Originally posted by jonnydel:
For sure. But, to me, those things go hand in hand. Knowing how to budget out positions but also ability to budget out because of quality drafting. The Eagles can dump bucketloads of cash into an O-line because they drafted well at QB and on defense. Seattle couldn't because they were paying a FQB on a 2nd contract as well as their defense.
We're not going to be able to build our O-line the same as Philly because we have a different set of circumstances. Also, like I mentioned above. We're already spending over 60% of the current cap on offense and if we were to have poured even more cash into the offensive line in the terms of a 10+ mil contract we'd be so out of balance in cap management it'd be ridiculous.
Huge imbalances in spending like that create situations like the Giants. They spent MASSIVE amounts on defense and got one-year-wonders out of a few guys but then bombed and didn't even have ample cap space to show for it.
We could dump 48 mil into an offensive line and there's still the potential for flame-out.
While the Raiders allowed fewer QB hits, that was also due to a lot of games in the 2nd half of the season. I remember watching them vs the Chiefs in week 6 and what was talked about most of the game was how the O-line was underperforming, especially for how much they were getting paid, and it was a big reason the team wasn't winning.
Again, another example of how spending huge money on Guards doesn't mean you'll get the production on the field. They should have mauled everyone up the middle and Carr shouldn't have been touched. Next season their 3 interior lineman will all make close to or over 10 mil. I think the 3 guys total equal about 32 mil. Also, who do they have as depth on their O-line? Nobody. I checked, all their guys for depth aren't even making 1 mil. That means they're all either minimum contracts or guys who were drafted - and drafted later. While they may develop some of those guys, they aren't able to keep quality depth like we just did with Gilliam.
True, but both cases prove how crucial OL protection is in the grand scheme of things whether you're protecting a FQB like Jimmy or Carr or a rookie like Wentz or a journeyman Foles who was Superbowl MVP. If there is one unit you invest on, its's the lines IMHO. I believe in Walsh's inside-out philosophy.
To your point, it's easier to buy an OL like Philly (or invest heavily in it financially) when you have a rookie contract at QB. Seattle chose to go skinny there as they invested in the QB and defense and ultimately it cost them every year.
We invested in Richburg in the same mold. Could there be a better investment than the C of your OL? Kyle gets that. That said, I don't believe they should have stopped there.
They are taking the same approach at G as they did with the collective team last year... let's let the pool play and compete and see what we have. That could end good or bad but it's a risk when you're talking about having a $137.5M investment directly behind them.
At the end of day, it's all in how you allocate your cap. You're going to have to go skinny somewhere, even in today's cap that's increasing $10M per, and perhaps RB, LB and G is that for our team.
That said, the league is changing and G's like Osemele and Norwell help neutralize excellent interior rushes. In fact, I showed how there isn't a big discrepancy between top LT and G money now. Crazy.
I think our FO was fine locking down Richburg and now we may have the single best pass protection trio in the league with Staley, Richburg and Brown. I feel good about that. Timing though...I don't think our FO was expecting we needed two premier interior OL as very few teams have a Donald-Suh combo inside.
I personally would have loved locking up an all pro like Norwell...no issue paying him $13M esp. at that age. But we didn't pursue. After that, at $8.5M, would have been stoked to get Sitton.
Now we're all concerned with both G spots and are hoping it works out and there are no injuries. It was a conscious calculated risk and now we turn our attention to the draft and look at rookies to help.
Great post, and I'll just add that I've been watching Kyle's NFL meeting breakfast interview, and found out that the 49er O Linemen do both man/power/gap blocking *and* zone blocking. While I kinda knew this in the back of my mind, the fact that he outright states that is very illuminating to me. He wants combinations on the O Line, it seems, not just one type. So, from what he said and from what I know about the inside zones, you need some power/man blockers to do those - which is perfect for guards like Garnett and Laken. So, to reiterate, I think it's intentional that he has some good man/power blockers in there in addition to the zone blockers to have a variety of blocking on the O Line schemes. Now he also said the majority of the time they do zone blocking, so it makes sense that the LT, C, and RT would be zone guys. So Brown really has to improve his movement for the zone blocking for this line to be at its full potential.
