Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=steveo395;322013]Sacks Allowed: [URL="http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-PASSING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=11&_1:col_1=11&_1:col_2=11"]NFL.com - NFL Stats[/URL]

Rushing: [URL="http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-RUSHING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=7"]NFL.com - NFL Stats[/URL]

[URL="http://www.nfl.com/stats/2006/regular"]NFL.com - NFL Stats[/URL][/quote]
well, i feel dumb now :(.


Ok I said the only way I would consider putting NO top 10 is if they were top 5 in Sacks allowed. They ranked 4th. hmm

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=GTripp0012;321998]I don't think though that the O Line is in any way reliant on the quarterback or receivers to do its job. I don't think we can blame the QBing for the line underachieving. That's just order of football operations.

Is it them underachieving their talent, or is it just a misevalutation of their talent?[/quote]

I completely disagree. If you have a player like Patrick Ramsey holding on to the ball for at leat a full second too long as his weakness then the line will be at a massive disadvantage. If the QB has a noodle arm like Danny Weurfel or can only go deep if he is allowed the time to step into his throw like Brunell then the line is not going to perform at it's best. In the NFL if the Quarterback doesn't put pressure on the defense then the line can't possible function properly. Unless the line is ridiculously dominant and we don't have that kind of line. If Campbell becomes a top ten QB which I think he will then IMO this line will look very very good or great even. That's what they are right now. Very good, but certainly not great.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

speaking of stats though, this stat page is cool [url=http://www.footballoutsiders.com/premium/beta/]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2007[/url]

I have a question though. Someone posted a book up last year that was about statistics in football. I think the book cost $50 but i can't find it on this site or anywhere else. While searching I came to find a book and the link i provided above but i don't think it is the book i am looking for. Does anyone know off the top of their heads what book i might have been thinking about

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=BigSKINBauer;322012]Its hard for me to say an o-line isn't good by saying its offense isn't good. I could say an offense that is good has a good o-line though. However, i don't think N.O has a top 5 o-line like its top 3 offense. I can't even say they are top ten.

When judging a line I look at
- Yards/ attempt (how good it is at opening holes)
- Sacks allowed (protection)
- Yards/ game (consistancy over a game)
- Big yardage running plays (Ability to block upfield)


Now many, actually all, of these numbers are dependent on the other parts of the offense. Yards/ attempt- RB, Sacks allowed- QB mobility and awareness, Y/G- RB consistancy and RB depth, BIg Yardage plays- RB ability to allude defenders.

N.O is a good example to look at. Nearly 400/game... amazing.

O-line- yards/ attempt -3.7 very low, 19 TDs rushing- pretty good, Very few 20+ yard runs- 6, 110 ypg rushing- average. NOw I can't say that this is a top 10 O-line. The onlly thing that will make me even consider that is if they are top 5 in sacks allowed. I don't know the number so... Matty?


moreso, i think a lot of how good an o-line is can only be seen on tape. The time in the pocket given to a QB would be a great stat. Average time until a defender gets behind the o-line or the pocket breaks down. That would be the stat of stats. That is why baseball can be fun, stats on everything... THat is the only reason baseball can be fun. :D[/quote]

I think those are very good, but obvious ways to measure an offensive lines productivity. But let me throw this out there; What was our third down conversion ratio when we ran the ball? I think that's also a good way to quantify the effectiveness of an offensive line. Can you pound the ball when they know you're going to run it?

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=wilsowilso;322018]I completely disagree. If you have a player like Patrick Ramsey holding on to the ball for at leat a full second too long as his weakness then the line will be at a massive disadvantage.[/quote]

I agree. The ability of a QB to make decisions and get rid of the ball quickly can make a OL look much better than they really are. And on the other hand like you said, if a guy like Ramsey is back there holding the ball all day long, even the best offensive line will break down eventually.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=12thMan;322027]I think those are very good, but obvious ways to measure an offensive lines productivity. But let me throw this out there; What was our third down conversion ratio when we ran the ball? I think that's also a good way to quantify the effectiveness of an offensive line. Can you pound the ball when they know you're going to run it?[/quote] yeah, that is true. The first thing i looked at when i went to that stat page was 3rd and short and it ranked the skins 30th overall. That was the 2006 version of the book so 2005-2006 season. I guess a few stats on that will be provided when the next version comes out next month

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=BigSKINBauer;322032]yeah, that is true. The first thing i looked at when i went to that stat page was 3rd and short and it ranked the skins 30th overall. That was the 2006 version of the book so 2005-2006 season. I guess a few stats on that will be provided when the next version comes out next month[/quote]

Okay, then that says something to me. It's not everything, but to be ranked 30th out of 32 teams doesn't display dominance.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=12thMan;322043]Okay, then that says something to me. It's not everything, but to be ranked 30th out of 32 teams doesn't display dominance.[/quote]
That could also be a reflection of play calling.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=firstdown;322044]That could also be a reflection of play calling.[/quote]


I absolutely think it could be a result of the play calling. We did see evidence of that last year. Still to to be ranked 30 out of 32 isn't good.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

On 3rd and short you also have to consider who's running the ball. Sometimes a back has to make something out of nothing. Neither Portis or Betts have been overly impressive in those situations.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

Rate every offensive line from 1-32? I would just go to NFL.com pull up the team rushing stats sacks allowed and passing yards and just do the math.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[QUOTE=Sammy Baugh Fan;321960]We have the #1 Offensive Line this year.

