A favorable video look at George Fant

[semiahmoo]

If Fant works out, great.

But a truly good NFL O-Lineman is a special breed and becoming increasingly valued throughout the league as the D-Side gets bigger/faster/stronger.

B-Ball skill can bridge into a tight end far easier than O-Line. Top tier O-Line guys are a mix of strength, and position smarts that take some time to develop. You can take two guys of similar age/build/etc., put some gloves on them and box a few rounds. The guy with even just a few years of actual boxing training will completely toy with the other guy whose only experience is a few occasional fist fights or hitting the bag - or just watching fighting.

The trained fighter can almost instantly calculate angle, recognize a punch thrown a half-second before it's thrown, know what side the guy is going to move by the position of their feet, etc. Within a minute the untrained fighter is out of balance, gassed, and easy pickings.

O-Line is very similar. The have a couple seconds of explosive interaction in which to do their job and it all starts right before the snap. It takes skill. I laugh at those who say linemen just need to be big and strong. Good Lord there's so much more to it than that. It's all about center of gravity, weight shift, anticipation, getting away with holding, intimidation, keeping at it until the play is finished even when the air is sizzling out of your lungs.

Another analogy is someone who is a highly skilled wrestler. Put him up against an untrained guy who is a good 30 pounds heavier. If the wrestler isn't taken out by a wild swing, and gets the other guy down, it's all over. He'll wrap you up and goodnight. That 30+ pounds is just an anchor.

O-Line is king. They can make a mediocre running back look like a solid workhorse who chews up teams for 3 and 4 yard gains all game long. Without a good line - it's much smaller gains and/or negative yards all game long.

(Sound familiar?)

 

[MontanaHawk05]

O-Line is king. They can make a mediocre running back look like a solid workhorse who chews up teams for 3 and 4 yard gains all game long. Without a good line - it's much smaller gains and/or negative yards all game long.

(Sound familiar?)

I would agree for the run game.

For the passing game, QB is king. When TJ Lang was in the wind, you heard a lot of Packers fans going "Why should we pay $20 million for a guy to protect a QB who gets rid of the ball after two seconds?" They get it. We're still catching up. You can mitigate the effects of a bad O-line with a superstar QB and a smart scheme that doesn't overburden the line.

Russell Wilson is Exhibit A of this (since mid-2015, at least), but really this idea has quietly proven itself throughout the league, and the pundits haven't figured it out yet. Brady transcends his line and we all know it. Matt Schaub made the same line look better after David "QB Shock Poster Boy" Carr left (and took his sack rate with him to other teams). Peyton Manning's line looked awful with Curtis Painter behind it. There's a reason mobile QBs are at a premium.

You cannot, however, turn a mediocre QB into a great one with a good offensive line. The ceiling of that idea is Drew Brees, or maybe Tony Romo. Romo got close a couple times. Replace him with Dak Prescott, same line, and suddenly the team is in yearly Super Bowl buzz. Remember Matt Hasselbeck? He played behind a brilliant 2005 O-line and had a career year. He played behind a bad line in 2007 and still had a career year. Then his arm shriveled up in 2009 and all of a sudden the bad line mattered a lot more.

You know what occurred to me, though?

This dearth of quality linemen is the NFL's fault. We've reached the point where their lust for QB dominance is actually backhandedly starting to make life harder on QB's.

Think about it. The NFL changes rules to favor passing offense and QB safety because Tom Brady and OMG ratings. QB's therefore become more powerful. Teams respond by stocking up on D-linemen. (Have you noticed how many teams are trying to cheat their way to excellence by just stocking up on DL? Our division, Miami, NYJ, Philly, TB, we saw them all last year). Now O-linemen see that it boosts one's draft stock to jump over to defense. The result is fewer quality O-linemen. Which means more and more teams are are going to have a harder time securing good protection for their QBs.

Which only favors guys like...Russell Wilson.

 

[Jville]

The prototype ZBS left tackle, and arguably the best left tackle in the game today, is Trent Williams. By some accounts he was the guy that Alex Gibbs, our O-Line coach at the time and a ZBS guru, really wanted when they ended up with Okung.

If you look at the pre-draft measurables of Williams and Fant, they are eerily similar. Williams was a little heavier, and there is no arm/hand measurement for Fant (other than Cable calling him "a long-armed athlete") but all of the other numbers are really, really close. It's easy to see why the Seahawks took a chance on him and are invested in his future:

Height:
Williams: 6045
Fant: 6047

Weight:
Williams: 315
Fant: 296

Arms:
Williams: 34 1/4”
Fant: N/A

Hands:
Williams: 9 3/4”
Fant: N/A

40-yd dash:
Williams: 4.88 s
Fant: 4.84 s

20-yd split:
Williams: 2.87 s
Fant: 2.82 s

10-yd split:
Williams: 1.72 s
Fant: 1.77 s

225 Bench:
Williams: 23 reps
Fant: 22 reps

Vertical:
Williams: 34.5”
Fant: 37”

Broad:
Williams: 09’5”
Fant: 09’11”

20 yd shuttle:
Williams: 4.63 s
Fant: 4.54 s

3-Cone:
Williams: 7.64 s
Fant: 7.20 s

One other thing that is a little frustrating about this board is how a general sentiment on a player (especially on the O-Line, which is very difficult for an average fan to evaluate), gets set in stone pretty early on, usually after one particular article comes out and it becomes gospel on a player's ability and potential. Not only that, it's either "he's amazing!" or "he sucks!" There's no middle ground. It's funny how posters attitudes about Joekel took a sharp negative downturn after the overthecap article.

John Boyle mentioned this week in his "Sixth Annual Prime Time Celebrity Waiter Event A “Great Event For A Great Cause” article a ..... "noticeably bigger George Fant". Fant is now likely much closer to 315lbs than 296lbs.

I also ran across an article that described Fants arm length as "two inches short of a yard". So he is right there with Williams with regards to arm length as well.

EDIT: Much thanks to Montana for posting the Coleman Crawford video. :2thumbs:

 

[vin.couve12]

I think Fant definitely needs to get stronger and really needs improvement in the run game overall, which sort of ties in with the aforementioned strength. However, he had a better year than Ifedi and still does have obvious upside.

EDIT: Just saw the previous post and am almost putting my food in my mouth. 315 might be just a little too much in one year for a playing weight. Leg injuries are more common...thats almost 20 pounds.

EDIT AGAIN: Probably 5 of that comes off early in TC. 310 might be just about right. I know that seems like nit picking, but there's an optimal balance between functional and injury when you're talking about the rate of gain. You've got to allow all the stabilizer muscles adjust over x amount of time in real world functionality.

 

[FormerEvil]

I was really hoping that Joeckle would play LG but I have a feeling our starting LG is I'm this draft. Ifedi should be moving to RT which IMO will be an upgrade over Gilliam.

The good news is this new o-line can only be Bette than last year's. Gilliam was horrible and I'm going to assume Ifedi will be better seeing how that's his natural position.

I still think LJ will be our starting LG with Fant at LT. I think the Hawks are on record specifically saying they really liked what they saw from Joeckel at LT and LG. Especially at LG.

 

[semiahmoo]

George Fant is OK but I really do prefer Arial.

Easier to read.

 

[Crawdad45c]

[youtube]W_vsgJVakW0[/youtube]

This video did raise an eyebrow with me. The videomaker's omission of Fant's tape against the Cardinals - by far his worst game of the season - did nothing to quiet suspicious of bias. You have to include that. Fant was awful against Arizona. Dangerously awful.

But in the end, I don't doubt the videomaker's conclusion. Fant has the building blocks necessary to succeed at the position. That's not a guarantee that he will; as Carroll said, he's going to have to earn the position back from Joeckel. But since some of you are convinced that Joeckel is Satan, don't be surprised if Fant does win it back.

Hey guys, So I'm the creator. Just to clarify about the lack of ARI tape. I enjoy doing these but don't have time to take clips from every game. So I watch every game but only notate certain plays to take clips from a select number of games, usually 5. I have a method for choosing which games to take from, in this case, it broke down like this:
Week 8 vs NO: First Start for Fant
Week 11 vs PHI: First top tier DLine faced (#2 per DVOA)
Week 13 vs CAR: Next best DLine faced and a game where it seemed to "come together" for most of the line
WC vs DET/ DIV vs ATL: Always take the two most recent games, a plus that they were playoff games and Fant went up against a top tier DE in Ziggy Ansah.

On top of that, I agree that Fant had a terrible game against ARI but the point of issues w/ strike and hand placement, some slow recognition, and poor fundamentals ( from lack of experience) could be demonstrated through the five games I took from. Since it wasn't a play by play of each individual snap I felt that the point was demonstrated well enough through the snaps portrayed.

Just wanted to clear that up for any future situations. I'm glad you guys enjoy the videos. I love making them!

 

[toffee]

There were two sides to Fant's first year:

1. Why and how Fant became starting LT?
That's not on Fant, I am almost sure that Fant didn't dream of being a starter on OL let alone LT. That's on Pete, John and Cable for not stocking the team with legit LT before the season. The fact that Fant with no experience or training became the team's best LT was totally on the team. ie Pete, John and Cable screwed up.

