49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
My argument is if the O line looks the same whether we win or lose, how can they be responsible for the loss? If they play the same in both cases, they are the constant. Its usually something else that is the variable and a bigger reason for the loss.

This is faulty logic. The only way this would makes sense is if all of our opponents were the exact same talent level and scheme. The O-Line can look great as we thump an inferior opponent. The O-Line will be much more severely tested when we play a better team, especially one with a great pass rush. Their play may be constant, but clearly an inferior O-Line that gets upgraded should do better against the better teams. Talent of the O-Line is for sure a contributing factor in our success.....it's not the only factor, but it is definitely a factor.

I could easily find a game this season where the O line played poorly and we won against a superior defense and I can find a game where the O line played poorly and we lost against a superior defense. I can also find a win where the O line played well against an inferior defense and a loss where the O line played well against an inferior defense.

Halfway through this season I posted a true pass set pressure rankings chart and the 49ers O line was ranked 22nd in the league. I just finished up my end of season true pass set pressure rankings chart and guess what? the 49ers O line is still ranked 22nd in the league.

My main issue is that no one complains about the O line no matter how poor they play unless we lose. As if there weren't more concerning factors that played into the loss.

This is very true unfortunately. And hell yes there are a myriad reasons for a loss. I wished they were all discussed because IMHO, it tends to be a pretty big grocery list when we do.

QB, OL and Secondary is probably just easier to talk about for most because they are repeat offenders over the years and areas the FO has chosen to prioritize less in their team building strategy.

I am one of the biggest Kyle Shanahan advocates on this site. However, I get hammered by several posters when I criticize anything about him, including a game plan that I believe was a big reason for a loss. So it seems as though some topics are just not allowed to be brought up.

Bring them up in here. I'll gladly talk to you openly about each and every one. It's part of football. Every team has its weaknesses, blind spots in team building and bad days.

Originally posted by NCommand:
This is very true unfortunately. And hell yes there are a myriad reasons for a loss. I wished they were all discussed because IMHO, it tends to be a pretty big grocery list when we do.

This is an EXTREME comment.

Well.... you just told us a couple pages ago that you are not really an expert at football matters just a couple pages ago. (passive voice)

But the reality is,... larger you can make a list regarding WHY we lost whenever we lose,....the MORE of an expert you are.(extreme aggressive voice)

The IMHO is again thrown in to add a little passiveness but again,....extreme proclamation...especially in a sport like American football.

The longer of a real list you can forge whenever we lose a game,....the better job you should have within an NFL organization that intends to win games.

Now is what you are saying you can spot when we lose true? Of course it's not,...and everyone here knows it.

I only intended to point out the constant back and forth of the voice you choose to use when discussing the team.

And you admitted it right here, really. "Everyone sit back and listen to me" when we lose a game,.....silent when we win a game. To any impartial bystander, something is clearly wrong here.

If this half-baked opinion were even halfway true,....you'd be able to make a list just as big when we win games that we could investigate and confirm. But that doesn't happen, because again, this is just a fairy tale.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
My argument is if the O line looks the same whether we win or lose, how can they be responsible for the loss? If they play the same in both cases, they are the constant. Its usually something else that is the variable and a bigger reason for the loss.

This is faulty logic. The only way this would makes sense is if all of our opponents were the exact same talent level and scheme. The O-Line can look great as we thump an inferior opponent. The O-Line will be much more severely tested when we play a better team, especially one with a great pass rush. Their play may be constant, but clearly an inferior O-Line that gets upgraded should do better against the better teams. Talent of the O-Line is for sure a contributing factor in our success.....it's not the only factor, but it is definitely a factor.

I could easily find a game this season where the O line played poorly and we won against a superior defense and I can find a game where the O line played poorly and we lost against a superior defense. I can also find a win where the O line played well against an inferior defense and a loss where the O line played well against an inferior defense.

Halfway through this season I posted a true pass set pressure rankings chart and the 49ers O line was ranked 22nd in the league. I just finished up my end of season true pass set pressure rankings chart and guess what? the 49ers O line is still ranked 22nd in the league.

