49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by NYniner85:

what does that thread have to do with your hypothesis based on the OL (which is what we're discussing)? We've been banged up OVERALL for yrs, even during the Harbs administration....all those teams in the top (including ours) have ran MULIPLE offenses and defenses schemes. Players on ALL of those teams are big/small/short/tall etc.... It's not just OZ or "smaller" IOL like you keep proclaiming.

Until you have some actual hard data to backup your claim regarding OZ = more injuries, it's pure speculation nothing more.

I'm too blunt to be in politics lol you on the other hand would be great...moving goalposts to fit a narrative and I mean that in the nicest way possible.

You are aware OL injuries are a big part of the overall team injuries. In fact, no position group has been hit harder over the past 4 years and year 5 is already on par with that trend and they haven't started a game yet. Those are the facts.

As to speculating or theorizing on why that is, asking 300 pound men to think that much, execute that much, run that much and move that much with extra bodies flying around, that's just a theory. When the evidence is consistent for YEARS it's moved off of, "It's just football."

The evidence pointed to a consistent theme. That theme lead to a theory for OUR team. No need to minimize it. I'll save you the suspense and tell you right now year 5 will be just like 1, 2, 3 & 4. Will you take notice then?

Maybe you have a better theory?

Originally posted by NCommand:

You are aware OL injuries are a big part of the overall team injuries. In fact, no position group has been hit harder over the past 4 years and year 5 is already on par with that trend and they haven't started a game yet. Those are the facts.

As to speculating or theorizing on why that is, asking 300 pound men to think that much, execute that much, run that much and move that much with extra bodies flying around, that's just a theory. When the evidence is consistent for YEARS it's moved off of, "It's just football."

The evidence pointed to a consistent theme. That theme lead to a theory for OUR team. No need to minimize it. I'll save you the suspense and tell year right now year 5 will be just like 1, 2, 3 & 4.

Maybe you have a better theory?

SF ran some form of zone blocking this past season 55% of the time. Less then in previous yrs yet injuries still happened.

The trenches in general (both sides) tend to get injured more than any other group. It's the nature of the position. That's my theory lol. Not that deep.

All those teams in your thread have run various schemes with different coaching staffs and yet dudes get hurt.

It's the nature of the sport, it's not some conspiracy theory.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

You are aware OL injuries are a big part of the overall team injuries. In fact, no position group has been hit harder over the past 4 years and year 5 is already on par with that trend and they haven't started a game yet. Those are the facts.

As to speculating or theorizing on why that is, asking 300 pound men to think that much, execute that much, run that much and move that much with extra bodies flying around, that's just a theory. When the evidence is consistent for YEARS it's moved off of, "It's just football."

The evidence pointed to a consistent theme. That theme lead to a theory for OUR team. No need to minimize it. I'll save you the suspense and tell year right now year 5 will be just like 1, 2, 3 & 4.

Maybe you have a better theory?

SF ran some form of zone blocking this past season 55% of the time. Less then in previous yrs yet injuries still happened.

The trenches in general (both sides) tend to get injured more than any other group. It's the nature of the position. That's my theory lol. Not that deep.

All those teams in your thread have run various schemes with different coaching staffs and yet dudes get hurt.

It's the nature of the sport, it's not some conspiracy theory.

And the other 45% are the variant schemes I noted previously. It's not the scheme as it is the ask and the volume of that ask that has me theorizing.

Why is theorizing about an evidence-based theme a conspiracy theory to you? That's the art of minimizing.

In the end, it doesn't matter what you and I think as the facts speak for themselves. I'd just like to talk about why that may be. No need to turn that into a conspiracy theory.

Originally posted by NCommand:

And the other 45% are the variant schemes I noted previously. It's not the scheme as it is the ask and the volume of that ask that has me theorizing.

Why is theorizing about an evidence-based theme a conspiracy theory to you? That's the art of minimizing.

In the end, it doesn't matter what you and I think as the facts speak for themselves. I'd just like to talk about why that may be. No need to turn that into a conspiracy theory.

