Yeah, or simply place less value on the #53 on the roster? I'm not arguing either way, just saying the most logical reason why he was brought up to the 53. There's no difference between being on the 53/inactive game day and being on the PS except for 1) Pay and 2) protection from being swiped.
Yeah, well in the end, we are both guessing. The point of the thread was simply that I feel Blanton could be a bigger part of the Jets next year than we collectively might be thinking right now, and given the state of the right side of the offensive line, just called him out as a guy to keep an eye on. A potential sleeper. Perhaps there is something in THIS post you can find to take issue with?
Can anyone make sense of these stats? http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol.php According to this we were 3rd best at running behind the RT Anthony Clement. A 4.72 YPC. I unfortunately have no idea what Right End is. I'm thinking it could be around a Tight end. I'm just not sure. Now I've been in support of Clement the past few months. I am going to try to do some more research, but if this is any indication of what he's done this past season than I see no reason at all that we don't bring him back (outside of a huge salary cap hit - which I completely doubt would be the case) EDIT - Look to the 3rd box of stats 2 False Start penalties all season according to this http://realfootball365.stats.com/fb/playerstats.asp?id=4296&team=20
Clement wasn't terrible, but he needs to be upgraded. Ditto on Brandon Moore. Also, Clement plays the right side, next to the tight end. Most runs are more successful that way simply because you have more blocking to that side of the field If Blanton has any athleticism whatsoever, he has tremendous upside. We'll see how he works out, but we can't go dismissing a need because we've got Anthony Clement and Ed Blanton. -X-
at 6'9" i fuggn hope he can turn out to be a starter in this league...you dont come across that size often....
if Blanton shows he can potentially start, then that gives us all the more flexibility heading into the draft. and speaking of flexibility, i hope we sign Kelly Gregg as one of the answers to NT; because he would also give us flexibility with those first 3 picks. cheers
Don't be so defensive man. People are allowed to debate what they think without takign it personal. Heck, I didn't even realize it was you I was discussing things with until this post.. If I did, I wouldn't have even bothered replying. Blanton is obviously in the plans or they would have let him walk... Now get over yourself. Not everything has to be personal.
Sime interesting stuff there, Murell. One thing that really jumped out at me is how often we run between the guards, (63%) and how rarely we run outside. Given how good both Mangold and Ferguson are at pulling and blocking in space, seems to me we aren't making enough use of those abilities. We only ran behind the RT 11% of the time, and the RT gets help from the TE on thise plays. I wonder what the reasoning is behind so many up the gut running plays. maybe the CS thinks that niether Clement and Ferguson can get any drive going? Look at how often Seattle ran behind Walter Jones. Seems to me that the CS feels we can't run block very well at either tackle spot, even though these numbers would seem to indicate otherwise. Nice find!
Looking at those stats it seems that most teams run the majority of the time throught mid/guard. Does have anything to do with the fact that you can get a more favorable matchup up the middle than through the end? If you are facing a 4-3 D then you should be able to have your guards block the DT's and the C should be able to take out the MLB or double team one of the DT's therefore making a hole the RB should be able to go through. That doesnt count the FB if he is being used as a lead blocker. If the D is a 3-4 then the C should take on the NT and the 2 G's move up to the ILB's again making a hole. Once again not counting the FB. By running to the outside, you begin having the straight 1 on matchups of T and DE's then add the OLB which would generally make it 2 on 1 for the defense. The offense would need another blocker (TE/FB) just to even the odds. With the way our FB situation was last year plus Ferg's development, I can understand why Mangini would want to take as much advantage of Kendall and Mangold as possible. Am I right about any of this?
i see so many other RB's on other teams going outside, yet we cant seem to do that or dont do that???
Yes, interesting, and so are your observations. My only explanation is that by running "by committe," we really never did find any kind of rythm this year whatsoever. In fact, lets face it, our running game still hasn't "found itself" and won't, until we get a legit back. And as far as Washington goes, he's not the man for running up the gut, yet we chose to do that very often lat ein the season (far too often for me, in fact). His strength is not getting tied up in traffic, yet that's where we sent him in recent games. Ludicrous. So yeah, you're right and it sure is curious, but one thing is for sure... after we tweak our lines, we need to look at RB. I know you like Houston a lot and I do too, but now I'm not so sure he's gonna get it done. Now there's even talk we may keep Barlow. This whole RB situation is befuddling...
Precisely my point with Washington. They can say what they want about Schottenheimer bing some kind of "offensive guru," but we totally wasted Washington's outside juking talent in recent games. I can't tell you how many times I wound up screaming at the TV with Leon up the middle.
A couple of things come to mind. First, most 3rd and shorts and all QB sneaks will be run between the guards. That partly explains why so many teams are at the 50% number. As far as what sort of defense you are running against, it is also scheme dependent. In the 3-4, the NT is supposed to keep both the LG and center tied up. But that was also true for the Scheme Edwards ran here, even though it was a 4-3. In that scheme, the RDT lined up in the 1 hole, slanted towards the center, thus the name "slant nose". Also called a 1T, or one technique. The SNT is also supposed to hold ground and occupy both the center and OLG, preventing the center from getting a block on the MLB. That's why it's so hard to find good NT's. They have to demand the double team, or the center is free to block at the next level, be it a MLB or a safety that might come up. In most "man blocking" schemes like Schotty uses, the actual scheme changes a bit from week to week, or it's supposed to. Teams also change their D alignment at the line of scrimmage to try to confuse the O linemen regarding their blocking assignments. That's what the Jets were trying to do against NE in the playoff game with all that jumping around. It's Mangold's job to try to reconize the scheme and call the O line blocking assignments. That's what both he and pennington are doing when they start pointing at the line. I like to obsrve line play as much as I can, but it's usually pretty hard to see what's going on with the commercial TV angles. The game film that the CS breaks down is much better, usually overhead end zone shots where it's easier to see stunts and slants that the defense might use. I'm not sure if that film (or tape) is available for an O coordinator to look at live during a game, but those still shots they look at on the sidelines are often end zone views. Bottom line, as fans we don't have much info to base our opinions on. What might look like a bad block could have been a blown call or a blown assignment, or just sometimes getting fooled by the look the defense gave. Sort of a rant there, but I still think based on this data Murrell uncovered that we have a clear tendency to run up the gut, and I think changing it up a bit more would make the running offense a bit less predictable. There is little doubt in my mind that against some teams we should be pulling more and running outside though. That was Martin's signature play, and it worked pretty well. Interesting discussion tho....
Prior to the AFL, the NFL prided itself in the "gain 3 yards at a time" game plan. It seems to me that you take more of a risk of going outside then inside. Inside relies more on the blocking where outside relies more on the "juking" of the RB. Mangini might have been more comfortabe with the gain 3 and hope for more than the bigger possibility of losing yards if the juke doesnt work.
Buttleman, my last post wasn't necessarily directed at you... just an attempt to make an over simplified synopsis of some schemes in general. What I find interesting from that stats page Murrell linked to was how bad the Jets were in the power ranking. 27th in the league at 3rd and short sort of situations. Nothing new there, the Jets have always struggled trying to move the pile in short yardage and at the goal line. The begs to ask once again, why run up the gut so often? This O line still can't generate push, but we still run between the guards. The Jets run btween the tackles 63% of the time, compared to the NFL average of 49%. Only two teams in the NFL do it more often. That tells me we don't have much cinfidence in the running game unless it's behind Kendall and Mangold. That needs to get fixed.
