PDA

View Full Version : Why is our O-Line so big?


AFD1717
06-05-2006, 11:48 AM
I understand it is more about athleticism than size, but it seems like our o-line is much bigger than others that run the Zone Scheme.

Denver: AVG - 298

LT Lepsis - 290
FG Hamilton - 283
C Nalen - 286
RG Carlisle - 295
RT Foster - 338

Atlanta: AVG - 302

LT Gandy - 315
LG Lehr - 305
C McClure - 286
RG Forney - 307
RT Weiner - 297

Houston: AVG - 317

LT Wand - 330 (Spencer 352)
LG Pitts - 320
C Flanagan - 301
RG McKinney - 302
RT Wiegert - 309 (Winston 302)

Is it just because we happened to find guys who can move and operate in space that happen to be big too, or are we doing something different?

WWJD
06-05-2006, 11:50 AM
Better steak houses in Houston maybe?

All those guys seem big to me. Isn't it pretty much common for linemen these days to be 300 pounds?

Runner
06-05-2006, 11:51 AM
I understand it is more about athleticism than size, but it seems like our o-line is much bigger than others that run the Zone Scheme.


Houston: AVG - 317

LT Wand - 330 (Spencer 352)
LG Pitts - 320
C Flanagan - 301
RG McKinney - 302
RT Wiegert - 309 (Winston 302)

Is it just because we happened to find guys who can move and operate in space that happen to be big too, or are we doing something different?

For the most part, the coaches want them at a lower playing weight than shown here. Spencer for one is on a strict diet. Some will lose weight naturally through the rigors of training camp. There may also be cases where we have lineman that are both big and quick enough for the system.

AFD1717
06-05-2006, 11:55 AM
Better steak houses in Houston maybe?

All those guys seem big to me. Isn't it pretty much common for linemen these days to be 300 pounds?

In a zone scheme, linemen are usually right around 300 or less. Look at the weights of the Denver linemen where this scheme was made popular. The guys in Atlanta are a little bigger than Denver's, but our guys are the size of linemen in a regular scheme.

AUSTexan
06-05-2006, 12:06 PM
In a zone scheme, linemen are usually right around 300 or less. Look at the weights of the Denver linemen where this scheme was made popular. The guys in Atlanta are a little bigger than Denver's, but our guys are the size of linemen in a regular scheme.


AFD - thanks for posting this question... I've been wondering the same thing.

I've assumed that since the scheme, Kubiak, et al... is so new, it would take time for everyone to lose the weight. I was a bit thrown, though, when we grabbed Spencer (352) in the draft then tagged him as a LT. They must have seen agility there and surmised that he could lose the weight and gain even more quickness... Runner says he's on a diet, so then maybe that's the case.

Regardless, good question.

texanskan
06-05-2006, 12:36 PM
Push back from the table O-LINE!

dalemurphy
06-05-2006, 12:40 PM
Wand, Pitts, Spencer, Winston are all very athletic linemen who happen to be above 300 lbs. Denver's best OLman is 330 (George Foster). So, the size doesn't preclude a lineman from being successful in this scheme. Todd Wade is the kind of slow-footed lineman that won't work in the system- but I'm pretty sure he's history.

Honoring Earl 34
06-05-2006, 01:16 PM
:twocents: Maybe smaller guys do better not only in the zone blocking but also in the high altitude .

nunusguy
06-05-2006, 01:32 PM
Wand, Pitts, Spencer, Winston are all very athletic linemen who happen to be above 300 lbs.
True but speed and quickness are more important than size and power in
ZB, so if a player is quick at 315, he should be even quicker and therefor even more effective at say 295. And few of these OLineman are trim as they
use diets and weight train to maxamize bulk, but this priority will now change and expect to see them get lean (relatively speaking).
Some guys will really benefit: I remember seeing Hodgdon last year at the scrimmages and he was only 6'2" or so tops, but had a really big gut 'cause he wanted to get his weight to around 300. Now he can drop down < 290, and give the coachs even more of what they want by maxamizing his quickness without sacrificing anything.

