How Can Our O-Line Be Such A Mess?

#28
#28
Yep it is all coaching, there is simply no excuse for a line made up of fine High School stud recruits to not be able to handle four of the top teams in the nation...everybody knows that. With our easy schedule, coaching has to be the only reason we are not undefeated.
 
#30
#30
Orange_Crush said:
How can we do that? Our fans have already fired our current OL coach and are bring Bama's retired OL coach out of retirement. As soon as they can get CDD ran out of town with some burned mattresses and UHaul's, they are pretty sure Bear Bryant will be interested in the head coaching job...
Click to expand...

What really, you think so? I heard he's just been laying around.
 
#31
#31
VolinDawgland said:
I wonder what Coach Craig could do with this line. I sure hated to lose him.
Click to expand...

I think you are meaning James Cregg from Kiffin's staff. I actually heard that it was Mitch Browning who had alot of influence on the OL during that time. Not sure where he went.
 
#38
#38
This line needs to drop a few pounds and live in the weight room this offseason. If not, fire whoever doesn't make that happen.
 
#39
#39
The O-line is vey young, and has given up 14 sacks when they gave up 41 last year. They are on pace to cut last year's number in half despite facing the extremely talented UF, LSU, and Bama D lines.

They have IMPROVED, where it matters for thus team because, let's face it, we are built around the pass.

Now I will admit they have failed tremendously in the run game, but what do they require to bolck in the run game I ask? Size and strength. This will come as they mature and hit the weights. This cannot happen instantly, you can't "coach up" anybody to become bigger and stronger. This takes TIME. Some on here seem to want to overlook that simple fact.

Much of our Oline are still teenagers. As they play together for 2-3 more years the run game will come.

I will also add, our backs have not done this line any favors.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#41
#41
therealitytheory said:
Hoople heads like orange crush think if you point out how bad our run game is you are somehow throwing a brick through CDD's window.

The fact is, we have a lot to be positive about as year zero-plus-one is coming to a close. Our passing game when healthy is top drawer, and we've got a keeper at TE. Our defense is rounding into shape under JW, and our return game brings excitement that we haven't seen this millenium. Our coverage teams are much improved, and there's hope that Palardy will build off of some recent successes.

The one glaring negative is our running game. You can't polish that turd enough; I'm sorry. Last in the league (by a mile), next to last in the country - what can you say?
Our line has had almost two full injury-free years under Hiestand and we can't runblock poor MTSU (ranked 112th in run defense)? Does it really offend people to point that out?

Dooley has proven time and again with his players that he's not afraid to ditch what doesn't work in favor of something that does.
Click to expand...

What? You're not holding out for the Bear?

Our running game, as with so many other areas of need on this team, is mainly the result of youth, inexperience and lack of talent. It will be alright. We need stability.

Seriously, I think we may be able to get the Bear out of retirement. Give him a call.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#42
#42
The O-line and runner certainly have some issues ...as do most ...but are far from the main reason we cannot run the ball

Not sure who in the think tank decided we needed a spint draw type of running system ...but they did . It was a popular deal in the Big 10 , so i am guessing this is Chaneys thing

The problem with this concept in the SEC is obvious. The back is set deeper than usual 2-3 yards. The quarback drops to the back , rather than the back running down hill toward the line . The process is to give the illusion of a pass on virtually everyplay .

The problem ..it developes to slow for the SEC. The blocks have to be held too long . That is why the linebackers who start well behind the line of scrimmage ...always end up in the gaps creating an overload that was not apparent presnap . This system is the boxing equal to a haymaker . Seems like a good idea , but it will never land.

To confound the whole thing , you have the wing T like concept that Dooley brought from Tech ...where guys are flying out of the backfield and H as decoys. The problem ...the SEC defenders recover too quickly and the decoys should be blocking.

The line can certainly pass block which is usually the harder thing to do . In the LSU and Bama games ...they went with power run forms that were almost textbook . They did this because they needed more blocking at the point of attack . Guess what ...they had relative running success.

This is basic football. Go with what is simple . You pass forms should look like your run forms ( another issue all together ) so the D does not know what you are about to do ( balanced offense ....an insane concept ) Keep enough guys in to block and cut the MAC decoy philosophy . Set the backs closer to the line and scrap the spring draw delay stuff ...get them running down hill .

