Xs and Os: Offensive Line Tech: Does it look different?

[Gary Wood]

I have not had the opportunity to see any of the spring practices this year. I've heard the offensive line technique is different. More of a focus of firing forward. Can anyone expand on this from a technical standpoint? Reports are the DL is struggling a little so far and adjusting. I'm curious if this is due to the change in offensive line technique.

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

I have not had the opportunity to see any of the spring practices this year. I've heard the offensive line technique is different. More of a focus of firing forward. Can anyone expand on this from a technical standpoint? Reports are the DL is struggling a little so far and adjusting. I'm curious if this is due to the change in offensive line technique.

Dude, you're an Offensive Coordinator, you should know these things...lol

 

[Gary Wood]

Dude, you're an Offensive Coordinator, you should know these things...lol

I've never been an offensive coordinator. And ... I've yet to see this line play with the new tech. I'm praying it's true the rumors I'm hearing.

 

[Headcard]

I do think the OL is firing of the ball, drive blocking more now. However, I doubt that is the sole reason for the DL struggles. Something tells me Danniels and Stille wouldn’t have a problem with Hixon or Bando firing off the ball.

 

[OzzyLvr_rivals293656]

I have not had the opportunity to see any of the spring practices this year. I've heard the offensive line technique is different. More of a focus of firing forward. Can anyone expand on this from a technical standpoint? Reports are the DL is struggling a little so far and adjusting. I'm curious if this is due to the change in offensive line technique.

I'm surprised that with all the Coaching Experts we have on this board that nobody has come up with a good answer.

I'm not sure the 'technique' is any different (placement of hands, weight distribution, hip angle, etc.) but it sounds like it's more of an attitude change or an approach change. Run block first vs pass block first, that type of thing. Some of the technique could be a little different with a different approach but there's still only so many techniques being taught. Looking at articles online, I don't see any difference at all in techniques to be taught.

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

I'm surprised that with all the Coaching Experts we have on this board that nobody has come up with a good answer.

I'm not sure the 'technique' is any different (placement of hands, weight distribution, hip angle, etc.) but it sounds like it's more of an attitude change or an approach change. Run block first vs pass block first, that type of thing. Some of the technique could be a little different with a different approach but there's still only so many techniques being taught. Looking at articles online, I don't see any difference at all in techniques to be taught.

Hope you don't hold it against myself and others for not talking technique. It makes sense to me to watch the Spring game. If the guys are firing off the ball, that will be the first clue that a change is not only being talked about, but actually being put in practice.

Of course, NU will need another 2 or 3 quality linemen in the next year or so and then something might be brewing. We need to get the recruiting personnel bringing in some real DL talent.

If and when NU returns to 80% of what they were years ago, NU can begin to put the mediocrity to bed. At least I hope.

 

[steinek11]

I've never been an offensive coordinator. And ... I've yet to see this line play with the new tech. I'm praying it's true the rumors I'm hearing.

No, really, you are an offensive coordinator.

 

[Bremser_rivals74172]

No, really, you are an offensive coordinator.

It's like a "kick me" sign on your back...

 

[HUSKERFAN66]

I've never been an offensive coordinator. And ... I've yet to see this line play with the new tech. I'm praying it's true the rumors I'm hearing.

Keep posting so you're not an OC anymore

 

[trooper141]

I have not had the opportunity to see any of the spring practices this year. I've heard the offensive line technique is different. More of a focus of firing forward. Can anyone expand on this from a technical standpoint? Reports are the DL is struggling a little so far and adjusting. I'm curious if this is due to the change in offensive line technique.

Watch the interview from Sean with Teddy, Banks, Miller and Hixon.

Banks and Miller do a nice job explaining

 

[DarkHorse93]

I've never been an offensive coordinator. And ... I've yet to see this line play with the new tech. I'm praying it's true the rumors I'm hearing.

I’ll help. Look below your handle. It says you’re an Offensive Coordinator.

One of the most clever posts I’ve seen in a while.

 

[DarkHorse93]

Dude, you're an Offensive Coordinator, you should know these things...lol

Really clever.