My main issue is that no one complains about the O line no matter how poor they play unless we lose. As if there weren't more concerning factors that played into the loss.

This is very true unfortunately. And hell yes there are a myriad reasons for a loss. I wished they were all discussed because IMHO, it tends to be a pretty big grocery list when we do.

QB, OL and Secondary is probably just easier to talk about for most because they are repeat offenders over the years and areas the FO has chosen to prioritize less in their team building strategy.

I am one of the biggest Kyle Shanahan advocates on this site. However, I get hammered by several posters when I criticize anything about him, including a game plan that I believe was a big reason for a loss. So it seems as though some topics are just not allowed to be brought up.

Dude,...he is buttering you up,...for starters. He's had a rough day....lol. This is the usual "looking for help with kind talk" stuff he pulls whenever others have questions about the gatekeeping,...and it's exactly why he's gotten away with it for so long. Only pointing it out since he is so consistent at doing this whenever others reasonably question the faulty logic he controls this thread with. He essentially uses others (like you) as a raft.

So right now he is going to pretend like the charts u just provided are the greatest things since sliced bread if you grant him some favor.

But on Kyle,....criticism is good and fine so long as you are able to continue to back it up with more than sheer numbers from 1 game. That is not going to usually be enough. If you can whip out the film and show us what you mean,....and if you're a little less defensive when others disagree with you,.... I doubt that you would get hammered anywhere near as much. Just my $0.02.

These are my final O line rankings which include hurries, hits & sack rates as well as YPC, rushing 1st down rate and PFF run blocking grade ranks.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
These are my final O line rankings which include hurries, hits & sack rates as well as YPC, rushing 1st down rate and PFF run blocking grade ranks.

How is the average rank tallied? I'd imagine this is more of a composite grade instead of an average rank since the lowest average is 17 (out of 32).

Are all of the rankings averaged in equally weighted?

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I have created two charts based on NC's criteria for winning a SB. He stated that our Achilles heel is when we have to go off script and every down becomes an obvious passing down. One chart is based on the O line's ability to protect in obvious passing situations and one chart based on how well a QB plays under pressure. I created overall rankings for each. I used hurries, hits and sack rates for the O line rankings. I used TD, INT and 1stD rates for QB rankings. This is my overall rankings when combining true pass set O line rankings + QB pressure rankings.



According to NC's criteria, Cowboys should beat the Ravens in the SB.

I have the separate charts for O line's and QB's if anyone is interested in those.

Hey, that's really cool. Yeah, I can't speak to other teams but in SF, should a team get us off script, which is rare, that does highlight our weaknesses on the OL and is the best recipe for defeat. Thanks for doing this. That's important to know for the playoff run.

Based on just this, it probably wouldn't surprise anyone if any of those top 4 teams made the Superbowl.

I understand that you cannot speak for other teams but I think you and I can agree that the elite QB's in this league are the one's who perform the best when under pressure. Obviously you think that the O line is a bit more important than I do. However, I think this chart sums up what your criteria for winning a SB is? If I am missing something please let me know. I will tweak it to your satisfaction. I would really like to end this debate about tier 1 O line + tier 1 QB = super bowl. I know that you stated that there isn't a tier 1 O line + tier 1 QB combo in the NFL this season. But it should suffice that one of these top 2 teams on my chart should win it all according to your theory.

Yeah, the ability to protect the QB under predictable sets and the ability to play well while under pressure still are great indicators of a deadly combination for success. Teams that have that combination certainly are increasing their odds for a winning formula.

Let's test it out and see if both continue that through the playoffs en route to a Superbowl win.

Although with both of those two teams, I'd if they won. Ha

Originally posted by YACBros85:
These are my final O line rankings which include hurries, hits & sack rates as well as YPC, rushing 1st down rate and PFF run blocking grade ranks.

Both of your charts are sort of validating why BT continued to have the Eagles in tier 1.

And the Ravens were in fact a team they had climbing all year (currently in tier 2). 9ers at 5 (tier 2). Bills and Falcons late bloomers too. Very interesting. Lions and Cowboys vascillated between tier 1 and 2 but moved a lot d/t weekly injuries.

