Interesting note from practice today on the OL

alaguy

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,117
It seems to me having agility is more important than sizeat OT than OG.They are out in space much more which means Joe and Devine would be a fish out of water there.
Oddly ,it seems Barrick and Sellers from 09 era were both converted TEs and did ok.
 

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,487
Here's what I glean from the article. The Dline is killing the Oline. I'm very ok with this at this point in time. If they weren't I'd say next year would be a bust. Keep giving that Oline hell boys and all things will come together.
 

presjacket

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
549
Here's what I glean from the article. The Dline is killing the Oline. I'm very ok with this at this point in time. If they weren't I'd say next year would be a bust. Keep giving that Oline hell boys and all things will come together.
Interesting point. Last week everyone was concerned about the defensive line replacing 3 of 4 starters. Now we're worried about the offensive line. Which position group will we worry about next?
 

augustabuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,187
Interesting point. Last week everyone was concerned about the defensive line replacing 3 of 4 starters. Now we're worried about the offensive line. Which position group will we worry about next?
Hopefully, the next group to worry about will be the equipment managers. They will be overworked because they are changing all the equipment that doesn't have the correct shade of gold.:D
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,526
Location
Georgia
You're overreacting. Most of the guys stay at their position and are only forced to move due to injuries. Burden has not suddenly become an OT, he's cross training because that is our weakest spot on the line and we got several guys banged up right now. (Heck, he wasn't even a center in high school.) Injuries forced some experimentation and that's what you do in April. We just lost 3 starters off a 5 man unit. I honestly don't know what people expect. This isn't the NFL.

not overreacting. Every snap at one position is the lack of getting that snap at another. The fact we lost 3 starters to graduation etc, is more of a reason why you need continuity, so the young guys rep in their spot. We are always dealing with injuries on the OL. 6 years of it. You follow tech football close as anyone. Can you ever remember a 6 year stretch of position chaos on the OL like under paul? Do you realize Will Jackson played every spot on the OL but center in his last two years? I never remember seeing that ever at a bigtime D1 school. he played 3 positions last year alone (both tackles and guard). Our only two lockdown spots under paul have been center and right guard.

I mean sure we had guys injured in the past, but in a spot here or there. 6 years under chan you had guys like Wrotto, tuminello, gardner, howard, rhodes, etc lock down their spot and play it for years; yes wrotto started out as a DT. But once he moved he locked in that gaurd spot and stayed there. Very little rotation and cross training. Same under Oleary, Nat dorsey, robinson, chris brown, craig page etc. Yes we had injuries there too...but again, we knew who was where, what the starting 5 was, and who the prime backups where.

Now were GOL And Chan great at OL or recruiting no not necessarily, better than now? Maybe who knows. But the fact is we had a predictable and more stable OL system than what I see now and I really believe those teams were better on OL than we have been, more All-ACC and more All-Americans than under paul. I just know how important OL staying together is in that units development. Its huge. And I am convinced its a major factor why we have had trouble the last few years. Many false starts, bad execution, blown body positions etc...
 

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,126
@33jacket I think you have a valid point. But, it's tough to compare how things on the OL should be done based on comparing systems that are extremely different. It could be that OG and OT in CCG/GOL system (or at least in their minds) required completely different skill sets and/or mentalities whereas in CPJ's system (or at least in his mind) the skill set required for his OL positions is more interchangeable. Plus, I remember other teams doing a lot of shuffling on the OL when they've had injuries, Ugag comes to mind in particular. They have moved guys around a lot from C to G and even G/T. And, now that I think about it, CCG also had a few guys that were interchangeable. Andy Tidwell-Neal comes to mind who played OG while O'Reilly was at C then switched to C when he graduated. That got the best guys on the field. So, it may not be as big of a difference as you're thinking.

But, either way, like you're saying, it's not ideal. You want your guys to gain more of that continuity. At the same time you want to get your best guys on the field regardless of position. It's injuries that have been the biggest cause of the reshuffling problem in my mind. It seems that injuries have been much more of an issue for us with CPJ than they were with CCG. And, I think that may have a lot to do with CPJ's practice philosophy vs CCG. It seems to me that CPJ is more about throwing the guys into the fire at practice whereas CCG may have been a bit more protective/cautious.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,526
Location
Georgia
@33jacket I think you have a valid point. But, it's tough to compare how things on the OL should be done based on comparing systems that are extremely different. It could be that OG and OT in CCG/GOL system (or at least in their minds) required completely different skill sets and/or mentalities whereas in CPJ's system (or at least in his mind) the skill set required for his OL positions is more interchangeable. Plus, I remember other teams doing a lot of shuffling on the OL when they've had injuries, Ugag comes to mind in particular. They have moved guys around a lot from C to G and even G/T. And, now that I think about it, CCG also had a few guys that were interchangeable. Andy Tidwell-Neal comes to mind who played OG while O'Reilly was at C then switched to C when he graduated. That got the best guys on the field. So, it may not be as big of a difference as you're thinking.