 

[salsa red]

I'm offended, huskerwood coordinated it.

 

[huskerlandfan_rivals150254]

I do think the OL is firing of the ball, drive blocking more now. However, I doubt that is the sole reason for the DL struggles. Something tells me Danniels and Stille wouldn’t have a problem with Hixon or Bando firing off the ball.

I'll be the first to say I don't know much about line play. But from what I read on all this is they are blocking a man instead of blocking someone that fills their gap that they are responsible for. I would assume that this is letting guys get on their blocks faster.

No knowledge here, all assumption.

 

[PeliniTheCrutch_rivals294365]

What I hear from my guys(I haven’t been able to make it down to a practice yet) is that not much has changed on the OL(there’s only so many ways to skin a cat), but the DL is truly awful.

 

[trooper141]

What I hear from my guys(I haven’t been able to make it down to a practice yet) is that not much has changed on the OL(there’s only so many ways to skin a cat), but the DL is truly awful.

Honest question, please don't read sarcasm into this, but who are your guys? Not specific names, but are you talking players? Coaches?

 

[HominidHusker]

I'll be the first to say I don't know much about line play. But from what I read on all this is they are blocking a man instead of blocking someone that fills their gap that they are responsible for. I would assume that this is letting guys get on their blocks faster.

No knowledge here, all assumption.

Last year I re-watched a couple games specifically to break down OL play. While at times we were just getting beat physically, there were way too many plays that simply didn’t make sense from a layman’s point of view.

These were plays fitting your description where our guys seemed to be more focused on a certain space or general assignment, ignoring the reality of needing simply make contact with an opponent in their range (resulting in easily preventable free runners).

I was left unimpressed with their mental/strategic game.

While it’s the elusive goal of every OL, there were also too many moments of feet stopping when engaged on a block. Not continuing to churn feet is asking for trouble.

 

[TruHusker]

Well, since none of us are there to see anything, all we have to go off of is what we hear from players and coaches and then sort through the speak. I have been critical of Austin's line play from day one. We sometimes had decent initial strike and then very poor body positioning and not much follow through. I have a buddy who is an OL coach at the NAIA level so we talk stuff all the time. Too often I watch our OL have a good chance for some yards only to allow the DL to slide off the block while the OL only had to make a small step play side to make it cut off pursuit angles. I remember back in the pipeline days there was a tremendous amount of work done on steps for pulling guards and tackles. One time they were talking about some problems they were having and it boiled down to a player angling his foot just a few inches less then what he needed to. For those that don't think the technique is important, it is extremely important at this level.

Anyway, MY understanding is under Austin we often allowed the DL to make the first move. In theory if you have a line twist, stunt or something unusual, you allow the DL to make his move and then you adjust to take him in the direction you want him to go using his movement/momentum away from the play. You often saw our tackles drop back several steps before engaging, sometimes providing way too much space to make a move. The problem with this type of blocking is the DL gets to make the initial move and your OL needs to be quick and decisive as to what he is going to do with him and they all need to work together up front. That is why I often would see what looked like a decent hole open up only to shut down quickly and have OL standing around helping the RB off the ground. If the DL could sustain the initial contact by our OL, they usually could find a path to the ball.

From listening to guys talk the emphasis is on more of a power stance with the hands and fire directly out to your assigned guy and power forward. Think more man on man, engage and drive, Wisconsin type. Something that hasn't been talked about much is the RPO game, does Whip use is it much because it does make a difference in line play. The down side to the man on man drive blocking is you have to account for the quicker guys and twists and stunts because you may not hand the guy off, he's yours and if he takes and angle, you don't care, you drive.

One thing I picked up from players is they aren't doing the holding where they put their hands up under the pads which is a very common technique. For those who don't understanding holding, it is legal. Now there is more arm extension and hands pointed fingers up, like you would shove a guy only now just keep driving him, butt down, back straight, forward lean, power.

With the react type O play I believe we were susceptible to the holding plays when we were caught off guard and had to reach. Hopefully we will see that area of the game improve as well. Just my two cents and my OPINION only from talking to some coaches.

