Gophers coach P.J. Fleck hints at changing up offensive line

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
63,089
Reaction score
20,803
Points
113
per Megan:

The Gophers offensive line could look different against Purdue.

While the same five players have started each of the three nonconference games, coach P.J. Fleck has hinted at the potential for personnel changes as the team strives for more consistency.

“There will be four out of five that are really doing a good job, and then one guy that doesn’t stay on a block. That is the person that makes the play,” Fleck said. “… The biggest thing for us is we have to be able to finish. We are good at the point of attack at times, and we just need to be able to run our feet and finish our blocks and be relentless.”

Fleck added he could rotate players in and out to help set up the run game for success. The Gophers rank near the bottom of the FBS in yards per carry at just 2.6. The O-line also has allowed 11 sacks in the first three games, losing 81 yards.

Fleck said he really likes his line of left tackle Sam Schleuter, left guard Blaise Andries, center Conner Olson, right guard Curtis Dunlap Jr. and right tackle Daniel Faalele, none shorter than 6-5 or lighter than 305 pounds. John Michael Schmitz (6-4, 315 pounds) and Nate Umlor (6-5, 300 pounds) are other lineman who have seen brief playing time.

“Just because I like them doesn’t mean that they’re the best offensive line in America,” Fleck said, adding there isn’t a senior on the line right now. “… It’s still really, really a young group up front and that needs to get better … We’re going to look at every option to be able to make it the best five we possibly can in that particular play.”

http://www.startribune.com/fleck-hints-at-changing-up-offensive-line/561269452/

Go Gophers!!
 

Bye weeks are great for giving teams a chance to take a deep breath and really look hard at themselves. Won't shock me at all to see some changes in personnel or groupings when we take the field this weekend.

Specific to the O-Line, it can take multiple years for those guys to be ready to compete at a really high level. Faalele is such a freak of nature with his size but he is still very new to the game and Dunlap is just a redshirt freshman. We all tire of the young comments but in the case of lineman in college football it is fairly rare for young players to do really well early in their careers, usually takes a few years for lineman to really reach their full potential.
 

He mentioned on radio show that he is comfortable with 7 guys. I would hope that next year or later this year, that is more like 9.
 

Wow, I would be really surprised if they were playing different OL for different plays in the same game.

That does not seem to be a recipe for success, purely my gut feeling. 1) can't the defense key on that, based on who goes in? 2) I feel like a line needs to "gel" with each other, and if you're constantly switching up who's next to who, that might be harder to achieve?


rockford, any thoughts?
 

It'd be interesting to have a different offense (and O-Line) when Green is at QB, something like the old Wishbone offense. If a bye week gave us time to implement a few Wishbone plays for green, then every team for the rest of the season is going to have to take time during their prep week to practice defending that formation. The key here is forcing every team to spend their few practice hours learning a new defense.
 


Do we have a consensus on who would get moved out of the starting five?
At the start of the season, I think it would have been SS, but he seems to be doing fair. It appears it's the Dunlop / Faalele combo being problematic most of the time.
 

I'm up for anything but I'm nervous about rotating guys and if they get any better doing that.
 

I sometimes wonder why PJ highlights the negative and plants seeds of doubt in his own players minds?

Schlueter and Olson are fourth year juniors.

Andries is a third year sophomore and is old for his class (July 1998), two months younger than Olson.

Faalele and Dunlap are not typical second year guys...physical maturity well beyond their years...in a world class weight and strength program at IMG...early enrolls here. Faalele, Dunlap, and Andries were four stars recruited by everyone and would likely be on the field at other programs as well.

Oseland would be a fifth year senior here if Fleck wanted him.

Dickson was brought as juco in to add experience, age. Would be oldest olineman in the league if he was out there.

Guessing Ben Davis was brought in from juco to add experience and age. He is a fourth year guy now.

Sassack, Schmitz, Umlor, Ruschmeyer are all third year guys if we need more age.

Beebe could be a fifth year senior helping the run game if Fleck wanted him.
 
Last edited:

swingman said:
I sometimes wonder why PJ highlights the negative and plants seeds of doubt in his own players minds?

Schlueter and Olson are fourth year juniors.

Andries is a third year sophomore and is old for his class (July 1998), two months younger than Olson.

Faalele and Dunlap are not typical second year guys...physical maturity well beyond their years...in a world class weight and strength program at IMG...early enrolls here.

Oseland would be a fifth year senior here if Fleck wanted him.

Dickson was brought as juco in to add experience, age. Would be oldest olineman in the league if he was out there.

Guessing Ben Davis was brought in from juco to add experience and age. He is a fourth year guy now.

Sassack, Schmitz, Umlor, Ruschmeyer are all third year guys if we need more age.

Beebe could be a fifth year senior helping the run game if Fleck wanted him.
Click to expand...

Is there any P5 coach in the country, a single one, who credits having "a large amount biological age out there" as a key factor in winning?

