Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Mavric

      Fall 2017 Fundraiser   09/22/2017

      One of the things that was lost in the board upgrade is the way we used to give users the "Donor" tag that showed up below their user info doesn't work the same way anymore.  I have a new tag set up that will go to anyone who donates going forward.   I should get a notification when you donate but it is only tied to your email, not your username.  So if I don't get your tag on right away either PM me or send an email to Admin@HuskerBoard.com.
Enhance

Husker offensive line play 'just average' vs. Oregon

Recommended Posts

Enhance    2,976

One of the dead horses I've been beating for awhile around here is o-line play. This article is perhaps the most frustrating for me to personally read out of everything from this past weekend.

 

Quote

Nebraska’s line gave up three sacks Saturday, and pressure in quarterback Tanner Lee’s face led to the last of his four interceptions, which ended Nebraska’s chance at a comeback.

 

Coach Mike Riley, offensive coordinator Danny Langsdorf and line coach Mike Cavanaugh all offered lukewarm reviews of the line play against the Ducks.

 

Too many hits on the quarterback, they said. Not good enough. Not even close.

 

“Just average,” Cavanaugh said. “We gotta get better.”

OWH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744

I don't think the OL play against Oregon was all that bad.  Conrad is average at best - like several of our previous centers he'll be better in the games he doesn't have a NG right on top of him.  I've been disappointed in Farmer - not so much physically but mentally/communication-wise something isn't working.  The rest I though played pretty well against Oregon.

 

On a couple of the big plays we screwed ourselves by trying to be too cute with our protection.  On the play mentioned above, there was nothing wrong with what the OL did.  But for some reason we didn't want to have them just do their base pass pro.  We had to slide the entire line left so Farniok was to ignore the DE right in front of him in favor of blocking nobody and we expected a TE to come across the formation and pick him up.  Got there too late and the rest is history. 

 

We did the same thing on a screen play earlier in the game.  For whatever reason we pulled Foster away from where we were going throw the screen - blocking nobody.  Then we didn't have anyone there to pick up a blitzing LB and it blew up the play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are we getting to the point where we're starting to see our coaches are average, our AD is average, and our program is average? 

 

It shouldn't take a footbal genius to figure this stuff out, especially since the coaches have been together forever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
swmohusker    607
2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

I don't think the OL play against Oregon was all that bad.  Conrad is average at best - like several of our previous centers he'll be better in the games he doesn't have a NG right on top of him.  I've been disappointed in Farmer - not so much physically but mentally/communication-wise something isn't working.  The rest I though played pretty well against Oregon.

 

On a couple of the big plays we screwed ourselves by trying to be too cute with our protection.  On the play mentioned above, there was nothing wrong with what the OL did.  But for some reason we didn't want to have them just do their base pass pro.  We had to slide the entire line left so Farniok was to ignore the DE right in front of him in favor of blocking nobody and we expected a TE to come across the formation and pick him up.  Got there too late and the rest is history. 

 

We did the same thing on a screen play earlier in the game.  For whatever reason we pulled Foster away from where we were going throw the screen - blocking nobody.  Then we didn't have anyone there to pick up a blitzing LB and it blew up the play.

I think some of the reason we were running play action at the end of the game is Wilbon has no clue in pass protection and it helps him in his assignment.  Hence the not typical pass pro.  Screens plays you typically punch and release interior DL and release to the 2nd level.  If they blitz a LB that is awesome bc you can just give them quick resistance and it removes the 2nd level defenders.  Should hit big time if you can get your screen off in the face of a blitz.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
Just now, swmohusker said:

I think some of the reason we were running play action at the end of the game is Wilbon has no clue in pass protection and it helps him in his assignment.  Hence the not typical pass pro.  Screens plays you typically punch and release interior DL and release to the 2nd level.  If they blitz a LB that is awesome bc you can just give them quick resistance and it removes the 2nd level defenders.  Should hit big time if you can get your screen off in the face of a blitz.  

 

Running play action has nothing to do with sliding the protection like we did.

 

Yeah, the screen would have been great had we left Foster there to chip on the LB instead of pulling him to block no one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
knapplc    17,313
5 minutes ago, huskerfan120889 said:

So are we getting to the point where we're starting to see our coaches are average, our AD is average, and our program is average? 