For reference: Week 18
1. Eagles
2. Lions
3. Chiefs
4. Bucs
5. 49ers
6. Cowboys
7. Ravens
8. Colts
9. Bengals
10. Bills
11. Falcons

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
My argument is if the O line looks the same whether we win or lose, how can they be responsible for the loss? If they play the same in both cases, they are the constant. Its usually something else that is the variable and a bigger reason for the loss.

This is faulty logic. The only way this would makes sense is if all of our opponents were the exact same talent level and scheme. The O-Line can look great as we thump an inferior opponent. The O-Line will be much more severely tested when we play a better team, especially one with a great pass rush. Their play may be constant, but clearly an inferior O-Line that gets upgraded should do better against the better teams. Talent of the O-Line is for sure a contributing factor in our success.....it's not the only factor, but it is definitely a factor.

I could easily find a game this season where the O line played poorly and we won against a superior defense and I can find a game where the O line played poorly and we lost against a superior defense. I can also find a win where the O line played well against an inferior defense and a loss where the O line played well against an inferior defense.

Halfway through this season I posted a true pass set pressure rankings chart and the 49ers O line was ranked 22nd in the league. I just finished up my end of season true pass set pressure rankings chart and guess what? the 49ers O line is still ranked 22nd in the league.

My main issue is that no one complains about the O line no matter how poor they play unless we lose. As if there weren't more concerning factors that played into the loss.

This is very true unfortunately. And hell yes there are a myriad reasons for a loss. I wished they were all discussed because IMHO, it tends to be a pretty big grocery list when we do.

QB, OL and Secondary is probably just easier to talk about for most because they are repeat offenders over the years and areas the FO has chosen to prioritize less in their team building strategy.

I am one of the biggest Kyle Shanahan advocates on this site. However, I get hammered by several posters when I criticize anything about him, including a game plan that I believe was a big reason for a loss. So it seems as though some topics are just not allowed to be brought up.

Dude,...he is buttering you up,...for starters. He's had a rough day....lol.

But criticism is good and fine so long as you are able to continue to back it up with more than sheer numbers from 1 game. That is not going to usually be enough. If you can whip out the film and show us what you mean,....and if you're a little less defensive when others disagree with you,.... I doubt that you would get hammered anywhere near as much. Just my $0.02.

I stated my case and you all just ignore it and call me an idiot. Why do I need to provide film? Everyone else was using merely total passing yards as a rebuttal to my argument. In fact, that was the basis of their entire argument. My argument included the ravens defensive strengths as well as weaknesses. I also provided points on what our strengths are and how they are a favorable matchup for the ravens weaknesses. I provided quantifiable data to back up my argument. Than I reenforced my argument by explaining how many times the ravens got their hands (a strength) on the ball in that game. I didn't just provide the INT's as they defended quite a few of our other passes as well. They also had 9 QB hits (another strength). Why heavily attack an opponents strengths when the better matchup is to attack their weakness with our strength? Total passing yards is not enough evidence to contradict my argument. I am going to need film to take you all seriously. Just my $0.02.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Both of your charts are sort of validating why BT continued to have the Eagles in tier 1.

Maybe you mean supporting,...instead of validating? You have to actually know and understand the calculations that have gone into his rankings to claim validation.

You can argue that they support something just fine, however. But since they are so frequent and dominate the thread, the extreme takes need to be pointed out.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
These are my final O line rankings which include hurries, hits & sack rates as well as YPC, rushing 1st down rate and PFF run blocking grade ranks.

How is the average rank tallied? I'd imagine this is more of a composite grade instead of an average rank since the lowest average is 17 (out of 32).

Are all of the rankings averaged in equally weighted?

its a 6 category ranking system using the categories posted above the chart. Each category gets its own separate ranking. Then the rankings for each category are added up and divided by the number of categories. Giving you an average ranking overall.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
My argument is if the O line looks the same whether we win or lose, how can they be responsible for the loss? If they play the same in both cases, they are the constant. Its usually something else that is the variable and a bigger reason for the loss.

This is faulty logic. The only way this would makes sense is if all of our opponents were the exact same talent level and scheme. The O-Line can look great as we thump an inferior opponent. The O-Line will be much more severely tested when we play a better team, especially one with a great pass rush. Their play may be constant, but clearly an inferior O-Line that gets upgraded should do better against the better teams. Talent of the O-Line is for sure a contributing factor in our success.....it's not the only factor, but it is definitely a factor.

I could easily find a game this season where the O line played poorly and we won against a superior defense and I can find a game where the O line played poorly and we lost against a superior defense. I can also find a win where the O line played well against an inferior defense and a loss where the O line played well against an inferior defense.

Halfway through this season I posted a true pass set pressure rankings chart and the 49ers O line was ranked 22nd in the league. I just finished up my end of season true pass set pressure rankings chart and guess what? the 49ers O line is still ranked 22nd in the league.

My main issue is that no one complains about the O line no matter how poor they play unless we lose. As if there weren't more concerning factors that played into the loss.

This is very true unfortunately. And hell yes there are a myriad reasons for a loss. I wished they were all discussed because IMHO, it tends to be a pretty big grocery list when we do.

QB, OL and Secondary is probably just easier to talk about for most because they are repeat offenders over the years and areas the FO has chosen to prioritize less in their team building strategy.

I am one of the biggest Kyle Shanahan advocates on this site. However, I get hammered by several posters when I criticize anything about him, including a game plan that I believe was a big reason for a loss. So it seems as though some topics are just not allowed to be brought up.

Dude,...he is buttering you up,...for starters. He's had a rough day....lol.

But criticism is good and fine so long as you are able to continue to back it up with more than sheer numbers from 1 game. That is not going to usually be enough. If you can whip out the film and show us what you mean,....and if you're a little less defensive when others disagree with you,.... I doubt that you would get hammered anywhere near as much. Just my $0.02.

I stated my case and you all just ignore it and call me an idiot. Why do I need to provide film? Everyone else was using merely total passing yards as a rebuttal to my argument. In fact, that was the basis of their entire argument. My argument included the ravens defensive strengths as well as weaknesses. I also provided points on what our strengths are and how they are a favorable matchup for the ravens weaknesses. I provided quantifiable data to back up my argument. Than I reenforced my argument by explaining how many times the ravens got their hands (a strength) on the ball in that game. I didn't just provide the INT's as they defended quite a few of our other passes as well. They also had 9 QB hits (another strength). Why heavily attack an opponents strengths when the better matchup is to attack their weakness with our strength? Total passing yards is not enough evidence to contradict my argument. I am going to need film to take you all seriously. Just my $0.02.

My exact thoughts as well. And Kyle probably won't make the same mistake next time. It's OK that wasn't the best game plan or that it didn't work out ideally. That's what the regular season is for.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I stated my case and you all just ignore it and call me an idiot. Why do I need to provide film? Everyone else was using merely total passing yards as a rebuttal to my argument. In fact, that was the basis of their entire argument. My argument included the ravens defensive strengths as well as weaknesses. I also provided points on what our strengths are and how they are a favorable matchup for the ravens weaknesses. I provided quantifiable data to back up my argument. Than I reenforced my argument by explaining how many times the ravens got their hands (a strength) on the ball in that game. I didn't just provide the INT's as they defended quite a few of our other passes as well. They also had 9 QB hits (another strength). Why heavily attack an opponents strengths when the better matchup is to attack their weakness with our strength? Total passing yards is not enough evidence to contradict my argument. I am going to need film to take you all seriously. Just my $0.02.

1) Speaking of a single game,.....Using situational yards can count as a valid rebuttal to a claim saying why we lost,... without counting as proof of its own. I hope that's not confusing,....but plenty of evidence can be used to rebut claims without being standalone proof.

Saying "this is the reason we lost this game" is a HUGE commitment to evidence you are providing. Without going in-depth in film study can be a recipe for disaster in a legitimate conversation with those that know how the game of football is.

2) Sometimes there are clear reasons that show up on film (that are unaccounted for in numbers, btw). Other times,....it is black and white and plain as day.

