Backup center discussion

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

One problem that Campbell had last year was that he was having to almost squat on the ground when he was under center and I know that was something the coaching staff wanted to address for next season. Could be the reason why they were trying Jansen out there. And, maybe it looks like the road for JJ is coming to an end, especially with his rash of injuries the past few seasons.

I remember Zorn saying at some point he wanted to work with Rabach on staying higher in his stance to help out JC in that regard.

[Schneed10]

Sounds like a whole lot of hope and not a lot of substance from the "we'll be fine" camp.

First, you don't do a whole lot of "blowing people off the ball" in OTAs. They're non-contact and no pads.

As Matty mentioned, Jansen is tall and will be easy for DTs to get under should he be forced into center duty. Also, with longer legs, the higher the chance is he'll step back on JC's feet.

The real problem with this situation is that if one guy gets hurt (Rabach), we essentially have two backups coming onto the field. Jansen moves to C, which makes me nervous as it is for reasons already mentioned, and on top of that Heyer comes in to play RT. Two backups at once, with Randy Thomas (the RG) in the middle of all that shifting, will all of a sudden have to get used to two changes on that side of the line. That sounds like a disaster from an assignment standpoint.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Sounds like a whole lot of hope and not a lot of substance from the "we'll be fine" camp.

First, you don't do a whole lot of "blowing people off the ball" in OTAs. They're non-contact and no pads.

As Matty mentioned, Jansen is tall and will be easy for DTs to get under should he be forced into center duty. Also, with longer legs, the higher the chance is he'll step back on JC's feet.

The real problem with this situation is that if one guy gets hurt (Rabach), we essentially have two backups coming onto the field. Jansen moves to C, which makes me nervous as it is for reasons already mentioned, and on top of that Heyer comes in to play RT. Two backups at once, with Randy Thomas (the RG) in the middle of all that shifting, will all of a sudden have to get used to two changes on that side of the line. That sounds like a disaster from an assignment standpoint.

True but from Bugel's standpoint the 5 best healthy players will be on the field in that situation. I understand our concern, but I feel he is more qualified to decide what is best for the team, at least until the Oline situation stinks and does not work; then we can lynch him (Bugel).

[GMScud]

Fortunately Rabach has been very durable. He's been a full time starter at C since the beginning of the '04 season, and has only missed one game in that 4 season span.

Based simply on the law of averages, our offensive line has gotta have a healthy season. No way we can be that ravaged again. Law of averages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Angry

True but from Bugel's standpoint the 5 best healthy players will be on the field in that situation. I understand our concern, but I feel he is more qualified to decide what is best for the team, at least until the Oline situation stinks and does not work; then we can lynch him (Bugel).

So long as it's recognized that this opinion basically says "I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach." then I've got no beef.

I can't fault you for thinking Bugel is a good coach and good evaluator of talent.

But you have to ask yourself, are we going with Jansen at backup center because Bugel thinks it will work, are are we doing it because the front office didn't get Bugel any better backup C options in FA or the draft?

Bugel believes in his guys, and he believes he can make the best out of any situation. The question isn't Joe Bugel. The question is the situation: was he given what he needs at backup C to succeed?

I say no. Hopefully Rabach stays healthy all 16 so we don't have to find out.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Fortunately Rabach has been very durable. He's been a full time starter at C since the beginning of the '04 season, and has only missed one game in that 4 season span.

Based simply on the law of averages, our offensive line has gotta have a healthy season. No way we can be that ravaged again. Law of averages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

LOL

I hope you were being purposefully sarcastic/ironic. Because this is what it says on Wiki:

As invoked in everyday life, the "law" usually reflects bad statistics or wishful thinking rather than any mathematical principle.

Interesting link though. It has a fascinating discussion on random events, such as flipping a coin... or other gambling phenomenon.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

So long as it's recognized that this opinion basically says "I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach." then I've got no beef.

I can't fault you for thinking Bugel is a good coach and good evaluator of talent.

But you have to ask yourself, are we going with Jansen at backup center because Bugel thinks it will work, are are we doing it because the front office didn't get Bugel any better backup C options in FA or the draft?

Bugel believes in his guys, and he believes he can make the best out of any situation. The question isn't Joe Bugel. The question is the situation: was he given what he needs at backup C to succeed?

I say no. Hopefully Rabach stays healthy all 16 so we don't have to find out.

