There are 95 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

We should not take a 1st round O-lineman in the draft!

Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.



Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

Ok enlighten me. What exactly are we good at that we should stick to? Drafting QBs? RBs? We haven't exactly hit on much.
The Jets and Broncos have two of the best Olines in football. Each is anchored by a top 15 pick at LT and/or surrounded with other high picks. I'm glad you aren't making these decisions. If the GM fails at these picks much more, you change GMs, not stop drafting linemen.

I think if we can get proven FA Olinemen we can do some amazing things with this years picks at RB, WR, DB, LB, and maybe even D-line. We can't keep trying to get rookies to block grown men with no real coach to develope them. Working towards our strengths point to this. We get man handled in the trenches on offense (with all of these young undeveloped O-linemen) while we have an all pro TE, RB, and serviceable WR's. We should really be focusing on the QB position in this draft as well since we are not solidified there. But it all starts upfront and our current philosophy isn't working!
Originally posted by glorydayz:
We have no luck with first or second round O-linemen.

Staley - average at best!
Bass - below average!
Rachell - below average!

One rookie O-lineman is not the answer. I am open to later round o-line picks that can sit behind a free agent veteran and learn while providing some depth. We should trully go for best player available at ANY position outside of middle linebacker! We still need help at every position until we reach the playoffs!

I can see grabbing first & second round O-linemen if you get a coach that can develope them but other than that those picks tend to look like waisted picks if you are only getting warm bodies. These picks can look a lot lot like the Balmer over Jackson pick if we are not careful.

I agree but also I disagree! Iupati is a hof-er under coach singletary. remember coach sing can get everything out of a player if he has something to get out of him. the tackle from rutgers can help as well!
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.



Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

dam that was harsh, funny , and true all at the same time.

this might be the dumbest thread of the year so far considering the Niners o line, and the reasoning presented for not drafting one in the 1st round.
Originally posted by ninerforyears:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
We have no luck with first or second round O-linemen.

Staley - average at best!
Bass - below average!
Rachell - below average!

One rookie O-lineman is not the answer. I am open to later round o-line picks that can sit behind a free agent veteran and learn while providing some depth. We should trully go for best player available at ANY position outside of middle linebacker! We still need help at every position until we reach the playoffs!

I can see grabbing first & second round O-linemen if you get a coach that can develope them but other than that those picks tend to look like waisted picks if you are only getting warm bodies. These picks can look a lot lot like the Balmer over Jackson pick if we are not careful.

I agree but also I disagree! Iupati is a hof-er under coach singletary. remember coach sing can get everything out of a player if he has something to get out of him. the tackle from rutgers can help as well!

We said the same thing about Rachel, Baas, and Staley right before they were all man handled!
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.



Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

dam that was harsh, funny , and true all at the same time.

this might be the dumbest thread of the year so far considering the Niners o line, and the reasoning presented for not drafting one in the 1st round.

one or two rookie o-linemen will take us to the promise land? I say two proven professional O-linemen can make our young o-linemen better! Who would our rookie o-linemen learn from Staley? LOL
Why do people think that what happens in the past has some form of magical control over the future. I grade the OP with another recently who said that we might as well trade our 3rd round pick because we are terrible at drafting in the third round.

Basically, apart from kickers there isnt a position that we havent had a bust in the first couple of rounds at some time. And here is a funny thing, so has everyone else! The draft is a crapshoot. But it is the only game in town when it comes to rebuilding a team within the salary cap.

We need starter O linemen for next year. Later draft picks can turn into gems or not. Free agent signings can bomb oiut, and thanks to CBA this is unlikely to be any sort of year for FA. So what should we do? We should take a 1st round O lineman in the draft. Or two. See, you nearly got it right.
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.



Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

This is my approach to building an oline, I feel sorry for your kids as you are probably raising them with the thought of "what would sing or any other football coach do in this situation".

Keep your kids out of nut cracker drills buddy...
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.



Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

This is my approach to building an oline, I feel sorry for your kids as you are probably raising them with the thought of "what would sing or any other football coach do in this situation".

Keep your kids out of nut cracker drills buddy...

That's the most lame comeback I've seen in the zone for a while. Keep it up with your philosophy. There are plenty of bums living on the street with that mentality. Get yourself a nice warm blanket when u get a chance.

[ Edited by kronik on Jan 13, 2010 at 12:09:32 ]
This theory sucks.
The fallacy of the FA approach to fixing the OL, is that the CBA is expiring and anyoine with less than 6 years of experience will be an RFA (meaning compensation and/or the right for a team to match any offer), not a UFA, this year. The rules are different for this upcoming FA period. Normally, I would agree with the notion of acquiring veteran talent, in conjunction with draft talent, to upgrade the OL . But, this year the FA market will be a desert.

So, the draft is going to have to be the solution. The Jets had 2 first round picks a few years back, and took both Ferguson and Mangold in the first round. It has happened. It does work. Look at where the Jets are today, even with a rookie QB. That would be IN THE PLAYOFFS!

Just like Marvin and Tammie sang years ago, "It takes two, baby. It just takes two".

[ Edited by jimbagg on Jan 13, 2010 at 12:16:40 ]
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.



Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

This is my approach to building an oline, I feel sorry for your kids as you are probably raising them with the thought of "what would sing or any other football coach do in this situation".

Keep your kids out of nut cracker drills buddy...

That's the most lame comeback I've seen in the zone for a while. Keep it up with your philosophy. There are plenty of bums living on the street with that mentality. Get yourself a nice warm blanket when u get a chance.

