49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
I think it goes both ways. A top OLine will help QB's like Trent Dilfer and Foles to elevate their games too. Same with Jimmy when he was healthy and the OLine was healthy.

Well obviously a QB will do better when given time then when pressured. That doesn't mean they are elevating their games. Give Jimmy the Cowboys o line in the 90s and he'd be the same guy

Well my source - YacBros - basically says you give a good QB (and Jimmy is a good QB) 3 seconds in a clean pocket, he can torch most defenses. That's all you want in a QB - is to have a good chance to win the game. Folks here are upset because Jimmy can't win the big one. Well a lot of very talented 49er QB's couldn't win the big one, that doesn't mean these former 49er QB's weren't talented.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
I think it goes both ways. A top OLine will help QB's like Trent Dilfer and Foles to elevate their games too. Same with Jimmy when he was healthy and the OLine was healthy.

Well obviously a QB will do better when given time then when pressured. That doesn't mean they are elevating their games. Give Jimmy the Cowboys o line in the 90s and he'd be the same guy

Well my source - YacBros - basically says you give a good QB (and Jimmy is a good QB) 3 seconds in a clean pocket, he can torch most defenses. That's all you want in a QB - is to have a good chance to win the game. Folks here are upset because Jimmy can't win the big one. Well a lot of very talented 49er QB's couldn't win the big one, that doesn't mean these former 49er QB's weren't talented.

In what world is Jimmy a good QB lol.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
I think it goes both ways. A top OLine will help QB's like Trent Dilfer and Foles to elevate their games too. Same with Jimmy when he was healthy and the OLine was healthy.

Well obviously a QB will do better when given time then when pressured. That doesn't mean they are elevating their games. Give Jimmy the Cowboys o line in the 90s and he'd be the same guy

Well my source - YacBros - basically says you give a good QB (and Jimmy is a good QB) 3 seconds in a clean pocket, he can torch most defenses. That's all you want in a QB - is to have a good chance to win the game. Folks here are upset because Jimmy can't win the big one. Well a lot of very talented 49er QB's couldn't win the big one, that doesn't mean these former 49er QB's weren't talented.

In what world is Jimmy a good QB lol.

He's a good QB. You don't get to have a 70% win percentage and get to three NFCCG's and a super bowl by being an average QB. He's no Brock Purdy, but he was plenty good when he was here.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by AB81Rules:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Seriously. Look at all these studs!

Tomlinson, Garland, Person, Compton and big-game McGlinchey!

LOL.

They were "good" at run blocking though.

Would've been plenty for Brock

Or Patrick Mahomes. LOL

well one thing, the main thing that you started all this riff raff has been settled, is that the QB does transcend the OL

Hey NC remember you wanted us to keep Laken, I did too, but glad we didn't, Banks is so much better, as is Feliciano. But I agree with all time here, QB transcends the OL, Purdy is so good, but we really do IMO have a top tier OL, they're gelling big time, McKivitz looks good at RT, for a fraction of what McGlinchey got.

I think it goes both ways. A top OLine will help QB's like Trent Dilfer and Foles to elevate their games too. Same with Jimmy when he was healthy and the OLine was healthy.

not really, even the best OL can't win the games for mediocre QBs. Dilfer had one of the best defenses all time. Jimmy choked when he had time in big games

Yes they can if they have a good running back and the OLine is elite. That will elevate the QB's performance.

well thats adding more than just OL isn't ?

plus we had a good running game and stil lost

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
I think it goes both ways. A top OLine will help QB's like Trent Dilfer and Foles to elevate their games too. Same with Jimmy when he was healthy and the OLine was healthy.

Well obviously a QB will do better when given time then when pressured. That doesn't mean they are elevating their games. Give Jimmy the Cowboys o line in the 90s and he'd be the same guy

Well my source - YacBros - basically says you give a good QB (and Jimmy is a good QB) 3 seconds in a clean pocket, he can torch most defenses. That's all you want in a QB - is to have a good chance to win the game. Folks here are upset because Jimmy can't win the big one. Well a lot of very talented 49er QB's couldn't win the big one, that doesn't mean these former 49er QB's weren't talented.

In what world is Jimmy a good QB lol.

He's a good QB. You don't get to have a 70% win percentage and get to three NFCCG's and a super bowl by being an average QB. He's no Brock Purdy, but he was plenty good when he was here.

yes you do get to that win %, you seen it right from the start. all defense and run game

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
I think it goes both ways. A top OLine will help QB's like Trent Dilfer and Foles to elevate their games too. Same with Jimmy when he was healthy and the OLine was healthy.