Runner
06-05-2006, 01:44 PM
True but speed and quickness are more important than size and power in
ZB, so if a player is quick at 315, he should be even quicker and therefor even more effective at say 295. And few of these OLineman are trim as they
use diets and weight train to maxamize bulk, but this priority will now change and expect to see them get lean (relatively speaking).
Some guys will really benefit: I remember seeing Hodgdon last year at the scrimmages and he was only 6'2" or so tops, but had a really big gut 'cause he wanted to get his weight to around 300. Now he can drop down < 290, and give the coachs even more of what they want by maxamizing his quickness without sacrificing anything.

I'd agree with this for some of the lineman, but they really need to be looked at individually. At the other extreme, having a 6' 7" guy playing at 300 may cost more in strength than he makes up for in additional quickness. Each player has his own weight goals. Quick and mobile at 315 may be better than slightly more quick and mobile at 305.

I'm sure our strength and conditioning guys are working with the other coaches to reach the right balance for each player.

DocBar
06-05-2006, 01:58 PM
IMO, Kubiak is probably making the most of what he has, and will be putting some guys on diets. He had to see what he had to work with during the OTA's before he could assign reporting weights to players. :lightbulb:

LORK 88
06-05-2006, 02:20 PM
Zone blocking scheme has to do with quickness and walling you man off, not so much the weight. Granted, smaller OL have an easier time and are usually quicker, but that isnt always the case. The heaviest guy on there (Spencer) for example is an amazing athlete and has great quickness. You also have to realize that this is year 1 of the Denver running game coming to us, so we have to be patient and give Kubiak some time.

TexanFan881
06-05-2006, 02:22 PM
Exactly Lork. If you aren't a certain weight it doesn't mean you can't fit at a certain spot. It doesn't matter if you're a 250 pound lineman or a 350 pound lineman. If you have talent, you have it. If you don't, you don't.

AFD1717
06-05-2006, 03:42 PM
Exactly Lork. If you aren't a certain weight it doesn't mean you can't fit at a certain spot. It doesn't matter if you're a 250 pound lineman or a 350 pound lineman. If you have talent, you have it. If you don't, you don't.

I agree with this completely. A guy who is 295 lbs who is strong as a bull and can move like a mongoose is worthless if at the end of the day his man beats him. Give me a guy with lovehandles and quickness that understands angles and positioning and he'll succeed in this system despite being 330.

My point is simply that the guys we found seem to be so much bigger than the guys other teams are using. I understand that Spencer is on a diet and his body hasn't had time to adapt from being a DT, then an OG, then and OT, and now an OT in a Zone Scheme. If we drop him (our biggest guy) and Foster (Denver's biggest guy), the averages come out to:

Houston: 310.6
Denver: 288.5

That is a pretty staggering difference. I was just wondering if we are really running the exact same system as the Broncos or if we've modified it a little.

Corrosion
06-05-2006, 04:03 PM
I think its an assumption from many a fan that only one body type player can fit into this scheme ... Its been driven into our heads on this board since before the draft that the ZBS is better suited to smaller linemen because they are more agile . But if a man of 325-350 lbs can carry the weight and still maintain the agility / quickness required then he in theory should be a better lineman .... Its just not often that a man of that size can carry the weight .

Scooter
06-05-2006, 04:24 PM
kubiak didnt have a choice with most of his linemen here. it wasnt as if we could go out and in one season create a new offensive line. one, because we actually did have a little talent already in place, and two because no one lets their offensive linemen become available without a fight. combine that with the fact that many of our linemen are a bit taller, and we're going to be a little heavier than the norm. the heaviest guy on that listing is wand, who at 6'7" is a full 2 inches taller than any starter in denver. he probably wont be dropping much weight because mobility has never been a problem, but strength has been an issue and dropping pounds could be counter productive (although it's been noted that wand carries around what some call "baby fat", he might lean a little as he ages). pitts however could lose 5-10lbs and retain strength if kubiak feels he'd have more to offer if he were to trim down.

in a few years we could see those numbers drop as we add players of kubiaks' choosing, although wand & spencer will probably offset any shrinking the rest of the line does.

