Jump to content

What grade do you give the Falcons offensive line for their 2020 performance?


Recommended Posts

I give them a C-. As a group they were rated in the bottom third of the league. McGary still had problems with his pass blocking and the line never established any consistency in the running game. They will have to be better this year if we're going to have a real running attack to go with our passing game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Godzilla1985 said:

I give them an A+ for trying to play in that clown Koetters system.

Lol....I really think they are better than they played....If folk want to blame Koetter for a lot of Ryan's play....( which I agree with) 

Then some of the OLine play has to be a result of play calling as well....

My opinion anyway 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree,,, a C,,, Here is the good news.. we only need a couple of players Drafted , And Good ones.. Or draft one and pick up a good vet. Hey,,, wouldn't hurt my feeling if we picked up Two vets and didn't draft a one.. For real..  That way we know what we are getting.  Then we could make our D# a Monster .   And if by chance they draft an OL ,, That would give the Rookie a chance to learn and watch how it's done.  Seems like when we draft OL , it takes them a year to learn how to play in the league ....:o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d say a B-, I think they had opportunities obviously, but I think they were put in bad positions as far as playing to their strengths.  Scheme was bad, situational play calling was horrid.  I know it won’t be the same group of five this year, but I think especially Lindstrom and McGary will take a huge step forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Rings said:

I’d say a B-, I think they had opportunities obviously, but I think they were put in bad positions as far as playing to their strengths.  Scheme was bad, situational play calling was horrid.  I know it won’t be the same group of five this year, but I think especially Lindstrom and McGary will take a huge step forward.

that's where i'm at too, B- because i find it really hard to criticize anyone's performance on the offense last year.

really looking forward to seeing them in an o-line friendly scheme this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, JohnnyFranchise said:

that's where i'm at too, B- because i find it really hard to criticize anyone's performance on the offense last year.

really looking forward to seeing them in an o-line friendly scheme this year.

100%.  Not sure the last time I had this much optimism heading into a season and we haven’t even hit free agency yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I cannot grade the OL in 2020.  They were forced into a plan that worked against everything a football team wants to do. 

If you really want to know, ask someone who has played on the OL, college, NFL, doesn't matter, what is the difference between run blocking and pass blocking.  Then, dig a little deeper.  Ask how much pass protection can be held up during a game.  Pass protection is very exhausting for the OL.  And, Dirk Koetter expected them to pass protect nearly every play for 5-6 seconds.  I don't think there has ever been a super human OL who could do that.

We do not know what we have for an OL.  One thing is certain.  With no changes at all except for the removal of DK, this OL will look much better in 2021.

The defense will improve dramatically unless we find another way to produce the 3 and outs that DK specialized in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Draftnut57 said:

Agree,,, a C,,, Here is the good news.. we only need a couple of players Drafted , And Good ones.. Or draft one and pick up a good vet. Hey,,, wouldn't hurt my feeling if we picked up Two vets and didn't draft a one.. For real..  That way we know what we are getting.  Then we could make our D# a Monster .   And if by chance they draft an OL ,, That would give the Rookie a chance to learn and watch how it's done.  Seems like when we draft OL , it takes them a year to learn how to play in the league ....:o

With vets, you know you are getting mediocre at the best.  Teams simply do not let high level lineman walk.  They do not generally create the cap situations that force them out.  I think it is best to go with drafts.  You do not know what you are getting but they could be better than mediocre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ask Matty, the Atlanta O-lines own crash test dummy.  Got his butt sacked excessively again due to the antics of our O-line.  All because your the O-line dosen't mean you don't defend the QB...multi task... open up a hole but let no one through to the QB.

O-line... they have to show up to get graded.

PS: we need a get a in your face smashmouth running game.

:munch:

Edited by Realsurfin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, celtiksage said:

Here's something I've thought about our OLine and y'all can let me know if you think it isn't the case, but I believe our OL was drafted with the primary intention of pass protection. Have we drafted anyone that's known for their run blocking skills? Could that be a problem? 

Your just too polite.  🤣 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Falcon's o-line is the toughest part of the team to evaluate, because of lack of commitment to the run game.