I know your intentions are good ... but I don't think you're on to something, here.
 



swingman said:
I sometimes wonder why PJ highlights the negative and plants seeds of doubt in his own players minds?

Schlueter and Olson are fourth year juniors.

Andries is a third year sophomore and is old for his class (July 1998), two months younger than Olson.

Faalele and Dunlap are not typical second year guys...physical maturity well beyond their years...in a world class weight and strength program at IMG...early enrolls here. Faalele, Dunlap, and Andries were four stars recruited by everyone and would likely be on the field at other programs as well.

Oseland would be a fifth year senior here if Fleck wanted him.

Dickson was brought as juco in to add experience, age. Would be oldest olineman in the league if he was out there.

Guessing Ben Davis was brought in from juco to add experience and age. He is a fourth year guy now.

Sassack, Schmitz, Umlor, Ruschmeyer are all third year guys if we need more age.

Beebe could be a fifth year senior helping the run game if Fleck wanted him.
Click to expand...


Before I go into the rest of your post, can you elaborate on how PJ is doing the bolded / underlined part?
Cite specific examples please.
 

Face The Facts said:
Before I go into the rest of your post, can you elaborate on how PJ is doing the bolded / underlined part?
Cite specific examples please.
Click to expand...

Well he's obviously talking about the part where PJ says they're young. Because they are.

To swingman, calling a football player young, is the ultimate insult and slap in the face. How dare he.
 

MnplsGopher said:
Well he's obviously talking about the part where PJ says they're young. Because they are.

To swingman, calling a football player young, is the ultimate insult and slap in the face. How dare he.
Click to expand...

So perhaps if they are taking him very literally, PJ should preach "You are all 5-year veteran, NFL players all at the peak of your career!"
Or maybe PJ needs to say "You are all 27 years old!"


If PJ shared that at a press conference, media wouldn't have any fun with that I am sure.
 

PJ at events this offseason alluded to some of olinemen being three year guys...so yes he could say they are NFL quality players about halfway done with their college careers who should be performing at a very high level.
 



PJ also made a comment after the GSU game that made it sound like personnel changes on the OL were possible. I guess we'll see.

Was Umlor on the field for a non-special teams play? If he was, I never noticed him.

Considering that the starting five on the OL are relatively young and the reserves are completely inexperienced, I'm somewhat surprised we didn't see more bodies on the field during the non-conference slate. I guess fighting for your life every game has a way of hindering that.

JTG
 

That comment did not sound to me like they will change things up IMO. I think Megan was reaching.

Fleck is right that oftentimes 4 guys will do their job but then the 5th well make a mistake and the play is blown up but so far this year, all 5 lineman, Andries, Schlueter, Olson, Dunlap and Faalele, have all made mistakes and have had play blown up because of that. I don't think he was singling out one individual.
 

MnplsGopher said:
Well he's obviously talking about the part where PJ says they're young. Because they are.

To swingman, calling a football player young, is the ultimate insult and slap in the face. How dare he.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it after the SDSU game when PJ said something about how no one cares how old you are, they only care about whether or not you can play?
 

rockford said:
PJ also made a comment after the GSU game that made it sound like personnel changes on the OL were possible. I guess we'll see.

Was Umlor on the field for a non-special teams play? If he was, I never noticed him.

Considering that the starting five on the OL are relatively young and the reserves are completely inexperienced, I'm somewhat surprised we didn't see more bodies on the field during the non-conference slate. I guess fighting for your life every game has a way of hindering that.

JTG
Click to expand...

Right. At what point in the first three games would you say "OK, we're pretty comfortably up at this point, let's get some time in for the backups" ?

I don't believe we had that benefit, this non-con.


Umlor may have snuck in there for a play, at some point. Maybe someone had a cramp, or a shoe came off, etc.

Or someone may have misreported that, by just looking at the participation stats and seeing his name. I would guess this, more than the former. Maybe he blocks on the FG/PAT ?
 

MnplsGopher said:
Right. At what point in the first three games would you say "OK, we're pretty comfortably up at this point, let's get some time in for the backups" ?

I don't believe we had that benefit, this non-con.


Umlor may have snuck in there for a play, at some point. Maybe someone had a cramp, or a shoe came off, etc.

Or someone may have misreported that, by just looking at the participation stats and seeing his name. I would guess this, more than the former. Maybe he blocks on the FG/PAT ?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing Umlor may have been out there on special teams.

But beyond that, given our personnel situation, it wouldn't have been unreasonable to expect an approach like, "Third possession of the game, Dickson is in at LT for the series," rather than waiting for a comfortable lead.

I'm not claiming to be smarter than the staff. But to me, the fact we didn't employ that approach implies that they see (or saw) a sizeable gap between out starters and our reserves. More recently, the rumblings we hear imply otherwise.

JTG
 

die hard gopher said:
That comment did not sound to me like they will change things up IMO. I think Megan was reaching.