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

Well, since none of us are there to see anything, all we have to go off of is what we hear from players and coaches and then sort through the speak. I have been critical of Austin's line play from day one. We sometimes had decent initial strike and then very poor body positioning and not much follow through. I have a buddy who is an OL coach at the NAIA level so we talk stuff all the time. Too often I watch our OL have a good chance for some yards only to allow the DL to slide off the block while the OL only had to make a small step play side to make it cut off pursuit angles. I remember back in the pipeline days there was a tremendous amount of work done on steps for pulling guards and tackles. One time they were talking about some problems they were having and it boiled down to a player angling his foot just a few inches less then what he needed to. For those that don't think the technique is important, it is extremely important at this level.

Anyway, MY understanding is under Austin we often allowed the DL to make the first move. In theory if you have a line twist, stunt or something unusual, you allow the DL to make his move and then you adjust to take him in the direction you want him to go using his movement/momentum away from the play. You often saw our tackles drop back several steps before engaging, sometimes providing way too much space to make a move. The problem with this type of blocking is the DL gets to make the initial move and your OL needs to be quick and decisive as to what he is going to do with him and they all need to work together up front. That is why I often would see what looked like a decent hole open up only to shut down quickly and have OL standing around helping the RB off the ground. If the DL could sustain the initial contact by our OL, they usually could find a path to the ball.

From listening to guys talk the emphasis is on more of a power stance with the hands and fire directly out to your assigned guy and power forward. Think more man on man, engage and drive, Wisconsin type. Something that hasn't been talked about much is the RPO game, does Whip use is it much because it does make a difference in line play. The down side to the man on man drive blocking is you have to account for the quicker guys and twists and stunts because you may not hand the guy off, he's yours and if he takes and angle, you don't care, you drive.

One thing I picked up from players is they aren't doing the holding where they put their hands up under the pads which is a very common technique. For those who don't understanding holding, it is legal. Now there is more arm extension and hands pointed fingers up, like you would shove a guy only now just keep driving him, butt down, back straight, forward lean, power.

With the react type O play I believe we were susceptible to the holding plays when we were caught off guard and had to reach. Hopefully we will see that area of the game improve as well. Just my two cents and my OPINION only from talking to some coaches.

That's a good synopsis Tru. I joined this forum about last September and my first comment was regarding the OL play, maybe the way they were being taught, and in general, dismay at not only the schemes, which were highly effective against AAC competition, but allowing such kids as Piper, Benhart, Corcoran to be beaten so many times during the game.

I felt Piper and Corcoran had good athletic ability, but Benhart, not so much. Doesn't mean I don't like these kids, it should have been pretty obvious to anyone who watched even a little.
I couldn't begin to imagine that every pass play, Benhart was in pass pro. If he was (no hand on the surface) running setup, NU was gonna run the ball. Early on, depending on where Toure was lined up, it almost indicated where the play was headed. I chalked that up to just plain old lack of detail.

OL's that are reactive and waiting on the DL man to make his move is no different than playing one on one in basketball and standing flat footed against the ball handler. If you're not pre-stepping as an infielder, and standing still or flat footed, you are very limited in range and it causes the ball to play the infielder, rather than the other way.

It all starts with a good athletic stance. I'm hopeful, Raiola has corrected a lot of that, and even without great physical talent the OL can and should be better. Does that translate into more wins? It could if the defense gets shored up. Of course, we need better and more consistent QB play.

If the NU transfer from Montana is a high level punter, all of a sudden, a couple of glaring weaknesses can turn into a different situation. It might even allow NU to not beat themselves.

As I said in an earlier post, I'm withholding judgment of the OL improvement/changes to get at least an early view of what has or hasn't changed along the OL. If Benhart happens to be, in Raiola's view the "best" we have at RT, then I'm just gonna have to give the kid a break and hope for the best.

 

[cubsker_rivals142943]

What I hear from my guys(I haven’t been able to make it down to a practice yet) is that not much has changed on the OL(there’s only so many ways to skin a cat), but the DL is truly awful.

