The size of our offensive line meme
I have heard from every random acquaintance that wants to rub our recent history in my face (because apparently I'm the reason we haev struggeled recently) that RR's system will not work in the Big Ten. I'm not going to discusss whether or not our our offense was great (my vote is yes), but the other point that is inevitably brought up...that our players (specifically our o-line) is too small for the B10. I posted this chart in a thread I found earlier today, but it is way back on the board now, so I thought everyone who is so inclined could use some ammunition in contradicting this meme.
Below are the weights of the starting o-lines for "power" teams in the Big Ten, as well as Notre Dame:
| Tackle | Guard | Center | Guard | Tackle | Team Avg. | |
| M | 6'-8", 294 lbs | 6'-5", 308 lbs | 6'-2", 287 lbs | 6'-4", 305 lbs | 6'-7", 321 lbs | 6'-5", 303 lbs |
| OSU | 6'-7", 299 | 6'-3", 320 | 6'-5", 293 | 6'-4", 313 | 6'-8", 300 | 6'-5", 305 |
| MSU | 6'-5", 298 | 6'-4", 310 | 6'-5", 285 | 6'-5", 295 | 6'-5", 312 | 6'-5", 300 |
| PSU | 6'-3", 298 | 6'-4", 323 | 6'-3"286 | 6'-3", 306 | 6'-4", 310 | 6'-3", 305 |
| Iowa | 6'-6", 300 | 6'-3", 300 | 6'-2", 275 | 6'-2", 273 | 6'-5", 295 | 6'-3.5", 289 |
| Wisc | 6'-7", 327 | 6'-5", 323 | 6'-5", 313 | 6'-4", 315 | 6'-6", 322 | 6'-5", 320 (!) |
| ND | 6'-4", 290 | 6'-5", 351(!) | 6'-3", 301 | 6'-5", 295 | 6'-5", 297 | 6'-4", 307 |
| Position Avg. | 6'-6", 302 | 6'-4", 319 | 6'-3.5", 291 | 6'-4", 300 | 6'-6", 308 |
Nonbullets
- Our Offensive Line is not undersized; in fact if you take our ND's OG (who must make Boren look fit and trim), all of our starters are "average" size at worst
- Holy hell is Wisconsin's line huge!
- Iowa has the "smallest" OL, which I find kind of suprising (corn-fed midwesterners and all)
Info for B10 teams was taken from Rivals depth charts, except Michigan's, which I got from mgoblue.com (because that was the only team I actually knew who the starters were)
November 29th, 2010 at 8:20 PM ^
Thanks for posting this. I remember seeing a similar comparison a while back and I too am sick of hearing the same "he recruits small linemen" meme.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:25 PM ^
This theory/idea is very old... in fact, I thought it was put to rest at least a year or two before the word "meme" became a meme.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:46 PM ^
Our offensive linemen do tend to look smaller (or just more in shape) because muscle is much more dense than fat. We don't sport the over-hanging guts that a Wisconsin O-Line does.
I remember during the Wisconsin game, Speilman was ranting about how our line was too small to compete in the B10. He said we were playing guys at 260 lbs... thanks for proving him wrong. I also think that our line has been damn effective this year and has controlled the line against just about everyone, exceptions being Wisconsin and Purdue (Kerrigan).
November 29th, 2010 at 11:26 PM ^
I could have sworn that Spielman was ranting about the size of our defensive linemen, not our offensive linemen.
November 30th, 2010 at 12:27 AM ^
He was. That is all.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:26 PM ^
WHAT?!?!? FACTS ABOUT RICH ROD?!?!? NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
/fingers in ears
//blindfold on
November 29th, 2010 at 8:27 PM ^
the only difference is our o-line isnt fat
November 29th, 2010 at 8:27 PM ^
bookmarked. I was hoping someone would do this, but really, the o line has been a strength of this team all season
November 29th, 2010 at 8:31 PM ^
His name is Chris Stewart, and he's a first-year ND Law student. He is the approximate size and density of a German WWII Dreadnaught. And it seems like every time I wear my Michigan gear around school, I run into him. Literally.
The number of times I've had to wash fear-shit out of my MIchigan apparel this year has been astounding.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:28 PM ^
His name is Chris Stewart, and he's a first-year ND Law student.
I've heard this mentioned in every ND game this year and, seriously, it's one of those things that never gets less impressive the more I hear it. The dude must have some serious time management skills (and tutors).
November 29th, 2010 at 8:38 PM ^
FWIW all of our Olinemen I've cared to check out who had combine verified heights as recruits were listed at exactly an inch shorter when recruited. Probably measured with shoes at Michigan.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:45 PM ^
Please post this (seriously) for at least ten days after the last idiot poster who complains about RichRod's small players.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:46 PM ^
You posted this earlier in a response post and agreed there as well. RR's offense is predicated on having good athletes on the line, but that doesn't remotely preclude those athletes from being massive. The line played really well all year, and a large reason has to do with their size coupled with the athleticism we all expected.
November 29th, 2010 at 8:58 PM ^
Man they have some beef up in Madison. I guess it makes sense since they have to make all that cheese.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:22 PM ^
there wouldn't be a size problem if Jim Harbaugh was coaching eh? so there wouldn't be that much of a transition on the oline right?
November 29th, 2010 at 9:31 PM ^
call a man that weighs over 300 pounds "small". in all respects.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:06 PM ^
The 2011 coach will have something to work worth.
Do you really want Wisconsin's line? That just seems to be too big.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:08 PM ^
Michigan's offensive line was small. There was a rumor after last season that Rich Rodriguez told his linemen to pack on some pounds in the offseason to make them more effective in the Big Ten.
I'm not vouching for its veracity, but Michigan's OL got bigger from 2009 to 2010.
November 30th, 2010 at 11:08 AM ^
To add to this point, no one has mentioned the fact that Big Will was just recently moved to O- Line right? 6'5" 331. Thassa big boy.
Will he be athletic enough to be effective or is he about to be a major bust? I bought into the hype about him when he signed and I've been disappointed he hasn't been a factor on either side of the ball yet.
November 30th, 2010 at 12:08 AM ^
I think Lewan could definitely pack on 10-15 more this offeason and still be as nimble as he is now. I swear I saw Barnum out there during the OSU game and he looked to be the "roundest" of our O-lineman for sure.
November 30th, 2010 at 10:26 AM ^
If there is a coaching change, there won't be the black hole on offense that RR inherited. The OL is excellent, and while it may not be wisconsin style roadgraders, it is more than capable to compete and run most any scheme the OC would want to run. We have three workable-to-excellent QBs, two of which could be a fit in a pro-style offense (Tate and Gardner, and with a little more development in the passing game, Denard may work in it as well). The WRs and RBs would be suitable in any offense as well. The only thing lacking may be numbers at TE.
I hope RR is back, but if he is not, I'm not worried about the offensive cupboard being bare.
November 30th, 2010 at 10:45 AM ^
November 30th, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^
They were undersized the last couple years but it's amazing what actually having mostly upperclassmen on the O-Line can do for a team. Those couple years of S&C and nutrition can really help pack on the quality pounds. Lewan being the exception of course, though he did have a red shirt year behind him.