Offensive Line and Depth

Ruhskins · 09-07-2009, 01:23 AM

There have been recent concerns about our offensive line given the recent cuts and of course what happened at the end of last season. I wanted to start a discussion about the offensive line, its depth, and to take a closer look our 2nd string offensive line (which I knew little about). Also I wanted to ask some general questions for discussion regarding this topic.

Our 2nd string line according to the depth chart in Redskins.com (I know it is probably not the final depth chart, but I had to start somewhere). I also threw some "pros" about these guys (since we can all come up with cons).

(LT) D'Anthony Batiste 6'4"/314lbs/age 27/3rd yr. Started 4 games at guard; has had stints with Dallas and Carolina.

(LG) Edwin Williams 6'3"/315lbs/age 22/Rookie. 3-yr starter at UMD/1st team All-ACC in 2008; can play guard and center.

(C) Will Montgomery 6'3"/305lbs/age 23/3rd yr. Has played 13 games, 6 as starter (as a rookie played 6 games, started 4 games with Panthers).

(RG) Chad Rinehart 6'5"/310lbs/age 24/2nd yr. Got a lot of reps during training camp in R. Thomas' absence, and has played with 1st-team o-line this preseason.

(RT) Mike Williams 6'6"/337lbs/age 29/5 yrs. Praised by coaching staff in his run blocking.

The best case scenario is of course that none of these guys see the field as starters. If one were to start, who would you pick? Do you think that one of these guys playing with the starters would be a big drop off in production?

A lot of people are criticizing the team for not having enough depth in the 2nd team. I am curious to know what people would respond to the following questions:

- Buges (of course) has an opinion on the decision of who stays with the team and makes the roster in regards to the o-line. With that in mind, is his decision to keep these guys as the 2nd team should be a cause of concern on his ability to judge talent?

- Would the team cut a guy like Bridges, if Buges would have wanted to keep him? If not, what would you say at the possibility that Buges picked these guys over Bridges?

- Realisticly, what type of player would add better depth to this group?

- Do you think that having a guy like Michael Oher instead of Batiste or Williams (and having the rest of the back ups the same) would solve any depth concerns?

- This entire 2nd string line is under 30 years old...is this a good thing because they are infusing youth or a bad thing because they lack experience.

skins89moss · 09-07-2009, 01:39 AM

Our O-Line startes are above average players, but its the what if game. Every team has lack of depth at the O-line postion thats why you have to draft lineman to get a good quality back up. I do believe that next years draft O-line will be a big priority when we draft, i'm talking 1st or 2nd round selects.

Dirtbag59 · 09-07-2009, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skins89moss

Our O-Line startes are above average players, but its the what if game. Every team has lack of depth at the O-line postion thats why you have to draft lineman to get a good quality back up. I do believe that next years draft O-line will be a big priority when we draft, i'm talking 1st or 2nd round selects.

Yes but not every team has to face Ware, Osi, Tuck, and whatever 5th round pick the Eagles feel like turning into a double digit sack player.

53Fan · 09-07-2009, 01:56 AM

One thing I notice is they're young and big. That's a good start. I'll take Buges decisions, I think he knows what he's doing. If I had to pick one to start, it would probably be Rinehart. I think he's ready and will get better with more playing time. This is the thing that I think people are overlooking....Playing all these guys at the same time gives the impression that they're not very good. But they're never going to be all playing at the same time. Plug one of these guys in with the starters and all of a sudden they look better. There is a reason for that. It's harder for any one player to play on a bad line than a good line. Put one in with the starters and they're job is not as hard and they step up. Buges isn't stupid, he knows as a group they may not be that good but he isn't going to play them as a group. They each have something he obviously likes just like Heyer did and now he's starting. I'll admit that my biggest fear is that Samuels goes down, but there is no certainty that he'll be out for a significant amount of time this year so I'm not ready to panic about it. It's a concern but at this point I think we're in better shape than we've been in awhile and I think we're headed in the right direction. Could we be better? Sure, but I like that we have young guys like Montgomery, Edwin Williams and Rinehart on the team. Nice thread Ruh!

skins89moss · 09-07-2009, 02:15 AM

Well other teams have back up players that step in and continue to play well so why can't our team. We just can't afford 2 and 3 starters from our O-line to miss games all at once that would be a serious problem. I like our starting O-line lets just Pray they stay healthy for a entire season.

