100 Starts and the Robinson scenario...

by domer.mq ⌂ @, Sunday, June 21, 2009, 20:14 (6247 days ago)

As most of you are probably aware, with the projected OL starting lineup as it was after spring ball, the NYT's quad blog and a few other outlets made a deal over the fact that ND would be over the 100 starts threshold at OL, and that number seems to correlate with on-field success.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123984090891223207.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

If the Robinson to Right, Stewart to Left, Wenger on the bench idea actually gets put in play, where's that put us in terms of OL starts? And do we then still count Stewart's starts and Olsen's starts? I suppose we would since we're already counting Young's starts at LT.

I also wonder about questions of symmetry. To me, there's a lot of symmetry between moving from RT to LT and back. There's also a fair bit of symmetry moving from RG to LG and vice versa. But I start worrying when you pull someone from Guard to Center, particularly when thinking about zone blocking. Any thoughts from anyone on that matter? I'm thinking learning your read assignments, chips, scoops, etc from the center position is a little more difficult than taking what you knew from your right position and moving and applying it to a left position.

Note: I do feel that moving from RT to LT, in particular, is more difficult than simply applying everything you already knew, but in "reverse." Being the guy in charge of the QB's blind-side, and thus the man at whom so much is thrown is quite a change from the relative calm of the position to the right, I think.

--
Sometimes I rhyme slow sometimes I rhyme quick.

It has no impact.

by FunkDoctorSpock, Your Nightmares, B* tches, Monday, June 22, 2009, 05:05 (6246 days ago) @ domer.mq

The numbers listed for all those teams, and the info posted on Phil Steele's site, are for total number of starts for all OL and not just the five starters. The last time ND had at least 6 OL with starting experience, and roughly this number of total starts, was 2005.

I'm so off my game.

by domer.mq ⌂ @, Monday, June 22, 2009, 10:01 (6246 days ago) @ FunkDoctorSpock

Thanks for pointing that out. I should have read more carefully.

Of course, I wonder what 100 starts looks like in the last decades for teams who have all or almost all of those starts on the starting OL versus teams that have 100 starts but have them dispersed among the entire depth chart.

--
Sometimes I rhyme slow sometimes I rhyme quick.

powered by my little forum