Jump to content

My OL opinion


NorthGATiger

Recommended Posts

The problem with the OL is boxed in with the problems with this offense.  Our OL is light by todays standards.  Gus wants them that way because he wants them agile.  There lies the problem.  If you are going to run plays inside the tackles over and over and over again then you are asking your OL to do something that they physically can't do.

If Gus or Auburn fans think we should just be able to line up and move a Tulane off of the ball then we are lacking the correct tools and it is not going to happen.  This is why we have had to resort to using the Wildcat to get a 1st down or Touchdown in any type of short yardage situation.  These guys might pull and seal the edge for you but they are not going to blow you off the ball.  Gus has asked them for two straight weeks to blow teams off the ball by running between the tackles.  That is not what these guys are built for.  

Fans, including myself, want an OL that can line up and blow inferior teams off of the ball and assert themselves and take over a game.  This will not happen under Gus with the type of player he is looking for.  When we play Texas A&M and the smoke and mirrors starts with this offense then you will see what many think is a much improved OL.  They will be improved because of the plays that Gus is calling.  We still will have trouble with short yardage situations just like always but we will be asking the OL to quickly get to the next level and seal the edges and they will look better.

Bottom line is our 299-305 pound OL is not going to move anyone off the ball in order to look like the dominating veteran OL we all want to see and that we have been told we have all offseason.  They won't shine until the smoke and mirrors start in two weeks and even then they will struggle mightily on short yardage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

And if we can start freezing the DE with Nix keeping it more often, we'll look even better. I think Kim has improved but it's not enough. We need more physicality out of this group and I don't think there is much more they can give.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, aubaseball said:

Just my opinion, but it’s play calling more so than size.   If you line up and run the same thing over and over and over and over, anyone can stop it.  

Here is an example so that it is easier to see just how small we are

AU
307
309
300
325
300

Average: 308.2

UGA
320
336
330
341
325

Average: 330.4

Most on here would agree that a team like GA Tech under Paul Johnson had a super small OL that was used for agility and not moving the man in front of him.  Below is what they had last year.

GA tech 2018
276
280
287
288
285

Average: 283.2

As you can clearly see we average 25# more on what is an extremely light line used for agility, cut blocking, and misdirection at GA Tech.
We average 25# less than what is a dominating OL that will not only move people but can also surprise you with their athletic ability at UGA.
To me we are stuck in the middle and don't seem to know what we want.  Our current OL will never be able to do what UGA's OL can do and it is unfair to put them in a position asking them to.  The problem is all too often due to playcalling we are asking them to be UGA's line.  In reality we are just a beefed up GA Tech OL.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Same with RB. Gus has recruited guys that play well in space. But go look at our splits, we’re bunched together. Spread out! If all you recruit is faat RBs that fine. But use them the way theyre intended to be used. 

For us to be successful on offense we HAVE to throw the ball to run the ball. We’ve got to hit crosses, outs, and some quick passes. Force the D into a zone coverage- that gives the RBs more space and our WRs more room to run AND make blocks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, NorthGATiger said:

The problem with the OL is boxed in with the problems with this offense.  Our OL is light by todays standards.  Gus wants them that way because he wants them agile.  There lies the problem.  If you are going to run plays inside the tackles over and over and over again then you are asking your OL to do something that they physically can't do.

If Gus or Auburn fans think we should just be able to line up and move a Tulane off of the ball then we are lacking the correct tools and it is not going to happen.  This is why we have had to resort to using the Wildcat to get a 1st down or Touchdown in any type of short yardage situation.  These guys might pull and seal the edge for you but they are not going to blow you off the ball.  Gus has asked them for two straight weeks to blow teams off the ball by running between the tackles.  That is not what these guys are built for.  

Fans, including myself, want an OL that can line up and blow inferior teams off of the ball and assert themselves and take over a game.  This will not happen under Gus with the type of player he is looking for.  When we play Texas A&M and the smoke and mirrors starts with this offense then you will see what many think is a much improved OL.  They will be improved because of the plays that Gus is calling.  We still will have trouble with short yardage situations just like always but we will be asking the OL to quickly get to the next level and seal the edges and they will look better.

Bottom line is our 299-305 pound OL is not going to move anyone off the ball in order to look like the dominating veteran OL we all want to see and that we have been told we have all offseason.  They won't shine until the smoke and mirrors start in two weeks and even then they will struggle mightily on short yardage.

Yup. We also ran off the right side of the line multiple times. And I don’t think it is as much about going vanilla as some think as it is evaluating what we can do without much dressing or “eye candy”. 

To your point a good amount of Malzahns run plays involve pulling linemen. Most of the time it’s pulling guards for wildcat and buck sweep, but even saw us pulling RT Driscoll on some interior run plays. Maybe we see more trap and sweep plays to get some movement working in our advantage. Couple that with using RPO and Option based reads to eliminate unblocked defenders, it could drastically improve run game performance. We shall see. I’m with you though, waiting for after the A&M to call one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BigWhiskey91 said:

Yup. We also ran off the right side of the line multiple times. And I don’t think it is as much about going vanilla as some think as it is evaluating what we can do without much dressing or “eye candy”. 

