Cowboys interviewing Paul Alexander for their OL coach

[jorev5]

(01-11-2018, 08:56 PM)sandwedge Wrote: I have always wanted to see us on the war cam during the draft, instead the of the Cowboys, Seattle or Giants and Patriots. I bet it would look like a chinese fire drill, with ol'Mikey sleeping in a recliner over in the corner, till he jumps up and wants to make a DE a TE....

hahaha good one.  I was thinking ol'Mikey is in the corner looking through a bunch of papers with "scouting reports" on players only to find that they're all old receipts from Mcdonalds.  

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-11-2018, 07:29 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Who would have been successful with OG and Fisher being our starting tackles to start the season. 

Not many, but rfaulk pretty much nailed it.  Also, most teams coach up late rounders and UDFA to become solid, if not good in some cases, starters.  Look at NE.  Alexander?  No so much.

[fredtoast]

(01-12-2018, 12:48 PM)Wyche Wrote:  Also, most teams coach up late rounders and UDFA to become solid, if not good in some cases, starters.  Look at NE.  Alexander?  No so much.

Actually this is not true.

In the 7 years since we drafted Boling only ONE other O-lineman in the entire league drafted in the 4th round or later has more starts.  If you include Bodine the Bengals have two of the top ten on the list of most starts by an O-lineman drafted in the 4th round or later since 2011.

The claim that every other team in the league is getting great production form late drafted O-linemen is a myth.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-12-2018, 01:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually this is not true.

In the 7 years since we drafted Boling only ONE other O-lineman in the entire league drafted in the 4th round or later has more starts.  If you include Bodine the Bengals have two of the top ten on the list of most starts by an O-lineman drafted in the 4th round or later since 2011.

The claim that every other team in the league is getting great production form late drafted O-linemen is a myth.

Interesting stat, for sure, but Bodine is starting by default.  He isn't very good, and he was "Paul's guy".

I'm not saying every team gets that production, but Villenueva in Pitt is an UDFA, isn't he?  The Pats start a 3rd, 4th, 5th, and UDFA on their oline, for example, and look what they get out of it.

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2018, 01:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually this is not true.

In the 7 years since we drafted Boling only ONE other O-lineman in the entire league drafted in the 4th round or later has more starts.  If you include Bodine the Bengals have two of the top ten on the list of most starts by an O-lineman drafted in the 4th round or later since 2011.

The claim that every other team in the league is getting great production form late drafted O-linemen is a myth.

Isn't that stat a little swayed though because obviously someone who joined in 2014, for example, won't have as many starts as Boling?
And just because a player has starts doesn't mean they are a good player. Bodine is a good example of that IMO.

Can you provide your source? I'd like to read it please.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

Just curious fred, what has been your take on Alexander these last two years?  Also, after seeing Lazor change up his scheme to give an uptick in the run game, and reading about infighting among the staff over it, do you think he could have been stuck in his ways and arrogant to the point of becoming a detriment?  So much has come to light after his dismissal, I'm wondering about your take on all of that.

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2018, 01:11 PM)Wyche Wrote: Interesting stat, for sure, but Bodine is starting by default.  He isn't very good, and he was "Paul's guy".

I'm not saying every team gets that production, but Villenueva in Pitt is an UDFA, isn't he?  The Pats start a 3rd, 4th, 5th, and UDFA on their oline, for example, and look what they get out of it.

La'el Collins was also an UDFA.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-12-2018, 01:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually this is not true.

In the 7 years since we drafted Boling only ONE other O-lineman in the entire league drafted in the 4th round or later has more starts.  If you include Bodine the Bengals have two of the top ten on the list of most starts by an O-lineman drafted in the 4th round or later since 2011.

The claim that every other team in the league is getting great production form late drafted O-linemen is a myth.

Starting and production are two different things. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(01-12-2018, 01:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually this is not true.

In the 7 years since we drafted Boling only ONE other O-lineman in the entire league drafted in the 4th round or later has more starts.  If you include Bodine the Bengals have two of the top ten on the list of most starts by an O-lineman drafted in the 4th round or later since 2011.

The claim that every other team in the league is getting great production form late drafted O-linemen is a myth.

It's a myth that number of starts equals talent. Ghiacuic, Livings, Bodine, Andrews. They all had lots of starts, but not a quality lineman among them.

Eventually, you will admit the truth just like you did with Bratkowski.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-12-2018, 01:16 PM)ochocincos Wrote: La'el Collins was also an UDFA.

Good point, and there are examples of this across the league.  After reading what Bill Lazor had to say, you gotta wonder if the talent really isn't the issue as much as a stubborn coach wanting to do it his way hell or high water is.  The old cliche is true, you can't fit square pegs in round holes.  