 

It shouldn't take a footbal genius to figure this stuff out, especially since the coaches have been together forever. 

 

They fit in well with some of our average fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VectorVictor    1,378
7 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

They fit in well with some of our average fans.

 

Good Sir, I will have you know we have THE greatest fans in college football. 

 

0668790b95dfbdc98f1f84877ae2b82a.jpg

 

All the best fans. Huge fans. 

 

---

 

As for the topic at hand, I think once the line learns their assignments better, this will clear up. Problem is, this should have been clear since the first game of the season, and we saw similar mistakes re: blown assignments from the same folks in two games so far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
grandpasknee    596
16 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

They fit in well with some of our average fans.

Note to Mods:  We need a "fire/flame" emoticon to show our appreciation for burns like this....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VectorVictor    1,378
Just now, grandpasknee said:

Note to Mods:  We need a "fire/flame" emoticon to show our appreciation for burns like this....

 

Why, when the internet already has quality Kelso GIFs

 

giphy.webp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Enhance    2,976

To that point @VectorVictor, the other problem for me is this is a relatively experienced group who has (mostly) been with the same offensive coaches for two full seasons and part of a third. If you looked at this line just based on their combined number of starts and age, and took away their names and who they'd play for, a lot of people would think 'hey, that group should be pretty good if not one of the better lines in the B1G.'

 

That said, their story hasn't been written yet and Mav is right. I don't think they've been all that bad. I think they've been average to above average this season, and conceptually, that's been a problem around here for some time. Have we had better than a ~9-win line? I would argue no.

 

Man, the o-line makes me pretty doom and gloom. :facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigRedBuster    7,056
33 minutes ago, Mavric said:

I don't think the OL play against Oregon was all that bad.  Conrad is average at best - like several of our previous centers he'll be better in the games he doesn't have a NG right on top of him.  I've been disappointed in Farmer - not so much physically but mentally/communication-wise something isn't working.  The rest I though played pretty well against Oregon.

 

 

I agree.  Now, I'm not surprised the coaches are saying these things.  They are trying to light a fire under them.  But, our O line played better than "average".  Yes, there were a few break downs that were frustrating.  There is room for improvement.

 

The last play was very frustrating.  Just to be clear, that was a tight end that allowed that pressure.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
10 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

The last play was very frustrating.  Just to be clear, that was a tight end that allowed that pressure.

 

Yes.  But we're not just asking him to make a run-of-the mill play.  From where he was lined up, Hoppes has almost as far to go to get in front of the OLB as the OLB has to go to get to Lee.  We left ourselves no margin for error.  Why can't we just have Farniok block the OLB on his side and Hoppes help of the OLB right next to him?

 

sfBweSS.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigRedBuster    7,056
3 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Yes.  But we're not just asking him to make a run-of-the mill play.  From where he was lined up, Hoppes has almost as far to go to get in front of the OLB as the OLB has to go to get to Lee.  We left ourselves no margin for error.  Why can't we just have Farniok block the OLB on his side and Hoppes help of the OLB right next to him?

 

sfBweSS.png

Well....rewatching the play, I think Farniok actually screwed up.  If you look, he literally blocks nobody.

 

Think about who you have on the line.  You have Gates at LT who is a seasoned vet.  You have Farniok making his first start at RT.  Both have to reach and block an OLB.  I would prefer Hoppes to help Farniok and trust that Gates can take care of his OLB himself.  Problem was, Farniok crashed inside to help block the inside D lineman that is actually lined up on the inside shoulder of the guard.  

 

If he would have gone after the OLB and then Hoppes would have been there just to help....it would have probably been way better protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
4 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Well....rewatching the play, I think Farniok actually screwed up.  If you look, he literally blocks nobody.

 

Think about who you have on the line.  You have Gates at LT who is a seasoned vet.  You have Farniok making his first start at RT.  Both have to reach and block an OLB.  I would prefer Hoppes to help Farniok and trust that Gates can take care of his OLB himself.  Problem was, Farniok crashed inside to help block the inside D lineman that is actually lined up on the inside shoulder of the guard.  

 

If he would have gone after the OLB and then Hoppes would have been there just to help....it would have probably been way better protection.

 

No, he didn't screw up.  Watch the entire line.  Everyone slides their protection left.  That's why Hoppes is brought across the formation to pick up the other side that the entire line slides away from.

