OFFENSIVE LINE PLAY: Most Important

Originally posted by Overkill:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Overkill:
Line play is important. But MOST important? I don't know about that. The relationship between an OL & its QB is symbiotic. Each can make the other better or worse.

Indy, Chicago, Philadelphia, Arizona, and Cincinnati (off the top of my head) have all made significant playoff runs in recent memory with question marks on the OL. Green Bay won the SB with an OL that wasn't exactly top notch.

By the time the playoffs began, GB's OL was back intact, and so was the timing of the passing game.

But you are correct, a team can win it all with a question in the OL but not 5 of them. At the beginning of last year, the 49er OL was a complete train wreck. Iupati and Davis were brand new, Baas was a total fish out of water (though he showed surprising improvement in the second half of the year), Staley was hurt, Rachal was, well, Rachal. There was not solid play from anyone on the OL in the first half of last season.

Back in history, the first 49er SB win was with an under-sized guard named Dan Audick playing LT. He was barely adequate in addition to having some emotional issues. Walsh showed his genius by running plays that took advantage of his limited talent while avoiding his liabilities. He could do that because he had studs at the other spots.

Green Bay's struggles at OL weren't simply a product of injuries or limited to a single position. They had shaky play all across the line for most of the season (with the exception of Clifton) and still had huge questions in the playoffs. Bulaga struggled with speed rushers throughout the year, and got owned by Lamar Woodley in the SB (at least 5 pressures). The LG (forgot his name) was the only capable run blocker but also did his best traffic cone impression on passing plays. The RG & C were average (at best) when pass blocking and never got any push when run blocking. This wasn't a line anchored by studs that overcame a few weak spots. And the Green Bay passing attack was effective long before the playoffs. Swap GB's OL for ours and I'm not sure you'd see much of a record change for either team.

The Pittsburgh-AZ SB featured lines with multiple holes on each side, too.

I know this topic comes close to one that makes a lot of zoners lose all rationality, but the truth is that OL & QB affect each other. Any argument about which affects the other more strikes me as a matter of opinion, but in the overall scheme of things, I'd say its obvious QB play is more important than OL play.

Originally posted by Overkill:

I'd say its obvious QB play is more important than OL play.

... and unpredictable, competent scheming trumps both QB and OL. (so long as the players have decent skills to begin with)

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by Overkill:

I'd say its obvious QB play is more important than OL play.

... and unpredictable, competent scheming trumps both QB and OL. (so long as the players have decent skills to begin with)

LOL. Yeah, its tough to overcome bad coaching. No argument there.

I'm excited to see Harbaugh's impact. I'm trying to temper my expectations for the preseason, but its hard. I want to believe again.

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by Overkill:

I'd say its obvious QB play is more important than OL play.

... and unpredictable, competent scheming trumps both QB and OL. (so long as the players have decent skills to begin with)

Well, the good thing is that it is fair to say that both QB and OL played to the level of NFL standard with terrible scheming admittingly, it wasn't to a high or average standard, but it wasn't horrid. This tells me that both WILL (garuantee) improve as the scheme improves. To what degree, who knows.

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by OptimusPrime52:
yep i agree, why do you think we fired our hc? was steve young a bad qb or was tampa bay just a horribly ran franchise making it impossible for him to succeed there? hindsight shows the latter.

The bucs were horrible but were are now comparing Steve Young to Alex Smith, I can't take any part in that comparison.

im not compairing the qbs so much as the situation they were in. steve young didnt put up any numbers until his 7th year in the nfl. now he is sitting in the hof.

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by RichmondPete:
That comment is 100% accurate whether you take it as past tense or present tense. There are more productive and less experienced QBs winning more games than Alex Smith on teams with less talent at OL, and offense in general in the NFL. You think that Ryan Fitzpatrick has a better team around him than Alex Smith?

Ryan Fitzpatrick 4-11 3000 yards 23 tds

Alex Smith 3-9 2370 yards 14 tds

The Bills have far worse talent on offense than the 49ers both at the line and at the skill positions

Originally posted by Marvin49:
Bills didn't have Singletary.

I get your point. I'm not saying that Alex is a great QB, but he's not as bad as peeps make him out to be. He's had the deck stacked against him since the beginning. If you wanted to write an instruction manual on how to make a QB fail it would only read "See Alex Smith".

Maybe he will never amount to anything and wouldn't have even in the best of conditions, but I don't think there is any way of knowing that given the trainwreck he's been subjected to.

Mike Singletary was a horrible coach, but lets not pretend that Alex Smith didn't have some decent coaches too. Mike Martz Mike McCarthy and Norv Turner are all highly respected coaches who were not able to get much out of him. Norv Turners stint was hardly a success with just over 2000 yards and 16 touchdowns.

Alex Smith is not as bad as most 49er fans think he is, but players who have legitimate talent usually shine through even in tough situations. And by shine through I don't mean a monster season, I am talking about a 300 yard 3 touchdown victory against a decent team. Smith has never put together a performance like that even when the team was clicking

Well, he had McCarthy as a ROOKIE and had ZERO help outside of Frank Gore....and even then Gore didn't start the season. Kevan Barlow did. Turner probably got the most out of him (16 TDs and 16 INTs is a huge improvement from 1 TD and 11 INTs) and he never played for Martz. Alex re-injured his shoulder and didn't play a down that season.

He has also had Jeff Hostler, Jimmy Raye, and Mike Johnson (although I think Johnson is decent...he just had to work under Raye and didn't get a full off-season to install HIS version of the O).

Look, I'm not saying Alex is perfect. Not by a long shot. His biggest failing as a player is that he hold the ball too long if he isn't sure. Urban Meyer said he was "non-functional" until he completely learned an offense. Truer words were never spoken. He's never even had the opportunity to learn a complete offense (except for Jimmy Raye's prehistoric version). Alex will hold the ball too long and then throw it away, check it down, or throw a ball too late giving the defender a chance to break it up or make the tackle just as the ball gets there.

Alex's problem is paralysis through analysis.

THATS why I think Harbaugh might be able to "fix" him. I remember interviews with QBs Harbaugh has coached in the past. Josh Johnson, Andrew Luck, and another guy who was the first QB Harbaugh coached at USD. They said that he makes playing QB so much easier because there is alot less grey area involved in the decision making.

Thats EXACTLY what Alex needs. He needs the decisions to be clear cut. He is never going to be a "gunslinger". He is a cerebral player who needs to be sure of his decision before he makes them.

Yeah, thats kinda annoying. Its also why Harbaugh might be exactly what the doctor ordered.

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by dj43:
If all you watch is the ball, then you have missed an ongoing weakness. It was the reason the team spent two high draft choices on OL last year. IMO, OL has been a close second to QB and was VERY often the reason QB play was not better.

I know the OL is not that good but I am sorry there are more productive QBs in the league than Alex Smith who have worse offensive lines than he does.

I won't go into another AS realm but the 49er OL was in the top 5 (worst 5?) in QB pressures/passing attempt last season. I would challenge you to show a comparison between pressures and productivity of QBs. I'm out for the next few hours. Back later.

Originally posted by Overkill:

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by Overkill:

I'd say its obvious QB play is more important than OL play.

... and unpredictable, competent scheming trumps both QB and OL. (so long as the players have decent skills to begin with)

LOL. Yeah, its tough to overcome bad coaching. No argument there.

I'm excited to see Harbaugh's impact. I'm trying to temper my expectations for the preseason, but its hard. I want to believe again.

As long as you don't go over the deep end after 1 preseason game, you will be ahead and above the majority here, I suspect.

Originally posted by Joecool:
Well, the good thing is that it is fair to say that both QB and OL played to the level of NFL standard with terrible scheming admittingly, it wasn't to a high or average standard, but it wasn't horrid. This tells me that both WILL (garuantee) improve as the scheme improves. To what degree, who knows.

Glad to hear you predict as much. Let's just see how long you keep this open minded persona this time.

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Bluefalcon61:
I'm willing to go out on a limb that no other NFL team in the past 5-7 years has invested as many high round draft picks on offensive linemen. Our O-line coaches have had good credentials and while they have had some success at run blocking, pass blocking has been a constant problem.

Why? Why?

I beg to differ in that George Warhop has been stealing money for years an as "OL coach." The guy was not good. I applauded when he was let go in mid-season, IIRC.