53Fan · 09-07-2009, 02:31 AM

There's 2 more things I'd like to add. 1- I was disappointed Bridges was cut. After reading what the coaches had to say, not so much. Bridges didn't really play that well and the coaches didn't want him to impede the progress of the young guys. I like that they want and expect them to improve. 2- I had Batiste as one of my first cuts. I wasn't impressed by him at all. Then again I didn't see him practice every day like the coaches did. They are very impressed with his footwork and size. If he has good footwork Buges can probably help him become a decent LT. It's worth a shot anyway, we're not going to go out and sign a bunch of all-pro's at this point. One more thing. I wasn't one of the people who thought Mike Williams was just going to come in and start at RT. He hasn't played in 4 years and had to lose over 100 lb's. But given some time he might still contribute.

KI Skins Fan · 09-07-2009, 08:10 AM

I would be much more comfortable with this group if the Skins would bring in a veteran OT for depth. I admire what Mike Williams has accomplished but I wonder if he's ready if called upon.

I we had drafted Oher he would have been our starting RT. Heyer would have been the backup at both OT positions. That would have been a very good thing, IMO.

For some reason, I'm not concerned about our depth at C and G.

CRedskinsRule · 09-07-2009, 08:23 AM

Excellent, well thought out thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

There have been recent concerns about our offensive line given the recent cuts and of course what happened at the end of last season. I wanted to start a discussion about the offensive line, its depth, and to take a closer look our 2nd string offensive line (which I knew little about). Also I wanted to ask some general questions for discussion regarding this topic.

Our 2nd string line according to the depth chart in Redskins.com (I know it is probably not the final depth chart, but I had to start somewhere). I also threw some "pros" about these guys (since we can all come up with cons).

(LT) D'Anthony Batiste 6'4"/314lbs/age 27/3rd yr. Started 4 games at guard; has had stints with Dallas and Carolina.

(LG) Edwin Williams 6'3"/315lbs/age 22/Rookie. 3-yr starter at UMD/1st team All-ACC in 2008; can play guard and center.

(C) Will Montgomery 6'3"/305lbs/age 23/3rd yr. Has played 13 games, 6 as starter (as a rookie played 6 games, started 4 games with Panthers).

(RG) Chad Rinehart 6'5"/310lbs/age 24/2nd yr. Got a lot of reps during training camp in R. Thomas' absence, and has played with 1st-team o-line this preseason.

(RT) Mike Williams 6'6"/337lbs/age 29/5 yrs. Praised by coaching staff in his run blocking.

It's good that they are all over 300lbs, and all under 30. I think MWilliams is really the only boom/bust scenario, and with the efforts he has made not only with his weight and body, but with his technique and training, it's worth taking the shot with him. Batiste still worries me, I didn't see a lot on the field, but as you point out, the coaches see so much more and work with the guys so hopefully their call is correct.

Quote:

The best case scenario is of course that none of these guys see the field as starters. If one were to start, who would you pick? Do you think that one of these guys playing with the starters would be a big drop off in production?

For the guard spot, Rhinehart is obviously qualified. He played a lot of first team snaps while Thomas was out, and seemed to hold up well.

Center is solid I believe with Montgomery

Tackles - fountain of youth would be nice for Samuels. I don't think any one of these guys steps in and steps up, so both running and passing will decline. But not many teams have a probowl left tackle backing up a probowl left tackle, so you do what you can to minimize wear and tear. If we have a safe lead going into 4th quarters, I would pull him out every chance I could.
as for RT, I think Williams will have to fill in (maybe Batiste on obvious passing downs).

Quote:

A lot of people are criticizing the team for not having enough depth in the 2nd team. I am curious to know what people would respond to the following questions:

- Buges (of course) has an opinion on the decision of who stays with the team and makes the roster in regards to the o-line. With that in mind, is his decision to keep these guys as the 2nd team should be a cause of concern on his ability to judge talent?

I like Buges, but if the backups can't hold their own again this year, I think he has to take the lion share of blame. He has been outspoken in his praise of all the line, especially Rabach. And I think he knows he needs a backup LT, but hasn't made his case well enough to get the right player(LJ) in here.

Quote:

- Would the team cut a guy like Bridges, if Buges would have wanted to keep him? If not, what would you say at the possibility that Buges picked these guys over Bridges?

If a position coach wants one player over another, and money isn't a deciding factor - I don't imagine it would be in Bridges case- then he ought to get who he wants. I think this is the line and backups Buges wanted, he will be responsible for the unit's cohesive play this year. I am not saying individual players are not held accountable obviously once on the field each player has to stand on his own merit BUT Buges put these lines together and he has been in the league long enough to know where his responsibility starts and ends

Quote:

- Realisticly, what type of player would add better depth to this group?

the only type of player would be a left guard of proven caliber- not too worried about injury history, as the goal would be to get up to 3 good games from the player so as to give Samuels a true healing opportunity. I think Samuels was rushed back several times last year in the hopes he was good to go. When/if he gets hurt, it would be nice for the line to function well enough that he can heal "fully"

Quote:

- Do you think that having a guy like Michael Oher instead of Batiste or Williams (and having the rest of the back ups the same) would solve any depth concerns?

