Browns O-Line ranked better than only the pathetic Lions.
-
I would suggest that the Browns oline won't be rated so foolishly low for very long. With the Browns RG and RT "up in the air", how
does anybody rate them at all?
...can't WAIT until Mack starts at the beginning of the season.
We've seen the end of the embarrassing "lineman on right side gets blocked into rb on a quick hitter up the middle".
Buttkickin time on the Browns oline, I don't care who rates them low.
-
Plain and simple. If you want to be ranked higher, win more games.
The Browns sucked last year and this ranking is a carry over from their on feild performance last year.
They won't be ranked this low next year, one more good draft and this is a top ten o-line.
-
First of all...let's address this thought that our OL sucked last year.
We ranked 8th in the league with only 24 sacks against. Keep in mind that 9 of those sacks came in the 4 games started by Dorsey and Gradkowski....so that meant when we had a legit starter (yes, DA and BQ qualify) in the game, we had only 15 sacks in 12 games!!!
THAT does not equate to bad pass protection.
Now, onto this coming year.
The Browns have arguably address BOTH of their biggest problems (if a top 10 pass protection OL is really considered a problem) at Center and RT. We not only upgraded...but we added depth.
Further, just take a little gander at our coming schedule.
Only 2 teams (PITT @ #2 with 51 sacks; MIN @ #4 with 45 sacks) had a top 10 pass rush in 2008. After that only 3 more fall into the top 16 (BAL @ #11 w/34; DET @ #16 w/30; OAK @ #13 w/32). The remaining 9 games are against teams ranked no better than #20 (JAGS 29 sacks)....and includes 2 games vs Cinci (17) and KC (10). There are also 3 teams making the switch from a 4-3 to the 3-4 in KC, DET and GB.
This all makes me believe our OL is going to EASILY be in the top 10 when it comes to pass protection. The real question...and the problem with our OL IMHO, is can they block for the run???
-
First of all...let's address this thought that our OL sucked last year.
We ranked 8th in the league with only 24 sacks against. Keep in mind that 9 of those sacks came in the 4 games started by Dorsey and Gradkowski....so that meant when we had a legit starter (yes, DA and BQ qualify) in the game, we had only 15 sacks in 12 games!!!
THAT does not equate to bad pass protection.
Now, onto this coming year.
The Browns have arguably address BOTH of their biggest problems (if a top 10 pass protection OL is really considered a problem) at Center and RT. We not only upgraded...but we added depth.
Further, just take a little gander at our coming schedule.
Only 2 teams (PITT @ #2 with 51 sacks; MIN @ #4 with 45 sacks) had a top 10 pass rush in 2008. After that only 3 more fall into the top 16 (BAL @ #11 w/34; DET @ #16 w/30; OAK @ #13 w/32). The remaining 9 games are against teams ranked no better than #20 (JAGS 29 sacks)....and includes 2 games vs Cinci (17) and KC (10). There are also 3 teams making the switch from a 4-3 to the 3-4 in KC, DET and GB.
This all makes me believe our OL is going to EASILY be in the top 10 when it comes to pass protection. The real question...and the problem with our OL IMHO, is can they block for the run???
First of all...let's address this thought that our OL sucked last year.
We ranked 8th in the league with only 24 sacks against. Keep in mind that 9 of those sacks came in the 4 games started by Dorsey and Gradkowski....so that meant when we had a legit starter (yes, DA and BQ qualify) in the game, we had only 15 sacks in 12 games!!!
THAT does not equate to bad pass protection.
This all makes me believe our OL is going to EASILY be in the top 10 when it comes to pass protection. The real question...and the problem with our OL IMHO, is can they block for the run???
That's a good point, but run blocking isn't a secondary concern. Preventing sacks is obviously important, but it's not going to matter much unless you can open up holes for the RB, unless you're a run-and-shoot team.
I don't think anyone is saying that the line was awful last year, but was it as good as it had been a year before? Not to a lot of us. Was it a top-half of the league unit in terms of opening up holes? Again, not from what I saw. Also, sacks are a somewhat misleading indicator. They're important to be sure, but they don't take into account the number of hurried throws that QBs have to make, the number of times he has to scramble because the protection doesn't allow for enough time for receivers to get open, the number of hits after the throw, etc.
