49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that was part of my convo, I was saying, ok, if the OL is getting boosted in the ranks, by virtue of BP playing well, to me that's not the OL doing better, it's BP playing well. A good QB, who climbs the pocket, makes a play, averts a sack, can make the OL look better than it is. Gotta evaluate in isolation. I've seen high level QB play, and mediocre OL play, from all but TW, and to a lesser degree, Banks.

Only one person has made the counter argument as Random pointed out. Very clear QBs make the OLs look better. Lamar avoided like 4 sacks on his own.

They certainly can but not many do. It can work the other way too. Like in Detroit. Spending the most money on the OL has paid off for Goff and Detroit. Hence why you need both (for best odds).

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
To your second point, on that initial drive we went right down the field through the air against them. Every team stacks the box and prioritizes defending the run against us. It makes sense to attack through the air, and we were very successful until the QB made a pretty bad mistake in execution. It's easy to say we should have ran the ball when something like that happens. It's just as easy to say the QB shouldn't make that mistake.

That's not to crush Brock. He's a young player that's still learning. He's going to make mistakes and have bad games too. It's just bizarre to me that there's probably a pretty large crossover between people who think Brock is one of the best QB's in the league, but also think we can't ask him to make plays when the defense is susceptible to those plays…

You say that all the teams stack the box against us but CMC is leading the lead in rushing attempts and that means Shanahan calls runs no matter what because CMC is just like Lamar: you can try to contain him but at some moment he is going to kill you and we saw it with that 39-yrd run later.

BTW even in that first drive I was hoping for a run with CMC after Kittle got that big play.

Shanahan decided to call a pass-happy game against a defense that excels at stopping the pass and the worst of all was that he called deep passes all night.

I watched the Rams-Ravens game and McVay destroyed that defense with crossing routes because those linebackers are slow running laterally but Shanahan wanted to call an Air-Coryell passing game and his QB was picked 4 times because of that.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that was part of my convo, I was saying, ok, if the OL is getting boosted in the ranks, by virtue of BP playing well, to me that's not the OL doing better, it's BP playing well. A good QB, who climbs the pocket, makes a play, averts a sack, can make the OL look better than it is. Gotta evaluate in isolation. I've seen high level QB play, and mediocre OL play, from all but TW, and to a lesser degree, Banks.

Only one person has made the counter argument as Random pointed out. Very clear QBs make the OLs look better. Lamar avoided like 4 sacks on his own.

They certainly can but not many do. It can work the other way too. Like in Detroit. Spending the most money on the OL has paid off for Goff and Detroit. Hence why you need both (for best odds).

How did that DET O line look against that same ravens defense?

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that was part of my convo, I was saying, ok, if the OL is getting boosted in the ranks, by virtue of BP playing well, to me that's not the OL doing better, it's BP playing well. A good QB, who climbs the pocket, makes a play, averts a sack, can make the OL look better than it is. Gotta evaluate in isolation. I've seen high level QB play, and mediocre OL play, from all but TW, and to a lesser degree, Banks.

Only one person has made the counter argument as Random pointed out. Very clear QBs make the OLs look better. Lamar avoided like 4 sacks on his own.

They certainly can but not many do. It can work the other way too. Like in Detroit. Spending the most money on the OL has paid off for Goff and Detroit. Hence why you need both (for best odds).

How did that DET O line look against that same ravens defense?

No idea but overall, since last year, they've been pretty damn good. We all know who Goff really is too. Does that mean they can't have a few bad games just like our own tier 1 DL? Of course not. This ain't Madden. But let's not minimize it to one game in the grand scheme of things.

Originally posted by Monsterniner:
You say that all the teams stack the box against us but CMC is leading the lead in rushing attempts and that means Shanahan calls runs no matter what because CMC is just like Lamar: you can try to contain him but at some moment he is going to kill you and we saw it with that 39-yrd run later.

BTW even in that first drive I was hoping for a run with CMC after Kittle got that big play.

Shanahan decided to call a pass-happy game against a defense that excels at stopping the pass and the worst of all was that he called deep passes all night.

I watched the Rams-Ravens game and McVay destroyed that defense with crossing routes because those linebackers are slow running laterally but Shanahan wanted to call an Air-Coryell passing game and his QB was picked 4 times because of that.

Look, I was expecting a run play after that big gain by Kittle as well, but I'm not blaming the coach for calling pass plays when the pass is working… nor am I going to say a play call was a mistake when terrible execution leads to a turnover.

The 2nd drive, we were effectively perfectly balanced. Think we ran 9 plays, not including the defensive penalty on 4th against the Ravens, or the punt, and 5 were runs. 4 to CMC, 1 to Deebo. Got 3 points.

The third drive Shanahan called a pass that had Deebo wide open in space for a huge gain… and the QB couldn't get it around a defender and got unlucky on the tip. You saw Brock literally make the same play in much more traffic later to CMC when his initial throwing lane was blocked.

Either we have a QB that can be trusted to make plays and we call games accordingly, or we have to protect him by limiting his impact on the game. There was nothing going into that game to indicate we shoudn't let him pass, especially when the plays are there to be made and the mistakes are avoidable.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that was part of my convo, I was saying, ok, if the OL is getting boosted in the ranks, by virtue of BP playing well, to me that's not the OL doing better, it's BP playing well. A good QB, who climbs the pocket, makes a play, averts a sack, can make the OL look better than it is. Gotta evaluate in isolation. I've seen high level QB play, and mediocre OL play, from all but TW, and to a lesser degree, Banks.

Only one person has made the counter argument as Random pointed out. Very clear QBs make the OLs look better. Lamar avoided like 4 sacks on his own.

They certainly can but not many do. It can work the other way too. Like in Detroit. Spending the most money on the OL has paid off for Goff and Detroit. Hence why you need both (for best odds).

How did that DET O line look against that same ravens defense?

No idea but overall, since last year, they've been pretty damn good. We all know who Goff really is too. Does that mean they can't have a few bad games just like our own tier 1 DL? Of course not. This ain't Madden. But let's not minimize it to one game in the grand scheme of things.

I will tell you. Goff had 3.14 seconds before being pressured and was sacked 5 times. Brock had 3.52 seconds before being pressured and was sacked twice. 49ers O line gave up 14 pressures. DET O line gave up 13 pressures. Against a common opponent that O line didn't fair any better.

Originally posted by Monsterniner:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Why do the Ravens lead the league in sacks?

Understanding the reason would probably illuminate why we struggled with them, especially when we don't see them regularly.

They disguise coverages and blitzes better that the other 31 teams. Heck sometimes they just do creeper blitzes which aren't real blitzes (rush 5) and they do it so well that the QB and the O-line don't even notice that they are rushing only 4.

Fans say that we were losing by a lot and that's why Shanahan didn't run more but the reality is that in the first 2 drives we only ran once with CMC. I'm convinced that 3 or 4 runs with CMC in those first 2 possessions would have meant 2 TD's and the game would have been very different.

I agree a balanced attack from the start changes things dramatically.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that was part of my convo, I was saying, ok, if the OL is getting boosted in the ranks, by virtue of BP playing well, to me that's not the OL doing better, it's BP playing well. A good QB, who climbs the pocket, makes a play, averts a sack, can make the OL look better than it is. Gotta evaluate in isolation. I've seen high level QB play, and mediocre OL play, from all but TW, and to a lesser degree, Banks.

Only one person has made the counter argument as Random pointed out. Very clear QBs make the OLs look better. Lamar avoided like 4 sacks on his own.

They certainly can but not many do. It can work the other way too. Like in Detroit. Spending the most money on the OL has paid off for Goff and Detroit. Hence why you need both (for best odds).

How did that DET O line look against that same ravens defense?

No idea but overall, since last year, they've been pretty damn good. We all know who Goff really is too. Does that mean they can't have a few bad games just like our own tier 1 DL? Of course not. This ain't Madden. But let's not minimize it to one game in the grand scheme of things.

I will tell you. Goff had 3.14 seconds before being pressured and was sacked 5 times. Brock had 3.52 seconds before being pressured and was sacked twice. 49ers O line gave up 14 pressures. DET O line gave up 13 pressures. Against a common opponent that O line didn't fair any better.

How many passing attempts?

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Monsterniner:
You say that all the teams stack the box against us but CMC is leading the lead in rushing attempts and that means Shanahan calls runs no matter what because CMC is just like Lamar: you can try to contain him but at some moment he is going to kill you and we saw it with that 39-yrd run later.

BTW even in that first drive I was hoping for a run with CMC after Kittle got that big play.

Shanahan decided to call a pass-happy game against a defense that excels at stopping the pass and the worst of all was that he called deep passes all night.

I watched the Rams-Ravens game and McVay destroyed that defense with crossing routes because those linebackers are slow running laterally but Shanahan wanted to call an Air-Coryell passing game and his QB was picked 4 times because of that.

Look, I was expecting a run play after that big gain by Kittle as well, but I'm not blaming the coach for calling pass plays when the pass is working… nor am I going to say a play call was a mistake when terrible execution leads to a turnover.

The 2nd drive, we were effectively perfectly balanced. Think we ran 9 plays, not including the defensive penalty on 4th against the Ravens, or the punt, and 5 were runs. 4 to CMC, 1 to Deebo. Got 3 points.

The third drive Shanahan called a pass that had Deebo wide open in space for a huge gain… and the QB couldn't get it around a defender and got unlucky on the tip. You saw Brock literally make the same play in much more traffic later to CMC when his initial throwing lane was blocked.

Either we have a QB that can be trusted to make plays and we call games accordingly, or we have to protect him by limiting his impact on the game. There was nothing going into that game to indicate we shoudn't let him pass, especially when the plays are there to be made and the mistakes are avoidable.

I don't see it as needing to limit or protect the QB it's about the path of least resistance and going against the norms why get pass happy vs the best pass rush in the league with this OL when you have McCaffrey & Deebo at your disposal?

Originally posted by Monsterniner:
You say that all the teams stack the box against us but CMC is leading the lead in rushing attempts and that means Shanahan calls runs no matter what because CMC is just like Lamar: you can try to contain him but at some moment he is going to kill you and we saw it with that 39-yrd run later.

BTW even in that first drive I was hoping for a run with CMC after Kittle got that big play.

Shanahan decided to call a pass-happy game against a defense that excels at stopping the pass and the worst of all was that he called deep passes all night.

I watched the Rams-Ravens game and McVay destroyed that defense with crossing routes because those linebackers are slow running laterally but Shanahan wanted to call an Air-Coryell passing game and his QB was picked 4 times because of that.

Uh what? Are you calling Queen and Smith slow? No, that is simply not the case.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that was part of my convo, I was saying, ok, if the OL is getting boosted in the ranks, by virtue of BP playing well, to me that's not the OL doing better, it's BP playing well. A good QB, who climbs the pocket, makes a play, averts a sack, can make the OL look better than it is. Gotta evaluate in isolation. I've seen high level QB play, and mediocre OL play, from all but TW, and to a lesser degree, Banks.

Only one person has made the counter argument as Random pointed out. Very clear QBs make the OLs look better. Lamar avoided like 4 sacks on his own.

They certainly can but not many do. It can work the other way too. Like in Detroit. Spending the most money on the OL has paid off for Goff and Detroit. Hence why you need both (for best odds).

How did that DET O line look against that same ravens defense?

No idea but overall, since last year, they've been pretty damn good. We all know who Goff really is too. Does that mean they can't have a few bad games just like our own tier 1 DL? Of course not. This ain't Madden. But let's not minimize it to one game in the grand scheme of things.

I will tell you. Goff had 3.14 seconds before being pressured and was sacked 5 times. Brock had 3.52 seconds before being pressured and was sacked twice. 49ers O line gave up 14 pressures. DET O line gave up 13 pressures. Against a common opponent that O line didn't fair any better.

How many passing attempts?

Why does the number of pass attempts matter? Goff had to get rid of the ball faster than Brock did on average and was sacked 5 times. But to entertain you. Goff was sacked 5 times on 58 dropbacks which is a 8.6% rate. Brock was sacked twice on 36 dropbacks which is a 5.6% rate.

Originally posted by DaleGribble:
I don't see it as needing to limit or protect the QB it's about the path of least resistance and going against the norms why get pass happy vs the best pass rush in the league with this OL when you have McCaffrey & Deebo at your disposal?

Well in the context of the posts I'm responding to, we weren't pass happy on the 2nd drive. We ran it more times than we passed. On the first drive we went right through them with the pass and our QB made a bad mistake and killed the drive.

What would be the reason to not use the pass game when it's working, and has worked consistently throughout the year? Again, it's easy to say a play call or a plan is bad when it's not executed well. There wasn't much reason to believe that would be the case coming in…. And further, our run game wasn't exactly churning up yards in our previous losses either.

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by Monsterniner:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Why do the Ravens lead the league in sacks?

Understanding the reason would probably illuminate why we struggled with them, especially when we don't see them regularly.

They disguise coverages and blitzes better that the other 31 teams. Heck sometimes they just do creeper blitzes which aren't real blitzes (rush 5) and they do it so well that the QB and the O-line don't even notice that they are rushing only 4.

Fans say that we were losing by a lot and that's why Shanahan didn't run more but the reality is that in the first 2 drives we only ran once with CMC. I'm convinced that 3 or 4 runs with CMC in those first 2 possessions would have meant 2 TD's and the game would have been very different.

I agree a balanced attack from the start changes things dramatically.

We want to make it about strategy. We're talking ourselves into believing we're invincible if we just call the right plays,...lol.

Other teams have NFL players too.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that was part of my convo, I was saying, ok, if the OL is getting boosted in the ranks, by virtue of BP playing well, to me that's not the OL doing better, it's BP playing well. A good QB, who climbs the pocket, makes a play, averts a sack, can make the OL look better than it is. Gotta evaluate in isolation. I've seen high level QB play, and mediocre OL play, from all but TW, and to a lesser degree, Banks.

Only one person has made the counter argument as Random pointed out. Very clear QBs make the OLs look better. Lamar avoided like 4 sacks on his own.

They certainly can but not many do. It can work the other way too. Like in Detroit. Spending the most money on the OL has paid off for Goff and Detroit. Hence why you need both (for best odds).

How did that DET O line look against that same ravens defense?

No idea but overall, since last year, they've been pretty damn good. We all know who Goff really is too. Does that mean they can't have a few bad games just like our own tier 1 DL? Of course not. This ain't Madden. But let's not minimize it to one game in the grand scheme of things.

I will tell you. Goff had 3.14 seconds before being pressured and was sacked 5 times. Brock had 3.52 seconds before being pressured and was sacked twice. 49ers O line gave up 14 pressures. DET O line gave up 13 pressures. Against a common opponent that O line didn't fair any better.

How many passing attempts?

Why does the number of pass attempts matter? Goff had to get rid of the ball faster than Brock did on average and was sacked 5 times. But to entertain you. Goff was sacked 5 times on 58 dropbacks which is a 8.6% rate. Brock was sacked twice on 36 dropbacks which is a 5.6% rate.

Context.

It was 53 total passing attempts down 28 points in the first half vs. 32 down 4 points at halftime.

Given the context of the game and knowing the OL was in pass protection against a defense that could tee off all game, I'd say that was a pretty admirable job and a very different environment for our OL.

But one game wasn't my point anyways.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that was part of my convo, I was saying, ok, if the OL is getting boosted in the ranks, by virtue of BP playing well, to me that's not the OL doing better, it's BP playing well. A good QB, who climbs the pocket, makes a play, averts a sack, can make the OL look better than it is. Gotta evaluate in isolation. I've seen high level QB play, and mediocre OL play, from all but TW, and to a lesser degree, Banks.

Only one person has made the counter argument as Random pointed out. Very clear QBs make the OLs look better. Lamar avoided like 4 sacks on his own.

They certainly can but not many do. It can work the other way too. Like in Detroit. Spending the most money on the OL has paid off for Goff and Detroit. Hence why you need both (for best odds).

How did that DET O line look against that same ravens defense?

No idea but overall, since last year, they've been pretty damn good. We all know who Goff really is too. Does that mean they can't have a few bad games just like our own tier 1 DL? Of course not. This ain't Madden. But let's not minimize it to one game in the grand scheme of things.

I will tell you. Goff had 3.14 seconds before being pressured and was sacked 5 times. Brock had 3.52 seconds before being pressured and was sacked twice. 49ers O line gave up 14 pressures. DET O line gave up 13 pressures. Against a common opponent that O line didn't fair any better.

How many passing attempts?

Why does the number of pass attempts matter? Goff had to get rid of the ball faster than Brock did on average and was sacked 5 times. But to entertain you. Goff was sacked 5 times on 58 dropbacks which is a 8.6% rate. Brock was sacked twice on 36 dropbacks which is a 5.6% rate.

Context.

It was 53 total passing attempts down 28 points in the first half vs. 32 down 4 points at halftime.

Given the context of the game and knowing the OL was in pass protection against a defense that could tee off all game, I'd say that was a pretty admirable job and a very different environment for our OL.

But one game wasn't my point anyways.

I know. Your point was that Goff+DET O line has better odds than Brock+49ers O line. But given a common opponent, Goff+DET O line didn't fair any better than Brock+49ers O line. They also lost by 32 points and only turned the ball over once.