49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Its obvious we have gone through a lot of O lineman in the past 6 years. But how does it compare to other regimes around the NFL? If we don't have numbers to actually compare than it is nothing more than an assumption that we go through them at a higher rate.

The theory wasn't in comparison to other teams. It was noting this system here. There's no secret this system here eats through OL, TE's and RB's.

Even QB's. But that's another topic. Haha.

We have had the same #1 TE since the beginning of the Kyle Shanahan era. Are you really arguing about numbers 2's who don't see a lot of playing time?

As far as RB's, I would argue that no other system in the NFL has proven to get as much production from UDRFA RB's than Kyle. Who cares if they only last 1-2 seasons? They are cheap and seem to be a dime a dozen for this system.

When it comes to OL, it would be disingenuous to diminish the importance of comparing the rate of turnover with this team/system and other teams/systems.

No, I'm theorizing the volume of players used to execute and get through a season at those 3 positions over the past 6 years is incredibly large. That speaks to volume and complexity within the system. What, how and how much can = more risk of injury. You obviously see that now with OL but you can't with RB and TE and by default "the offensive system?" Or philosophy within it?

Incredibly large compared to what? What have I obviously seen now with the OL? I see players get hurt every Sunday. No team is immune. You know damn well I can be persuaded to take another stance. If you have actual numbers to compare than I would be inclined to side with you if your argument was proven by statistical analysis.

Your own quote.

Its obvious we have gone through a lot of O lineman in the past 6 years.

Compared to what though? Its relevant to know whether its excessive or in line with the rest of the league. I could say $1000.00 is a lot of money but compared to someone who makes 200k+ a year, it might just be a normal weekend with the boys.

If you feel the need to compare our system and injuries to others, you're welcomed too. The Rams run a pass centric version of Kyle's offense and they are annually the #1 healthiest team in the league. My theory was never comparing us to others.

Like injuries, it's recognizing what happens here annually in this system and protecting yourself for the inevitable. Kyle is getting it. It doesn't sound like our fans are there quite yet?

You can also look across the league to see who carries 10 OL (only need to carry 8 active on game days and that includes call ups from the PS), 4-6 RB's + FB and 3-4 TE's in volume combination.

Kyle chooses the 53 and he's telling you how he's going to play it and how much he needs to make it through the year doing it.

Pass centric started last year with stafford. Let's use 2020 as a point of reference when the niners were decimated
Niners-537 passing attempts and 430 rushing attempts
Rams-548 passing attempts and 388 rushing attempts

Sure. They were #1 in health and we were 29th.

For whatever reason, volume+complexity+reliance (my theory) = eating through those positions Kyle leans on heavily in his system.

So why do you think they consistently have less injuries to those positions than us despite running the same system?

It's an interesting hypothesis, that complexity can be the factor in having more OL injuries. I don't think comparing the amount of injuries with other teams' OLs is the way to test it. There are too many variables with the main variable being the players - some guys simply get injured easier. We need a medical expert to tell us if different blocking movements contribute to a higher chance of injury. Do the different movements asked of Kyle's OL put additional stress on their bodies? Outside/inside zone, pulling, combo block get to second level, block on edges, pass block, pull, all require different movements.

What types of injuries are the 49er OLmen suffering from, and did the play on which they were injured (scheme) a factor? For example, if an OLman is hurt running outside the tackle box, that can be considered a scheme factor since Kyle asks his OL to do this often (probably towards top of the league, just a guess). Look more at the team itself, not around the league tallying up OL injuries. imo.

If you actually try to figure that out it will take the narrative away.

right now it's a quantity over quality issue. Hopefully we got some quality guys now, time will tell

I'm really curious if asking the body to do all the different movements puts added stress on ligaments/muscles compared to less variety of movements, same number of reps. If an OL executed 100 drive blocking reps, and then the same OLman did 25oz, 25iz, 25pass block, 25run then block downfield - which put more stress on the body? Just an example to explain what I meant.

You need to find the injury, then diagnose. OL get rolled up on a lot but that not system or scheme.

Yeah, just look at the volume and then work backwards. I'm sure their own S&C team has done that to look for trends in the scheme.

Volume of what? The 49ers OL is most likely playing the same number of snaps as other teams, 60-70ish?

The total volume of OL injuries over the past 5 years.

Ohhh oops. Thought you meant volume of snaps and how it wears down a player.

All good.

I have theorized that with leading the league in rushing attempts coupled with the complexity of the system and the types of OL used to execute it could be a big factor.

