49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:
If either of our OTs get hurt we're screwed

Says all 32 NFL teams.

Sure with all the great edge rushers in the nfl, we might have some of the worst depth at OL in contention. All I read in training camp was our backups being destroyed by people we just picked up off the streets and it showed against the Raiders.

Bull. Eagles were without Lane Johnson 2 games late last season and gave up 9 sacks combined in those games. O line depth around the league is highly exaggerated by 49ers fans.

I'm not concerned about a couple games unless it was the playoffs if one goes out for several weeks its going to be brutal. I'm good with our starting OL but don't think I've been this concerned about our backups while in contention

Originally posted by Since07:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:
If either of our OTs get hurt we're screwed

Says all 32 NFL teams.

Sure with all the great edge rushers in the nfl, we might have some of the worst depth at OL in contention. All I read in training camp was our backups being destroyed by people we just picked up off the streets and it showed against the Raiders.

Bull. Eagles were without Lane Johnson 2 games late last season and gave up 9 sacks combined in those games. O line depth around the league is highly exaggerated by 49ers fans.

I'm not concerned about a couple games unless it was the playoffs if one goes out for several weeks its going to be brutal. I'm good with our starting OL but don't think I've been this concerned about our backups while in contention

Really? You must be in the vast minority. Should have seen this place this time last year.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:
If either of our OTs get hurt we're screwed

Says all 32 NFL teams.

Sure with all the great edge rushers in the nfl, we might have some of the worst depth at OL in contention. All I read in training camp was our backups being destroyed by people we just picked up off the streets and it showed against the Raiders.

Bull. Eagles were without Lane Johnson 2 games late last season and gave up 9 sacks combined in those games. O line depth around the league is highly exaggerated by 49ers fans.

Going from an elite Lane Johnson to Jack Driscoll is a far bigger drop off from Mike McGlinchey to Tom Compton or Colton McKivitz. In fact, there was a stretch where both Tom Compton and Colton McKivitz played better.

The goal should be to obtain the best OL possible. They did that. We have not.

I agree that it's hard to find quality depth and keep developing a pool annually. With the OL, you simply need time to develop 'with' the unit.

And HERE, so much more is asked of our OL too. Couple in the injury history here, it's more than fair to be concerned about the depth. In fact, its refreshing fans are even looking at the depth. They've come a long ways in here. LOL

Originally posted by NCommand:
Going from an elite Lane Johnson to Jack Driscoll is a far bigger drop off from Mike McGlinchey to Tom Compton or Colton McKivitz. In fact, there was a stretch where both Tom Compton and Colton McKivitz played better.

The goal should be to obtain the best OL possible. They did that. We have not.

I agree that it's hard to find quality depth and keep developing a pool annually. With the OL, you simply need time to develop 'with' the unit.

And HERE, so much more is asked of our OL too. Couple in the injury history here, it's more than fair to be concerned about the depth. In fact, its refreshing fans are even looking at the depth. They've come a long ways in here. LOL

I seem to recall the Eagles taking 2 d lineman in the first this season. Is that trying to get the best OL possible?

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Going from an elite Lane Johnson to Jack Driscoll is a far bigger drop off from Mike McGlinchey to Tom Compton or Colton McKivitz. In fact, there was a stretch where both Tom Compton and Colton McKivitz played better.

The goal should be to obtain the best OL possible. They did that. We have not.

I agree that it's hard to find quality depth and keep developing a pool annually. With the OL, you simply need time to develop 'with' the unit.

And HERE, so much more is asked of our OL too. Couple in the injury history here, it's more than fair to be concerned about the depth. In fact, its refreshing fans are even looking at the depth. They've come a long ways in here. LOL

I seem to recall the Eagles taking 2 d lineman in the first this season. Is that trying to get the best OL possible?

I can't imagine why they had to do that. LOL

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Going from an elite Lane Johnson to Jack Driscoll is a far bigger drop off from Mike McGlinchey to Tom Compton or Colton McKivitz. In fact, there was a stretch where both Tom Compton and Colton McKivitz played better.

The goal should be to obtain the best OL possible. They did that. We have not.

I agree that it's hard to find quality depth and keep developing a pool annually. With the OL, you simply need time to develop 'with' the unit.

And HERE, so much more is asked of our OL too. Couple in the injury history here, it's more than fair to be concerned about the depth. In fact, its refreshing fans are even looking at the depth. They've come a long ways in here. LOL

I seem to recall the Eagles taking 2 d lineman in the first this season. Is that trying to get the best OL possible?

Ehh...

I've always felt our problem with the OL wasn't the lack resources or draft capitol we did or didn't use... the issue was the players we selected.