As to your main point, I believe that both Nolan and Singletary put so much emphasis on running the ball that they did not spend adequate amount of time on pass protect. Also, too much of the time was spent in man blocking which is very difficult to pass protect in, especially once the defense figures you out and start to loop and stunts. Though Chilo has had enough problems for which there are not excuses, one thing I will NOT fault him on is the many times he was beaten when in an obvious man scheme and the defense looped or stunted and he wound up blocking air.

Whoop! Quotes are working!

It will be interesting to see how the line plays, but also how the backups play. I expect to see at least one, perhaps two, Stanford linemen to make the team as backups. Not necessarily because they are more talented than the "other guys," but because they know the Harbaugh offensive system and are well grounded in it.

Bill Walsh inheirited a GREAT line when he came onboard in 1978, but it was just as unheralded and full of questions marks as our current line is. Nobody would ever guess that Randy Cross, John Ayers, Fred Quillan, Keith Fahnhorst would pave the way to two or three Super Bowl titles. But they did. And nobody knew who the kids were in 1978. Nobody knew how they would perform -- nor how well they would grow together as a unit.

You can give all the credit in the world to Bill Walsh for those Super Bowl titles, and it's well deserved. But it's Monte Clarke who drafted and built that line, and nobody gives Monte any credit.

My thanks to the people who are working on getting the bugs out of the new system. It's much improved today!

Good history. I was shocked when Clark was fired. The team had just come off a nice season and there seemed to be no justification for it.

Credit also to Bobb McKittrick for blending it all together.

Originally posted by Marvin49:
Well, he had McCarthy as a ROOKIE and had ZERO help outside of Frank Gore....and even then Gore didn't start the season. Kevan Barlow did. Turner probably got the most out of him (16 TDs and 16 INTs is a huge improvement from 1 TD and 11 INTs) and he never played for Martz. Alex re-injured his shoulder and didn't play a down that season.

He has also had Jeff Hostler, Jimmy Raye, and Mike Johnson (although I think Johnson is decent...he just had to work under Raye and didn't get a full off-season to install HIS version of the O).

Look, I'm not saying Alex is perfect. Not by a long shot. His biggest failing as a player is that he hold the ball too long if he isn't sure. Urban Meyer said he was "non-functional" until he completely learned an offense. Truer words were never spoken. He's never even had the opportunity to learn a complete offense (except for Jimmy Raye's prehistoric version). Alex will hold the ball too long and then throw it away, check it down, or throw a ball too late giving the defender a chance to break it up or make the tackle just as the ball gets there.

Alex's problem is paralysis through analysis.

THATS why I think Harbaugh might be able to "fix" him. I remember interviews with QBs Harbaugh has coached in the past. Josh Johnson, Andrew Luck, and another guy who was the first QB Harbaugh coached at USD. They said that he makes playing QB so much easier because there is alot less grey area involved in the decision making.

Thats EXACTLY what Alex needs. He needs the decisions to be clear cut. He is never going to be a "gunslinger". He is a cerebral player who needs to be sure of his decision before he makes them.

Yeah, thats kinda annoying. Its also why Harbaugh might be exactly what the doctor ordered.

The arugment of coaching stopped for me when I saw Tim Rattay, Shaun Hill, Trent Dilfer, JT O'Sulliven and Troy Smith all play better under the same circumstances.

I am hopeful Harbaugh can win, no matter who is playing QB I hope for their success.

Originally posted by Overkill:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Overkill:
Line play is important. But MOST important? I don't know about that. The relationship between an OL & its QB is symbiotic. Each can make the other better or worse.

Indy, Chicago, Philadelphia, Arizona, and Cincinnati (off the top of my head) have all made significant playoff runs in recent memory with question marks on the OL. Green Bay won the SB with an OL that wasn't exactly top notch.

By the time the playoffs began, GB's OL was back intact, and so was the timing of the passing game.

But you are correct, a team can win it all with a question in the OL but not 5 of them. At the beginning of last year, the 49er OL was a complete train wreck. Iupati and Davis were brand new, Baas was a total fish out of water (though he showed surprising improvement in the second half of the year), Staley was hurt, Rachal was, well, Rachal. There was not solid play from anyone on the OL in the first half of last season.