My source liked the new guys on the OL more than the old guys, but that was probably the first week of camp. I think it was Weaver, he said, just took an OL and threw him out of the way on one play but that he was still very raw. He thought they needed more bodies on the DL. I'll probably get another report next week.

 

[TruHusker]

That's a good synopsis Tru. I joined this forum about last September and my first comment was regarding the OL play, maybe the way they were being taught, and in general, dismay at not only the schemes, which were highly effective against AAC competition, but allowing such kids as Piper, Benhart, Corcoran to be beaten so many times during the game.

I felt Piper and Corcoran had good athletic ability, but Benhart, not so much. Doesn't mean I don't like these kids, it should have been pretty obvious to anyone who watched even a little.
I couldn't begin to imagine that every pass play, Benhart was in pass pro. If he was (no hand on the surface) running setup, NU was gonna run the ball. Early on, depending on where Toure was lined up, it almost indicated where the play was headed. I chalked that up to just plain old lack of detail.

OL's that are reactive and waiting on the DL man to make his move is no different than playing one on one in basketball and standing flat footed against the ball handler. If you're not pre-stepping as an infielder, and standing still or flat footed, you are very limited in range and it causes the ball to play the infielder, rather than the other way.

It all starts with a good athletic stance. I'm hopeful, Raiola has corrected a lot of that, and even without great physical talent the OL can and should be better. Does that translate into more wins? It could if the defense gets shored up. Of course, we need better and more consistent QB play.

If the NU transfer from Montana is a high level punter, all of a sudden, a couple of glaring weaknesses can turn into a different situation. It might even allow NU to not beat themselves.

As I said in an earlier post, I'm withholding judgment of the OL improvement/changes to get at least an early view of what has or hasn't changed along the OL. If Benhart happens to be, in Raiola's view the "best" we have at RT, then I'm just gonna have to give the kid a break and hope for the best.

As far as stances, there are several, one is generally to keep your weight under you so you can move in any direction when the ball is snapped, that is more what Austin apparently wanted. The other is to put more weight forward to get body lean for a bigger strike and more robust contact. With the second you can more quickly engage the legs and extend into the arms/hands for the block. With the first, your weight is under you more so it is more arms type and body positioning action. Again, from my limited experience and talking with some small college OL coaches.

As for why one works at some places and leagues and not others, go back and watch some UCF film when Frost and Co. were there. It is pretty eye opening. Most people see are the big plays, chunks of yards on big pass and run plays. I get that. I watch OL frame by frame and what the D is reacting to., why was the play successful. You hear the statement by coaches about "trusting their eyes" which is so true. Every O coordinator wants to put the D in conflict, get their eyes here and you go there, just takes a split second of indecision. Frost was very good at it at UCF to the point were many plays where the OL hardly ever made what you would call a crunching block or even much contact. A lot of just getting in the way of pursuit or keeping the D off balance with a strike enough they couldn't make the play. I couldn't count how many times a play would get a LB or DL moving in the wrong direction where his misread/eyes took him and it resulted in a big play. That is where the passive blocking system works, if they take a false step to the outside the OL just continues to use his momentum to continue him there while the play actually goes inside or to the outside, over the top, etc.

Where it failed in the B1G, again IN MY OPINION, is the players are just so much better and better coached. They can take that half false step and still recover or one guy may get suckered but not all of them so you don't see the wide open scramble plays where it looks like a junior high game with some kid rambling down the field at will.

 

[OzzyLvr_rivals293656]

Well, since none of us are there to see anything, all we have to go off of is what we hear from players and coaches and then sort through the speak. I have been critical of Austin's line play from day one. We sometimes had decent initial strike and then very poor body positioning and not much follow through. I have a buddy who is an OL coach at the NAIA level so we talk stuff all the time. Too often I watch our OL have a good chance for some yards only to allow the DL to slide off the block while the OL only had to make a small step play side to make it cut off pursuit angles. I remember back in the pipeline days there was a tremendous amount of work done on steps for pulling guards and tackles. One time they were talking about some problems they were having and it boiled down to a player angling his foot just a few inches less then what he needed to. For those that don't think the technique is important, it is extremely important at this level.

Wait, if stuff works at the AAC level but not the B1G, how would stuff at the NAIA level be comparable to the B1G?

Edit: Saw your response AFTER I posted where you do comment on the difference between the AAC & B1G. However, I'd still be interested in your comments about how someone in the NAIA being comparable to the B1G.

 

[TruHusker]

Wait, if stuff works at the AAC level but not the B1G, how would stuff at the NAIA level be comparable to the B1G?

Edit: Saw your response AFTER I posted where you do comment on the difference between the AAC & B1G. However, I'd still be interested in your comments about how someone in the NAIA being comparable to the B1G.

I wasn't comparing NAIA ball to B1G or AAC. I just have a friend who coaches OL at that level, goes to a lot of clinics at D1 schools all over so he hears and sees what these schools are doing. Naturally, athletes get better the higher up you go in division. It doesn't matter really, run whatever you want at whatever level you are at but comparing one to another is not going to work.

 

[OzzyLvr_rivals293656]

I wasn't comparing NAIA ball to B1G or AAC. I just have a friend who coaches OL at that level, goes to a lot of clinics at D1 schools all over so he hears and sees what these schools are doing. Naturally, athletes get better the higher up you go in division. It doesn't matter really, run whatever you want at whatever level you are at but comparing one to another is not going to work.

Thanks Tru! I've been saying for some time that technique is technique no matter the level you're playing at. It's the scheme & approach (philosophy) that make the difference. There are some techniques that may work better at different levels but there's still only so much technique available. "Experts" on this board have been saying for a long time that the techniques that our coaches have been teaching may have worked in the AAC but that doesn't work in the B1G. When I've asked which techniques they're talking about, it's nothing but crickets. You at least know the difference between technique and scheme/philosophy. We can have the same techniques used in HS, NAIA, P5 or NFL but the outcome will likely be determined by talent and philosophy, not the technique.

Listening to the video that was posted, what I gathered that they said was different is the philosophy of being aggressive. The only technique I caught that they discussed was their hands being open instead of grabbing the shoulder pads.

You mentioned the weight distribution above. That is a very good point. One argument for having equal weight distribution is that it's more difficult for the DL & LB to get a pre-snap read. If the weight is on your hands and your knuckles are white (a pretty easy read), the DL knows it's most likely a running play. If there isn't that pressure on your hands, they may believe it's more likely a passing play but if you always do that, they would have to look for other keys.

As you mentioned, technique at this level is very important - but so is the scheme/philosophy/attitude.

 

[trooper141]

Thanks Tru! I've been saying for some time that technique is technique no matter the level you're playing at. It's the scheme & approach (philosophy) that make the difference. There are some techniques that may work better at different levels but there's still only so much technique available. "Experts" on this board have been saying for a long time that the techniques that our coaches have been teaching may have worked in the AAC but that doesn't work in the B1G. When I've asked which techniques they're talking about, it's nothing but crickets. You at least know the difference between technique and scheme/philosophy. We can have the same techniques used in HS, NAIA, P5 or NFL but the outcome will likely be determined by talent and philosophy, not the technique.

Listening to the video that was posted, what I gathered that they said was different is the philosophy of being aggressive. The only technique I caught that they discussed was their hands being open instead of grabbing the shoulder pads.

You mentioned the weight distribution above. That is a very good point. One argument for having equal weight distribution is that it's more difficult for the DL & LB to get a pre-snap read. If the weight is on your hands and your knuckles are white (a pretty easy read), the DL knows it's most likely a running play. If there isn't that pressure on your hands, they may believe it's more likely a passing play but if you always do that, they would have to look for other keys.

As you mentioned, technique at this level is very important - but so is the scheme/philosophy/attitude.

Didn't they also talk about different technique with their feet/movement? More running through the defender as opposed to short choppy steps and sealing the defender? (sometimes the videos run together so that certainly could have been somewhere else).

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

Didn't they also talk about different technique with their feet/movement? More running through the defender as opposed to short choppy steps and sealing the defender? (sometimes the videos run together so that certainly could have been somewhere else).

But dammit, they're supposed to run through the smoke.

 

[OzzyLvr_rivals293656]

Didn't they also talk about different technique with their feet/movement? More running through the defender as opposed to short choppy steps and sealing the defender? (sometimes the videos run together so that certainly could have been somewhere else).

They did, you are correct. I took that as a philosophy change as opposed to a technique change. If they are stepping at a different angle while doing it, that, to me, would be a technique change. I think it's just the difference in being aggressive vs. being reactive.

 

[Gary Wood]

They did, you are correct. I took that as a philosophy change as opposed to a technique change. If they are stepping at a different angle while doing it, that, to me, would be a technique change. I think it's just the difference in being aggressive vs. being reactive.

If we are doing more drive blocking, than I suppose we will see much more play action. Have we been more under center or are we still shotgun?

 

[OzzyLvr_rivals293656]

If we are doing more drive blocking, than I suppose we will see much more play action. Have we been more under center or are we still shotgun?

Sounds like they've been more under center. I doubt the shotgun is a thing of the past, however. Whipple does have some film out there where he's running shotgun & RPOs. I think being under center will help us in the Red Zone.

 

[ChattyCathy]

As far as stances, there are several, one is generally to keep your weight under you so you can move in any direction when the ball is snapped, that is more what Austin apparently wanted. The other is to put more weight forward to get body lean for a bigger strike and more robust contact. With the second you can more quickly engage the legs and extend into the arms/hands for the block. With the first, your weight is under you more so it is more arms type and body positioning action. Again, from my limited experience and talking with some small college OL coaches.

As for why one works at some places and leagues and not others, go back and watch some UCF film when Frost and Co. were there. It is pretty eye opening. Most people see are the big plays, chunks of yards on big pass and run plays. I get that. I watch OL frame by frame and what the D is reacting to., why was the play successful. You hear the statement by coaches about "trusting their eyes" which is so true. Every O coordinator wants to put the D in conflict, get their eyes here and you go there, just takes a split second of indecision. Frost was very good at it at UCF to the point were many plays where the OL hardly ever made what you would call a crunching block or even much contact. A lot of just getting in the way of pursuit or keeping the D off balance with a strike enough they couldn't make the play. I couldn't count how many times a play would get a LB or DL moving in the wrong direction where his misread/eyes took him and it resulted in a big play. That is where the passive blocking system works, if they take a false step to the outside the OL just continues to use his momentum to continue him there while the play actually goes inside or to the outside, over the top, etc.

Where it failed in the B1G, again IN MY OPINION, is the players are just so much better and better coached. They can take that half false step and still recover or one guy may get suckered but not all of them so you don't see the wide open scramble plays where it looks like a junior high game with some kid rambling down the field at will.

I was wondering if you think all of that working or not makes a difference if the quarterback gets rid of the ball more quickly? Thanks

 

[OzzyLvr_rivals293656]

I was wondering if you think all of that working or not makes a difference if the quarterback gets rid of the ball more quickly? Thanks

I'm not Tru but there were obviously plenty of times where AM never had time to look downfield. It wouldn't have made a difference there. As you would probably agree, there were also plenty of times where AM held the ball too long which made it harder on the OL. I'm sure Tru would agree it goes both ways.

 

[ChattyCathy]

I'm not Tru but there were obviously plenty of times where AM never had time to look downfield. It wouldn't have made a difference there. As you would probably agree, there were also plenty of times where AM held the ball too long which made it harder on the OL. I'm sure Tru would agree it goes both ways.

Fair enough, but are you a politician? Thanks for the reply.

 

[HominidHusker]

Maybe not the right place for this, but I think it’s worth noting that Casey threw quite a few more TDs than Adrian behind an OL (preseason) consisting of three 4* and two 3* (I don’t know about injuries). 2 seniors, 2 juniors, 1 sophomore.
We also had “roughly” the same composition, but our guys were younger on average.

Hopefully, with an “older” group up front, we’ll see some more seasoned play to coincide with new coaching. Losing Jurgens was still a huge loss though.