 

I realize Farniok didn't block anyone.  But that doesn't mean he isn't doing what he's supposed to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedDenver    1,273
53 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Running play action has nothing to do with sliding the protection like we did.

 

Yeah, the screen would have been great had we left Foster there to chip on the LB instead of pulling him to block no one.

Maybe the slide protection was meant to look like the counter run play with pulling TE? The down block by Farniok could draw in the LB and safeties. But maybe that's too cute as you say, since instead Lee gets hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
Just now, RedDenver said:

Maybe the slide protection was meant to look like the counter run play with pulling TE? The down block by Farniok could draw in the LB and safeties. But maybe that's too cute as you say, since instead Lee gets hit.

 

Exactly.  It's a play-action fake that's supposed to look like the counter play we've run a lot of.  Which is fine in some situations.  But when there's about two minutes to play and you have to score a TD, the defense isn't going to care about the run fake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GSG    5,377
Just now, Mavric said:

 

Exactly.  It's a play-action fake that's supposed to look like the counter play we've run a lot of.  Which is fine in some situations.  But when there's about two minutes to play and you have to score a TD, the defense isn't going to care about the run fake.

 

Yep. That only works on old video games where the D has no situational awareness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigRedBuster    7,056
2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

No, he didn't.  Watch the entire line.  Everyone slides their protection left.  That's why Hoppes is brought across the formation to pick up the other side that the entire line slides away from.

 

I realize Farniok didn't block anyone.  But that doesn't mean he isn't doing what he's supposed to do.

Well....technically, then both Farniok and Hoppes were doing what they were supposed to do.  Hoppes just lost the battle.  I would prefer a play where Farniok and Hoppes are taking on the OLB when you look at how the D was lined up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
Just now, BigRedBuster said:

Well....technically, then both Farniok and Hoppes were doing what they were supposed to do.  Hoppes just lost the battle.  I would prefer a play where Farniok and Hoppes are taking on the OLB when you look at how the D was lined up.

 

Yes, Hoppes was doing what he was supposed to do.  He was just put in a very tough spot with no margin for error.  He had to come across the formation and stonewall an OLB who had a five yard run at him.  And he physically could not get there any faster to give himself a cushion in front of Lee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedDenver    1,273
20 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Exactly.  It's a play-action fake that's supposed to look like the counter play we've run a lot of.  Which is fine in some situations.  But when there's about two minutes to play and you have to score a TD, the defense isn't going to care about the run fake.

You can definitely run with 2 minutes left, especially in college where the clock stops on first downs. Maybe that play is more effective if we first run the ball to show Oregon that they can't just ignore the run threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
8 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

You can definitely run with 2 minutes left, especially in college where the clock stops on first downs. Maybe that play is more effective if we first run the ball to show Oregon that they can't just ignore the run threat.

 

I realize you CAN run.  But the defense is going to take their chances with that.  Even if they give up 7-8 yards and trade that for 30 seconds off the clock, they'll take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Toe    234

Honestly, 'average' O-line play is at least enough to get them away from being my #1 concern with this team. Obviously still I want to see better, but OLBs & pass rush have taken over as my biggest concern...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedDenver    1,273
7 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I realize you CAN run.  But the defense is going to take their chances with that.  Even if they give up 7-8 yards and trade that for 30 seconds off the clock, they'll take it.

A few 7-8 yard runs (which don't take 30 seconds if you're in hurry up, especially if any of them result in 1st downs) is what I think you'd need to setup the play you're analyzing, So IMO the play isn't terrible, but you've got to either call it when the defense is at least thinking run or set it up on that drive so that you get them thinking run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ColoradoHusk    2,937
35 minutes ago, Mavric said:

We made it much tougher on ourselves than we had to.

