since68andcounting

How much does weight matter in the trenches?

45 posts in this topic

This is something I've wondered a lot about with our roster. I've felt like we needed a big DT in the Grady Jackson mold for a long time. Obviously, we had Poe and lost him, but have some possibilities of a replacement. Still not at the same size. It's not just defense it's offense.

On our current roster, we have two players at 310 or above. Both on offense. The Eagles have fifteen, mostly on offense but also two DTs at 320+. I understand that quickness, core strength, and explosiveness can beat size. This seems to be Quinn's philosophy. But I worry about late in games where the accumulation of the big guys just "leaning on you" begins to take its toll.

This seems to be the late round playoff/super bowl million dollar question in my mind. I KNOW we can get there. But will we simply get out-sized and worn out late in games once we do? Is this part of what happened in SB 51? I'm not sure about the 2016 roster, but currently the Patriots have 14 players at 310+, including a massive 380 lb. OT.

I don't have answers. I'm just asking for thoughts. Mostly from the guys here who have played the game at a high level.

Tim Mazetti and ShadyRef like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leverage > Weight

Hageman was the size of a refrigerator with legs but got backpedaled by guards 3 inches shorter and ~30lbs lighter 

I also would highlight that many of the best 4-3 DTs, especially recently, were/are all "small" for their position

Geno Atkins, Gerald McCoy, Aaron Donald, Grady Jarrett (yes he is already working his way into a list like that), etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess weight vs leverage depend on scheme position  along the line and team needs.  Grady was asked to eat blocks and take up space because he was so large. Rod Coleman was more adept at pass rushing because he was quicker and lighter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It matters, but as others have said in this topic, leverage is more important.  That being said, if you have a pair of guys who are both 6'4" and one weighs a buck-95 he's easily gonna get pushed around.

Vandy likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me weight matters when the defender starts to get tired (playing alot of snaps) ... But in a normal situation its more about leverage

 

 

Im interested to see what weight the team want Dearin at...... Again i dont think we want big tackles.. More penetration... Dontari Poe had a under 330 weight clause in his contract so he was playing in the 320's to 3 teens.

At the east west shrine (where deadrin was the most dominant DT there) he weight in at 322lbs ... At the combine he came in at 314lbs ,,,, So he is a big NT

gazoo and Tim Mazetti like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kschreck said:

leverage but it sure is nice to have someone like grady jackson who can literally eat olineman for breakfast

Grady drew bodies because of the gap he played but also because he was strong as an ox. Which is what senat is. Speed and quickness will draw the same bodies as well tho. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Boise Falcon Fan said:

Personally, I like to have a heavy DT or 2, because they can take up space and keep OG's off of my LB's.

A 305/310 pound guy with speed can also do that. Ala Warren Sapp. The thing is you can be a big body guy but soft as Charmin tissue. You can be a squatty Guy like Sapp, Randle, Grady, and Senat and still be as strong as the big body guy but have better leverage and quicker. That will keep guys off lb’s too. But the main reason for our guys is we’re built to play with a lead so we can get go after the qb. That’s why it’s important for the offense to get back tonits scoring ways. 

blkbigdog35 and Tim Mazetti like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Boise Falcon Fan said:

Personally, I like to have a heavy DT or 2, because they can take up space and keep OG's off of my LB's.

I prefer that in my 1-tech for sure. You want that immovable force who can take on two blockers and keep your ILB clean.

Everyone loves the 3-tech DTs, but 1-techs are often who determines which side wins and loses at line of scrimmage. This is the vital part of a defense stopping the run most folks don’t grasp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They say football players are built from the ground up.  

Consider the quote “with a lever long enough and a base solid enough, you can move the earth.”   

It’s all physics and so it’s all leverage.   A squat body style (powerful hips and thighs) makes it easier.  Obviously strength is required, but if you can get underpad on someone, you should win the battle.  

Big guys leaning on you for 3 1/2 quarters does take a toll, so I wouldn’t say you want light fast guys, but rather you want squat powerful guys rather than just “big” guys.   

 

Tim Mazetti likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a good rotation would help in keeping DL fresh going against big OL. As far as the OL going against 340 pound two-gap run stuffers is a matter of strictly leverage.

