Do You See What I See? - OL

[Harry]

Clichés become clichés because they are typically true. Games are won in the trenches in the NFL and the Cards aren’t winning anything there when they try to run. Few things are harder to do than to admit in front of the entire world that you made a mistake. The Cards must do so and admit they have serious O-line problems. Gandy had a decent season, but he wore down at the end and was constantly beaten by speed rushes in the Super Bowl. He could still be serviceable at guard, but the Cards certainly have future issues to be concerned with on Warner’s blindside. On the other end of the line, Levi Brown’s footwork leaves much to be desired. While he improved slightly this season, he will never be a left tackle and will be hard pressed to ever be viewed as a solid right tackle. Neither man was much of an asset in the running game.

The Cards did make an adjustment in the playoffs to compensate for these deficiencies, but they were too little, too late when it came to the Super Bowl. Throughout the season the spacing on the line forced the tackles to be flexible protecting inside and outside. During the playoffs, a tighter line set was used, essentially minimizing the gaps between the linemen. This helped Brown as he had more help inside, so he could focus more on outside protection. On the other hand, Gandy seemed to struggle to get out quickly enough to protect against a speed rusher taking a wide set. This formation also enhanced the run as it allowed the Cards to focus more on drive blocks. Unfortunately it made their running game more predictable and they were out-coached in that aspect in the Super Bowl. While this draft is deep in tackles, the Cards have said the future is now by re-signing Warner. So I don’t expect a tackle to be drafted, but I do not see a long term solution at tackle on this roster. The best future option might be Brandon Keith, but he is still very raw.

Wells showed improvement at guard, but again his run blocking did little to distinguish him from an ordinary lineman. Lutui shows flashes and can run block, but on too many plays he is not an impact player. Re-signing the other Brown was a smart move, as he has shown nice versatility.

You have to believe the Cards intend to draft a center in round one or two. Otherwise it made little sense to not sign one of the exceptional free agents from this year’s market. Sendlein is a decent value at center, but he Cards need a force and a leader in the middle.

How the Cards deal with this group over the next couple of years will be a major factor in how far this team can go in the playoffs.

 

[Goldfield]

You can never have too many good OL/DL If we took OL & DL every pick I wouldnt complain.

 

[Goldfield]

I think Russ Grimm has worked wonders with a below average line. I welcome any upgrade there.

 

[PJ1]

Gandy had a tough time in the Super Bowl when left by himself to block the best speed rusher in the game. Don't get the criticism. He did great in the rest of the playoffs so how did he wear down?

The Cardinals didn't lose the Super Bowl because of the offensive line. How many more points did you want against the NFL's best D? We lost because our D once again could not come up with a stand when needed. A problem all year.

I hope they do add depth in the draft but the wildcard to me is how will Keith and Vallejo develop.

 

[CardinalChris]

I think Russ Grimm has worked wonders with a below average line. I welcome any upgrade there.

Interesting because I look at the talent on the line and I am seeing recent hgh draft picks greatly underperform on the right side. Lutui and Brown were supposed to be one of the better young side of football and both seem to be below average 2 years after Grimm got ahold of them. On the flip side, they got more mileage out of the left side than most of us thought he could. Maybe he's not so good at developing talent, but he's very good at squeezing production from veterans.

 

[WildBB]

Harry, what round would you pick a running back if Wells, Moreno, Brown and McCoy are all off the board when our 63 rolls up?

What do you do if Moreno is there at 31?

Finally if Moreno is gone, do you go OLB, or OL? Some have suggested a FS like Delmas as well.

Who would you take between Mack, Unger and Pettigrew if avial?

 

[Brighteyes]

Gandy had a tough time in the Super Bowl when left by himself to block the best speed rusher in the game. Don't get the criticism. He did great in the rest of the playoffs so how did he wear down?

The Cardinals didn't lose the Super Bowl because of the offensive line. How many more points did you want against the NFL's best D? We lost because our D once again could not come up with a stand when needed. A problem all year.

