NFL Forum :: - The Future of the Offensive Line

Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

FAQ Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

FootballsFuture.com Home

The Future of the Offensive Line
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Desperado82

Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 18343
Location: Maryland

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:11 pm Post subject:

Rtnldave wrote:

Why? Because our D line (which has been ignored since we drafted Russell Maryland in 1990 or 91-I forget) just dosent have that type of personel to do the job.

In short, whatever they decide to do with the O line, they better do it right. Anymore of this "old School" mentality and this team will fall from mediocrity to abysmal, if they havent already.

Again, just my opinion.

Funny thing is...Lissemore, Ratliff and Crawford all fit in that category of fast/strong. Hatcher has shown some improvement in rushing the passer as well. I think once we see Ratliff come back, we'll see an improved defensive line and hopefully more pressure/sacks which should (hopefully) result in more turnovers.
_________________

^^^mack.

R.I.P. B2TB & SA

Rtnldave

Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 2344

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject:

Hatcher and Crawford maybe. I think Ratliff was in that group but wear and tear has slowed him too much and made him a liability. He'll be solid for a few games and then look out.

Texas_OutLaw7

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 19403
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 8:23 pm Post subject:

This kind of speaks to my theory that the Defensive Line is evolving quicker than the offensive line. Geno - who by all accounts is an excellent player - has four (4!) players trying to block him.
_________________

In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.

Desperado82

Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 18343
Location: Maryland

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:32 pm Post subject:

Seems as though Jake Long may be leaving Miami...but I don't think he'd fit our new scheme.
_________________

^^^mack.

R.I.P. B2TB & SA

Northland

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 3123
Location: Ajax, Ontario

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:45 pm Post subject:

Desperado82 wrote:

Seems as though Jake Long may be leaving Miami...but I don't think he'd fit our new scheme.

Any source on that?
_________________
Northland

Desperado82

Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 18343
Location: Maryland

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:33 pm Post subject:

Northland wrote:

Desperado82 wrote:

Seems as though Jake Long may be leaving Miami...but I don't think he'd fit our new scheme.

Any source on that?

Just appears to be the general consensus among Dolphin fans.

They are moving away from a man blocking scheme, and combined with Long's injury issues and struggles in their new system...Miami appears to be ready to move on from him.
_________________

^^^mack.

R.I.P. B2TB & SA

Ace5

Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 5544
Location: CT

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 12:21 am Post subject:

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:

This kind of speaks to my theory that the Defensive Line is evolving quicker than the offensive line. Geno - who by all accounts is an excellent player - has four (4!) players trying to block him.

Geno is a very good player. But trench play is pretty much the only place I feel my knowledge is up to par with the (very excellent) posters here. And that picture screams player error tO me. Specifically qb error. There's a four man rush on, and 7/8 players were kept in to block. Without looking at the play, I'd say the qb called a max protect based on pre snap reads, and was flat out wrong.
_________________

muncy54

Joined: 09 Feb 2009
Posts: 634

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 12:42 am Post subject:

Ppl love to be known and the Oline isnt where you become famous i mean who didnt want to be a RB? i think the best big men now play on the Dline because it gives them a chamce for fame and so on where Oline men are only seen when they play bad???

Texas_OutLaw7

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 19403
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 12:48 am Post subject:

Ace5 wrote:

If, however, we take this as TO is suggesting, and look at the offensive line as an evolving position where many new things are being tried and many old philosophies are being phased out (as viewed in the long term; eg, several years), then this topic demands attention. There is no denying that the general build of NFL players is, generally speaking, getting bigger, stronger, leaner and faster. Therefore, the question becomes whether you prefer to match speed and agility on speed and agility or strength and size on speed and agility. These questions apply mostly to the running game.

I agree in the basic sense that it becomes of how to fight the new trend of DL (and one could make a case for front seven given the new wrinkles defenses are employing). And there is nothing that states you can't have a big mauler that can run. Part of the reason Larry Allen was so dominant was the fact he could move in his early years - anyone remember when he ran back an int to prevent the TD? I guess the thing I find striking is that I don't see the maulers who are mobile anymore. So what has more value (and assume perfect execution for this theoretical debate). An individual who is agile and mobile or a road warrior against this seemingly new breed of defensive players. I really enjoy your breakdown below.

Quote:

If you match speed on speed, you're hoping for perfect execution, and running plays such as sweeps, traps, counters, stretches, etc. You then want agile, mobile, smaller lineman who can move in space. Also important becomes smart lineman, who understand the pacing of the play, the importance of film study to know your opponent's habits, and the exact spacing needed to allow the play to flourish. This, in today's NFL, is commonly used in the form referred to as the zone blocking scheme, and rarely has one on one blocking. Interior running is limited to draw plays and the occasional HB lead. Plays are more explosive, and lead to bigger scores, bigger gains and bigger mistakes when they do happen, but with less plays to a drive, less opportunity for mistakes to be made.

This was a good break down. Which - as a whole - do you think would be more beneficial for a no-huddle offense? And what about for the entire game? Is it more effective to make defenses have to run more and therefor exhaust themselves more - or is it better to abuse them and exhaust them that way?

