Excited for Brett Jones

[YikesVikes]

I am usually excited to see Brett Jones play. For the last 2 years, i have felt that this guy could be a solution to our guard woes, only to see us cut and resign him time and time again. Now he gets his chance and I hope we is excellent. I would love to have a diamond in the rough sitting there for us and for us to have a potential starting OL of Ezra - Dozier - Brad - Jones - Oniel next season.

[J. Kapp 11]

I’m not.

Nothing against Jones, but him playing means Ezra Cleveland isn’t. And he might just be our best O-lineman right now.

[S197]

I don't know if I'm necessarily excited since he's been here for a while and hasn't exactly had a lot of talented guys in front of him to overtake. But Cleveland long term is a tackle so seeing what we have in Jones or needing to draft yet another interior lineman isn't such a bad thing from a long term perspective.

[VikingLord]

I am usually excited to see Brett Jones play. For the last 2 years, i have felt that this guy could be a solution to our guard woes...

Why?

I don't ask that with any sarcasm or bad intent. I'm honestly curious what you see in Jones that leads you to believe this. I honestly don't know enough about him because I just haven't seen him play all that much, but based on his pro career to this point that would suggest he's either struggled with injuries or hasn't played up to his potential.

[YikesVikes]

I am usually excited to see Brett Jones play. For the last 2 years, i have felt that this guy could be a solution to our guard woes...

Why?

I don't ask that with any sarcasm or bad intent. I'm honestly curious what you see in Jones that leads you to believe this. I honestly don't know enough about him because I just haven't seen him play all that much, but based on his pro career to this point that would suggest he's either struggled with injuries or hasn't played up to his potential.

He looked like a guy that was nicely built and stout at the point of attack. I felt that alone would be an increase over Pat but the chance was never given. I don't remember any truly bad plays but I was so caught up into the game that I didn't even remember to watch him. I think he would have been an upgrade (not now however).

[VikingLord]

He looked like a guy that was nicely built and stout at the point of attack. I felt that alone would be an increase over Pat but the chance was never given. I don't remember any truly bad plays but I was so caught up into the game that I didn't even remember to watch him. I think he would have been an upgrade (not now however).

Yeah, I don't remember Jones having any outstanding plays, positive or negative, but like you I found it hard to focus on individual linemen. The plays I most remember didn't involve Jones. I remember watching Bradbury get shoved backwards several yards on at least two snaps, and Dozier stood out at least once in a negative way. But I can't say Jones did, so maybe he did OK.

It seemed like the Dallas front 7 just had a little more fire and juice than the Vikings OL yesterday. That's probably to be expected given Dallas was coming off a bye and a frustrating loss to arguably the best team in the NFL this year, while the Vikings were riding a 3 game win streak and might have gotten a little complacent.

[S197]

I also don't recall him standing out in either scenario. Dozier had the chop block call, O'Neill had a false start, and there were a few holds but none on Jones. I think overall he did a decent job as next man up.

[J. Kapp 11]

I also don't recall him standing out in either scenario. Dozier had the chop block call, O'Neill had a false start, and there were a few holds but none on Jones. I think overall he did a decent job as next man up.

That chop block call was one of the worst of the entire game. That was a cut block, the difference being that the guy being blocked can SEE a cut block coming. Offensive linemen do that all the time. The guy was right in front of Dozier, who immediately went low. That's a legal block. No idea why the ref threw that flag.

[S197]

I also don't recall him standing out in either scenario. Dozier had the chop block call, O'Neill had a false start, and there were a few holds but none on Jones. I think overall he did a decent job as next man up.

That chop block call was one of the worst of the entire game. That was a cut block, the difference being that the guy being blocked can SEE a cut block coming. Offensive linemen do that all the time. The guy was right in front of Dozier, who immediately went low. That's a legal block. No idea why the ref threw that flag.

It actually doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the lineman can see the block coming. It has to do with whether or not the defender is "engaged" with a lineman and a second lineman hits him low. If I recall the play correctly, the DT is lined up over Bradbury who puts his arm on him as he moves to his right. Dozier then initiates a low block, which is an illegal chop block. Similar to this:

https://streamable.com/hdnn

A legal cut block has to be a 1-on-1 engagement:

https://streamable.com/mhj4

I can't find an actual clip of the play and I remember it being fairly close but if my memory is right, Bradbury had an arm on the defender and he is therefore engaged at the time of the low block.

[YikesVikes]

That chop block call was one of the worst of the entire game. That was a cut block, the difference being that the guy being blocked can SEE a cut block coming. Offensive linemen do that all the time. The guy was right in front of Dozier, who immediately went low. That's a legal block. No idea why the ref threw that flag.

It actually doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the lineman can see the block coming. It has to do with whether or not the defender is "engaged" with a lineman and a second lineman hits him low. If I recall the play correctly, the DT is lined up over Bradbury who puts his arm on him as he moves to his right. Dozier then initiates a low block, which is an illegal chop block. Similar to this:

https://streamable.com/hdnn

A legal cut block has to be a 1-on-1 engagement:

https://streamable.com/mhj4

I can't find an actual clip of the play and I remember it being fairly close but if my memory is right, Bradbury had an arm on the defender and he is therefore engaged at the time of the low block.

You are 100% correct. Although, I'm not sure what the reset time is on this. I felt that Bradbury, shoved and the released him with just enough time for it to be considered a legal chop block. However, I can't blame the refs on this call. They screwed up man other calls.

[J. Kapp 11]

It actually doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the lineman can see the block coming. It has to do with whether or not the defender is "engaged" with a lineman and a second lineman hits him low. If I recall the play correctly, the DT is lined up over Bradbury who puts his arm on him as he moves to his right. Dozier then initiates a low block, which is an illegal chop block. Similar to this:

https://streamable.com/hdnn

A legal cut block has to be a 1-on-1 engagement:

https://streamable.com/mhj4

I can't find an actual clip of the play and I remember it being fairly close but if my memory is right, Bradbury had an arm on the defender and he is therefore engaged at the time of the low block.

You are 100% correct. Although, I'm not sure what the reset time is on this. I felt that Bradbury, shoved and the released him with just enough time for it to be considered a legal chop block. However, I can't blame the refs on this call. They screwed up man other calls.

Thanks guys. I was watching on a 50-inch TV from about 60 feet away in a sports book (thank you, social distancing), so I didn't notice Bradbury. All I saw was that Dozier went low immediately at the snap. Looked like a cut block to me. The timing of it makes me wonder how Bradbury already could have been engaged, but I certainly don't know for sure.