49ers Offensive Line

Because it is a slow Sunday, here are the OL rankings/draft round of some other teams of interest. It shows we are not as far off as some think.

Philly - best in the league

Tackle - 1/7 - 5/1

Guard - 8/2 - 21/6

Center - 14/2

Detroit - close behind Philly

Tackle - 3/1 - 22/1

Guard - 55/3 - 19/6

Center - 2/1

Rams - underrated

Tackle - 19/udfa - 25/2

Guard - 9/4 - 28/2

Center - 35/6

Washington

Tackle - 18/1 - 71/3

Guard - 23/2 - 49/7

Center - 14/4

KC

Tackle - 61/2 - 71/3

Guard - 14/6 - 73/udfa

Center - 1/2

Buffalo

Tackle - 20/3 - 33/2

Guard - 28/5 - 64/3

Center - 10/3

SF

Tackle - 7/1 - 34/5

Guard - 6/3 - 15/4 (Bartch with limited snaps)

Center - 17/udfa

In reviewing all these numbers, I stand by my observation that the SF line is far from junk. It is above average, albeit in a league full of poor OL groupings.

Yes, Brendel needs to improve his pass blocking, but he did show improvement from 2023. His run blocking has always been acceptable (10th of 40). If he makes a similar jump next season, we will be fine. I have high hopes for Matt Hennesy. If he stays healthy and Brendel fails to improve his Pblk, our problem may be solved. We also have some depth behind him.

McKivitz is another worth discussing. He had a decent year in 2024. He decreased his sacks from 9 to 2, although he did commit four more penalties. His overall ratings for pass blocking improved from 56 to 72, while his run blocking remained an acceptable 67.

We still need a swing tackle, but Burford has experience there. He lost time last season due to injury, so we don't know what he can do. He has the physicals.

Summarily, all is not gloom and doom despite the lack of OL picks this time around. With some improvements here and there, we will do well with the schedule we play and get into the tournament. Assuming the defense is fixed, the pressure on the offense will be greatly reduced as they will have more chances with better field position to put points on the board.

I am taking the over at 10.5 wins this season.

I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

You could say that about nearly every team. The quality of the backup isn't going to be nearly as good as the starter in most cases. If he is then your starter probably isn't great.

Originally posted by TD49ers:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Yes you can always add OL. They should every yr. No this OL is not junk. This was not a good OL draft.

folks need to understand the scheme and what is needed to make it go. This is not a Martz offense. It's not a straight drop back passing team. There's a reason they value run blocking & athletic ability.

To that point, here are the rankings for 49er OL, according to PFF:

Tackle - #7 and #34 out of 81 players who had qualifying reps last season.

Guard - #6 and #15 (Bartch did not have qualifying reps but in the reps he did have, he was #15).

Center - #17 of 40.

I will be so bold as to say that is a pretty solid group, with some young talent behind them for depth.

Yeah man. It's not the worst s**t ever. Also Barch was a 4th rd pick just a couple yrs ago. Hennessy was a 3rd rd pick a couple yrs ago (and got hurt). They're not horrible prospects.

I just don't know who folks really really really wanted that was just sitting there when we were picking. s**tty OL draft.

imo fans just wanted to see an offensive lineman picks regardless of talent

What people want that advoate for OL talent is the same allocation of resources that was used on the DL in 2025 but in 2024. Strong OL draft in 2024 and we take a Guard in the 3rd. This goes pretty far back in draft years, the lack of draft resources used on the OL. Sure this year was weak but nothing until the 7th.....a WR in the 4th that will probably not even play.

You defend this like your 49ers mangement. I understand they dont see the OL as a top need..... ever......but using players off the reduced rack will impede this offense.

If they had selected any of the Olinemen that were available to them and neglected edge and the interior D line fans would be complaining about that. At least they had a plan and stuck too it instead of listening to us knuckleheads that think we know more than they do.

If the guys they drafted help raise the defense back into a top notch unit then I don't mind that they didn't reach for a mediocre O lineman. Maybe next year will have more O line talent.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

Who would you have drafted that would have been a better value than the guy they took? Do you have an OL guy in mind who would have been better than Collins or Martin, or West?

Yes, I want quality backups at every position, but that is not reality. We have Burford, and I expect we will pick up an FA or two along the way.

As I said above, if the defense/STs give the offense one more possession/game, it will have a much greater impact than a backup OT.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

You could say that about nearly every team. The quality of the backup isn't going to be nearly as good as the starter in most cases. If he is then your starter probably isn't great.

Originally posted by dj43:
Who would you have drafted that would have been a better value than the guy they took? Do you have an OL guy in mind who would have been better than Collins or Martin, or West?

Yes, I want quality backups at every position, but that is not reality. We have Burford, and I expect we will pick up an FA or two along the way.

As I said above, if the defense/STs give the offense one more possession/game, it will have a much greater impact than a backup OT.