Other than Burford and getting TW (incredible value), I'd argue we have struggled to get value out of our picks.

According to PFF, Banks wasn't a top 32 G last year, and this was his breakout year.

MM was drafted in the first, and while he graded out well in run blocking, I'd argue his pass blocking was nowhere near acceptable to his draft selection.

And we just paid Brendel, who's extremely average to me.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Going from an elite Lane Johnson to Jack Driscoll is a far bigger drop off from Mike McGlinchey to Tom Compton or Colton McKivitz. In fact, there was a stretch where both Tom Compton and Colton McKivitz played better.

The goal should be to obtain the best OL possible. They did that. We have not.

I agree that it's hard to find quality depth and keep developing a pool annually. With the OL, you simply need time to develop 'with' the unit.

And HERE, so much more is asked of our OL too. Couple in the injury history here, it's more than fair to be concerned about the depth. In fact, its refreshing fans are even looking at the depth. They've come a long ways in here. LOL

I seem to recall the Eagles taking 2 d lineman in the first this season. Is that trying to get the best OL possible?

Ehh...

I've always felt our problem with the OL wasn't the lack resources or draft capitol we did or didn't use... the issue was the players we selected.

Other than Burford and getting TW (incredible value), I'd argue we have struggled to get value out of our picks.

According to PFF, Banks wasn't a top 32 G last year, and this was his breakout year.

MM was drafted in the first, and while he graded out well in run blocking, I'd argue his pass blocking was nowhere near acceptable to his draft selection.

And we just paid Brendel, who's extremely average to me.

If we added just one more elite C, G or RT here right now, the entire unit would move into an ideal spot for Brock, Kyle and all the playmakers ready to go for #6.

Originally posted by Waterbear:
Ehh...

I've always felt our problem with the OL wasn't the lack resources or draft capitol we did or didn't use... the issue was the players we selected.

Other than Burford and getting TW (incredible value), I'd argue we have struggled to get value out of our picks.

According to PFF, Banks wasn't a top 32 G last year, and this was his breakout year.

MM was drafted in the first, and while he graded out well in run blocking, I'd argue his pass blocking was nowhere near acceptable to his draft selection.

And we just paid Brendel, who's extremely average to me.

That's a much fairer criticism. It doesn't reside in the make believe world that the team doesn't value OL capitol like other teams.

Now secondary on the other hand.

Originally posted by NCommand:
If we added just one more elite C, G or RT here right now, the entire unit would move into an ideal spot for Brock, Kyle and all the playmakers ready to go for #6.

This. I'd feel so much better if we went after one of those positions now, rather than waiting until it really shows and possibly costs the team any games.

Originally posted by SLCNiner:

Originally posted by NCommand:
If we added just one more elite C, G or RT here right now, the entire unit would move into an ideal spot for Brock, Kyle and all the playmakers ready to go for #6.

This. I'd feel so much better if we went after one of those positions now, rather than waiting until it really shows and possibly costs the team any games.

Other than waiting for after camp cuts..I don't know of any trade scenarios, we should look though. If we don't do something we are not getting number 6.

Originally posted by NCommand:
If we added just one more elite C, G or RT here right now, the entire unit would move into an ideal spot for Brock, Kyle and all the playmakers ready to go for #6.

This x 1M

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Going from an elite Lane Johnson to Jack Driscoll is a far bigger drop off from Mike McGlinchey to Tom Compton or Colton McKivitz. In fact, there was a stretch where both Tom Compton and Colton McKivitz played better.

The goal should be to obtain the best OL possible. They did that. We have not.

I agree that it's hard to find quality depth and keep developing a pool annually. With the OL, you simply need time to develop 'with' the unit.

And HERE, so much more is asked of our OL too. Couple in the injury history here, it's more than fair to be concerned about the depth. In fact, its refreshing fans are even looking at the depth. They've come a long ways in here. LOL

I seem to recall the Eagles taking 2 d lineman in the first this season. Is that trying to get the best OL possible?

Ehh...

I've always felt our problem with the OL wasn't the lack resources or draft capitol we did or didn't use... the issue was the players we selected.

Other than Burford and getting TW (incredible value), I'd argue we have struggled to get value out of our picks.

According to PFF, Banks wasn't a top 32 G last year, and this was his breakout year.

MM was drafted in the first, and while he graded out well in run blocking, I'd argue his pass blocking was nowhere near acceptable to his draft selection.

And we just paid Brendel, who's extremely average to me.

If we added just one more elite C, G or RT here right now, the entire unit would move into an ideal spot for Brock, Kyle and all the playmakers ready to go for #6.

Adding 3 elite players, so easy a caveman can do it

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Since07:
If either of our OTs get hurt we're screwed

Says all 32 NFL teams.