Texans Horror
06-05-2006, 04:52 PM
kubiak didnt have a choice with most of his linemen here. it wasnt as if we could go out and in one season create a new offensive line. one, because we actually did have a little talent already in place, and two because no one lets their offensive linemen become available without a fight. combine that with the fact that many of our linemen are a bit taller, and we're going to be a little heavier than the norm. the heaviest guy on that listing is wand, who at 6'7" is a full 2 inches taller than any starter in denver. he probably wont be dropping much weight because mobility has never been a problem, but strength has been an issue and dropping pounds could be counter productive (although it's been noted that wand carries around what some call "baby fat", he might lean a little as he ages). pitts however could lose 5-10lbs and retain strength if kubiak feels he'd have more to offer if he were to trim down.

in a few years we could see those numbers drop as we add players of kubiaks' choosing, although wand & spencer will probably offset any shrinking the rest of the line does.

Just curious: has anyone posting here met any of the Houston linemen? Specifically, did anyone go to the Total Access thing this past week? Did the linemen look fat? Did Wand look like he's carrying around any baby fat?

Maddict5
06-05-2006, 05:30 PM
this is purely my theory so its probably wrong but if you look at denver and atlanta..they're both excellent running teams but their linemen arent so great at pass blocking probably due to their lack of size..so maybe kubiak is trying to find a better balance with our o-line with bigger bodies

powerfuldragon
06-05-2006, 05:31 PM
Or maybe they just like cheeseburgers.

Ibar_Harry
06-05-2006, 05:44 PM
Is it possible Kubiak - people say he was under a control freak in Denver - has some ideas of his own. As some have said, perhapes we will be seeing the awakening of the Gulf Coast Offense. I keep saying don't paint Kubiak with the same brush as Denver.

There may be similarities, but I will bet there will be some surprising differences. Again as others have stated Denver had a different style when Elway was there. Kubiak likes Carr a lot and he sees a lot of similarities to Elway. Carr may not be a total Elway, but he has a lot of Elway's traits. Therefore an Elway like offense might make sense.

I keep saying you don't have 3 wide receivers with the size, hands, and speed we have to sit them on the bench for decoration. They are going to be out there for a reason. Clue #1, I don't think the other team is going to like the reason.

Honoring Earl 34
06-05-2006, 07:20 PM
[QUOTE=Ibar_Harry]Is it possible Kubiak - people say he was under a control freak in Denver - has some ideas of his own. As some have said, perhapes we will be seeing the awakening of the Gulf Coast Offense. I keep saying don't paint Kubiak with the same brush as Denver.

I agree with this , Denver has the most consistent OL in the last 10-15 years but the best was Dallas before Erik Williams got in car wreck . Dallas was huge except for the center Stepnoski ... Tuinea (sp), Newton , Allen and Williams were well over 320 lbs .

Wolf
06-05-2006, 07:22 PM
Or maybe they just like cheeseburgers.


I was scrolling the mouse fast PowerfulDragon and saw

And Behold the Power of cheeseburgers

:lol:

michaelm
06-05-2006, 08:10 PM
Push back from the table O-LINE!


Or push the table back..!

jparrish
06-06-2006, 02:01 AM
If you know anything about statistics, then you've heard about "outliers." Outliers are points that don't follow a particular trend, or are obviously out of place. When you incorporate these "outliers" into your averages, it will skew the result. Spencer at 350+ definitely skews your average.

Kaiser Toro
06-06-2006, 03:58 AM
Is it possible Kubiak - people say he was under a control freak in Denver - has some ideas of his own. As some have said, perhapes we will be seeing the awakening of the Gulf Coast Offense. I keep saying don't paint Kubiak with the same brush as Denver.