How he was designated as LT was on Cable. Somehow Cable came to the conclusion that Fant's more suitable as a tackle than guard. Not sure how Cable came to that conclusion, but Fant as an unsigned free agent, took whatever came his way, rightfully so. Cable probably did it out of desperation, starting someone raw with "upside" at least gave fans something to munch on, playing a no future vet that sucked would have been worse, much worse ... it could have cost Cable's job. Playing Fant, if it worked made Cable a genius, if Fant sucked, it's his first year etc etc.,

2. Fant's LT performance.
So Fant was basically asked to face the wolves with no training or experience. He sucked most of the time, but did have a few bright spots.

Cable might be right that Fant had most needed physical tools, size, quickness, and strength (not enough), but lack the most basic skill and knowledge. The shortage of skill and knowledge led to most of his struggles, overthinking, slow reaction, missed assignments, fooled by movements, etc.

Future:
Could Fant improve and mature enough in year 2? Pete isn't willing to take that chance and find out the hard way. Most star LTs or even starting LTs in the league had 4 years of college plus 2 years or so in pro before shining. Fant had a late start, working on a condensed learning schedule, even if he was a natural and quick learner, he would still be inconsistent for 2-3 years before serviceable.

I would like to see Fant getting his opportunity to play in year two, perhaps not as starter. What he did in year one was unbelievable, considering the circumstance.

 

[chris98251]

O-Line is king. They can make a mediocre running back look like a solid workhorse who chews up teams for 3 and 4 yard gains all game long. Without a good line - it's much smaller gains and/or negative yards all game long.

(Sound familiar?)

I would agree for the run game.

For the passing game, QB is king. When TJ Lang was in the wind, you heard a lot of Packers fans going "Why should we pay $20 million for a guy to protect a QB who gets rid of the ball after two seconds?" They get it. We're still catching up. You can mitigate the effects of a bad O-line with a superstar QB and a smart scheme that doesn't overburden the line.

Russell Wilson is Exhibit A of this (since mid-2015, at least), but really this idea has quietly proven itself throughout the league, and the pundits haven't figured it out yet. Brady transcends his line and we all know it. Matt Schaub made the same line look better after David "QB Shock Poster Boy" Carr left (and took his sack rate with him to other teams). Peyton Manning's line looked awful with Curtis Painter behind it. There's a reason mobile QBs are at a premium.

You cannot, however, turn a mediocre QB into a great one with a good offensive line. The ceiling of that idea is Drew Brees, or maybe Tony Romo. Romo got close a couple times. Replace him with Dak Prescott, same line, and suddenly the team is in yearly Super Bowl buzz. Remember Matt Hasselbeck? He played behind a brilliant 2005 O-line and had a career year. He played behind a bad line in 2007 and still had a career year. Then his arm shriveled up in 2009 and all of a sudden the bad line mattered a lot more.

You know what occurred to me, though?

This dearth of quality linemen is the NFL's fault. We've reached the point where their lust for QB dominance is actually backhandedly starting to make life harder on QB's.

Think about it. The NFL changes rules to favor passing offense and QB safety because Tom Brady and OMG ratings. QB's therefore become more powerful. Teams respond by stocking up on D-linemen. (Have you noticed how many teams are trying to cheat their way to excellence by just stocking up on DL? Our division, Miami, NYJ, Philly, TB, we saw them all last year). Now O-linemen see that it boosts one's draft stock to jump over to defense. The result is fewer quality O-linemen. Which means more and more teams are are going to have a harder time securing good protection for their QBs.

Which only favors guys like...Russell Wilson.

Yeah O lineman are a commodity that is getting harder to plug and play from College and be successful, but and I say this having watched the cycles of life in the NFL, it should trend back again at some point, whether it's the payday, the high level of people playing defense and choosing offense to be able to play and then get good and a change of schemes again bringing back a more balanced college game thus improving O line play again and their skill set.

No when this trend will start to happen and what the catalyst will be is the question.

 

[hawxfreak]

If you can't handle a bulrush I'm not sure there's much hope as far as being an NFL lineman in this league.
Dlinemen don't have to have an array of moves to put on to get by you , so are you guys sure that video was a positive one bcuz I really didn't see it that way.
Yeah maybe he'll learn to get lower in his stance but if it's a move that works every time against you ,,,, Ouch
Yes, yes, yes , we love videos like these.
Ever since Comcast upgerded their system zI haven't been able to do slow mo and look at the games myself.
Much thanks.
EFFIN Comcrap

 

[A-Dog]

If you can't handle a bulrush I'm not sure there's much hope as far as being an NFL lineman in this league.
Dlinemen don't have to have an array of moves to put on to get by you , so are you guys sure that video was a positive one bcuz I really didn't see it that way.
Yeah maybe he'll learn to get lower in his stance but if it's a move that works every time against you ,,,, Ouch
Yes, yes, yes , we love videos like these.
Ever since Comcast upgerded their system zI haven't been able to do slow mo and look at the games myself.
Much thanks.
EFFIN Comcrap

Literally the first three plays on the reel show him handling the bullrush.

Yes, he can get better (particularly with his hands), and stronger (it sounds like he's added some bulk in the offseason), but there is no reason he can't consistently handle a bullrush if he improves with work and experience the way you would expect him to.

 

[AustrianHawk]

I don't like this "it's only the technique" notion. It's the technique that makes the difference between a lot of strong guys and the few good OLiners. Would be kinda boring for a sport if athletic ability was the only thing that's important.

 

[brimsalabim]

If he has the building blocks then the Sea Hawks lack a capable builder!

 

[brimsalabim]

I don't like this "it's only the technique" notion. It's the technique that makes the difference between a lot of strong guys and the few good OLiners. Would be kinda boring for a sport if athletic ability was the only thing that's important.

Nevertheless that has been our staff's exact strategy for the position group.

 

[Jville]

[youtube]W_vsgJVakW0[/youtube]

This video did raise an eyebrow with me. The videomaker's omission of Fant's tape against the Cardinals - by far his worst game of the season - did nothing to quiet suspicious of bias. You have to include that. Fant was awful against Arizona. Dangerously awful.

But in the end, I don't doubt the videomaker's conclusion. Fant has the building blocks necessary to succeed at the position. That's not a guarantee that he will; as Carroll said, he's going to have to earn the position back from Joeckel. But since some of you are convinced that Joeckel is Satan, don't be surprised if Fant does win it back.

Hey guys, So I'm the creator. Just to clarify about the lack of ARI tape. I enjoy doing these but don't have time to take clips from every game. So I watch every game but only notate certain plays to take clips from a select number of games, usually 5. I have a method for choosing which games to take from, in this case, it broke down like this:
Week 8 vs NO: First Start for Fant
Week 11 vs PHI: First top tier DLine faced (#2 per DVOA)
Week 13 vs CAR: Next best DLine faced and a game where it seemed to "come together" for most of the line
WC vs DET/ DIV vs ATL: Always take the two most recent games, a plus that they were playoff games and Fant went up against a top tier DE in Ziggy Ansah.

On top of that, I agree that Fant had a terrible game against ARI but the point of issues w/ strike and hand placement, some slow recognition, and poor fundamentals ( from lack of experience) could be demonstrated through the five games I took from. Since it wasn't a play by play of each individual snap I felt that the point was demonstrated well enough through the snaps portrayed.

Just wanted to clear that up for any future situations. I'm glad you guys enjoy the videos. I love making them!

Then keep on making them. :2thumbs: It adds much needed content that brings the purpose of this forum back into focus and back on subject.

 

[HawkGA]

One thing that jumped out at me from some of the videos is that I'm not so sure the left-side was all that good at handing off stunts. Whey they did have was Britt helping out. Fant seemed fine at handing off the student, but it was the guard, in this case Glow, who didn't really do it and Britt saved their bacon. I'm wondering if the right side was similar. If Ifedi wasn't so good at handing off the stunt but if Gilliam did okay with it and the real issue (in comparison) was simply not having the center helping out the right side.

 

[toffee]

One thing that jumped out at me from some of the videos is that I'm not so sure the left-side was all that good at handing off stunts. Whey they did have was Britt helping out. Fant seemed fine at handing off the student, but it was the guard, in this case Glow, who didn't really do it and Britt saved their bacon. I'm wondering if the right side was similar. If Ifedi wasn't so good at handing off the stunt but if Gilliam did okay with it and the real issue (in comparison) was simply not having the center helping out the right side.

You may have a good point, as we have signed guards in off season.

 

[A-Dog]

One thing that jumped out at me from some of the videos is that I'm not so sure the left-side was all that good at handing off stunts. Whey they did have was Britt helping out. Fant seemed fine at handing off the student, but it was the guard, in this case Glow, who didn't really do it and Britt saved their bacon. I'm wondering if the right side was similar. If Ifedi wasn't so good at handing off the stunt but if Gilliam did okay with it and the real issue (in comparison) was simply not having the center helping out the right side.

For some reason Glowinski gets a pass from fans but I've seen him absolutely abused and looking clueless on many occasions.

The whole line is young.

And when you talk about ability vs technique - you can learn technique. You can't learn ability. Case in point: Bradley Sowell.