Why?
Cus I'm a homer with blind faith and support for my team regurdless of facts or stats. lol Hail Skins!!!!!!!!

~chants "We're #1, we're #1!"

lol
peace[/QUOTE]



Couldn't have put it any better!!!

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[QUOTE=skinsWill;321963]Well Deff. Top 5 i would prob. say #3 I Think only Seattle and Indy [B]MAY[/B] have better lines. We finished #4 in rushing and i think #5 in sacks allowed. San Deigo and Denver are up there too.[/QUOTE]

I agree here...but I'd say 4 overall...I think we are going to come out of the gates with a 10 or so OL, then by the end of the season we will have the #1 unit after Wade gels with the team, so we will likely end 4th or so.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

Without doing statistical research, I'm lazy, I can say that we're a top 7 OL. If you break down position we stack up pretty well with almost any line. Add in some solid chemistry and you can bump up a raw talent score a bit. The question is LG. I am not sure I like what I am hearing out of the Park. It sounds like Wade was struggling a little bit and even though it is early I would arther have heard he was looking like the second coming of Steinbach. On the other hand our depth sounds like it is as strong as it has been in years which is a welcome relief.

Samuels is a top 5 tackle. Some will argue this but they are the ones who don't remember what an average LT looks like. He may not be Walter Jones in his prime but he is right behind the small group of totally dominate LTs.

Wade-who knows. He clearly had skills to be a beyond serviceable tackle which would seem to lend him to being an above average tackle but that remains to be seen. Whitacker as his backup makes me feel a lot better about this spot. One of these guys has to be decent.

Rabach-probably on average, maybe a little above. But what does it really matter. He doesn't commit a lot of penalties and seems to be doing just fine directing the line. He is not by any stretch a weak link.

Thomas- I think he is one of the most underrated guards in the league. Our line falls apart when he is out. He is good, very good.

Jansen-Used to be a top 7 tackle and has probably slipped a bit. A top 10 type guy now skills wise but his leadership is a plus.

Put them together and add the carryover chemistry and they have two top tier guys, one pretty good guy, one ok guy and one who knows guy. Not sure how that adds up but I dont see it being worse than last year.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

Talent wise I would say 4th - 7th .On performance , maybe top ten . Hard to gage the line , new offence , change at QB , and injuries to Thomas and Jansen . If we can move the ball and score TD's this year at NYG and at Dallass , maybe top 5 or better. We have to score TDs in NY and Dallass this year !!!!

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG;322070]Without doing statistical research, I'm lazy, I can say that we're a top 7 OL. If you break down position we stack up pretty well with almost any line. Add in some solid chemistry and you can bump up a raw talent score a bit. The question is LG. I am not sure I like what I am hearing out of the Park. It sounds like Wade was struggling a little bit and even though it is early I would arther have heard he was looking like the second coming of Steinbach. On the other hand our depth sounds like it is as strong as it has been in years which is a welcome relief.

Samuels is a top 5 tackle. Some will argue this but they are the ones who don't remember what an average LT looks like. He may not be Walter Jones in his prime but he is right behind the small group of totally dominate LTs.

Wade-who knows. He clearly had skills to be a beyond serviceable tackle which would seem to lend him to being an above average tackle but that remains to be seen. Whitacker as his backup makes me feel a lot better about this spot. One of these guys has to be decent.

Rabach-probably on average, maybe a little above. But what does it really matter. He doesn't commit a lot of penalties and seems to be doing just fine directing the line. He is not by any stretch a weak link.

Thomas- I think he is one of the most underrated guards in the league. Our line falls apart when he is out. He is good, very good.

Jansen-Used to be a top 7 tackle and has probably slipped a bit. A top 10 type guy now skills wise but his leadership is a plus.

