Clary, why is he still here???

[Steve]

You are discussing theory. I do not disagree with your theoretical analysis that defenders taking away cutback lanes can help shut down a running game. What I am saying is that in terms of actual analysis of the 2013 San Diego Chargers and the difficulties that they had in running the ball to the right, sealing the back side and creating cut back lanes did not appear to be the actual problem. The problem appeared to be that Clary, possibly because he is slow (not ideal for ZBS, right?) and at times not physical enough, was not effective in his blocking assignments. Your theory, while interesting, is irrelevant in that it does not explain what actually happened with our team's problems running to the right. At least that is not what I saw happening. The others can speak for themselves. Is that what you saw happening with our problems running to the right?

I do not think the switching of the play call based upon a DT playing 3 technique factors into the analysis we are discussing, but the play calling concept you are discussing makes sense to me.

I agree that Clary is historically more durable than Rinehart and that Clary has experience at OT (even if he is not very good there), but Rinehart is the better player at OG, which is what each player is being paid to play. I could see Clary's durability and versatility being an offset for Rinehart's superior play, but we are talking about a ratio of 3.5 times in terms of salary cap figure disparity. If Rinehart's salary is fair, then Clary is being hugely overpaid. And that's exactly what I and many others think is happening here.

I am talking that when I watch the Chargers play, we allow a lot of penetration on the backside. It is NOT A THEORY, it is an OBSERVATION.

You and Beer keep citing why we didn't run to the right side, yet many teams keep citing that we didn't runt to the right, and since we are a right handed offenses, with the TE lining up to the right more often, that puts most teams with their 3 Technique DT on the right side of our line. Rivers spent a lot of season adjusting plays at the line, every wonder what he was doing?

Reinhart is being underpaid to protect the team from his injury tendency. But if Clary is playing well (which is what the coaches and GM say) then perhaps they do not feel he is being overpaid. Again, go back and watch him play. You and Beer both seem highly biased by what PFF has been saying about how poor Clary has played, and since those British guys who run PFF don't know how to play football, I call bullshit.

To that end, I have been rewatching the games focusing on OL, then again on how Clary did on every running play (since we already agree his pass protection is fine). I couldn't disagree with you about his run blocking more. Without an understanding of how he is playing, how can you possibly asses his true value?

So, go sign up for NFLrewind and start watching. I am at halftime of the Raiders game (week 5), and you can skip Dallas and the playoff game vs Oakland, since Clary didn't play in those.

[Beerman]

Yea backside penetration was a big issue last year, but so was Clary not getting any push at the point of attack. There was plenty of blame to go around. That said, I'll take that deficiency in Dunlaps game allowing that occasional penetration when he is just so dominant at the point of attack.

The question TT has to answer is whether it's worth having that trade off with Clary - pass protection vs. run blocking. Then he has to take salary into account.

[Yubaking]

I am talking that when I watch the Chargers play, we allow a lot fo penetration on the backside. It is NOT THEORY SHITHEAD.

Sorry, but you are talking out of your backside penetration.

Now run along as you are apparently late for your nap time and it has made you cranky.

[Steve]

I understand you are a lawyer, but you are just so fucking stupid, even giving you points for that.

[Beerman]

One other thing that hasn't really been brought up is that on multiple occasions there were just missed assignments when that backside penetration happened. Is it correctable with another year of continuity? A lot of the times it seemed there was just some miscommunication between Dunlap and the LG (another issue since this position was a revolving door during the season.)

Then you ask yourself if Clary can improve his run blocking? Given that it was his first season at OG ever, I suspect there's some improvement to be made still (not much though). Fluker on the other hand, I think just scratched the surface, so in that sense we should see improved overall play from the right side of the line as well.

[Steve]

Yea backside penetration was a big issue last year, but so was Clary not getting any push at the point of attack. There was plenty of blame to go around. That said, I'll take that deficiency in Dunlaps game allowing that occasional penetration when he is just so dominant at the point of attack.

The question TT has to answer is whether it's worth having that trade off with Clary - pass protection vs. run blocking. Then he has to take salary into account.

I disagree completely on Clary's run blocking. It could be better, especially his footwork at times, but considering he was playing through that injury, I thought his run blocking was fine. The thing I keep seeing, is that while Fluker tends to bury guys at times, there are times he misses badly.

I think some of it may be expectations, that people want to see run blocking destroy the guy opposite them, but that is not what coaches preach. They really want OL to lock up the defender, and don't mind if the DL penetrates to one side or the other, provided that they get turned out of the hole. Clary is not going to bury anyone, but he does a damn good job of locking up and turning his man, sealing the hole, at least in the 3 and a half games I watched again (so far).

[Beerman]

The Fluker point is completely valid and a reason why I have much higher expectations from him and his continued development.

Now I get what you are saying, but I also use stats to assess our play compared to the rest of the league's performance.

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

It's not like I'm making things up or just pointing to a PFF grade. We clearly have sub par rushing statistics when we run right vs the rest of the league.

[Yubaking]

I understand you are a lawyer, but you are just so fucking stupid, even giving you points for that.

Disagreeing with you does not make anyone stupid. Nobody attacked you personally.

Nobody is saying that there was not an occasional play made against us in backside pursuit, but you are making it sound like that was the primary problem when we ran to the right. The primary problem with us running to the right was that Clary did not run block very well. I think everyone on this board sees that except maybe you.

If backside pursuit were such a huge deal as you make it sound, then we would have been all over Dunlap instead of praising him all year long for the great job he did and congratulating Telesco for making such a great acquisition and many of us, myself included, would not have been admitting that we were all wrong about Dunlap.

[Steve]

No it is your complete nonesense and lack of reason that does it.

And backside pursuit was a big, big problem in our running game. Most fans focus playside. I do too watching games live. Which is why you go back and watch the games again. You can't see the whole field, and running game is a coordinated activity. You have to block everyone for the plays to work.

And if we use praise for a player as a reason to assume that they did everything correctly, why only for Dunlap, and not for Clary, who was praised by McCoy on numerous occasions?

[sandiego17]

So, go sign up for NFLrewind and start watching. I am at halftime of the Raiders game (week 5), and you can skip Dallas and the playoff game vs Oakland, since Clary didn't play in those.

Wait, you re-watched the Tennessee game?

[Panama]

Disagreeing with you does not make anyone stupid. Nobody attacked you personally.

Nobody is saying that there was not an occasional play made against us in backside pursuit, but you are making it sound like that was the primary problem when we ran to the right. The primary problem with us running to the right was that Clary did not run block very well. I think everyone on this board sees that except maybe you.

If backside pursuit were such a huge deal as you make it sound, then we would have been all over Dunlap instead of praising him all year long for the great job he did and congratulating Telesco for making such a great acquisition and many of us, myself included, would not have been admitting that we were all wrong about Dunlap.

I think part of Steve's frustration this time is that you fail to recognize that we run a zone-blocking scheme, and the points you repeatedly make about point-of-attack simply aren't valid in this context, where the aim is not to crush the defenders but to guide them out of the way in an intricately choreographed maneuver. It's not a matter of a backside pursuer making the tackle as much as it is closing off a running lane. Then the RB often has nowhere to run to because the cutback lanes have not been properly sealed off. But you (and, admittedly, others) insist on assessing the OL using power-blocking principles or looking at stats, which indicate the what (such as "we had less success running to the right") but not the why.

I think to get past this particular hurdle you need to leave your preconceived ideas about what run blocking ought to be at the door and be open to new ideas.

[Mister Hoarse]

Please keep rebuttles to 50 words or less!

Time to post this drive bys