49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Spot on! Like I always say...these are conscious decisions. Calculated risks.

Sometimes they are the right moves. Sometimes, clearly not. We need to remember that this FO is very fallible and not every move and non-move they make is going to prove best. Not every philosophy they subscribe to is going to work either.

Hence, why this thread continues on annually (not addressed properly). And on the contrary, hence why the defensive line and pass rush threads are dead now (addressed properly).

My dear Watson your powers of deduction cannot be argued with

LOL. Squeaky wheel gets the grease, right?

Originally posted by NCommand:
Spot on! Like I always say...these are conscious decisions. Calculated risks.

Sometimes they are the right moves. Sometimes, clearly not. We need to remember that this FO is very fallible and not every move and non-move they make is going to prove best. Not every philosophy they subscribe to is going to work either.

Hence, why this thread continues on annually (not addressed properly). And on the contrary, hence why the defensive line and pass rush threads are dead now (addressed properly).

Being that the team went from 4-12 and the 2nd pick overall to the SB it's hard to argue they didn't make the right moves.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Spot on! Like I always say...these are conscious decisions. Calculated risks.

Sometimes they are the right moves. Sometimes, clearly not. We need to remember that this FO is very fallible and not every move and non-move they make is going to prove best. Not every philosophy they subscribe to is going to work either.

Hence, why this thread continues on annually (not addressed properly). And on the contrary, hence why the defensive line and pass rush threads are dead now (addressed properly).

Being that the team went from 4-12 and the 2nd pick overall to the SB it's hard to argue they didn't make the right moves.

No, it just means they made far more correct decisions over the first three off seasons. That doesn't mean they don't have blind spots and weaknesses and reassess themselves every off season accordingly. And even Championship caliber teams still have weaknesses too they'd like to improve upon.

Looks like he's staying at T for Brady.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Spot on! Like I always say...these are conscious decisions. Calculated risks.

Sometimes they are the right moves. Sometimes, clearly not. We need to remember that this FO is very fallible and not every move and non-move they make is going to prove best. Not every philosophy they subscribe to is going to work either.

Hence, why this thread continues on annually (not addressed properly). And on the contrary, hence why the defensive line and pass rush threads are dead now (addressed properly).

Being that the team went from 4-12 and the 2nd pick overall to the SB it's hard to argue they didn't make the right moves.

If a top 2 RB and middle of the pack PP is a teams big weakness, I'll gladly take it.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Spot on! Like I always say...these are conscious decisions. Calculated risks.

Sometimes they are the right moves. Sometimes, clearly not. We need to remember that this FO is very fallible and not every move and non-move they make is going to prove best. Not every philosophy they subscribe to is going to work either.

Hence, why this thread continues on annually (not addressed properly). And on the contrary, hence why the defensive line and pass rush threads are dead now (addressed properly).

Being that the team went from 4-12 and the 2nd pick overall to the SB it's hard to argue they didn't make the right moves.

If a top 2 RB and middle of the pack PP is a teams big weakness, I'll gladly take it.

100%. This is just improving your weaknesses to give you the best chance at bringing home 6. Chiefs, Saints, etc. have weaknesses too.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Spot on! Like I always say...these are conscious decisions. Calculated risks.

Sometimes they are the right moves. Sometimes, clearly not. We need to remember that this FO is very fallible and not every move and non-move they make is going to prove best. Not every philosophy they subscribe to is going to work either.

Hence, why this thread continues on annually (not addressed properly). And on the contrary, hence why the defensive line and pass rush threads are dead now (addressed properly).

Being that the team went from 4-12 and the 2nd pick overall to the SB it's hard to argue they didn't make the right moves.

If a top 2 RB and middle of the pack PP is a teams big weakness, I'll gladly take it.

100%. This is just improving your weaknesses to give you the best chance at bringing home 6. Chiefs, Saints, etc. have weaknesses too.

My question is is he really a top two running back or is Kyle's system and the running backs coach making him a top two running back while he's in San Francisco?

Originally posted by NCommand:
Haha. Perfect word though...road grading. That is true. Until they had to pass, then things got real.

How are you feeling about the current situation?

We keep debating whether a 1st round pick is of value but ignoring the trainwreck that's on our back door. Isn't that proof enough that their current strategy isn't working?

