define or grade the Oline exclusively from that vantage point.

They're not big and they're not going to overpower anyone, outside of Trent. But they are smart and seem to work well with each other. You don't really see them just miss their guy.

Most of the breakdowns occur with the TEs and RBs when it comes to that. And, as discussed ad nauseam, the QB play. Which causes some to put too much blame on them.

But their weaknesses are clear. They can't anchor well, especially when a defense knows we're going to pass, like on 3rd and long. They get pushed back even if they're on their guy and fulfilling their responsibility (I bet that's also where they earn positive grades from PFF whereas it doesn't pass our eye tests).

And they're certainly not going to move the LOS when you need a yard or two for your RB to move the sticks.

This is right in line with my assessment of our line's play.

They are good in the ZBS run game, but they struggle in pass pro. Poor QB play and poor blocking by TEs and RBs amplify this weakness.

Good post.

[Dark Acre]

I want OL guys who can function in zone and power.  That generally means 1st & 2nd round picks.

This part I disagree with. You can find o-linemen anywhere, in any round, or even undrafted.  I don't care if we spend a first or a seventh if the line gets fixed. My concern is that we haven't fixed it and we haven't found or coached up the players to fix what's been a whole largely for a whole decade.

 

In a different thread someone mentioned drafting Stabby, Long, and Moses early enough that they should be fixes and contributors, but they haven't been yet. It's not a first round issue. It's an issue. One of our biggest. We don't need to use the first rounder, but we need to somehow get this line and all the pieces that make up run blocking and pass blocking up to form.

Then you didn't read my post.  I wasn't talking about serviceable, even starting-caliber, OL.  I was talking about guys who can grade the road, keep the QB in a safe pocket, and take on ZBS like a champ.  First, even HOF QBs can be found in any round.  Heck, someone even found a Hall of Fame punter in round 1.    But unless you get really lucky, you have to spend early picks on OL who can do both power and finesse, like pretty much every position.  They don't last because they are in demand.

Yeah, I'm not opposed to finding a monster on the line and getting him really early, but I'm just saying that isn't the only way. Hopefully, we have a GM who is good at identifying guys who become what we need. I know I'm  going very old school, but the Hogs of old... only Russ Grimm , May, and Jim Lachey would have been draft selections. Bostic, Jacoby, and all the others were drafted after the 7th round or not drafted at all... and you still see that happening today.

 

The trick is we need to draft good prospects, not be afraid to put them on the field, and actually teach/coach them. We drafted guys, but never gave them any run. Maybe that was the right decision, but I suspect on the line more than anywhere else you can't tell what you have until you see it under live fire. 

Jacoby would have been a 1st rounder if 2 GMs knew what he could do.

[Dukes and Skins]

I've read Scott quoted as saying he really likes the depth of this draft in terms of O'Line. It will be a surprise (to me at least) if we don't use at least two picks somewhere on this area. But unless we trade back I'm not expecting that first round pick to be one of them.

 

And he's right about it as well. The best value in this draft isn't early on, it's the mid round range where you can get those power guys who can start early

[galloprf]

I don't see Schreff as a top 5 pick for sure and actually not top 10. But if we traded back and took him 11-15 range I'd be happy with that personally. I think calling it a waste at that range is hyperbole.

My view of Schreff is he is an excellent run blocker who is solid in pass pro against power or inside rushers but who gets in trouble against outsid speed rushers. I think his floor is a good starting guard and with a ceiling of being a very good RT. Maybe not an all pro potential - but certainly not a waste either IMO.

So just 60% of the O'Line to improve then.

I would take Schreff at pick 5 and the best guard/center at pick 2. This would not only stabilize your OL for 4-5 years but would also would add value to the investment you have made in RG3. I don't think anyone successfully can make the argument that a better OL does not make a better quarterback. My basis for this thought is when the Redskins have been successful they have had great OLines and average quarterbacks. How many different quarterbacks did Joe Gibbs when Super Bowls with? Hail to the Hogs! On the other side of this thought I do not believe the past OL coach had the OL properly prepared for most games. In most cases the OL breakdowns where missed assignments. This will improve greatly this year.