Fleck is right that oftentimes 4 guys will do their job but then the 5th well make a mistake and the play is blown up but so far this year, all 5 lineman, Andries, Schlueter, Olson, Dunlap and Faalele, have all made mistakes and have had play blown up because of that. I don't think he was singling out one individual.
Click to expand...

Exactly my perception...I’d be surprised if we utilize different people. That would send a panic message to the team. It wouldn’t be consistent with other comments. But anything is possible.

Also, some attempt to motivate via threats may be in play here.
 
Last edited:

I would look for #60 John Michael Schmitz at center...Olson back to left guard...Andries back to right guard next to Faalele.
 


swingman said:
I would look for #60 John Michael Schmitz at center...Olson back to left guard...Andries back to right guard next to Faalele.
Click to expand...

Yes, that would make some sense. But, I said something similar after game 1. Why breakout the new lineup to start the Big Ten without any game reps in the first three weeks?
 

rockford said:
I'm guessing Umlor may have been out there on special teams.

But beyond that, given our personnel situation, it wouldn't have been unreasonable to expect an approach like, "Third possession of the game, Dickson is in at LT for the series," rather than waiting for a comfortable lead.

I'm not claiming to be smarter than the staff. But to me, the fact we didn't employ that approach implies that they see (or saw) a sizeable gap between out starters and our reserves. More recently, the rumblings we hear imply otherwise.

JTG
Click to expand...

I would be fine with that type of thing, but I don't believe that's the MO of most college coaches, and certainly not Fleck. If anything, I think Fleck tends more on leaving starters in for too long, or resisting changes for too long.
 

rockford said:
That's my guess ... if they make a move.

JTG
Click to expand...

I don't think the starters will change. The depth chart, if you believe that thing, indicates they won't.

But I do think JMS could get some meaningful snaps at C in this game.

However, in that case, I would put Olson at RG and leave Andries where he is. Olson has started at all three interior positions in his career, so he'd be just fine at RG. And JMS is the first backup at all three interior positions (ie, the next man in, if it's not tackle).
 

60's Guy said:
Yes, that would make some sense. But, I said something similar after game 1. <b>Why breakout the new lineup to start the Big Ten without any game reps in the first three weeks?</b>
Click to expand...

Why? Did you watch the OL play in the first 3 games. Worth trying anything, IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

That's a real catch-22.

let's say for sake of argument that one OL guy is a good run blocker and poor pass blocker. If you sub him out in obvious passing situations, you are telegraphing the play to the defense. "hey, #78 is in at tackle - it's going to be a pass."

But, if you're saying that the starting 5 must play the entire game (except in case of injury) - and one guy is struggling or missing assignments, how does that impact the team's ability to win the game?

That's where Football is different. In other sports, if a player is having a bad game, they wind up on the bench - at least for a while. In football, it's like taking a guy out of the game based on performance is taboo - "oh, you'll hurt his confidence." Well, if he's out there getting beat, how does that help his confidence?

So, I would have no problem with a rotation in the OL. maybe playing some guys fewer snaps will help them stay fresh and mentally focused. Of course, that all depends on having a backup or two who can come into the game without making things worse.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
That's a real catch-22.

let's say for sake of argument that one OL guy is a good run blocker and poor pass blocker. If you sub him out in obvious passing situations, you are telegraphing the play to the defense. "hey, #78 is in at tackle - it's going to be a pass."

But, if you're saying that the starting 5 must play the entire game (except in case of injury) - and one guy is struggling or missing assignments, how does that impact the team's ability to win the game?

That's where Football is different. In other sports, if a player is having a bad game, they wind up on the bench - at least for a while. In football, it's like taking a guy out of the game based on performance is taboo - "oh, you'll hurt his confidence." Well, if he's out there getting beat, how does that help his confidence?

So, I would have no problem with a rotation in the OL. maybe playing some guys fewer snaps will help them stay fresh and mentally focused. Of course, that all depends on having a backup or two who can come into the game without making things worse.
Click to expand...

This is a pure guess, I haven't watched practices: I think the staff feels good enough about JMS coming in at Center, and then sliding Olson and maybe Andries around, that it's worth a shot, during a meaningful game scenario. Something to have in our pocket, if things aren't going well during the Purdue game, they can pull the trigger and try to get something rolling.
 


Studwell55 said:
What's the word on Dickson?
Click to expand...

Behind Schleuter on the depth chart. Is the #3 or 4 OT on the roster depending on if you move Blaise or not and the #7 O-lineman. The last guy that the coaches would feel somewhat comfortable playing without a huge drop-off.
 

die hard gopher said:
Behind Schleuter on the depth chart. Is the #3 or 4 OT on the roster depending on if you move Blaise or not and the #7 O-lineman. The last guy that the coaches would feel somewhat comfortable playing without a huge drop-off.
Click to expand...

Even Umlor or Sassack? That's rough, if so, they at least appear on the depth chart. Cannot say that for some other guys, who are RSophs or older.

What about Richter, I thought he was moving to OL?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom