Protection

[AROS]

It doesn’t matter what DL we’re going against. Russ has RARELY ever been given that much time. Some will argue that all a QB needs is 2.5-3 seconds but that’s B.S.. you cannot run a functional consistent offense like that. Watch the Rams, watch any high powered offense. On several passing downs, they sometimes have 4 to 6 Mississippi before having to let it go. That gives an offense versatility. We need to hold our O-like to the same standard as any great offense in the league. Or, we can continue to write think pieces about how Russell has nothing to complain about and 2.5 seconds is the gold standard :sarcasm_on:

Yep, yep. Agreed.

 

[adeltaY]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/hawkblogger/status/1049635409108586497[/tweet]

This is where I believe stats are misleading. I think it has a LOT more to do with our running game then actual blocking proficiency. This line is really good at run blocking, and that in itself slows the defensive rush down. IMO, just pure pass blocking, this line has a long ways to go.

There is no evidence this is true, though kid.

The stat factors in the fact that we basically abandoned the run game in the first two weeks as well, went against Von and Khalil, and still come out 7th. That's pretty dang impressive.

 

[Jac]

It also goes to show which/how many national sportswriters/personalities aren't actually watching them play, because not many are referencing any improvement at all (and, rather, simply parrot the cliche of them having the worst OL in the league). Doubly makes sense when the game they did probably watch was the anemic MNF showing against the Bears.

 

[kidhawk]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/hawkblogger/status/1049635409108586497[/tweet]

This is where I believe stats are misleading. I think it has a LOT more to do with our running game then actual blocking proficiency. This line is really good at run blocking, and that in itself slows the defensive rush down. IMO, just pure pass blocking, this line has a long ways to go.

There is no evidence this is true, though kid.

The stat factors in the fact that we basically abandoned the run game in the first two weeks as well, went against Von and Khalil, and still come out 7th. That's pretty dang impressive.

Actually it does show evidence of that. We are 7th overall, but 2nd over the past 3 weeks. Those are the 3 weeks we had a strong running attack. We has 60% of our stats developed in those last 3 games, which means that the pass protection wasn't nearly as good without the rushing attack being used the same way.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/hawkblogger/status/1049635409108586497[/tweet]

This is where I believe stats are misleading. I think it has a LOT more to do with our running game then actual blocking proficiency. This line is really good at run blocking, and that in itself slows the defensive rush down. IMO, just pure pass blocking, this line has a long ways to go.

There is no evidence this is true, though kid.

The stat factors in the fact that we basically abandoned the run game in the first two weeks as well, went against Von and Khalil, and still come out 7th. That's pretty dang impressive.

Not against either opinions, they are actually pretty close.
My opinion is the trending upward as our running game gets stronger. The risk now is to our up and coming running game so the weakness will be the passing game...as Kidhawk stated. I think they are trends and that is the thing the stat-makers focus on. Trends and not the whole body of work. Trends via statistics and not the whole body of work. Trends without injuries that keep the statistics stable and the learning and experience of the players as they become a cohesive unit.

NFL....Not For Long as the games are being played.

 

[UK_Seahawk]

The Rams hold like bitches and it never gets called. Watch their games if you can and concentrate on the oline.

 

[chris98251]

Offenses that have that much time get deeper routes open and thus more yards passing and with those deep routes they also get the routes we seen on the drag routes and delays. Opens up a whole other level of ability to do damage, when Wilson has time we see the deep ball or on the designed roll out. That's how we do it, but the drag or late releases are not there.

 

[adeltaY]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/hawkblogger/status/1049635409108586497[/tweet]

This is where I believe stats are misleading. I think it has a LOT more to do with our running game then actual blocking proficiency. This line is really good at run blocking, and that in itself slows the defensive rush down. IMO, just pure pass blocking, this line has a long ways to go.

There is no evidence this is true, though kid.

The stat factors in the fact that we basically abandoned the run game in the first two weeks as well, went against Von and Khalil, and still come out 7th. That's pretty dang impressive.

Actually it does show evidence of that. We are 7th overall, but 2nd over the past 3 weeks. Those are the 3 weeks we had a strong running attack. We has 60% of our stats developed in those last 3 games, which means that the pass protection wasn't nearly as good without the rushing attack being used the same way.

