49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
I gotta shoutout Daniel Brunskill in this thread; sorry to break up the NC debates lol. But we need to resign this guy and let him retire a 49er IMO. This dude has been our offensive lines offensive weapon. Filling in for Banks at LG and not skipping a beat; arguably did it better. I don't think I've ever seen a guy literally play every position on the line in such the short time frame he's done it for us; seemingly every season he plays a different position. And the crazy thing about it all is that I think we all universally agree that his best position might be tackle and that hasn't been where he's played recently filling in at C and both guard positions. We talk about movie scripts with Purdy; this dudes 30 for 30 would be a damn good story too man. Brunskill

I second that.

He's the perfect backup, IMHO. Perfect.

I mean... Larry Allen would be a nice backup too.

Man, we had some effing studs on the OL over our history. He was such a beast even when he came to us.

I won a signed Larry Allen football at a 49ers event when I was a kid. I got to meet him and Sopoaga.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Back when? so I can see some numbers. But pressure TTT takes the mobile vs pure pocket passer argument out of the equation due to the definition of pressure TTT given by PFF.

This is the O line thread and we are talking pass pro. Anything dealing with coverage or a QB not reading the defense quickly enough is for another conversation in another thread. Although a discussion of who is responsible for a free rusher is an interesting one and is tied to this topic of pass pro as well.

The 3.73 seconds should relieve the O line from being the major issue in that game imo. You can blame it on playcalling, the receivers failing to get open or the QB not processing the field fast enough but not the O line.

I was one of the very first to note TTT and IAY from NG, what 3-4 years ago? But back then I only brought it up because I could see those stats compared to ALL QB's. And I could also see the list of QB hits. It became very obvious PP was an issue. And then a million PFF stats came out to validate it (see DL). I run the Team Needs thread. So recognizing Jimmy's skill set, I pushed hard for building up the pass protection like we did the DL. That would give us the best shot IMHO.

Fair.

So how I read it with the newer splits is there were periods where the PP held up. This is where you focus on Jimmy because his production went down. I'm saying kudos for holding up at those points but I can't speak to what happened. I'm also saying the cumulative stat is highly correlated to wins/losses so my expectations were right in line with PFF's own analysis.

I can speak to what happened because of the film breakdowns that I watched that showed receivers open on a handful or more plays where he had time to make the pass but didn't. Instead he was eventually pressured and the passes ended up incomplete.

I don't have a personal hatred for Jimmy. I praise and critique him as I see it. Last season he was jekyll and hyde throughout much of the season. In a majority of games he was great in one half and bad in another. Jimmy picked the wrong half to play bad in the championship. He came back this season and continuously looked better than I have ever seen him and it is ashame that he was once again injured.

It's a matter of degree. Like I said from the very beginning. You clearly still want to talk Jimmy.

This wasn't a QB-reliant offense. It was run-centric. Run blocking and dudes like Mostert, Deebo, Kittle and Gould were just as critical to our wins as Jimmy if not more. Like Brock says today...he's simply a conductor. A point guard. We spent a gazillion resources on the DL at the expense of the OL...hell, at the expense of all other areas. Stafford went from Detroit to LA and finally had an elite OL. He won. 25% > 35.5%. That's the difference in a 3 point win. So far your own stat company confirms the probability of winning with higher TTT and overall pressure rates.

Only Hoov could find one playoff win with a 35% or higher pressure rate; against our D. The same D we spent a gazillion resources on to close out games. Where's your same expectations here?

Then the one outlier (who was losing through 53 minutes) also got destroyed the next time. It's about realistic expectations. I'm looking globally because of the strong proven correlation. You're focusing on the granular. And that's OK too. I like the odds.

And if we go to a Superbowl with Brock and T.Williams is playing on one leg and McKivitz is starting and they give up a 35% pressure rate, I wouldn't expect him to win either.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
I gotta shoutout Daniel Brunskill in this thread; sorry to break up the NC debates lol. But we need to resign this guy and let him retire a 49er IMO. This dude has been our offensive lines offensive weapon. Filling in for Banks at LG and not skipping a beat; arguably did it better. I don't think I've ever seen a guy literally play every position on the line in such the short time frame he's done it for us; seemingly every season he plays a different position. And the crazy thing about it all is that I think we all universally agree that his best position might be tackle and that hasn't been where he's played recently filling in at C and both guard positions. We talk about movie scripts with Purdy; this dudes 30 for 30 would be a damn good story too man. Brunskill

I second that.

He's the perfect backup, IMHO. Perfect.

I mean... Larry Allen would be a nice backup too.

Man, we had some effing studs on the OL over our history. He was such a beast even when he came to us.

I won a signed Larry Allen football at a 49ers event when I was a kid. I got to meet him and Sopoaga.

That's dope!!!! I bet Sopoaga was the nicest dude!

These are pressure TTT measurements for the 2022 season. The filter is 20% of 266 dropbacks. P2S% is the percentage of pressures turned into sacks.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Back when? so I can see some numbers. But pressure TTT takes the mobile vs pure pocket passer argument out of the equation due to the definition of pressure TTT given by PFF.

This is the O line thread and we are talking pass pro. Anything dealing with coverage or a QB not reading the defense quickly enough is for another conversation in another thread. Although a discussion of who is responsible for a free rusher is an interesting one and is tied to this topic of pass pro as well.

The 3.73 seconds should relieve the O line from being the major issue in that game imo. You can blame it on playcalling, the receivers failing to get open or the QB not processing the field fast enough but not the O line.

I was one of the very first to note TTT and IAY from NG, what 3-4 years ago? But back then I only brought it up because I could see those stats compared to ALL QB's. And I could also see the list of QB hits. It became very obvious PP was an issue. And then a million PFF stats came out to validate it (see DL). I run the Team Needs thread. So recognizing Jimmy's skill set, I pushed hard for building up the pass protection like we did the DL. That would give us the best shot IMHO.

Fair.

So how I read it with the newer splits is there were periods where the PP held up. This is where you focus on Jimmy because his production went down. I'm saying kudos for holding up at those points but I can't speak to what happened. I'm also saying the cumulative stat is highly correlated to wins/losses so my expectations were right in line with PFF's own analysis.

I can speak to what happened because of the film breakdowns that I watched that showed receivers open on a handful or more plays where he had time to make the pass but didn't. Instead he was eventually pressured and the passes ended up incomplete.

I don't have a personal hatred for Jimmy. I praise and critique him as I see it. Last season he was jekyll and hyde throughout much of the season. In a majority of games he was great in one half and bad in another. Jimmy picked the wrong half to play bad in the championship. He came back this season and continuously looked better than I have ever seen him and it is ashame that he was once again injured.

It's a matter of degree. Like I said from the very beginning. You clearly still want to talk Jimmy.

This wasn't a QB-reliant offense. It was run-centric. Run blocking and dudes like Mostert, Deebo, Kittle and Gould were just as critical to our wins as Jimmy if not more. Like Brock says today...he's simply a conductor. A point guard. We spent a gazillion resources on the DL at the expense of the OL...hell, at the expense of all other areas. Stafford went from Detroit to LA and finally had an elite OL. He won. 25% > 35.5%. That's the difference in a 3 point win. So far your own stat company confirms the probability of winning with higher TTT and overall pressure rates.

Only Hoov could find one playoff win with a 35% or higher pressure rate; against our D. The same D we spent a gazillion resources on to close out games. Where's your same expectations here?

Then the one outlier (who was losing through 53 minutes) also got destroyed the next time. It's about realistic expectations. I'm looking globally because of the strong proven correlation. You're focusing on the granular. And that's OK too. I like the odds.

And if we go to a Superbowl with Brock and T.Williams is playing on one leg and McKivitz is starting and they give up a 35% pressure rate, I wouldn't expect him to win either.

Whatever, dude. 3.73 seconds before pressure arrived means it wasn't on the O line. If you want blame it on something else than fine. I was telling you what I saw on film with my own eyes. If you saw something else in the pass game that was at fault please do share.

What Hoov found is most likely true. But that doesn't explain what the reason for the high pressure rate was; pass pro, coverage, receivers failing to get open, QB holding the ball too long, playcalling, etc.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
i also find it funny that it's incumbent on YAC to prove whether 3.73 seconds to throw is good or not.

The ball was being held too long. Film can be broken down to see why all day but that doesn't change that fact. So to use pressure rate to put blame on the OL without that context is completely disingenuous. The OL did their job on the plays he was pressured. Bottom line.

This is your issue. You are assuming holding the ball longer is 100% a QB issue. That's disingenuous. There could be a variety of issues for that. Holding protection longer actually is a negative thing according to PFF past a QB's first read.

Also, funny you ignore this: 35.5% > 25%. THAT is far more significant overall than the splits. The more pressure, the higher odds of negative plays. The more duress, the higher the odds of negative plays.

The pass protection overall was an issue all through the playoffs and this game was no different.