Dooley needs to call Nick and get a lesson in I form football and get a memo to chaney ...this is not the Big 10.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#43
#43
majic73 said:
The O-line and runner certainly have some issues ...as do most ...but are far from the main reason we cannot run the ball

Not sure who in the think tank decided we needed a spint draw type of running system ...but they did . It was a popular deal in the Big 10 , so i am guessing this is Chaneys thing

The problem with this concept in the SEC is obvious. The back is set deeper than usual 2-3 yards. The quarback drops to the back , rather than the back running down hill toward the line . The process is to give the illusion of a pass on virtually everyplay .

The problem ..it developes to slow for the SEC. The blocks have to be held too long . That is why the linebackers who start well behind the line of scrimmage ...always end up in the gaps creating an overload that was not apparent presnap . This system is the boxing equal to a haymaker . Seems like a good idea , but it will never land.

To confound the whole thing , you have the wing T like concept that Dooley brought from Tech ...where guys are flying out of the backfield and H as decoys. The problem ...the SEC defenders recover too quickly and the decoys should be blocking.

The line can certainly pass block which is usually the harder thing to do . In the LSU and Bama games ...they went with power run forms that were almost textbook . They did this because they needed more blocking at the point of attack . Guess what ...they had relative running success.

This is basic football. Go with what is simple . You pass forms should look like your run forms ( another issue all together ) so the D does not know what you are about to do ( balanced offense ....an insane concept ) Keep enough guys in to block and cut the MAC decoy philosophy . Set the backs closer to the line and scrap the spring draw delay stuff ...get them running down hill .

Dooley needs to call Nick and get a lesson in I form football and get a memo to chaney ...this is not the Big 10.
Click to expand...

Excellent points all the way through. And notice there was no crying about "youth, inexperience, and a lack of talent."

Nobody seriously thought Poole would get 2000 yards, but there's no excuse for not being able to push hapless MTSU around for 250-300 yards.
 
#44
#44
GLDunlap said:
If you ask any coach they would rather have a great back with an average line then a great line with an average back. Unfortunately we have a average line with a well below average back.
Click to expand...

No coach I know of (CDD don't count) would take this option. What kinda success did Barry Sanders and the Lions have?
 
#45
#45
Flathead said:
Yep it is all coaching, there is simply no excuse for a line made up of fine High School stud recruits to not be able to handle four of the top teams in the nation...everybody knows that. With our easy schedule, coaching has to be the only reason we are not undefeated.
Click to expand...

Do those four top teams include MTSU or is there some other excuse for the ground game last week?
 
#46
#46
therealitytheory said:
Excellent points all the way through. And notice there was no crying about "youth, inexperience, and a lack of talent."

Nobody seriously thought Poole would get 2000 yards, but there's no excuse for not being able to push hapless MTSU around for 250-300 yards.
Click to expand...

So, you start a thread about firing our OL coach and hiring a man that doesn't want to coach anymore, and then agree that it's schemes.

Brilliant.

You're all for firing the guy who's doing what his bosses tell him so that a retired OL coach can come in and do the same thing.

Edit: And listen... Chaney set up this year's offense to play to our strengths-- an all-SEC QB with basically unstoppable WRs. So, he set up the sprint-draw scheme to play to our strengths. It would have worked too in a strong pass-first offense where Ds had to respect the pass.

Guess what? Unless you haven't noticed, we lost that all-SEC QB and were dealt Simms and a true-fresh. We lost our best WR, leaving DR to get doubled. So, we become a desperate running team in a pass-first scheme.

We have a young OL. Chaney MAY have been able to change scheme with an experienced OL, but it's not as easy as the couch-coached think to do so. Chaney is in a hard spot. He's having to pull a buffalo out of his hat.

