Our Offensive Line

[1Big_Orange_Fan]

Missouri has very good linebacker play, it'll happen.

Yeah I was thinking that too, that #32 was awesome. But, you'd think we could scheme a chip or something that would keep the backside guy from making the tackle. It sucks to see the OL move the line of scrimmage just to see a guy who isn't touched from the edge crash down and make a tackle for not gain. Just hope to see that cleaned up but maybe that's life without a fullback.

 

[1Big_Orange_Fan]

Maybe it's just me, but I feel like our backs sometimes expect to go down early...like they are looking to dive forward as soon as they can. Instead of trying their best to stay on their feet. Maybe I'm wrong, but I got that impression watching some of those drives. Like their bodies are leaning low and forward as they try to run through the line.

Yeah I was telling my wife who didn't watch us play back in our heyday that if we had a back like Travis Henry or Jamal Lewis they would've had 300 yards rushing yesterday. Our TBs are good but we haven't had that level of talent in a loooooong time.

 

[ThreatLevelOrange]

There’s a video earlier in this thread of the Gray 20 yard touchdown. It’s a trap play, with the left DE unblocked until the pulling lineman traps him. If that play develops slower or the lineman has a good read it can be blown up in the backfield, but otherwise it can get a blocker on the DE and LB on the strong side, leaving the runner matched up against the secondary.

Morris stoned him pulling around. This was the way some of Butch’s offense was supposed to work. But it usually resulted in plays getting blown up.

 

[LucidZ]

Yeah I was telling my wife who didn't watch us play back in our heyday that if we had a back like Travis Henry or Jamal Lewis they would've had 300 yards rushing yesterday. Our TBs are good but we haven't had that level of talent in a loooooong time.

I have to wonder if it's something that is taught or if it's a mental thing. I guess most of them haven't been around long enough, but for instance I imagine not having much of an OLine...unlike now...maybe created that mentality. If it's something that is taught though, I can imagine it's just to make sure they fall forward and not end up getting pushed backwards. I mean I appreciate that either way, always best to try to get as many yards as you can...even if that means to extend your body or arms forward. I thought I was just imagining it, but it's just an impression I got a few times. Like they were anticipating it. I didn't notice it when Small ran the ball the couple times he did. He was looking to run over anyone that got in his way. Reminded me a bit of those older guys you mentioned.

 

[GVol1966]

We had 49 carries and not a single one went for negative yardage. Our backs averaged 5-7 yards. 1-2 yard gains are going to happen and I'll take those small gains over having negative yardage plays. Considering we had no negative yardage run plays this game, complaining about the small gain plays comes across as nitpicky. They had a good game, there isn't much to be complaining about really. I'll take a day like this any day, I think most people would.

Ok I said first 2 games and there were definitely negative yardage against SC and you may want to re watch the Mizzou game because there was at least 5-6 0 yard gains to go along with them 1-2 yard gains.
I haven’t said they haven’t been good, but UGA will be a big step up from USC and Mizzou, and I don’t think they have been “Good “ enough to win the LOS against the Dogs. Hope they prove me wrong but we will see.

 

[JonGrudensAgent]

Glad we have finally cycled Jones' players and overall philosophy regarding the o line out of the system.

Run for 200 next week and keep Guarantano uprightish for the most part next week and we can start brqgging though.

 

[LittleVol]

Yes. I didn’t know his jersey number, so I said who the hell is that after his first run. I don’t think I’ve ever seen Chandler or Gray run through tackles like that.

Runs like Travis Stephens

 

[Pride85]

No I’m somewhat concerned that for the first 2 games we have had several negative or 0 -1 yard runs. That’s quite different from complaining every run wasn’t a Big Gain.

Even Alabama and Georgia have the occasional 0 or negative run play. Stop trying to look for things to wring your hands about. We also had several 10+ runs, by your logic you should be ranting about how amazing they are.

 

[walkenvol]

Hurd was born 5 years too early. I’d like to see him running behind this line

 

[LucidZ]

Ok I said first 2 games and there were definitely negative yardage against SC and you may want to re watch the Mizzou game because there was at least 5-6 0 yard gains to go along with them 1-2 yard gains.
I haven’t said they haven’t been good, but UGA will be a big step up from USC and Mizzou, and I don’t think they have been “Good “ enough to win the LOS against the Dogs. Hope they prove me wrong but we will see.

I really don't want to get into this with you. Not sure why you're being so defensive about it and correcting me like,"I said" "I haven't said" "you may want to re-watch". I know what you said, it's clearly there for anybody to read. Maybe be a bit more specific in your writing.

Yes, you did say the first 2 games. You said and I quote,"No I’m somewhat concerned that for the first 2 games we have had several negative or 0 -1 yard runs.". The main problem with that sentence is that in the 2nd game we didn't have any negative yardage runs.

Then in your most recent response you said,"Ok I said first 2 games and there were definitely negative yardage against SC and you may want to re watch the Mizzou game because there was at least 5-6 0 yard gains to go along with them 1-2 yard gains.". All in one sentence, as if you are implying that a run that goes for no gain means it's a negative yardage play. It isn't. 0 is not a negative number. Or was that just one big run-on sentence?

I never said you didn't believe they haven't been good. I just said they did good and that there isn't much to complain about. So, again, I'm not sure why you're getting defensive about that...like I specifically said "You don't think they are good.". I just don't see the point in you complaining about some plays that went for either no gain or just a couple of yards. That's going to happen, you'd be hard pressed to find a team that it doesn't happen to.

It was a complete improvement from game one. We converted more 3rd downs and had no negative yardage runs. Even converted 4/4 in 4th down conversions. We went 1/12 on 3rd down conversions in the first game. One could argue that a 1-2 yard run can make all the difference, as we saw in this game, to extending our drives.

But go ahead and feel how you want to feel, about how it's not good enough to win.

 

[BeecherVol]

This group stays healthy and they re gonna do nothing but get better as the season goes along

 

[LucidZ]

This group stays healthy and they re gonna do nothing but get better as the season goes along

True. I feel like having Cade here was meant to be. To be playing alongside his brother. It's hard to get better chemistry out of 2 players than ones who are brothers. Seeing them work together is just awesome.

 

[GVol1966]

I really don't want to get into this with you. Not sure why you're being so defensive about it and correcting me like,"I said" "I haven't said" "you may want to re-watch". I know what you said, it's clearly there for anybody to read. Maybe be a bit more specific in your writing.

Yes, you did say the first 2 games. You said and I quote,"No I’m somewhat concerned that for the first 2 games we have had several negative or 0 -1 yard runs.". The main problem with that sentence is that in the 2nd game we didn't have any negative yardage runs.

Then in your most recent response you said,"Ok I said first 2 games and there were definitely negative yardage against SC and you may want to re watch the Mizzou game because there was at least 5-6 0 yard gains to go along with them 1-2 yard gains.". All in one sentence, as if you are implying that a run that goes for no gain means it's a negative yardage play. It isn't. 0 is not a negative number. Or was that just one big run-on sentence?

I never said you didn't believe they haven't been good. I just said they did good and that there isn't much to complain about. So, again, I'm not sure why you're getting defensive about that...like I specifically said "You don't think they are good.". I just don't see the point in you complaining about some plays that went for either no gain or just a couple of yards. That's going to happen, you'd be hard pressed to find a team that it doesn't happen to.

It was a complete improvement from game one. We converted more 3rd downs and had no negative yardage runs. Even converted 4/4 in 4th down conversions. We went 1/12 on 3rd down conversions in the first game. One could argue that a 1-2 yard run can make all the difference, as we saw in this game, to extending our drives.

But go ahead and feel how you want to feel, about how it's not good enough to win.

It’s all mute to argue about it , the improvement could be attributable to another 5 * on the line, JG actually completing some 3rd Down passes , a different team, another week of practice.
It doesn’t matter, the first 2 games were quizzes, the next game is a TEST.

 

[GVol1966]

We rushed for 200 yards!!! Are you seriously complaining that they didn't break every run for a big gain? MISERABLE MINORITY UNITE!

What you say now???
I’m saying the same thing I said last week ,
I haven’t been impressed

 

[GVol1966]

Even Alabama and Georgia have the occasional 0 or negative run play. Stop trying to look for things to wring your hands about. We also had several 10+ runs, by your logic you should be ranting about how amazing they are.

Didn’t take to long to find something to wring my hands about today, huh?