49ers Offensive Line

from athletic regarding draft and no OL

Shanahan's rationale is rooted in the 49ers' belief that O-line is a tougher spot for rookies to break in than other positions, where players can initially focus on more specialized roles that prevent early overexposure to NFL competition.

"Receivers, running backs and D-linemen, you're rotating," Shanahan said. "You can put guys that just have a certain skill set, put them in that situation and that situation only. An O-lineman, you're out there 70 plays. That's why the guy with the best highlight tape is not the guy that you go get. If it's the highlight tape and the whole game, yes, but an O-lineman is different. You've got to be built to last. You don't have to be flashy. You've got to make sure you can survive that game and not be the reason that we lost

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
from athletic regarding draft and no OL

Shanahan's rationale is rooted in the 49ers' belief that O-line is a tougher spot for rookies to break in than other positions, where players can initially focus on more specialized roles that prevent early overexposure to NFL competition.

"Receivers, running backs and D-linemen, you're rotating," Shanahan said. "You can put guys that just have a certain skill set, put them in that situation and that situation only. An O-lineman, you're out there 70 plays. That's why the guy with the best highlight tape is not the guy that you go get. If it's the highlight tape and the whole game, yes, but an O-lineman is different. You've got to be built to last. You don't have to be flashy. You've got to make sure you can survive that game and not be the reason that we lost

I seem to remember an argument about that very thing. OL are harder to sign as backups than DL simply because DL can rotate in and out while OL want an opportunity to play 70 plays.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
from athletic regarding draft and no OL

Shanahan's rationale is rooted in the 49ers' belief that O-line is a tougher spot for rookies to break in than other positions, where players can initially focus on more specialized roles that prevent early overexposure to NFL competition.

"Receivers, running backs and D-linemen, you're rotating," Shanahan said. "You can put guys that just have a certain skill set, put them in that situation and that situation only. An O-lineman, you're out there 70 plays. That's why the guy with the best highlight tape is not the guy that you go get. If it's the highlight tape and the whole game, yes, but an O-lineman is different. You've got to be built to last. You don't have to be flashy. You've got to make sure you can survive that game and not be the reason that we lost

I seem to remember an argument about that very thing. OL are harder to sign as backups than DL simply because DL can rotate in and out while OL want an opportunity to play 70 plays.

I recall it as well

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
from athletic regarding draft and no OL

Shanahan's rationale is rooted in the 49ers' belief that O-line is a tougher spot for rookies to break in than other positions, where players can initially focus on more specialized roles that prevent early overexposure to NFL competition.

"Receivers, running backs and D-linemen, you're rotating," Shanahan said. "You can put guys that just have a certain skill set, put them in that situation and that situation only. An O-lineman, you're out there 70 plays. That's why the guy with the best highlight tape is not the guy that you go get. If it's the highlight tape and the whole game, yes, but an O-lineman is different. You've got to be built to last. You don't have to be flashy. You've got to make sure you can survive that game and not be the reason that we lost

LOL. So you need OL who can play 1,100+ snaps a year? Earth shattering perspective there.

The bold (and his mentality) is exactly what's cost us numerous times (one of the main factors, anyways).

It's almost like he's recognizing how critical they are to buy/develop while simultaneously establishing the lowest of expectations possible.

PS: Thanks for posting, Hoov (genuinely).

Originally posted by NCommand:
LOL. So you need OL who can play 1,100+ snaps a year? Earth shattering perspective there.

The bold (and his mentality) is exactly what's cost us numerous times (one of the main factors, anyways).

It's almost like he's recognizing how critical they are to buy/develop while simultaneously establishing the lowest of expectations possible.

PS: Thanks for posting, Hoov (genuinely).

I can think of bigger reasons

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
from athletic regarding draft and no OL

Shanahan's rationale is rooted in the 49ers' belief that O-line is a tougher spot for rookies to break in than other positions, where players can initially focus on more specialized roles that prevent early overexposure to NFL competition.

"Receivers, running backs and D-linemen, you're rotating," Shanahan said. "You can put guys that just have a certain skill set, put them in that situation and that situation only. An O-lineman, you're out there 70 plays. That's why the guy with the best highlight tape is not the guy that you go get. If it's the highlight tape and the whole game, yes, but an O-lineman is different. You've got to be built to last. You don't have to be flashy. You've got to make sure you can survive that game and not be the reason that we lost

LOL. So you need OL who can play 1,100+ snaps a year? Earth shattering perspective there.

The bold (and his mentality) is exactly what's cost us numerous times (one of the main factors, anyways).

It's almost like he's recognizing how critical they are to buy/develop while simultaneously establishing the lowest of expectations possible.

PS: Thanks for posting, Hoov (genuinely).

Damn, his thinking here vs reality is strange. Nobody is perfect, but for me this is a huge difference between him and Walsh.

Walsh made sure he had a beast o line and had McKittrick from day 1.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
Damn, his thinking here vs reality is strange. Nobody is perfect, but for me this is a huge difference between him and Walsh.

Walsh made sure he had a beast o line and had McKittrick from day 1.

No he didn't. In fact he didn't take an OL in the draft until his 4th draft. Starting OL from 1981 was a 4th rounder, an 8th rounder, a 7th rounder, and 2 2nd rounders, all inherited. McKittrick was all about developing guys.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
from athletic regarding draft and no OL

Shanahan's rationale is rooted in the 49ers' belief that O-line is a tougher spot for rookies to break in than other positions, where players can initially focus on more specialized roles that prevent early overexposure to NFL competition.