I hope they do add depth in the draft but the wildcard to me is how will Keith and Vallejo develop.

I agree one hundred percent.

 

[az1965]

Gandy had a tough time in the Super Bowl when left by himself to block the best speed rusher in the game. Don't get the criticism. He did great in the rest of the playoffs so how did he wear down?

The Cardinals didn't lose the Super Bowl because of the offensive line. How many more points did you want against the NFL's best D? We lost because our D once again could not come up with a stand when needed. A problem all year.

Yep... the D let the won game slip away in the last seconds.

 

[CardLogic]

Gandy had a tough time in the Super Bowl when left by himself to block the best speed rusher in the game. Don't get the criticism. He did great in the rest of the playoffs so how did he wear down?

DING!

The Cardinals didn't lose the Super Bowl because of the offensive line. How many more points did you want against the NFL's best D? We lost because our D once again could not come up with a stand when needed. A problem all year.

DING! DING!

I hope they do add depth in the draft but the wildcard to me is how will Keith and Vallejo develop.

DING! They are hanging on to them for a reason.

IDEALLY, it would be great to have an All-Pro at each and every postion! But that is never going to happen. Great "skill" positions and average trench players or great trench players and average "skill" positions, which is better?

For me I choose the former; it's more interesting. It's also more nerve-wracking, but hey...

 

[Skkorpion]

Pittsburg, the 2009 champ, has how many all-pros on it's offensive line?

Harry still makes some interesting points and some valid ones as well.

 

[CardLogic]

Harry still makes some interesting points and some valid ones as well.

He always does!

And it's Pittsburgh! :bim:

 

[schwalbhimself]

 

[Mitch]

I think this time around your critique is far too harsh, Harry. The offensive line deserves a great deal of credit for the Cardinal offense scoring 27 ppg and 30 ppg in the playoffs versus some dang good defenses.

You are right that at times both Gandy and Brown struggle with their footwork...and you made an astute point about the Cardinals closing down on their splits...but let's not forget that Gandy and Brown played on islands all year, even when Gandy was pmatched up versus the best pass rusher in the NFL in the Super Bowl and for some inexplicable reason Todd Haley decided not to chip Harrison at all in the game. Despite all of that, the Cardinals still scored enough points versus the best defense by far in the NFL to win the Super Bowl.

As for dismissing Gandy and Brown as run blockers, that's not quite accurate or fair, IMO. Both of them were especially effective in the red zone...rookie Tim Hightower scored 12 TDs this past season (when was the last time a Cardinal RB scored double digit TDs?). There were some plays where both Brown and Lutui blew open Mack truck sized holes near the goalline...and on the other side, Gandy and Wells were a little more finesse, but efficient, nonetheless.

Reggie Wells---and I thought I would never say this---is one of the most improved players on the Cardinals...he's stronger and he pulls very well and he influences his man at times just the way you would want. He still lacks head on power, but he doesn't get totally dominated anymore either.

Lyle Sendelin, IMO, is the most under-appreciated player on the team. For two years (after being signed as an UCFA)...he has played his tail off, at a position that requires leadership (line calls), technique and smarts. The fact is, the team did not miss much of a beat at all when Al Johnson was sidelined. Yes, Sendlein struggled at times...but how much leeway does a 2nd year UCFA deserve? Plus, he almost never, ever gave up any sacks...which for a center on a passing juggernaut is pretty darned good.

Deuce played well for most of the plays...when he misses a play or makes a mistake, it's the kind that make you wonder what he's thinking, but for the most part, he played good, physical style football and, like Sendelin and Wells, he was a stalwart in protection (and let's not forget that they were all blocking for an immobile QB).

The line is developing good depth too...the coaches have confidence in Elton Brown, Elliot Vallejo and Brandon Keith and we may see much more of these three this season. And if they outplay the incumbents they will be able to earn starting roles...which is the Whiz way. Russ Grimm was thinking about starting Keith late in the season. And he loves Vallejo, which is why you may be right about Gandy sliding down to guard at some point.

