Bill Bleil
- Thread starter mkadl
- Start date
I agree with Tre as well. You blow up the middle you blow our rushing attack (and Oregons for that matter) up. I hate opinions that say we should start over. We shouldnt. we have been recruiting a type of linemen for 4 years now, scrapping everything would set us back. I dont know if Bleil is the problem but I would also like to see him coach a line that is very physical at 4 out of 5 positions then make a judgement. It would have been nice if Scott Haughton would have stayed eligible because him/Hick/KO would have been a very formidable group. This class as well as last years hopefully will go a long way into creating a good O-Line.
I think having a guy like SR who stays in the pocket and doesnt spin out of and then into sacks (Steele Jantz) consistently will help these guys. I bet it is hard when you have a qb who looks like he is randomly moving around. I think SR will make more strides in the offseason with the competition he will receive from the other qbs. Also SR will go a long ways to making teams pay for blitzing by throwing it to a better core of receivers next year. I love Quenton Bundrage. Horne/Lenz/Young were ok receivers but nothing that you'd have to gameplan around. Im hoping Bundrage/West and company make the receiving core a threat, and Lazard begins to make it big time the second he steps on campus. Having bigger more athletic receivers will also help the run game by stretching the field as well as with their downfield blocking. Having 2 pass catching TE's that can spread out wide or stay tight will be helpful as well by creating matchup problems with the LB's.
I worry about our LB's and the D-Line because they are unproven, I believe the talent is there but I need to see it perform. Next season will give us more of a glimpse of the future because a lot of seasoned veterans are gonna be gone.
I think having a guy like SR who stays in the pocket and doesnt spin out of and then into sacks (Steele Jantz) consistently will help these guys. I bet it is hard when you have a qb who looks like he is randomly moving around. I think SR will make more strides in the offseason with the competition he will receive from the other qbs. Also SR will go a long ways to making teams pay for blitzing by throwing it to a better core of receivers next year. I love Quenton Bundrage. Horne/Lenz/Young were ok receivers but nothing that you'd have to gameplan around. Im hoping Bundrage/West and company make the receiving core a threat, and Lazard begins to make it big time the second he steps on campus. Having bigger more athletic receivers will also help the run game by stretching the field as well as with their downfield blocking. Having 2 pass catching TE's that can spread out wide or stay tight will be helpful as well by creating matchup problems with the LB's.
I worry about our LB's and the D-Line because they are unproven, I believe the talent is there but I need to see it perform. Next season will give us more of a glimpse of the future because a lot of seasoned veterans are gonna be gone.
In order to make the spread work well, you need your OL to be smart and mobile. They don't need to be behemoth road graders, but if they're mobile as well as strong it's a huge plus (clearly). They need to be able to see where they need to be and then get there while moving the opposition. My armchair analysis of OL is that we had one interior guy who very much lacks mobility but is pretty stout. There were many plays where I watched on the DVR a 3tech guy opposite him, just run right past him with a simple swim move or spin stunt and our guy almost never even touched him. Multiple times in multiple games. When healthy, the guy was able to do some decent things in the more hat-on-hat power stuff, but couldn't do any pulling or the counter option sweep that we like to do bringing Jarvis/Horne in motion. Just not great at quite a bit of our spread package.
In my view, we also had one tackle who doesn't have great feet and struggles on the reach blocks and basically any OZR where he is leading the playside stretch. This one tackle also had some problems in pass protection because of mobility. That's an issue. It limits what you can do effectively. Strong points were overall size and strength so he was able to do some decent work on IZR and power stuff. We also had injuries throughout the year which hurt us, because the backups clearly weren't ready and/or were ineffective.
Overall, I think we're still a unit in transition to a degree. We need better mobility overall to make the spread work really well - that is clear to me. We had some legacy guys in there who are clearly more suited to power/pro-set packages and we got pretty beat up throughout the year. However, I want better fundamentals too. What I don't like is seeing all the blown assignments, failures to pickup a walk-up blitz or flooded zone - GAME AFTER GAME. It's like some horrid football version of Groundhog Day where we have to keep re-living our inability to account for guys in the box and pick-up the extra man.
The OC is doing us any favors with the play calls in this, as I was puzzled a number of times at what we were doing in response to what was working and not working against the opponents, but that's a whole different can or worms that shouldn't go into as this is too long already.
Cheers
In my view, we also had one tackle who doesn't have great feet and struggles on the reach blocks and basically any OZR where he is leading the playside stretch. This one tackle also had some problems in pass protection because of mobility. That's an issue. It limits what you can do effectively. Strong points were overall size and strength so he was able to do some decent work on IZR and power stuff. We also had injuries throughout the year which hurt us, because the backups clearly weren't ready and/or were ineffective.
Overall, I think we're still a unit in transition to a degree. We need better mobility overall to make the spread work really well - that is clear to me. We had some legacy guys in there who are clearly more suited to power/pro-set packages and we got pretty beat up throughout the year. However, I want better fundamentals too. What I don't like is seeing all the blown assignments, failures to pickup a walk-up blitz or flooded zone - GAME AFTER GAME. It's like some horrid football version of Groundhog Day where we have to keep re-living our inability to account for guys in the box and pick-up the extra man.
The OC is doing us any favors with the play calls in this, as I was puzzled a number of times at what we were doing in response to what was working and not working against the opponents, but that's a whole different can or worms that shouldn't go into as this is too long already.
