• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

the offensive line play isn't that bad

argh!

Well-known member
DONOR
it isn't great, but it is nowhere near as bad as those trying to scapegoat the ol make it out to be.

if i had to pick one thing "wrong" with this team, i'd say it is focus. even when things have been going their way, i.e. poly's bumbling fumbles, the defense has had big lapses - ergo, again for instance, poly's huge rushing numbers. oh, und also had huge rushing numbers, to those who want to say this game was lost entirely on turnovers.

focus. that's a coaching problem, and what so many of you promised would be better under hauck. but it is about as bad as it's ever been.
 
Nonsense on both counts. The OL is horrible and has been for several years.
Focus is not a coaching problem. If they can’t focus, no coach can teach them how.
 
Think about what you are saying. Has anyone taught you how to focus?
Please explain a coaching procedure to accomplish this.
 
Spanky2 said:
Nonsense on both counts. The OL is horrible and has been for several years.
Focus is not a coaching problem. If they can’t focus, no coach can teach them how.
I agree that the o-line is horrible. I posted weeks ago that this team will go as far as the o-line will take them and that is nowhere. With Hauck style coaching which is not real clever you need a dominant o-line. He doesn't know anything else.
Focus is a lack of practice repetition and instilled fundamentals and that boils down to coaching.
 
Ursus1 said:
I think you need to rewatch the games and actually watch the oline. Soft

didn't say they were good, just not as awful as is being made out. also, cut them some slack, it is hard to play all-out all the time when your 'skill' guys are dropping the ball or otherwise turning it over left and right.
 
argh! said:
Ursus1 said:
I think you need to rewatch the games and actually watch the oline. Soft

didn't say they were good, just not as awful as is being made out. also, cut them some slack, it is hard to play all-out all the time when your 'skill' guys are dropping the ball or otherwise turning it over left and right.

Wow argh, are you serious or joking? If you can't play all-out all the time then there is a lack of focus.
 
bigsky33 said:
argh! said:
Ursus1 said:
I think you need to rewatch the games and actually watch the oline. Soft

didn't say they were good, just not as awful as is being made out. also, cut them some slack, it is hard to play all-out all the time when your 'skill' guys are dropping the ball or otherwise turning it over left and right.

Wow argh, are you serious or joking? If you can't play all-out all the time then there is a lack of focus.

hauck himself said the team doesn't respond to adversity.
 
bigsky33 said:
argh! said:
Ursus1 said:
I think you need to rewatch the games and actually watch the oline. Soft

didn't say they were good, just not as awful as is being made out. also, cut them some slack, it is hard to play all-out all the time when your 'skill' guys are dropping the ball or otherwise turning it over left and right.

Wow argh, are you serious or joking? If you can't play all-out all the time then there is a lack of focus.

This is a thread all to itself. But then, you already knew that.
 
I think they're doing admirably considering the circumstances they've been put under, but "poor" would be the most flattering adjective I would use to describe their play, especially over the last two weeks.

And I don't think that's really anyone's fault. An avalanche of circumstances have lead us to where we are.

For the record, the coaches tried to get at least two FBS dropdowns at the end of the summer that I know of, and neither worked out.
 
If you rewatch a a game and solely focus on just the O line, it isn’t pretty. There are many many many times some of the kids get blown off their blocks or they swing and miss blocks all together. They seem to miss a number of blitzes and assignments. These kids are giving it their all but I don’t think for a minute their weakness is being over exaggerated by the coaches or fans. They are a huge Achilles heel and the coaches said that would be the case. They weren’t lying. Unfortunately everything starts with a good O line so now we are being exposed greatly due to that weakness (no time to pass, no pocket, no run game).
 
HookedonGriz said:
If you rewatch a a game and solely focus on just the O line, it isn’t pretty. There are many many many times some of the kids get blown off their blocks or they swing and miss blocks all together. They seem to miss a number of blitzes and assignments. These kids are giving it their all but I don’t think for a minute their weakness is being over exaggerated by the coaches or fans. They are a huge Achilles heel and the coaches said that would be the case. They weren’t lying. Unfortunately everything starts with a good O line so now we are being exposed greatly due to that weakness (no time to pass, no pocket, no run game).

but the griz would be 7 - 0 without the turnovers, so how could this be?
 
From an old OL guy, there is not a lot of athleticism on our OL. Big, yes, agile, no. And the returning starter is the worst of the pack. Immobile. Easy to scout and exploit. They get beat to the move and the penalties come from getting beat. Either false start to cheat on the speed or holding to try to salvage inability to block assignment. Constant disruption in the backfield.