There may be similarities, but I will bet there will be some surprising differences. Again as others have stated Denver had a different style when Elway was there. Kubiak likes Carr a lot and he sees a lot of similarities to Elway. Carr may not be a total Elway, but he has a lot of Elway's traits. Therefore an Elway like offense might make sense.

I keep saying you don't have 3 wide receivers with the size, hands, and speed we have to sit them on the bench for decoration. They are going to be out there for a reason. Clue #1, I don't think the other team is going to like the reason.

This is brutal. Please elaborate om the Elway traits that Carr has lots of?

AFD1717
06-06-2006, 08:53 AM
If you know anything about statistics, then you've heard about "outliers." Outliers are points that don't follow a particular trend, or are obviously out of place. When you incorporate these "outliers" into your averages, it will skew the result. Spencer at 350+ definitely skews your average.

You didn't read this post (#14)...

My point is simply that the guys we found seem to be so much bigger than the guys other teams are using. I understand that Spencer is on a diet and his body hasn't had time to adapt from being a DT, then an OG, then and OT, and now an OT in a Zone Scheme. If we drop him (our biggest guy) and Foster (Denver's biggest guy), the averages come out to:

Houston: 310.6
Denver: 288.5

That is a pretty staggering difference. I was just wondering if we are really running the exact same system as the Broncos or if we've modified it a little.

Runner
06-06-2006, 09:01 AM
You didn't read this post (#14)...

My point is simply that the guys we found seem to be so much bigger than the guys other teams are using. I understand that Spencer is on a diet and his body hasn't had time to adapt from being a DT, then an OG, then and OT, and now an OT in a Zone Scheme. If we drop him (our biggest guy) and Foster (Denver's biggest guy), the averages come out to:

Houston: 310.6
Denver: 288.5

That is a pretty staggering difference. I was just wondering if we are really running the exact same system as the Broncos or if we've modified it a little.

A couple of other thoughts:

Spencer (reportedly: http://pittsburghpanthers.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/spencer_charles00.html) played at 330 last season in college. The other 20 pounds is post season weight gain, and NO, I'm NOT implying he's fat, doesn't work out, or whatever. That skews the data some.

Also, I think some of our players are over their projected playing weights right now. If many of them lose from 5-15 pounds before the season starts, that will get you to within about a 10 pound difference. That isn't quite as significant. There will be normal variation from team to team. Also, how do their heights compare?

Hulk75
06-06-2006, 09:10 AM
I understand it is more about athleticism than size, but it seems like our o-line is much bigger than others that run the Zone Scheme.

Denver: AVG - 298

LT Lepsis - 290
FG Hamilton - 283
C Nalen - 286
RG Carlisle - 295
RT Foster - 338

Atlanta: AVG - 302

LT Gandy - 315
LG Lehr - 305
C McClure - 286
RG Forney - 307
RT Weiner - 297

Houston: AVG - 317

LT Wand - 330 (Spencer 352)
LG Pitts - 320
C Flanagan - 301
RG McKinney - 302
RT Wiegert - 309 (Winston 302)

Is it just because we happened to find guys who can move and operate in space that happen to be big too, or are we doing something different?
Cause we are running the Elway Bronco Offense, not the scrambling Plummer Offense, remember Mike Sclarith was not a small guy when he played with John.

Runner
06-06-2006, 10:54 AM
Just curious: has anyone posting here met any of the Houston linemen? Specifically, did anyone go to the Total Access thing this past week? Did the linemen look fat? Did Wand look like he's carrying around any baby fat?

Can no one answer this? Must we rely on rampant speculation?????

BamaTexan
06-06-2006, 11:01 AM
Denver drafted George Foster who hasn't seen 330 since his freshmen year at Georgia. Tom Nalen would start at center for 30 teams in this league. I'm sure the coaches are getting some of these guys weight at a better number in order to improvw their quickness. Being able to "pull" from any postion on the line is a staple of the offense and it will take to time for these guys to get used to it.

Also, Denver and Atlanta had at some point the last few years Alex Gibbs, Sr. who is a great O-Line coach and he liked guys under 300lbs for the most part.