Cheers
Last edited:
One of the biggest things that I think killed out offensive line play was their inability to sustain blocks and also to pick up the secondary assignments. Biggest reason our O-line was watching our RBs and QBs get tackled was because they weren't sustaining blocks. And I also saw at times that we couldn't even stop a basic bull rush by the D-line. That is technique and conditioning there. NOt firing off the line with shoulder pads low and getting stood up at the point of attack. The good thing is that all of the problems can be fixed with coaching and development. We just need to get better at it apparently.
May as well toss in Tuftee being completely healthy as well. This is the second straight season he's had nagging injuries. Playing on one leg was a big dropoff--and worse when his reserve came in.
Yep. Every line gets beat once and awhile, but there were way too many times we have an Olineman (sometimes more than one) "looking" for someone to block while a defender(s) goes unimpeded to the RB/QB. Other times there were just more defenders than Olinemen at the point of attack, again leading to an unblocked defender to make a play. Not really getting "man-handled" like some continue to suggest, but not getting the job done. 4 years of this type of poor execution- we need a new scheme.
Sustaining blocks long enough was an issue this year. But that too is sometimes due to our scheme and/or putting the success of our run game in the hands of the QB.
Lenz was a very good to great receiver in just about every respect. Unfortunately my stats spreadsheet is on a different computer, but Lenz was in the Top 20% of all BCS receivers in just about every per-pass stat I calculated (catch rate, yards per attempt, 1st Downs/catch, TD/catch...). Unfortunately he just spent too much time injured to rack up big numbers of receptions and yards. West and Brun also calculated out very well compared to all BCS receivers. You're right about Horne and Young though - and unfortunately these two had the most targets of anyone. Same deal with Reynolds and Darks in 2011.
To me that's a problem with the QB/WR/RB reading the defense and making the right adjustments on the fly, not the scheme. Remember Jantz was only playing his, what, 2nd year of QB? He was still learning how to be a QB not to mention the details of the offense. Barnett just doesn't have the arm for it unfortunately. Richardson is a RSFrosh. Hopefully Barnett is able to tutor Richardson and Rohach in the offseason some so they can pick up the intricacies of reading a defense better.
If our scheme is so hard to grasp that Olinemen in the system for 3 and 4 years are blocking air and/or susceptible to routinely being outnumbered, then the scheme is wrong for this roster and ISU. If the scheme so easily allows for the QB position to compromise every aspect of our offense, including the run game, it is the wrong scheme for ISU.
If the defense sends more than five rushers, then the laws of our physical universe prevent five offensive linemen from blocking them all. If the defense only sends four rushers but overloads one side of the line so its 3 against 4 or 3 against 5, then again the laws of our physical universe prevent the offensive line from blocking everyone. It's not like an uncovered left guard is going to be able to get outside the right tackle to pick up a blitzing linebacker. And if the runningback is lined up to the left, he will have a hard time getting across the formation without interfering with the QB as well. It's up to the QB/WR to see what's going on, make the right adjustment, and get the ball out of the backfield before the defense can get the sack.
If you run the ball into a blitz, there's not much you can do other than hope the RB can make an athletic play to get out of trouble. If you're going to be a big power run team, you have to be effective enough at play-action to keep the defense honest.
If you run the ball into a blitz, there's not much you can do other than hope the RB can make an athletic play to get out of trouble. If you're going to be a big power run team, you have to be effective enough at play-action to keep the defense honest.
I am hoping for this too. I hope to see Barnett go down in my book as one of the greatest Cyclones of time not because he starts at QB the next two years and sets records, but instead because he uses what I think is a very high football IQ to teach Richardson, Rohach, and Hodge. Barnett is definitely a future coach as far as I'm concerned. He understands the game, just for whatever reason has fallen short in passing ability so far.
We have recruited for this scheme since Rhoads got on campus. There is no reason to make any major changes to the scheme. History shows that schools that do an unexpected major scheme change within a coaching staff aren't traditionally successful anyway (see Auburn 2012). Two young QB's and a host of talented young receivers have been in this scheme for a year or two now and have great potential. No reason to make major schematic changes on them and confuse them more.
Being poor on offense due to the same issues for four years is a reason. Do you even follow our recruiting? Needing development in a sound scheme is what they fit. Our recruiting is another reason to move away from this putrid offense- it magnifies our inability to recruit playmakers.
Next year has looked like a down year for awhile. Make the change now so that our lack of offense does not ruin 2014 and beyond.
Last edited:
What major scheme change do you suggest we do then? And I assume you are talking about the whole offense, not just blocking schemes, etc. We certainly are not a power run team. We do not have the line of the backs to do that kind of a system. All three of our QB's for next season played in some form of a spread offense in high school to the best of my knowledge, so the scheme certainly isn't the problem with them.
If anything I still think small changes would be best. Small ones turn into big ones. This might be stuff like simply tweaking the blocking schemes, etc. You say that our recruiting is a reason to change the scheme, but the next two seasons we will really begin to see the development of Rhoads's recruits on both sides of the ball. This program in the conference we are in was never a one or two year fix, rather a five or six year fix. IMO year three to four saw huge improvements in terms of the athletes and play makers on the field. I expect to see big improvements again from year four to five.
Oh yeah? Let's get one of these guys and our problems are solved. (VBG)
http://thegazette.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Duke-Slater-1024x826.jpg
(Duke Slater reportedly blocking five players on one play.)