49ers Offensive Line

I thought Purdy hided the mediocrity of the O-Line the first three games.
But against Arizona and Dallas, the O-Line really improved.
Great job by everyone.

Originally posted by pdc20:
I thought Purdy hided the mediocrity of the O-Line the first three games.
But against Arizona and Dallas, the O-Line really improved.
Great job by everyone.

The 5th fastest Time to Throw will mask (or make it moot) a ton of unit pass protection.

BUUUUUUT, Brock is making the absolute most of the passing game within that.

Either way, the OL has played really well the last 2 games and have been elite in run blocking per usual too. They deserve a lot of credit.

After Dallas, fans should be feeling very encouraged as THAT was a playoff atmosphere and one where our OL of the past s**t the bed.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by NCommand:
This ain't Madden. BOTH can be playing at that level during this stretch.

Well the logic we've heard is it's really the OLine that is the difference.

When QBs clearly do well that is the only time where this "both" thing comes up.

O line is the difference. They played very well last night. Of Purdy doesn't have time nothing good happens 90% of the time.

I hope banks is alright.

The QB is the difference.

Fred Warner and Hufanga are the difference.

Nick Bosa is the difference.

Since he's been here, CMC has made a huge difference.

You see where I'm going with this?

The proclamation has been to ignore all of these factors and the OL being #1 or #2 in the league is WHAT WINS THE SUPER BOWL.

Forget everything else. This silly line softens up when we have games like this and comes out in full force when we don't do well, or another team takes home a Lombardi trophy.

Let's not get lost in the hypocrisy. This is the only thing people have been arguing against.

Originally posted by random49er:
The QB is the difference.

Fred Warner and Hufanga are the difference.

Nick Bosa is the difference.

Since he's been here, CMC has made a huge difference.

You see where I'm going with this?

The proclamation has been to ignore all of these factors and the OL being #1 or #2 in the league is WHAT WINS THE SUPER BOWL.

Let's not get lost in the hypocrisy. This is the only thing people have been arguing against.

Had the 9ers had Brock Purdy in 2021 they would've won the SB. Not even a question.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Had the 9ers had Brock Purdy in 2021 they would've won the SB. Not even a question.

Just looking @ his play now,...I take us over the Eagles in last year's NFCCG too.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
On paper this an above average OL that has been been playing very well. Proof again that scheme + QB elevates the OL

Cowboys have an elite OL and looked average tonight.

Cowboys do not have an elite line. LOL. They actually are average. But TBF, our DL can make quite a few OL's look below average.

Lmao. Everyone has Dallas as a top 5 OL. They have 3 pro bowl / all pros on their OL.

Here's NC thinking again that you need 5 all pros on OL

They have been injured and recently came back into the lineup - so there are some health issues with the Cowboys OLine, that affects their performance.

He clearly only watches QB's too. Haha.

Yeah, hard to assess independently QB and OLine performance because it's a team game. Got to see how each affects the other. QB is nothing without his WR's. RB is nothing without his blockers. Look at Belichick without Brady (Coach without a good QB). For a long time I thought Belichick was a great HC, but without Tom, he looks horrible. He looks like he's back to coaching the Browns.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Can't wait for PFF's advanced game stats to come out later today so that I can verify what my eyes showed me last night.

Pure silliness. I'll wait for the cumulative ones after we are knee deep into the season. I'll then compare them to how other teams and other players are doing as well. This is how they are useful.

Don't need stats from 1 single game to tell me how good what I saw really was for a contest [everyone] just watched,...lol. This makes completely no sense in regards to numbers, rankings, etc.

And it's not the numbers that are the problem. It is the way you guys want to use them. That's what makes them "look like" garbage. The context is what's garbage. JBH.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by random49er:
The QB is the difference.

Fred Warner and Hufanga are the difference.

Nick Bosa is the difference.

Since he's been here, CMC has made a huge difference.

You see where I'm going with this?

The proclamation has been to ignore all of these factors and the OL being #1 or #2 in the league is WHAT WINS THE SUPER BOWL.

Let's not get lost in the hypocrisy. This is the only thing people have been arguing against.

Had the 9ers had Brock Purdy in 2021 they would've won the SB. Not even a question.

You think we would have won with one-legged Williams, Tomlinson, Garland, Person and big-game McGlinchey/Compton?

It's certainly possible esp. given the elite level Brock is playing at right now but...

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Can't wait for PFF's advanced game stats to come out later today so that I can verify what my eyes showed me last night.

Pure silliness. I'll wait for the cumulative ones after we are knee deep into the season. I'll then compare them to how other teams and other players are doing as well. This is how they are useful.

Don't need stats from 1 single to tell me how good what I saw really was for a game I just watched,...lol. This makes completely no sense in regards to numbers. JBH.

You do, however, need data to back up your opinions when debating online. That is how you win debates or else it becomes my opinion vs your opinion and we all know what opinions are compared to.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by pdc20:
I thought Purdy hided the mediocrity of the O-Line the first three games.
But against Arizona and Dallas, the O-Line really improved.
Great job by everyone.

The 5th fastest Time to Throw will mask (or make it moot) a ton of unit pass protection.

BUUUUUUT, Brock is making the absolute most of the passing game within that.

Either way, the OL has played really well the last 2 games and have been elite in run blocking per usual too. They deserve a lot of credit.

After Dallas, fans should be feeling very encouraged as THAT was a playoff atmosphere and one where our OL of the past s**t the bed.