Richburg is a known product that should never be counted on for anything. Brunskill is still mostly an unknown product. Compton is known garbage? McKivitz in the 5th and one of the weakest OL ever. He and Skule are now working at G and both were brought in as T's. Garland's ankle is bad. Person is gone. Brunskill should be solely focused on RG but is now playing C. Kyle's bringing in every last second OL off the streets.

At what point does one say, "Ya know, maybe we should have added more talent to the OL."

It's not like all the warning signs weren't cut out for you coming into the off season esp. after the Superbowl.

Keep in mind adding Trent Williams is adding a first round/first pick kind of talent level - so I disagree about your point ..we should have added more talent to the OL .

Having said that - Laken is solid, and McGlinchy will be better in his 3rd year, going against Bosa, Ford and company. The unknowns are the backups behind Richburg, and the right guard. If Richburg is there that line becomes more solid. He should be back around mid-season. In the meantime McKivits, Skule, Brunskill, and Garland -- are viying for those two spots (plus backing up the rest of the OLine positions). I think that's pretty good additions to a percieved weakness. Randy Cross and Jesse Sapulu cross trained between Guard and Center and did just fine. Having McKivits, Skule, Brunskil, and Garland cross train between Guard and Center - will simply add more versatility with very minor detractions.

The overall design of this offense is predicated on agility, quickness, speed and intelligence. Strength is important, but not ALL-important. So in building this particular line, you look to the side to side nature of this offense. They like to draw the defense to one side (or the other) and create space for the receivers and the runners on the opposit side - to run in space and break tackles and score. Kyle seems to get a feel for what the defense is doing, and once he keyes into the DC's mindset, he'll hit him with an explosive counter or fake and explode into a score. Strength would be more important in a Bo Shembechler/Al Davis off-tackle offense. Madden's OLinemen were *Huge* and powerful. Positioning is more important in Kyle's offense, and hence the speed and agility aspect of it. You don't need to road grade a DLineman that's going in the wrong direction, you just need to help him go in the wrong direction, and when he figures out he's going the wrong way, just get in his way when he changes his mind.

Watching Skule and Brunskill last year, they have good strength - but more importantly they demonstrated that they have good balance, agility, and quickness playing at the tackle positions. Skule is 5.23/40; Brunskill 5.2/40 (both are faster than Kittle) -- SPEED is important in this offense, because of the side to side nature of it. (deferring to any strength and conditioning coaches) I think strength can be developed over time, but not quickness, speed and agility. Those are god given and you either have it or not, and I don't know of any techniques that can *significantly* alter those characteristics. So why not draft agile OLinemen in the 5th round (and later) who are perceived as weak, but have good SPEED, agility and quickness and *intelligence* and just have a good offseason strength and conditioning program to develop your OLInemen? Why not sign free agent OLinemen who are first round talent but haven't done well in other offenses for cheap, so long as they meet the criteria of speed, quickness and agility?

Ideally, for Center (or any position on the OLine), I'd love a OLineman like Mike Webster/Alex Mack. Intelligent, agile, fast (5.17/40). and strong.

Alex Mack - Center, California
6'4", 316 lbs, Age: 23
Senior
Strengths: He's got ideal size for a center and has the smarts to go along with it, and is considered a great technician who understands leverage and angles. Has the aggressiveness and physicality to go along with a nasty killer instinct. Mack is a strong and powerful athlete who is known to be a "gym rat". Has lots of experience, since he was a four year starter at Cal after red-shirting his freshman year.

.

Originally posted by fan49:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Spot on! Like I always say...these are conscious decisions. Calculated risks.

Sometimes they are the right moves. Sometimes, clearly not. We need to remember that this FO is very fallible and not every move and non-move they make is going to prove best. Not every philosophy they subscribe to is going to work either.

Hence, why this thread continues on annually (not addressed properly). And on the contrary, hence why the defensive line and pass rush threads are dead now (addressed properly).

Being that the team went from 4-12 and the 2nd pick overall to the SB it's hard to argue they didn't make the right moves.

If a top 2 RB and middle of the pack PP is a teams big weakness, I'll gladly take it.

100%. This is just improving your weaknesses to give you the best chance at bringing home 6. Chiefs, Saints, etc. have weaknesses too.

My question is is he really a top two running back or is Kyle's system and the running backs coach making him a top two running back while he's in San Francisco?