And to me, the PP was just a part of the overall reason for the loss. Just like Jimmy, Tartt, the defense, Kyle getting outschemed (1.5 gap), ST blunders at the end, secondary, 10 point lead curse, health, etc.

Pick your preference.

There are only 2 reasons for a QB to hold the ball too long. Either the QB is not seeing the field well and is indecisive or the coverage was blanketing the receivers.

If both Stafford and Garoppolo both had a pressure TTT of 2.89 seconds than your argument for pressure rate being higher for Jimmy would hold more weight. But Jimmy was holding the ball almost a full second longer than Stafford before pressure got to him.

Show me how long Stafford held the ball without pressure? The splits.

As to the first sentence, IMHO, it was absolutely a combination of both.

Without pressure is pointless since if the first read was open, the ball would be coming out well before pass pro ever had a chance to break down. But if you must know. Stafford had a TTT of 2.42 on passes with a clean pocket and Jimmy had a 2.21. But we all know Jimmy has one of if not the fastest releases in the NFL.

What this tells me is both QB's were getting the ball out to their first reads as quickly as possible. This makes sense given the pressure ability of both defenses.

In the end, they got home at a much higher rate (35.5%) than we did (25%). Therefore QB pressure was a factor in our loss by 3. Should we move this topic to the DL thread?

Wow.....All of this without the need to watch the damn game. Percentages seconds with a clean pocket,....lol. That's all you need to make a definitive conclusion (that you've bene dying to make).

I will remind again,...this is 100% the wrong way to use stats in football. Completely reversed, logically.

But that wont stop some here.

Originally posted by random49er:
Wow.....All of this without the need to watch the damn game. Percentages seconds with a clean pocket,....lol. That's all you need to make a definitive conclusion (that you've bene dying to make).

I will remind again,...this is 100% the wrong way to use stats in football. Completely reversed, logically.

But that wont stop some here.

Somehow the difference in a 3 point win was the pressure rate and not the fact that one team was holding the ball too long. Can't fathom that the difference in the pressure rate WAS likely due to the nearly second difference in holding the ball.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
i also find it funny that it's incumbent on YAC to prove whether 3.73 seconds to throw is good or not.

The ball was being held too long. Film can be broken down to see why all day but that doesn't change that fact. So to use pressure rate to put blame on the OL without that context is completely disingenuous. The OL did their job on the plays he was pressured. Bottom line.

This is your issue. You are assuming holding the ball longer is 100% a QB issue. That's disingenuous. There could be a variety of issues for that. Holding protection longer actually is a negative thing according to PFF past a QB's first read.

Also, funny you ignore this: 35.5% > 25%. THAT is far more significant overall than the splits. The more pressure, the higher odds of negative plays. The more duress, the higher the odds of negative plays.

The pass protection overall was an issue all through the playoffs and this game was no different.

And to me, the PP was just a part of the overall reason for the loss. Just like Jimmy, Tartt, the defense, Kyle getting outschemed (1.5 gap), ST blunders at the end, secondary, 10 point lead curse, health, etc.

Pick your preference.

There are only 2 reasons for a QB to hold the ball too long. Either the QB is not seeing the field well and is indecisive or the coverage was blanketing the receivers.

If both Stafford and Garoppolo both had a pressure TTT of 2.89 seconds than your argument for pressure rate being higher for Jimmy would hold more weight. But Jimmy was holding the ball almost a full second longer than Stafford before pressure got to him.

Show me how long Stafford held the ball without pressure? The splits.

As to the first sentence, IMHO, it was absolutely a combination of both.

Without pressure is pointless since if the first read was open, the ball would be coming out well before pass pro ever had a chance to break down. But if you must know. Stafford had a TTT of 2.42 on passes with a clean pocket and Jimmy had a 2.21. But we all know Jimmy has one of if not the fastest releases in the NFL.

What this tells me is both QB's were getting the ball out to their first reads as quickly as possible. This makes sense given the pressure ability of both defenses.

In the end, they got home at a much higher rate (35.5%) than we did (25%). Therefore QB pressure was a factor in our loss by 3. Should we move this topic to the DL thread?

Wow.....All of this without the need to watch the damn game. Percentages seconds with a clean pocket,....lol. That's all you need to make a definitive conclusion (that you've bene dying to make).I will remind again,...this is 100% the wrong way to use stats in football. Completely reversed, logically.

But that wont stop some here.

talk about putting your head in the sand to really avoid the real issue

Originally posted by NCommand:
It's a matter of degree. Like I said from the very beginning. You clearly still want to talk Jimmy.