We could have taken mbow. We have not drafted a tackle in two years.

Selecting an OLineman isint some kind of guarantee that they'll be a useful one.

It needs to be guys they really like at respective spots, relative to what they have at the top of the depth chart.

Originally posted by random49er:
Selecting an OLineman isint some kind of guarantee that they'll be a useful one.

It needs to be guys they really like at respective spots, relative to what they have at the top of the depth chart.

Go look at the Colby thread. Most think he'll win the job.

Every year it's the same story. Many fans are asking for oline upgrades and a few posters defending them to death. If you look at my posts I did expect a defensive heavy draft but wanted to see some oline sprinkled in. A 7th round guard wasn't what I imagined but I'm also not surprised.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

You could say that about nearly every team. The quality of the backup isn't going to be nearly as good as the starter in most cases. If he is then your starter probably isn't great.

Problem is our starters are back ups at LG, C and RT. Is TW going to be able get through 17 games. He was running off the field to get oxygen for the first 4 weeks and was in the press box for a good portion of the season. Not too encouraging.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

You could say that about nearly every team. The quality of the backup isn't going to be nearly as good as the starter in most cases. If he is then your starter probably isn't great.

Originally posted by dj43:
Who would you have drafted that would have been a better value than the guy they took? Do you have an OL guy in mind who would have been better than Collins or Martin, or West?

Yes, I want quality backups at every position, but that is not reality. We have Burford, and I expect we will pick up an FA or two along the way.

As I said above, if the defense/STs give the offense one more possession/game, it will have a much greater impact than a backup OT.

We could have taken mbow. We have not drafted a tackle in two years.

So a guy with short arms (32"), a weak upper body that hurts him against power rushers, is going to be of more value than a guy compared favorably to Jordan Mason, who led the league in rushing last season?

No, thank you.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

You could say that about nearly every team. The quality of the backup isn't going to be nearly as good as the starter in most cases. If he is then your starter probably isn't great.

Originally posted by dj43:
Who would you have drafted that would have been a better value than the guy they took? Do you have an OL guy in mind who would have been better than Collins or Martin, or West?

Yes, I want quality backups at every position, but that is not reality. We have Burford, and I expect we will pick up an FA or two along the way.

As I said above, if the defense/STs give the offense one more possession/game, it will have a much greater impact than a backup OT.

We could have taken mbow. We have not drafted a tackle in two years.

So a guy with short arms (32"), a weak upper body that hurts him against power rushers, is going to be of more value than a guy compared favorably to Jordan Mason, who led the league in rushing last season?

No, thank you.

See you here again next year.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

You could say that about nearly every team. The quality of the backup isn't going to be nearly as good as the starter in most cases. If he is then your starter probably isn't great.

Originally posted by dj43:
Who would you have drafted that would have been a better value than the guy they took? Do you have an OL guy in mind who would have been better than Collins or Martin, or West?

Yes, I want quality backups at every position, but that is not reality. We have Burford, and I expect we will pick up an FA or two along the way.

As I said above, if the defense/STs give the offense one more possession/game, it will have a much greater impact than a backup OT.

We could have taken mbow. We have not drafted a tackle in two years.

So a guy with short arms (32"), a weak upper body that hurts him against power rushers, is going to be of more value than a guy compared favorably to Jordan Mason, who led the league in rushing last season?

No, thank you.

See you here again next year.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I guess using the logic here then the fact they keep drafting wr and rb every year means they don't trust the guys they already drafted?

You can never have too many running backs, or speedy WRs that can improve Special Teams. Watkins will compete for a return role while waiting for a chance to play on offense. James will replace Mason and play ST.

We have already improved STs a lot by the addition of speed and aggressiveness.

Ok and when TW is hurt who steps in?

You could say that about nearly every team. The quality of the backup isn't going to be nearly as good as the starter in most cases. If he is then your starter probably isn't great.

Originally posted by dj43:
Who would you have drafted that would have been a better value than the guy they took? Do you have an OL guy in mind who would have been better than Collins or Martin, or West?

Yes, I want quality backups at every position, but that is not reality. We have Burford, and I expect we will pick up an FA or two along the way.

As I said above, if the defense/STs give the offense one more possession/game, it will have a much greater impact than a backup OT.

We could have taken mbow. We have not drafted a tackle in two years.

So a guy with short arms (32"), a weak upper body that hurts him against power rushers, is going to be of more value than a guy compared favorably to Jordan Mason, who led the league in rushing last season?

No, thank you.

See you here again next year.

Lol I guess you're counting on cmc getting hurt so we need a rb right? What's wrong with gurrendo? Who's the backup swing tackle? You think TW is playing 17 games.

What about the 24 draft when there were 7 starting caliber centers and we passed on them all?

You could say they do OK with scraps. Imagine what they could do with better talent? That's my argument. If nothing else I wanted them to try and upgrade center. You can't improve the line if you never draft anyone.