49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by NCommand:
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.

How about just comparing the 2nd half for the sake of discussion?

We were basically in the same position as Detroit after the Ravens scored their first TD in the half and we turned it over on first play of the next drive.

We did end up with 46 attempts total, including the GEQBUS.

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.

Gotta love people saying don't minimize it to 1 game…then doing the same thing with the BAL game

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Gotta love people saying don't minimize it to 1 game…then doing the same thing with the BAL game

9ers O line is judged by how they perform against the best. The other 31 teams get graded on a season curve.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Gotta love people saying don't minimize it to 1 game…then doing the same thing with the BAL game

9ers O line is judged by how they perform against the best. The other 31 teams get graded on a season curve.

It's very surprising to me that the resident OL expert and all things DET/PHI can't even tell folks how DET OL fared against BAL. Fitting

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Gotta love people saying don't minimize it to 1 game…then doing the same thing with the BAL game

9ers O line is judged by how they perform against the best. The other 31 teams get graded on a season curve.

It's very surprising to me that the resident OL expert and all things DET/PHI can't even tell folks how DET OL faired against BAL. Fitting

OL used to be a group position that could stack up with the DL and either be dominant against them or very much hold their own.

It hasn't been the case anymore for 20-30+ years. Every player / coach will tell you how much more DL players are better than OL players from an athletic POV compared to previous eras. Then you add to that holding rules that now get enforced, the OL is at a big disadvantage. Obviously you have your outliers on the OL, but they are much much fewer compared to the DL.

You need at least above average athletic players on the OL, but most importantly they have to be able to think as well. It's a good mix between, scheme, players, play calling, and QB, when it comes to the OL now days. It doesn't matter how talented your OL is if you're going up against a good DL / good scheme, the QB won't be able to just sit back in the pocket and do what he wants.

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 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.

Sorry, no, the original point was from 9ers4eva who only sees the football world through a QB lens where he believes it's the QB who makes the OL look better. I agreed to a point. There are a few who certainly can do that. But the reverse is true too. A really good OL can help make a QB like Goff look better too. Hence, why I always say it's most ideal to have both. I simply used Detroit as an example of that.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
OL used to be a group position that could stack up with the DL and either be dominant against them or very much hold their own.

It hasn't been the case anymore for 20-30+ years. Every player / coach will tell you how much more DL players are better than OL players from an athletic POV compared to previous eras. Then you add to that holding rules that now get enforced, the OL is at a big disadvantage. Obviously you have your outliers on the OL, but they are much much fewer compared to the DL.

You need at least above average athletic players on the OL, but most importantly they have to be able to think as well. It's a good mix between, scheme, players, play calling, and QB, when it comes to the OL now days. It doesn't matter how talented your OL is if you're going up against a good DL / good scheme, the QB won't be able to just sit back in the pocket and do what he wants.

Great post. I believe this too. That said, when you get to the playoff teams annually, you still end up closer to even as the cream rises to the top. You still typically only have a couple tier 1 OL's vs. tier 1 DL's and we've seen the tier 1 DL's lose some of those battles, no doubt. But if you're talking generally across the league, no doubt the better athletes typically play on the DL. The good news is the league agrees and have overdrafted and oversaturated the market so much over the years you can pick up guys like Chase, Gregory, Suh, Day, a s**t ton of ex 1st rounders, etc. pretty much any time with minimal loss. OL? That's nearly impossible (to your point).

Anyone know who OL Sebastian Gutierrez is? It also sounds like Danny Gray's practice window is finally opened.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Anyone know who OL Sebastian Gutierrez is? It also sounds like Danny Gray's practice window is finally opened.

My next door neighbor 😂

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
OL used to be a group position that could stack up with the DL and either be dominant against them or very much hold their own.

It hasn't been the case anymore for 20-30+ years. Every player / coach will tell you how much more DL players are better than OL players from an athletic POV compared to previous eras. Then you add to that holding rules that now get enforced, the OL is at a big disadvantage. Obviously you have your outliers on the OL, but they are much much fewer compared to the DL.

You need at least above average athletic players on the OL, but most importantly they have to be able to think as well. It's a good mix between, scheme, players, play calling, and QB, when it comes to the OL now days. It doesn't matter how talented your OL is if you're going up against a good DL / good scheme, the QB won't be able to just sit back in the pocket and do what he wants.

Great post. I believe this too. That said, when you get to the playoff teams annually, you still end up closer to even as the cream rises to the top. You still typically only have a couple tier 1 OL's vs. tier 1 DL's and we've seen the tier 1 DL's lose some of those battles, no doubt. But if you're talking generally across the league, no doubt the better athletes typically play on the DL. The good news is the league agrees and have overdrafted and oversaturated the market so much over the years you can pick up guys like Chase, Gregory, Suh, Day, a s**t ton of ex 1st rounders, etc. pretty much any time with minimal loss. OL? That's nearly impossible (to your point).

Originally posted by NCommand:
Anyone know who OL Sebastian Gutierrez is? It also sounds like Danny Gray's practice window is finally opened.

I wouldn't get too excited over Danny Gray,Not exactly a game changer. Maybe a kick returner.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
OL used to be a group position that could stack up with the DL and either be dominant against them or very much hold their own.

It hasn't been the case anymore for 20-30+ years. Every player / coach will tell you how much more DL players are better than OL players from an athletic POV compared to previous eras. Then you add to that holding rules that now get enforced, the OL is at a big disadvantage. Obviously you have your outliers on the OL, but they are much much fewer compared to the DL.

You need at least above average athletic players on the OL, but most importantly they have to be able to think as well. It's a good mix between, scheme, players, play calling, and QB, when it comes to the OL now days. It doesn't matter how talented your OL is if you're going up against a good DL / good scheme, the QB won't be able to just sit back in the pocket and do what he wants.

Great post. I believe this too. That said, when you get to the playoff teams annually, you still end up closer to even as the cream rises to the top. You still typically only have a couple tier 1 OL's vs. tier 1 DL's and we've seen the tier 1 DL's lose some of those battles, no doubt. But if you're talking generally across the league, no doubt the better athletes typically play on the DL. The good news is the league agrees and have overdrafted and oversaturated the market so much over the years you can pick up guys like Chase, Gregory, Suh, Day, a s**t ton of ex 1st rounders, etc. pretty much any time with minimal loss. OL? That's nearly impossible (to your point).

Great post, and believe this too..,,but here's why I really don't believe it

Originally posted by NCommand:
Sorry, no, the original point was from 9ers4eva who only sees the football world through a QB lens where he believes it's the QB who makes the OL look better. I agreed to a point. There are a few who certainly can do that. But the reverse is true too. A really good OL can help make a QB like Goff look better too. Hence, why I always say it's most ideal to have both. I simply used Detroit as an example of that.

So now you agree? For years it wasn't true.

Goff looks the same as he did in Los Angeles. No real noticeable improvement. Detroit isn't an example of having both because Goff isn't elite.

The reality is you think the O line is MORE important than the QB. I happen to think the QB is MORE important. We are seeing it with Brock. But you can't admit your take about QBs not making OLs better was wrong so you keep spinning everything I or others say.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Anyone know who OL Sebastian Gutierrez is? It also sounds like Danny Gray's practice window is finally opened.

My next door neighbor 😂

Nice. How's he with the grill?

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Anyone know who OL Sebastian Gutierrez is? It also sounds like Danny Gray's practice window is finally opened.

I wouldn't get too excited over Danny Gray,Not exactly a game changer. Maybe a kick returner.

I'd take it!