Gabe Jackson

[Bernards watch]

If brown can be had for cheap it might be a good idea. Injuries last year are one off types (covid and bubble in iv)
He is a potential pro bowler and as long as the weight is under control it should be a great pick up

[Bengalholic]

(03-04-2021, 05:14 PM)Synric Wrote: He's been in a wide zone scheme since 2018 with the Raiders under Jon Gruden and Tom Cable. 

True. It's primarily a wide zone concept, but one thing Cable does very well is scheme versatility and adapting to weaknesses in the defense by being able to change things up and exploit matchups. As he has stated 'keep running what works until they can stop it'...whether it's zone or man based.  I'm hoping Pollack has that same mindset and is willing to adapt based on what's effective game to game. Being able to run the ball consistently will help make Burrow's life a whole lot easier.

[*Synric*]

(03-04-2021, 05:35 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: True. It's primarily a wide zone concept, but one thing Cable does very well is scheme versatility and adapting to weaknesses in the defense by being able to change things up and exploit matchups. As he has stated 'keep running what works until they can stop it'...whether it's zone or man based.  I'm hoping Pollack has that same mindset and is willing to adapt based on what's effective game to game. 

Truth.

Brian Callahan in his interview on Lock on Bengals was mentioning how they tried to mix in some man gap concepts to their inside zone to change it up so mixing up the schemes will probably be a normal thing in Cincy. 

This is also another good reason why you would bring in a guy like Gabe Jackson who is a veteran with experience in anything the OC wants to throw at him.

[Bengalholic]

(03-04-2021, 05:42 PM)Synric Wrote: Truth.

Brian Callahan in his interview on Lock on Bengals was mentioning how they tried to mix in some man gap concepts to their inside zone to change it up so mixing up the schemes will probably be a normal thing in Cincy. 

This is also another good reason why you would bring in a guy like Gabe Jackson who is a veteran with experience in anything the OC wants to throw at him.

Yep. Not really understanding why anyone would be opposed to signing him.

[CoachGeorge]

(03-04-2021, 05:14 PM)Synric Wrote: He's been in a wide zone scheme since 2018 with the Raiders under Jon Gruden and Tom Cable. 

True. But Cable relies on a size/power version that is quite a bit different than Pollack’s traditional scheme that traces its heritage back to the Alex Gibbs/Gary Kubiak line. A legitimate “stretch” play that Mixon enjoyed success with and isn’t a Jackson strength.

I’m not against a Jackson signing per say, but he won’t come cheap and I would rather get a tackle, left guard/center, a decent WR and of course WJII and or Lawson or equivalents. Money/draft capital must be spent wisely.

I also prescribe to the theory that RG’s are largely the 6th most important lineman on the team (LT 1A, RT 1B, C 3, LG 4, swing tackle 5).

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(03-04-2021, 06:36 PM)CoachGeorge Wrote: True.  But Cable relies on a size/power version that is quite a bit different than Pollack’s traditional scheme that traces its heritage back to the Alex Gibbs/Gary Kubiak line.  A legitimate “stretch” play that Mixon enjoyed success with and isn’t a Jackson strength.

I’m not against a Jackson signing per say, but he won’t come cheap and I would rather get a tackle, left guard/center, a decent WR and of course WJII and or Lawson or equivalents. Money/draft capital must be spent wisely.

I also prescribe to the theory that RG’s are largely the 6th most important lineman on the team (LT 1A, RT 1B, C 3, LG 4, swing tackle 5).

Gabe will still be a lot cheaper than Thuney or Scherff. We could add more to the OL instead of just one player with Gabe.

Get Gabe and say Daryl Williams or Ricky Wagner... 

Cut Hart and add pass rushers.

[TJHoushmandzadeh's Shiny Shoes]

(03-04-2021, 03:50 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Other than Thuney and Scherff (who will both be crazy expensive) and maybe Feiler, who could potentially end up playing G for someone...how many guards out there are better than Jackson?

 
Better than 2016 Jackson or better than 2021 and 2022 Jackson is likely to be?

I don't think the free agency guard class is very deep this year after the big names but that's not the only pool for recruiting. There's the draft, there may be trade possibilities and then there's likely to be more cap casualties given the cap squeeze. If you want a stopgap someone like old friend Kevin Zeitler may become available and whilst he's older he always kept himself in good shape and I think he may be a better bet to age better than Jackson. Trai Turner struggled with injury last year but he's another potential cap casualty and I think offers a better bet of bouncing back along with being a better scheme fit. Maybe if someone like Greg van Roten who Pollack worked with at the Jets is cut he can provide a similar level of play for less money whilst not blocking a day 2 draft pick and letting you spend money on another position on the line in free agency like Corey Linsey or Taylor Moton (if he isn't tagged) or even trade for Rob Haverstein.