I will get a nice warm blanket to keep me warm in my 24 person suite at the stick for 49ers home games. I guess if things get worst I can always live at the lake house. Raise some kids with out your nut cracker drill and then talk to me about a philosophy on life little fella.
Originally posted by jimbagg:
The fallacy of the FA approach to fixing the OL, is that the CBA is expiring and anyoine with less than 6 years of experience will be an RFA (meaning compensation and/or the right for a team to match any offer), not a UFA, this year. The rules are different for this upcoming FA period. Normally, I would agree with the notion of acquiring veteran talent, in conjunction with draft talent, to upgrade the OL . But, this year the FA market will be a desert.

So, the draft is going to have to be the solution. The Jets had 2 first round picks a few years back, and took both Ferguson and Mangold in the first round. It has happened. It does work. Look at where the Jets are today, even with a rookie QB. That would be IN THE PLAYOFFS!

Just like Marvin and Tammie sang years ago, "It takes two, baby. It just takes two".

I forgot about the CBA, and this does change things. I am open to grabbing O-linemen in the first round with both picks if we can find someone that can develope them.

I just think we have waisted 2 picks (smiley & Harris) out of the five 1st and 2nd round o=line draft picks (Harris/Staley/Rachell/Baas/Smiley) in the past 7 or 8 years and are on the verge of lossing another (Baas) and this is not including the 3rd rounder (snyder) and when you look at how bad the O-line has performed as a whole I think we should be extra careful not to wind up with an all unexperienced players upfront. Didn't the jets have veteran leadership on the line when they took those two guys? I believe they got an all pro from the Steelers in FA that same year correct?
  • TX9R
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,142
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Originally posted by jimbagg:
The fallacy of the FA approach to fixing the OL, is that the CBA is expiring and anyoine with less than 6 years of experience will be an RFA (meaning compensation and/or the right for a team to match any offer), not a UFA, this year. The rules are different for this upcoming FA period. Normally, I would agree with the notion of acquiring veteran talent, in conjunction with draft talent, to upgrade the OL . But, this year the FA market will be a desert.

So, the draft is going to have to be the solution. The Jets had 2 first round picks a few years back, and took both Ferguson and Mangold in the first round. It has happened. It does work. Look at where the Jets are today, even with a rookie QB. That would be IN THE PLAYOFFS!

Just like Marvin and Tammie sang years ago, "It takes two, baby. It just takes two".

I forgot about the CBA, and this does change things. I am open to grabbing O-linemen in the first round with both picks if we can find someone that can develope them.

I just think we have waisted 2 picks (smiley & Harris) out of the five 1st and 2nd round o=line draft picks (Harris/Staley/Rachell/Baas/Smiley) in the past 7 or 8 years and are on the verge of lossing another (Baas) and this is not including the 3rd rounder (snyder) and when you look at how bad the O-line has performed as a whole I think we should be extra careful not to wind up with an all unexperienced players upfront. Didn't the jets have veteran leadership on the line when they took those two guys? I believe they got an all pro from the Steelers in FA that same year correct?

Wrong again (surprise) DBrick and Mangold both started with NY in 2006, Woody was not yet with the team, Faneca came 2 years later as the final piece and isn't the same player he was with the Steelers. Another reason you draft for Oline: good teams don't let good lineman leave while still good. Case in point: every FA lineman the Niners have gotten. Allen had a good 2 years, when healthy, the rest: bums.
Member Milestone: This is post number 1,400 for Overkill.
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.



Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

how often do trades really happen in the NFL?

yeah we had real success with FA linemen, jennings, marvel smith, pashos

Jennings was better than any o-lineman on our current team by far when he was healthy! Marvel never played for us (not healthy), and Pashos went on IR (health issue). So other than health all of our free agents pretty much out played all of our 1st and second round o-line picks outside of Smiley who we decided to let walk because OG's come a dime a dozen right?

We are currently starting ONE first round pick on our OL - Joe Staley. He's the best OL we have, and the only way you can argue Jennings is better is if you ignore the fact Jennings played in less than 50% of his games while he was here.

And, in reference to the bolded above, the "other ways" we could acquire talent in the draft would be spending later picks on them, correct? Show me where Scot did that and it turned out better than Staley.

I'm sorry, but your argument makes no sense.

You may also want to look at how the CBA will impact FA this year. The market won't exactly be flooded with great FA talent this year and we need 2-3 starters. There are maybe one or two aging guards out there that may very well be past their prime and almost no decent OT candidates.

So who would you trade for? Who is being shopped? How much would you give for them? Outline a realistic trade scenario for me because simply throwing out "we can trade for one" is weak. Teams don't just part with decent OL via trade all that often.
Originally posted by Overkill:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.



Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

how often do trades really happen in the NFL?

yeah we had real success with FA linemen, jennings, marvel smith, pashos

Jennings was better than any o-lineman on our current team by far when he was healthy! Marvel never played for us (not healthy), and Pashos went on IR (health issue). So other than health all of our free agents pretty much out played all of our 1st and second round o-line picks outside of Smiley who we decided to let walk because OG's come a dime a dozen right?

We are currently starting ONE first round pick on our OL - Joe Staley. He's the best OL we have, and the only way you can argue Jennings is better is if you ignore the fact Jennings played in less than 50% of his games while he was here.

And, in reference to the bolded above, the "other ways" we could acquire talent in the draft would be spending later picks on them, correct? Show me where Scot did that and it turned out better than Staley.

I'm sorry, but your argument makes no sense.

You may also want to look at how the CBA will impact FA this year. The market won't exactly be flooded with great FA talent this year and we need 2-3 starters. There are maybe one or two aging guards out there that may very well be past their prime and almost no decent OT candidates.

So who would you trade for? Who is being shopped? How much would you give for them? Outline a realistic trade scenario for me because simply throwing out "we can trade for one" is weak. Teams don't just part with decent OL via trade all that often.

Or we could go with the new team motto: "If at first you don't succeed, give up."