Re: Is having a great LT overrated?
It's the speed in footwork. Either you have it or you don't. You can teach the techniques but not the speed.
The thing that makes Suggs great is he gets by his blocker in 1 step - that's all. That's speed.
JJ always said he doesn't have the speed or natural skills that Suggs had and he had to work for everything.
Same with JO. He had the natural speed for footwork. He had natural abilities in all the techniques. He didn't have to work like JJ. It just came natural to him - that and his
great size with the long 36" arms, wing span and size.
You can go over footwork techniques like they do with CB drills but the speed is what
makes it go. You gotta beat those great pass rushers with footwork speed and techniques.
KO didn't have it on the end and that's why they moved him back.
You either got it or you don't and neither Oher or KO had the footwork speed. Look
how KO improved after moving back to his natural position. He had less area to cover
and had Mac and Birk covering for him on both sides. Despite his great size he was
a LG in college.
He was asked about that when he was drafted. He said I was always a LG but will play
wherever the put me. He tried it at RT and failed but excelled back at his natural
position.
KO and Mac looked like Mount Rushmore on the left side. That's when we started winning.
I really hope they don't tamper with that but they might have to.
Re: Is having a great LT overrated?
I said you can't teach the speed in footwork. You can go over the techniques but you have to have the natural speed to succeed on the ends. Oher and KO don't have that natural speed and failed miserably on the ends.
Suggs was a perfect example on speed. Its his natural first step that beats his opponents to the backfield. That's what the players say. I'm going by them not you.
The 40 time has nothing to do with it.
Suggs dropped to us because of his poor 40 time and Phil Savage who was at his workout at
ASU phoned Oz and said Suggs just dropped to us.
Yet, it's that first step that makes him the greatest on the outside. Nobody knew that except Phil and Ozzie. The rest were like you relying on his 40 time.
I'M A FOOTBALL PLAYER, NOT A TRACK STAR. T. SUGGS.
Re: Is having a great LT overrated?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
AirFlacco
I said you can't teach the speed in footwork. You can go over the techniques but you have to have the natural speed to succeed on the ends. Oher and KO don't have that natural speed and failed miserably on the ends.
Suggs was a perfect example on speed. Its his natural first step that beats his opponents to the backfield. That's what the players say. I'm going by them not you.
The 40 time has nothing to do with it.
Suggs dropped to us because of his poor 40 time and Phil Savage who was at his workout at
ASU phoned Oz and said Suggs just dropped to us.
Yet, it's that first step that makes him the greatest on the outside. Nobody knew that except Phil and Ozzie. The rest were like you relying on his 40 time.
I'M A FOOTBALL PLAYER, NOT A TRACK STAR. T. SUGGS.
In Oher's case, I think he doesn't use his hands well, probably a result of having short arms. And honestly, I just don't think he's the sharpest knife in the drawer. All the times he jumped offsides it was easy to see(since he was the only one on the field moving) that he has quick feet.
Re: Is having a great LT overrated?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bigfish
In Oher's case, I think he doesn't use his hands well, probably a result of having short arms. And honestly, I just don't think he's the sharpest knife in the drawer. All the times he jumped offsides it was easy to see(since he was the only one on the field moving) that he has quick feet.
Ditto and AMEN.
That's why he dropped to begin with. The word "stupid" is plastered all over the book starting
at about p. 37 and on. Ozzie never read the book.
That's what I said all season about his hands. Doesn't use his hands well.
He wrestles his opponents and gets his hands up under the arm pits. Just pull out some old
tapes on him, especially at LT.
He doesn't use his hands as a stun gun hitting his man in the chest. Even I did that at my lowly level and we weren't allowed to use hands back in the 60s and 70s. We used our fists and
fore arms but I loved whacking my opponent in the chest and stomach when he jumped up
and raised his arms to block a pass. He lost his wind every time.
The arm pit hold goes back to his high school days as the book says and he never got rid
of it in college or the pros.
Re: Is having a great LT overrated?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wickedsolo
Oher is very athletic. He has quick feet and his footwork isnt AS bad as some are making it out to be. His downfall is indeed his short arms. Offensive tackles with short arms have a tough time because pass rushers can close the gap quicker, get their hands on them sooner, and that allows them to in a sense "drive" or take control of the short-armed tackle. This is why Filmstudy believes that tackle candidates ideally should have as close to 34.50" arms or longer because those extra inches count big time when fending off pass rushers.
Longer arms means pass rushers have a harder time getting into the body of a tackle and steering the tackle around. Tackles with long arms have the ability to use greater leverage. As athletic as Oher is, he will never have that leverage capability.
KO, btw, has 35"+ arma iirc.
Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
Oher is athletic and excellent in run blocking but hates pass blocking like so many other
linemen. Hell I loved it even though the shoulders hurt like hell after a while.
Yea, KO is perfectly built as a LT but played LG. That's why he was so cool to look at back at
LG along with the mammoth Big Mac next to him.
You're right about teaching footwork technique and if KO loses weight he'll add speed to that
footwork but he better get on the track every day in the offseason to do it and get one of
Ray's juicers drinking only carrot and broccoli juice-lol.