[pjfootballer]

Would you consider our current Oline as 'big'. Looked at their height and weights, seemed pretty sizable? Where do they currently rank? And if you throw Long in as starter, which I'm hoping he has the talent level to supplant Chester, he's listed 6'5''

No, I do not. Lich is undersized. Chester is getting too old and I think besides Trent, none of them are "powerful". They have agility, but no strength.

[Silvernon]

No, I do not. Lich is undersized. Chester is getting too old and I think besides Trent, none of them are "powerful". They have agility, but no strength.

Long and Moses are power guys, and so is Lauvao. Not unlikely for a draft pick to supplant one of those if the production is not there. I see them drafting a day three interior player to compete with Larsen as the heir apparent at center. 

[pjfootballer]

Long and Moses are power guys, and so is Lauvao. Not unlikely for a draft pick to supplant one of those if the production is not there. I see them drafting a day three interior player to compete with Larsen as the heir apparent at center.

Yeah, I was thinking more about the starters, but yes Long and Moses are power guys. Luvaou is better at a power scheme, but did not show well last year. It would be great if Larsen became a diamond in the rough.

[bowhunter]

Personally i feel that the hiring of Callahan was the best thing we could have done for the OL this offseason so far. If the staff thinks Long is ready to take over Chester's place, & they don't go reaching for an OL early because of that belief, then i'm on board with that too.

^This. I couldn't agree more. I think one thing that all of us fans have tired of is seeing our Offense get out-played (or out coached) only to hear the Coach-speak in the post-game presser. phrases commonly used included "correct our mistakes" or "coach them up" Only to see the exact same issues reappear the following weeks. We never seemed to get better.

   I agree that Callahan seems to be a fixer. Our O-line play needs a fixin'.

[Peregrine]

Perhaps a good question would be: is there any evidence outside of one PFF ranking that our offensive line is not terrible?

[skinny21]

Perhaps a good question would be: is there any evidence outside of one PFF ranking that our offensive line is not terrible?

Does Gruden count?

[Wildbunny]

I would take Schreff at pick 5 and the best guard/center at pick 2. This would not only stabilize your OL for 4-5 years but would also would add value to the investment you have made in RG3. I don't think anyone successfully can make the argument that a better OL does not make a better quarterback. My basis for this thought is when the Redskins have been successful they have had great OLines and average quarterbacks. How many different quarterbacks did Joe Gibbs when Super Bowls with? Hail to the Hogs! On the other side of this thought I do not believe the past OL coach had the OL properly prepared for most games. In most cases the OL breakdowns where missed assignments. This will improve greatly this year.

 

If we go Scherff with #5, because I doubt he goes past #10, I don't want us to go interior line in round 2. I'd rather get one of the leftovers on the DL such as Goldman, Jordan Philips in case Knighton backfires. Or a CB prospects, there's some great guys out there to get.

 

I'm pretty sure we'll draft a center on day 3. Someone like Andy Gallik or BJ Finney. Big, nasty guys.

Btw, regarding Hogs and stuff, let's not call Rypien average. He was pretty good.

 

Perhaps a good question would be: is there any evidence outside of one PFF ranking that our offensive line is not terrible?

 

Well PFF rates OL as individuals.But it's not a good thing to me. OL and DLgains more with cohesion and chemistry that an addition of talents. They should rather see it as a whole and get penalties point when someone blows the pocket or miss a run assignment and doesn't open the hole. OL is an unit and works as such, not as individuals.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I may be the only one but I am still not sold on Kory as our C for the next 5 years. Cooley talked him up as an All Pro but I just don't see it.  Cooley seems to have favorite players he doesn't hesitate to talk up.

 

Until we can run a simple QB sneak, I will probably not like our center play.

 

That is just me, I am an old school hog.

 

There's a guy I just drafted in our ES mock for Dallas that I really hope is on Mac's radar for our line re-build. 

 

Day 1 starting caliber center right now IMHO and someone with extensive knowledge and experience of playing in all the other 4 OL slots. Perfect early day 3 addition for this football team. 

 

http://es.redskins.com/topic/387204-2015-es-gms-mock-draft-met/?p=10183790

 

Hail. 

