49ers Offensive Line

All this talk about "the niners are built to win the superbowl" surrounding the topic of Trey Lance taking over, yet the biggest question mark on this team is the offensive line. If we aren't as good as what people say we will be this year, it won't be because of the QBs but the OLine.

That said I remain optimistic, I think Burford/Banks will be good players in time.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by dj43:
I posted this in the McGlinchey thread but it fits here better:
_________
At some point, you have to look at the position coaches. The OL guys that have been good under Shanahan have either been here before (Staley) or trades/FA signees (LT, Mack, Richburg). None of the draft picks have met or exceeded expectations. McKivitz, Moore, McG, Banks, etc., will not be on Foerster and Cregg's resumes when they look for their next job.

The really good coaches take the average player and move them up a level. The fact none of the current group have shown any significant growth speaks to low-quality coaching, IMO.

I fear you are right.

I think it's a combination of coaching and our inability to draft OL.

Because I believe Burford could be the first OL that we have drafted that could improve over time. I feel like he's the exception to the rule.

What bugs me the most is that they want to focus on running the ball and yet they've passed up a lot of really good run blocking lineman in good OL drafts, to then turn around and draft a very average run blocking guard really high in a poor guard class.

Same thing with RBs. It's not that there's never a RB worth picking in rounds 1-3, it's that we continue to pick extremely average RBs high and at the same we have a lot of success with UDFA's.

No one would be complaining about drafting Sermon high if he played like Johnathan Taylor. I know that's obvious but I'm just saying, if we're in position to draft an elite RB I don't see why we should pass on him.

I would fire whoever is in charge of scouting RBs and OL. Bring in a coach who knows how to get the most out of our OL and start scouting OL better.

Position coaches have a say in who is drafted. How that responsibility is divided I can't say but I know they have a voice in reviewing scouting reports and recommending a choice. So, if they make a recommendation and that player disappoints, they are now doubly responsible.

High quality discussions in the OL thread. My ❤

Originally posted by NCommand:
High quality discussions in the OL thread. My ❤

C'mon in. The water is fine.

should fire Foerster and hire someone with a track record of improving oline. Oline is everyone's major concern going into this season. At least teach the guys how to hold dline covertly to avoid free rushes to the QB. They don't call holding especially when the game is on the line.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by NCommand:
High quality discussions in the OL thread. My ❤

C'mon in. The water is fine.

Enough about me. Let's get back to the OL discussion.

I mean is really on coaching when you're coaching super late picks and UDFAs ? Can't hit the lotto every time

we went through this with WRs back in the days

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by dj43:
I posted this in the McGlinchey thread but it fits here better:
_________
At some point, you have to look at the position coaches. The OL guys that have been good under Shanahan have either been here before (Staley) or trades/FA signees (LT, Mack, Richburg). None of the draft picks have met or exceeded expectations. McKivitz, Moore, McG, Banks, etc., will not be on Foerster and Cregg's resumes when they look for their next job.

The really good coaches take the average player and move them up a level. The fact none of the current group have shown any significant growth speaks to low-quality coaching, IMO.

Good post dj.

I'll say this; From 2018 - 2019, the OL was getting better YOY. Benton was the OL coach and Foerster was hired as a consultant to eval players in the league and had some input during pre-draft conversations. Benton saw the benefit of keeping Brunskill at OT and never tried to make him a guard. Even Skule looked decent under Benton. Not just the OL was awesome at runblocking, but the blocking TEs were pretty good too in that stretch outside of Kittle. It was not a shock at all now that I look back an assess why the 49ers run game was damn near unstoppable. Once Benton went to the Jets and the 49ers promoted Forester, not one drafted linemen got better YOY and we move Brunskill to guard and back-up center. 2020 was a forgettable year, particularly with the OL and we didn't keep one FA from that line. 2021 was better because Mack joins the team and one could also argue skill players got better (like Deebo) and Kyle could hide a lot on his OL (e.g. Compton a guard, started at RT). I've shared my opinion about Foerster and he continues to get a pass just like he did when he was here before.

Good history. It continues to point the finger at Foerster.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by NCommand:
High quality discussions in the OL thread. My ❤

C'mon in. The water is fine.

Enough about me. Let's get back to the OL discussion.

It's a long swim back.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
I just wish there was an agile O-lineman that can pass protect. Like can we get both?

Trent Williams!

Of course, that costs you something like a first round first pick in the draft.

We tried that (Mike McGlinchey lol). But it's high time we develop these draft picks.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
I mean is really on coaching when you're coaching super late picks and UDFAs ? Can't hit the lotto every time

we went through this with WRs back in the days

What about Glinch and Banks, though? Both we're considered high picks ( especially, Mike ) and at this point, Mike has been a big disappointment overall, considering where he was drafted to begin, whilst Banks Is still a question mark.

