Does our O-line suck?

BobcatLionFan · Post by **BobcatLionFan** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 7:23 pm

My guess is a combination of things.

Groves matured during the year. Being a RedshirtFR he probably thought he knew everything but possibly didn't and he needed to work on pass blocking.

The OL was having a couple of issues, Jensen was still hurting from the broken leg to some degree early in the year and who was to play center was a big issue. Once Jensen was 100% and Bolton settled in, things moved ahead.

Another was the TEs were still young and learning to block. That improved during the year. Then in the UM game, DeCock came in as a blocking TE which helped even more.

Bass looked good in the OSU game, but them the knee starting giving more and more problems (which is truely to bad). And the coaches decided Dom wasn't the runner.

In the PSU and EWU games, it looked like Lulay was told not to run. probably to protect the one main resource we had. They opened it up again in the UM game.

Bottom line, I think the questions have been answered. We can run the ball. Should make for good years coming up on the Running and Defensive sides, now just find a passer (which we might have already in-house) and receivers.

catatac · Post by **catatac** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:23 am

BobcatLionFan wrote:My guess is a combination of things.

Groves matured during the year. Being a RedshirtFR he probably thought he knew everything but possibly didn't and he needed to work on pass blocking.

The OL was having a couple of issues, Jensen was still hurting from the broken leg to some degree early in the year and who was to play center was a big issue. Once Jensen was 100% and Bolton settled in, things moved ahead.

Another was the TEs were still young and learning to block. That improved during the year. Then in the UM game, DeCock came in as a blocking TE which helped even more.

Bass looked good in the OSU game, but them the knee starting giving more and more problems (which is truely to bad). And the coaches decided Dom wasn't the runner.

In the PSU and EWU games, it looked like Lulay was told not to run. probably to protect the one main resource we had. They opened it up again in the UM game.

Bottom line, I think the questions have been answered. We can run the ball. Should make for good years coming up on the Running and Defensive sides, now just find a passer (which we might have already in-house) and receivers.

I don't think Lulay was told "not to run" in any game, let alone the Eastern Game. It's been a big part of our O for the past 3.5 years. Eastern game-planned for him running and always had a spy there waiting when he got through the line.

BobcatLionFan · Post by **BobcatLionFan** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 11:09 am

catatac wrote: I don't think Lulay was told "not to run" in any game, let alone the Eastern Game. It's been a bug part of our O for the past 3.5 years. Eastern game-planned for him running and always had a spy there waiting when he got through the line.

Not what I hear. You might want to check it out, but I fairly sure it is true! He was told to stay in the pocket. Watch the EWU and SAC games again if you have either on a tape. In the SAC game Lulay had 20 yards rushing (and there were NO called QB draws) and the EWU game he had 79 yards (but there were NO QB draws and he ran only after setting in the pocket for ever).

Should check it out with others??

catatac · Post by **catatac** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 11:37 am

I can definitely see Kramer telling him to stay in the pocket against Sac. But against Eastern - Absolutely no way he wouldn't have taken off and sprinted straight up the gut if the oportunity had been there. Especially after we started getting our a$$es kicked...

MSUcantouchus · Post by **MSUcantouchus** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 12:01 pm

BobcatLionFan wrote:
catatac wrote: I don't think Lulay was told "not to run" in any game, let alone the Eastern Game. It's been a bug part of our O for the past 3.5 years. Eastern game-planned for him running and always had a spy there waiting when he got through the line.
Not what I hear. You might want to check it out, but I fairly sure it is true! He was told to stay in the pocket. Watch the EWU and SAC games again if you have either on a tape. In the SAC game Lulay had 20 yards rushing (and there were NO called QB draws) and the EWU game he had 79 yards (but there were NO QB draws and he ran only after setting in the pocket for ever).

Should check it out with others??

I seems that Bailey found a play that worked and we ran the same one over and over. Quick pitch to the outside with a pulling guard i think. I would venture he copied it from NDSU or ISU. It was similar to what they used alot. I think that play alone made a big difference. Could it be that the running plays we were running to start the season were not very good and easy to stop? I don't know.

catatac · Post by **catatac** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 12:38 pm

catatac wrote:I can definitely see Kramer telling him to stay in the pocket against Sac. But against Eastern - Absolutely no way he wouldn't have taken off and sprinted straight up the gut if the opportunity had been there. Especially after we started getting our a$$es kicked...

CatFanatic · Post by **CatFanatic** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 4:19 pm

When our young Tight Ends started maturing toward the end of the season - that really helped the running game. Being able to use the double TE set was huge.

MSUcantouchus · Post by **MSUcantouchus** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 6:50 pm

CatFanatic wrote:When our young Tight Ends started maturing toward the end of the season - that really helped the running game. Being able to use the double TE set was huge.

At least that is what Kramer told us.

cornbreadfred · Post by **cornbreadfred** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:17 pm

Cats o line doesn't suck, they just had very poor running backs behind them not reading the zone blocking. Groves was hurt most the year or else he would have been starting earlier, not because he was a redshirt freshman who thought he knew everything, although his pass blocking is also somewhat suspect

grizzh8r · Post by **grizzh8r** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:08 am

cornbreadfred wrote:Cats o line doesn't suck, they just had very poor running backs behind them not reading the zone blocking. Groves was hurt most the year or else he would have been starting earlier, not because he was a redshirt freshman who thought he knew everything, although his pass blocking is also somewhat suspect

This is news to me. Groves was hurt most of the year? I think you are confusing him w/ Bass. Coaches did not trust Groves enough to let him play, plain and simple. He proved them wrong however.