What cant really ever fail is the eye in the sky. The former, however,...is going to toss alot of numbers used in the garbage. Alot goes on in a single football game that cant be accounted for with numbers.

Quick example: Bosa's 2 sacks (in 3 different games) can clearly be the REASON we won in 1 game,.... supportive details highlighting the great pass rush we had all game in another game,... and virtually unrelated to the outcome of a 3rd game where we garnered next to no pass rush all day, but ended up winning. This is just how football is!!

Can't really know without looking at the game. And I think you run into trouble there. Just my $0.02.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I stated my case and you all just ignore it and call me an idiot. Why do I need to provide film? Everyone else was using merely total passing yards as a rebuttal to my argument. In fact, that was the basis of their entire argument. My argument included the ravens defensive strengths as well as weaknesses. I also provided points on what our strengths are and how they are a favorable matchup for the ravens weaknesses. I provided quantifiable data to back up my argument. Than I reenforced my argument by explaining how many times the ravens got their hands (a strength) on the ball in that game. I didn't just provide the INT's as they defended quite a few of our other passes as well. They also had 9 QB hits (another strength). Why heavily attack an opponents strengths when the better matchup is to attack their weakness with our strength? Total passing yards is not enough evidence to contradict my argument. I am going to need film to take you all seriously. Just my $0.02.

It's not so much about total yards. It's more the idea that the gameplan was effective and outlier poor execution (and some bad luck) was the primary reason we failed.

Originally posted by NCommand:
My exact thoughts as well. And Kyle probably won't make the same mistake next time. It's OK that wasn't the best game plan or that it didn't work out ideally. That's what the regular season is for.

Hmmm. I hear you on the other guy suddenly mirroring your exact thoughts on a football game. (Edit: Then again,...didnt you just tell us you have a much more expansive, laundry list for why we lose,...when we lose games? So how could these be your exact thoughts as well? Yet another Catch-22)

Just going off of history, though, it's more likely you're using whatever convenient crutch you can find at the moment to exit out of something. Not to be too critical,...only saying what is observed time and time and time again.

No real stand-alone, consistent opinions. Just leaning on whatever is closest

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I stated my case and you all just ignore it and call me an idiot. Why do I need to provide film? Everyone else was using merely total passing yards as a rebuttal to my argument. In fact, that was the basis of their entire argument. My argument included the ravens defensive strengths as well as weaknesses. I also provided points on what our strengths are and how they are a favorable matchup for the ravens weaknesses. I provided quantifiable data to back up my argument. Than I reenforced my argument by explaining how many times the ravens got their hands (a strength) on the ball in that game. I didn't just provide the INT's as they defended quite a few of our other passes as well. They also had 9 QB hits (another strength). Why heavily attack an opponents strengths when the better matchup is to attack their weakness with our strength? Total passing yards is not enough evidence to contradict my argument. I am going to need film to take you all seriously. Just my $0.02.

1) Speaking of a single game,.....Using situational yards can count as a valid rebuttal to a claim saying why we lost,... without counting as proof of its own. I hope that's not confusing,....but plenty of evidence can be used to rebut claims without being standalone proof.

Saying "this is the reason we lost this game" is a HUGE commitment to evidence you are providing. Without going in-depth in film study can be a recipe for disaster in a legitimate conversation with those that know how the game of football is.

2) Sometimes there are clear reasons that show up on film (that are unaccounted for in numbers, btw). Other times,....it is black and white and plain as day.

What cant really ever fail is the eye in the sky. The former, however,...is going to toss alot of numbers used in the garbage. Alot goes on in a single football came that cant be accounted for with numbers.

Quick example: Bosa's 2 sacks in a game can clearly be the REASON we won in 1 game,.... supportive details highlighting the great pass rush we had all game in another game,... and virtually unrelated to the outcome of a 3rd game where we garnered next to no pass rush all day, but ended up winning. This is just how football is!!

Can't really know without looking at the game. And I think you run into trouble there. Just my $0.02.

Keep spinning the tires in the mud. You still haven't provided anything. No film, no real data, nothing. Yet you continue to demand that I keep providing more and more when you and everyone else haven't provided much if anything.