Colts offensive line ranked 10th best in NFL

[bigt]

Per pff.  Haeg lowest rated.  Smith highest rated.  For what it’s worth.

 

[Dark Superman]

Pretty cool knowing all the injuries we've went through so far, plus starting a few rookies as well.

[DaveA1102]

It would be interesting to see the trend of that as well as I think the last two weeks we have really made good strides after flattering to deceive to open the season. 

 

Nelson and Kelly have become more solid (according to PFF as well as the eye test) and Smith has been a nice surprise at RT.

 

Big test against a solid Bills D on Sunday though.

[K-148]

Going against Geno Atkins, Carlos Dunlap, Fletcher Cox, Brandon Graham, J.J. Watt... Not bad at all. Even Clark, Haeg, Slauson held their own against such competition.

[coltsfeva]

   I’ve had to listen to some games and heard over and over: “Luck with time to throw”. 

    Nice to see some positive threads!

 

[NewEra]

Now we just need them to stay healthy and gel. I don't think they've played more then 2 games as the same unit. I think Kelly and Nelson are the only two who've played all games. Wait, didn't Kelly miss one? 

[DougDew]

Does it rank OLs with consideration to how quickly the QB releases the ball?

[krunk]

All I will say is I think the lineup of Costanzo, Nelson, Kelly, Glowinski, and Smith will work if they stay healthy. I figured they wouldn't replace Smith with Good even if healthy.

[Defjamz26]

15 minutes ago, krunk said:

All I will say is I think the lineup of Costanzo, Nelson, Kelly, Glowinski, and Smith will work if they stay healthy. I figured they wouldn't replace Smith with Good even if healthy.

Which tells me that Smith is the best RT in the roster. Good for him but that says a lot about Haeg, Good, and Clarke IMO.

[lollygagger8]

[NagelHausForge]

Now if only our WRs, TEs and RBs could catch/run the ball...

[aaron11]

they have been solid now get that running game going.  and somebody catch the ball

[krunk]

45 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Which tells me that Smith is the best RT in the roster. Good for him but that says a lot about Haeg, Good, and Clarke IMO.

It only says what most of us have been saying for a while now.  They are decent back up level players.

[Peterk2011]

53 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Which tells me that Smith is the best RT in the roster. Good for him but that says a lot about Haeg, Good, and Clarke IMO.

 

Haeg is on IR...

[Defjamz26]

15 minutes ago, krunk said:

It only says what most of us have been saying for a while now.  They are decent back up level players.

Which confirms that the long term answer for RT isn’t on the roster. I still think Smith’s best position is RG. He’s the answer at RT now but not forever IMO.

[John Waylon]

It’s been better, but there’s also been 1000% more emphasis on getting the ball out before the pass rush has a chance to get to him. Which is supported by the passing game numbers. 

[krunk]

3 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Which confirms that the long term answer for RT isn’t on the roster. I still think Smith’s best position is RG. He’s the answer at RT now but not forever IMO.

Who knows?  He's looked pretty good there the last two games, but I wouldn't trip if they drafted more OL somewhere.  He corrected his issues pretty quickly because in the beginning he was looking like Clark out there.

[chad72]

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

Which tells me that Smith is the best RT in the roster. Good for him but that says a lot about Haeg, Good, and Clarke IMO.

 

Not sure why they kept insisting on playing Braden Smith at guard again. Sometimes, you go with the flow of how a player responds to a specific position until it doesn't work anymore. 

[Valpo2004]

Didn't Smith play guard in college?

 

Color me a surprised that a guy who played guard in college has been able to do well at right tackle.  

 

To me this begs the question as to if we should leave Smith at RT and try to find a RG or if he's just a stop gap player at RT and we should next year try to find the long term solution at RT and move Smith back inside??

 

Regardless this is a sign that the team is rounding the corner on the OL.  At this point our OL is ABOVE AVERAGE.

 

 

[Valpo2004]

8 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Not sure why they kept insisting on playing Braden Smith at guard again. Sometimes, you go with the flow of how a player responds to a specific position until it doesn't work anymore. 

 

Ehh if the guy is a average right tackle but a future pro-bowler at right guard, do we really want to keep him at right tackle?

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't know that, you can't know that stuff.  But if he has higher potential at RG doesn't seem wise to make him the long term solution at RT.  

[chad72]

3 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Ehh if the guy is a average right tackle but a future pro-bowler at right guard, do we really want to keep him at right tackle?

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't know that, you can't know that stuff.  But if he has higher potential at RG doesn't seem wise to make him the long term solution at RT.  

 

Actually, with stunts, communication with the center and blitzes all responsibilities by playing inside as guard, playing tackle might be easier at the pro level than guard if you have the athleticism and not NFL strength yet. There is a reason why experienced guards are paid well where they have seen more variations playing inside, communicate well and have NFL strength.

 

I feel that is why Braden Smith is doing better at tackle. If this is a feel out period, let him play out the season at RT, and we can find out if he is our future at RT.

[King Colt]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Does it rank OLs with consideration to how quickly the QB releases the ball?

Good point

[Coffeedrinker]

57 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Actually, with stunts, communication with the center and blitzes all responsibilities by playing inside as guard, playing tackle might be easier at the pro level than guard if you have the athleticism and not NFL strength yet. There is a reason why experienced guards are paid well where they have seen more variations playing inside, communicate well and have NFL strength.

 

I feel that is why Braden Smith is doing better at tackle. If this is a feel out period, let him play out the season at RT, and we can find out if he is our future at RT.

I will say, if Smith continues to play well at RT that really opens things up for the Colts in the 2019 draft.  Instead of picking a RT in the first three rounds.  Finding a guard to plug into an established with a good (or better) center and RT is easier than finding a RT with a good (or better) RG.

[csmopar]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

Does it rank OLs with consideration to how quickly the QB releases the ball?

Good point but i think it's still improved regardless 

[DougDew]

18 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Good point but i think it's still improved regardless 

Agreed.  If its just stats about sacks and yards per carry, that's pretty superficial.  If they talk about how long they hold their blocks in pass blocking, that's more deeper and meaningful.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

7 hours ago, DaveA1102 said:

It would be interesting to see the trend of that as well as I think the last two weeks we have really made good strides after flattering to deceive to open the season. 

 

Nelson and Kelly have become more solid (according to PFF as well as the eye test) and Smith has been a nice surprise at RT.

 

Big test against a solid Bills D on Sunday though.

 

Top 10 is pretty dang impressive to me considering the revolving door that we've had at both tackle positions through the first 5 games. Now that there's some stability on the edges, we should see even more improvement moving forward. What a time to be alive.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

2 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Ehh if the guy is a average right tackle but a future pro-bowler at right guard, do we really want to keep him at right tackle?

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't know that, you can't know that stuff.  But if he has higher potential at RG doesn't seem wise to make him the long term solution at RT.  

 

Normally I'd agree, but everything that I've seen so far regarding Smith suggests that the coaches feel that he's actually looked better playing right tackle than he has at right guard so far this season.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

4 hours ago, DougDew said:

Does it rank OLs with consideration to how quickly the QB releases the ball?

 

I don't buy the notion that the o-line play looks better solely because Luck is getting rid of the ball more quickly, if that's what you're getting at. There were several plays on Sunday where he had A LOT of time to scan the field & go through all of his reads, & he wasn't sacked once.

[#12.]

They wanted Smith to play tackle in preseason.  He didn't play well, so they dropped the plan.  Like I said last week, now that he is playing well, just leave him there.  

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

I don't buy the notion that the o-line play looks better solely because Luck is getting rid of the ball more quickly, if that's what you're getting at. There were several plays on Sunday where he had A LOT of time to scan the field & go through all of his reads, & he wasn't sacked once.

I've got no problem using the eye test.

 

I'm wondering if the ranking is stats driven, or subjective eye testing. 

 

The stats should factor in the time from snap to release to compare the effectiveness of olines to each other.

 

If one line is protecting their QB for an average of 4.5 seconds but is giving up more sacks than an oline protecting their QB for only 3 seconds, it matters, IMO.

[#12.]

8 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

I don't buy the notion that the o-line play looks better solely because Luck is getting rid of the ball more quickly, if that's what you're getting at. There were several plays on Sunday where he had A LOT of time to scan the field & go through all of his reads, & he wasn't sacked once.

 

With so many lineup changes already, it's hard to form any kind of opinion.  This group needs to play together for a month before we'll know anything.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I've got no problem using the eye test.

 

I'm wondering if the ranking is stats driven, or subjective eye testing. 

 

The stats should factor in the time from snap to release to compare the effectiveness of olines to each other.

 

If one line is protecting their QB for an average of 4.5 seconds but is giving up more sacks than an oline protecting their QB for only 3 seconds, it matters, IMO.

 

Considering it's PFF, I'd assume they're applying a lot of statistical data to arrive at their finalized rankings. I've never really viewed PFF as gospel by any means, especially when it comes to individual player rankings, but when they rank units, it usually seems to fall in line with what other analysts put out there.

[cbear]

Not surprising.  And don't confuse the quick passing game as the reason either IMO.  Even on 7 step drops, Luck is getting close to 3 seconds to throw.  I've never seen a cleaner pocket I don't think since he got here.  If we could get some seperation and not drop the ball, who knows the kind of numbers Luck would have.  

 

As far as the run blocking, we'll get a better idea now that they are healthy. 

[Colt Overseas]

 

[richard pallo]

2 hours ago, #12. said:

They wanted Smith to play tackle in preseason.  He didn't play well, so they dropped the plan.  Like I said last week, now that he is playing well, just leave him there.  

He's only played two games at RT and the DL were not that good.  Hopefully it works out but I'm still skeptical.  I'd still prefer him at G.  Good only played one game at RT before his brothers death.   I still like his fit at RT better than Smith.  But time will tell. 

[Jeremy Waldon]

5 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Which confirms that the long term answer for RT isn’t on the roster. I still think Smith’s best position is RG. He’s the answer at RT now but not forever IMO.

I still hope we go after a stud RT in the draft next yr, there are 5 being talked alot about as starting caliber in the NFL. 

[Coffeedrinker]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

If one line is protecting their QB for an average of 4.5 seconds but is giving up more sacks than an oline protecting their QB for only 3 seconds, it matters, IMO.

Why does it matter?  If an oline's job is to protect their QB for 4.5 seconds and they are not doing it, then they are not doing their job.  It should not really matter if their job is different than another team.

[-JJ-]

7 hours ago, DougDew said:

Does it rank OLs with consideration to how quickly the QB releases the ball?

No but a more complete ranking is here including ranking each position at the Oline.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

 

 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

3 hours ago, cbear said:

Not surprising.  And don't confuse the quick passing game as the reason either IMO.  Even on 7 step drops, Luck is getting close to 3 seconds to throw.  I've never seen a cleaner pocket I don't think since he got here.  If we could get some seperation and not drop the ball, who knows the kind of numbers Luck would have.  

 

As far as the run blocking, we'll get a better idea now that they are healthy. 

 

Mack averaging 7.4ypc last week was pretty encouraging, but I also realize that's likely not sustainable. Moving forward anything between 4 & 5ypc would be fantastic.

[Tombstone]

11 hours ago, DougDew said:

Does it rank OLs with consideration to how quickly the QB releases the ball?

Must mostly be pass blocking with the amount of pass attp and not run blocking....