Schilling to Guard
There's an interesting little piece in the News today about Schilling spending all of spring practice at guard. From what I can tell, this is a fairly positive sign for the overall shape of the line for a few reasons:
1) We're actually somewhat deep at guard, with three guys who have played (Ferrara, Moosman, McAvoy) and one redshirt who's supposed to be very promising (Barnum).
2) Schilling will definitely start somewhere. He's one of our more experienced and athletic linemen.
3) We're thin on experience at tackle, so I only believe that we'd move Schilling if we thought that Omameh was ready to start. (Conversely, I'm not expecting us to start Ortman - Dorrestein.)
If you put this altogether, there has to be some faith that we'll have more experience on the line, and that we'll be significantly more athletic at two spots (whomever Schilling replaces + Omameh).
I agree that they think Omameh is going to start and I have very stupid reasoning for it. If you look at the front picture of thewolverine, it's Omameh and man, he looks WAY different then when he came in. He's got girth now, thanks to Barwis and he was even the talk of the team last year but they didn't want to burn his redshirt.
As far as who mans the other side? No clue. I do think a potential left side of Omameh and Schilling would be pretty promising. I haven't heard anything about Barnum yet - whether he's been good or bad, so I guess the jury is still out on him. Molk seems pretty entrenched as the center and so really the two positions that there's a lot of speculation is one guard and one tackle.
when I saw his picture in the Spring Gallery at mgoblue.com
He was a bigtime recruit who redshirted. Could he be ready to start at RT?
Not yet; he'll probably be pretty good but needs work. No point in rushing him in (I think).
RR said that McAvoy sprained an ankle and would be out for a bit in the presser on mgoblue.
I read somewhere that RR moved him to guard for the spring because RR likes the offensive linemen to know multiple positions; RR said nothing about moving Schilling to guard permanently.
Of course, as has been discussed, Schilling is probably a more natural guard than tackle. But I think the message here is that RR knows how Schilling can perform at tackle and is now testing his abilities at guard. This can only bode well for the offensive line's potential this year, but I don't think it's a given (at all) that Schilling stays at guard.
Actually, it's more than likely that Schilling stays at guard. It's probable that the only way he moves back to tackle is if there are injury problems out there. Otherwise, Ortmann, Omameh, and Dorrestein will be the ones battling for PT at tackle.
Also, the first spring practice had Ortmann at LT and Dorrestein at RT. So I wouldn't put Dorrestein out of the race quite yet.
On Rivals, it was suggested once that Barnum would get a look at OT, as well. Now, I doubt that happens, but that was something they said to look out for down the line.
Also, of not, RR specifically stated that they always want at least 8 ol to be ready to play. If he is to believe that Schilling, Moosman, Ortmann, Dorrestein, Molk, Branum, Omameh and McAvoy are good enough to play/provide solid depth, does he move Ferrara back to DT?
From what I've heard/read, Barnum isn't expected to contribute much at tackle right now. He's probably looking at another year on the bench - not because he's bad, but because there are experienced guys ahead of him.
Also, Rodriguez said specifically that Ferrara is going to stay on the offensive line. He said if injuries deplete the DL then it would be possible to switch him, but he has no plans as of now to move Ferrara again.
Yeah, I read that in his presser comments. But, if Ferrara is going to be a backup, why not move him to a position that needs depth? Doesn't make much sense on the surface.
I think you could make an equally compelling argument that the OL needs depth. Right now they have Schilling and Moosman at guard, with McAvoy (who was displaced by Ferrara and is currently injured) and a bunch of redshirt freshmen backing them up.
It's 50/50, in my opinion. Ferrara could be used in either place, but why switch him again? He's supposedly very coachable, but he's going to be less effective at DT if you switch him again.
March 23rd, 2009 at 11:11 AM ^
First team at practices has been Ortmann, Schilling, Molk, Moosman, and Dorrestein. McAvoy has been second team center, Ferrara second team guard along with Barnum.
Obviously, lots can change, but that's what it looks like now.
but can someone articulate the differences between a guard and tackle? I've always assumed that tackles are typically more mobile, a little taller, and generally better athletes than guards, but that's simply what I've discerned from player profiles and such. Is it one of those things that completely depends on the offensive scheme?
It seems like it would be more challenging to play tackle since you'd typically have no help on one side. So all other things being equal, I'd think they want more experience at that position.
It depends on what type of offense the team runs, but generally, guards have to move more. There's more trapping and pulling from guards, so guards have to be more mobile than tackles.
Guards are generally shorter and squatter than tackles. This is because they depend on leverage to root out nose tackles and defensive tackles. A 6'7" guy might have a hard time getting under a short Terrence Taylor-type player. Their arm length generally doesn't matter as much because they use more shoulder blocking and drive blocking than tackles.
Tackles should have good lateral mobility and knee bend, but they don't generally have to be great athletes. They usually block defensive ends - which means they use arm extension to keep the DE's away from their bodies - or 3-tech defensive tackles, who are generally taller than a nose tackle. So leverage doesn't matter quite as much for them.
You want a guard to be mauling, run-blocker type.
You want a tackle to be a long-armed, almost finesse type player.
Obviously, that's an oversimplification. But it's a general rule of thumb.
No offense, and maybe I'm mistaken, but you seem to be kinda contradictory in your post. At one point you say guards have to be more mobile than tackles which I would think would imply they need to be more athletic in order to move their large bodies well. But later on you say they are more maulers/run blockers and tackles are more finesse which to me implies the opposite. Would you mind clarifying that? As I've often wondered the same thing as the above poster.
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:32 PM ^
Well, the toughest thing a guard has to do is pull and/or hit a moving target. Guards are asked to get out and block linebackers more often than tackles, which means they have to be faster and more agile to latch onto smaller, quicker players in open space. But since they need leverage on small nose tackles, they also need to be shorter and squatter.
Tackles' main jobs are to block defensive ends. As I'm sure you've seen in games, tackles often use lateral mobility and pure strength to ward off pass rushers. It's almost like a dance rather than an "Okay, I'm going to move this defensive guy from point A to point B" type of thing. But if you ask that tackle to pull or get up to the second level, there's a good chance he'll look like a big slug.
The footwork is also vastly different, but that's something that can be taught and not an inherent difference between the players themselves.
That helps.