The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 1:49 pm**

skinsfan#33 wrote:I'm sorry, I've known for years that Indy's OL was garbage and it was Manning that made them look adequate.

That was my point...

But I also stand by my point that IF RGIII is decisive and can get the ball out, he'll make the o-line look better than it is.

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 2:09 pm**

SkinsJock wrote: nothing is certain but this offense and this franchise look to be better this coming season than we were last season

wow. God for Bid they actually get better one time in the decade. Cue the band.

last season we beat the giants twice

And did absolutely nothing else of note for the entire rest of the season. Few clubs accomplished less, actually.

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 2:21 pm**

skinsfan#33 wrote:.. I've known for years that Indy's OL was garbage and it was Manning that made them look adequate.

so - QB's can make a difference?

Don't expect RG3 to improve matters for the OL.

I do

He had a habit (like Big Ben) of holding on to the ball too much. He is a rookie QB and he will probably run more next year than other QBs. All three of those things will lead this team to give up more sacks than it did last year.

1 - he will be prepared
2 - so he's a rookie - so was Cam last year - what's the point
3 - he will use his speed but he's not a running QB

Right now it is a Gods awful unit, one of the worst on the league in giving up QB hits.

I don't agree - it's not great but it is getting better - the ZBS and Mike will help him a lot

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 4:50 pm**

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
UK Skins Fan wrote: Another point: the offensive line could surely be helped out by the playcalling?
That's the case on any/every team. I have no gripe with the play calling. Kyle isn't out there throwing interceptions.

UK Skins Fan wrote:A commitment to the running game, especially when it's going well, would be a help.
There is a commitment to the run, but you can't be 1 dimensional. First and foremost, this is a passing leauge. Secondly, you have to keep defenses honest. When you're not scoring points, you can't keep running the rock in the 4th QTR. You are forced to play catch up.

People make it seem as if Kyle is missing easy play calls, and that a simple run between the tackles would solve all of our offensive woes. Do you think that defenses are stacking against the run? Do you think that opposing DC's don't recognize our midget WR's? Do you think that they don't recognize Rex and Beck at QB?

Of course they do, so you gotta take what the defense gives you. The problem was the QB. Every team last year played the odd's of "Good Rex vs Bad Rex"... When good Rex showed up, we won... When bad Rex showed up, they won the bet.

UK Skins Fan wrote:It makes me want to hurl when I listen to the Redskins march down the field by running the ball, only to have it screwed up by Kyle's huge brain trying to out-think the opposition, rather than let his offensive line beat them, just as they were doing before they got inside the 20.
But you can't compare the offense between the 20's to the offense in the redzone. The defense is compacted, you're out of real estate. The defensive can more easily defend both the run and pass. And as I said before, they're gonna stop the run because the odds are, Rex gets sacked or throws a pick. Who in our WR corps demanded attention last year? Davis. That's one guy.

UK Skins Fan wrote:And when it comes to passing, of course, having a quarterback who throws it on time, and to the right place, would be huge.
Huge??? It's EVERYTHING. For the Colts, it was the difference between 13 wins and 1 win for an entire season.

UK Skins Fan wrote:I think this line is going to make it a point of personal pride to keep RGIII upright.
I don't see it that way. That's too rainbowy and hugs & kisses for me. Those guys are come out to play and do their job, just like they did last year. IF RGIII can get the ball out of his hands, they'll all look good.

UK Skins Fan wrote:If his charisma in the huddle is anything like what he brings to the press room, then these linemen are going to want to run through walls for him. Would YOU do that for Rex?!
A good QB makes his linemen look good. That charisma wont mean jack if he's taking sacks, making bad reads and patting the ball too much. That smile aint gonna get the ball out on time. If he's producing in conjunctino with that charisma, then I see your scenario playing out.

Well, I stand corrected on every point, I must say. I bow down before you sir

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 5:17 pm**

You French surrender too easily.