One thought to remember: how about the time the offensive line gave Kurt Warner at Carolina to complete those stunning intermediate crossing patterns? Those plays were textbook, and it took a great effort from the line to give Warner and the WRs time to let the plays develop.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

I don't disagree with the premise of Harry's post. The Oline could use more talent and a overpowering player at any of the 5 positions would be quite an upgrade.

But Wisenhunt is smart enough to know that on the offensive line you can make up for lack of talent with continuity and discipline. Ideally we would be able to add a stud to that line and then an injury somewhere else or a mix up in communication can be over come.

But most of the good teams have shown that with right mix of players you can overcome not having stellar individual play.

 

[Jetstream Green]

I agree with you Mitch, though I value Harry's opinion often, and I think the OL was far better than anyone expected and I think keeping it together for the most part will only help it rather than going back to the constant plugging in of players as in the past.

 

[Garthshort]

One thing I agree with is Harry's contention that we draft an OC early.

 

[JeffGollin]

Lots to agree with/some stuff not to agree with.

Let's get rid of the disagreement stuff first, starting with Harry's observation that "Cliches become cliches because they're typically true." I'm not sure I totally buy into this because of other cliches - (a) there are exceptions to every rule and (b) rules are made to be broken. Plus, sometimes folks make really insightful observations, but then reach the wrong conclusions as to their cause.

For example: "Total ground yardage stats indicate that running the ball successfully (and stopping the run) wins games." But Football Outsiders points out that most successful offensive teams rely on the passing game to gain the lead and churn out a lot of running yardage later in the game in order to protect that lead. (And vice versa - teams that can't stop other teams from passing their way to an early lead tend to struggle).

Now for the O-Line.

I think we were amazingly lucky last season that we had no significant injuries to our starting 5. (It would be unrealistic to believe that we'll be that fortunate again in the future).

This strongly suggests that we'd better have quality depth behind our starters.

I agree that, when you dissect the play of each starting Cardinal lineman, you'll find plenty of warts. One guy can't drive block. Another guy's feet are too slow. Another guy has trouble remembering the snap count. Yet - when all was said and done - the Cardinal offense somehow got the job done.

I believe this is partly due to Russ Grimm's coaching, but also partly due to a phenominon I'll term: "The Even a Cave Man Can Do it" factor. By this I'm referring to the number of times teams will use duct-tape and anything else available to patch up a beaten-up offensive line and somehow emerge OK. (The Giants are notorious for doing so, and the irony is that after each season, one or two of their journeyman O-linemen always seem to wind up with Pro Bowl reputations).

Do I think the Cards need solid depth behind their current 5 starters? Absolutely! Do I think we'd be better off upgrading the LT position and having more bulk and strength at center? YessirreeBob! Am I completely satisfied with Reggie Wells as a run blocker? Uh....no!

But this doesn't mean I feel the Cardinal line sucks either - after all, it was good enough to get us to within a few inches of a Super Bowl Championship. (Results have to count for something).

Looking forward - I'd love for us to draft a quality center who could also become a Pro Bowl guard. And I'm hoping that our off-season program is productive enough to develop Keith and Vallejo to a point where they are as good or better than the starters we've got. Because of other priorities and our drafting position, I doubt this will be the year where we draft a primo LT (unless we want to draft a RT/or move Elton there and then move Levi to the left side - logical but not without some iffiness). Or - if we could somehow shake free a few shekels, maybe we could sign Orlando Pace to a one-year.

In the end, I think what we're facing (as we will every year) will be a situation where we have more roster holes than we have resources to fill all of them. So what we will do is cherry pick the draft board for opportunities - in the form of good players who fall to us. Maybe a couple will be offensive linemen. Maybe not. Maybe this will be the Cardinal "Year of the RB, LB or DB instead. Each draft year is different.

So I think our every hope and intention will be to add a couple of quality offensive linemen (most notably center) but whether or not we do so is by no means a lock.