Oher would have stepped in at RT, this would have let Heyer focus on backing up Samuels. I would have been content.

Quote:

- This entire 2nd string line is under 30 years old...is this a good thing because they are infusing youth or a bad thing because they lack experience.

Great thing. Our line should have an excellent opportunity to grow and create a cohesive unit. This is a very big positive to me.

Again excellent thread, well thought out points and great questions.
Thanks Ruhskins.

CRedskinsRule · 09-07-2009, 10:28 AM

Apparently Pashos signed with SF. Wanted the opportunity to start.
Pashos to 49ers | ProFootballTalk.com

CultBrennan59 · 09-07-2009, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

There have been recent concerns about our offensive line given the recent cuts and of course what happened at the end of last season. I wanted to start a discussion about the offensive line, its depth, and to take a closer look our 2nd string offensive line (which I knew little about). Also I wanted to ask some general questions for discussion regarding this topic.

Our 2nd string line according to the depth chart in Redskins.com (I know it is probably not the final depth chart, but I had to start somewhere). I also threw some "pros" about these guys (since we can all come up with cons).

(LT) D'Anthony Batiste 6'4"/314lbs/age 27/3rd yr. Started 4 games at guard; has had stints with Dallas and Carolina.

(LG) Edwin Williams 6'3"/315lbs/age 22/Rookie. 3-yr starter at UMD/1st team All-ACC in 2008; can play guard and center.

(C) Will Montgomery 6'3"/305lbs/age 23/3rd yr. Has played 13 games, 6 as starter (as a rookie played 6 games, started 4 games with Panthers).

(RG) Chad Rinehart 6'5"/310lbs/age 24/2nd yr. Got a lot of reps during training camp in R. Thomas' absence, and has played with 1st-team o-line this preseason.

(RT) Mike Williams 6'6"/337lbs/age 29/5 yrs. Praised by coaching staff in his run blocking.

The best case scenario is of course that none of these guys see the field as starters. If one were to start, who would you pick? Do you think that one of these guys playing with the starters would be a big drop off in production?

A lot of people are criticizing the team for not having enough depth in the 2nd team. I am curious to know what people would respond to the following questions:

- Buges (of course) has an opinion on the decision of who stays with the team and makes the roster in regards to the o-line. With that in mind, is his decision to keep these guys as the 2nd team should be a cause of concern on his ability to judge talent?

- Would the team cut a guy like Bridges, if Buges would have wanted to keep him? If not, what would you say at the possibility that Buges picked these guys over Bridges?

- Realisticly, what type of player would add better depth to this group?

- Do you think that having a guy like Michael Oher instead of Batiste or Williams (and having the rest of the back ups the same) would solve any depth concerns?

- This entire 2nd string line is under 30 years old...is this a good thing because they are infusing youth or a bad thing because they lack experience.

I look at it like this:
If we had drafted Oher, then yes our OL situation would have been more secure then it is now. Because we could have gotten rid of Batiste and maybe even mike williams.
But the problem is that we wouldn't have a great young star OLB/DE in Orakpo. I look at it like this, the steelers had an awful OL last year, but a Great defense. They won/got to the Super Bowl, because Defense wins championships, and they won it with one of the worst OL's in super bowl history. I still would have picked Orakpo adding a great pass rusher to an already great Defense making our Defense that much better, than getting a RT to help our OL, which isn't the whole problem of our offense. Now had Orakpo had been selected, then yeah, I wouldn't of hesitated to get Oher. Had they both of been gone, then I would of gotten Alex Mack, because our G/C position is shaky.

Lotus · 09-07-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

I look at it like this:
If we had drafted Oher, then yes our OL situation would have been more secure then it is now. Because we could have gotten rid of Batiste and maybe even mike williams.
But the problem is that we wouldn't have a great young star OLB/DE in Orakpo. I look at it like this, the steelers had an awful OL last year, but a Great defense. They won/got to the Super Bowl, because Defense wins championships, and they won it with one of the worst OL's in super bowl history. I still would have picked Orakpo adding a great pass rusher to an already great Defense making our Defense that much better, than getting a RT to help our OL, which isn't the whole problem of our offense. Now had Orakpo had been selected, then yeah, I wouldn't of hesitated to get Oher. Had they both of been gone, then I would of gotten Alex Mack, because our G/C position is shaky.

