2013 offensive line- Schofield's best position

Submitted by pbmd on February 21st, 2013 at 3:26 PM

In regards to depth chart,  the offensive line is one of the most interesting position groups for 2013.  I'm not sure if the conventional thinking regarding the offensive line is on target.  Specifically, that Scholfield is a lock at right tackle.

I had the chance to speak with Scholfield's father in Tampa at the Outback Bowl, and I am convinced that he thinks that guard is his son's best position and certainly where his NFL future lies.  Clearly, the line was better with him at guard in 2011 than tackle in 2012, regardless of the other multiple variables. I think he might be the best guard on the team in 2013.


Prediction of 2013 OL left to right Lewan,  Schofield,  Kalis,  Bryant,  Braden.

I think the ceiling for this group might be very high.


ED: bryant not barnum-- too many Bs with braden barnum burzynski and bryant



February 21st, 2013 at 3:51 PM ^

OP probably just read the most recent "insider" report at thewolverine.com.

Basically an anonymous source indicated that Kalis is a possibility.  The main point of the article was to say that the coaches are going to try out players at different positions on the line to see what works best.


February 21st, 2013 at 4:01 PM ^

The assumption that Miller will ascend to the starting spot is dubious.

He's started as many games as Kugler and hasn't played that many more snaps.  He's still smaller than some of the freshman too.  The coaches didn't trust him last year.  Maybe that's changed but until we have evidence that it has - Center is wide open. 

Normally, I'd be skeptical of baseless speculation, but in regards to the interior OL - anything can happen.  For all we know they might start Burzynski-Kalis-Bosch on the inside.


February 21st, 2013 at 6:36 PM ^

Is bowl season the Time To Make Position Changes?  It could be that moving Kalis to center is necessary due to a lack of depth... which wasn't an issue during the bowl season.  Barnum and Mealer are now gone, so we're now left with an undersized Miller, a true freshman and maybe a former walk-on.  Maybe coaches re-evaluated, thought "who are our best 5 OL," and decided to give Kalis a look there.  Not out of the question.


February 21st, 2013 at 8:26 PM ^

Miller was 288 going into last season. It wouldn't be that much a surprise to see him put on another 10 pounds during the offseason. Playing around 300 isn't that underweight for a C, usually he smallest player on the OL. Molk played around that weight for most of his career (obviously Miller has a long way to go before being as good as Molk which enabled him to play at that weight). Regardless, if you play Kalis at C, you then need to scratch together two Gs out of Bryant, Burzinski, and possibly Bosch. Or you could move Schofield back inside but then Braden or magnusson has to be ready to play RT. Lots of uncertainties regardless of what happens.


February 21st, 2013 at 3:42 PM ^

The thesis of your post is good, but the rest is sub par. Your evidence is "his dad said so" and "our OL was better when he was at Guard" and you disregard the fact that other guys on the line are different as well (including Molk who is in the NFL).

You might be on to something, but not for the reasons you mentioned.

oriental andrew

February 21st, 2013 at 3:43 PM ^

SCHOFIELD.  Not SchoLfield. 

Maybe he is a better guard than tackle (people more knowledgeable about football than me - not hard - would have to chime in), but Kalis at C seems far-fetched.  And Ricky Barnum...  Well, that's already been beat to death.  Most seem to think Jack Milles is the guy at C. 


February 22nd, 2013 at 8:29 AM ^

If Schofield were to go to guard, I wouldn't want him right next to Lewan. That might create a weak right side of the line. I would put Lewan - Bryant/Kalis - Miller/Kugler - Schofield - Braden (whoever wins those battles, I trust the coaches on that). If he were to stay at tackle then take Braden out and slide one of the other two guards over.


February 21st, 2013 at 3:49 PM ^

I think Kalis would be wasted at center.  He's too good of an athlete and a drive blocker to put at a position that doesn't necessarily require much athleticism in this type of offense.  Rodriguez's offense needed a good athlete at center.  Borges's does not.

I like the idea of putting Schofield back at OG, because he was better there in 2011 than he was at OT in 2012.  However, the right side of that offensive line looks really weak/inexperienced - you have first-time starters at C, RG, and RT.  

If I were going to put Schofield at his best position, I would put him at RG.  But we're talking about what's best for the TEAM, not just for Schofield.  That has to be taken into account.  If we're looking at it from a Schofield-centric point of view, I suggest...

LT: Lewan
LG: Kalis
C: Miller
RG: Schofield
RT: Braden


February 21st, 2013 at 3:54 PM ^

From a line-building point of view, the OP's post got me thinking about how to distribute strength players. Is it better to spread Schofield and Lewan out to distribute the talent/ability or is it better to put them together and have a strong side to the line for the offense to kind of lean on (e.g., running to the left more often than the right)?

Sounds like you, Magnus think spreading them out would be better. Isn't there risk in watering down the ability and ending up with, in total, a mediocre line?


February 21st, 2013 at 4:24 PM ^

You're only as strong as your weakest link.  If you keep Lewan and Schofield together (at LT and LG, respectively), the entire right side is potentially weak.  If you keep Lewan and Schofield as bookend tackles, then the entire interior of the line is potentially weak.

With a right-handed quarterback, I think it's important for the right side of the line to be strong in the running game.  Putting Lewan and Schofield on the left side means you could very well struggle running the ball to the right, and you might constantly have guys in Gardner's face on pass plays.  I'd prefer to keep Schofield somewhere on the right side, whether it's at RG or RT.  That is, of course, if he's superior to the other options; since the other options are so young, I'm just making the assumption that Schofield is better.