I think given the circumstances, Bugel hopes it will work. By "circumstances" I mean the Skins not getting him a guard/center type player to fill that role. I highly doubt Buges told Vinny & Co to not bother addressing this need because we've got. Doesn't make much sense to have a starter at one vital position also be the #1 backup at another vital position.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GMScud

I think given the circumstances, Bugel hopes it will work. By "circumstances" I mean the Skins not getting him a guard/center type player to fill that role. I highly doubt Buges told Vinny & Co to not bother addressing this need because we've got. Doesn't make much sense to have a starter at one vital position also be the #1 backup at another vital position.

Exactly. I guess that's the whole point. The situation bites.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

LOL

I hope you were being purposefully sarcastic/ironic. Because this is what it says on Wiki:



Interesting link though. It has a fascinating discussion on random events, such as flipping a coin... or other gambling phenomenon.

Actually not really. While lots of variables factor into injuries- stretching, conditioning, smart play, etc- it's largely random and dumb luck. Not as much as so as flipping a coin, but close. Kinda like JC somehow not blowing out his knee in that preseason game because his foot didn't stick in the turf. Dumb luck. Given last year's miserable rash of injuries to a historically durable group of lineman, it would be pretty unprecedented if it repeated itself just one season later.

Sure there's no real science to it, but isn't wishful thinking what the offseason is all about?

[mooby]

I really don't think Jansen should be the backup center lol. I'd rather have someone we've never heard of taking the backup reps, we need Jansen at tackle and as someone mentioned earlier I think it would be like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

So long as it's recognized that this opinion basically says "I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach." then I've got no beef.

I can't fault you for thinking Bugel is a good coach and good evaluator of talent.

But you have to ask yourself, are we going with Jansen at backup center because Bugel thinks it will work, are are we doing it because the front office didn't get Bugel any better backup C options in FA or the draft?

Bugel believes in his guys, and he believes he can make the best out of any situation. The question isn't Joe Bugel. The question is the situation: was he given what he needs at backup C to succeed?

I say no. Hopefully Rabach stays healthy all 16 so we don't have to find out.

""I don't have any good reasons why this will work, but I'm putting my faith in a very qualified O Line coach.""

[BDBohnzie]

Originally Posted by Angry

I think that you guys are making a big deal out of nothing. How hard is it to slam the ball into your taint before you engage in a block?

Quotable...

It's still too early to worry about this. If we're into the 3rd Preseason game with no C backup that isn't named Jon Jansen, then you worry. But I have the impression that Buges is doing this because the Skins did not get him the depth he needs to go into Training Camp...

[Defensewins]

It is not an ideal situation if have to move your starter at RT to center if your center goes down. That displaces two starter, not just one. However given our quality depth at RT (Wade & Heyer) it probably makes sense. You can have Wade or Heyer start at RT with out much of a drop off in ability from Jansen. If Jansen is our second best center on the team than it is the right move. What good is putting in a 6' 3" center to replace Rabach if that 6' 3" replacement is going to give up sacks and cause the rest of the line play worse. The height thing is a non-factor.

[Kope65]

This might not be about Rabach at all. Mebbie Heyer has become the RT, and that is why JJ is now backing up at center.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Actually not really. While lots of variables factor into injuries- stretching, conditioning, smart play, etc- it's largely random and dumb luck. Not as much as so as flipping a coin, but close. Kinda like JC somehow not blowing out his knee in that preseason game because his foot didn't stick in the turf. Dumb luck. Given last year's miserable rash of injuries to a historically durable group of lineman, it would be pretty unprecedented if it repeated itself just one season later.

Sure there's no real science to it, but isn't wishful thinking what the offseason is all about?

OK. But using the Law of Averages to say we're due for an injury-free season is bad reasoning, just making sure that kind of reasoning isn't creeping in here.

The Law of Averages says we should have an "average" injury season. Last year's ravage is in the past, and has no bearing on this year. We're not due for an injury-free year any more than we're due to repeat the ravage.

You're right in saying it's dumb luck. But that's why they call it "dumb" luck. It can't even itself out.

What we're really saying here is that last year we had an abnormally high number of games missed along the line. Chances are we won't have to endure that again, as it was a pretty rare event to be that ravaged. But that doesn't mean we should be injury free. The law of averages states that we should have an "average" number of games missed along the line.