Well obviously a QB will do better when given time then when pressured. That doesn't mean they are elevating their games. Give Jimmy the Cowboys o line in the 90s and he'd be the same guy

Well my source - YacBros - basically says you give a good QB (and Jimmy is a good QB) 3 seconds in a clean pocket, he can torch most defenses. That's all you want in a QB - is to have a good chance to win the game. Folks here are upset because Jimmy can't win the big one. Well a lot of very talented 49er QB's couldn't win the big one, that doesn't mean these former 49er QB's weren't talented.

In what world is Jimmy a good QB lol.

He's a good QB. You don't get to have a 70% win percentage and get to three NFCCG's and a super bowl by being an average QB. He's no Brock Purdy, but he was plenty good when he was here.

yes you do get to that win %, you seen it right from the start. all defense and run game

Keep in mind the 49rs were a 1-10 team and with Jimmy they became a 5-0 team and the pass blocking actually improved, if I recall correctly. That's one of the criteria of the "great QB's transcends a bad Oline" folks.

Originally posted by AB81Rules:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Seriously. Look at all these studs!

Tomlinson, Garland, Person, Compton and big-game McGlinchey!

LOL.

They were "good" at run blocking though.

Would've been plenty for Brock

Or Patrick Mahomes. LOL

well one thing, the main thing that you started all this riff raff has been settled, is that the QB does transcend the OL

Hey NC remember you wanted us to keep Laken, I did too, but glad we didn't, Banks is so much better, as is Feliciano. But I agree with all time here, QB transcends the OL, Purdy is so good, but we really do IMO have a top tier OL, they're gelling big time, McKivitz looks good at RT, for a fraction of what McGlinchey got.

For sure. I only wanted to keep him if Burford wasn't the answer (so Banks + Tomlinson) but not at the price he got. He's a below average G for sure when he's not playing next to Trent Williams.

You need both if you want the best odds of winning a Superbowl. No doubt scheme and a tier 1 QB can help an OL a lot. But in the end, talent wins out or it gets exposed hence why we've seen all the great QB's fail when they didn't have that element too. You need both.

As to our OL, they are certainly playing very well right now. You can't score 30+ a game without both playing very well.

I don't get too far ahead of my excitement though as we've seen "...we don't suck" OL's here in the past go on really nice runs for a while and then get exposed later (esp. in the playoffs). But it's hard not to feel very encouraged right now!

IMHO, of course.

Originally posted by NCommand:
For sure. I only wanted to keep him if Burford wasn't the answer (so Banks + Tomlinson) but not at the price he got. He's a below average G for sure when he's not paying next to Trent Williams.

You need both if you want the best odds of winning a Superbowl. No doubt scheme and a tier 1 QB can help an OL a lot. But in the end, talent wins out or it gets exposed hence why we've seen all the great QB's fail when they didn't have that element too. You need both.

As to our OL, they are certainly playing very well right now. You can't score 30+ a game without both playing very well.

I don't get too far ahead of my excitement though as we've seen "...we don't suck" OL's here in the past go on really nice runs for a while and then get exposed later (esp. in the playoffs). But it's hard not to feel very encouraged right now!

IMHO, of course.

Yea, when the QB is quick with his reads, decisive and gets the ball out quick all while being mobile enough to buy time and extend drives you get a great situation. You wear down the opponents DL and you win games

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by NCommand:
For sure. I only wanted to keep him if Burford wasn't the answer (so Banks + Tomlinson) but not at the price he got. He's a below average G for sure when he's not paying next to Trent Williams.

You need both if you want the best odds of winning a Superbowl. No doubt scheme and a tier 1 QB can help an OL a lot. But in the end, talent wins out or it gets exposed hence why we've seen all the great QB's fail when they didn't have that element too. You need both.

As to our OL, they are certainly playing very well right now. You can't score 30+ a game without both playing very well.

I don't get too far ahead of my excitement though as we've seen "...we don't suck" OL's here in the past go on really nice runs for a while and then get exposed later (esp. in the playoffs). But it's hard not to feel very encouraged right now!

IMHO, of course.

Yea, when the QB is quick with his reads, decisive and gets the ball out quick all while being mobile enough to buy time and extend drives you get a great situation. You wear down the opponents DL and you win games

No doubt about that. And that phone booth mobility and "feel" of pressure is crucial. But processing and release is the key whether you have mobility or not.

I'm stoked to hear that Banks injury was NOT a torn upper bicep. I mean, a 'shoulder' injury isn't fun either, but from what Kyle said, it's a mild strain.

...bullet dodged...

Originally posted by NCommand:
For sure. I only wanted to keep him if Burford wasn't the answer (so Banks + Tomlinson) but not at the price he got. He's a below average G for sure when he's not playing next to Trent Williams.

You need both if you want the best odds of winning a Superbowl. No doubt scheme and a tier 1 QB can help an OL a lot. But in the end, talent wins out or it gets exposed hence why we've seen all the great QB's fail when they didn't have that element too. You need both.

As to our OL, they are certainly playing very well right now. You can't score 30+ a game without both playing very well.

I don't get too far ahead of my excitement though as we've seen "...we don't suck" OL's here in the past go on really nice runs for a while and then get exposed later (esp. in the playoffs). But it's hard not to feel very encouraged right now!

IMHO, of course.

Except now there's a qb there that can make up for being exposed in the playoffs like Mahomes did last playoffs.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
For sure. I only wanted to keep him if Burford wasn't the answer (so Banks + Tomlinson) but not at the price he got. He's a below average G for sure when he's not playing next to Trent Williams.

You need both if you want the best odds of winning a Superbowl. No doubt scheme and a tier 1 QB can help an OL a lot. But in the end, talent wins out or it gets exposed hence why we've seen all the great QB's fail when they didn't have that element too. You need both.

As to our OL, they are certainly playing very well right now. You can't score 30+ a game without both playing very well.

I don't get too far ahead of my excitement though as we've seen "...we don't suck" OL's here in the past go on really nice runs for a while and then get exposed later (esp. in the playoffs). But it's hard not to feel very encouraged right now!

IMHO, of course.

Except now there's a qb there that can make up for being exposed in the playoffs like Mahomes did last playoffs.

Yeah, PM was so exposed behind a tier 1 OL who had given up the least sacks in the league (yes, he's a big help there too).

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by NCommand:
For sure. I only wanted to keep him if Burford wasn't the answer (so Banks + Tomlinson) but not at the price he got. He's a below average G for sure when he's not paying next to Trent Williams.

You need both if you want the best odds of winning a Superbowl. No doubt scheme and a tier 1 QB can help an OL a lot. But in the end, talent wins out or it gets exposed hence why we've seen all the great QB's fail when they didn't have that element too. You need both.

As to our OL, they are certainly playing very well right now. You can't score 30+ a game without both playing very well.

I don't get too far ahead of my excitement though as we've seen "...we don't suck" OL's here in the past go on really nice runs for a while and then get exposed later (esp. in the playoffs). But it's hard not to feel very encouraged right now!

IMHO, of course.

Yea, when the QB is quick with his reads, decisive and gets the ball out quick all while being mobile enough to buy time and extend drives you get a great situation. You wear down the opponents DL and you win games

No doubt about that. And that phone booth mobility and "feel" of pressure is crucial. But processing and release is the key whether you have mobility or not.

Yup, if you give a QB with a fast processor time in the pocket, and he has a good arm and accuracy as well as a quick release - it would be really hard to stop that kind of QB without having to resort to overloads and blitzes. Now add in a good strong run blocking OLine with a decent (but not great running back) and you will have a DLine that can't key on the pass and just shoot the gaps.

But if you *don't* give any elite QB the time he needs to process and throw, of course that QB will begin to misfire. (Pat Mahomes without his two OTs for example).

In other words, as you said, its a team game. The OLine and QB work together. Some QBs can process fast some slower, but if you give them time to process, those QBs will succeed. Obviously the advantage goes to QBs that can process faster. Just like the advantage goes to the WR or RB that can run faster, if all else stay equal.

2 average (at best) OL's:

Chiefs:
LT: Eric Fisher
LG: Nick Allegretti
C: Austin Reiter
RG: Andrew Wylie
RT: Mike Remmers

Patrick Mahomes couldn't transcend this OL and lost 31-9.

49ers:
LT: Joe Staley
LG: Laken Tomlinson
C: Ben Garland
RG: Mike Person
RT: Mike McGlinchey

Jimmy Garoppolo had a 10 point lead in the 4Q with 7 minutes to go.

And Patrick Mahomes >>>>>>> Jimmy Garoppolo

You need both (until proven otherwise).

Originally posted by NCommand:
2 average (at best) OL's:

Chiefs:
LT: Eric Fisher
LG: Nick Allegretti
C: Austin Reiter
RG: Andrew Wylie
RT: Mike Remmers

Patrick Mahomes couldn't transcend this OL and lost 31-9.

49ers:
LT: Joe Staley
LG: Laken Tomlinson
C: Ben Garland
RG: Mike Person
RT: Mike McGlinchey

Jimmy Garoppolo had a 10 point lead in the 4Q with 7 minutes to go.

And Patrick Mahomes >>>>>>> Jimmy Garoppolo

You need both (until proven otherwise).

all credit to Mahomes but chris jones is the main reason we didn't win that game