No it's a blunt hypothesis that literally has no factual evidence backing it up, outside of 49ers getting hurt....Do you have numbers showing that OL on 45% of the snaps not running zone aren't getting hurt? Teams across the league run zone blocking. The correlation is a huge reach imo.

I'm gonna get you a jump to conclusion mat lol.

Yeah I'm gonna call it sort of a conspiracy theory because there's little factual evidence and you're somewhat obsessed with it and the OL overall...Come back to me with actual hard facts backing it up, instead of loose claims that push a narrative.

1) The nature of Professional Football includes encountering SOME injuries -- given an 85-player squad and a full football season's time to account for.

2) Some methods (style of play, practice regimen, repetitive, intense motions, lack of rest periods...just to name a few) in Professional Football give players greater risk for injuries than other methods. This has been proven,...no need for debate.

#1 doesn't dismiss #2,...and #2 doesn't dismiss #1. It's a wasted effort because they aren't mutually exclusive.

It would be much sensible to say why NC is wrong about this particular team (the 49ers) than to try to dismiss the possibility of #2 altogether.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

And the other 45% are the variant schemes I noted previously. It's not the scheme as it is the ask and the volume of that ask that has me theorizing.

Why is theorizing about an evidence-based theme a conspiracy theory to you? That's the art of minimizing.

In the end, it doesn't matter what you and I think as the facts speak for themselves. I'd just like to talk about why that may be. No need to turn that into a conspiracy theory.

No it's a blunt hypothesis that literally has no factual evidence backing it up, outside of 49ers getting hurt....Do you have numbers showing that OL on 45% of the snaps not running zone aren't getting hurt? Teams across the league run zone blocking. The correlation is a huge reach imo.

I'm gonna get you a jump to conclusion mat lol.

Yeah I'm gonna call it sort of a conspiracy theory because there's little factual evidence and you're somewhat obsessed with it and the OL overall...Come back to me with actual hard facts backing it up, instead of loose claims that push a narrative.

Looks like the minimizer has become the exaggerator. Haha.

"No factual evidence...outside of 49ers getting hurt."

That IS the evidence. 4 straight years of evidence. Evidence themes lead to developing theories. Theories.

No one made a conclusion here, Sunshine.

How many more years in a row would it take for you to move to your own theory about THIS team, THIS trend and THIS evidence?

Originally posted by random49er:

1) The nature of Professional Football includes encountering SOME injuries -- given an 85-player squad and a full football season's time to account for.

2) Some methods (style of play, practice regimen, repetitive, intensive motions, lack of rest periods...just to name a few) in Professional Football give players greater risk for injuries than other methods. This is has been proven,...no need for debate.

#1 doesn't dismiss #2,...and #2 doesn't dismiss #1. It's a wasted effort because they aren't mutually exclusive.

It would be much sensible to say why NC is wrong than to try to dismiss the possibility of #2 altogether.

Right. Saying "All teams suffer injuries" is true. But the degree and consistency to which they do couldn't be more different (i.e. Rams/Hawks vs. Redskins/49ers over the past 6 years). When that theme permeates consistently over time, that is an evidence based theme. It still doesn't mean you know why...hence theories.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Looks like the minimizer has become the exaggerator. Haha.

"No factual evidence...outside of 49ers getting hurt."

That IS the evidence. 4 straight years of evidence. Evidence themes lead to developing theories. Theories.

No one made a conclusion here, Sunshine.

How many more years in a row would it take for you to move to your own theory about THIS team, THIS trend and THIS evidence?

Hahaha you have made a conclusion. You continue to makeup something and play it off as factual because it supports your narrative... Stop that s**t!

Yes SF players have gotten hurt. YOU have no factual evidence that the reason for this is because of zone blocking. That's my issue with what you've said.

Again show me factual evidence to backup the claim. Give me some real data. Show me the difference of players (you can use SF) getting hurt on ZB plays vs power plays...until then it's a baseless blind theory and should be treated as such.