McKivitz held up against Parsons for sure. 49ers do a quick game and have a great run offense, but again - without an offensive line that can execute the pass and run blocks, you don't have a quick game or a run offense. Between a guy like McKivitz who is decent at *both* run and pass blocking versus a guy like McGlinchy who is above average/great at run blocking and below average pass blocking, I'll take McKivitz who's good at both. By the way the 49er OLine held up against the Dallas D on two of those 3rd and long throws, so it looks like they can do some 7 step drop protections now. too. Impressed with Jon Feliciano - he held up well when Banks went out.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Can't wait for PFF's advanced game stats to come out later today so that I can verify what my eyes showed me last night.

Pure silliness. I'll wait for the cumulative ones after we are knee deep into the season. I'll then compare them to how other teams and other players are doing as well. This is how they are useful.

Don't need stats from 1 single game to tell me how good what I saw really was for a contest [everyone] just watched,...lol. This makes completely no sense in regards to numbers, rankings, etc.

And it's not the numbers that are the problem. It is the way you guys want to use them. That's what makes them "look like" garbage. The context is what's garbage. JBH.

You do, however, need data to back up your opinions when debating online. That is how you win debates or else it becomes my opinion vs your opinion and we all know what opinions are compared to.

Edited, but what I'm saying is the context they are being used in is what's lacking.

Also,...for these derived stats,...you can't expect 1 stat or ranking from 1 game to really tell you how well a player played in relation to the guy playing 17 games and averaging the stats out.

When you calculate something like that, there's going to be some aberrations along the way. Even with stats that are NOT derived.

Think about a WR having 2 plays over 60 yards but being a complete flop and a problem for his team for his other 60 snaps of a game. Didnt block well, didn't get open, etc.

He's well over 120 yards but that doesn't automatically mean he played great or contributed much.

Very different context when we say he had 1800 yards for the season,...right?

But yea for the formulas and everything that have been created,...having #'s over 17 games and averaging the numbers,....what the creators of something like QBR are telling you is that it's pretty much impossible for the cream to not rise to the top.

THIS is how they should really be used.

So again,..whatever # you bring back here for this 1 game is going to be worth a hill of beans. But yea...bring it anyway.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
On paper this an above average OL that has been been playing very well. Proof again that scheme + QB elevates the OL

Cowboys have an elite OL and looked average tonight.

Cowboys do not have an elite line. LOL. They actually are average. But TBF, our DL can make quite a few OL's look below average.

Lmao. Everyone has Dallas as a top 5 OL. They have 3 pro bowl / all pros on their OL.

Here's NC thinking again that you need 5 all pros on OL

Not even close. Maybe in the 90's. They also haven't been healthy for over 2 years. Yesterday's game was the first time the original group started together in over 2 years. And their C instantly goes down in the game. LOL.

Where do you weirdos come up this "need 5 all pros" thing!

https://www.lineups.com/articles/nfl-offensive-line-rankings

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/best-offensive-lines-nfl-rankings/

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-offensive-line-rankings-2023-offseason

I can keep going on.

And we come up with the 5 all pros needed based on your posts. How we need to draft 1st round OL constantly and spend in FA. If we would've only gotten Orlando Brown 😂

All good man, you're wrong. Once a while it's okay to admit it.

Originally posted by NCommand:
You think we would have won with one-legged Williams, Tomlinson, Garland, Person and big-game McGlinchey/Compton?

It's certainly possible esp. given the elite level Brock is playing at right now but...

3.4 seconds to pass with the balls to actually throw it downfield? Absolutely

Person wasn't on the team in 21 so he isn't relevant.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Can't wait for PFF's advanced game stats to come out later today so that I can verify what my eyes showed me last night.

Pure silliness. I'll wait for the cumulative ones after we are knee deep into the season. I'll then compare them to how other teams and other players are doing as well. This is how they are useful.

Don't need stats from 1 single game to tell me how good what I saw really was for a contest [everyone] just watched,...lol. This makes completely no sense in regards to numbers, rankings, etc.

And it's not the numbers that are the problem. It is the way you guys want to use them. That's what makes them "look like" garbage. The context is what's garbage. JBH.

You do, however, need data to back up your opinions when debating online. That is how you win debates or else it becomes my opinion vs your opinion and we all know what opinions are compared to.

Edited, but what I'm saying is the context they are being used in is what's lacking.

Also,...for these derived stats,...you can't expect 1 stat or ranking from 1 game to really tell you how well a player played in relation to the guy playing 17 games and averaging the stats out.

When you calculate something like that, there's going to be some aberrations along the way. But having that over 17 games and averaging the numbers,....what the creators of something like QBR is telling you is that's nearly impossible.

THIS is how they should really be used.

Tell me which stats specifically that I have used that have lacked context? People who argue with me about the efficiency stats I provide usually do so because they have ZERO EVIDENCE to back up their OPINION that is in contrast to mine. I have read time and time again on here that the stats that I provide are invalid because their eye test told them otherwise. Assuming that I don't watch the games or the all-22 film breakdowns to first make my assessment and then use stats 2nd to back up what I observed on film is just asinine and simply baseless.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
You think we would have won with one-legged Williams, Tomlinson, Garland, Person and big-game McGlinchey/Compton?

It's certainly possible esp. given the elite level Brock is playing at right now but...

3.4 seconds to pass with the balls to actually throw it downfield? Absolutely

Person wasn't on the team in 21 so he isn't relevant.

You do realize 3.4s is the PFF mark. Not NextGen. That would be equivalent to closer to 2.3s (lightning fast).

But yeah, Brock processes so quickly, he'd certainly make the most of it.

I never said a QB playing elite couldn't win with less than a tier 1 OL. It just hasn't happened recently.

Maybe this is the year it does. Or maybe this is the year the OL reaches that tier 1 level too.