And maybe that's why Kyle is going for a big bigger OL but who mostly still have good athleticism and feet? That and because he'll run inside more and short yardage and goal line has been a challenge.

Originally posted by NinerBuff:
@NCommand, I do see you push the O-line investment every year and the injury bug conversation. I assume we agree the Niners are doing everything they can think of to limit injuries, but the evidence is the evidence.

Is it lack of insight/skill with staff?
Is it a penchant for injury-prone players?
Is it relates to more than average travel (due to geography)
other?

The evidence isn't definitive. That's the issue. All the things you cite could be contributing factors. But until you have a definitive study you won't know.

Originally posted by thl408:
Do injury free OLmen come to SF and get injured more often? That's something to consider. There are so many variables that I think we'd need 10-15 years of data to find any association between scheme and injuries.

100%. Let's see some data before making definitive statements.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Its obvious we have gone through a lot of O lineman in the past 6 years. But how does it compare to other regimes around the NFL? If we don't have numbers to actually compare than it is nothing more than an assumption that we go through them at a higher rate.

The theory wasn't in comparison to other teams. It was noting this system here. There's no secret this system here eats through OL, TE's and RB's.

Even QB's. But that's another topic. Haha.

We have had the same #1 TE since the beginning of the Kyle Shanahan era. Are you really arguing about numbers 2's who don't see a lot of playing time?

As far as RB's, I would argue that no other system in the NFL has proven to get as much production from UDRFA RB's than Kyle. Who cares if they only last 1-2 seasons? They are cheap and seem to be a dime a dozen for this system.

When it comes to OL, it would be disingenuous to diminish the importance of comparing the rate of turnover with this team/system and other teams/systems.

No, I'm theorizing the volume of players used to execute and get through a season at those 3 positions over the past 6 years is incredibly large. That speaks to volume and complexity within the system. What, how and how much can = more risk of injury. You obviously see that now with OL but you can't with RB and TE and by default "the offensive system?" Or philosophy within it?

Incredibly large compared to what? What have I obviously seen now with the OL? I see players get hurt every Sunday. No team is immune. You know damn well I can be persuaded to take another stance. If you have actual numbers to compare than I would be inclined to side with you if your argument was proven by statistical analysis.

Your own quote.

Its obvious we have gone through a lot of O lineman in the past 6 years.

Compared to what though? Its relevant to know whether its excessive or in line with the rest of the league. I could say $1000.00 is a lot of money but compared to someone who makes 200k+ a year, it might just be a normal weekend with the boys.

If you feel the need to compare our system and injuries to others, you're welcomed too. The Rams run a pass centric version of Kyle's offense and they are annually the #1 healthiest team in the league. My theory was never comparing us to others.

Like injuries, it's recognizing what happens here annually in this system and protecting yourself for the inevitable. Kyle is getting it. It doesn't sound like our fans are there quite yet?

You can also look across the league to see who carries 10 OL (only need to carry 8 active on game days and that includes call ups from the PS), 4-6 RB's + FB and 3-4 TE's in volume combination.

Kyle chooses the 53 and he's telling you how he's going to play it and how much he needs to make it through the year doing it.

Pass centric started last year with stafford. Let's use 2020 as a point of reference when the niners were decimated
Niners-537 passing attempts and 430 rushing attempts
Rams-548 passing attempts and 388 rushing attempts

Sure. They were #1 in health and we were 29th.

For whatever reason, volume+complexity+reliance (my theory) = eating through those positions Kyle leans on heavily in his system.

So why do you think they consistently have less injuries to those positions than us despite running the same system?

It's an interesting hypothesis, that complexity can be the factor in having more OL injuries. I don't think comparing the amount of injuries with other teams' OLs is the way to test it. There are too many variables with the main variable being the players - some guys simply get injured easier. We need a medical expert to tell us if different blocking movements contribute to a higher chance of injury. Do the different movements asked of Kyle's OL put additional stress on their bodies? Outside/inside zone, pulling, combo block get to second level, block on edges, pass block, pull, all require different movements.

What types of injuries are the 49er OLmen suffering from, and did the play on which they were injured (scheme) a factor? For example, if an OLman is hurt running outside the tackle box, that can be considered a scheme factor since Kyle asks his OL to do this often (probably towards top of the league, just a guess). Look more at the team itself, not around the league tallying up OL injuries. imo.