Put them together and add the carryover chemistry and they have two top tier guys, one pretty good guy, one ok guy and one who knows guy. Not sure how that adds up but I dont see it being worse than last year.[/QUOTE]

I agree...also I feel we have THE best OL coach in the league. Long live Bugel.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=BigSKINBauer;322024]speaking of stats though, this stat page is cool [URL="http://www.footballoutsiders.com/premium/beta/"]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2007[/URL]

I have a question though. Someone posted a book up last year that was about statistics in football. I think the book cost $50 but i can't find it on this site or anywhere else. While searching I came to find a book and the link i provided above but i don't think it is the book i am looking for. Does anyone know off the top of their heads what book i might have been thinking about[/quote]Pro Football Prospectus?

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=wilsowilso;322018]I completely disagree. If you have a player like Patrick Ramsey holding on to the ball for at leat a full second too long as his weakness then the line will be at a massive disadvantage. If the QB has a noodle arm like Danny Weurfel or can only go deep if he is allowed the time to step into his throw like Brunell then the line is not going to perform at it's best. In the NFL if the Quarterback doesn't put pressure on the defense then the line can't possible function properly. Unless the line is ridiculously dominant and we don't have that kind of line. If Campbell becomes a top ten QB which I think he will then IMO this line will look very very good or great even. That's what they are right now. Very good, but certainly not great.[/quote]But Patrick Ramsey holding on to the ball too long is NOT the fault of the line. A good line evaluation system would not penalize a line for Ramsey holding the ball too long.

But still, the line is no better or worse with Ramsey back there. If we are penalizing line play for Ramsey's mistakes, its time to find a new system of evaluation.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=BigSKINBauer;322032]yeah, that is true. The first thing i looked at when i went to that stat page was 3rd and short and it ranked the skins 30th overall. That was the 2006 version of the book so 2005-2006 season. I guess a few stats on that will be provided when the next version comes out next month[/quote]I think I've been saying that we have no power running game now for about 5 months...and yes that page is where I found evidence for my claim. Good work BSB.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=Mattyk72;322053]On 3rd and short you also have to consider who's running the ball. Sometimes a back has to make something out of nothing. Neither Portis or Betts have been overly impressive in those situations.[/quote]Very good point, although a 30th out of 32 ranking suggests a consistent and decisive inability to run in short yardage situations, as to mean someone needs to be replaced. Do you suggest replacing Portis in short yardage situations?

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=GTripp0012;322112]Very good point, although a 30th out of 32 ranking suggests a consistent and decisive inability to run in short yardage situations, as to mean someone needs to be replaced. Do you suggest replacing Portis in short yardage situations?[/quote]


Ok this is how I do it. In run blocking I would put us at number 3 behind the Chiefs and Chargers. (Since will shields retired from the chiefs we could bump to number 2.)

In pass blocking I put us at 4. So in total I put us at the number 3 offensive line in the league. Behind Indy and Kansas City.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=BigSKINBauer;321975]Atlanta, Jax, San Fran, and San Diego above us. I'll put KC and Pitt above us for the fact that they have been good for a relatively long time. So... 123456 [B]7[/B][/quote]
There is no way I would rank San Francisco's O-line ahead of ours.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=GTripp0012;322112]Very good point, although a 30th out of 32 ranking suggests a consistent and decisive inability to run in short yardage situations, as to mean someone needs to be replaced. Do you suggest replacing Portis in short yardage situations?[/quote]

Maybe, we saw Sellers get a few short yardage carries last year, perhaps we'll see more of that this year.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=Mattyk72;322159]Maybe, we saw Sellers get a few short yardage carries last year, perhaps we'll see more of that this year.[/quote]


If not Portis Betts or Sellers for short yardage situations.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;322159]Maybe, we saw Sellers get a few short yardage carries last year, perhaps we'll see more of that this year.[/QUOTE]

I agree, Sellers is a total [B][SIZE="2"]MONSTER[/SIZE][/B] every time he touches the ball, I would love to see him used for short yardage situations. Portis and Betts are great between the 20's or even the 10's but lets see what Sellers can do on the goal line... And I am not talking about those roll out passes either, I want to see him up the gut and take out LB on his way to the endzone from like the 3 yard line....

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=Redskins8588;322169]I agree, Sellers is a total [B][SIZE=2]MONSTER[/SIZE][/B] every time he touches the ball, I would love to see him used for short yardage situations. Portis and Betts are great between the 20's or even the 10's but lets see what Sellers can do on the goal line... And I am not talking about those roll out passes either, I want to see him up the gut and take out LB on his way to the endzone from like the 3 yard line....[/quote]


and then he can slober all over them and spike the ball in their face. The guy is 260-275 pounds. I love how he ran over Brian Dawkins in 2005. I want to see more of that.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

1. SD
2. Vikings
3. Patriots
4. SKins

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=skins009;322193]1. SD
2. Vikings
3. Patriots
4. SKins[/quote]



500 for you. You must be happy

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

This is as good a way of ranking OLs as I've seen...