[Gamebreaker]

I can't believe you would say that in a thread where I completely dismantled that argument.  But here's one for you - maybe RG3 and Mccoy should start closing their eyes then, because that guy also led the NFL in passing yards per game, had more TDs than interceptions, and had the 3rd lowest sack rate by a Redskin since Rypien in 1991.  It's irresponsible to use this argument at this point.

 

Actually,it isn't. Nothing you wrote explains away why Gruden said in a post-game press conference that Kirk needs to get the ball out a little slower. Kirk has a tendency to be fooled by a defensive look pre-snap, and not read the defense post-snap before making his throw. Many of those throws became incompletions, and a few of them became back-breaking INTs that killed our chances of winning the game. Stating he lead in completely unrelated statistics doesn't change the fact that choosing where you're going throw the ball before it's hiked will eventually burn you badly. 

 

Maybe Kirk knew he didn't have much time behind this poor OL, and to avoid getting hit, just wouldn't scan the field correctly in certain situations. Who knows? But trying to write this off as "nothing to see here" is comical. His lack of patience in the pocket and lack of confidence after INTs is likely the main reason why Gruden didn't want to see him any further for the rest of the season. At least Robert got back on the field. 

 

Regardless, none of your arguments have ever explained why the OL cannot open holes in the running game unless the defense has to worry about read option. For the past four years, the only reason our OL has been competent in the run game is due to read option. They were terrible in 2011, good in 2012(we started using read option), decent in 2013(less read option), dreadful again in 2014(even less read option). 

 

Lauvao should've never been signed, he was terrible for Cleveland and didn't prove to be any better in our scheme. Lich is a decent player, but he's just too undersized. Chester is done, and really shouldn't be playing in this league. Compton is barely average at RT. I will not be surprised if we didn't use at least two early draft picks on the OL. Our QBs aren't great, no one will argue that, but having a poor OL protecting them and opening holes in the running game isn't making it any easier. 

[maskedsuperstar]

I don't think the OL is as bad as people say it is. A lot of the problem falls on the QB holding the ball for too long. Gruden calling 50 pass plays doesn't help. The Skins are running team.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I have posted this in other threads, but for some reason, the concept just doesn't seem to click.

 

Statement 1:

At times, the OL pass protection blocking was poor, and made the QB look bad.

 

Statement 2:

At times, the QB did not play well (held onto the ball, wrong drop depth, etc) which made the OL look bad.

 

Both of the above statements are true. It doesn't have to be an either or.  

 

One thing that I will point out is that on running plays, it seemed as though AM was getting hit behind the LOS more often last year than in years past.  I'm not entirely sure why that is, but my guess is because Kyle/Mike know more about the zone-stretch running game than Gruden/Foerster. Shrug.  Dunno. 

 

For me, it's really hard to judge the OL overall because the QB play was spotty, the TE play, both in pass-pro and run-support, was absolutely dreadful, and the RB play (apart from Alfred running the ball) was questionable. 

 

All of that said, it's clear that they need more talent on the OL.  TW and KL are fine.  KL isn't at as big of a size disadvantage at C as some want to make him out to be.  

 

The RT and Guard play all could be better.  The question is, between Ribs, Compton, Moses and Long, are there already pieces on the team that can fill in and play well, especially if the TE and RB situation improves as well.  Again, no idea.  BUT I will say that IF the talent is there, Callahan is much more proven at developing guys than Foerster. So there's some hope.

 

I honestly don't really care what they do, but I think that they have to have 1-2 new starters on the line opening day.  I REALLY want Long to earn a starters spot.  Ideally Moses gets the RT spot, but because he has been hurt, I'm not sure that might be a stretch for him.

 

They also need to draft a few guys to come in and play as well. 

 

But you can't give up on 3rd round picks after 1 year.  Or you'll never be able to "build through the draft."

[Wildbunny]

There's a guy I just drafted in our ES mock for Dallas that I really hope is on Mac's radar for our line re-build. 

 

Day 1 starting caliber center right now IMHO and someone with extensive knowledge and experience of playing in all the other 4 OL slots. Perfect early day 3 addition for this football team. 

 

http://es.redskins.com/topic/387204-2015-es-gms-mock-draft-met/?p=10183790

 

Hail. 

