forums

O-Line issues

Gables Cane said:
Why not move McCoy back to left guard, a spot where he started the last 2 years. It also creates a dominant left side that we can run behind and protects Mensah’s blind slide.

I recognize that you are then left with Buchanon and Cantwell on the right side but at least Mensah can “see” the pressure from that side.

I kinda like the idea of a strong left side where we can run behind on 3rd or 4th down and short.
Click to expand...
this was my suggestion, but it only works if Cantwell is clearly better at RT than SJ is at LG AND can pass protect at least minimally well. I’m not sure how we couldn’t find that out from watching our own practices, or maybe they did and the answer is SJ and McCoy (which would be awful news).
 
One9 said:
One9

Post in thread 'Guard Play'

image (2).jpg
  • Crying
  • Haha
  • Like
Click to expand...
If I were looking to invest in bonesaw stocks, which is the best
 
KingB02 said:
Al Golden had good lines Brandon Linder, Ereck Flowers, Feliciano, Seantrel Henderson, Shane McDermott.. all NFL guys! He just couldn’t let go of his wefense!
Click to expand...
2013 Canes had one of the better rosters in Miami history on offense. No it wasn't on the level of the national championship teams but that 2013 squad was loaded. I think pretty much every starter went on to have a solid NFL career outside of the QB
 
LuCane said:
this was my suggestion, but it only works if Cantwell is clearly better at RT than SJ is at LG AND can pass protect at least minimally well. I’m not sure how we couldn’t find that out from watching our own practices, or maybe they did and the answer is SJ and McCoy (which would be awful news).
Click to expand...

I do find it curious that Cantwell was LT in the spring and RG in fall camp. It wasn't until late in fall camp (IIRC) that we started seeing glimpses of him at RT. I don't believe he's had a single snap at RT so far this year but Congdon has (and struggled mightily).

The issue with Congdon and Cantwell is that if you're gonna make a revamping of the OL, it has to be done soon rather than waiting for week 10. Need to be running on all cylinders with a cohesive unit by then, imo/
 
supacane said:
I think we should move McCoy and Samson back to the guards spots and sure up the interior. Then let the FR battle for the tackle spots with the other guys. People talk about the tackle spots but getting ragged on the interior is crazy work and more dangerous
Click to expand...
Don’t talk, crazy man, Sampson is our best tackle. He’s our best lineman. He’s lock down out there. Now, if you wanna move McCoy to guard, and put Cantwell at right tackle I’m all for that.
 
Strobe said:
McCoy at LG, Cantwell RT
McCoy LG, 6'9 kid RT
Ryan Rod to LG, Rhys C
Cannon Pickett LG
Click to expand...
I personally like Woodrow at C. Seems like he could be a good one. I would leave the tackles and then just find someone with a pulse at LG.

If memory serves we were complaining about the OL early on last year as well. That was limited to the run game and this year is clearly worse, but I am sure we will see progress.
 
Silver King said:
I'm not sure what people were thinking; you don't just replace four starters, two of which were pretty **** good. And freshmen take time. But at least as a unit they have been pass blocking a little above average against average or below DL fronts.

Here are some teams that were considered the best O-Lines coming into this season. Nobody mistook us to be in that category. But we have a single sack. It is going to take some time to get the run blocking going with new and young guys.

  • Ohio State: 5 sacks allowed (2 vs. Ball State, 2 vs. Texas, and 1 vs. Kent State).
  • Georgia: 3 sacks allowed (all 3 were given up during their Week 3 road matchup against Arkansas).
  • Notre Dame: 2 sacks allowed (1 through their first two contests and 1 during Week 3 against Michigan State).
  • Miami (FL): 1 sack allowed (they held a clean sheet through their first two weeks before conceding their first sack of the season against Wake Forest)
Click to expand...
Yes, you do replace 4 starters.

Its called...THE TRANSFER PORTAL.

Miami's genius coaches brought in 2 project, backup tackles from the portal instead of a bonafide P4 center and guard.

We're all going to watch the consequences of this over the next few months.
 
kyle_schick said:
Silver King said:
I'm not sure what people were thinking; you don't just replace four starters, two of which were pretty **** good. And freshmen take time. But at least as a unit they have been pass blocking a little above average against average or below DL fronts.

Here are some teams that were considered the best O-Lines coming into this season. Nobody mistook us to be in that category. But we have a single sack. It is going to take some time to get the run blocking going with new and young guys.

  • Ohio State: 5 sacks allowed (2 vs. Ball State, 2 vs. Texas, and 1 vs. Kent State).
  • Georgia: 3 sacks allowed (all 3 were given up during their Week 3 road matchup against Arkansas).
  • Notre Dame: 2 sacks allowed (1 through their first two contests and 1 during Week 3 against Michigan State).
  • Miami (FL): 1 sack allowed (they held a clean sheet through their first two weeks before conceding their first sack of the season against Wake Forest)
Click to expand...
Yes, you do replace 4 starters.

Its called...THE TRANSFER PORTAL.

Miami's genius coaches brought in 2 project, backup tackles from the portal instead of a bonafide P4 center and guard.

We're all going to watch the consequences of this over the next few months.
Click to expand...
Brother, if you want 30 + players from the portal go be a fan of Colorado. OSU and UT are the deepest teams with us. You know what else all 3 of us have in common. The least amount leaving the program and the least amount transferring into the program. And that’s even with the OL issue.
 
Zbrod95 said:
Brother, if you want 30 + players from the portal go be a fan of Colorado. OSU and UT are the deepest teams with us. You know what else all 3 of us have in common. The least amount leaving the program and the least amount transferring into the program. And that’s even with the OL issue.
Click to expand...
There’s a difference between being Colorado and signing an extra players or two to address what was a pretty obvious hole (maybe instead of signing 3 wr?!?). We made a run at Seaton but then decided we don’t need an additional starter level body on the line. It doesn’t make any sense.
 
CanesSkins26 said:
There’s a difference between being Colorado and signing an extra players or two to address what was a pretty obvious hole (maybe instead of signing 3 wr?!?). We made a run at Seaton but then decided we don’t need an additional starter level body on the line. It doesn’t make any sense.
Click to expand...
Because Seaton is a 1st round LT…what are we even talking about? We could have had last years line and we still probably make a play for Seaton.
 
Back
Top