Finally were just one player away from a oline!

Yep...I don't see Harbaugh having a lot of patience w/Chilo...he'll either have to really step it up or he'll be gone. Would love to see them draft an OG, or a guy who can play both OT and OG. Snyder is much more consistent at RG, but his biggest value is coming off the bench to play virtually everywhere but C. They need to re-sign Baas before the CBA expires...I trust they will. Like many in this forum, I called for him to play C for quite some time. He asserted himself very well...and is a tough inside presence that was much-needed.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by 9erred:
Better O line

LT AD
LG Iupati
Center Heitmann
RG Snyder
RT Staley.

Back up LT-Sims
Back up RT Boone
Back Up Guard Racal
Back up Center/guard Wragge

No need to draft OL or get any in FA this year.

Anthony Davis can't even handle RT. How is going to handle LT?...

Probably because LT is his natural position, that being said i would not trust him as a LT at this point in his career, maybe in a year or two

A couple of things. I don't buy the notion that a great line makes a great quarterback. Green Bay doesn't have a great line. They have an average line with a great quarterback and great weapons at his disposal. Jennings, Driver, Nelson, Jones. The same can be said about Indy only their line isn't adequate it's been downright horrible since Glenn retired. They rank last in rushing every year and the only thing keeping that offense going is Peyton and his weapons. Clark and Collie go down and that offense takes a serious hit.

I'm not saying the line doesn't make a quarterback better because it does, but not to the extent people want it to. With a great line Smith might get to a Cassel or Dilfer level, but the reality is great quarterbacks are great quiarterbacks because they can beat before the play even starts.

Originally posted by tjd808185:
A couple of things. I don't buy the notion that a great line makes a great quarterback. Green Bay doesn't have a great line. They have an average line with a great quarterback and great weapons at his disposal. Jennings, Driver, Nelson, Jones. The same can be said about Indy only their line isn't adequate it's been downright horrible since Glenn retired. They rank last in rushing every year and the only thing keeping that offense going is Peyton and his weapons. Clark and Collie go down and that offense takes a serious hit.

I'm not saying the line doesn't make a quarterback better because it does, but not to the extent people want it to. With a great line Smith might get to a Cassel or Dilfer level, but the reality is great quarterbacks are great quiarterbacks because they can beat before the play even starts.

It sounds like your assessment of GB's line has been influenced by their play in the first half of the season when they had a a lot of injuries. After Chad Clifton got healthy, they played VERY well. They even allowed James Stark (who?) to have a nice season running the ball.

Is it a GREAT line? No, but it is VERY good. In the playoffs they allowed Rodgers 3.5+ seconds on most throws. That kind of time helped AR to SB MVP status.

Originally posted by tjd808185:
A couple of things. I don't buy the notion that a great line makes a great quarterback. Green Bay doesn't have a great line. They have an average line with a great quarterback and great weapons at his disposal. Jennings, Driver, Nelson, Jones. The same can be said about Indy only their line isn't adequate it's been downright horrible since Glenn retired. They rank last in rushing every year and the only thing keeping that offense going is Peyton and his weapons. Clark and Collie go down and that offense takes a serious hit.

I'm not saying the line doesn't make a quarterback better because it does, but not to the extent people want it to. With a great line Smith might get to a Cassel or Dilfer level, but the reality is great quarterbacks are great quiarterbacks because they can beat before the play even starts.

I really can't think of a QB who became great behind a bad line. Indy's line is not a bad line just not as dominant as it had been. Manning did not have as much time as usual...4 seconds...but he still had plenty of time most often. Of course that was also due to his ability to audible to quick reads, etc. He is a master of the game.

The 9er lines in the 80s tended to be undersized but they were tenacious and, at times, dirty. Their attitude was all out war to protect their QB. I do not want to get into our situation because there were too many bad things going on to judge the line other than to say they were part of the problem.

Hmm...was Fran Tarkenton a great QB? He is the only QB I can think of who consistently bought more time for himself despite the line. But he bought minutes, not seconds!