This wasn't a QB-reliant offense. It was run-centric. Run blocking and dudes like Mostert, Deebo, Kittle and Gould were just as critical to our wins as Jimmy if not more. Like Brock says today...he's simply a conductor. A point guard. We spent a gazillion resources on the DL at the expense of the OL...hell, at the expense of all other areas. Stafford went from Detroit to LA and finally had an elite OL. He won. 25% > 35.5%. That's the difference in a 3 point win. So far your own stat company confirms the probability of winning with higher TTT and overall pressure rates.

Only Hoov could find one playoff win with a 35% or higher pressure rate; against our D. The same D we spent a gazillion resources on to close out games. Where's your same expectations here?

Then the one outlier (who was losing through 53 minutes) also got destroyed the next time. It's about realistic expectations. I'm looking globally because of the strong proven correlation. You're focusing on the granular. And that's OK too. I like the odds.

And if we go to a Superbowl with Brock and T.Williams is playing on one leg and McKivitz is starting and they give up a 35% pressure rate, I wouldn't expect him to win either.

You asked for one and I gave you one, and shocker it still wasn't good enough and you proceeded to move goalposts. But here you go, here are a few other SB winners …and this just SB's in the last 15 or so years . And these are just few I could quickly find. Let the spin begin

Eli Manning - 2007 44.7%
Tom Brady - 2017 40% 2.45
Eli Manning - 2011 39.5%
Aaron Rodgers - 2010 35.7%
Peyton Manning - 2015 35.7%

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
you think he still thinks the Eagles is an elite OL after giving up 12 sacks the last two games ?

I didn't watch but the sacks and losses may be reverting to a much lesser QB. No surprise that when Hurts went down, so did the team.

Lol. According to him though.....it's all the OLine when it's "built" and "elite."

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
i also find it funny that it's incumbent on YAC to prove whether 3.73 seconds to throw is good or not.

The ball was being held too long. Film can be broken down to see why all day but that doesn't change that fact. So to use pressure rate to put blame on the OL without that context is completely disingenuous. The OL did their job on the plays he was pressured. Bottom line.

This is your issue. You are assuming holding the ball longer is 100% a QB issue. That's disingenuous. There could be a variety of issues for that. Holding protection longer actually is a negative thing according to PFF past a QB's first read.

Also, funny you ignore this: 35.5% > 25%. THAT is far more significant overall than the splits. The more pressure, the higher odds of negative plays. The more duress, the higher the odds of negative plays.

The pass protection overall was an issue all through the playoffs and this game was no different.

And to me, the PP was just a part of the overall reason for the loss. Just like Jimmy, Tartt, the defense, Kyle getting outschemed (1.5 gap), ST blunders at the end, secondary, 10 point lead curse, health, etc.

Pick your preference.

There are only 2 reasons for a QB to hold the ball too long. Either the QB is not seeing the field well and is indecisive or the coverage was blanketing the receivers.

If both Stafford and Garoppolo both had a pressure TTT of 2.89 seconds than your argument for pressure rate being higher for Jimmy would hold more weight. But Jimmy was holding the ball almost a full second longer than Stafford before pressure got to him.

Show me how long Stafford held the ball without pressure? The splits.

As to the first sentence, IMHO, it was absolutely a combination of both.

Without pressure is pointless since if the first read was open, the ball would be coming out well before pass pro ever had a chance to break down. But if you must know. Stafford had a TTT of 2.42 on passes with a clean pocket and Jimmy had a 2.21. But we all know Jimmy has one of if not the fastest releases in the NFL.

What this tells me is both QB's were getting the ball out to their first reads as quickly as possible. This makes sense given the pressure ability of both defenses.

In the end, they got home at a much higher rate (35.5%) than we did (25%). Therefore QB pressure was a factor in our loss by 3. Should we move this topic to the DL thread?

Wow.....All of this without the need to watch the damn game. Percentages seconds with a clean pocket,....lol. That's all you need to make a definitive conclusion (that you've bene dying to make).

I will remind again,...this is 100% the wrong way to use stats in football. Completely reversed, logically.

But that wont stop some here.

I wonder what he meant by they were getting home at a much higher rate? We had 2 sacks and they had none.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
i also find it funny that it's incumbent on YAC to prove whether 3.73 seconds to throw is good or not.

The ball was being held too long. Film can be broken down to see why all day but that doesn't change that fact. So to use pressure rate to put blame on the OL without that context is completely disingenuous. The OL did their job on the plays he was pressured. Bottom line.

