49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
No one is assigning blame regardless, that's where you are off. I am saying that in the Ls we have had, I know what the issues were, imo at least..
so if one considers the way in which we lose, there are some culprits that are perhaps more likely than others, that's all I am suggesting
NC just earlier today, admitted losing some bet of some sort, so he doesn't strike me as the type to stick with a narrative, even if the facts are glaringly in opposition..

Am I off? I responded to a specific post that I felt indicated that the performance of the OL will dictate whether we ultimately win or lose.

Beyond that I think it's pretty obvious based on this very long running argument that previous shortcomings, in years past, were primarily blamed on the OL by some people… which I would absolutely disagree with.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I would say likely true, based on how we took Ls so far. I think if TW is healthy we win a SB.. I'll even bet on it. Now if TW is not right, all bets are off.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Is he wrong tho, in terms of a future loss?

I watched our losses this year. 65 team rush yds, with a MVP convo HOF RB, and a MVP convo QB.
all our losses we were running into the brick wall
or I believe it was 20 for 50 in the NFCCG, do the math on that one (the YPC math)...

not saying this is guaranteed, but there is a trend here..
AA talked about team rush yds, and the correlation of how it relates to winning, it's often what the game comes down to, I would say team rush yds, and TO battle are of the highest correlation, aside from points

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I would say likely true, based on how we took Ls so far. I think if TW is healthy we win a SB.. I'll even bet on it. Now if TW is not right, all bets are off.

I already did this. You were around at the time. You're also not NC, who IMO assigns way too much importance to OL play. That's why he chose to take a horrendous value bet on the Lions and Eagles, lol

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
if he's assigning blame for Ls, when stuff like that 3 game losing streak or the NFCCG vs LAR, then yeah he's all over it, and spot on, to point at OL issues.
You all may take exception that he's running laps around you guys, perhaps, but that's not my issue.. and I'm not into the whole history of the debates..

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
that ain't the same bet, who do you have again SF and KC?
I think this may be the one where he's already admitting defeat

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
I'm referencing the bet I made… no idea about any others. The point of it being you mentioned that you'd be willing to bet on something as a means to show how confident you were, yet some of us have already done that.

He hasn't lost the bet either. But the fact that it was ever made shows the holes in reasoning IMO.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Is he wrong tho, in terms of a future loss?

I watched our losses this year. 65 team rush yds, with a MVP convo HOF RB, and a MVP convo QB.
all our losses we were running into the brick wall
or I believe it was 20 for 50 in the NFCCG, do the math on that one (the YPC math)...

not saying this is guaranteed, but there is a trend here..
AA talked about team rush yds, and the correlation of how it relates to winning, it's often what the game comes down to, I would say team rush yds, and TO battle are of the highest correlation, aside from points

Defense not getting stops also contributes. Somehow you ignore those struggles however.

Originally posted by random49er:
And he'll ignore what he chooses to over and over again,...as he always does,...lol.

But suddenly believe he can seamlessly step into a "Gatekeeper #2" role here without any hitch.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Thank you. Also shows he never valued QB play in the first place. Any QB play will do and if it doesn't work out blame the OL tier 1 or not.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Well I honestly don't want to personally crush NC. Seems like a good enough dude and I generally enjoy his posts. But this argument is clearly morphing for convenience.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:
>>Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
We're not, but that doesn't answer what is sub par and Purdy decisions throw INTs<<

I'm not the only one saying that.

A second factor is that the Niners are a decidedly left-handed team running the ball. The foundational concept of Shanahan's scheme is unpredictability. An investment in the right side of the line would restore balance to the force, they could run left or right with equal success.
https://www.si.com/nfl/49ers/news/progress-and-barriers-on-the-49ers-quest-for-six

We do also run to the right, not as much but it's not 100%

but what is sub par?

Here you go.

adjective

• Below an average, usual, or normal level, quality, or the like; below par: This month his performance has been subpar. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/subpar#google_vignette

great. so how would a below avg OL be able to win 12 games, lead the league in rushing, passing, have 4 1k yard players and 2 MVP candidates ?

also, how does a below avg line have better results than Tier 1 OLs ?

the math just doesn't add up

So you think the 49ers OLine played elite in the 49ers losses this season?

Does it have to be below avg or elite as the options to choose between ? that's pretty extreme

I've been saying we are towards the top in OL (not the best or elite) the last few years and QB play was the missing element.

one thing for sure is that we are not sub par.. unless par is being number 1 and not 16. We also can't have the offense production like have had with a below avg OL

Take out Trent Williams, and I think our OLine becomes average. Take out Banks, and it becomes sub par. Just my opinon, of course.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:
>>Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
We're not, but that doesn't answer what is sub par and Purdy decisions throw INTs<<

I'm not the only one saying that.

A second factor is that the Niners are a decidedly left-handed team running the ball. The foundational concept of Shanahan's scheme is unpredictability. An investment in the right side of the line would restore balance to the force, they could run left or right with equal success.
https://www.si.com/nfl/49ers/news/progress-and-barriers-on-the-49ers-quest-for-six

We do also run to the right, not as much but it's not 100%

but what is sub par?

Here you go.

adjective

• Below an average, usual, or normal level, quality, or the like; below par: This month his performance has been subpar. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/subpar#google_vignette

great. so how would a below avg OL be able to win 12 games, lead the league in rushing, passing, have 4 1k yard players and 2 MVP candidates ?

also, how does a below avg line have better results than Tier 1 OLs ?

the math just doesn't add up

So you think the 49ers OLine played elite in the 49ers losses this season?

Does it have to be below avg or elite as the options to choose between ? that's pretty extreme

I've been saying we are towards the top in OL (not the best or elite) the last few years and QB play was the missing element.

one thing for sure is that we are not sub par.. unless par is being number 1 and not 16. We also can't have the offense production like have had with a below avg OL

Take out Trent Williams, and I think our OLine becomes average. Take out Banks, and it becomes sub par. Just my opinon, of course.

I'm sure you can do that to all OLs and they won't be as good as they are

thanks for clarifying that they are not sub par unless we have guys taken out.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Banks too. Without Trent and Banks, this OL is in big trouble. And you can misquote me out of context on that one.