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 6:02 pm**

Cue the band.

You got it.

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 7:27 pm**

DarthMonk wrote:
Cue the band.

You got it.

Ahhhh, they all look so happy.

Must be a very, very, very old picture. 1921 maybe...???

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 10:02 pm**

the poster wrote:
1niksder wrote:Trent Williams & Kory Lichtensteiger Better Than You Think?

Are we better off than we think?

I think so....

um..no. it's one of the worst offensive lines in the sport. there's more than 2 players on an offensive line, the 3 other spots are garbage. and those 2 "bright spots" are just one joint and one blow to the knee away from their careers being in jeopardy.

I don't even think pass blocking is their problem. their ok at pass blocking, probably middle of the road. it's run blocking where this line is , at least to me, perhaps the worst line in the entire sport.http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40484/179/2012-offensive-line-rankings?pg=3

So how did Helu & Royster put up all those 100+ yard games?

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 10:08 pm**

DFTFT - not ever

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 10:13 pm**

the poster wrote:
1niksder wrote:Trent Williams & Kory Lichtensteiger Better Than You Think?

Are we better off than we think?

I think so....

um..no. it's one of the worst offensive lines in the sport. there's more than 2 players on an offensive line, the 3 other spots are garbage. and those 2 "bright spots" are just one joint and one blow to the knee away from their careers being in jeopardy.

I don't even think pass blocking is their problem. their ok at pass blocking, probably middle of the road. it's run blocking where this line is , at least to me, perhaps the worst line in the entire sport.

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/4 ... kings?pg=3

Posted: **Mon May 14, 2012 10:45 pm**

People actually think they can "get" a troll... they simply don't get it. Feeding is feeding... the caloric content matters not... it's still troll food.

dftt

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 4:13 am**

Deadskins wrote:You French surrender too easily.

You're confused. This was Dunkirk, not Waterloo.

But then, you really only have the Alamo to celebrate, señor?

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 6:53 am**

SkinsJock wrote:
Right now it is a Gods awful unit, one of the worst on the league in giving up QB hits.
I don't agree - it's not great but it is getting better - the ZBS and Mike will help him a lot

Look you can disagree with the "Gods awful" part because that is an opinion, but you can't disagree with the fact that the OL was one of the worst in the league in giving up QB his. You can't disagree with that because it isn't my opinion out is fact! Black and white. The Skins OL allowed more QB hits than every team in the NFL accept the CHawks and Rams.

Also, I don't expect the teams hits our sacks to go down with RG3 inserted, because history shows us QBs that hold the ball long and running QBs take more sacks and hits than most QBs. QBs typically do their worst in avoiding hits and sacks in their rookie season. Those are facts too

So if you want to go with your gut, great! I'll go with history and facts!

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 1:11 pm**

skinsfan#33 wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:
Right now it is a Gods awful unit, one of the worst on the league in giving up QB hits.
I don't agree - it's not great but it is getting better - the ZBS and Mike will help him a lot
Look you can disagree with the "Gods awful" part because that is an opinion, but you can't disagree with the fact that the OL was one of the worst in the league in giving up QB his. You can't disagree with that because it isn't my opinion out is fact! Black and white.

The problem is that "QB hits" is neither 100% attributable to the offensive line nor the best indicator of a line's performance.

That's like saying a receiver is "God awful" based solely on targets that fell incomplete — not only is it a metric almost no one uses in isolation when talking about best receivers (except when they have a pre-approved conclusion they are trying to support), but incompletions can be blamed on QBs and even partly on the offensive line, too (if the QB throws under pressure).

Instead of claiming that you are only going with facts, it might be a good idea to recognize the fact that you are making multiple generalizations and judgment calls here. This issue is not black and white.

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 1:44 pm**

Irn-Bru wrote:
skinsfan#33 wrote:
SkinsJock wrote: I don't agree - it's not great but it is getting better - the ZBS and Mike will help him a lot
Look you can disagree with the "Gods awful" part because that is an opinion, but you can't disagree with the fact that the OL was one of the worst in the league in giving up QB his. You can't disagree with that because it isn't my opinion out is fact! Black and white.
The problem is that "QB hits" is neither 100% attributable to the offensive line nor the best indicator of a line's performance.

That's like saying a receiver is "God awful" based solely on targets that fell incomplete — not only is it a metric almost no one uses in isolation when talking about best receivers (except when they have a pre-approved conclusion they are trying to support), but incompletions can be blamed on QBs and even partly on the offensive line, too (if the QB throws under pressure).

Instead of claiming that you are only going with facts, it might be a good idea to recognize the fact that you are making multiple generalizations and judgment calls here. This issue is not black and white.

No links or numbers to show us these are facts?

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 1:50 pm**

Irn-Bru wrote:
skinsfan#33 wrote:
SkinsJock wrote: I don't agree - it's not great but it is getting better - the ZBS and Mike will help him a lot
Look you can disagree with the "Gods awful" part because that is an opinion, but you can't disagree with the fact that the OL was one of the worst in the league in giving up QB his. You can't disagree with that because it isn't my opinion out is fact! Black and white.
The problem is that "QB hits" is neither 100% attributable to the offensive line nor the best indicator of a line's performance.

That's like saying a receiver is "God awful" based solely on targets that fell incomplete — not only is it a metric almost no one uses in isolation when talking about best receivers (except when they have a pre-approved conclusion they are trying to support), but incompletions can be blamed on QBs and even partly on the offensive line, too (if the QB throws under pressure).

Instead of claiming that you are only going with facts, it might be a good idea to recognize the fact that you are making multiple generalizations and judgment calls here. This issue is not black and white.

These I went by http://wp.advancednflstats.com/teamOL.php. These were QB hits that were detirmined to be on the OL.

I agree with you that nothing is 100% black and white when it comes to football, but I stated our OL was "one of the worst in the league in giving up QB hits" and that isn't debatable. It is pretty much cut and dry. Only two other teams OL gave up more hits.

I look at QB hits as a better indicator as to the OLs pass pro prowess than sacks. My reason is QBs have much more of an impact how many sacks they take then how many times they get hit!

Think of it this way. A bad OL (read AZ Cardinals OL when Warner was there) can look much better in pass pro if you look at sacks, because a QB can get rid of the ball before the pressure get to him, but he still gets hit. That is why I concentrate more on hits.

While I agree with what you said overall, what I stated about our OL giving up QB hits was to point out that while they were middle of the road in sacks allowed (Rex helped keep that low) they were TERRIBLE or as i said, Gods awful, in allowing QB hits.

Now could Rex avoided some of those QB hits? Sure! Could the play calling reduced those numbers some? Sure! But that still doesn't change the fact that they were on of the worst OL in the NFL in allowing QB hits.

And it is my opinion that RG3 will not improve that because he is a rookie, a QB that holds the ball to the last second, and he probably will run more than other pocket passers (which leads to more hits and sacks).

With that being said, I do think the Offensive stats will improve in all categories. Run blocking (both yards and yards/carry) and passing (yards and yards/attempt) and it will be mostly because MS and KS will use RG3's athetic ability to keep the defenses honest.

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 1:54 pm**

Mississippiskinsfan2 wrote:
Irn-Bru wrote:
skinsfan#33 wrote: Look you can disagree with the "Gods awful" part because that is an opinion, but you can't disagree with the fact that the OL was one of the worst in the league in giving up QB his. You can't disagree with that because it isn't my opinion out is fact! Black and white.
The problem is that "QB hits" is neither 100% attributable to the offensive line nor the best indicator of a line's performance.