Also stop pretending that SF is the only team that runs zone blocking schemes.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Looks like the minimizer has become the exaggerator. Haha.

"No factual evidence...outside of 49ers getting hurt."

That IS the evidence. 4 straight years of evidence. Evidence themes lead to developing theories. Theories.

No one made a conclusion here, Sunshine.

How many more years in a row would it take for you to move to your own theory about THIS team, THIS trend and THIS evidence?

Hahaha you have made a conclusion. You continue to makeup something and play it off as factual because it supports your narrative... Stop that s**t!

Yes SF players have gotten hurt. YOU have no factual evidence that the reason for this is because of zone blocking. That's my issue with what you've said.

Again show me factual evidence to backup the claim. Give me some real data. Show me the difference of players (you can use SF) getting hurt on ZB plays vs power plays...until then it's a baseless blind theory and should be treated as such.

Also stop pretending that SF is the only team that runs zone blocking schemes.

Evidence themes lead to developing theories. Theories.

No one made a conclusion here, Sunshine.

Lord. It's like talking to a foreigner.

Originally posted by random49er:

1) The nature of Professional Football includes encountering SOME injuries -- given an 85-player squad and a full football season's time to account for.

2) Some methods (style of play, practice regimen, repetitive, intensive motions, lack of rest periods...just to name a few) in Professional Football give players greater risk for injuries than other methods. This has been proven,...no need for debate.

#1 doesn't dismiss #2,...and #2 doesn't dismiss #1. It's a wasted effort because they aren't mutually exclusive.

It would be much sensible to say why NC is wrong about this particular team (the 49ers) than to try to dismiss the possibility of #2 altogether.

I'm asking him to backup his claim with real data...until then it's baseless.

If he's gonna get so specific to say that zone blocking schemes are a reason why we have so many injured players...prove it. He proved a list of the most injured teams in the NFL over the course of 5 yrs or so. Not every team on that list runs ZB predominantly. Those teams also had multiple coaching staffs and schemes.

If there's a real correlation let's see the numbers. That's all I'm asking for. I'll gladly agree if the facts show it over a meaningful sample size.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Lord. It's like talking to a foreigner.

And I'm saying you theory is trash because there no factual evidence to back it up.

You could say you have a theory that the earth is flat and I'm gonna say that's a trash theory all the same lol

Multiple teams across the league run zone blocking schemes, are they all dealing with injured OLs every yr? Is SF only getting injured on those 55% of ZB plays?

It's a baseless claim...that's all I'm saying. You've been playing it off like it's a thing.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Right. Saying "All teams suffer injuries" is true. But the degree and consistency to which they do couldn't be more different (i.e. Rams/Hawks vs. Redskins/49ers over the past 6 years). When that theme permeates consistently over time, that is an evidence based theme. It still doesn't mean you know why...hence theories.

Right and I can say a theory is junk lol. Seattle's OL has been banged up for yrs and they run a gap blocking scheme.

Imo there are entirely too many variables to conclude a certain scheme equals more injuries to an OL.

Meanwhile, it looks like Denver has lost Von Miller for the season to a freak injury. I wonder if it had anything to do with their blocking scheme?

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Meanwhile, it looks like Denver has lost Von Miller for the season to a freak injury. I wonder if it had anything to do with their blocking scheme?

LMAO. If he got injured 4 years in a row, then you might want to start theorizing about it.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Right. Saying "All teams suffer injuries" is true. But the degree and consistency to which they do couldn't be more different (i.e. Rams/Hawks vs. Redskins/49ers over the past 6 years). When that theme permeates consistently over time, that is an evidence based theme. It still doesn't mean you know why...hence theories.

Right and I can say a theory is junk lol. Seattle's OL has been banged up for yrs and they run a gap blocking scheme.

Imo there are entirely too many variables to conclude a certain scheme equals more injuries to an OL.

Haha. OK, let's just pretend everything is totally normal here after 4-7 years and minimize it to "its football." God forbid someone actually theorize about why the evidence is so consistent year over year.

So, should we minimize the fires in CA every year too since "fires happen in every State."