The Most Significant Effect of Mark Dixon's Move to LT...

What is the most significant effect Mark Dixon's moving to LT will have?

  • Significantly improving the run blocking while downgrading our pass protection.

    Votes: 2 8.0%
  • Significantly upgrading our pass protection at the expense of run blocking.

    Votes: 2 8.0%
  • Significantly upgrading both pass protection and run blocking

    Votes: 18 72.0%
  • Significantly downgrading both pass protection and run blocking

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No significant effect whatsoever. Pass blocking and/or run blocking would have been the same with B

    Votes: 3 12.0%

  • Total voters
    25

ckparrothead

Premium Member
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
52,174
Reaction score
6,405
Location
Tampa, FL
Mark Dixon's move to left tackle, what will be the most significant effect of it for the season?
 

ckparrothead

Premium Member
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
52,174
Reaction score
6,405
Location
Tampa, FL
My take is that our pass blocking overall will be slightly improved. The weakness at LT in pass blocking will be replaced by a weakness at LG in pass protection.

BUT overall, it is much better to have weaker protection at LG than LT, because a weak LT will allow blindside pressure and sacks and those almost always lead to fumbles, interceptions, injury, etc. Whereas the QB can probably see a big 300 lbs defensive tackle rumble through the middle of the line, and may even be able to scramble away to buy time and complete a pass, or throw it away, or whatever.
 

MDFINFAN

Reach for the Stars
Finheaven VIP
Joined
May 23, 2002
Messages
21,938
Reaction score
569
Age
17
Location
Maryland
Our pass blocking will be increased first..but as the season go on and Dixon's leg becomes stronger..and Nails learns to pass block better..I expect our overall game to get better. Dixon can run block, he's proven that from the LG position..it's a matter of trusting his right ankle..and as I said once it's up to part the L side will be a strong running side and well as passing side.
 

relive1972

Premium Member
Joined
May 3, 2002
Messages
847
Reaction score
0
Age
60
Location
Pensacola
I guess I'm thinking the opposite. I think the run blocking will be significantly improved at first, while the pass protection will suffer slightly. Nails' and Dixon's strenghts are run blocking, aren't they? And I think I read where Dixon mentioned it will take a little time for him to get the pass protection down. I think with time though, they'll be significantly improved in both areas.
 

Phinmaster1354

Active Roster
Joined
Nov 18, 2001
Messages
654
Reaction score
0
Location
Miami Lakes,FL
It Scares me!!

You are taking our BEST O-LINEMAN and moving him out of his FORTE!!! What about SEARCY playing tackle?? What ever happened to that idea??His years in PITTBURGH, he made the PRO-BOWL at TACKLE!!! I just like DIXON at LEFT GUARD!!! He is one of the BEST there!!!
 

dolphan39

Maria & LauRen Aha!
Joined
Sep 4, 2001
Messages
13,973
Reaction score
2
Age
57
Location
CT
Dixon has not been himself strength-wise and Nails in shape c/b a monster. They are simply putting the best 5 OL men out there by moving the best athlete on the OL to LT. Since Smith and Spriggs have sucked and Nails has been solid, it is a no lose situation based on the current personnel
 

ckparrothead

Premium Member
Joined
May 24, 2002
Messages
52,174
Reaction score
6,405
Location
Tampa, FL
No matter what the bottom line is you've got to protect your quarterback's blindside. Neither Brent Smith nor Marcus Spriggs can accomplish that. They've shown it throughout the training camps and preseason. Mark Dixon CAN accomplish that.

Your best offensive lineman, SHOULD be your left tackle. If your best offensive lineman is a left guard, there are problems. Dixon has the attributes it takes to be a good left tackle. And as a result it could extend his career (though we may have to pay him a bit more).
 

DNY

Active Roster
Joined
Jul 26, 2002
Messages
600
Reaction score
0
What a PR move. Nobody has seen him play a down at LT and already he's the messiah. I for one still have doubts about Dixon due to his injury, he still isn't able to do 2 a days, and his familiarity with the position. I agree that he has the attributes, at least most of them, to play the position but he's far from a finished product. This mark Dixon, the 2002 product is far from our best lineman. He should be able to play the position but he has not been the Mark Dixon of previous years so far, which still could be better then the othyer two guys. It looks like Spriggs isn't taking this well and may be headed out, he was listed as sick and I'm not sure he has practiced since the move. I'm as concerned as anyone over the the LT position but I just still have concerns until we actually see what Dixon can do and how he holds up.
 

dolphan39

Maria & LauRen Aha!
Joined
Sep 4, 2001
Messages
13,973
Reaction score
2
Age
57
Location
CT
to somewhat echo CK - Dixon was moved reluctantly to LT since Spriggs and Smith were not cutting it and the biggest positive of the move is that we have a guy at LG that is looking good thus far, but we all need to wait to see if any of this works for a few games.
 

Sherif

Pro Bowler
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
5,000
Reaction score
222
Location
Greensboro, NC
I don't know what the effect will be. I just haven't heard much about Ricky in camp so I don't think the OL is opening up holes and I dont understand these lingering injuries to Brent Smith, Dixon, Chester, and Burnette. Hasn't it been over a year that they sustained these injuries?
 

minus

Perennial All-Pro
Hammered
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
4,510
Reaction score
0
Age
36
Location
Miami
I would like to see how Dixon handles the position in two remaining games before I make comment on Dixon.....
 

BLITZKRIEG

~LACUNA LEGIONS~
Joined
May 21, 2002
Messages
6,915
Reaction score
11
Location
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Minus said it best....We should wait.

If I had to make an educated guess, which is basically what all of us are doing anyway, I would say his move will upgrade BOTH aspects of the pass protection and run blocking along the OL....

He's a good run blocker. We already know that. He's also had his share of experience at LT while he played in the Canadian League from 1994-97.

Dave said he would start the best five OLman, and he stuck to his word.....

M. Dixon will improve at LT with more experience, and our OL will be better becuase of it....

PHINZ RULE!!!!
 

dolphan39

Maria & LauRen Aha!
Joined
Sep 4, 2001
Messages
13,973
Reaction score
2
Age
57
Location
CT
here is the s/t effect:

Coach Dave Wannstedt wasn't happy with the performance of the offense against the scout defense simulating the Houston Texans' 3-4 scheme. The offense was, at best, sluggish as the line struggled to pick up the blitzes that are standard in the three-defensive lineman, four-linebacker scheme. . . . Rain hampered the passing game for the second straight day.
from http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/sports/football/nfl/miami_dolphins/3912439.htm
 

MDFINFAN

Reach for the Stars
Finheaven VIP
Joined
May 23, 2002
Messages
21,938
Reaction score
569
Age
17
Location
Maryland
D39 this is an area of concern for most teams O's that play against a 3-4..it's not the norm in the NFL..but a lot of teams are adopting it..If our scout team is playing it that well, maybe we should add it to our Defensive arsenal.
 

jaxdolfan

Starter
Joined
May 4, 2002
Messages
2,149
Reaction score
0
Location
jacksonville
Jamie Nails is a bad pass blocker. He was like a turnstyle out there agains the Saints on passing plays.
 
Top Bottom