To your point a good amount of Malzahns run plays involve pulling linemen. Most of the time it’s pulling guards for wildcat and buck sweep, but even saw us pulling RT Driscoll on some interior run plays. Maybe we see more trap and sweep plays to get some movement working in our advantage. Couple that with using RPO and Option based reads to eliminate unblocked defenders, it could drastically improve run game performance. We shall see. I’m with you though, waiting for after the A&M to call one way or the other.

Yes. To be clear, I am not happy with what we have seen and what we have asked the OL to do.  I just think when we get back to trying to use misdirection, smoke and mirrors, and trickeration then we will see what APPEARS like an improved OL.  The OL won't necessarily improve and become a mighty force like it will appear to some but it will be physically capable of doing what Gus is asking them to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NorthGATiger said:

Yes. To be clear, I am not happy with what we have seen and what we have asked the OL to do.  I just think when we get back to trying to use misdirection, smoke and mirrors, and trickeration then we will see what APPEARS like an improved OL.  The OL won't necessarily improve and become a mighty force like it will appear to some but it will be physically capable of doing what Gus is asking them to do.

You make some good points, where I disagree with you is if our running game works because the play calling takes advantage of what these players are capable of doing and if we can bring a Gatewood in for the times we need that 1 yard gain I would be happy with it. My problem is more with play calling. I think you are correct a slightly over 300 pound O-Linemen is not going to move a guy like Johnson from Tulane who was the definition of immovable object. 

All good coaches try to run plays that takes advantage of their teams strength's and other teams weaknesses. Ideally a D gets pressure without Blitzing but if you watch the games that Auburn has played in most cases the pressure they are getting on Nix is by blitzing.  When a team blitz's they leave an opening our problem is we don't run plays to take advantage of the opening.  We don't allow the QB to audible a quick slant when we see the LB will be blitzing.

So far Gus has not called a good game this year. He has called a few good plays but he has not consistently forced the D's hand. He has not let QB keep the ball when the D sells out to stop hand off to RB he has not used TE or quick slants when other team Blitz's. Sometimes a team hides the blitz and we can't audible I understand that but this year there were multiple times D gave a way the blitz and we did nothing to take advantage of it..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NorthGATiger said:

Yes. To be clear, I am not happy with what we have seen and what we have asked the OL to do.  I just think when we get back to trying to use misdirection, smoke and mirrors, and trickeration then we will see what APPEARS like an improved OL.  The OL won't necessarily improve and become a mighty force like it will appear to some but it will be physically capable of doing what Gus is asking them to do.

So what you're really saying is that we haven't been running our true offense...just a vanilla version of an offense.  So, if in your words, we start with all the misdirection, trickeration, etc., and we're successful, then its not because the O-line is better?  If I'm reading your comments right, based on the first two games, we've been asking the offense, and especially the O-line, to do something that it is not designed to do (blow people off the ball).  How do you grade them based on that?  Seem to be comparing apples to oranges.  My guess, and you mentioned this too, we'll know more after the aTm game, but my guess also is if we're successful its because the O-line IS doing what it is designed to do.  I'm in wait and see mode here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AuburnNTexas said:

You make some good points, where I disagree with you is if our running game works because the play calling takes advantage of what these players are capable of doing and if we can bring a Gatewood in for the times we need that 1 yard gain I would be happy with it. My problem is more with play calling. I think you are correct a slightly over 300 pound O-Linemen is not going to move a guy like Johnson from Tulane who was the definition of immovable object. 

All good coaches try to run plays that takes advantage of their teams strength's and other teams weaknesses. Ideally a D gets pressure without Blitzing but if you watch the games that Auburn has played in most cases the pressure they are getting on Nix is by blitzing.  When a team blitz's they leave an opening our problem is we don't run plays to take advantage of the opening.  We don't allow the QB to audible a quick slant when we see the LB will be blitzing.

So far Gus has not called a good game this year. He has called a few good plays but he has not consistently forced the D's hand. He has not let QB keep the ball when the D sells out to stop hand off to RB he has not used TE or quick slants when other team Blitz's. Sometimes a team hides the blitz and we can't audible I understand that but this year there were multiple times D gave a way the blitz and we did nothing to take advantage of it..

 

If we have 3rd or 4th and short and Number 1 is not in the game, somebody needs to be fired...just sayin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Warbird82 said:

If we have 3rd or 4th and short and Number 1 is not in the game, somebody needs to be fired...just sayin.

and there in lies another problem that i have not seen brought up yet and that is, our plays are so personnel driven as to be a huge heads up to the defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, fasttimes said:

and there in lies another problem that i have not seen brought up yet and that is, our plays are so personnel driven as to be a huge heads up to the defense.

Maybe so, but in 2010 when we had 3rd or 4th and short, they opposition also knew who was going to get the ball and still couldn't stop it.  Same with No. 1 this year IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Warbird82 said:

Maybe so, but in 2010 when we had 3rd or 4th and short, they opposition also knew who was going to get the ball and still couldn't stop it.  Same with No. 1 this year IMO.

true, but that was 

1) tubberville's senior oline class

2) a once in a life time freak of an athlete at qb.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, fasttimes said:

true, but that was 

1) tubberville's senior oline class

2) a once in a life time freak of an athlete at qb.

Hear, hear. The difference between Ryan Pugh and Kaleb Kim might be even more significant than the difference between Cam and Joey. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AuburnNTexas said:

You make some good points, where I disagree with you is if our running game works because the play calling takes advantage of what these players are capable of doing and if we can bring a Gatewood in for the times we need that 1 yard gain I would be happy with it. My problem is more with play calling. I think you are correct a slightly over 300 pound O-Linemen is not going to move a guy like Johnson from Tulane who was the definition of immovable object. 

All good coaches try to run plays that takes advantage of their teams strength's and other teams weaknesses. Ideally a D gets pressure without Blitzing but if you watch the games that Auburn has played in most cases the pressure they are getting on Nix is by blitzing.  When a team blitz's they leave an opening our problem is we don't run plays to take advantage of the opening.  We don't allow the QB to audible a quick slant when we see the LB will be blitzing.

So far Gus has not called a good game this year. He has called a few good plays but he has not consistently forced the D's hand. He has not let QB keep the ball when the D sells out to stop hand off to RB he has not used TE or quick slants when other team Blitz's. Sometimes a team hides the blitz and we can't audible I understand that but this year there were multiple times D gave a way the blitz and we did nothing to take advantage of it..

 

I don't think we are in disagreement on anything.  I am not taking up for the OL.  I am just stating why I think they are struggling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Warbird82 said:

So what you're really saying is that we haven't been running our true offense...just a vanilla version of an offense.  So, if in your words, we start with all the misdirection, trickeration, etc., and we're successful, then its not because the O-line is better?  If I'm reading your comments right, based on the first two games, we've been asking the offense, and especially the O-line, to do something that it is not designed to do (blow people off the ball).  How do you grade them based on that?  Seem to be comparing apples to oranges.  My guess, and you mentioned this too, we'll know more after the aTm game, but my guess also is if we're successful its because the O-line IS doing what it is designed to do.  I'm in wait and see mode here...

Yes.  I think we have guys who are barely serviceable to dominate the line of scrimmage.  They need the misdirection of the play calls to be successful and we have not seen any of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are on to something. I thought Gus called a better game overall against Oregon than he did against Tulane. I am hoping, and Key word being "Hoping", that he wanted to go fairly vanilla knowing that were the superior team talent and depth wise just to get a good handle on what we can be asked of this line outside of what they are built for. I think we will see another similar type game this week. I also think he still ironing out the other details in these OOC games like what personnel package gives us the most flexibility. Again, just the hopes and dreams of one man. My biggest issue is letting our QB be our QB and audible and read the Defense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tigerpro2a said:

I think you are on to something. I thought Gus called a better game overall against Oregon than he did against Tulane. I am hoping, and Key word being "Hoping", that he wanted to go fairly vanilla knowing that were the superior team talent and depth wise just to get a good handle on what we can be asked of this line outside of what they are built for. I think we will see another similar type game this week. I also think he still ironing out the other details in these OOC games like what personnel package gives us the most flexibility. Again, just the hopes and dreams of one man. My biggest issue is letting our QB be our QB and audible and read the Defense. 

if ^^^^^this turned out to be true, i would expect us to win 10 plus games.

but i have heard this same song every year since chizik really. its basically "we are playing bad on purpose" explanation. i saw a team that could not run the ball on tulane. i do not think that was by design.

i HOPE you are right and i am wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, fasttimes said:

if ^^^^^this turned out to be true, i would expect us to win 10 plus games.

but i have heard this same song every year since chizik really. its basically "we are playing bad on purpose" explanation. i saw a team that could not run the ball on tulane. i do not think that was by design.

i HOPE you are right and i am wrong.

You are preaching to the choir....I am just trying to be optimistic until I can't anymore. It did seem very vanilla against Tulane, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just doesn’t make sense to not run the best possible offense for a freshman qb to build confidence off of going forward.  I understand the optimism and hope.  You put your QB in the best possible position to be successful period.   I also don’t believe the vanilla to surprise later on theory.  For almost a decade we have consistently not known our offensive identity to start the season because of failure in the off season by offensive coaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NorthGATiger said:

Yes.  I think we have guys who are barely serviceable to dominate the line of scrimmage.  They need the misdirection of the play calls to be successful and we have not seen any of that.

Agreed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, McLoofus said:

Hear, hear. The difference between Ryan Pugh and Kaleb Kim might be even more significant than the difference between Cam and Joey. 

But we're not having any holding calls on the left tackle...so its a wash.  😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...