PDA

View Full Version : An Idea fixing the Oline issues


Rotorhead
11-29-2007, 12:44 PM
I feel we should put 2 backs in the backfield every play from here on out. We need a lead blocker on running plays, and we can have an extra blocker on the blitzing side for pass plays (the second back can go to the flat for dumpoffs). If there is no blitzer, than we have both sides for a dumpoff pass and Ben can choose the more open player. We can use Najeh or Spaeth for the second back on passing plays (like shotgun with FWP and Najeh/Spaeth on either side of him) and anyone as a lead blocker on running plays. I feel this will vastly improve our blocking as we will have an extra blocker at all times. This is my fix for our oline the rest of the season, Whaddya think?

Steelman16
11-29-2007, 02:27 PM
Maybe, but nothing replaces the O-Line. If you have alot of issues with them, nothing will really fix it except the O-linesmen themselves.

That's my take.

GeneralRobinson
11-29-2007, 04:09 PM
I feel we should put 2 backs in the backfield every play from here on out. We need a lead blocker on running plays, and we can have an extra blocker on the blitzing side for pass plays (the second back can go to the flat for dumpoffs). If there is no blitzer, than we have both sides for a dumpoff pass and Ben can choose the more open player. We can use Najeh or Spaeth for the second back on passing plays (like shotgun with FWP and Najeh/Spaeth on either side of him) and anyone as a lead blocker on running plays. I feel this will vastly improve our blocking as we will have an extra blocker at all times. This is my fix for our oline the rest of the season, Whaddya think?

Interesting idea. Ideally, it would have to be a split back formation since an I formation would position the full back too close to the LOS to block an outside blitzer. Plus, unless you are going to hand the ball to the fullback during running plays, that would mean using Willie as a lead blocker. I can see Willie on a DB but having to block a line backer would not be ideal. I love well-rounded players and favor them over the specialists in today's game, guys that don't need to be sub'd on third down. A full back and tail back that could carry the ball 10-15 times a game each (for the tail back, maybe 20 times), block, and be an effective receiver would be my wish.

Rhee Rhee
11-29-2007, 04:20 PM
i agree this is a very good idea it's just that.. those dumpoff passes will only gain 3-4 yards per completetion because the ball carriers will quickly be wrapped up... BUT i do agree that it will help.. i remember the year we went 15-1 and we played the Eagles we did something very similar to this... we had two backs like jerome and deuce... or dan and we'd block one and send the other.. it worked OK against the eagles pass rush....

19ward86
11-29-2007, 04:34 PM
we need to go back to running our 2-3 TE formations like we did at the beginning of the season, we have been trying to run with only 1 TE this year. we have not stretched the field enough this year at all either. we have 3 TE that i feel can make plays in our offense but injuries have limited the backups play(tuman and spaeth). now we are completely healthy at TE we need to go back, im not sure why we changed in the first place.

SteelerFanInCA
11-29-2007, 04:51 PM
we need to go back to running our 2-3 TE formations like we did at the beginning of the season, we have been trying to run with only 1 TE this year. we have not stretched the field enough this year at all either. we have 3 TE that i feel can make plays in our offense but injuries have limited the backups play(tuman and spaeth). now we are completely healthy at TE we need to go back, im not sure why we changed in the first place.

Aren't we still missing Tuman? I like the 3 TE set but who would be our 3rd TE at this point?

lilyoder6
11-29-2007, 05:33 PM
well they did put deker on the list as 3rd Te... i would start getting gary russell learning how to block and catch and try try him at 3rd TE...

GeneralRobinson
11-29-2007, 07:19 PM
I was thinking that one way to run out of split backs without having to rely on a lead blocking running back is to run a quick trap play.

Galax Steeler
11-30-2007, 04:51 AM
Tuman was a big part of the offense when he went out that was a big hit for us.

Rotorhead
11-30-2007, 11:04 AM
Well there are alot of things you can run out of split backs, one of the reasons I like the idea. I know FWP is not the best blocker but giving Ben at least 2 more seconds by slowing the rush would make all the difference in the world. Another issue with the sacks is Holmes being hurt, earlier this year, when protection broke down he and Ben were on the same page and he would always come back to make a play for the ball (and Ben would look for that), him being out changes that and I don't feel he has the confidence/comfort level with the other receivers.

revefsreleets
11-30-2007, 05:50 PM
This would probably take about 60% of the plays out of our playbook. Dumbing down the offense will make us even more predictable and conservative, all things most fans hate.