That's like saying a receiver is "God awful" based solely on targets that fell incomplete — not only is it a metric almost no one uses in isolation when talking about best receivers (except when they have a pre-approved conclusion they are trying to support), but incompletions can be blamed on QBs and even partly on the offensive line, too (if the QB throws under pressure).

Instead of claiming that you are only going with facts, it might be a good idea to recognize the fact that you are making multiple generalizations and judgment calls here. This issue is not black and white.
No links or numbers to show us these are facts?

There are plenty out there, Google for yourself if you don't believe me! Or you could look at the one in the post above.

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 2:06 pm**

All very reasonable, and the line certainly wasn't good at keeping the quarterback clean.

But to say that the line overall was "god awful" still doesn't ring true to me. That denies the obvious improvement during the season in the running game. Again, that isn't ALL on the offensive line, but the fact is that gaps occurred and running backs ran through them.

I still maintain that the genius Boy Shanahan didn't commit to that improving running game enough, but even that didn't prevent the improvement from being obvious.

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 2:25 pm**

UK Skins Fan wrote: All very reasonable, and the line certainly wasn't good at keeping the quarterback clean.

But to say that the line overall was "god awful" still doesn't ring true to me. That denies the obvious improvement during the season in the running game. Again, that isn't ALL on the offensive line, but the fact is that gaps occurred and running backs ran through them.

I never said that they were overall "gods awful" The paragraph before and the end of the sentence was talikng about QB hits. I was trying to convey that they were "gods awful" WRT QB hits.

And of course it is my stance that QB hits are a better indication od OL pass pro play than sacks allowed. The QB hits in that website I provided were graded to be the fault of the OL. NFL.com has the total QB hits allowed by the team as 108, while wp.advancedNFLstats has them at 92 hits allowed by the OL

UK Skins Fan wrote: I still maintain that the genius Boy Shanahan didn't commit to that improving running game enough, but even that didn't prevent the improvement from being obvious.

I agree. I wanted them to improve the OL at least some in FA. So now we have to rely on the players we had getting better (some have to over come serious injury concerns - Lichten and Brown) or a third rounder, fifth rounder or sixth rounder making major contributions.

I don't think that there was a play calling issue. KS didn't call a lot of running plays earlier in the season for two main reasons. It wasn't effective and they were down a lot. The back ups seemed to gel and the running game came on by the end of the season (or Helu and Royster are just that much better than Hightower!).

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 2:39 pm**

skinsfan#33 wrote:
Mississippiskinsfan2 wrote:
Irn-Bru wrote: The problem is that "QB hits" is neither 100% attributable to the offensive line nor the best indicator of a line's performance.

That's like saying a receiver is "God awful" based solely on targets that fell incomplete — not only is it a metric almost no one uses in isolation when talking about best receivers (except when they have a pre-approved conclusion they are trying to support), but incompletions can be blamed on QBs and even partly on the offensive line, too (if the QB throws under pressure).

Instead of claiming that you are only going with facts, it might be a good idea to recognize the fact that you are making multiple generalizations and judgment calls here. This issue is not black and white.
No links or numbers to show us these are facts?
There are plenty out there, Google for yourself if you don't believe me! Or you could look at the one in the post above.

If you're going to bring it up then you should show where you are getting it from or at least some numbers to go with it. Its not that I don't believe you just like to see these things for myself is all. Anyways its not all on the O-line. The QB and WR have a lot to do with that too..... and I think the FO showed us where they thought the problem was.

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 5:19 pm**

Is it unfathomed that the qb hits were in FACT inflated by the horrible qb play? Yes a rook MIGHT have similar issues but to blame the line for an immobile qb that can't pull the trigger is simply an injustice.
Hike... 54321....1......1......1.............1 vs hike 54321 gone is a big difference. The way they call and don't call holding = the d line will get there at some point, rex earned every hit the line didn't give him any.