I still believe It would be best for the 9ers focus on Improving the OL through free agency and leave the draft for other positional needs, such as, CBs, Lbs, ect.

Originally posted by Sickaa:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
I mean is really on coaching when you're coaching super late picks and UDFAs ? Can't hit the lotto every time

we went through this with WRs back in the days

What about Glinch and Banks, though? Both we're considered high picks ( especially, Mike ) and at this point, Mike has been a big disappointment overall, considering where he was drafted to begin, whilst Banks Is still a question mark.

I still believe It would be best for the 9ers focus on Improving the OL through free agency and leave the draft for other positional needs, such as, CBs, Lbs, ect.

So one often injured first rounder. If we went high round OL every year.. do we have the team today? Odds say we don't

now that we got the team, there's more opportunities for quality going forward to fill the rest of the pieces which aren't many

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by NCommand:
High quality discussions in the OL thread. My ❤

C'mon in. The water is fine.

Enough about me. Let's get back to the OL discussion.

LMAO. I'm in no position to assess OL coaching outside of the end results and no doubt, the lack of talent identified and then subsequently, developed has been a massive issue over 5 years (to date; that could change this year). TBF, Kyle prefers veterans who already know his system even if they clearly lacked talent.

IMHO, their strategy has been completely backwards. With a guy like Kocurek and with the preferred rotation, W9 and oversaturated DL that are annually available all year, that's the position coach you give all the 5th-UDFA's and cheap veteran FA's.

We clearly don't have a Kocurek on the offensive side so that's the side that needs premier talent, not the 5th-UDFA's and cheap veterans.

That's not to say you pass on Bosa or top notch talent...just add more balance in the resources. In addition, we've learned that while the DL rotates 10-11+ DL annually, it's the OL that runs deep into OL7-8+ and that's cost us significantly in the end. We've learned eventually, the talent will need to stand on its own.

In addition, we've seen these officials completely neutralize our pass rush by allowing holdings all game long as they try and promote the entertainment side of football (e.g. gun slinging QB's and passing game).

Our team building and offensive and defensive philosophy is constantly going against that grain.

Finally, the OL is clearly Kyle's blindspot. He owns the 53. This is his roster annually and the OL issues are very consistent in their strengths and weaknesses. He genuinely sees the OL like most fans...as long as they aren't standing out in a bad way, he's fine with it. Kyle basically controls the 90 man roster as well since he created every profile for every player he needs to operate his system from. The scouts go and find those exact profiles. Lynch gets his annual first pick-DL of course and works in concert with Kyle. Our pro personnel side is nearly non-existent given they extend in-house mostly and only pick up 1 higher end FA per year. In short, this roster is Kyle's IMHO.

Gonna be interesting to see how this OL grows through out the season.

Originally posted by NCommand:
LMAO. I'm in no position to assess OL coaching outside of the end results and no doubt, the lack of talent identified and then subsequently, developed has been a massive issue over 5 years (to date; that could change this year). TBF, Kyle prefers veterans who already know his system even if they clearly lacked talent.

IMHO, their strategy has been completely backwards. With a guy like Kocurek and with the preferred rotation, W9 and oversaturated DL that are annually available all year, that's the position coach you give all the 5th-UDFA's and cheap veteran FA's.

We clearly don't have a Kocurek on the offensive side so that's the side that needs premier talent, not the 5th-UDFA's and cheap veterans.

That's not to say you pass on Bosa or top notch talent...just add more balance in the resources. In addition, we've learned that while the DL rotates 10-11+ DL annually, it's the OL that runs deep into OL7-8+ and that's cost us significantly in the end. We've learned eventually, the talent will need to stand on its own.

In addition, we've seen these officials completely neutralize our pass rush by allowing holdings all game long as they try and promote the entertainment side of football (e.g. gun slinging QB's and passing game).

Our team building and offensive and defensive philosophy is constantly going against that grain.

If that's the case then our OL should & will hold all the same…

I mean you act like they have spent money or picks on the OL overall…top paid LT, top 10 pick at RT, traded for form 1st rd OG, top paid center, top 50 pick at OG. That doesn't always equal success as we have seen.

I was and still am a fan of the Burford pick. I think he's gonna be a long-term starter at RG. Banks imo just wasn't a scheme fit, when the pick was made I was like WTF. All that said dude was a starter at LG for Notre Dame since 2018 (which is kinda a big deal) he was a high end recruit. His pass-blocking grade was 80+ and that was his strength in college. Imo he's got slow feet and that will hurt him here and at the next level, but for pass-blocking purposes that wasn't a massive issue in college.