The problems were a combo of poor play design and coaching, as well as consistency from the players -- but I mostly, it points more to coaching. 

Here's what I saw: 

1) Predictability. Because we didn't run the ball well, d-lines played aggressively towards rushing the passer. Combine this with our long developing plays, it led to more opportunities for sacks. 40+ sacks for the 3rd year in a row.

2) Losing the physical battle. No running game means no counterpunch. It's the only way that an offensive line gets to punch back, rather than playing on their heels. This is a recipe for how teams lose the battle at the line of scrimmage.   

3) No consistent philosophy re: running the ball, especially between the 20s. Were we an inside zone team? An outside zone team? A trapping team? (Definitely not a power team). If there's no consistency to what we do, it becomes harder to execute as a unit (where all 5-6 guys must be in sync). This led to missed assignments, plays getting blown up, and yes, more holding to avoid getting beat. The run game looked awful, because of this. (It also led to blowing leads). 

4) Lack of play action. We ranked near the bottom of the league for running play-action. This relates to #1. It goes without saying, if there's not even a threat of a run, makes life easier for defenses.   

5) Inopportune penalties. This one is on the players. There were many promising drives that got killed by calls. I know that holding technically happens every play, but for some reason, we seemed to get flagged when we were moving ball. Led to drives getting killed, or having to settle for field goals.

What I think Arthur Smith will do:

1) Commit to a run philosophy. Based on his evaluation of the current o-line, they will commit to the particular run scheme that best suits who we have. We will likely base our drafting of RBs, based on this also.  

2) Run more play action. Was a staple of the Tennessee offense. Matt Ryan's also been successful running it. 

3) Commit to more balance between run and pass. This will allow the offensive line to play more aggressively, while also protecting the QB. 

To answer your question, the line was a "C" last year, but I think much of it is product of poor coaching.

 

  

Edited by GhostOfBukowski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I give them a DK, which is the same as incomplete. Dirk's scheme has always made life for OLs hard. His philosophy was always, I don't care how you do it, but go block that guy while I stand here for 10 seconds waiting for a route to develop.

I'll wait and see how these same guys do in a system where the coaches actually care about a putting a line in a good position to succeed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, GhostOfBukowski said:

The Falcon's o-line is the toughest part of the team to evaluate, because of lack of commitment to the run game.

The problems were a combo of poor play design and coaching, as well as consistency from the players -- but I mostly, it points more to coaching. 

Here's what I saw: 

1) Predictability. Because we didn't run the ball well, d-lines played aggressively towards rushing the passer. Combine this with our long developing plays, it led to more opportunities for sacks. 40+ sacks for the 3rd year in a row.

2) Losing the physical battle. No running game means no counterpunch. It's the only way that an offensive line gets to punch back, rather than playing on their heels. This is a recipe for how teams lose the battle at the line of scrimmage.   

3) No consistent philosophy re: running the ball, especially between the 20s. Were we an inside zone team? An outside zone team? A trapping team? (Definitely not a power team). If there's no consistency to what we do, it becomes harder to execute as a unit (where all 5-6 guys must be in sync). This led to missed assignments, plays getting blown up, and yes, more holding to avoid getting beat. The run game looked awful, because of this. (It also led to blowing leads). 

4) Lack of play action. We ranked near the bottom of the league for running play-action. This relates to #1. It goes without saying, if there's not even a threat of a run, makes life easier for defenses.   

5) Inopportune penalties. This one is on the players. There were many promising drives that got killed by calls. I know that holding technically happens every play, but for some reason, we seemed to get flagged when we were moving ball. Led to drives getting killed, or having to settle for field goals.

What I think Arthur Smith will do:

1) Commit to a run philosophy. Based on his evaluation of the current o-line, they will commit to the particular run scheme that best suits who we have. We will likely base our drafting of RBs, based on this also.  

2) Run more play action. Was a staple of the Tennessee offense. Matt Ryan's also been successful running it. 

3) Commit to more balance between run and pass. This will allow the offensive line to play more aggressively, while also protecting the QB. 

To answer your question, the line was a "C" last year, but I think much of it is product of poor coaching.

 

  

Outstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...