 

[WildBB]

and, like Sendelin and Wells, he was a stalwart in protection (and let's not forget that they were all blocking for an immobile QB).


One thought to remember: how about the time the offensive line gave Kurt Warner at Carolina to complete those stunning intermediate crossing patterns? Those plays were textbook, and it took a great effort from the line to give Warner and the WRs time to let the plays develop.

The line did a commendable job in pass protection, but a lot of credit needs to go to Warner and WR's for their reads on the secondary. Plus Warner is the oportune QB for getting the ball out when necessary. Warner had plenty of pressure on him throughout the year. And in the playoffs Philly and Pitt brought the heat which really stiffled the Cards in Philly's second half comeback bid. Run blocking would probably be rated a C+ with this unit. They didn't have the most explosive backs taking advantage of the holes and creases as well.

 

[WildBB]

For example: "Total ground yardage stats indicate that running the ball successfully (and stopping the run) wins games." But Football Outsiders points out that most successful offensive teams rely on the passing game to gain the lead and churn out a lot of running yardage later in the game in order to protect that lead. (And vice versa - teams that can't stop other teams from passing their way to an early lead tend to struggle).

That's easier said then done.

Running successfully while holding the lead wins games. That's why running the football in the 2nd half's are so imperative in this league.
When the D knows your going to run the football and you do, successfully. That's a beautiful thing to behold. And an aggravating thing to watch when it's happening to your team.

 

[moklerman]

I have a really tough time figuring out how well the o-line is actually performing. It seems very unusual that a line that can pass block so well could run block so poorly.

Something that kind of crystallized my "solution" to at least the evaluation was thanks to ramsfanatic.com. That site offers free downloads of various Rams games from the past. It's only one game at a time and only once a month but still a cool service. Anyway, the most recent offering was the 2000 opening MNF game with the Rams vs. the Broncos.

It's no secret that the GSOT was built on speed and mismatches but I think we all forget just how fast they really were when they were at their peak. Even in '01 they weren't as fast as that 2000 season(which I consider the peak of the offense). Having said all of that, even though it's a major example of an extreme contrast, it was glaring how quick Faulk looked compared to how James and Hightower have looked.

This leads me to my "solution" which is to let the o-line maintain the continuity that it has going(something I happen to value very highly) and try some RB's that are more suited to the offense that's in place. JJ was supposed to be the quick RB of the trio and he has never looked to be that. From what I can remember, there really hasn't been a quick(not fast) RB for the last few years.

When I try to think of the perfect RB for the Cardinals situation Leon Washington pops into my head for some reason. Maybe Wright is quick enough at the LOS to be more productive?

 

[WildBB]

I have a really tough time figuring out how well the o-line is actually performing. It seems very unusual that a line that can pass block so well could run block so poorly.

Something that kind of crystallized my "solution" to at least the evaluation was thanks to ramsfanatic.com. That site offers free downloads of various Rams games from the past. It's only one game at a time and only once a month but still a cool service. Anyway, the most recent offering was the 2000 opening MNF game with the Rams vs. the Broncos.

It's no secret that the GSOT was built on speed and mismatches but I think we all forget just how fast they really were when they were at their peak. Even in '01 they weren't as fast as that 2000 season(which I consider the peak of the offense). Having said all of that, even though it's a major example of an extreme contrast, it was glaring how quick Faulk looked compared to how James and Hightower have looked.

This leads me to my "solution" which is to let the o-line maintain the continuity that it has going(something I happen to value very highly) and try some RB's that are more suited to the offense that's in place. JJ was supposed to be the quick RB of the trio and he has never looked to be that. From what I can remember, there really hasn't been a quick(not fast) RB for the last few years.

When I try to think of the perfect RB for the Cardinals situation Leon Washington pops into my head for some reason. Maybe Wright is quick enough at the LOS to be more productive?

The greatest show on turf huh...it brings back fond memories. We could be part II next season with all our components in tact and a "quicker" to the hole back.