Trent is a beast a boss a mudda truckin problem... Everyone is quick to forget Trent digging trenches vs d ware.... Getting mean dirty and shutting him down. So much in fact he had to switch sides.
It's up to the qb to protect the (not) blind side. So I ask Wtf are u smoking, thinking our o line is godawful? Our qb play is all that earned that title. Show me stats of rex or beck getting rid of the ball ON TIME and taking hits.. o wait that never happened.

I hear you, but I don't feel you. You are tripping on a splinter and blaming the log. Look up and see the qb was the problem not the line.

Bom!
ROASTED!

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 5:29 pm**

Nope, didn't understand a word of that!

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 5:40 pm**

cowboykillerzRED wrote: You are tripping on a splinter and blaming the log.

Maybe he's just trippin'.

Posted: **Tue May 15, 2012 9:29 pm**

The problem was not so much the injuries it was the fact that we lost our entire left side of the line in about one game - center included. That's why our rushing stats were terrible in Oct. & Nov. We were shuffling guys around to find what was a fit. Next thing you know in Dec we were very effective in the running game averaging over 100 ypg. That was with backup talent and the coaches looking to see what the backups have.

I think we'll be fine.

And I should point out that if your line has top 15 talent at each position, you've probably got the best line in the NFL and the most expensive as well. Something Shanahan doesn't do and Allen has been known to be frugal.

Posted: **Wed May 16, 2012 5:08 am**

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
mastdark81 wrote:Colts downfall had more to do with the team organization/coaching then just quarterback. When Indy was successful and won their SuperBowl Peyton had Tarik Glenn, Jeff Saturday two all pro's...potential hall of famers.
I can't agree with that at all. They won 10 games in the previous season with the same exact squad. Subtract Peyton Manning, they win 2 games in 2011. I'm not discussing Superbowls, we're discussing the impact that a competent QB has in making the o-line look better than it is, or having a bad QB make it look worse than it is.

mastdark81 wrote:This is not a playoff line. We need an interior all-pro. Couldn't get an inch with this line if we really needed it in crunch time, shoot we can't even stop guys from blocking our field goals!!
1. We don't know how good/bad they are yet.

2. I find it even more difficult to accept your stance because it's not even accurate. http://www.thehogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38059
Read that thread. Most of the blocks were due to defensive linemen...

Our starting OL took A LOT of injuries last year. They played well towards the end, if you can be unbiased.

mastdark81 wrote:Lets make a starting 5 of just NFC East olineman and how many Redskins would you put in that starting 5?

Riiiiiight. Thats why we last in the division each year.

Different systems, different requirements. Your point is moot and almost as baseless as the one I disproved above.

How many NFCE teams run the Mike ZBS? None.

I bet if we released some of our OL bodies, the Texans would scoop 1 or 2 of them up. Heck, they just snatched up John Beck. ZBS to ZBS, we have quality players, let's be real.

Systems? Yeah different techniques when it come 2 run blocking only but not much different now that Alex Gibbs cutblockin has been outlawed. Our problem has been talent. Yeah we improved definitely but Im saying not enough. I understand the importantance of oline chemistry but part of a line working together is everyone doing their job at the sane time. Our guys lose too many one on one battles to say they play well together

System is overrated...it all comes down to winning individual battles in the oline/dline . For qb its diff and thats why they picked up Beck...qb and oline is waaaay diff soyour point on that is moot. You dont think everyteam in the NFL incorpirate zoneblockin? Every playbook has it...its just we run this forn of blocking more consistently. Cant think of 1 guy thats the best at his pisition juuuuust in our division.

Manning is a special case BC he calls the majority of his own plays...but even still you disregard the fact that they were ELITE only when had two all olineman and only were good without them even when Manning did lastplay...

Im talkin bout winnin superbowls not just being good enough to win 8-10 games. And m

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Trent Williams & Kory Lichtensteiger Better Than You Thi

Re: Trent Williams & Kory Lichtensteiger Better Than You

Re: Trent Williams & Kory Lichtensteiger Better Than You