BT

Texans_Chick
06-06-2006, 11:02 AM
Just curious: has anyone posting here met any of the Houston linemen? Specifically, did anyone go to the Total Access thing this past week? Did the linemen look fat? Did Wand look like he's carrying around any baby fat?

Can no one answer this? Must we rely on rampant speculation?????

I watched practice on Friday and really didn't notice any linemen looking bad, but admittedly I really wasn't too focused on it--they were working a lot with Carr in the middle field. (I watched a bunch of the DB work because they were closer--looking good).

Saw Winston up close at the All Access and he just looked like a scary Olinemen.

The Texans dietician and strength coaches talked a lot about how they are not believers in arbitrary weight amounts and making weight--because everyone is shaped different--they are more interested in performance and improving performance.

The people cracking on Babin for being fat I do not understand. I saw him in person and he looked fit.

Sorry, it's the best info I can give.

AFD1717
06-06-2006, 11:04 AM
Also, how do their heights compare?

This is a good point...

Denver:

Lepsis - 6'4"
Hamilton - 6'4"
Nalen - 6'3"
Carlisle - 6'5"
Foster - 6'5"

Houston:

Wand - 6'7" (Spencer 6'4")
Pitts - 6'3"
Flanagan - 6'5"
McKinney - 6'4"
Wiegert - 6'5" (Winston 6'7")

We are a little taller than they are.

infantrycak
06-06-2006, 11:04 AM
Just curious: has anyone posting here met any of the Houston linemen? Specifically, did anyone go to the Total Access thing this past week? Did the linemen look fat? Did Wand look like he's carrying around any baby fat?

Here is my impression:

Wade is a very trim 315 lbs (6' 8" for your height info)--too bad his feet don't match.
Wand looked more trim than when he came out of the draft but could still trim 15 pounds off to get down to a more Wade like 312 lbs. Pitts falls into the same category of could be more svelt. Whether the weight has any effect on them is an issue for the coaches. When Wand and Pitts played together on the left they were two of the better OLmen at getting down the field to make second level blocks. Wiegert does not carry a ton of extra weight around. I wouldn't be surprised to see several of the OLmen drop 10-15 lbs over the season, but folks are probably making far too much of this issue. As has been pointed out, the Broncos have not been weight obsessed, they have been talent obsessed as evidenced by the use of their highest OL draft pick on their heaviest OLmen.

BamaTexan
06-06-2006, 11:11 AM
The Broncos did/do have weight maximums for players at certain postions. O-Line and TE that I know of. They would be given a certain weight to show up at for mini-camps, training camp and during the season. Players would be fined if they were over there personal limit. All thought the players would tell you they hated it, in the same breath they would tell you it helped them stay in better shape and eat better.

Runner
06-06-2006, 11:19 AM
I wouldn't be surprised to see several of the OLmen drop 10-15 lbs over the season, but folks are probably making far too much of this issue.

Too much of an issue! We haven't even begun to overreact. Next we start bringing in pictures.

AFD1717
06-06-2006, 11:23 AM
Too much of an issue! We haven't even begun to overreact. Next we start bringing in pictures.

When I originally started this thread it wasn't a crack on these guys' conditioning. I was wondering if we were purposely looking for bigger guys or if it just happened that way.

BamaTexan
06-06-2006, 11:26 AM
To early to tell...

BT

Runner
06-06-2006, 11:28 AM
When I originally started this thread it wasn't a crack on these guys' conditioning. I was wondering if we were purposely looking for bigger guys or if it just happened that way.

I know - but original intent and where things end up are often very different. I'm just having fun with it - you saw my serious answers earlier.

AFD1717
06-06-2006, 11:31 AM
I know - but original intent and where things end up are often very different. I'm just having fun with it - you saw my serious answers earlier.