Yeah, in terms of team needs and weaknesses, RB is very far down the list IMHO.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Haha. Perfect word though...road grading. That is true. Until they had to pass, then things got real.

How are you feeling about the current situation?

We keep debating whether a 1st round pick is of value but ignoring the trainwreck that's on our back door. Isn't that proof enough that their current strategy isn't working?

Richburg is a known product that should never be counted on for anything. Brunskill is still mostly an unknown product. Compton is known garbage? McKivitz in the 5th and one of the weakest OL ever. He and Skule are now working at G and both were brought in as T's. Garland's ankle is bad. Person is gone. Brunskill should be solely focused on RG but is now playing C. Kyle's bringing in every last second OL off the streets.

At what point does one say, "Ya know, maybe we should have added more talent to the OL."

It's not like all the warning signs weren't cut out for you coming into the off season esp. after the Superbowl.

Keep in mind adding Trent Williams is adding a first round/first pick kind of talent level - so I disagree about your point ..we should have added more talent to the OL .

Having said that - Laken is solid, and McGlinchy will be better in his 3rd year, going against Bosa, Ford and company. The unknowns are the backups behind Richburg, and the right guard. If Richburg is there that line becomes more solid. He should be back around mid-season. In the meantime McKivits, Skule, Brunskill, and Garland -- are viying for those two spots (plus backing up the rest of the OLine positions). I think that's pretty good additions to a percieved weakness. Randy Cross and Jesse Sapulu cross trained between Guard and Center and did just fine. Having McKivits, Skule, Brunskil, and Garland cross train between Guard and Center - will simply add more versatility with very minor detractions.

The overall design of this offense is predicated on agility, quickness, speed and intelligence. Strength is important, but not ALL-important. So in building this particular line, you look to the side to side nature of this offense. They like to draw the defense to one side (or the other) and create space for the receivers and the runners on the opposit side - to run in space and break tackles and score. Kyle seems to get a feel for what the defense is doing, and once he keyes into the DC's mindset, he'll hit him with an explosive counter or fake and explode into a score. Strength would be more important in a Bo Shembechler/Al Davis off-tackle offense. Madden's OLinemen were *Huge* and powerful. Positioning is more important in Kyle's offense, and hence the speed and agility aspect of it. You don't need to road grade a DLineman that's going in the wrong direction, you just need to help him go in the wrong direction, and when he figures out he's going the wrong way, just get in his way when he changes his mind.

Watching Skule and Brunskill last year, they have good strength - but more importantly they demonstrated that they have good balance, agility, and quickness playing at the tackle positions. Skule is 5.23/40; Brunskill 5.2/40 (both are faster than Kittle) -- SPEED is important in this offense, because of the side to side nature of it. (deferring to any strength and conditioning coaches) I think strength can be developed over time, but not quickness, speed and agility. Those are god given and you either have it or not, and I don't know of any techniques that can *significantly* alter those characteristics. So why not draft agile OLinemen in the 5th round (and later) who are perceived as weak, but have good SPEED, agility and quickness and *intelligence* and just have a good offseason strength and conditioning program to develop your OLInemen? Why not sign free agent OLinemen who are first round talent but haven't done well in other offenses for cheap, so long as they meet the criteria of speed, quickness and agility?

Ideally, for Center (or any position on the OLine), I'd love a OLineman like Mike Webster/Alex Mack. Intelligent, agile, fast (5.17/40). and strong.

Alex Mack - Center, California
6'4", 316 lbs, Age: 23
Senior
Strengths: He's got ideal size for a center and has the smarts to go along with it, and is considered a great technician who understands leverage and angles. Has the aggressiveness and physicality to go along with a nasty killer instinct. Mack is a strong and powerful athlete who is known to be a "gym rat". Has lots of experience, since he was a four year starter at Cal after red-shirting his freshman year.

.

But you didn't add talent at LT...you simply swapped it out. If you still had Staley and then added TW, that's adding talent to the starting 5. In fact, without Richburg, you've removed talent and talent you gained at RG over Person (Brunskill), is now playing C.

TW = Staley
Tomlinson = Tomlinson
Brunskill < Richburg/Garland
Compton < Person
McGlinchey = McGlinchey

Net loss, actually AND the depth is already being used and we haven't played a game yet. Skule and McKivitz are now forced to try out at G. Hot mess. And you just know the injuries are just getting started too esp. in this system. The OL group is always hammered annually.