BobcatLionFan · Post by **BobcatLionFan** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:59 am

CatFanatic wrote:When our young Tight Ends started maturing toward the end of the season - that really helped the running game. Being able to use the double TE set was huge.

Actually some of that two TE set in the UM game was DeCock at right TE. He played there about 6 plays (short yardage, including the TD run).

cornbreadfred · Post by **cornbreadfred** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 9:46 pm

grizzh8r wrote:
cornbreadfred wrote:Cats o line doesn't suck, they just had very poor running backs behind them not reading the zone blocking. Groves was hurt most the year or else he would have been starting earlier, not because he was a redshirt freshman who thought he knew everything, although his pass blocking is also somewhat suspect
This is news to me. Groves was hurt most of the year? I think you are confusing him w/ Bass. Coaches did not trust Groves enough to let him play, plain and simple. He proved them wrong however.

Groves was hurt for the first half of the year. Kramer never let it out though. That's why he didn't play at all. I wasn't confusing him with Bass.

grizzh8r · Post by **grizzh8r** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:48 am

Where do you get your info CBF? Seems to me that if Groves was hurt early in the season, someone on this board would have found out about it long ago. Your other posts also seem strange this way. I'm not trying to be mean, but are you just making this stuff up?

Also, I have yet to figure it out - are you a Cat or a Griz? Man you are a confusing person

cornbreadfred · Post by **cornbreadfred** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:05 am

grizzh8r wrote:Where do you get your info CBF? Seems to me that if Groves was hurt early in the season, someone on this board would have found out about it long ago. Your other posts also seem strange this way. I'm not trying to be mean, but are you just making this stuff up?

Also, I have yet to figure it out - are you a Cat or a Griz? Man you are a confusing person

Nobody thought of Groves being hurt because everyone just thought he wasn't playing because he was a redshirt freshman. I got this information from a very reliable source, and the way I found out was actually quite off handed.

Helcat72 · Post by **Helcat72** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:46 pm

cornbreadfred wrote:
grizzh8r wrote:Where do you get your info CBF? Seems to me that if Groves was hurt early in the season, someone on this board would have found out about it long ago. Your other posts also seem strange this way. I'm not trying to be mean, but are you just making this stuff up?

Also, I have yet to figure it out - are you a Cat or a Griz? Man you are a confusing person
Nobody thought of Groves being hurt because everyone just thought he wasn't playing because he was a redshirt freshman. I got this information from a very reliable source, and the way I found out was actually quite off handed.

I talked to his dad at every out of town game and he never hinted that Evin was hurt...just that he needs to learn to pass protect!

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:35 am

How good will the Cats O-line be next season? Didn't they lose most of their line to graduation?

The Griz lost most of theirs, and the O-line will be a big problem area for them next year. Just wondered about the Cats situation.

wbtfg · Post by **wbtfg** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:46 am

Wolfman wrote:How good will the Cats O-line be next season? Didn't they lose most of their line to graduation?

The Griz lost most of theirs, and the O-line will be a big problem area for them next year. Just wondered about the Cats situation.

Lost Bolton and Figs.

BobcatLionFan · Post by **BobcatLionFan** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 10:21 am

wbtfg wrote:
Wolfman wrote:How good will the Cats O-line be next season? Didn't they lose most of their line to graduation?

The Griz lost most of theirs, and the O-line will be a big problem area for them next year. Just wondered about the Cats situation.
Lost Bolton and Figs.

Bolton is a big lose for anyone (he was the real deal), Fig is all-conference (two years) and brought an attitude. So typically you would think the OL is in trouble.

Given that, The Tackles are VERY good (both full time starters from their first game their Freshman year and now they have started 3 and 2 full years): Hirst and Jensen. Both could be all-conference guys next year. Both are tall, big and atheltic and have handled the speed rushers for years.

Birkeland is a two year starter at left guard.

Saucedo moving to RG (6'6" 300+) (making it a tall big OL, giving Hirst, Jensen, and Lou all 6'6" or taller and 290 to 320).

Verlanic looks like the center (started two games this past year, one briefly for Fig, where Fig went in after the first series). Needs to gain 20 pounds or more.

Given that, the starting five look real solid. Then you have red-shirt Freshman Jeff Hanson and Dominic Sonsini and Soph Chris Smith, all that might start at one of the guards and/or center (the first two are that good I believe).
Backups at Tackle are real solid with Hanson (if he doesn't win a starting guard spot), DeCock, and Beniger.

That being said, the kid from Glendive (who could have possibly started) will probably redshirt and might start in Hirst's spot the following year for the next four years.

Bottom line, the OL looks solid if not VERY good for the next three years with only 2 of that group being seniors next year and very good replacements for them already in house.

With the Glendive kid committed, I can see the coaches NOT using a scholarship on another OL player this year because there is so much depth and quality youth. (typically you use 2 or 3 scholarships on OL each year).

So answer to your question is that position looks good. Someone will still ask the question "Does our O-Line suck" next year, but that's a common topic every year. In this case, it's probably not true.

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 10:41 am

Are most of the Cats O-linemen Montana kids?

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Mon Dec 05, 2005 11:22 am

Wolfman wrote:Are most of the Cats O-linemen Montana kids?

Yes.