But, either way, like you're saying, it's not ideal. You want your guys to gain more of that continuity. At the same time you want to get your best guys on the field regardless of position. It's injuries that have been the biggest cause of the reshuffling problem in my mind. It seems that injuries have been much more of an issue for us with CPJ than they were with CCG. And, I think that may have a lot to do with CPJ's practice philosophy vs CCG. It seems to me that CPJ is more about throwing the guys into the fire at practice whereas CCG may have been a bit more protective/cautious.

But for me when we talk about a guy like tidwell-neal there is a big difference to what Paul is doing. When we made switches under Chan or GOL....we made the switch and stuck with it. Paul moves guys spot to spot multiple times mid season. For sure, we will shuffle due to many injuries. Alot of teams do that. Typically its because the backup is a specialist at guard, and is better than the backkup for tackle. So you slide the starter to tackle and put the good backup at gaurd. This happens a ton at every level, but typically it is always the same side of the line and just the G/T combo. What we see at tech is multiple sides, positions, etc...mid season etc.

So this is why I am a bit more critical....I am cool with sliding a guy to fill a gap...for sure. But burden was a Center. Now a tackle...and we are not sure he will stay at tackle. So he is losing reps at Center. I can't recall a switch like this anywhere in football a center and tackle are so freaking different. The body type, feet etc are so different. Maybe its our system...like you say....But if we make the switch STICK with it and allow the guy to specialize. What will happen is in a week he will be back at center....you can't get good doing this.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,967
@33jacket You end your post on our OL by saying we "have had trouble" the past few years. What's your measure for this?

Footballoutsiders SnP plus Offense Ranking
2013 21
2012 13
2011 15

2007 43
2006 38
2005 49
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,672
33, Your point is very valid, I just don't think it's very realistic or very common across college football. Yeah, who wouldn't love to have 10 guys all starter quality, all having a specific position. I'd love that, too. It always boils down to getting your 10 best guys at the moment on the field together. If you cross train them early, they have the ability to move over when you need it.

Let's say you have a starting five that are all A quality players, but your backups.... not so much. Let's say you have two backups that are B quality, two that are C, and one that is D. Are you gonna replace the A starter with the D backup just because he's the backup for that particular guy? No, your gonna put your best mix out there provided they know what the hell they are doing. The only way to do that is to cross train them now.
 

Rodney Kent

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
558
Location
McDonough, GA
It appears to me that it is too early to assess the offensive line play. As most have stated, the defense is generally always ahead at this time of the year. If the defense has improved vastly, then this just means the offense will have to work harder to get better. This is always good. The best possible situation for an offense is to have to play against a great defense in practice day in and day out. This is the only way to get better. You do not get better playing against a weak defense.

This is a wait and see situtaion which will only show up when we hit the ACC games after the cupcakes. Hopefully, the defense is better, which in turn will make the offense better.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,672
I doubt our DL has made great strides from last year. It's more likely our OL is suffering from green-itis. Guys who are learning on the fly do not play to 100% of their athletic potential. OL, especially our version, is much more cerebral than DL. When you are clueless, even just a little bit, it shows... bad.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,526
Location
Georgia
@33jacket You end your post on our OL by saying we "have had trouble" the past few years. What's your measure for this?

Footballoutsiders SnP plus Offense Ranking
2013 21
2012 13
2011 15

2007 43
2006 38
2005 49

offensive ranking is no measure for OL execution. My measure of this is looking at how they executed. Missed assignments, execution, penalties. And the primary evaluation of this is against your best competition. I mean by your criteria then, the WR in 11-13 must be better than the WR from 5-06. Or the RB the same evaluation. Total offensive production never is the representation for a position evaluation.

the fact is the OL did not perform well. When you have 3 seniors and a 3 year player in Mason (4 major players) the execution we saw, the missed blocks, the blown pass coverages etc are what I evaluate. Penalties. etc.

For instance performance of the OL vs VT was horrid. Performance vs BYU was not good. Performance vs Clemson was awful. Go watch the firs half vs clemson and tell me the OL was doing its job?