You know I agree with the rest of your novel though. LOL

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Haha. Perfect word though...road grading. That is true. Until they had to pass, then things got real.

How are you feeling about the current situation?

We keep debating whether a 1st round pick is of value but ignoring the trainwreck that's on our back door. Isn't that proof enough that their current strategy isn't working?

Richburg is a known product that should never be counted on for anything. Brunskill is still mostly an unknown product. Compton is known garbage? McKivitz in the 5th and one of the weakest OL ever. He and Skule are now working at G and both were brought in as T's. Garland's ankle is bad. Person is gone. Brunskill should be solely focused on RG but is now playing C. Kyle's bringing in every last second OL off the streets.

At what point does one say, "Ya know, maybe we should have added more talent to the OL."

It's not like all the warning signs weren't cut out for you coming into the off season esp. after the Superbowl.

Keep in mind adding Trent Williams is adding a first round/first pick kind of talent level - so I disagree about your point ..we should have added more talent to the OL .

Having said that - Laken is solid, and McGlinchy will be better in his 3rd year, going against Bosa, Ford and company. The unknowns are the backups behind Richburg, and the right guard. If Richburg is there that line becomes more solid. He should be back around mid-season. In the meantime McKivits, Skule, Brunskill, and Garland -- are viying for those two spots (plus backing up the rest of the OLine positions). I think that's pretty good additions to a percieved weakness. Randy Cross and Jesse Sapulu cross trained between Guard and Center and did just fine. Having McKivits, Skule, Brunskil, and Garland cross train between Guard and Center - will simply add more versatility with very minor detractions.

The overall design of this offense is predicated on agility, quickness, speed and intelligence. Strength is important, but not ALL-important. So in building this particular line, you look to the side to side nature of this offense. They like to draw the defense to one side (or the other) and create space for the receivers and the runners on the opposit side - to run in space and break tackles and score. Kyle seems to get a feel for what the defense is doing, and once he keyes into the DC's mindset, he'll hit him with an explosive counter or fake and explode into a score. Strength would be more important in a Bo Shembechler/Al Davis off-tackle offense. Madden's OLinemen were *Huge* and powerful. Positioning is more important in Kyle's offense, and hence the speed and agility aspect of it. You don't need to road grade a DLineman that's going in the wrong direction, you just need to help him go in the wrong direction, and when he figures out he's going the wrong way, just get in his way when he changes his mind.

Watching Skule and Brunskill last year, they have good strength - but more importantly they demonstrated that they have good balance, agility, and quickness playing at the tackle positions. Skule is 5.23/40; Brunskill 5.2/40 (both are faster than Kittle) -- SPEED is important in this offense, because of the side to side nature of it. (deferring to any strength and conditioning coaches) I think strength can be developed over time, but not quickness, speed and agility. Those are god given and you either have it or not, and I don't know of any techniques that can *significantly* alter those characteristics. So why not draft agile OLinemen in the 5th round (and later) who are perceived as weak, but have good SPEED, agility and quickness and *intelligence* and just have a good offseason strength and conditioning program to develop your OLInemen? Why not sign free agent OLinemen who are first round talent but haven't done well in other offenses for cheap, so long as they meet the criteria of speed, quickness and agility?

Ideally, for Center (or any position on the OLine), I'd love a OLineman like Mike Webster/Alex Mack. Intelligent, agile, fast (5.17/40). and strong.

Alex Mack - Center, California
6'4", 316 lbs, Age: 23
Senior
Strengths: He's got ideal size for a center and has the smarts to go along with it, and is considered a great technician who understands leverage and angles. Has the aggressiveness and physicality to go along with a nasty killer instinct. Mack is a strong and powerful athlete who is known to be a "gym rat". Has lots of experience, since he was a four year starter at Cal after red-shirting his freshman year.

.

But you didn't add talent at LT...you simply swapped it out. If you still had Staley and then added TW, that's adding talent to the starting 5. In fact, without Richburg, you've removed talent and talent you gained at RG over Person (Brunskill), is now playing C.

TW = Staley
Tomlinson = Tomlinson
Brunskill < Richburg/Garland
Compton < Person
McGlinchey = McGlinchey

Net loss, actually AND the depth is already being used and we haven't played a game yet. Skule and McKivitz are now forced to try out at G. Hot mess. And you just know the injuries are just getting started too esp. in this system. The OL group is always hammered annually.