[url=http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=1024&Category=2]Cold, Hard Football Facts.com: Quality Stats: 2006 Offensive Hog Index[/url]

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

Why are you guys putting the Chiefs up there? As of now they're panicking in Kansas City about how old their line is. To make matters worse both [B]Willie Roaf and Will Shields [/B]are now retired. They also released Kyle Turley this past week, who started a handful of games for them at tackle. Put it this way, if this was the WarPath Chiefs forum we would be starting threads about why haven't the Chiefs addressed their O-Line this past offseason. In conclusion their O-Line is good not great.

Chiefs Depth Chart

LT - D. McIntosh
LG - B. Waters
C- C. Wiegmann
RG - J. Welbourn
RT - C. Terry

Oh yeah, another thing. How the hell is Atlanta getting in peoples top 5. Sure they're great at run blocking I will give you that, but they can't even protect the most mobile QB in the game. Then again maybe hes busy thinking about his next dog fight while flipping off some kid in section 132 while carrying a water bottle full of 'jewelry.'

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

You think they can't protect him or he just sucks at passing?

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

San Diego and Indy are better hands down. I would also say there are a handful of teams in the same category: ATL, NO, SF, BAL, PIT...just to name a few. However, I think they're a top 10 offensive line and certainly cannot be #32, I'm pretty sure that's been a staple of the Houston Texans franchise since their inception.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

A mobile QB can be hard to protect since you don't know where he's going to be all the time. It's hard to maintain a pocket when the QB doesn't want to stay in it.

I'd guess that Vick brings a lot of sacks on himself by scrambling around and not getting rid of the ball quickly enough.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[quote=davy;322272]This is as good a way of ranking OLs as I've seen...

[URL="http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=1024&Category=2"]Cold, Hard Football Facts.com: Quality Stats: 2006 Offensive Hog Index[/URL][/quote]

That is great stuff and very much in line with my previous post re: rankings. The only surprise to me was Indy being so low. They are ranked #1 in NPP% and they are far ahead of #2. Since they are a pass first team with the best QB in the league I have to believe they should be ranked higher by this measure.

Maybe you could adjust these rankings by weighting the run blocking ranking and the negative pass play ranking by the percentage of total yard gained by rushing or passing over the season. That way a primarily running team would get more credit for having a high yards/carry, and a primarily passing team would get more credit for being great pass blockers.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[QUOTE=jdlea;322410]San Diego and Indy are better hands down. I would also say there are a handful of teams in the same category: ATL, NO, SF, BAL, PIT...just to name a few. However, I think they're a top 10 offensive line and certainly cannot be #32, I'm pretty sure that's been a staple of the Houston Texans franchise since their inception.[/QUOTE]

Well structured offenses make a very good line look great. I think both SD and Indy are examples. The fact that each has an offense that simply clicks in the passing game really reduces the strain on the OL. They are both very good for sure. I am hopeful that our passing game can improve to the point that the mechanics and execution of our passing game make our line look even better.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG;322424]Well structured offenses make a very good line look great. I think both SD and Indy are examples. The fact that each has an offense that simply clicks in the passing game really reduces the strain on the OL. They are both very good for sure. I am hopeful that our passing game can improve to the point that the mechanics and execution of our passing game make our line look even better.[/QUOTE]

I don't disagree. However, those two teams had both a great running and passing attack. Therefore, I have to come to the conclusion that they have 2 of the best lines in all of football. It all starts up front.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[QUOTE=Mc2guy;322418]That is great stuff and very much in line with my previous post re: rankings. The only surprise to me was Indy being so low. They are ranked #1 in NPP% and they are far ahead of #2. Since they are a pass first team with the best QB in the league I have to believe they should be ranked higher by this measure.

Maybe you could adjust these rankings by weighting the run blocking ranking and the negative pass play ranking by the percentage of total yard gained by rushing or passing over the season. That way a primarily running team would get more credit for having a high yards/carry, and a primarily passing team would get more credit for being great pass blockers.[/QUOTE]

Good points, you could also argue that their lowly rank in TOP has more to do with there quick-score ability and the defense being unable to stop the run for most of the season rather than any deficit in the OL.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

I was ranking our O-line based before the chiefs guys retired.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2920248]ESPN - Maryland's Gaither applies for supplemental draft - NFL[/url]

Dumbass couldn't keep his grades up and now is going to the supplimental draft. Good player maybe some backup on the o-line?

They say he might go in the mid rounds maybe as early as the third. He is viewed as the best player in the supplemental draft. Vikings are also showing heavy interest.

Re: Rank our OLine among the 32 teams
 

[url=http://mvn.com/nfl-redskins/2007/06/29/are-bugels-boys-overrated/]Hog Heaven | MVN - Most Valuable Network » Blog Archive » Are Bugel’s Boys Overrated?[/url]

Thanks to all who helped.