All the Falcons' OL can do against that is hope for a neutralizing encounter with some movement from leverage. And trust in Free and Coleman to take it elsewhere.

Geeze, I am no educated FB coach...Just rambling. From watching games.

RichardCNile likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RichardCNile said:

They say football players are built from the ground up.  

Consider the quote “with a lever long enough and a base solid enough, you can move the earth.”   

It’s all physics and so it’s all leverage.   A squat body style (powerful hips and thighs) makes it easier.  Obviously strength is required, but if you can get underpad on someone, you should win the battle.  

Big guys leaning on you for 3 1/2 quarters does take a toll, so I wouldn’t say you want light fast guys, but rather you want squat powerful guys rather than just “big” guys.   

 

The Senator looks like he has 34-36 inch thighs.

William Andrews had 32 inch thighs.

Wonder how big Grady's are? Prolly in that range.

BTW I wear a 32 waist pant.

NeonDeion and RichardCNile like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Tim Mazetti said:

I think a good rotation would help in keeping DL fresh going against big OL. As far as the OL going against 340 pound two-gap run stuffers is a matter of strictly leverage.

All the Falcons' OL can do against that is hope for a neutralizing encounter with some movement from leverage. And trust in Free and Coleman to take it elsewhere.

Geeze, I am no educated FB coach...Just rambling. From watching games.

On offense, when going against a big dline, you gotta run them to death in the first 3 quarters.   Sweeps, screens, hit the perimeter last, right, left, left again until their tongues are hanging out.  

Tim Mazetti likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, RichardCNile said:

On offense, when going against a big dline, you gotta run them to death in the first 3 quarters.   Sweeps, screens, hit the perimeter last, right, left, left again until their tongues are hanging out.  

Nice. Thanks. Yep, normally two down guys. Gotta have good execution, as the DC may be lurking in the OC's mind, right?

Ah, screens indeed. Prolly the best counter on downs one/two.

I have seen offenses forced to the outside,just to be cut down by LBs.

I don't think the Falcons' have that concern in the Division, except for maybe TB.. Not so much their LBs, but D Front.

Well there is Q Alexander, dammit.

Edited by Tim Mazetti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, since68andcounting said:

This is something I've wondered a lot about with our roster. I've felt like we needed a big DT in the Grady Jackson mold for a long time. Obviously, we had Poe and lost him, but have some possibilities of a replacement. Still not at the same size. It's not just defense it's offense.

On our current roster, we have two players at 310 or above. Both on offense. The Eagles have fifteen, mostly on offense but also two DTs at 320+. I understand that quickness, core strength, and explosiveness can beat size. This seems to be Quinn's philosophy. But I worry about late in games where the accumulation of the big guys just "leaning on you" begins to take its toll.

This seems to be the late round playoff/super bowl million dollar question in my mind. I KNOW we can get there. But will we simply get out-sized and worn out late in games once we do? Is this part of what happened in SB 51? I'm not sure about the 2016 roster, but currently the Patriots have 14 players at 310+, including a massive 380 lb. OT.

I don't have answers. I'm just asking for thoughts. Mostly from the guys here who have played the game at a high level.

we are wondering because we have smaller d-lineman especially up the middle, I actually think it matters, teams with larger oline can really wear on you. it will be interesting to see how many times we have the little booger mcfarlands in there together, now on a side note you are going to get homer responses in this thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't mind if a backup Dlineman or two was 340+ LBs myself. But not that important

With the way the defense is constructed, going to get big runs against it occasionally, it should be so good the rest of the time, it won't matter.

Very few teams are going to be able to both run on the falcons with their offense and stop the falcons with their defense. If you can't stop Ryan & Co, you'll just get further and further behind running the ball.

 

 

Knight of God and JC Falcon like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, falconidae said:

Wouldn't mind if a backup Dlineman or two was 340+ LBs myself. But not that important

With the way the defense is constructed, going to get big runs against it occasionally, it should be so good the rest of the time, it won't matter.

Very few teams are going to be able to both run on the falcons with their offense and stop the falcons with their defense. If you can't stop Ryan & Co, you'll just get further and further behind running the ball.

 

 

I read that as 

Wouldn't mind if a backup DL or two eats 340+ Linebackers myself.

rugger8 and falconidae like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now