Dennis
-
First of all...let's address this thought that our OL sucked last year.
We ranked 8th in the league with only 24 sacks against. Keep in mind that 9 of those sacks came in the 4 games started by Dorsey and Gradkowski....so that meant when we had a legit starter (yes, DA and BQ qualify) in the game, we had only 15 sacks in 12 games!!!
THAT does not equate to bad pass protection.
This all makes me believe our OL is going to EASILY be in the top 10 when it comes to pass protection. The real question...and the problem with our OL IMHO, is can they block for the run???
That's a good point, but run blocking isn't a secondary concern. Preventing sacks is obviously important, but it's not going to matter much unless you can open up holes for the RB, unless you're a run-and-shoot team.
I don't think anyone is saying that the line was awful last year, but was it as good as it had been a year before? Not to a lot of us. Was it a top-half of the league unit in terms of opening up holes? Again, not from what I saw. Also, sacks are a somewhat misleading indicator. They're important to be sure, but they don't take into account the number of hurried throws that QBs have to make, the number of times he has to scramble because the protection doesn't allow for enough time for receivers to get open, the number of hits after the throw, etc.
Dennis
That's a good point, but run blocking isn't a secondary concern. Preventing sacks is obviously important, but it's not going to matter much unless you can open up holes for the RB, unless you're a run-and-shoot team.
I don't think anyone is saying that the line was awful last year, but was it as good as it had been a year before? Not to a lot of us. Was it a top-half of the league unit in terms of opening up holes? Again, not from what I saw. Also, sacks are a somewhat misleading indicator. They're important to be sure, but they don't take into account the number of hurried throws that QBs have to make, the number of times he has to scramble because the protection doesn't allow for enough time for receivers to get open, the number of hits after the throw, etc.
Dennis
I agree 100%...I think our running game issue is huge...but then again...how much was on the OL and how much on twinkle toes Lewis. Seems to me even Jason Wright had a better y/c than JL last year. Plus, the fact that JL was rarely used as a receiver out of the backfield had a tendency to telegraph our play selections.
As for the sacks vs hurries vs scrambles, as DA was the QB of choice in 9 games...I figure if you got to him...you got to him. Not many scrambles there. And like I said, in 4 games with backups we gave up 9 of our 24 total. That is ALL on the QB's.
Not that we can't improve the OL....believe me, our RT was a turnstile that had QB's quaking...but I think that has been addressed at least to adequate. We shall see if that..and some more inventive play calling...may not just make this an OL and offense to be reckoned with.
-
That's a good point, but run blocking isn't a secondary concern. Preventing sacks is obviously important, but it's not going to matter much unless you can open up holes for the RB, unless you're a run-and-shoot team.
I don't think anyone is saying that the line was awful last year, but was it as good as it had been a year before? Not to a lot of us. Was it a top-half of the league unit in terms of opening up holes? Again, not from what I saw. Also, sacks are a somewhat misleading indicator. They're important to be sure, but they don't take into account the number of hurried throws that QBs have to make, the number of times he has to scramble because the protection doesn't allow for enough time for receivers to get open, the number of hits after the throw, etc.
Dennis
I agree 100%...I think our running game issue is huge...but then again...how much was on the OL and how much on twinkle toes Lewis. Seems to me even Jason Wright had a better y/c than JL last year. Plus, the fact that JL was rarely used as a receiver out of the backfield had a tendency to telegraph our play selections.
As for the sacks vs hurries vs scrambles, as DA was the QB of choice in 9 games...I figure if you got to him...you got to him. Not many scrambles there. And like I said, in 4 games with backups we gave up 9 of our 24 total. That is ALL on the QB's.
Not that we can't improve the OL....believe me, our RT was a turnstile that had QB's quaking...but I think that has been addressed at least to adequate. We shall see if that..and some more inventive play calling...may not just make this an OL and offense to be reckoned with.
I agree 100%...I think our running game issue is huge...but then again...how much was on the OL and how much on twinkle toes Lewis. Seems to me even Jason Wright had a better y/c than JL last year. Plus, the fact that JL was rarely used as a receiver out of the backfield had a tendency to telegraph our play selections.