We all know why Riley, Langsdorf, and Cavanaugh like to go with a deception-based offense (even with their blocking schemes), it's because they have never felt they could line up across the other team and whip them physically.  They couldn't do that at Oregon State, because they felt they were always at the talent disadvantage.  Now, they are at Nebraska, I would think they would have a physical advantage over a lot of teams, yet they still prefer to "trick" defenses and do things cute.  What I liked about the first half of last year is that they stopped getting cute (because being cute didn't work in 2015), and they physically wore teams down.  Yes, the 2nd half of last year the offense fizzled due to injuries on the o-line, the QB, and other key spots.  Now, that Langsdorf has their passing QB they want, they go back to being cute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, GSG5545 said:

Sorry for the crappy quality

 

 

160Pkt.gif

 

Honestly I kind of blame Lee for this. While the protection is no the greatest, if he just steps up in the pocket he can make an unpressured throw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigRedBuster    7,056
1 minute ago, Husker from Kansas said:

 

Honestly I kind of blame Lee for this. While the protection is no the greatest, if he just steps up in the pocket he can make an unpressured throw

The WR had broken free and he needed to get the ball out.  If he steps up and releases the ball a few seconds later, the window of opportunity could have been gone.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigRedBuster    7,056

One thing we will have to get used to with a true pocket passer like Lee.  He is going to hang in the pocket and not have happy feet like TA had.  This is going to be mostly good.  He will be able to deliver the ball to more options.  You do run a chance though on a play like the last play where he gets caught there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BigRedBuster said:

The WR had broken free and he needed to get the ball out.  If he steps up and releases the ball a few seconds later, the window of opportunity could have been gone.  

 

Correct, but he also has time to read the field and have another receiver break open, or just throw the ball away. Of course it's easy for me to say this (hindsight 20/20 and all) but I think Lee was trying to make a play and young QB's need to realize that more often than not it's better to throw it away and live to play another down 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ColoradoHusk    2,937
2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

One thing we will have to get used to with a true pocket passer like Lee.  He is going to hang in the pocket and not have happy feet like TA had.  This is going to be mostly good.  He will be able to deliver the ball to more options.  You do run a chance though on a play like the last play where he gets caught there.

There is definitely a give and take with having a statue like Lee.  While he is going to stay in the pocket longer, he is still going to be effected by the pass rush, which we saw against Oregon.  I didn't think Lee handled the pressure very well.  It could be an issue that has gone back to his days at Tulane, and he could grow and improve.  We will have to see if he does.  The one thing that the statue QB does it makes it a lot easier for the D-line to apply pressure.  If they know the QB is no threat to roll out of the pocket, they are going to have a target 5-7 yards behind the o-linemen and will be able to go full bore with that pass rush.  They won't have to worry about playing any contain at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
16 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

A few 7-8 yard runs (which don't take 30 seconds if you're in hurry up, especially if any of them result in 1st downs) is what I think you'd need to setup the play you're analyzing, So IMO the play isn't terrible, but you've got to either call it when the defense is at least thinking run or set it up on that drive so that you get them thinking run.

 

It's too late to be setting things up at this point.  You should have been setting them up earlier in the game - which we were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ColoradoHusk    2,937
5 minutes ago, Husker from Kansas said:

 

Correct, but he also has time to read the field and have another receiver break open, or just throw the ball away. Of course it's easy for me to say this (hindsight 20/20 and all) but I think Lee was trying to make a play and young QB's need to realize that more often than not it's better to throw it away and live to play another down 

I was told over and over during the off-season that Lee was going to be able to step up in the pocket and move around just enough to avoid the pass rush.  He didn't do that very well against Oregon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
teachercd    2,548
10 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I was told over and over during the off-season that Lee was going to be able to step up in the pocket and move around just enough to avoid the pass rush.  He didn't do that very well against Oregon.

Plus, since his arm release is basically a laser-rocket release he would not have to worry about the pass rush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigRedBuster    7,056
31 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I was told over and over during the off-season that Lee was going to be able to step up in the pocket and move around just enough to avoid the pass rush.  He didn't do that very well against Oregon.

And he has been better at that so far this year compared to our past QBs.

 

Are you two seriously going to turn a good football discussion into a waaa waaa boo hoo......crap fest???

 

Just because we say he is going to be better at that, doesn't mean he isn't going to get caught in there sometimes.  

Edited by Enhance
Please attack the post, not the poster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Undone    341
24 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

One thing we will have to get used to with a true pocket passer like Lee.  He is going to hang in the pocket and not have happy feet like TA had.  This is going to be mostly good.  He will be able to deliver the ball to more options.  You do run a chance though on a play like the last play where he gets caught there.

 

It's going to be mostly good *if* he checks down to the underneath routes.

I realize we were in a situation essentially the entire game where we were behind and had to throw the ball down field quite a bit. And I don't think it's a shortcoming of Langsdorf; I really believe Langsdorf knows exactly how to get this offense to grind out long drives. 

Lee needs to just be given a couple more games to settle in and settle down. And we need to find high-percentage ways to get the ball in Lindsey & DPE's hands and let them do things in space. Too much "boom or bust" so far (but I know it's only been two games).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744

I guess my caveat to my original comment is I don't think they were completely busting very much.

 

I"m sure there are times when they weren't giving Lee as much space as he would like.  But there's always going to be some pressure.  I don't think there was very often that he didn't have enough room to make a good throw.

 

And I'm sure there are things that could be better in the running game.  Maybe we only got 3-4 yards when they thought we could get 6-7 or whatever.  But, again, I didn't see a lot of complete busts.

 

So I guess it depends on what the standard is  for "average."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zoogs    5,840

The OL is playing pretty average. If you're disappointed in the overall caliber of the team or its performance thus far, it's really inconsistent to give the OL a break. If the OL has been about fine so far, then so has the entire offense -- mistakes, imperfections, lack of greatness and all. 

 

The standard cannot be "that which maximizes blame on the coaches." Which isn't to absolve coaches of blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
Just now, zoogs said:

The OL is pretty average. If you're disappointed in the overall caliber of the team or its performance thus far, it's really inconsistent to give the OL a break. If the OL has been about fine so far, then so has the entire offense -- mistakes, imperfections, lack of greatness and all. 

 

I don't really think so.  That's kind of an overly-simplistic way to look at it.

 

There isn't any reason that some position groups can't be playing better than other position groups.  Our offense hasn't been terrible by any means.  We're 35th in scoring.  69th in yardage is not very good.

 

But there isn't any reason that good OL play can't be wasted by bad QB play or vice versa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zoogs    5,840

Sure, there's not. But we generally consider OL play to be one of the defining factors of a football team. It's often cited as a reason to turn up the heat on the OL coach for not recruiting or developing his guys well enough, for example. Or used as a reason to excuse a lack of demonstrable quality at QB because the OL is not doing great. 

 

'Average' OL performance explains a lot of things. Dress that up to 'pretty solid' and this points the finger elsewhere. In this case it seems hardly fair to merit that. The OL needs to kick it up a notch, along with other groups. Most things right now are within some reasonable definition of average, and so long as that holds we'll (probably) have a pretty average season. Which, if this is considered fine, so should the latter. If not, then a great deal of improvement will be needed and the OL is as good a place as any to start -- if only because of the importance of the line to the game, but also because the potential here is fairly bright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Dude    6,264
1 hour ago, Husker from Kansas said:

 

Honestly I kind of blame Lee for this. While the protection is no the greatest, if he just steps up in the pocket he can make an unpressured throw

It doesn't look like he had a pocket to step into.  Farmer should probably take the blame on that one.   He gets beaten to the inside when he had help to the outside.  Not that I believe Lee would have taken advantage of it if it was there.  He appeared committed to whip it into double coverage from the snap.

 

I've always thought a strong middle is the most important part of pass protection.  If tackles get beaten to the outside, where the best pass rushers typically are, the middle 3 should have a clean pocket to step into.

 

Nothing I've seen from Lee so far indicates this is a strength of his though.  Even when he has a clean pocket to step into he doesn't use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hunter94    473
1 hour ago, ColoradoHusk said:

There is definitely a give and take with having a statue like Lee.  While he is going to stay in the pocket longer, he is still going to be effected by the pass rush, which we saw against Oregon.  I didn't think Lee handled the pressure very well.  It could be an issue that has gone back to his days at Tulane, and he could grow and improve.  We will have to see if he does.  The one thing that the statue QB does it makes it a lot easier for the D-line to apply pressure.  If they know the QB is no threat to roll out of the pocket, they are going to have a target 5-7 yards behind the o-linemen and will be able to go full bore with that pass rush.  They won't have to worry about playing any contain at all.

pretty good assessment, he doesn't seem at all interested in running the ball, even if there is an opening.........was hoping we would see someone back there between happy feet and a statue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Igetbored216    179

I think average is a pretty good description for how the o-line played. Some good, some bad. I'm not sure the blocking schemes are helping their cause. As was stated above, with many of the blocking schemes, there is zero margin for error.

 

How would the group look and perform if things were simplified? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    8,744
20 minutes ago, zoogs said:

Sure, there's not. But we generally consider OL play to be one of the defining factors of a football team. It's often cited as a reason to turn up the heat on the OL coach for not recruiting or developing his guys well enough, for example. Or used as a reason to excuse a lack of demonstrable quality at QB because the OL is not doing great. 

 

'Average' OL performance explains a lot of things. Dress that up to 'pretty solid' and this points the finger elsewhere. In this case it seems hardly fair to merit that. The OL needs to kick it up a notch, along with other groups. Most things right now are within some reasonable definition of average, and so long as that holds we'll (probably) have a pretty average season. Which, if this is considered fine, so should the latter. If not, then a great deal of improvement will be needed and the OL is as good a place as any to start -- if only because of the importance of the line to the game, but also because the potential here is fairly bright.

 

That's fair.

 

My issue at the moment is that the most obvious plays where things went wrong against Oregon that many like to point to as "bad OL play" are actually not that at all.  The line did what they were supposed to do and did it well.  The team was just put in a pretty bad position by the play call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
teachercd    2,548
57 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

And he has been better at that so far this year compared to our past QBs.

 

Are you two seriously going to turn a good football discussion into a waaa waaa boo hoo......crap fest???

 

Just because we say he is going to be better at that, doesn't mean he isn't going to get caught in there sometimes.  

Not really...he looks like TA with a stronger arm and no legs.  So far the stats pretty much prove that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Enhance    2,976
8 minutes ago, Igetbored216 said:

How would the group look and perform if things were simplified? 

I often view this as an intangible or nebulous argument. What does simple look like in comparison to not getting run over by the defense? Do we know that this is the problem? Or, is it possible the line isn't communicating well? Or, do they just have a bad coach who struggles to put them in positions to succeed? We've had average to above average lines dating back to the early 2000's and that includes four very different offensive systems.

 

At this point, several of these guys have been operating under this offensive system for almost three years. Some of the strategy has changed, but I imagine much of the language, teachings and concepts haven't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ColoradoHusk    2,937
1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

And he has been better at that so far this year compared to our past QBs.

 

Are you two seriously going to turn a good football discussion into a waaa waaa boo hoo......crap fest???

 

Just because we say he is going to be better at that, doesn't mean he isn't going to get caught in there sometimes.  

Maybe I am being a whiny bitch, especially when it comes to Lee.  I guess it's because I think I can analyze a QB's throwing technique and mechanics to notice where things can go wrong.  I can't analyze line play or what a defense is doing on a specific play, but I can tell what is going to cause a pass to be inaccurate.

 

The baseline for Lee shouldn't be "well, he's better at this than Armstrong or Martinez".  He should be automatically better at passing than those guys, because those guys were limited as passing QB's.  The baseline for Lee should be "is he being a good pocket passer".  In the Arkansas State game, he was pretty good, but he was pretty bad against Oregon. Since he looks to be a statue back there, he won't beat teams with his legs.  That means he has to be extra good in the passing game.  Maybe he can get better over the course of this season, but so far he has shown to be the same QB he was at Tulane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Igetbored216    179
49 minutes ago, Enhance said:

I often view this as an intangible or nebulous argument. What does simple look like in comparison to not getting run over by the defense? Do we know that this is the problem? Or, is it possible the line isn't communicating well? Or, do they just have a bad coach who struggles to put them in positions to succeed? We've had average to above average lines dating back to the early 2000's and that includes four very different offensive systems.

 

At this point, several of these guys have been operating under this offensive system for almost three years. Some of the strategy has changed, but I imagine much of the language, teachings and concepts haven't.

That's because it is. It's just my opinion from what I have seen. 

 

To answer your questions:

One example of simple would have been Farniok blocking the DE/OLB, instead of a tight end coming across the formation to block, and Farniok sliding left. 

 

We don't know it's specifically a problem, and I wouldn't know about the communication on the line. It appeared every one was trying to do what they were supposed to on that last play, but Hoppes just couldn't execute. So, I would guess communication on that last play appeared to be okay. 

 

I personally felt Cav should have been dumped with Reed and Banker last year, but again, that's just my opinion. The o-line performed average last Saturday. Just as the article says. Hopefully they can take some steps forward in the games to come. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×