If you actually try to figure that out it will take the narrative away.

right now it's a quantity over quality issue. Hopefully we got some quality guys now, time will tell

I'm really curious if asking the body to do all the different movements puts added stress on ligaments/muscles compared to less variety of movements, same number of reps. If an OL executed 100 drive blocking reps, and then the same OLman did 25oz, 25iz, 25pass block, 25run then block downfield - which put more stress on the body? Just an example to explain what I meant.

You need to find the injury, then diagnose. OL get rolled up on a lot but that not system or scheme.

Yeah, just look at the volume and then work backwards. I'm sure their own S&C team has done that to look for trends in the scheme.

Volume of what? The 49ers OL is most likely playing the same number of snaps as other teams, 60-70ish?

The total volume of OL injuries over the past 5 years.

Ohhh oops. Thought you meant volume of snaps and how it wears down a player.

All good.

I have theorized that with leading the league in rushing attempts coupled with the complexity of the system and the types of OL used to execute it could be a big factor.

And maybe that's why Kyle is going for a big bigger OL but who mostly still have good athleticism and feet? That and because he'll run inside more and short yardage and goal line has been a challenge.

Now that's something easier to narrow down - run blocking versus pass blocking. But this comes down to run blocking and pass blocking, not variety in scheme (different types of blocks), so we'd be changing it up a bit. The hypothesis would then be, teams that run block more have more injured OLmen. I don't expect you to mine for this data, just asking the questions required to prove or disprove that scheme contributes to OL injuries.

Originally posted by NinerBuff:

Originally posted by NCommand:
The total volume of OL injuries over the past 5 years.

@NCommand, I do see you push the O-line investment every year and the injury bug conversation. I assume we agree the Niners are doing everything they can think of to limit injuries, but the evidence is the evidence.

Is it lack of insight/skill with staff?
Is it a penchant for injury-prone players?
Is it relates to more than average travel (due to geography)
other?

I do genuinely think they are doing everything they can.

We've had many theories in the injury thread including they're too soft on them. Here's an example. From Harbaugh to Kyle in AGL. 2014 was when all the veterans physically broke down.

Historical AGL Ranks: Lower = Healthiest
2008 - 6th
2009 - 23rd
2010 - 4th
2011 - 8th (NFCCG)
2012 - 1st (Superbowl)
2013 - 23rd (NFCCG)
2014 - 26th
2015 - 26th
2016 - 24th
2017 - 23rd
2018 - 29th
2019 - 27th (Superbowl)
2020 - 32nd
2021 - 29th (NFCCG)

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Its obvious we have gone through a lot of O lineman in the past 6 years. But how does it compare to other regimes around the NFL? If we don't have numbers to actually compare than it is nothing more than an assumption that we go through them at a higher rate.

The theory wasn't in comparison to other teams. It was noting this system here. There's no secret this system here eats through OL, TE's and RB's.

Even QB's. But that's another topic. Haha.

We have had the same #1 TE since the beginning of the Kyle Shanahan era. Are you really arguing about numbers 2's who don't see a lot of playing time?

As far as RB's, I would argue that no other system in the NFL has proven to get as much production from UDRFA RB's than Kyle. Who cares if they only last 1-2 seasons? They are cheap and seem to be a dime a dozen for this system.

When it comes to OL, it would be disingenuous to diminish the importance of comparing the rate of turnover with this team/system and other teams/systems.

No, I'm theorizing the volume of players used to execute and get through a season at those 3 positions over the past 6 years is incredibly large. That speaks to volume and complexity within the system. What, how and how much can = more risk of injury. You obviously see that now with OL but you can't with RB and TE and by default "the offensive system?" Or philosophy within it?

Incredibly large compared to what? What have I obviously seen now with the OL? I see players get hurt every Sunday. No team is immune. You know damn well I can be persuaded to take another stance. If you have actual numbers to compare than I would be inclined to side with you if your argument was proven by statistical analysis.

Your own quote.

Its obvious we have gone through a lot of O lineman in the past 6 years.

Compared to what though? Its relevant to know whether its excessive or in line with the rest of the league. I could say $1000.00 is a lot of money but compared to someone who makes 200k+ a year, it might just be a normal weekend with the boys.

If you feel the need to compare our system and injuries to others, you're welcomed too. The Rams run a pass centric version of Kyle's offense and they are annually the #1 healthiest team in the league. My theory was never comparing us to others.

Like injuries, it's recognizing what happens here annually in this system and protecting yourself for the inevitable. Kyle is getting it. It doesn't sound like our fans are there quite yet?

