Getting ahead of the Offensive Line Narrative

Most BC fans agree that Oline U hasn't been itself for two years. We've been inconsistent and worst of all, the guys didn't always play well as a group. BC had talent, but the parts were greater than the sum. Who was to blame? There was plenty of finger pointing. Some say it was scheme. Others blamed coaching. Maybe BC's coaching turnover and talent attrition just came home to roost.

BC enters the season with a new offensive coordinator and three new starters on the Oline, so the excuse making is starting already. But we fans shouldn't accept this narrative just yet. Look at the talking points and then the reality.

1. BC lost three starters on the offensive line. Although it is technically true, the impact and importance of those starters is subjective. Castonzo started all 13 games and is a loss. Claiborne was in and out of the lineup last year and only started eight games. Lapham was inconsistent prior to his injury and the line play actually improved once Cleary stepped in for him. Lapham only started 8 games. Now the good news:
-- Cleary started 10 games
-- Richman started 10 games
-- Spinney started 11 games
-- White started 3 games
-- Davis earned 1 start
Plus BC has some promising depth on the roster. But look at that list of 2010 starters again. Spaz could open the season with an offensive line with an experienced starter at every position. That's a nice problem to have, especially since the media won't notice.

2. The offensive line has dealt with numerous coaching changes. The four oline coaches in four years was a nice tidbit excuse the media could trot out when covering BC the last few years. Now we've had a bit of stability. The current OL guys on the roster have only had two position coaches: Jack Bicknell Jr and Sean Devine. Most only know Devine. While they are learning another system, conceptually it is still "pro style" and shouldn't be a huge adjustment.

3. They were recruited for a different system. The zone blocking body type is overrated. Most good players on the Oline can do both. And if the oline and its coach are not capable of teaching and adapting then Spaz has a big problem on his staff.

I actually think the Oline will be good next year. If we get the right guys in the right positions things should be much much better.

How to ruin the best OLine in the ACC part 1

We have four returning offensive lineman. Three of those four earned all ACC honors last season. Coming into today's game they had a combined 63 starts. They looked lost today and I am afraid they don't know what to do. That's coaching. Now our coaches have plenty of experience and should be able to turn things around. My fear though is there is too much going on and we are doing nothing well. I am also a bit concerned about things like spacing and execution. This stuff should not be happening three games into the season with a mostly experienced group. The execution is probably due to too many varied schemes (part Tranq, part Logan) and four different QBs splitting time. Here are a few of the issues. (I may add more as I continue to go through the rewatch).

First Quarter. 3rd and 17. BC calls a draw that gets blown up.
This was the first real cowardly call of the game. But I can understand why we did it. The draw is low risk. It should be easy to execute and it plays to your strengths: the line and Harris. However, we failed to execute. Here are some issues:
-- Doesn't Harris seem awfully deep? This might make it seem like he is staying into block and sell the draw, but it also means he has to cover a lot of ground just to get to the line of scrimmage.

-- Anderson releases downfield and takes a defender with him. Now Clemson only has five guys in the box!! Although this doesn't guarantee a first down, it should at least mean a decent gain. But you can already see problems. Lapham (on the right side) is drawing his man downfield away from the play. That's good. However, the rest of the line is clustered at the line of scrimmage? This is a draw. These guys have runs thousands of draws. What are they doing? They should also being drawing/driving their men downfield too. There should be a big hole. Yet Clemson -- with only five in the box -- is ready to gobble up the runner.

-- Castonzo won his matchup. But the three interior guys (two of who were all ACC) shuffled around and left three defenders ready to crush Harris. Ugh.


1st and 10. Basic run play. Offensive line is asked to do something (pull I think? but it is so sloppy you can't be sure) and leave Haden out to dry.
Pulling and trapping is a staple of many offenses. Gary Tranquill might have multiple plays that call on it. One problem though...our guys have not been drilling in this for two years. Should we have these plays in our playbook? Can you do this and still mix in zone? Does anyone have clue what is going on? Take a look:
-- Clemson has five men on the line. That is problem No. 1. Do we audible? Have any counters? If so we didn't use them.

-- The play starts off ok. Richman, Claiborne and Pantale all block down and win their battles. Castonzo doubles the End with Anderson. I don't love the decision but you can live with it (I would prefer if one of them went to the second level). The real problem is that Lapham and Tennant are supposed to pull and clear the way. Yet Tennant doesn't disengage quickly enough and Lapham is a big dude who is probably never going to cover that much land quickly enough.

-- So now Haden is heading towards a hole with two Clemson guys waiting for him. Tennant and Lapham are never going to get there. Haden decided to kick it out and go around the end but was tackled for a loss.



1st and 10. Shinskie's first drive. 1st use of one of Logan's staples: the zone option read.
We are struggling. We haven't moved the ball. Someone (Tranq?) decides to go and use one of the plays that worked well for BC last year. Only we use it with the one guy who wasn't around in the Logan days in Shinskie!?!? But once again I think these guys have so much going on in their heads, they are screwing up basic things like spacing. Take a look:
-- Look how big the space is between Tennant and Claiborne! What's going on? Both are smart and experienced. Why is this happening? It screams lack of repetition or confusion. The Clemson DT picks up on it and gets right in the gap.

-- At the snap he is already by Claiborne. But the play is not totally lost. A good QB who knows this play might be able to make something out of nothing. But instead we have a relief pitcher who hasn't played football since 2002. Now if Tuggle had been in there, he might have done something...after all he saw film of Crane and Tuggle dealing with this same situation last year.

-- Claiborne is beat. Lapham is blocking air. Haden is about to be lunch. Since the end is starting to crash though a running QB who knew the offense might have kept it himself and tried to make positive yards.

-- Yet Shinskie gives it to Haden and we have another negative play.


I may have more of this, but you get the point. There is too much going on with the team and our experienced guys are lost. There is more talent than we saw today, but we need the staff to quickly put together a plan that plays to their strengths!

When the coaching staff has their come to Jesus meeting Sunday, it is on Spaz, Day and Sirmans to speak up and get us back on track. They know what can work with these guys. They know what drills will work. They are the carryovers. They have to help bridge the gap. If they don't we will have serious issues.

Is it all about Crane? and other links

I don't know if I buy the "it's all on Crane" angle developing. Look at the Georgia Tech game. He struggled and we still almost won. I think we need Crane to be good to win the division, but on a game to game basis we can compete regardless of how well he plays.

I wonder how accessible Ryan will be during the game? I hope he's in the box and not on the sidelines. His shadow is large enough already. We don't need Crane or Davis coming back to the bench and seeing the BC legend there.

The defense sounds worried about Taylor.

The Bobcats picked up Dudley's option.

I hadn't given much thought to Frantz Joseph until EDSBS's humorous post on him. Before he made a name for himself at FAU, he was a lightly regarded scout team member at BC. Being buried on the depth chart and homesickness curtailed his stay in Boston. His return to southern Florida has done wonders and he's put together a nice career. He's just another example of how hard it is to predict the physical and mental maturity of guys in their late teens.

For those who like wonky football stuff, check out Smart Football's post on line splits. It gets into the differences in a zone scheme like ours and a wide split team like Texas Tech. What is relevant to BC is that our current line coach (Bicknell Jr) worked at Texas Tech prior to coming back to BC.

Zoning in on Gibbs' zone blocking

As former BC consultant and Jags mentor Alex Gibbs continues his sojourn around football, his once secretive and protected techniques on zone blocking are becoming much more documented. My fellow Fanhouse blogger Stephanie Stradley found these videos on zone blocking related to Gibbs move to the Texans. Both are informative and give insight into the philosophies Jags is using at BC.

Here is an article on Gibbs' work in Houston.

2007 Position Previews: Offensive Line

This is the seventh part of my position by position breakdown of the 2007 roster.

OFFENSIVE LINE

This was the hardest position preview to write because nothing is set. Whatever I post here could be meaningless in a week or two. With that in mind here is my guess on our 2007 offensive line.

Overview
As I’ve highlighted the past week, BC is transitioning to a new strict zone blocking scheme. Under the zone, you ideally want to use smaller more athletic lineman. It is sort of serendipitous that due to graduation and gradual transition, this group of lineman is not as big as some of the units we’ve trotted out the past four or five years. Cherilus is very tall, but many of the other players are in the 6’3ish range. That is certainly big, but with lower center’s of gravity and hopefully more agile.

The Players
T - Gosder Cherilus, SR, 6’7, 318lbs
G - Ryan Poles, SR, 6’4, 295lbs
C – Kevin Sheridan, SR, 6’3, 290lbs
G – Tom Aneviski, SR, 6’2, 291lbs
T – Clif Ramsey, JR, 6’6, 313lbs
T – Pat Sheil, SO, 6’6, 284lbs
C/OG – Matt Tenant, SO, 6’4, 278lbs
G/T – Ty Hall, SR, 6’4, 300lbs
T — Carlos Huggins, JR, 6’6, 316lbs
G/T – Rich Lapham, FR 6’8, 336lbs
G/T – Anthony Castonzo, FR, 6’7, 260lbs

Cherilus is the best of this group. He moves to the left side after spending the majority of his career on the right. Cherilus was excellent last year with one exception – his penalties. If he can get his full mental game in check, he can put together a perfect season. Poles yo-yo’d in and out of the lineup last season. I found him to be less effective than the guy he started over (Ty Hall) but Poles quickness should fit in better with the new staff. Sheridan had a good spring and would seem perfect for the new system. He moves well and played better as the season moved on. His current understudy, Matt Tennant, also impressed the new staff, so it wouldn’t surprise me if Tennant gets a few snaps with the first team. Aneviski was another spot player from last year who played very well when given the chance. The Right Tackle spot is also getting a lot of play in the press. It seems to be coming down to Pat Sheil and Clif Ramsey. My bet (with no inside scoop) is that Sheil gets the call. Ty Hall seems like the forgotten man. He went from starting as a Redshirt Freshman to mop up duty last year. I wonder if his gut is also hurting his standing with the new staff. He’s always played well when given the chance, so I feel good that he is still around to fill holes. Huggins isn’t getting much attention but might get to see the field. Lapham came in with a lot of hype but so far has not lived up to it. Castonzo is very unlikely to play, but you never know.

If I had to guess the starting lineup for Wake (once again, no inside info), I would say LT — Cherilus, LG – Poles, C – Sheridan, RG - Aneviski, RT — Sheil. Now by November it might look like this LT – Cherilus, RG — Sheridan, C — Tennant, RG - Aneviski, RT – Sheil.

Outlook
While it is the biggest concern of the offseason, I predict that the line will be playing very well together by the second half of the season. The zone movement will also rejuvenate many things about O-Line U and our running game.

Zone blocking for dummies

Much has been made of our movement to zone blocking. The hype has been somewhat misleading as we've had numerous elements of the zone scheme for years. However, Jags is implementing a more strict zone scheme fathered by current BC consultant Alex Gibbs. The coaches also recently took a trip to Green Bay to see how Jags' former pupils are using the scheme at the pro level. In all this talk, I am sure many are wondering "what is zone blocking?" In an over simplification from my amateur perspective, zone blocking can be summarized as the line working as one to move the defense in a certain direction, as opposed to each lineman having a specific assignment. For a much better explination you're better off reading the following links and watching this amateur but decent video.

-- Bob Davie on zone blocking
-- American Football Monthly on Zone Blocking Principles
-- Zone Blocking in Wikipedia