Quote:

If you prefer to match strength on the speed of your new age DL, you're looking for road grader monsters. Gym rats. Players who bench press small trucks, and do so easily so they have the stamina to do it for four quarters. This results in less runs to the outside and more dives, leads, draws and seams. Rather than a 3 dimensional battle of spacing and position, you create a spartan phalanx of massive bodies, pushing forward with a stubborn runner who prefers to get in the back pocket of his lineman and push. Commonly referred to as three yards and a cloud of dust, it is an older running philosophy that relies on long, sustained drives and disciplined lineman who know the snap count and are in good enough shape to beat up an opponent and grind them to dust. You neutralize the strength of your opponent (speed and agility) by condensing the field to a small area between tackles, forcing them to punch it out with men as much as twice their size. This results in close games, and requires discipline, but will often result in late wins.

If properly executed you can absolutely neutralize the strength. But does this lead to a greater chance of exposure? If you have players who are constantly shifting and quicker at the start - do you run the risk then of having several negative plays impact your offense? Take the Giants or Rams DL's. Which do you view as the most effective way of shutting it down? Or does it need to be quick on the outside - road warriors on the inside and combine the two?

Quote:

I personally prefer option two when I'm forced to choose, but again, it all depends on who you have at your line positions. If option one fits better, than do it. Truly great teams will fuse the two, and are capable of finding and drafting the rare players who are capable of fitting in both schemes. I doubt that ever changes.

No I agree, give me maulers all day every day. It's just something I have started to notice. I think we all agree that the rules favor the offense in today's game. However, I am starting to see a shift in athletes favoring the defense. Look at Bunkely, at Ware, at JPP, at PP, at Carter. (Note - not saying all those are great players - just you are starting to see a leaner, quicker defense arise) what becomes the best way to combat that and keep the offense with the advantage that the rules already give.
_________________

In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.

Matts4313

Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 30419
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:53 am Post subject:

Desperado82 wrote:

Northland wrote:

Desperado82 wrote:

Seems as though Jake Long may be leaving Miami...but I don't think he'd fit our new scheme.

Any source on that?

Id bring him in and move Free to OG...
_________________

Desperado82

Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 18343
Location: Maryland

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 2:55 am Post subject:

Matts4313 wrote:

Desperado82 wrote:

Northland wrote:

Desperado82 wrote:

Seems as though Jake Long may be leaving Miami...but I don't think he'd fit our new scheme.

Any source on that?

Id bring him in and move Free to OG...

Even though he wouldn't likely fit in our (ZBS?) scheme?
_________________

^^^mack.

R.I.P. B2TB & SA

Matts4313

Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 30419
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:07 am Post subject:

Desperado82 wrote:

Even though he wouldn't likely fit in our (ZBS?) scheme?

Im not an expert here, but from what I have read - Callahan doesnt like to be pegged as any 1 type of scheme. He uses multiple schematic styles.

So, I would trust in Callahans judgement on if he would fit.
_________________

Desperado82

Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 18343
Location: Maryland

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:09 am Post subject:

Matts4313 wrote:

Desperado82 wrote:

Even though he wouldn't likely fit in our (ZBS?) scheme?

Gotcha.
_________________

^^^mack.

R.I.P. B2TB & SA

Dallas94Ware

Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 3624
Location: Queens, NY

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:42 am Post subject:

Desperado82 wrote:

Matts4313 wrote:

Desperado82 wrote:

Northland wrote:

Desperado82 wrote:

Seems as though Jake Long may be leaving Miami...but I don't think he'd fit our new scheme.

Any source on that?

Id bring him in and move Free to OG...

Even though he wouldn't likely fit in our (ZBS?) scheme?

Dallas in fact utilizes man blocking fairly often, hence the use of/signing of Vickers. The OL tends to set up pretty well for their isolation, gut, lead and power plays in the run game; so we try to utilize that. The problem is, none of our current runners run well in that schematic.

So we've began to use more zone blocking runs, partilcularly when we come out with two tight ends or with a singleback. Murray's run style fits this well, as he's got a strong cut and runs with decisiveness through the hole, but also has the speed to bounce wider when needed.

But then, the problem becomes clear too - our OL is not cut out for consistent zone blocking. The interior of the OL is especially not cut out for consistent man blocking or stunt blocking, either. We've began to plug in these 'tweener' types of OL (as I discuss in my next post) and all it has done is cause the OL to struggle with consistency. And it shows, week in, and week out - Romo always takes a beating, runners never get an easy lane, and running on third and short has become more difficult than throwing on third and 15.
_________________
Being a Coach doesn't mean I know everything. But I sure try to.
Read the Football FAQ!

Last edited by Dallas94Ware on Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:11 am; edited 1 time in total

JWingate

Joined: 10 Aug 2008
Posts: 3991
Location: Delaware

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:02 am Post subject:

Matts4313 wrote:

Desperado82 wrote:

Even though he wouldn't likely fit in our (ZBS?) scheme?

Correct, but I believe that he is leaning towards a ZBS here for us because of the running style of Murray. Murray reads his blockers which is what you want in a RB for the ZBS.
_________________

Display posts from previous:

       FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Page 2 of 3

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum