Lichtensteiger's knee scoped - What Shape is the O Line in?

[Smithian]

The O-Line will be rough but once Chester gets back in there and (if) Kory L gets back going then the O-Line will be serviceable.

Remember the Redskins lost 18 million in cap room this offseason due to not colluding. The Skins had to make do in some areas.

[Red_One43]

Keim's Colt Game Review of the Offense. Quotes are some of his comments on the O line - LINK

Chester made a big difference at right guard. And I’ll also say that Adam Gettis looked more comfortable facing the backups. But more about Chester. On the second play of the game, he hit defensive tackle Moala off the line, moving him back a couple yards and then headed to the linebacker. Polumbus then had a clean cut block attempt of Moala. Polumbus failed to get him on the ground, but Chester had done his part. Later in that same drive Chester’s patience resulted in two blocks. First he stayed on Moala long enough for Polumbus to take over and then went to the linebacker for another block on a five-yard run to the left.

14. Polumbus did not have a bad game last week; he did have a couple bad plays. For the most part Saturday he looked good. He wasn’t perfect, but he was effective and the plays with Chester show why cohesion is so important in this scheme. Polumbus had trouble on one pass set, allowing linebacker Jerry Hughes to get upfield and then inside, but the tackle was able to save the play and allow Griffin to throw the ball. But Polumbus did a nice job vs. Dwight Freeney on one rush (the 18-yard pass to Pierre Garcon). Freeney, who does not look comfortable as an outside ‘backer in a 3-4 yet, tried to speed rush him, but Polumbus rode him upfield and out of trouble. Freeney, rushing from a two-point stance, got too high on the play. On the next play, Polumbus was initially pushed back off the line, but he recovered and drove his man to the ground. One play later he reached the linebacker on Morris’ two-yard touchdown run.

15. Center Will Montgomery’s shotgun snaps are inconsistent. But even with the bad one’s Saturday, they were faster than a year ago. Of course, when the QB is in the pistol formation they’re only four yards off the ball rather than five to seven yards back. Montgomery’s snaps haven’t been a big issue this summer, but they were, uh, off Saturday. Griffin’s athleticism saved the play twice. First, on a snap that took .40 seconds because it was high, Griffin jumped, came down and hit tight end Chris ey for a completion (despite all this, Griffin still got the ball off in 1.70 seconds). On Griffin’s four-yard touchdown pass to Santana Moss, the ball was not only high but to the left. Griffin, in shotgun formation five yards deep, already was stepping to his right to get out on the sprint rollout. He grabbed the ball (.38 on the snap), sprinted and completed the pass.

Promising observation from Keim. To me, the key thing that he pointed out is the need for cohesion in this scheme. With Kory coming back, hopefully ready to go, cohesion will be basically acheived. Kory will be back with Trent and Monty and Chester and Polumbus played together last year along side Monty. This is not a Super Bowl line, but if the patchwork job that we ended up with last year could finish the season well. This unit, with a quick release QB, can do even better.

[welch]

Keim's Colt Game Review of the Offense. Quotes are some of his comments on the O line - LINK

Chester made a big difference at right guard. And I’ll also say that Adam Gettis looked more comfortable facing the backups. But more about Chester. On the second play of the game, he hit defensive tackle Moala off the line, moving him back a couple yards and then headed to the linebacker. Polumbus then had a clean cut block attempt of Moala. Polumbus failed to get him on the ground, but Chester had done his part. Later in that same drive Chester’s patience resulted in two blocks. First he stayed on Moala long enough for Polumbus to take over and then went to the linebacker for another block on a five-yard run to the left.

14. Polumbus did not have a bad game last week; he did have a couple bad plays. For the most part Saturday he looked good. He wasn’t perfect, but he was effective and the plays with Chester show why cohesion is so important in this scheme. Polumbus had trouble on one pass set, allowing linebacker Jerry Hughes to get upfield and then inside, but the tackle was able to save the play and allow Griffin to throw the ball. But Polumbus did a nice job vs. Dwight Freeney on one rush (the 18-yard pass to Pierre Garcon). Freeney, who does not look comfortable as an outside ‘backer in a 3-4 yet, tried to speed rush him, but Polumbus rode him upfield and out of trouble. Freeney, rushing from a two-point stance, got too high on the play. On the next play, Polumbus was initially pushed back off the line, but he recovered and drove his man to the ground. One play later he reached the linebacker on Morris’ two-yard touchdown run.

15. Center Will Montgomery’s shotgun snaps are inconsistent. But even with the bad one’s Saturday, they were faster than a year ago. Of course, when the QB is in the pistol formation they’re only four yards off the ball rather than five to seven yards back. Montgomery’s snaps haven’t been a big issue this summer, but they were, uh, off Saturday. Griffin’s athleticism saved the play twice. First, on a snap that took .40 seconds because it was high, Griffin jumped, came down and hit tight end Chris ey for a completion (despite all this, Griffin still got the ball off in 1.70 seconds). On Griffin’s four-yard touchdown pass to Santana Moss, the ball was not only high but to the left. Griffin, in shotgun formation five yards deep, already was stepping to his right to get out on the sprint rollout. He grabbed the ball (.38 on the snap), sprinted and completed the pass.

Promising observation from Keim. To me, the key thing that he pointed out is the need for cohesion in this scheme. With Kory coming back, hopefully ready to go, cohesion will be basically acheived. Kory will be back with Trent and Monty and Chester and Polumbus played together last year along side Monty. This is not a Super Bowl line, but if the patchwork job that we ended up with last year could finish the season well. This unit, with a quick release QB, can do even better.

+1

[Redskin in Canada]

Promising observation from Keim. To me, the key thing that he pointed out is the need for cohesion in this scheme. With Kory coming back, hopefully ready to go, cohesion will be basically acheived. Kory will be back with Trent and Monty and Chester and Polumbus played together last year along side Monty. This is not a Super Bowl line, but if the patchwork job that we ended up with last year could finish the season well. This unit, with a quick release QB, can do even better.

And this would be the BEST OL we could muster BEFORE the regular season and the injuries which often come with it during 16-game long gard-fought season?

The weakest unit of the team in my mind. Let's hope for the best (and wait for the next Draft/FA).

[Red_One43]

Promising observation from Keim. To me, the key thing that he pointed out is the need for cohesion in this scheme. With Kory coming back, hopefully ready to go, cohesion will be basically acheived. Kory will be back with Trent and Monty and Chester and Polumbus played together last year along side Monty. This is not a Super Bowl line, but if the patchwork job that we ended up with last year could finish the season well. This unit, with a quick release QB, can do even better.

And this would be the BEST OL we could muster BEFORE the regular season and the injuries which often come with it during 16-game long gard-fought season?

The weakest unit of the team in my mind. Let's hope for the best (and wait for the next Draft/FA).

Yes, there will be injuries, but we have depth this year. Gettis and LeRibeus get better with each game. Polumbus has gotten better. We have Hurt as experience depth. We do need a tackle to back up Polumbus and Trent - the swing tackle is needed. Looks like Willie Smith stagnated and is not that guy.

[the poster]

Yes, there will be injuries, but we have depth this year. Gettis and LeRibeus get better with each game. Polumbus has gotten better. We have Hurt as experience depth. We do need a tackle to back up Polumbus and Trent - the swing tackle is needed. Looks like Willie Smith stagnated and is not that guy.

maurice hurt can play. in fact, he can start. the rookies leribeus and gettis are not ready. particualy leribeus who has had a bad preseason.

maybe your team's local press should do you guys a favor and stop asking a million rg3 questions just long enough to throw in a question of "hey, mike, willie smith started some games last year, how come we havent seen much of him this year, are you happy with him or disapointed?"

i think your media guys are more interested in RG3's sweat socks, though.

[welch]

Promising observation from Keim. To me, the key thing that he pointed out is the need for cohesion in this scheme. With Kory coming back, hopefully ready to go, cohesion will be basically acheived. Kory will be back with Trent and Monty and Chester and Polumbus played together last year along side Monty. This is not a Super Bowl line, but if the patchwork job that we ended up with last year could finish the season well. This unit, with a quick release QB, can do even better.

And this would be the BEST OL we could muster BEFORE the regular season and the injuries which often come with it during 16-game long gard-fought season?

The weakest unit of the team in my mind. Let's hope for the best (and wait for the next Draft/FA).

Yes, there will be injuries, but we have depth this year. Gettis and LeRibeus get better with each game. Polumbus has gotten better. We have Hurt as experience depth. We do need a tackle to back up Polumbus and Trent - the swing tackle is needed. Looks like Willie Smith stagnated and is not that guy.

Maybe Smith will surprise?

[frankcal20]

Expect us to pick up some guys after cuts are made. I'm sure we'll cut some folks too.

[1niksder]

Expect us to pick up some guys after cuts are made. I'm sure we'll cut some folks too.

How about this guy

He appears to be healthy again, and he's a ex-Shanny pick that has played in the ZBS. He's running with the 3s and 4s.

Mat Bruce can trade someone Mike is planning on cutting, if he isn't released today

[Chris Luva Luva]

He appears to be healthy again, and he's a ex-Shanny pick that has played in the ZBS. He's running with the 3s and 4s.

It seems like there's a good chance they'll cut him. If he's healthy... I guess he'd be a decent backup.

[markshark84]

Expect us to pick up some guys after cuts are made. I'm sure we'll cut some folks too.

Taking peoples left-overs isn't the best way to upgrade a line, but honestly it is all they can do at this point. Regardless, I'm not very optimistic of this group. We'll see what happens though.

[Irn-Bru]

Expect us to pick up some guys after cuts are made. I'm sure we'll cut some folks too.

Taking peoples left-overs isn't the best way to upgrade a line, but honestly it is all they can do at this point. Regardless, I'm not very optimistic of this group. We'll see what happens though.

Our problem isn't that we lack decent starters as it is that we lack good depth. When healthy we have a middle-of-the-pack line. So the upgrade we're looking to get from other teams — and some people other teams cut can make a real improvement to our bench — will be addressing our greatest area of concern on the OL.

Then next year, we work more on the starters.

[Deadskins]

Then next year, we work more on the starters.

Or possibly some of our current depth players develop into starters.

[markshark84]

Expect us to pick up some guys after cuts are made. I'm sure we'll cut some folks too.

Taking peoples left-overs isn't the best way to upgrade a line, but honestly it is all they can do at this point. Regardless, I'm not very optimistic of this group. We'll see what happens though.

Our problem isn't that we lack decent starters as it is that we lack good depth. When healthy we have a middle-of-the-pack line. So the upgrade we're looking to get from other teams — and some people other teams cut can make a real improvement to our bench — will be addressing our greatest area of concern on the OL.

Then next year, we work more on the starters.

Honestly, we lack both. At a minimum, we NEED another starting tackle and guard. We also NEED depth at tackle and guard. Yes, if we were able to pick up 2 solid OLs off waivers (which is 99% unlikely), it would help. Then again, we will be looking thru a pool of the 10th-12th best OL on a particular team; to be our 6th-8th best . Still not a great situation to be in.

And when you are assembling an OL, "health" should always be taken into consideration. Therefore, I don't care about the "when healthy" because in reality, relying on all 5 starters being consistently healthy is unrealistic and shortsighted. When was the last time our 5 starters all played 14+ games in one season? The OL is the most injured position in the NFL. A good GM knows this and assembles their OL using this very principle.

I think its even worse that the state of our OL is an "at best mediocre" scenario -- depth is created in rounds 3-6 of the draft. We have -- year in and year out -- disregarded our OL depth and gone for RBs, WRs, etc. that don't pan out.

And next year we will work on our starters??? We only have one pick where you will find a clear starter. Everyone also knows that franchises don't let their solid OL starters go unless: (1) their old, (2) they want too much money, or (3) they have "issues". Outside of Randy Thomas, I'm not sure there have been many FA OL starters we have had that were really top OLs.

What I'm really saying is that this franchise has consistently overlooked the OL position and it continues to bit them in the behind.

[frankcal20]

We only need a backup LT and either an upgrade at RT or backup.

[Hooligan]

Yes, if we were able to pick up 2 solid OLs off waivers (which is 99% unlikely), it would help. Then again, we will be looking thru a pool of the 10th-12th best OL on a particular team; to be our 6th-8th best . Still not a great situation to be in.

The Redskins have one thing going for them in this scenario: the scheme works best with a certain type of lineman. There may be a player on another team's bubble who could contribute here because he fits our system better than theirs. Just a thought.

[Chris Luva Luva]

Last year, our backups gelled and played well. People were/are high on Helu and Royster during the same period.


My question is. How can those same linemen now be bums? Yet people are still high off of the performances they helped created for our two RB's?

That logic isn't clicking for me... I'm not saying we have a great situation but I don't think it's as dire as people make it out to be. There's def room for improvement.

[frankcal20]

Last year, our backups gelled and played well. People were/are high on Helu and Royster during the same period.


My question is. How can those same linemen now be bums? Yet people are still high off of the performances they helped created for our two RB's?

That logic isn't clicking for me... I'm not saying we have a great situation but I don't think it's as dire as people make it out to be. There's def room for improvement.

The problem last year was we were thin at depth. On top of that, we lost most of our line to injury in consecutive weeks. So if you look at weeks 4-8 or 10, we didn't rush the ball well. After that, once folks were moved around and had played a few games together, the rushing numbers dramatically improved and the running game was present.

In the draft, we got 3 interior lineman who all can play multiple interior positions so worse case scenario, if an interior lineman goes down, we're ok. Our biggest issue will be at tackle if we don't get someone. I also have to think that with the salary cap hit we took, that killed any chance that we had of getting a starter on the line. We'll have to address that next year. Folks have a hard time looking at it entirely and are just reactionary without looking at all the facts. Folks, we'll be ok as long as guys stay healthy but this is the same for every team in the NFL.

[oneman56]

Last year, our backups gelled and played well. People were/are high on Helu and Royster during the same period.


My question is. How can those same linemen now be bums? Yet people are still high off of the performances they helped created for our two RB's?

That logic isn't clicking for me... I'm not saying we have a great situation but I don't think it's as dire as people make it out to be. There's def room for improvement.

I agree, and the same line you're referencing that played well down the stretch last year just did it again in the 3rd pre-season game, allowing Alfred to run for over 100 yards on 14 carries (i understand it's the Colts but they still played a decent game). I don't think anyone's contention is that the Skins' could possibly land a waiver wire pick-up that would make this a top 10 o-line but if there's someone that can help with depth or fits the system it's better than doing nothing and worth a shot. And, in regards to Ryan Harris, I can tell you that living here in Denver and watching the Broncos a lot...nobody was touching Cutler when he and Clady were healthy. So, if by chance, the Skins' did acquire him and he's healthy it couldn't do anything but possibly give us an option where we need it.

[Irn-Bru]

Our problem isn't that we lack decent starters as it is that we lack good depth. When healthy we have a middle-of-the-pack line. So the upgrade we're looking to get from other teams — and some people other teams cut can make a real improvement to our bench — will be addressing our greatest area of concern on the OL.

Then next year, we work more on the starters.

Honestly, we lack both. At a minimum, we NEED another starting tackle and guard.

"NEED" for what? To be a top-10 offensive line? I agree, but you'll notice that's irrelevant to my post.

We also NEED depth at tackle and guard. Yes, if we were able to pick up 2 solid OLs off waivers (which is 99% unlikely), it would help. Then again, we will be looking thru a pool of the 10th-12th best OL on a particular team; to be our 6th-8th best . Still not a great situation to be in.

And when you are assembling an OL, "health" should always be taken into consideration. Therefore, I don't care about the "when healthy" because in reality, relying on all 5 starters being consistently healthy is unrealistic and shortsighted. When was the last time our 5 starters all played 14+ games in one season? The OL is the most injured position in the NFL. A good GM knows this and assembles their OL using this very principle.

I have no idea what you are going on and on about. Are you talking to me, or just the rabble in general, or are you saying something to me that you'd say to Bruce if you had the chance? Very confusing.

I think its even worse that the state of our OL is an "at best mediocre" scenario

We are not "at best mediocre." We are likely to be mediocre, just like we were last year. Our at best looks something more like the last 5-6 games of last year, in which our line was better than average and pushed around the eventual Super Bowl champs at will. I do not expect that same performance of this line week in, week out, however.

And next year we will work on our starters??? We only have one pick where you will find a clear starter.

Right. And then you turn to trades / FA to look for another. I predict we'll have two new starters next year that were acquired between March and April. We'd have one of them already if it wasn't for the cap penalty, but what can you do about that?

Everyone also knows that franchises don't let their solid OL starters go unless: (1) their old, (2) they want too much money, or (3) they have "issues".

What an overblown statement. You're saying you'd never wander into FA for an offensive guard or tackle and acquire a starter that way? Ridiculous. Just in the last year the Skins could have benefited from bringing in Eric Winston, Demetress Bell, Carl Nicks, or Ben Grubbs. (I don't remember any of the other names floating around in March but there were others that could have replaced one of our current starters.)

In fact, I'd be willing to bet that there are very few, if any, NFL teams without an FA starting on the line. The best teams / offensive lines have them, at any rate, which is proof enough of the ridiculousness of this argument.

What I'm really saying is that this franchise has consistently overlooked the OL position and it continues to bit them in the behind.

What I'm saying is the o-line isn't as bad as many seem to think, and right now our biggest issue is with quality depth. With as much as you wrote, one might suspect you were trying to disagree with me, but I'm not so sure of that myself.

[skinsfan#33]

We only need a backup LT and either an upgrade at RT or backup.

I agree. If you are talking NEED. My preference would be a starting RT and LG (Lichten.. would be the 1st backup at LG, C, and RG).

Of course we should have addressed that in FA. A starting RT would have been more important than a 3rd or 4th WR for the Skins to sign. We could have taken the money we spent on Morgan to get a RT or LG!

But hey, we will have a WR to throw to (when ever RG3 is upright!)

[frankcal20]

Didn't we sign both those guys out the gate and then the sanctions were handed down just a few days before the draft? I think it's clear we're a draft board guy. Not a need based drafting team.

[skinsfan#33]

Didn't we sign both those guys out the gate and then the sanctions were handed down just a few days before the draft? I think it's clear we're a draft board guy. Not a need based drafting team.

The sanctions were handed out prior to FA starting; just hours, but prior to it opening.

I think they tried to get a couple of OL (Mathis, Grubbs, Winstin) but the bidding got too high. They must not have thought too highly on Winstin because he signed with KC for a very affordable contract. Grubbs got rediculous money (so did Nicks) and I think Mathis just chose Philly over DC.

I know thet pursued OL, they just didn't have them as high of a priority as WR. I can see why at LG (even though I don't trust KL's knee!) but not addressing RT was inexcusable.

[markshark84]

We only need a backup LT and either an upgrade at RT or backup.

The way I see it Lich is injury plagued -- he has 0% chance of lasting the whole year. Chester is okay, but could be upgraded. Gettis may be good, but he's a 5th rounder and, IMHO, would be starting if MS thought highly of him. You need 4 good guards in a rotation. LeRibeus is a rookie but projected below Hurt, who isn't solid as it is. Chester should be a good reserve. IMHO, we need another starter and one additional reserve if Gettis doesn't pan out -- which we'll know by seasons end.

We 100% need a starting RT. Polumbus is a fine reserve. Williams is a solid starter. Compton, Lee, Smith aren't serviceable reserves. Thus we need a starter and reserve.

Now please note that these "needs" aren't to make a mediocre OL. This is to make a quality OL. If we want a mediocre line, then all we need is a starting RT -- but winning teams have top OLs. So in my eyes, the team will remain "mediocre" as long as our line is.

[skinsfan#33]

Now please note that these "needs" aren't to make a mediocre OL. This is to make a quality OL. If we want a mediocre line, then all we need is a starting RT -- but winning teams have top OLs. So in my eyes, the team will remain "mediocre" as long as our line is.

I can't agree.

With everyone healthy we have a solid OL (read better than mediocre or average), the problem is an OL almost NEVER stays healthy. The odds of every OL making it through the season is about as good as getting struck by lightning (which is better odds than winning the lottery)!

So I can see where you are at, but don't agree with the starting quality of our OL.