:thumbup

66cobra
06-06-2006, 04:44 PM
this guy looks like a monster! It is Charles Spencer and he looks really good, strong and athletic, not fat...

http://www.texansbullpen.com/06photogallery/Preseason/2006-06-06-PlayerPractice/Photos/DSC_0008.JPG

CoastalTexan
06-06-2006, 05:59 PM
Yeah he doesn't have a gut like TJ. :hides:

Hulk75
06-06-2006, 06:12 PM
this guy looks like a monster! It is Charles Spencer and he looks really good, strong and athletic, not fat...

http://www.texansbullpen.com/06photogallery/Preseason/2006-06-06-PlayerPractice/Photos/DSC_0008.JPG
Holy............Thats Spencer............I feel Carr is happy right now, thats a mean looking dude.

Kaiser Toro
06-06-2006, 06:54 PM
Would you like to super size or Spencer size it? That dude is big and looks to be extremely athletic (yes I recognize it is a still) by the way his muscle and weight are distributed.

Brandon420tx
06-06-2006, 07:02 PM
He actually makes Moulds look tiny .... Moulds aint tiny y'all!

Oh yea, Texas accent showing through right there.:)

TexanFan881
06-06-2006, 07:04 PM
To think, Moulds is about 10 years older than Spencer and look at the size difference :shocked I guess that's how it's supposed to be for offensive lineman though :tv:

Kaiser Toro
06-06-2006, 07:08 PM
He actually makes Moulds look tiny .... Moulds aint tiny ya'll!

Oh yea, Texas accent showing through right there.:)

You better take cover, the y'all police may be out. ;)

wags
06-06-2006, 07:20 PM
ya'll!

OMG you are so dead. Cak is coming for you!

Tex Trenches
06-06-2006, 08:08 PM
I say line them up, and get to work.

Number19
06-06-2006, 08:30 PM
"...One veteran offensive line coach with another team recently opined that Spencer had the strongest punch-out, the maneuver that is typically the initial upper-body move used in pass blocking, he has ever encountered..." ( from a Lenny Paquareli ESPN column, approx 5/13.)

CoastalTexan
06-06-2006, 09:30 PM
It also looks like he's got some Long arms too, another reason to be a LT I guess.

edo783
06-06-2006, 10:46 PM
http://www.texansbullpen.com/06photogallery/Preseason/2006-06-06-PlayerPractice/Photos/DSC_0008.JPG[/quote]

Gimmie your lunch money little person! :respect:

infantrycak
06-07-2006, 12:46 AM
He actually makes Moulds look tiny .... Moulds aint tiny ya'll!

Oh yea, Texas accent showing through right there.:)

OK, time for a once a quarter soap box message not aimed at the original poster.

(1) y'all is not an accent issue--it is a colloquialism--an expression found in a local area, not a different way of pronoucing things.
(2) it is y'all, not ya'll--the apostrophe replaces the missing letters--in this case the "ou" from you, not the (well there aren't any) missing from all.

Sorry, Brandon--not aimed at you--like I said, a just can't restrain the urge to convert folks to the proper spelling of their colloquialisms.

Carry on now.

powerfuldragon
06-07-2006, 12:52 AM
OK, time for a once a quarter soap box message not aimed at the original poster.

(1) y'all is not an accent issue--it is a colloquialism--an expression found in a local area, not a different way of pronoucing things.
(2) it is y'all, not ya'll--the apostrophe replaces the missing letters--in this case the "ou" from you, not the (well there aren't any) missing from all.

Sorry, Brandon--not aimed at you--like I said, a just can't restrain the urge to convert folks to the proper spelling of their colloquialisms.

Carry on now.
L'all

mexican_texan
06-07-2006, 01:09 AM
http://www.texansbullpen.com/06photogallery/Preseason/2006-06-06-PlayerPractice/Photos/DSC_0008.JPG

You gon' eat that cornbread?

Scooter
06-07-2006, 01:33 AM
http://www.texansbullpen.com/06photogallery/Preseason/2006-06-06-PlayerPractice/Photos/DSC_0008.JPG

You gon' eat that cornbread?

lol

there's gonna be consequences & repercussions!