Overpaying for a past his prime Gabe Jackson just seems like the bare minimum move that the Bengals historically like to make. Enough to make them not want to invest a top pick in the draft on the position, enough to show the fans that they are sort of trying but not enough to truly move the needle on the O-line.

[pulses]

(03-04-2021, 03:42 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Matt Rhule use Samuel in specific ways to help Samuel produce?
He's not really someone I see as being a consistent contributor unless you cater his plays to his strengths.
Would we trust Zac Taylor to be able to use Samuel properly?
I don't.

Nope. Better off to draft a WR who can run the route trees and can get open and you don't have to cater plays to them specifically.

[Whatever]

(03-04-2021, 05:42 PM)Synric Wrote: Truth.

Brian Callahan in his interview on Lock on Bengals was mentioning how they tried to mix in some man gap concepts to their inside zone to change it up so mixing up the schemes will probably be a normal thing in Cincy. 

This is also another good reason why you would bring in a guy like Gabe Jackson who is a veteran with experience in anything the OC wants to throw at him.

I would honestly hope that pick one blocking scheme and stick with it, at least for next year.  We were simply awful at picking up stunts and it didn't seem like guys knew who to block half the time.

[Whatever]

(03-04-2021, 05:47 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Yep. Not really understanding why anyone would be opposed to signing him.

I'm not opposed to signing him provided he's not the not the biggest or only OL FA we sign and we don't overpay for him.  At the end of the day, he's an average starting G.  That's better than what we have, but not something to be ecstatic with, either.

I think what sours people on him is the "typical Bengals" feeling it has.  It feels like a Hobspin piece.  We can't afford a good FA G despite having more cap room than most of the teams in the league because we have to spend elite money to resign good/not great players like Lawson and WJIII, so we signed low B tier guy to be the crown jewel of our FA.  

[Nicomo Cosca]

(03-04-2021, 11:15 PM)Whatever Wrote: I would honestly hope that pick one blocking scheme and stick with it, at least for next year.  We were simply awful at picking up stunts and it didn't seem like guys knew who to block half the time.

Definitely felt like the case on a couple of Hart’s worst plays.

[fredtoast]

(03-05-2021, 02:50 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Definitely felt like the case on a couple of Hart’s worst plays.

This.  But it was the case all across the line.  Guys were not getting blown up one-on-one or beaten around the edge as much as they were just blocking the wrong guy (or no guy)

Ravens had 5 sacks from DBs.  They were not overpowering our O-line.  We just didn't know how to pick up s blitz.

Even simple loops and other stunts by D-linemen resulted in wide open paths to the QB.

I am praying that coaching can fix a lot of that.

[Au165]

(03-05-2021, 11:44 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This.  But it was the case all across the line.  Guys were not getting blown up one-on-one or beaten around the edge as much as they were just blocking the wrong guy (or no guy)

Ravens had 5 sacks from DBs.  They were not overpowering our O-line.  We just didn't know how to pick up s blitz.

Even simple loops and other stunts by D-linemen resulted in wide open paths to the QB.

I am praying that coaching can fix a lot of that.

Correct, some of it is because when you stick a guy who isn't good next to another guy who isn't good you have a lot of miscommunications. The other part of that is the QB owns a piece there in ID'ing who is and isn't coming. It's expected through film study and situational awareness they can properly ID who is or isn't coming and set protections on that knowledge and Burrow, as good as he is, struggled with that at times last year. Specifically, in that Ravens game, Mixon owned part of the DB issue too as he was too quick to release at times wanting to get into his route and completely blew his pick up.

[XenoMorph]

(03-04-2021, 11:15 PM)Whatever Wrote: I would honestly hope that pick one blocking scheme and stick with it, at least for next year.  We were simply awful at picking up stunts and it didn't seem like guys knew who to block half the time.

who's job is it to call out the blocking assignments before the play the center or qb?

[Au165]

(03-05-2021, 02:08 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: who's job is it to call out the blocking assignments before the play the center or qb?

It varies by teams and personnel. Some let the center make the call completely, others let the center make the call and the Qb can override and some let the QB have complete control. Usually, it is dictated by the experience of the two positions. In terms of second-level pressure, the QB is usually tasked with identifying it, even if the Center sets the protection off it.