This is your issue. You are assuming holding the ball longer is 100% a QB issue. That's disingenuous. There could be a variety of issues for that. Holding protection longer actually is a negative thing according to PFF past a QB's first read.

Also, funny you ignore this: 35.5% > 25%. THAT is far more significant overall than the splits. The more pressure, the higher odds of negative plays. The more duress, the higher the odds of negative plays.

The pass protection overall was an issue all through the playoffs and this game was no different.

And to me, the PP was just a part of the overall reason for the loss. Just like Jimmy, Tartt, the defense, Kyle getting outschemed (1.5 gap), ST blunders at the end, secondary, 10 point lead curse, health, etc.

Pick your preference.

There are only 2 reasons for a QB to hold the ball too long. Either the QB is not seeing the field well and is indecisive or the coverage was blanketing the receivers.

If both Stafford and Garoppolo both had a pressure TTT of 2.89 seconds than your argument for pressure rate being higher for Jimmy would hold more weight. But Jimmy was holding the ball almost a full second longer than Stafford before pressure got to him.

Show me how long Stafford held the ball without pressure? The splits.

As to the first sentence, IMHO, it was absolutely a combination of both.

Without pressure is pointless since if the first read was open, the ball would be coming out well before pass pro ever had a chance to break down. But if you must know. Stafford had a TTT of 2.42 on passes with a clean pocket and Jimmy had a 2.21. But we all know Jimmy has one of if not the fastest releases in the NFL.

What this tells me is both QB's were getting the ball out to their first reads as quickly as possible. This makes sense given the pressure ability of both defenses.

In the end, they got home at a much higher rate (35.5%) than we did (25%). Therefore QB pressure was a factor in our loss by 3. Should we move this topic to the DL thread?

Wow.....All of this without the need to watch the damn game. Percentages seconds with a clean pocket,....lol. That's all you need to make a definitive conclusion (that you've bene dying to make).

I will remind again,...this is 100% the wrong way to use stats in football. Completely reversed, logically.

But that wont stop some here.

I wonder what he meant by they were getting home at a much higher rate? We had 2 sacks and they had none.

it was a cat and mouse game between jimmy and the OL.. a game within a game

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
LOL, the one you found had to be against our defense.

Find any classic pocket passers?

Burrows might have one but he's pretty athletic.

Either way, the point stands.

QB pressures go up, probability of winning goes down. Not rocket science.

Like this one: https://www.si.com/nfl/buccaneers/news/tampa-bay-buccaneers-dominany-defense-analysis-super-bowl

According to Pro Football Focus, Mahomes had been pressured in less than 2.5 seconds on 24 snaps, or 43% of his dropbacks.

Brutal.

Oof. Loss.

43% of pressures in less than 2.5 seconds sure makes the probability of winning go down.

Of course the 9ers never dealt with that so it's moot.

More time does not always equate to more open options. This team was NOT good off schedule.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Whatever, dude. 3.73 seconds before pressure arrived means it wasn't on the O line. If you want blame it on something else than fine. I was telling you what I saw on film with my own eyes. If you saw something else in the pass game that was at fault please do share.

What Hoov found is most likely true. But that doesn't explain what the reason for the high pressure rate was; pass pro, coverage, receivers failing to get open, QB holding the ball too long, playcalling, etc.

Ever since you provided the pressure rates for the NFCCG he has really latched onto it as the new barometer, as he feels this proves his point about the OL. Previously it was sacks, then when that couldn't be applied it was QB hits. Then that no longer could be applied. So for that above pressure rate % I provided, that was just to appease him because he said no QBs have ever won being pressure 35% because that was the # you provided for the niners in the NFCCG. Turns out that's not close to being true.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Whatever, dude. 3.73 seconds before pressure arrived means it wasn't on the O line. If you want blame it on something else than fine. I was telling you what I saw on film with my own eyes. If you saw something else in the pass game that was at fault please do share.

What Hoov found is most likely true. But that doesn't explain what the reason for the high pressure rate was; pass pro, coverage, receivers failing to get open, QB holding the ball too long, playcalling, etc.

Ever since you provided the pressure rates for the NFCCG he has really latched onto it as the new barometer, as he feels this proves his point about the OL. Previously it was sacks, then when that couldn't be applied it was QB hits. Then that no longer could be applied. So for that above pressure rate % I provided, that was just to appease him because he said no QBs have ever won being pressure 35% because that was the # you provided for the niners in the NFCCG. Turns out that's not close to being true.

he gone