Did Gailey and Fitz make the Oline look better than it is?

[HeHateMe]

For the O line being so good at run blocking, they had a real tough time in short yardage/goaline situations getting any push at all last season.

[Kellyto83TD]

I don't buy it. Why? Our rushing stats. We were good in rushing, CJ if he had more carries would have been one of the leagues top 5 RB's. Look Glenn is a Guard, put him at guard, put someone with some speed at LT and lets address LT this offseason. Too late to worry about it now.

[thebandit27]

One of RF's biggest strengths was his ability to direct the offensive line. Even so, he took it in the chin on the majority of pass plays. I was worried that if we drafted a QB with even a second slower release, our sack rate would probably triple. Luckily, I think EJ has a fast enough release to be ok, but our offensive line has never been "good."

 

No, he didn't. I went ahead and put this chart together based on the NFL's stats for QB hits and passing attempts found here:

 

http://www.nfl.com/s...qualified=false

 

http://www.nfl.com/s...qualified=false

Rank Team QB hits Attempts hits/att

1 Philadelphia Eagles 118 618 0.191

2 Kansas City Chiefs 89 475 0.187

3 Indianapolis Colts 116 628 0.185

4 Washington Redskins 80 442 0.181

5 Chicago Bears 87 485 0.179

6 Jacksonville Jaguars 103 586 0.176

7 Arizona Cardinals 97 608 0.160

8 Seattle Seahawks 64 405 0.158

9 San Francisco 49ers 68 436 0.156

10 New York Jets 76 493 0.154

11 Green Bay Packers 85 558 0.152

12 Atlanta Falcons 83 615 0.135

13T Buffalo Bills 75 511 0.147

13T Cleveland Browns 83 566 0.147

15 St. Louis Rams 81 557 0.145

16 Houston Texans 77 554 0.139

17 Carolina Panthers 67 490 0.137

18T Minnesota Vikings 64 483 0.133

18T San Diego Chargers 70 528 0.133

20 Miami Dolphins 66 504 0.131

21 Baltimore Ravens 69 560 0.123

22 Tennessee Titans 66 540 0.122

23 Cincinnati Bengals 65 540 0.120

24 Pittsburgh Steelers 67 574 0.117

25 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 66 566 0.117

26 Dallas Cowboys 75 658 0.114

27 Detroit Lions 80 740 0.108

28 New England Patriots 67 641 0.105

29 Oakland Raiders 63 629 0.100

30 New York Giants 53 539 0.098

31 New Orleans Saints 59 671 0.088

32 Denver Broncos 46 588 0.078

 

So the OL was right around average in # of QB hits allowed per attempt.

Edited August 8, 2013 by thebandit27

[Chandler#81]

What Nanker said. I don't think there's a dominant OL anywhere in the League, with some of the worse pass blocking coming from playoff teams.

 

It's not 'who needs replacing?' it's more 'how do we buy another second?'

[thebandit27]

Without following the link and examining their methodologies, is that "time to throw" or "took the least time to throw." Because those are two wildly different things.

 

At this risk of sounding snarky, you have to read the link to see how they make their determination.

[hondo in seattle]

And yet Tom Brady had the shortest "Time to Throw" in the entire NFL (Peyton Manning was 3rd)...

 

https://www.profootb...-time-to-throw/

 

And Fitz had the 4th (tied) fastest time to throw, holding on to the ball less than a 1/10th of a second more than Brady. In other words, the data supports the argument that our line didn't have to hold their blocks for very long on passing plays.

[Rocky Landing]

No, he didn't. I went ahead and put this chart together based on the NFL's stats for QB hits and passing attempts found here:

 

 

So the OL was right around average in # of QB hits allowed per attempt.

Great topic.

These stats are a little incomplete with knowing how much time was spent in the pocket. The point has been made that Fitz spent less time in the pocket than average, which (if true), would skew the results towards a lower hit/att ratio.

[thebandit27]

And Fitz had the 4th (tied) fastest time to throw, holding on to the ball less than a 1/10th of a second more than Brady. In other words, the data supports the argument that our line didn't have to hold their blocks for very long on passing plays.