 

That's not fair from you to advocate your team and makes it sounds you're having a good draft in our mock draft. You just drafted a 5th round grade player on the fourth round!

Not like Mitch isn't good or whatever, but there was better players to get! Such as Andy Gallik

 

Joking aside, I want nasty guys on the OL. Guys that'll make you pay for everything.

[RedBeast]

Well I like that the team is going to have a lot of competition and the best players are fielded. I hope we can add some quality maulers to the OL via the draft. Get this **** sorted out once and for all. We have been minimizing the importance of a good OL for too long IMO.

A few drafts from now I hope we have a much better feeling about where we are and pull up this old thread and laugh a bit about this.

[MassSkinsFan]

Well PFF rates OL as individuals.But it's not a good thing to me. OL and DLgains more with cohesion and chemistry that an addition of talents. They should rather see it as a whole and get penalties point when someone blows the pocket or miss a run assignment and doesn't open the hole. OL is an unit and works as such, not as individuals.

 

This is a very important point that everyone in this thread ought to consider. Great stuff WB!!!

 

As a former OL guy (center in Pop Warner, HS, college) my take on our OL is that TW is excellent, Lich is OK, Lauvao and Compton could be OK with better coaching and effort on their part, and Chester and Polumbus are unmitigated disasters.

 

What I saw last year was a unit where some of the members were physically outmatched in most instances, but also where certain individuals did not display good basic skills (footwork, angles) or motivation (see matador comments above). Those two things are likely related to coaching and hopefully will be addressed this coming season.

 

As far as ranking individual OL, I think that is a deceptive practice, and while it's a neat idea, an OL is a unit that really ought to be evaluated collectively for purposes of cross-team comparison. I'd say our OL is sub-par and frankly one of the weaker ones in the league, based on my own observations and also our poor red zone, short yardage, and third down performance.

 

One or two good OL acquisitions could vastly improve this unit. Upgrading at RT and C would be my focus. Having strong players at either tackle and in the middle of the line helps the Gs play better. I also think we may have some young talent that, with better coaching, could step up.

 

HTTR

[Wildbunny]

I would welcome some fresh blood at C, and believe it will happen anytime soon.

 

Still I'm having a hard time blaming Licht for our OL woes. Guys have done whatever asked and was classy until now. He just don't fit the scheme but he's playing it tough. We do have to respect that.

[TSO]

I have posted this in other threads, but for some reason, the concept just doesn't seem to click.

Statement 1:

At times, the OL pass protection blocking was poor, and made the QB look bad.

Statement 2:

At times, the QB did not play well (held onto the ball, wrong drop depth, etc) which made the OL look bad.

Both of the above statements are true. It doesn't have to be an either or.

One thing that I will point out is that on running plays, it seemed as though AM was getting hit behind the LOS more often last year than in years past. I'm not entirely sure why that is, but my guess is because Kyle/Mike know more about the zone-stretch running game than Gruden/Foerster. Shrug. Dunno.

For me, it's really hard to judge the OL overall because the QB play was spotty, the TE play, both in pass-pro and run-support, was absolutely dreadful, and the RB play (apart from Alfred running the ball) was questionable.

<EDITED FOR LENGTH>

Great post. I just wanted to add to your proposed rationale when it comes to the running game's regression. One thing in particular continually gets ignored when discussing it and that's Alfred Morris' play.

There was a point in the year, and it was for quite a few games, where Al's major strength (being hard to take down, running through arm tackles) was non-existent. He'd go down easily. Something was clearly wrong with him.

It was to the point that it became a heated topic. I remember Redd even getting a snap early in a game (and not just to spell Morris, I think it was first snap of the drive) to see what he could do instead and then he fumbled and was gone, lol.

But then something clicked with Morris and he turned it back on. He said himself he was being too hesitant and not trusting his eyes and hitting the hole faster.

I'm sure a lot of it was due to missing Turner at coach as well. He would've fixed that right away, I bet.

The other thing rarely mentioned is Lauvao and it being his first time in an almost exclusively ZBS.

And then, as you mentioned, you have new coaches who haven't implemented that scheme their entire careers, you're bound to lose something there.

I think it was a combination of all of the above.