(01-12-2018, 01:18 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Starting and production are two different things. 

Exactly.

[fredtoast]

(01-12-2018, 01:12 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Isn't that stat a little swayed though because obviously someone who joined in 2014, for example, won't have as many starts as Boling?
And just because a player has starts doesn't mean they are a good player. Bodine is a good example of that IMO.

Can you provide your source? I'd like to read it please.

Okay, here is a more detailed analysis.

There have only been 2 O-linemen draft in the 4th round or later over the last 7 years who have made the Pro Bowl.

Here is the yearly break down of the number of O-linemen drafted in the fourth round or later who were starters (starter = more than 8 starts) for more than one season and started at least 32 games.

2011...5
2012...3
2013...3
2014...7
2015...3
2016...0 (5 players have started at least 8 games in a single year, but only one has more than 16 starts in 2 years)
2017...0 (no players with more than 8 starts in their rookie season)

So in 7 years I would say there have been a total of 21 O-linemen drafted after the fourth round who became legit "starters", and the Bengals have two of them.  There may still be a couple from the '16 and '17 draft who will meet the criteria, but it looks like on average there are about 3 each year or less than 10% of the 32 NFL teams.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/draft-finder.cgi?request=1&year_min=2011&year_max=2017&draft_round_min=4&draft_slot_min=1&draft_slot_max=500&pick_type=overall&pos%5B%5D=t&pos%5B%5D=g&pos%5B%5D=c&pos%5B%5D=ol&conference=any&show=all&order_by=gs

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2018, 01:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Okay, here is a more detailed analysis.

There have only been 2 O-linemen draft in the 4th round or later over the last 7 years who have made the Pro Bowl.

Here is the yearly break down of the number of O-linemen drafted in the fourth round or later who were starters (starter = more than 8 starts) for more than one season and started at least 32 games.

2011...5
2012...3
2013...3
2014...7
2015...3
2016...0 (5 players have started at least 8 games in a single year, but only one has more than 16 starts in 2 years)
2017...0 (no players with more than 8 starts in their rookie season)

So in 7 years I would say there have been a total of 21 O-linemen drafted after the fourth round who became legit "starters", and the Bengals have two of them.  There may still be a couple from the '16 and '17 draft who will meet the criteria, but it looks like on average there are about 3 each year or less than 10% of the 32 NFL teams.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/draft-finder.cgi?request=1&year_min=2011&year_max=2017&draft_round_min=4&draft_slot_min=1&draft_slot_max=500&pick_type=overall&pos%5B%5D=t&pos%5B%5D=g&pos%5B%5D=c&pos%5B%5D=ol&conference=any&show=all&order_by=gs

Thank you for providing this. I feel many of us interpreted differently because your previous post did not reflect this. I think this makes it more clear.

With that said, would you agree then that it makes even more sense given this historical data that the likelihood the Bengals will find a "diamond in the rough" with OL in the 4th round or later is very miniscule, and therefore they would be much better off addressing their OL needs on days 1 and 2 of the draft?

[fredtoast]

(01-12-2018, 01:14 PM)Wyche Wrote: Just curious fred, what has been your take on Alexander these last two years?  Also, after seeing Lazor change up his scheme to give an uptick in the run game, and reading about infighting among the staff over it, do you think he could have been stuck in his ways and arrogant to the point of becoming a detriment?  So much has come to light after his dismissal, I'm wondering about your take on all of that.

Honestly, after the failure of Bodine, Fisher, and Ogbuehi I can't really object to the firing of Alexander.  I just think the hatred going back for years is unfounded.

Also, I was not aware that the O-line coach called the plays, so I am not sure what you mean by Lazor "changing up the scheme".  The bengals play book has always contained different running plays with different blocking schemes.  I remember when Kyle Cook was coming back from injury and started over Travis Stephenson.  They said the reason they did it was because they could use all of the different blocking schemes with Cook, but were limited with Stephenson.  So as I understand it the choice of blocking scheme on a run play has always been up to the OC calling the plays instead of the O-line coach.  Where did you hear that Lazor changed the scheme midseason?

[fredtoast]

(01-12-2018, 01:16 PM)ochocincos Wrote: La'el Collins was also an UDFA.

(01-12-2018, 01:18 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Starting and production are two different things. 

(01-12-2018, 01:21 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: It's a myth that number of starts equals talent. Ghiacuic, Livings, Bodine, Andrews. They all had lots of starts, but not a quality lineman among them.

Eventually, you will admit the truth just like you did with Bratkowski.