You add to all that a stable of running backs that dance instead of hitting what small holes the OL can produce, and you have major idiots on a Vols messageboard trying to hire retired coaches to do exactly what the current OL coach has been doing.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#47
#47
majic73 said:
The O-line and runner certainly have some issues ...as do most ...but are far from the main reason we cannot run the ball

Not sure who in the think tank decided we needed a spint draw type of running system ...but they did . It was a popular deal in the Big 10 , so i am guessing this is Chaneys thing

The problem with this concept in the SEC is obvious. The back is set deeper than usual 2-3 yards. The quarback drops to the back , rather than the back running down hill toward the line . The process is to give the illusion of a pass on virtually everyplay .

The problem ..it developes to slow for the SEC. The blocks have to be held too long . That is why the linebackers who start well behind the line of scrimmage ...always end up in the gaps creating an overload that was not apparent presnap . This system is the boxing equal to a haymaker . Seems like a good idea , but it will never land.

To confound the whole thing , you have the wing T like concept that Dooley brought from Tech ...where guys are flying out of the backfield and H as decoys. The problem ...the SEC defenders recover too quickly and the decoys should be blocking.

The line can certainly pass block which is usually the harder thing to do . In the LSU and Bama games ...they went with power run forms that were almost textbook . They did this because they needed more blocking at the point of attack . Guess what ...they had relative running success.

This is basic football. Go with what is simple . You pass forms should look like your run forms ( another issue all together ) so the D does not know what you are about to do ( balanced offense ....an insane concept ) Keep enough guys in to block and cut the MAC decoy philosophy . Set the backs closer to the line and scrap the spring draw delay stuff ...get them running down hill .

Dooley needs to call Nick and get a lesson in I form football and get a memo to chaney ...this is not the Big 10.
Click to expand...

While I agree with you on most of your points, the extra .2 seconds we need to make the big play out of the formations we are putting on the field, can be achieved by having a faster back in the backfield. The reason Kiffin didn't play Poole, was because of his speed, and I think most of us realize that now. The back is exactly 8 yards from the line of scrimmage, in most off-set I packages run with Hardesty was our back, as it is since Poole has been our back. What's the biggest differences in the two, aggression and speed. That's what we lack right now, and the line would look much better than they really are, just like it did when Kiffin had the Sullin's brothers on the line.
 
#48
#48
majic73 said:
The O-line and runner certainly have some issues ...as do most ...but are far from the main reason we cannot run the ball

Not sure who in the think tank decided we needed a spint draw type of running system ...but they did . It was a popular deal in the Big 10 , so i am guessing this is Chaneys thing

The problem with this concept in the SEC is obvious. The back is set deeper than usual 2-3 yards. The quarback drops to the back , rather than the back running down hill toward the line . The process is to give the illusion of a pass on virtually everyplay .

The problem ..it developes to slow for the SEC. The blocks have to be held too long . That is why the linebackers who start well behind the line of scrimmage ...always end up in the gaps creating an overload that was not apparent presnap . This system is the boxing equal to a haymaker . Seems like a good idea , but it will never land.

To confound the whole thing , you have the wing T like concept that Dooley brought from Tech ...where guys are flying out of the backfield and H as decoys. The problem ...the SEC defenders recover too quickly and the decoys should be blocking.

The line can certainly pass block which is usually the harder thing to do . In the LSU and Bama games ...they went with power run forms that were almost textbook . They did this because they needed more blocking at the point of attack . Guess what ...they had relative running success.

This is basic football. Go with what is simple . You pass forms should look like your run forms ( another issue all together ) so the D does not know what you are about to do ( balanced offense ....an insane concept ) Keep enough guys in to block and cut the MAC decoy philosophy . Set the backs closer to the line and scrap the spring draw delay stuff ...get them running down hill .

Dooley needs to call Nick and get a lesson in I form football and get a memo to chaney ...this is not the Big 10.
Click to expand...

Good stuff in my opinion.
 
#49
#49
They're tipping off when they're running also. That needs to be corrected. If they're going to run a sprint draw concept or whatever Big ten Cluster f;;;; that is, at least do it without letting the other team figure out when you're going to run. Several times in the game last week i noticed MTSU's linebacker's get tight to the line of scrimmage, in those plays we ran the ball. Might have something to do with Worley, but they knew we were going to run the football. They need to fix that.
 
#50
#50
I dont know what to call it but LSU's qb will pitch the ball to the rb as he is running toward the line. This might be something we could do to help our backs.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top