I totally agree. If we had taken Oher, the OL would be much more solid right now. That said, I'm quite happy that we got Rak instead.

GTripp0012 · 09-07-2009, 12:38 PM

This team can weather injuries to the interior OL. To the tackles, not so much. We'd lose the same section of the playbook we lost last year.

GTripp0012 · 09-07-2009, 12:41 PM

It's pretty obvious that Batiste is ahead of Mike Williams in the injury pecking order right now.

Longtimefan · 09-07-2009, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 53Fan

One thing I notice is they're young and big. That's a good start. I'll take Buges decisions, I think he knows what he's doing. If I had to pick one to start, it would probably be Rinehart. I think he's ready and will get better with more playing time. This is the thing that I think people are overlooking....Playing all these guys at the same time gives the impression that they're not very good. But they're never going to be all playing at the same time. Plug one of these guys in with the starters and all of a sudden they look better. There is a reason for that. It's harder for any one player to play on a bad line than a good line. Put one in with the starters and they're job is not as hard and they step up. Buges isn't stupid, he knows as a group they may not be that good but he isn't going to play them as a group. They each have something he obviously likes just like Heyer did and now he's starting. I'll admit that my biggest fear is that Samuels goes down, but there is no certainty that he'll be out for a significant amount of time this year so I'm not ready to panic about it. It's a concern but at this point I think we're in better shape than we've been in awhile and I think we're headed in the right direction. Could we be better? Sure, but I like that we have young guys like Montgomery, Edwin Williams and Rinehart on the team. Nice thread Ruh!

Good post...You bring out some very interesting points, some of which Zorn touched on last week in one of his PC's. It' difficult to actually make a complete evaluation of the OL depth when they are all inserted simultaneously, inserting them individually with starters gives you a better opportunity to guage their performances.

vallin21 · 09-07-2009, 12:53 PM

Good thread Ruhskins, I'm still shocked that Bastiste made it over Bridges even though I wasn't there to see every practice. I won't judge the O-line depth unless they play (hope not) because I trust Buges is doing the right thing. Time will tell.

09-07-2009, 01:23 AM	#1
Ruhskins Gamebreaker Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Columbia, MD Age: 34 Posts: 14,592	Offensive Line and Depth There have been recent concerns about our offensive line given the recent cuts and of course what happened at the end of last season. I wanted to start a discussion about the offensive line, its depth, and to take a closer look our 2nd string offensive line (which I knew little about). Also I wanted to ask some general questions for discussion regarding this topic. Our 2nd string line according to the depth chart in Redskins.com (I know it is probably not the final depth chart, but I had to start somewhere). I also threw some "pros" about these guys (since we can all come up with cons). (LT) D'Anthony Batiste 6'4"/314lbs/age 27/3rd yr. Started 4 games at guard; has had stints with Dallas and Carolina. (LG) Edwin Williams 6'3"/315lbs/age 22/Rookie. 3-yr starter at UMD/1st team All-ACC in 2008; can play guard and center. (C) Will Montgomery 6'3"/305lbs/age 23/3rd yr. Has played 13 games, 6 as starter (as a rookie played 6 games, started 4 games with Panthers). (RG) Chad Rinehart 6'5"/310lbs/age 24/2nd yr. Got a lot of reps during training camp in R. Thomas' absence, and has played with 1st-team o-line this preseason. (RT) Mike Williams 6'6"/337lbs/age 29/5 yrs. Praised by coaching staff in his run blocking. The best case scenario is of course that none of these guys see the field as starters. If one were to start, who would you pick? Do you think that one of these guys playing with the starters would be a big drop off in production? A lot of people are criticizing the team for not having enough depth in the 2nd team. I am curious to know what people would respond to the following questions: - Buges (of course) has an opinion on the decision of who stays with the team and makes the roster in regards to the o-line. With that in mind, is his decision to keep these guys as the 2nd team should be a cause of concern on his ability to judge talent? - Would the team cut a guy like Bridges, if Buges would have wanted to keep him? If not, what would you say at the possibility that Buges picked these guys over Bridges? - Realisticly, what type of player would add better depth to this group? - Do you think that having a guy like Michael Oher instead of Batiste or Williams (and having the rest of the back ups the same) would solve any depth concerns? - This entire 2nd string line is under 30 years old...is this a good thing because they are infusing youth or a bad thing because they lack experience. __________________ R.I.P. #21 New words created on The Warpath: Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual Stroried Check out this cool local internet radio show Weds 7-9pm: The DC Sports Chat I sense an annoyance in the Force