You can also look across the league to see who carries 10 OL (only need to carry 8 active on game days and that includes call ups from the PS), 4-6 RB's + FB and 3-4 TE's in volume combination.

Kyle chooses the 53 and he's telling you how he's going to play it and how much he needs to make it through the year doing it.

Pass centric started last year with stafford. Let's use 2020 as a point of reference when the niners were decimated
Niners-537 passing attempts and 430 rushing attempts
Rams-548 passing attempts and 388 rushing attempts

Sure. They were #1 in health and we were 29th.

For whatever reason, volume+complexity+reliance (my theory) = eating through those positions Kyle leans on heavily in his system.

So why do you think they consistently have less injuries to those positions than us despite running the same system?

It's an interesting hypothesis, that complexity can be the factor in having more OL injuries. I don't think comparing the amount of injuries with other teams' OLs is the way to test it. There are too many variables with the main variable being the players - some guys simply get injured easier. We need a medical expert to tell us if different blocking movements contribute to a higher chance of injury. Do the different movements asked of Kyle's OL put additional stress on their bodies? Outside/inside zone, pulling, combo block get to second level, block on edges, pass block, pull, all require different movements.

What types of injuries are the 49er OLmen suffering from, and did the play on which they were injured (scheme) a factor? For example, if an OLman is hurt running outside the tackle box, that can be considered a scheme factor since Kyle asks his OL to do this often (probably towards top of the league, just a guess). Look more at the team itself, not around the league tallying up OL injuries. imo.

If you actually try to figure that out it will take the narrative away.

right now it's a quantity over quality issue. Hopefully we got some quality guys now, time will tell

I'm really curious if asking the body to do all the different movements puts added stress on ligaments/muscles compared to less variety of movements, same number of reps. If an OL executed 100 drive blocking reps, and then the same OLman did 25oz, 25iz, 25pass block, 25run then block downfield - which put more stress on the body? Just an example to explain what I meant.

You need to find the injury, then diagnose. OL get rolled up on a lot but that not system or scheme.

Yeah, just look at the volume and then work backwards. I'm sure their own S&C team has done that to look for trends in the scheme.

Volume of what? The 49ers OL is most likely playing the same number of snaps as other teams, 60-70ish?

The total volume of OL injuries over the past 5 years.

Ohhh oops. Thought you meant volume of snaps and how it wears down a player.

All good.

I have theorized that with leading the league in rushing attempts coupled with the complexity of the system and the types of OL used to execute it could be a big factor.

And maybe that's why Kyle is going for a big bigger OL but who mostly still have good athleticism and feet? That and because he'll run inside more and short yardage and goal line has been a challenge.

Now that's something easier to narrow down - run blocking versus pass blocking. But this comes down to run blocking and pass blocking, not variety in scheme (different types of blocks), so we'd be changing it up a bit. The hypothesis would then be, teams that run block more have more injured OLmen. I don't expect you to mine for this data, just asking the questions required to prove or disprove that scheme contributes to OL injuries.

Yeah, YAC alluded to that earlier saying pass centric teams have more WR's and skill positions and by default, have more injuries to those positions by mere usage.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by thl408:
Do injury free OLmen come to SF and get injured more often? That's something to consider. There are so many variables that I think we'd need 10-15 years of data to find any association between scheme and injuries.

100%. Let's see some data before making definitive statements.

A theory is not a definitive statement. Also, it's football. Good luck finding anything that's a clear causation and not just correlation.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by thl408:
Do injury free OLmen come to SF and get injured more often? That's something to consider. There are so many variables that I think we'd need 10-15 years of data to find any association between scheme and injuries.

100%. Let's see some data before making definitive statements.

A theory is not a definitive statement. Also, it's football. Good luck finding anything that's a clear causation and not just correlation.

I think what we're doing with 'scheme causes injuries' is hypothesizing.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by thl408:
Do injury free OLmen come to SF and get injured more often? That's something to consider. There are so many variables that I think we'd need 10-15 years of data to find any association between scheme and injuries.

100%. Let's see some data before making definitive statements.

A theory is not a definitive statement. Also, it's football. Good luck finding anything that's a clear causation and not just correlation.

I think what we're doing with 'scheme causes injuries' is hypothesizing.

You always get me on that one.

Originally posted by NCommand:
You always get me on that one.

"My theory" is much easier to say/type than "my hypothesis".

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:
You always get me on that one.