You know I agree with the rest of your novel though. LOL

This seems very hindsighty (if even a word lol). They are down to their 4th C due to injuries and a retirement, so let's not act like this was by design that Brunskill was the C and Compton the RG.
TW>Staley
Tomlinson = Tomlinson
Richburg/Garland = Richburg/Garland
Brunskill > Person
MM= MM

Seems to me they did a good job improving the line and PP

Originally posted by NCommand:
But you didn't add talent at LT...you simply swapped it out. If you still had Staley and then added TW, that's adding talent to the starting 5. In fact, without Richburg, you've removed talent and talent you gained at RG over Person (Brunskill), is now playing C.

TW = Staley
Tomlinson = Tomlinson
Brunskill < Richburg/Garland
Compton < Person
McGlinchey = McGlinchey

Net loss, actually AND the depth is already being used and we haven't played a game yet. Skule and McKivitz are now forced to try out at G. Hot mess. And you just know the injuries are just getting started too esp. in this system. The OL group is always hammered annually.

You know I agree with the rest of your novel though. LOL

They added Trent Williams, and McKivitz. They *added* talent. Without Trent, they would have moved McGlinchy to LT and probably have McKivitz at McGlincy's former spot. They continued to develop Skule and Brunskill. I think if our strength and conditioning coaches are worth their salt, Skule and Brunskill **should** be stronger than last year. So in that sense, Skule and Brunskill are *added* talent by developing them in the offseason. To say that they *forced* Staley to retire so they could add Trent -- so as to prove your statement that it was a so called a Wash is very Sus-like of you. I'm not going fall for those Sus-like machinations.

Your real question is - is the offensive line more or less talented than last year. My assessment is that they *should* be more talented than last year. Trent is a younger and bigger version of Staley, Tomlinson, McGlinchey are playing in the same position as last year so at least 3/5th of the line is *as talented* or *more talented* than last year. If you take a look at center, all four Skule/Brunskill/McKivitz/Reynolds are all capable -- some may not have the experience, but they do have the talent to play at the two spots (Center and Right Guard). Whereas last year we had only Mike Person at Right Guard. Glad he's gone. Finally, as the season wears on and as the new members of the OLine play more with the established veterans of that line, the synchronicity and chemistry of that line will continue to improve.

Regarding injuries -- medical staff has to continue to invest in research and development to get better on treating and preventing injuries, for sure, but I think ShanaLynch is using the injuries in a positive way. They are building depth wherever there is an injury. I think - overall, the OLine is significantly deeper than last year in terms of player talent. I think the injuries have forced the personnel and scouting department to work harder at looking three or sometimes four deep at certain places (like WR) so they have the replacement pieces in place just in case. (Tavon and Jennings this year vs only Goodwin last year) They are using injuries to rest the veterans and allow the depth to get reps and experience just in case. They are bringing in more WR's, OLinemen etc... to try out and to see who might be good depth. Keep in mind, Richburg coming back mid-season should add to our depth at that point, so would the non-football and PUP players be additional depth as they heal up as the season wears on and we need new bodies in place.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
This seems very hindsighty (if even a word lol). They are down to their 4th C due to injuries and a retirement, so let's not act like this was by design that Brunskill was the C and Compton the RG.
TW>Staley
Tomlinson = Tomlinson
Richburg/Garland = Richburg/Garland
Brunskill > Person
MM= MM

Seems to me they did a good job improving the line and PP

You said what I said with less words!

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

This seems very hindsighty (if even a word lol). They are down to their 4th C due to injuries and a retirement, so let's not act like this was by design that Brunskill was the C and Compton the RG.
TW>Staley
Tomlinson = Tomlinson
Richburg/Garland = Richburg/Garland
Brunskill > Person
MM= MM

Seems to me they did a good job improving the line and PP

You said what I said with less words!

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

This seems very hindsighty (if even a word lol). They are down to their 4th C due to injuries and a retirement, so let's not act like this was by design that Brunskill was the C and Compton the RG.
TW>Staley
Tomlinson = Tomlinson
Richburg/Garland = Richburg/Garland
Brunskill > Person
MM= MM

Seems to me they did a good job improving the line and PP

You said what I said with less words!

Meanwhile, in reality: