|
DL Size
Jan 9, 2024 14:00:53 GMT -8
Post by grayman on Jan 9, 2024 14:00:53 GMT -8
Size matters. What y'all are missing is that the vast majority our "best ever" DL (interior or edge doesn't matter) were likely undersized relative to the ideal. And I argue would have been more effective if they were bigger (all other attributes remain the same.) Forever we've had lighter guys on the DL and had to compensate in other ways...scheme, etc. Maybe the Presidents, Swancut, and Butler were close to the quintessential size, but there a few and far between. JJ Watt changed the game and proved this. Before he was romping around at 290 all over the line (LB/DE/DT) there was very defined roles on the defensive line and the second level. DTs were typically going to be a bit shorter and 300+ immovable objects and DE were in the 240-270 range (Dwight Freeney). DE weren't even necessarily that long but they had to be fast and aggressive. JJ would.mobe all over to disguise blitz and create mismatches at 6'5 290 lbs. Then you get Donald who is short and light but strong as anyone and absolutely freakishly fast on DL who also moves around. The new generation is basically just athletic monsters. Guys like Chris Jones, Myles Garrett and Jalen Carter who move as well as any athletic TE but are also 270-320 lbs. This evolution is unlikely to affect college football as substantially because quite frankly very few humans exist that can do what those guys do. On average modern lines that don't have extreme talents will have to make up for it with big dudes and creative scheme. Exactly. And while all top defensive linemen in the NFL are the cream of the crop from college, guys like JJ Watt (6-6, 290), Julius Peppers (6-7, 295) and even back to Reggie White (6-5, 291) were outliers among the best. Just not a lot of guys out there with that combination of speed (at the level to pile up huge sack numbers) and size. Then you have guys like Garrett, who are pretty big at 6-4, 271 and have ridiculous 40 times (his is 4.64). And White reportedly ran a 4.6 at 291. Crazy.
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Jan 9, 2024 16:03:17 GMT -8
Angie Machado @angiemachado1 · 4m …and now it’s official. DL Tevita Pome’e has transferred from Oregon to Oregon State. #GoBeavs Asking as just a fan and not an expert , is it good to have your average DL over 300 LBS ? Doesnt that make it more likely that the line exhausts itself earlier than later in a game . Does it affect the players ability to catch a mobil QB or a half back, running back, tight end? Do players on the offensive line average over 300 as well and isnt that a plus as far as blocking ? To answer your question it depends a lot on scheme and what the coach wants to do on defense. With the recent additions makes me wonder if we’ll see a little different fronts. It’s always good to have at least a few for short yardage and goaline situations. It’s give and take with the size. In general size is better against the run than pass. That’s why it’s like a chess match between coordinators trying to get a personnel advantage. When you see an offense hurry up and not sub they’re keeping that personnel on the field. DL depth is a big must so you can rotate guys and keep them fresh. It’s the most physically exhausting position to play. Those unicorn 300 lbers who are also very athletic, are what sets the Georgias, and Michigans apart. Agreed that DL depth is key, especially if you don't have elite athletes on the DL.
|
|
|
DL Size
Jan 9, 2024 16:13:03 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by nuclearbeaver on Jan 9, 2024 16:13:03 GMT -8
To answer your question it depends a lot on scheme and what the coach wants to do on defense. With the recent additions makes me wonder if we’ll see a little different fronts. It’s always good to have at least a few for short yardage and goaline situations. It’s give and take with the size. In general size is better against the run than pass. That’s why it’s like a chess match between coordinators trying to get a personnel advantage. When you see an offense hurry up and not sub they’re keeping that personnel on the field. DL depth is a big must so you can rotate guys and keep them fresh. It’s the most physically exhausting position to play. Those unicorn 300 lbers who are also very athletic, are what sets the Georgias, and Michigans apart. Agreed that DL depth is key, especially if you don't have elite athletes on the DL. Mason Graham agrees with this sentiment.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jan 9, 2024 17:32:23 GMT -8
The 4-3, with smaller ends who can really run, is a better fit for the type of athlete we've been able to recruit (until now perhaps). And we had a lot of effective DEs as you mention. I would add in Crichton and I am sure there have been others as well. Defenses started going to the odd man front in a big way presumably from the idea that 4 backers was a better way to defend the read option or really any dual threat QB offense. We've never really had the NT for it. With GAG our odd man front defense was a disaster and it wasn't a lot better under JS until Trent Bray came along. And Trent threw in some 4 man fronts. Across college football, the zone read singlehandedly destroyed the single gap cancellation 4-3 scheme that Oregon State was running in those days. The whole idea was simply to clog up the middle and keep the linebackers clean so they could walk around talking s%#t about their stats, as James Greule explained it. String the play out to the sidelines where small fast OLB's who would be safeties in today's defenses could run them out of bounds. With a single gap to manage for the DE's as well, they could mostly pin their ears back and bring the pressure on the QB. The zone read made them pay dearly for that. It took several years and some rule changes for the rest of college football to catch up. Those undersized fast 4-3 schemes are dead and gone. Just to reiterate, the issue wasn't a 4 man front per se. It was fundamentally deploying those 4 dudes in a "just absolutely plug up the 4 feet in directly in front of you" as a primary objective part. It was just WAY to easy for the opposing OL to execute THEIR own side of their gap assignment blocking (which zone read generally all use) to ID easily who is getting washed out (or in) to where, and then just completely play into that to freely get an OL off a level and into the LBs. Unless your 4 dudes were just THAT physically dominate (see Auburn all those years ago against Oregon), you were just playing into the offense's scheme. Defensive disguise/confusion is just as important to beating zone offenses as anything else. Make the offense waste blocks or read that much slower.
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Jan 10, 2024 12:34:41 GMT -8
Across college football, the zone read singlehandedly destroyed the single gap cancellation 4-3 scheme that Oregon State was running in those days. The whole idea was simply to clog up the middle and keep the linebackers clean so they could walk around talking s%#t about their stats, as James Greule explained it. String the play out to the sidelines where small fast OLB's who would be safeties in today's defenses could run them out of bounds. With a single gap to manage for the DE's as well, they could mostly pin their ears back and bring the pressure on the QB. The zone read made them pay dearly for that. It took several years and some rule changes for the rest of college football to catch up. Those undersized fast 4-3 schemes are dead and gone. Just to reiterate, the issue wasn't a 4 man front per se. It was fundamentally deploying those 4 dudes in a "just absolutely plug up the 4 feet in directly in front of you" as a primary objective part. It was just WAY to easy for the opposing OL to execute THEIR own side of their gap assignment blocking (which zone read generally all use) to ID easily who is getting washed out (or in) to where, and then just completely play into that to freely get an OL off a level and into the LBs. Unless your 4 dudes were just THAT physically dominate (see Auburn all those years ago against Oregon), you were just playing into the offense's scheme. Defensive disguise/confusion is just as important to beating zone offenses as anything else. Make the offense waste blocks or read that much slower. Yup. The NT/DT in the single gap scheme was charged with attacking a gap to the heels of the offensive line and then sitting down to make a read on the QB or ballcarrier. The only time Banker remotely successfully blew that scheme up was when he had Paea and stuck him in 0 tech and told him to dump the center in the QB's lap. Nice adjustment that Mark gets too little credit for. But overall, there was little to no consideration in that defensive scheme for any type of designed QB run except a scramble, and the moderate QB runs that came along in the first generation of the running QB were fairly easily schemed for, see the use of DDogg to spy Dennis Dixon when Gary Crowton was running the offense at Oregon. The zone read rushing offense that Riley was running also took advantage of over aggressive DL's (Quizz and Mike Remmers against SC, where an undersized walk on freshman and undersized tailback wrecked a talented SC defense) in some of this way too, but the mesh took this to a new level. It just absolutely crushed the stifling single gap defenses. At any rate, my point is that people who are longing for the days of Butler and Norris need to understand that college football is such a cat and mouse game. There is no way you can really look to the past for lessons on how to find success - if it's in the past, it's because that riddle was already solved.
|
|
|
DL Size
Jan 10, 2024 14:01:07 GMT -8
Post by ag87 on Jan 10, 2024 14:01:07 GMT -8
Two of our best rush ends in the 2000-2010 era were Slade Norris and Victor Butler. They were not big guys. Neither was Dylan Wynn several years later. Slade Norris came here as a walk-on wide receiver. He bulked up some.
|
|
|
DL Size
Jan 10, 2024 23:11:10 GMT -8
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 10, 2024 23:11:10 GMT -8
Two of our best rush ends in the 2000-2010 era were Slade Norris and Victor Butler. They were not big guys. Neither was Dylan Wynn several years later. Slade Norris came here as a walk-on wide receiver. He bulked up some. He was projected to be a receiver. His second position was linebacker, though, which he wound up playing in the NFL.
|
|