"My theory" is much easier to say/type than "my hypothesis".

adding to NC incorrect list

Originally posted by NCommand:
I do genuinely think they are doing everything they can.

We've had many theories in the injury thread including they're too soft on them. Here's an example. From Harbaugh to Kyle in AGL. 2014 was when all the veterans physically broke down.

Historical AGL Ranks: Lower = Healthiest
2008 - 6th
2009 - 23rd
2010 - 4th
2011 - 8th (NFCCG)
2012 - 1st (Superbowl)
2013 - 23rd (NFCCG)
2014 - 26th
2015 - 26th
2016 - 24th
2017 - 23rd
2018 - 29th
2019 - 27th (Superbowl)
2020 - 32nd
2021 - 29th (NFCCG)

So damn impressive, if we just had 1 or 2 healthier players 2012, 2019 & 2021 we would've had 8 SBs

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I do genuinely think they are doing everything they can.

We've had many theories in the injury thread including they're too soft on them. Here's an example. From Harbaugh to Kyle in AGL. 2014 was when all the veterans physically broke down.

Historical AGL Ranks: Lower = Healthiest
2008 - 6th
2009 - 23rd
2010 - 4th
2011 - 8th (NFCCG)
2012 - 1st (Superbowl)
2013 - 23rd (NFCCG)
2014 - 26th
2015 - 26th
2016 - 24th
2017 - 23rd
2018 - 29th
2019 - 27th (Superbowl)
2020 - 32nd
2021 - 29th (NFCCG)

So damn impressive, if we just had 1 or 2 healthier players 2012, 2019 & 2021 we would've had 8 SBs

My own pet theory is that it stems from ShanaLynch and the entire front office. They used to value talented players that were undervalued because of injury. Kentavius being a prime example. He was injured during the draft and the 49rs took him at round four. Another Example: Jason Verrett was traded for and he's had a history of injury problems. They had no problems getting Richard Sherman, another injured player who was recovering from injury.

Starts from the top - Chairman of the board - John York is a MD. He knows injury and healing mechanics and I think prides himself in being able to be a source of medical knowledge for the strength and conditioning team. (no proof, just conjecture, but it makes sense). As a owner he also can put his thumb on the scale if somebody in the organization needs him to. Chairman York is witness first hand to Gore being drafted and becoming a Hall of Fame player (hopefully the latest news regarding domestic violence, I think, won't affect his Hall of Fame chances). Gore had severe injuries in college but didn't have any while in the pros.

John Lynch - he's had injury problems early in his career and he worked through it, so I think he had a bent towards talented but injured players, hoping they would be healthy after being in the NFL strength and conditioning program.

Kyle - he watches film, but film does not reveal durability. That's outside of film study and more the preview of textual scouting reports and bios.

Just to sum up, the entire front office made durability a very low priority, up until that last couple of playoff games where lack of durability hurt their chances for a Lombardi. I hope they have learned their lessons and elevated durability to as high a priority as talent. As they have recently said, Durability is also ability.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by thl408:
Do injury free OLmen come to SF and get injured more often? That's something to consider. There are so many variables that I think we'd need 10-15 years of data to find any association between scheme and injuries.

100%. Let's see some data before making definitive statements.

A theory is not a definitive statement. Also, it's football. Good luck finding anything that's a clear causation and not just correlation.

I think what we're doing with 'scheme causes injuries' is hypothesizing.

About half the league uses some zone concepts in their scheme, so I don't get that one.

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I do genuinely think they are doing everything they can.

We've had many theories in the injury thread including they're too soft on them. Here's an example. From Harbaugh to Kyle in AGL. 2014 was when all the veterans physically broke down.

Historical AGL Ranks: Lower = Healthiest
2008 - 6th
2009 - 23rd
2010 - 4th
2011 - 8th (NFCCG)
2012 - 1st (Superbowl)
2013 - 23rd (NFCCG)
2014 - 26th
2015 - 26th
2016 - 24th
2017 - 23rd
2018 - 29th
2019 - 27th (Superbowl)
2020 - 32nd
2021 - 29th (NFCCG)

So damn impressive, if we just had 1 or 2 healthier players 2012, 2019 & 2021 we would've had 8 SBs

That doesn't add up. We had the healthiest team in 2012 and still lost the SB. We went to the SB with the healthiest and the 27 healthiest teams and both outcomes were the same. Does being the healthiest team make it easier to get to the SB? Perhaps. But it doesn't guarantee anything.