Sure with all the great edge rushers in the nfl, we might have some of the worst depth at OL in contention. All I read in training camp was our backups being destroyed by people we just picked up off the streets and it showed against the Raiders.

Bull. Eagles were without Lane Johnson 2 games late last season and gave up 9 sacks combined in those games. O line depth around the league is highly exaggerated by 49ers fans.

I'm not concerned about a couple games unless it was the playoffs if one goes out for several weeks its going to be brutal. I'm good with our starting OL but don't think I've been this concerned about our backups while in contention

Really? You must be in the vast minority. Should have seen this place this time last year.

It could be better we have some question marks with Burford and Mckivitz but I don't expect our whole OL to be studs

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Going from an elite Lane Johnson to Jack Driscoll is a far bigger drop off from Mike McGlinchey to Tom Compton or Colton McKivitz. In fact, there was a stretch where both Tom Compton and Colton McKivitz played better.

The goal should be to obtain the best OL possible. They did that. We have not.

I agree that it's hard to find quality depth and keep developing a pool annually. With the OL, you simply need time to develop 'with' the unit.

And HERE, so much more is asked of our OL too. Couple in the injury history here, it's more than fair to be concerned about the depth. In fact, its refreshing fans are even looking at the depth. They've come a long ways in here. LOL

I seem to recall the Eagles taking 2 d lineman in the first this season. Is that trying to get the best OL possible?

Ehh...

I've always felt our problem with the OL wasn't the lack resources or draft capitol we did or didn't use... the issue was the players we selected.

Other than Burford and getting TW (incredible value), I'd argue we have struggled to get value out of our picks.

According to PFF, Banks wasn't a top 32 G last year, and this was his breakout year.

MM was drafted in the first, and while he graded out well in run blocking, I'd argue his pass blocking was nowhere near acceptable to his draft selection.

And we just paid Brendel, who's extremely average to me.

If we added just one more elite C, G or RT here right now, the entire unit would move into an ideal spot for Brock, Kyle and all the playmakers ready to go for #6.

Adding 3 elite players, so easy a caveman can do it

We do it on defense annually. It's just a matter where your prioritize things. And yes, that goes for any position. Yes, 9ers4eva, secondary too.

And here, I'm just asking for 2 elite players out of 5. 3 would make this unit elite.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Going from an elite Lane Johnson to Jack Driscoll is a far bigger drop off from Mike McGlinchey to Tom Compton or Colton McKivitz. In fact, there was a stretch where both Tom Compton and Colton McKivitz played better.

The goal should be to obtain the best OL possible. They did that. We have not.

I agree that it's hard to find quality depth and keep developing a pool annually. With the OL, you simply need time to develop 'with' the unit.

And HERE, so much more is asked of our OL too. Couple in the injury history here, it's more than fair to be concerned about the depth. In fact, its refreshing fans are even looking at the depth. They've come a long ways in here. LOL

I seem to recall the Eagles taking 2 d lineman in the first this season. Is that trying to get the best OL possible?

Ehh...

I've always felt our problem with the OL wasn't the lack resources or draft capitol we did or didn't use... the issue was the players we selected.

Other than Burford and getting TW (incredible value), I'd argue we have struggled to get value out of our picks.

According to PFF, Banks wasn't a top 32 G last year, and this was his breakout year.

MM was drafted in the first, and while he graded out well in run blocking, I'd argue his pass blocking was nowhere near acceptable to his draft selection.

And we just paid Brendel, who's extremely average to me.

Brendel was an alternate Pro bowler, Banks did well, as did the whole interior line did well last year and Trent is Trent, so Foerster did well in developing those players. Foerster couldn't do much for McGlinchy. One reason I think is because McGlinchy was not a Foerster guy, or pick. He was picked when Benton (I think) was OLine coach and Benton's gone. Why is that important? Well Foerster wants guys with that bulldog, never say die, keep fighting mentality. McGlinchy was more of a showman, and often injured. All of Foersters guys look much more durable than McGlinchy. (knock on wood) For all intents and purposes, McKIvitz is (in my opinion) more perfectly suited for Brock because McKivitz is better in pass protection than McGlinchy was. CMC will help make McKIvitz look like a run blocking Pro bowler, so from my perspective, McKivitz' lesser talent as a run blocker vs McGlinchy isn't a negative with CMC back there. As for the backups, they are all raw but talented, lack much NFL experience, sorta like Trey Lance. It's my hope that Foerster continues to work his magic on the rookies and second year guys and discover some raw Purdy-like gems on the OLine. Next year, I'll be really ticked off if ShanaLynch doesn't devote a number 1 pick level cap resource to the OLine, for sure.