That said, UND was exceptional at penetrating our and most everyone else's OL. CPSLO, not so much; big difference. Doubt we see anyone else as good at exploiting our OL as UND.
 
uofmman1122 said:
I think they're doing admirably considering the circumstances they've been put under, but "poor" would be the most flattering adjective I would use to describe their play, especially over the last two weeks.

And I don't think that's really anyone's fault. An avalanche of circumstances have lead us to where we are.

For the record, the coaches tried to get at least two FBS dropdowns at the end of the summer that I know of, and neither worked out.


Did the coaches try to get anyone from say the day they were hired until the beginning of summer when most occur after scoring ball wraps up and the JC's find homes?

Why didn't those two work out? Stayed at that school or choose another transfer place?
 
kemajic said:
From an old OL guy, there is not a lot of athleticism on our OL. Big, yes, agile, no. And the returning starter is the worst of the pack. Immobile. Easy to scout and exploit. They get beat to the move and the penalties come from getting beat. Either false start to cheat on the speed or holding to try to salvage inability to block assignment. Constant disruption in the backfield.

That said, UND was exceptional at penetrating our and most everyone else's OL. CPSLO, not so much; big difference. Doubt we see anyone else as good at exploiting our OL as UND.


Germer has been here through those recruitments, can he not judge that? Or is the S/C coach making them bigger but less athletic? Is it because they recruit 300 pound high school kids that can get away with less athleticism vs. 240 pound athletic ones that are going to redshirt in order to gain the size needed?
 
Ursus1 said:
kemajic said:
From an old OL guy, there is not a lot of athleticism on our OL. Big, yes, agile, no. And the returning starter is the worst of the pack. Immobile. Easy to scout and exploit. They get beat to the move and the penalties come from getting beat. Either false start to cheat on the speed or holding to try to salvage inability to block assignment. Constant disruption in the backfield.

That said, UND was exceptional at penetrating our and most everyone else's OL. CPSLO, not so much; big difference. Doubt we see anyone else as good at exploiting our OL as UND.


Germer has been here through those recruitments, can he not judge that? Or is the S/C coach making them bigger but less athletic? Is it because they recruit 300 pound high school kids that can get away with less athleticism vs. 240 pound athletic ones that are going to redshirt in order to gain the size needed?

The $64,000 question that no one seems willing to answer. At what point (either as O-line coach or during recruiting) does Germer become responsible for this shit show?
 
if the o/l is not bad then i am betting Hauck is thinking they are not good.....i would bet the past teams, on the one yard line, he would have his heavy two t/e look with fullback (Le Texier) leading, Calhoun in his hip pocket ,,,,not a gimmick play with Bingham.....in fact, i don't recall seeing this set with a lead fullback this year....i could be wrong.....why did we go to a fullbacks and never use them ?
 
AZGrizFan said:
Ursus1 said:
kemajic said:
From an old OL guy, there is not a lot of athleticism on our OL. Big, yes, agile, no. And the returning starter is the worst of the pack. Immobile. Easy to scout and exploit. They get beat to the move and the penalties come from getting beat. Either false start to cheat on the speed or holding to try to salvage inability to block assignment. Constant disruption in the backfield.

That said, UND was exceptional at penetrating our and most everyone else's OL. CPSLO, not so much; big difference. Doubt we see anyone else as good at exploiting our OL as UND.


Germer has been here through those recruitments, can he not judge that? Or is the S/C coach making them bigger but less athletic? Is it because they recruit 300 pound high school kids that can get away with less athleticism vs. 240 pound athletic ones that are going to redshirt in order to gain the size needed?

The $64,000 question that no one seems willing to answer. At what point (either as O-line coach or during recruiting) does Germer become responsible for this shit show?
Bingo!
 
Ursus1 said:
uofmman1122 said:
I think they're doing admirably considering the circumstances they've been put under, but "poor" would be the most flattering adjective I would use to describe their play, especially over the last two weeks.

And I don't think that's really anyone's fault. An avalanche of circumstances have lead us to where we are.

For the record, the coaches tried to get at least two FBS dropdowns at the end of the summer that I know of, and neither worked out.


Did the coaches try to get anyone from say the day they were hired until the beginning of summer when most occur after scoring ball wraps up and the JC's find homes?

Why didn't those two work out? Stayed at that school or choose another transfer place?
I’ll look into it. I haven’t paid attention to them after they didn’t come here.

As for did they do anything immediately, I’m not sure, but I’d say not because they probably weren’t anticipating all the departures and injuries we’d be dealing with now. Not sure, though.
 
Back
Top