My validation? Paul even said last years OL performance was not good, and we "fixed things internally" and it can't/won't happen again. He said that as recent as a month ago.

So all the evidence is there. We are not performing well on the OL.
 

33jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,526
Location
Georgia
33, Your point is very valid, I just don't think it's very realistic or very common across college football. Yeah, who wouldn't love to have 10 guys all starter quality, all having a specific position. I'd love that, too. It always boils down to getting your 10 best guys at the moment on the field together. If you cross train them early, they have the ability to move over when you need it.

Let's say you have a starting five that are all A quality players, but your backups.... not so much. Let's say you have two backups that are B quality, two that are C, and one that is D. Are you gonna replace the A starter with the D backup just because he's the backup for that particular guy? No, your gonna put your best mix out there provided they know what the hell they are doing. The only way to do that is to cross train them now.

But I stated in my latest post that this ok, it happens alot. But it doesn't happen severely. For instance Center to tackle mid season. Or right side tackle to left side guard mid season, then the right side guard starts at right side tackle. We have done that. I have seen a ton of right side guard slides to right side tackle and the backup plays guard. Why? As you state there is a premium for tackle play and subbing the guard is easier for most teams. This is the single most common cross train in football. The next most common is if your LT goes down, the RT if good enough goes to LT and the backup plays RT. That happens alot too....but again its because of the premium on blind side protection.

But when have you seen a backup center go to starting tackle as the cross train???? almost never. A C goes to G....or vice versa. The cross train is fine, I am with you I get it...but its typically done one position away and on the same side of the line. We do it 2 positions away and flip sides constantly

This is my point...that it is so drastic

As vamos says...could the system lend its hand to do this and be ok??? Maybe....I don't know. I never played in this system, but I am just offering my viewpoint on one thing that I think could contribute to our OL play. Its just an opinion.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
13,672
But when have you seen a backup center go to starting tackle as the cross train???? almost never.
On the surface, I'd agree with you. But a few key points to consider:

1) Freddie hasn't played center, at least not in a real game. He redshirted as a true frosh and he was out recovering from injury all last season. I'd hardly call that an experienced, fully trained center.

2) He didn't play center in high school. In fact, he played TE, which as pointed out by another poster, is a glorified tackle in his high school's offense. According to his h.s. experience tackle makes more sense than center, anyway.

3) This is just one example of such a "drastic" change. I'm not so sure drastic is the right word. The kid moving from wr to de is much more drastic than this, but I don't see a full thread on it or it being used an indictment of the DL.

4) It's spring. If this happened in season, I'd be more inclined to be alarmed by it.

5) He'll probably move back to center anyway as soon as certain guys are cleared and all this will be forgotten.
 

AE 87

Helluva Engineer
Messages
12,967
offensive ranking is no measure for OL execution. My measure of this is looking at how they executed. Missed assignments, execution, penalties. And the primary evaluation of this is against your best competition. I mean by your criteria then, the WR in 11-13 must be better than the WR from 5-06. Or the RB the same evaluation. Total offensive production never is the representation for a position evaluation.

the fact is the OL did not perform well. When you have 3 seniors and a 3 year player in Mason (4 major players) the execution we saw, the missed blocks, the blown pass coverages etc are what I evaluate. Penalties. etc.

For instance performance of the OL vs VT was horrid. Performance vs BYU was not good. Performance vs Clemson was awful. Go watch the firs half vs clemson and tell me the OL was doing its job?

My validation? Paul even said last years OL performance was not good, and we "fixed things internally" and it can't/won't happen again. He said that as recent as a month ago.

So all the evidence is there. We are not performing well on the OL.

Thanks. I had interpreted your reference to troubles incorrectly as referring to the offense as a whole, i.e. OL problems causing O troubles. Sorry for the confusion.
 

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,126
@33jacket often says that he wishes the coaches took more chances in recruiting more OL and DL numbers. I agree with that. And, it looks like it's been showing itself this year and throughout CPJ's tenure. It seems to me we're always scrambling on the OL with lots of injuries and being especially thin in the spring. That's to be expected some because you've lost the senior class and don't have the freshman class in yet, so you expect numbers to be low. But, it seems we've been lower on OL than other positions the last few years. It seems like WR has also been low the last 2 seasons.

Of course, if you can't get quality guys to come, then it is what it is, and I'd rather get other guys who can contribute than just bring in big guys who we know there isn't much chance of them being a real contributor.

But, I would be totally in 33jacket's philosophy all else being equal. Always seems to me we've got an abundance of AB's and not enough OL. Very glad we brought in 5 guys in the last class.
 
Top