"Receivers, running backs and D-linemen, you're rotating," Shanahan said. "You can put guys that just have a certain skill set, put them in that situation and that situation only. An O-lineman, you're out there 70 plays. That's why the guy with the best highlight tape is not the guy that you go get. If it's the highlight tape and the whole game, yes, but an O-lineman is different. You've got to be built to last. You don't have to be flashy. You've got to make sure you can survive that game and not be the reason that we lost

LOL. So you need OL who can play 1,100+ snaps a year? Earth shattering perspective there.

The bold (and his mentality) is exactly what's cost us numerous times (one of the main factors, anyways).

It's almost like he's recognizing how critical they are to buy/develop while simultaneously establishing the lowest of expectations possible.

PS: Thanks for posting, Hoov (genuinely).

Damn, his thinking here vs reality is strange. Nobody is perfect, but for me this is a huge difference between him and Walsh.

Walsh made sure he had a beast o line and had McKittrick from day 1.

Yeah, having McKittrick was like us having Kocurek now for the DL. He could get the most out of anybody. That said, they had (brought in) some studs back in the day and developed some guys into studs. And no doubt, BW set the standard for overseeing the OL and Bob. There's no way in hell BW would have that low standard for any position group esp. OL when he put so many hours into the timing and mechanics of his QB.

PS: Of course you had 35 rounds in the draft back then and 3-a-days and months to properly develop them. Now? You need the talent, first with way less time to develop.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
LOL. So you need OL who can play 1,100+ snaps a year? Earth shattering perspective there.

The bold (and his mentality) is exactly what's cost us numerous times (one of the main factors, anyways).

It's almost like he's recognizing how critical they are to buy/develop while simultaneously establishing the lowest of expectations possible.

PS: Thanks for posting, Hoov (genuinely).

I can think of bigger reasons

You'd be splitting hairs then from a long ass grocery long list.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
No he didn't. In fact he didn't take an OL in the draft until his 4th draft. Starting OL from 1981 was a 4th rounder, an 8th rounder, a 7th rounder, and 2 2nd rounders, all inherited. McKittrick was all about developing guys.

Too funny, post 81 (0 OL taken) it went like this..not exactly prioritizing based off what we hear here . Could argue it's even more egregious considering how many rounds there were to pick OL
82 Paris R2
83 Sapolu R11
84 McIntyre R3
85 Collie R5
86 Wallace R4
87 Barton R1
88 Clarkson R8

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Too funny, post 81 (0 OL taken) it went like this..not exactly prioritizing
82 Paris R2
83 Sapolu R11
84 McIntyre R3
85 Collie R5
86 Wallace R4
87 Barton R1
88 Clarkson R8

Also funny that the only position that is affected by lack of practice time for development is OL. Undrafted FA's are fine anywhere but OL.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Too funny, post 81 (0 OL taken) it went like this..not exactly prioritizing
82 Paris R2
83 Sapolu R11
84 McIntyre R3
85 Collie R5
86 Wallace R4
87 Barton R1
88 Clarkson R8

Also funny that the only position that is affected by lack of practice time for development is OL. Undrafted FA's are fine anywhere but OL.

I think I smell a case study

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
Damn, his thinking here vs reality is strange. Nobody is perfect, but for me this is a huge difference between him and Walsh.

Walsh made sure he had a beast o line and had McKittrick from day 1.

No he didn't. In fact he didn't take an OL in the draft until his 4th draft. Starting OL from 1981 was a 4th rounder, an 8th rounder, a 7th rounder, and 2 2nd rounders, all inherited. McKittrick was all about developing guys.

Facts. This made sure stuff is silly. Walsh took what he had and developed them and gave McKittrick less to work with in terms of picks. While I think more can be done, he hasn't treated the position the way DB has been treated (no 1st or 2nd round picks). I hope they look much better with a year under their belts.

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
Facts. This made sure stuff is silly. Walsh took what he had and developed them and gave McKittrick less to work with in terms of picks. While I think more can be done, he hasn't treated the position the way DB has been treated (no 1st or 2nd round picks). I hope they look much better with a year under their belts.

Right on money Lifelong

Took em 7 drafts to actually use a second day pick on a TE. Haven't drafted a LB since Greenlaw. Preaching to the choir about DB.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
No he didn't. In fact he didn't take an OL in the draft until his 4th draft. Starting OL from 1981 was a 4th rounder, an 8th rounder, a 7th rounder, and 2 2nd rounders, all inherited. McKittrick was all about developing guys.

Too funny, post 81 (0 OL taken) it went like this.not exactly prioritizing based off what we hear here . Could argue it's even more egregious considering how many rounds there were to pick OL
82 Paris R2
83 Sapolu R11
84 McIntyre R3
85 Collie R5
86 Wallace R4
87 Barton R1
88 Clarkson R8

In 1979, Walsh's first year as HC, he inherited a starting OL of Keith Fahnhorst, Randy Cross, Fred Quillan, Jon Ayers, and Ron Singleton. That same group (Dan Audick via trade replaced Singleton) went to the SB beginning in 1981. And, because Walsh and McKittrick wanted faster if smaller OL, they could pick OL lower in the draft than other teams.