 

Of course that's the case, as the passing offense largely revolved around timing patterns to suit what Fitz did well. That doesn't mean that the OL couldn't block effectively for longer than that.

 

Also, if you continue reading down the page, the next chart following "Time to Throw" is "Time to Sack", which tells the average amount of time that a QB was afforded before being brought down (I assume this means initial contact and not necessarily end of play, otherwise it would really invalidate the stat). Fitz ranked in the top 1/3 of the league in average time afforded before a sack with 3.61 seconds (more than Brady, Manning, Brees, etc.).

Edited August 8, 2013 by thebandit27

[Gugny]

Either Spiller is the next Barry Sanders, or the O-line did a hell of a job.

 

I love me some Spiller, but a RB doesn't average 7 YPC without getting touched if he's making his own holes; nor does an aging UDFA from a D-III school put up MVP-like numbers.

 

Why people have such a difficult time acknowledging how well this O-line has done is beyond me.

[Wayne Cubed]

And Fitz had the 4th (tied) fastest time to throw, holding on to the ball less than a 1/10th of a second more than Brady. In other words, the data supports the argument that our line didn't have to hold their blocks for very long on passing plays.

 

You're reading the data wrong.

 

Fitz, on average, would get rid of the ball in 2.5 secs. Yes thats the 4th fastest time. That stat alone tells you nothing. A QB could get rid of the ball very fast for a variety of reasons. Maybe they run an uptempo, quick strike offense. That doesn't mean the offensive line can't block. If you read on, you see that average time to sack tells you more. The Bills average sack time was 3.61 seconds, meaning FItz had a full second more, on average, to get rid of the ball. Meaning the line was holding their blocks longer than required for him to get rid of the ball.

 

Look at the other end of the spectrum. Roethisberger, on average gets rid of the ball in 2.76 secs, whereas his line, when its a sack only, holds there block for 2.43 seconds, on average. They aren't holding they're blocks long enough.

[The Big Cat]

Of course that's the case, as the passing offense largely revolved around timing patterns to suit what Fitz did well. That doesn't mean that the OL couldn't block effectively for longer than that.

 

But the same applies to Brady then, who has made his living let his receivers run around in crossing patterns until they find a gap. In spite of the data, we KNOW Brady had time to throw, but the data neither confirms no refutes the fact that Fitz did or did not: my original response (kinda).

[DDD]

Absolutely yes. The O-line sucked for years. Gailey used essentially the same players Jauron had and made them work. The loss of Levitre or not, I expect the O-line to have a big drop in productivity this year.

[The Big Cat]

You're reading the data wrong.

 

Fitz, on average, would get rid of the ball in 2.5 secs. Yes thats the 4th fastest time. That stat alone tells you nothing. A QB could get rid of the ball very fast for a variety of reasons. Maybe they run an uptempo, quick strike offense. That doesn't mean the offensive line can't block. If you read on, you see that average time to sack tells you more. The Bills average sack time was 3.61 seconds, meaning FItz had a full second more, on average, to get rid of the ball. Meaning the line was holding their blocks longer than required for him to get rid of the ball.

 

Look at the other end of the spectrum. Roethisberger, on average gets rid of the ball in 2.76 secs, whereas his line, when its a sack only, holds there block for 2.43 seconds, on average. They aren't holding they're blocks long enough.

 

Okay, well this only slightly changes things.

 

The time to sack adds an extra layer telling us how long it took to sack a quarterback. Perhaps the only way to sack some quarterbacks is to have a guy barrelling at him, un touched. Wouldn't that skew the data lower?

[Mark Vader]

And Fitz had the 4th (tied) fastest time to throw, holding on to the ball less than a 1/10th of a second more than Brady. In other words, the data supports the argument that our line didn't have to hold their blocks for very long on passing plays.

That's true. The O-Line did not have to hold their blocks for very long on passing plays, but they still did.

 

There were many times last year when Fitz had all day to throw, even without a Tight End left to block.

 

The O-Line has been a strength of the offense regardless of Gailey & Fitz. Yes it was catered to that offensive system, but the players had the talent to make it work.

 

With the loss of Levitre & Reinhardt, and the Bills not addressing their losses, there is a problem with the starting LG position.

 

Whether Cordy Glenn is better suited at OG than OT is debatable, but we just have to go with what we have now.

 

And to answer the initial question of this thread: No.

[Dorkington]

 

 

And yet Tom Brady had the shortest "Time to Throw" in the entire NFL (Peyton Manning was 3rd)...

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/11/07/signature-stat-snapshot-time-to-throw/

 

Insightful stats, thank you.

 

Shows that Fitz was quick to get rid of the ball, and that the line ranked 11th in the league in time given before taking a sack. Not the best, but far from the worst. So the OL is decent AND Fitz got rid of the ball quickly.

 

Edit: Good point by a commentator... play action plays might have a large effect on this.

Edited August 8, 2013 by Dorkington

[microscopes]

Sacks in general are completely overrated. Here are the top 10 sacked QB's in the league last season:

 

Aaron Rodgers - Pro Bowler, Super Bowl Winner

Philip Rivers - Pro Bowler

Andy Dalton - Pro Bowler

Andrew Luck - Pro Bowler

Jay Cutler - Pro Bowler

Cam Newton - Pro Bowler

Tony Romo - Pro Bowler

Sam Bradford - Pro Bowler

Joe Flacco - Pro Bowler, Super Bowl Winner

Ryan Tannehil

 

Enough said.

 

And Fitz had the 4th (tied) fastest time to throw, holding on to the ball less than a 1/10th of a second more than Brady. In other words, the data supports the argument that our line didn't have to hold their blocks for very long on passing plays.

 

Unfortunately, throwing the ball quickly at the feet of receivers isn't an accomplishment.

[Wayne Cubed]

Okay, well this only slightly changes things.

 

The time to sack adds an extra layer telling us how long it took to sack a quarterback. Perhaps the only way to sack some quarterbacks is to have a guy barrelling at him, un touched. Wouldn't that skew the data lower?

 

In short, no.

 

If a guy is going barreling at the QB, for a sack, that means his line didn't block long enough for him. It's not like the line choses which plays to block for and which plays to let a guy go barreling after the QB. One would think, on every pass play, the line is trying to hold there blocks for as long as possible. Yes, sometimes guys get through the block fast and sometimes QB's extend the play. But thats why that time is an average.

 

EDIT: The fact that some some times are really low, can only mean that their respective lines are getting blown up, consistently.

Edited August 8, 2013 by Wayne Cubed

[Kemp2Warlick]

Fitz was a below average QB who looked good after the Edwards'Losman debacle. I would have liked to see Gaileys offense work with a above average QB.

[Gugny]

Sacks in general are completely overrated. Here are the top 10 sacked QB's in the league last season:

 

Aaron Rodgers - Pro Bowler, Super Bowl Winner

Philip Rivers - Pro Bowler

Andy Dalton - Pro Bowler

Andrew Luck - Pro Bowler

Jay Cutler - Pro Bowler

Cam Newton - Pro Bowler

Tony Romo - Pro Bowler

Sam Bradford - Pro Bowler

Joe Flacco - Pro Bowler, Super Bowl Winner

Ryan Tannehil

 

Enough said.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, throwing the ball quickly at the feet of receivers isn't an accomplishment.

Is anything more overrated than being named a Pro Bowler?

 

What is your point, anyway? The fact that they are the top 10 most-sacked QBs could mean a few things.

 

They hang on to the ball too long. - Newton

Their teams passes more than other teams. - Rodgers

Their O line is terrible. - Romo

They're not that good. - Bradford

 

What, exactly, are you trying to illustrate?

[The Big Cat]

In short, no.

 

If a guy is going barreling at the QB, for a sack, that means his line didn't block long enough for him. It's not like the line choses which plays to block for and which plays to let a guy go barreling after the QB. One would think, on every pass play, the line is trying to hold there blocks for as long as possible. Yes, sometimes guys get through the block fast and sometimes QB's extend the play. But thats why that time is an average.

 

EDIT: The fact that some some times are really low, can only mean that their respective lines are getting blown up, consistently.

 

Let's stick with Brady. If the one and only way to sack Brady is to send 8 players, two of them corner backs, and the corner backs get him every time, un touched, then that has little to no bearing on the offensive line.