Back in history, the first 49er SB win was with an under-sized guard named Dan Audick playing LT. He was barely adequate in addition to having some emotional issues. Walsh showed his genius by running plays that took advantage of his limited talent while avoiding his liabilities. He could do that because he had studs at the other spots.

Green Bay's struggles at OL weren't simply a product of injuries or limited to a single position. They had shaky play all across the line for most of the season (with the exception of Clifton) and still had huge questions in the playoffs. Bulaga struggled with speed rushers throughout the year, and got owned by Lamar Woodley in the SB (at least 5 pressures). The LG (forgot his name) was the only capable run blocker but also did his best traffic cone impression on passing plays. The RG & C were average (at best) when pass blocking and never got any push when run blocking. This wasn't a line anchored by studs that overcame a few weak spots. And the Green Bay passing attack was effective long before the playoffs. Swap GB's OL for ours and I'm not sure you'd see much of a record change for either team.

The Pittsburgh-AZ SB featured lines with multiple holes on each side, too.

I know this topic comes close to one that makes a lot of zoners lose all rationality, but the truth is that OL & QB affect each other. Any argument about which affects the other more strikes me as a matter of opinion, but in the overall scheme of things, I'd say its obvious QB play is more important than OL play.

I don't disagree. My point is only to emphasize that it is not just all QB. We are talking about a matter of degrees here.

Originally posted by dj43:
I won't go into another AS realm but the 49er OL was in the top 5 (worst 5?) in QB pressures/passing attempt last season. I would challenge you to show a comparison between pressures and productivity of QBs. I'm out for the next few hours. Back later.

As I said before. Much of the blame goes to Alex Smith for the poor oline play. I am not going to waste my time gathering offensive line statistics as I don't believe in statistics to assess the play of a group of players that don't touch the ball. I will assume what you say is true and challenge you to find the 4 offensive lines worse than ours over the span you are talking about and find the production of the QBs on those teams. I bet 3 of the 5 will have better production than Smith on a per game basis

Originally posted by RichmondPete:

Originally posted by Marvin49:
Well, he had McCarthy as a ROOKIE and had ZERO help outside of Frank Gore....and even then Gore didn't start the season. Kevan Barlow did. Turner probably got the most out of him (16 TDs and 16 INTs is a huge improvement from 1 TD and 11 INTs) and he never played for Martz. Alex re-injured his shoulder and didn't play a down that season.

He has also had Jeff Hostler, Jimmy Raye, and Mike Johnson (although I think Johnson is decent...he just had to work under Raye and didn't get a full off-season to install HIS version of the O).

Look, I'm not saying Alex is perfect. Not by a long shot. His biggest failing as a player is that he hold the ball too long if he isn't sure. Urban Meyer said he was "non-functional" until he completely learned an offense. Truer words were never spoken. He's never even had the opportunity to learn a complete offense (except for Jimmy Raye's prehistoric version). Alex will hold the ball too long and then throw it away, check it down, or throw a ball too late giving the defender a chance to break it up or make the tackle just as the ball gets there.

Alex's problem is paralysis through analysis.

THATS why I think Harbaugh might be able to "fix" him. I remember interviews with QBs Harbaugh has coached in the past. Josh Johnson, Andrew Luck, and another guy who was the first QB Harbaugh coached at USD. They said that he makes playing QB so much easier because there is alot less grey area involved in the decision making.

Thats EXACTLY what Alex needs. He needs the decisions to be clear cut. He is never going to be a "gunslinger". He is a cerebral player who needs to be sure of his decision before he makes them.

Yeah, thats kinda annoying. Its also why Harbaugh might be exactly what the doctor ordered.

The arugment of coaching stopped for me when I saw Tim Rattay, Shaun Hill, Trent Dilfer, JT O'Sulliven and Troy Smith all play better under the same circumstances.

I am hopeful Harbaugh can win, no matter who is playing QB I hope for their success.

Rattay, Benched. Hill, Benched. Dilfer, Benched. O'Sullivan, Benched. T. Smith, Benched.

If you think it has nothing to do with the coaching, then we really don't have anything more to talk about.

I really want to see the progression of Anthony Davis because if he can play good we can have a good OLINE!