As for the sacks vs hurries vs scrambles, as DA was the QB of choice in 9 games...I figure if you got to him...you got to him. Not many scrambles there. And like I said, in 4 games with backups we gave up 9 of our 24 total. That is ALL on the QB's.
When I wrote the first post, I realized that using the term "QB scramble" with the Browns is iffy at best. I would stick by the issue of rushed passes, however.
As to the running backs, here are their stats. Lewis is the only one who had enough carries to have a representative sample.
Lewis: 279-1002 (3.6 ypc), long of 29, 4 TD
Harrison: 34-246 (7.2 ypc), long of 72, 1 TD
Wright: 23-85 (3.7 ypc), long of 11, 0 TD
If you take out Harrison's 72 yarder as a clear outlier, you get 33-174 (5.3 ypc).
So you have two guys averaging about three and a half yards a pop, and one guy averaging over five. I would imagine that if Harrison got more than two carries a game, his ypc would be much closer to the other guys'.
Dennis
-
this guys dosen't know what he's talking about. the browns have a top 10 O-line, and i'm sorry to say it, but a better line than the Steelers have.
without a doubt this is a crap ranking and should be disregarded.
if there's one thing i can say nice about the browns it's that they have a decent o-line.
-
The biggest problem with rating the OL is that the only real way to rate it is to base it off of your skill players production.
The fact that 4 of our games last year were started by QB's named Gradkowski/Dorsey automatically gives the stats a negative push. In 89 pass attempts, BQ got sacked 1x...in 112 combined pass attempts G&D got sacked 9x. Enough said.
Further, I know at least I noticed JL was not running with the same intensity as he did in '08...and all those drops by BE not only reflected on DA, but also on the OL stats.
I am not saying they didn't take a step backwards last year...but man, you have to take THAT into account
-
It might sound like I'm fence sitting but I do agree with both Peen and Shep... With the exceptions of Thomas & Mack the new Browns have somewhat overlooked the O line in the draft (Faine notwithstanding)... The Browns have chosen to improve their O line through free agency and for the most part have gotten burnt in the process.... I may not be writing this if LeCharles hadn't gotten hurt but it is what it is...
However, looking at this years cast of players I do see greatness in their future... Thomas, Steinbach and Tucker are A1 players in my estimation... Mack seems to be the perfect selection to solidify this line.... With the multitude of bodies vying for the RT spot it seems our chances of getting a solid player out of this group are pretty damn good... sitting here in July, I predict that our line can become a top 10 line, maybe a top 5.....
The key to all of this hinges on the play selection that our new (rookie) offensive coordinator sets forward.... Maybe for the 1st time in our new history we will run when the D is looking for a pass and we'll pass when they are looking for a run... Since our rebirth we've been the most predictible offense in the league.... With the exception of the Davis era, with seasoned coordinators, we've fooled no one...
As I sit here today I want to tip my hat to Hank Fraley.... He came aboard as our 6th option at center, without the benefit of a long camp I must add... He was selected by his peers as a team captian but maybe age and size have gotten the best of him... Although he might not have been great, he did an admirable job and will be a huge factor in getting Mack up to speed in the NFL.....
Peace
T.Dawg
-
The biggest problem with rating the OL is that the only real way to rate it is to base it off of your skill players production.
The fact that 4 of our games last year were started by QB's named Gradkowski/Dorsey automatically gives the stats a negative push. In 89 pass attempts, BQ got sacked 1x...in 112 combined pass attempts G&D got sacked 9x. Enough said.
Further, I know at least I noticed JL was not running with the same intensity as he did in '08...and all those drops by BE not only reflected on DA, but also on the OL stats.
I am not saying they didn't take a step backwards last year...but man, you have to take THAT into account
In 89 pass attempts, BQ got sacked 1x...in 112 combined pass attempts G&D got sacked 9x. Enough said.
But doesn't that just bolster Dennis's claim that sacks allowed is a poor indicator? In the Bills game, Quinn got his finger cracked and the crap beat out of him, but the sack stat would tell you that his pass protection was fine.
Or you could take the stats in the opposite direction. During his three starts in '06, DA was sacked 7 times. During his first three starts last year, he was sacked just as many times. So the stats say that our pass pro was just as bad last year as it was when Kevin Shaffer and Kelly Butler were our bookend tackles, but the eyeball test disproves that.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login