You guys are free to post any stats you want to prove your point.  I don't think that naming one undrafted free agent proves that every team in the league is doing a better job than the Bengals in developing late round draft picks for the O-line.

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2018, 01:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Honestly, after the failure of Bodine, Fisher, and Ogbuehi I can't really object to the firing of Alexander.  I just think the hatred going back for years is unfounded.

Also, I was not aware that the O-line coach called the plays, so I am not sure what you mean by Lazor "changing up the scheme".  The bengals play book has always contained different running plays with different blocking schemes.  I remember when Kyle Cook was coming back from injury and started over Travis Stephenson.  They said the reason they did it was because they could use all of the different blocking schemes with Cook, but were limited with Stephenson.  So as I understand it the choice of blocking scheme on a run play has always been up to the OC calling the plays instead of the O-line coach.  Where did you hear that Lazor changed the scheme midseason?

Was mentioned in Hobson article that Alexander was in charge of the ground game.

Quote:Alexander was in charge of the run game so it’s a major move that indicates a significant change in how the Bengals approach line play and the ground attack.  They had their worst rushing season ever in the history of the club when it came to net yards, but they are attempting to build on Lazor’s approach that helped them average 4.6 yards per carry and 114 yards per game in the last six games.

http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/Alexanders-departure-signals-change-in-run-game/8bf651dc-520e-43e8-bf96-56a2d8d32bdb

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-12-2018, 01:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Honestly, after the failure of Bodine, Fisher, and Ogbuehi I can't really object to the firing of Alexander.  I just think the hatred going back for years is unfounded.

Also, I was not aware that the O-line coach called the plays, so I am not sure what you mean by Lazor "changing up the scheme".  The bengals play book has always contained different running plays with different blocking schemes.  I remember when Kyle Cook was coming back from injury and started over Travis Stephenson.  They said the reason they did it was because they could use all of the different blocking schemes with Cook, but were limited with Stephenson.  So as I understand it the choice of blocking scheme on a run play has always been up to the OC calling the plays instead of the O-line coach.  Where did you hear that Lazor changed the scheme midseason?

That's fair enough.....I think he had let nuances of an ever evolving game pass him by, but I respect your opinion and honest answer.

My apologies, I guess you hadn't been around during the discussion about all of this over the last few weeks.  It appears Alexander was over the run game, and calling the blocking schemes per Lazor's presser and the Bengals homepage.  It was discussed on here after the Cleveland game (and before any of this came to light) that it appeared the Bengals had switched up their blocking approach.  From that game forward, the run game improved on a YPC basis rather dramatically.  Then, all of that was confirmed as ochocincos noted above.

This is speculation on my part, but it appears the assistant HC title had gone to his head, or Mike had given him way too much leeway in that department.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

fred, you should check out Bill Lazor's presser transcripts and the corresponding thread here to get a better insight into this.  It was rather eye opening.

[sandwedge]

(01-12-2018, 01:16 PM)ochocincos Wrote: La'el Collins was also an UDFA.

To be fair though, wasn't Collins projected to be drafted the top OT at the time, but was falsely accuse of a crime and he took a tumble out of the draft?

[*ochocincos*]

(01-12-2018, 02:42 PM)sandwedge Wrote: To be fair though, wasn't Collins projected to be drafted the top OT at the time, but was falsely accuse of a crime and he took a tumble out of the draft?

Yes, but that wouldn't be reflected anyway about draft picks from 4th round or later.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(01-12-2018, 01:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Okay, here is a more detailed analysis.

There have only been 2 O-linemen draft in the 4th round or later over the last 7 years who have made the Pro Bowl.

Here is the yearly break down of the number of O-linemen drafted in the fourth round or later who were starters (starter = more than 8 starts) for more than one season and started at least 32 games.

2011...5
2012...3
2013...3
2014...7
2015...3
2016...0 (5 players have started at least 8 games in a single year, but only one has more than 16 starts in 2 years)
2017...0 (no players with more than 8 starts in their rookie season)

So in 7 years I would say there have been a total of 21 O-linemen drafted after the fourth round who became legit "starters", and the Bengals have two of them.  There may still be a couple from the '16 and '17 draft who will meet the criteria, but it looks like on average there are about 3 each year or less than 10% of the 32 NFL teams.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/draft-finder.cgi?request=1&year_min=2011&year_max=2017&draft_round_min=4&draft_slot_min=1&draft_slot_max=500&pick_type=overall&pos%5B%5D=t&pos%5B%5D=g&pos%5B%5D=c&pos%5B%5D=ol&conference=any&show=all&order_by=gs

Thanks.....although, I would only call one of our 4th rounders a "legit" starter.