 

[TruHusker]

Well, I loved Adrian as a great kid and rep for the Huskers. Part of his curse what he had some really good talent around him his freshman year. The expectations going forward were high, perhaps way too high. I started seeing things on film that bothered me a lot and when I mentioned them I was called out. Always a reason for the play but really, some kids have it and some don't. The three positions I have always felt need the most "instincts" are LB, QB and RB. Adrian had guys his freshman year he could depend on being where they needed to be and making plays so his need to read and interpret what was going on was reduced. His soph year I thought he was just not seeing the field well, making good reads on what the D was doing and making quick adjustments. He compensated with his legs which is fine and he is still a very good QB, it was just something that never developed in him. At least that is my OPINION.

As for the leg drive and chopping steps, that falls right into the two different styles. If you let the D make the first move, you have to have feet to shadow him and then either cut him off if he is headed play side or drive him past if it away. Thinking about Frosts O with all the looks, motion, eye candy stuff, this type of blocking makes some sense overall. Anytime you get a guy guessing the wrong way, you don't have to pancake him, he can't make the play anyway. But just like there are levels of HS, to small college, to D1 there is a wide disparity of athletes in D1 overall. Think of the different stance you used in basketball when you were guarding one on one - back over your butt, feet apart, slide don't cross over, eye on the belly button, etc., you are matching his movement and then cut him off when he goes to the bucket. More of a football move to drive straight forward, get the guy off balance and take him away from the play, thus the comment by players about the line moving forward the back falling down for a 3-4 yard game. You don't get those with a react block very often.

Another point someone asked was about the passing game. As you watch the teams who like to run, i.e Wisconsin, they don't mind tipping when it is obvious 3rd and long. They get the OL in a two point, drop step already made and ready to take on the rush. The in between plays where they drive out hard, engage and block straight up give the impression of a pass.

I have nothing to base anything off of, I haven't watched a single Pitt game film but for some reason I expect to see a bit more robust short passing game next fall. I think the players are there for this and it will give the OL some time to adjust as well plus that is more to the skill set of Thompson. From reports I read the long ball is not his forte. I also think, again speculation on my part, that with Adrian's inability to see things quickly, they didn't exploit the middle of the field as much.

As a qualifier, I could be and very likely am wrong about some of this.

 

[PeliniTheCrutch_rivals294365]

Honest question, please don't read sarcasm into this, but who are your guys? Not specific names, but are you talking players? Coaches?

Definitely not players.

 

[OzzyLvr_rivals293656]

Didn't they also talk about different technique with their feet/movement? More running through the defender as opposed to short choppy steps and sealing the defender? (sometimes the videos run together so that certainly could have been somewhere else).

Another thing that caught my attention that I neglected to mention is when Ezra Miller was asked how Raiola's teaching compares to what he experienced at Iowa, he said the attention to detail that Raiola is bringing is similar to what he experienced at Iowa. IF true, I think that could be the biggest factor for improvement, even above an aggressive vs. passive approach. You can't master the 'big' things until you've mastered the 'little' things. Raiola & Austin could be teaching the same technique but if Austin doesn't have the attention to the little things, the detail, it could look entirely different. Sloppy play even.

 

[NUSouth]

Hope you don't hold it against myself and others for not talking technique. It makes sense to me to watch the Spring game. If the guys are firing off the ball, that will be the first clue that a change is not only being talked about, but actually being put in practice.

Of course, NU will need another 2 or 3 quality linemen in the next year or so and then something might be brewing. We need to get the recruiting personnel bringing in some real DL talent.

If and when NU returns to 80% of what they were years ago, NU can begin to put the mediocrity to bed. At least I hope.

It’s easier to fire off the ball on a Chins d-line than on a whiskey d-line.

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

It’s easier to fire off the ball on a Chins d-line than on a whiskey d-line.

NU likely playing 3 or 4 teams this year with weaker DL's than NU.

Maybe a whiskey d-line, but not Wiscy d-line. (Weak humor should be followed by even weaker humor. LOL).