09-07-2009, 01:39 AM	#2
skins89moss Playmaker Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 2,956	Re: Offensive Line and Depth Our O-Line startes are above average players, but its the what if game. Every team has lack of depth at the O-line postion thats why you have to draft lineman to get a good quality back up. I do believe that next years draft O-line will be a big priority when we draft, i'm talking 1st or 2nd round selects. __________________ RGIII the franchise QB we have been waiting for since Mark Rypien leads us to a SuperBowl win over the Bills. Redskins Fan Since 1972

09-07-2009, 01:56 AM	#4
53Fan Pro Bowl Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C. Posts: 7,354	Re: Offensive Line and Depth One thing I notice is they're young and big. That's a good start. I'll take Buges decisions, I think he knows what he's doing. If I had to pick one to start, it would probably be Rinehart. I think he's ready and will get better with more playing time. This is the thing that I think people are overlooking....Playing all these guys at the same time gives the impression that they're not very good. But they're never going to be all playing at the same time. Plug one of these guys in with the starters and all of a sudden they look better. There is a reason for that. It's harder for any one player to play on a bad line than a good line. Put one in with the starters and they're job is not as hard and they step up. Buges isn't stupid, he knows as a group they may not be that good but he isn't going to play them as a group. They each have something he obviously likes just like Heyer did and now he's starting. I'll admit that my biggest fear is that Samuels goes down, but there is no certainty that he'll be out for a significant amount of time this year so I'm not ready to panic about it. It's a concern but at this point I think we're in better shape than we've been in awhile and I think we're headed in the right direction. Could we be better? Sure, but I like that we have young guys like Montgomery, Edwin Williams and Rinehart on the team. Nice thread Ruh! __________________ "Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"

09-07-2009, 02:15 AM	#5
skins89moss Playmaker Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 2,956	Re: Offensive Line and Depth Well other teams have back up players that step in and continue to play well so why can't our team. We just can't afford 2 and 3 starters from our O-line to miss games all at once that would be a serious problem. I like our starting O-line lets just Pray they stay healthy for a entire season. __________________ RGIII the franchise QB we have been waiting for since Mark Rypien leads us to a SuperBowl win over the Bills. Redskins Fan Since 1972

09-07-2009, 02:31 AM	#6
53Fan Pro Bowl Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C. Posts: 7,354	Re: Offensive Line and Depth There's 2 more things I'd like to add. 1- I was disappointed Bridges was cut. After reading what the coaches had to say, not so much. Bridges didn't really play that well and the coaches didn't want him to impede the progress of the young guys. I like that they want and expect them to improve. 2- I had Batiste as one of my first cuts. I wasn't impressed by him at all. Then again I didn't see him practice every day like the coaches did. They are very impressed with his footwork and size. If he has good footwork Buges can probably help him become a decent LT. It's worth a shot anyway, we're not going to go out and sign a bunch of all-pro's at this point. One more thing. I wasn't one of the people who thought Mike Williams was just going to come in and start at RT. He hasn't played in 4 years and had to lose over 100 lb's. But given some time he might still contribute. __________________ "Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"

09-07-2009, 08:10 AM	#7
KI Skins Fan The Starter Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: MD Eastern Shore Posts: 1,297	Re: Offensive Line and Depth I would be much more comfortable with this group if the Skins would bring in a veteran OT for depth. I admire what Mike Williams has accomplished but I wonder if he's ready if called upon. I we had drafted Oher he would have been our starting RT. Heyer would have been the backup at both OT positions. That would have been a very good thing, IMO. For some reason, I'm not concerned about our depth at C and G.

09-07-2009, 10:28 AM	#9
CRedskinsRule MVP Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Pasadena, Md Age: 45 Posts: 10,901	Re: Offensive Line and Depth Apparently Pashos signed with SF. Wanted the opportunity to start. Pashos to 49ers \| ProFootballTalk.com

09-07-2009, 12:38 PM	#12
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Age: 25 Posts: 15,143	Re: Offensive Line and Depth This team can weather injuries to the interior OL. To the tackles, not so much. We'd lose the same section of the playbook we lost last year. __________________ Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

09-07-2009, 12:41 PM	#13
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Age: 25 Posts: 15,143	Re: Offensive Line and Depth It's pretty obvious that Batiste is ahead of Mike Williams in the injury pecking order right now. __________________ Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

09-07-2009, 12:53 PM	#15
vallin21 The Starter Join Date: May 2008 Location: Vienna Va Posts: 1,024	Re: Offensive Line and Depth Good thread Ruhskins, I'm still shocked that Bastiste made it over Bridges even though I wasn't there to see every practice. I won't judge the O-line depth unless they play (hope not) because I trust Buges is doing the right thing. Time will tell.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Offensive Line and Depth

Redskins Locker Room