That's what I was saying above. that we haven't exactly had the optimal back yet. Arrington was an overall disappointment. Hopefully the FO makes solid choices this draft. That said, I don't think Greene or that type of back would bring much of a difference than what James brought. Just saying, if they go in that kind of direction in the draft, he's not much different than what we already have. James Davis might be an alternative, as would Kory Sheets later in the draft if we don't go for one of the early draftboard backs.

 

[Harry]

Sorry I didn’t get back sooner. Also I’ve got an all day video conference meeting today, so I don’t have a great deal of time to elaborate.

From what I am now hearing the Cards will go running back in round one only if one of 3(some say 4) guys are there. After this pick no relatively sure thing is available that pairs well with Hightower. Moreno is surely in that group. There are few if any interesting rotation backs in the late rounds. I can’t see them taking a chance on White, but he would be interesting to acquire.

The second line of attack is a DE/OLB, specifically a pass rusher.

The Cards will listen to offers for Boldin and I believe Leinart despite the cap issues. Those issues can be resolved by trading Boldin or releasing James and/or Okeafor depending on whom they draft and would receive back in a trade.

I’m sure Whisenhunt likes Pettigrew, but tight end is not viewed as a major need based on the signing of Brecht. While Delmas is high on a few boards, I also do not believe the Cards will use an early pick on this position.
Mack & Unger present interesting players. Mack is the surest thing, but many scouts didn’t like his work in the Senior Bowl. Scouts have been divided on Unger since day one, but more like him than don’t. If the Cards somehow solve one or both of the above needs by round one, Mack is a possibility. Unger could last until their second pick and might well be chosen there.

As mentioned elsewhere the Cards would like a return man, but by the time they get to that need most of the surer things will be gone.

 

[JeffGollin]

Everything is relative because we're talking about a 53 man roster in a team sport where every player; every unit and every position has at least a remotely, indirect impact on the performance of every other player, unit etc.

We lost the Super Bowl because three DB's were a quarter of a step late covering Holmes and one of them lacked the extra 3 or 4 jumping-inches needed to tip the ball.

Then again you could say we lost the Super Bowl when Warner took Harrison's bait. Or when Rolle took out Fitz along the sideline.

Or, no doubt, scads of other what-ifs during the entire course of the game.

Rather than attempt to single any one roster-deficiency as being "that thing" (and reaching for the next Tommy Knight or Wendell Bryant "because that's the only thing we're missing"), I think we'd be better served if the Cardinal brass continued to upgrade the roster on a variety of fronts by drafting and cherrypicking free agency opportunistically.

If the right RB (Wells, Moreno, D Brown or anyone else) represents the available drafting option who can improve us most, then that's who we should pick.

But if Mack or Wood are available and Rod and Wiz feel that they'd help us more than Wells, Moreno etc., then we should pick one of them.

Or if, for some reason, Laurinaitis or Cushing should fall to us and Keim, Rod, Wiz etc. feel either one or Barwin would help our team more than any available RB or O-lineman, then they should pick the LB.

Of course, there's always the modicum of risk - that none of the BPA's you draft will turn out to be O-linemen, but that risk is mitigated somewhat by the presence of backups like Keith, E Brown and Vallejo and the expectations/"hope" that they'd be good enough to step up if necessary.

But my overall point is that you can't have everything (but, under normal situations, this doesn't mean you'll wind up with nothing). If we don't land a backup to Sendlein, we might wind up improved at RB with Wells or at LB with a Laurinaitis or Barwin.

Slightly OT - the most intriguing (and difficult) part of setting up a (need-modified) BPA board is "where to put the elite QB's." Our lack of need might drop Stafford, Sanchez or Freeman way down our board, but there will come a point where we'd have to ask yourself: In absolute terms, who would we rather have on my team: Stafford? Or McCoy? Or Delmas? Or Scott McKillup? Or Kory Sheets? (When you finally get to the point where you say "I'd rather have Stafford than the other dude, that's where you should slot Stafford).