Correlation does not imply causation, especially over a three game sample size. There is no evidence over a large sample size that rushing efficiency correlates with improved pass protection. If there is, I'd love to see it and concede I am wrong.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

It doesn’t matter what DL we’re going against. Russ has RARELY ever been given that much time. Some will argue that all a QB needs is 2.5-3 seconds but that’s B.S.. you cannot run a functional consistent offense like that. Watch the Rams, watch any high powered offense. On several passing downs, they sometimes have 4 to 6 Mississippi before having to let it go. That gives an offense versatility. We need to hold our O-like to the same standard as any great offense in the league. Or, we can continue to write think pieces about how Russell has nothing to complain about and 2.5 seconds is the gold standard :sarcasm_on:

*shrug*

Are you suggesting that there are route combinations that take more than 3 seconds to run?

Here's what you're seeing with those other offenses: the extra seconds give the QB and WR's time to improvise. Those plays where seven seconds expire and Tony Romo finds someone in the end zone? Improvisation, all of it. The offensive coordinator's intentions were beaten on that play after the first 3 seconds and the OL allowed the QB to make something happen anyway. No playbook anywhere in the league contains a play labeled “X 2 Fake Red Shallow Y Dagger Omaha Omaha Ugh Screw It Just Make the Line Protect for Seven Seconds and Throw to Whoever Gets Open.” That’s not how plays are drawn up in the NFL. Plays target a specific player or field region first, and very few route trees require more than 2.5 to 3 seconds to complete.

Would it be nice to have an OL that can enable improvisation like that? Absolutely. And every OL must - once in a while. But the fact remains that it's a contingency for the times when the original intentions of the OC is defeated, or the QB/WR makes a mistake. Those six seconds is never the intention in and of itself.

Which means the responsibility for a successful play is spread between QB, OC, WR's, OL, and other targets. In other words, it's a team sport.

So Wilson has something to complain about, but it's far less than most OL-obsessed armchair analysts think. If he can't operate at least some of the time within 3 seconds, then other things are wrong with the offense and deserve examination just like the OL might.

 

[adeltaY]

Plays may be designed to go to your first two or three reads within the 2.5 to 3 second frame, but you're almost never going all the way through your progression to your fourth read or checkdown in such a short time span. That doesn't mean the play is off script. You'll see Brady do this if he gets enough time very frequently. Usually the RB is open in the flat or in a soft spot for some good YAC.

Also, Rodgers doesn't always leave the pocket when that 2.8 seconds is up. I've seen him sit in the pocket for 10 seconds at a time and just wait for someone to come open. Brees, Brady, and Ben all do the same and the advantage is that you can see the whole field. It's "off script" but it's different than escaping the pocket and cutting the field in half like RW usually does. Romo was the king of this, I've never seen a QB maximize his time in the pocket better. Of course, this requires protection to hold up for quite a while and we ain't getting that.

 

[AROS]

Speaking of in the flat, was anyone else chewing glass every time Gurley was left WIDE OPEN in the flat for an easy dump off/relief valve??!

 

[adeltaY]

Speaking of in the flat, was anyone else chewing glass every time Gurley was left WIDE OPEN in the flat for an easy dump off/relief valve??!

Just poor tackling man. They get him to the ground on first contact a couple times and this is a different ballgame. Same for their WRs... meanwhile our WRs and TEs are struggling to break tackles now that Uncle Will is out.

 

[kidhawk]

Correlation does not imply causation, especially over a three game sample size. There is no evidence over a large sample size that rushing efficiency correlates with improved pass protection. If there is, I'd love to see it and concede I am wrong.

Are you trying to say that a good running game doesn't change the way a defense acts/reacts at the line of scrimmage? That it in know way alters their pass rushing scheme?

It sounds like that is what you are saying, and if so, I couldn't disagree with you more. Teams with a good run game cause defenses to be on guard at all times for the rush. It keeps them from being able to pin their ears and go hard after the quarterback on most plays. This, in and of itself will show a statistical decline in pass rushing for a defense, which in turn shows pass rush improvement for the offense. It's precisely why I believe we need to continue a strong running game. Without it, Wilson is a sitting duck.

 

[Spin Doctor]

7th in pass blocking?? Wow, I am honestly surprised by that stat, in a good way.

Still have much room to improve but props where props are due. The OL has improved tremendously under Solari.

Most lines don't hold pass blocks for a long time on a consistent basis. I chock this up to a switch in offensive philosophy and most of all Wilson himself. He is getting the ball out quick and he is stepping up in the pocket. When he does move around he has been smarter about it. I think he could stand to use his mobility more, especially for getting easy yardage off of the read option.That being said his pocket passing is coming along nicely thus far. People complain about him staying in the pocket, but learning this style of play is going to extend his career and make him a better player. If Wilson can learn to be a good traditional pocket passer, and merge it with his mobility, Rodgers better watch out.

 

[hawknation2018]

Correlation does not imply causation, especially over a three game sample size. There is no evidence over a large sample size that rushing efficiency correlates with improved pass protection. If there is, I'd love to see it and concede I am wrong.

Are you trying to say that a good running game doesn't change the way a defense acts/reacts at the line of scrimmage? That it in know way alters their pass rushing scheme?

It sounds like that is what you are saying, and if so, I couldn't disagree with you more. Teams with a good run game cause defenses to be on guard at all times for the rush. It keeps them from being able to pin their ears and go hard after the quarterback on most plays. This, in and of itself will show a statistical decline in pass rushing for a defense, which in turn shows pass rush improvement for the offense. It's precisely why I believe we need to continue a strong running game. Without it, Wilson is a sitting duck.

This.

 

[hawknation2018]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/PFF_AustinGayle/status/1049694999867052033[/tweet]

 

[adeltaY]

Correlation does not imply causation, especially over a three game sample size. There is no evidence over a large sample size that rushing efficiency correlates with improved pass protection. If there is, I'd love to see it and concede I am wrong.

Are you trying to say that a good running game doesn't change the way a defense acts/reacts at the line of scrimmage? That it in know way alters their pass rushing scheme?

It sounds like that is what you are saying, and if so, I couldn't disagree with you more. Teams with a good run game cause defenses to be on guard at all times for the rush. It keeps them from being able to pin their ears and go hard after the quarterback on most plays. This, in and of itself will show a statistical decline in pass rushing for a defense, which in turn shows pass rush improvement for the offense. It's precisely why I believe we need to continue a strong running game. Without it, Wilson is a sitting duck.

This.

It makes sense logically and is conventional wisdom but I haven't seen any evidence that it's true overall. It certainly doesn't have an effect in third and long or any obvious passing down.

It's like saying running the ball early and often wears down a defense and leads to longer runs later in a game. It makes sense but the data doesn't support it.

 

[hawknation2018]

The OL's pass blocking efficiency will hopefully only improve this week after they face the worst pass rush in the NFL.

I think I severely underestimated D.J. Fluker. He seems to have improved quite a bit as a pass blocker; through these last two games, Fluker is the ranked #2 among guards in pass pro. He played an amazing game against the Rams.

I also clearly underestimated Germain Ifedi's ability to improve at RT. I expected his pressures allowed and penalties to continue, unless he was moved to guard. That hasn't been the case. He has been average -- maybe even slightly above -- in pass protection, while facing a gauntlet of elite edge rushers.

J.R. Sweezy has also improved a lot in pass protection. And he made the switch to the left side seemingly without a hitch. Very surprised that he didn't struggle more with that adjustment.

Britt and Brown have been rocks, for the most part, but we anticipated that. Solari is clearly much better at teaching the fundamentals of pass protection than his predecessor.

Staying committed to the run is a critical component for what it does in wearing down the defense and slowing the pressure, but also what it does for your own offensive line: allowing them to be the aggressor builds their confidence.

 

[adeltaY]

I agree that if they can run as well as they did Sunday, they should keep doing it!

 

[IndyHawk]

7th in pass blocking?? Wow, I am honestly surprised by that stat, in a good way.

Still have much room to improve but props where props are due. The OL has improved tremendously under Solari.

Most lines don't hold pass blocks for a long time on a consistent basis. I chock this up to a switch in offensive philosophy and most of all Wilson himself. He is getting the ball out quick and he is stepping up in the pocket. When he does move around he has been smarter about it. I think he could stand to use his mobility more, especially for getting easy yardage off of the read option.That being said his pocket passing is coming along nicely thus far. People complain about him staying in the pocket, but learning this style of play is going to extend his career and make him a better player. If Wilson can learn to be a good traditional pocket passer, and merge it with his mobility, Rodgers better watch out.[/quote]
Good post...
The bolded part is what we need.