49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Are you one of the posters that thought I was crazy thinking Brock would only throw 1 TD pass against the ravens while you yourself stated that he will throw 5? I expressed my concern about believing Brock would have an MVP type of game against the ravens. No one took me seriously than either.

I never stated he would throw 5 TD passes, lol. I never made a single stat prediction for any game at any point this season. Not something I tend to do.

Okay. I was just asking. Not accusing.

Originally posted by bassmanr:
I think taking away Ricky Watters was just as bad as losing Deion. The next year we just didn't have 2 of our main horses that got us there before. Yes taking away one of our best players in TW would cause any unit to degrade to less than average.

All that being said when the Ravens Queen said we have "Tells". We are going to need great line play to let plays develope to confuse that A$$ Hat. I don't care about tiers but we are gong to have to play our best game to beat the Ravens should we meet them in the superbowl.

Agr💯%, and take the top players on any team (because of injury) and you will have pretty much a sub-par performance. *Unless* you have a hall of fame level player waiting in the wings playing 3rd string QB. Also, I was just trying to help 49ersATT undertand what the definition of Sub-par actually means.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Come on man. Nobody who actually watches the games could believe McKivitz is a Pro Bowl level player. I want him replaced ASAP.

Brock a product of elite offensive line - confirmed

That's BS. Our line is sub par. Other than Trent Williams and Aaron Banks. They are giving Nick WRONG ammo based on false narratives.

Agree on the OLine playing sub par - specially against the Ravens. Having said that, I think Feliciano brings up the play of Brendel and McKivitz. I think it's Burford that kind of makes both Brendel and McKivitz regress. So yes - when Burford is in there - I tend to feel that both Brendel and Mckivitz tend to have more mental errors than is normal for a - so called - pro bowl level player.

What's sub par lol

and the OL didn't make Purdy throw INTs

An OLine without it's top players won't play to it's potential, for sure. As I said previously, *Injuries* can play a role in any squad playing down or up to it's potential as the season goes on. Also the opposition has a vote. Any top of the line offense can play *sub par* if faced with an elite defense and it's not prepared or has the wrong strategy. Thats' why health (with regards to Kyle's system) is so important. Kyle doesn't have a lot of depth on the offensive line - for example.

Originally posted by Giedi:
An OLine without it's top players won't play to it's potential, for sure. As I said previously, *Injuries* can play a role in any squad playing down or up to it's potential as the season goes on. Also the opposition has a vote. Any top of the line offense can play *sub par* if faced with an elite defense and it's not prepared or has the wrong strategy. Thats' why health (with regards to Kyle's system) is so important. Kyle doesn't have a lot of depth on the offensive line - for example.

Please tell us which offensive systems there are in the league where health is not as important?

I eagerly await a thorough answer. Maybe we need to drop this "system" that has torched the league, efficiency-wise, and go towards one of your recognized systems that does not need healthy players?

|

Originally posted by Giedi:

Kyle doesn't have a lot of depth on the offensive line - for example.

Kyle's system has spread like wildfire across the league,...just in case you haven't noticed.

But which teams have alot of depth on the offensive line?

Again,...the wait is eager. I will then check out those several teams "doing in the right way" with the OLinemen 6 thru 8 as compared to us, and see what is up. But will this ever be responded to?

Seems like things get repeated over and over by the same characters, but never replied to or backed up.

These are a couple of those instances where I guess the truth lies in repetition? If several of the same circle posters keep agreeing with each other and not replying to or explaining what they are referring to,... everyone on a messageboard is to be silent and blindly accept these things as true? Why?

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Okay. I was just asking. Not accusing.

No problem. Only reason I threw the lol in was because it'd be insane to ever predict a QB would throw 5 TD passes in an NFL game.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I am not going to continue to have multiple conversations at the same time. This is the O line thread and It is currently getting derailed. I will say this before I stop responding to this topic. None of you have provided why a pass heavy game plan against the 6th ranked yds/game and #1 ranked yds/att pass defense is a better strategy than a run heavy game plan against the 13th ranked yds/game and 27th ranked yds/att defense. Which is the basis of my entire argument.

There's no reason you can't address those examples provided above. But either way, your gameplan gets perverted when you turn the ball over multiple times. I have no problem with you thinking we should have come in run heavy. The disagreement is in blaming a plan that was largely effective outside of poor execution from an MVP candidate nobody would have expected coupled with some unfortunate luck.

I'm happy Brock had the experience. Got a free look at a potential SB opponent and he's consistently shown to learn from the bulk of his mistakes.

Are you one of the posters that thought I was crazy thinking Brock would only throw 1 TD pass against the ravens while you yourself stated that he will throw 5? I expressed my concern about believing Brock would have an MVP type of game against the ravens. No one took me seriously than either.

It was tankle that predicted Brock would throw 5 TDs, which wasn't even the most optimistic thing people were predicting before that game.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
That is the issue. You say it's LUCK that the ravens got their hands on so many passes. I say it's the ravens STRENGTH as to the reason why they got their hands on so many passes. Are you that reluctant to give the ravens any credit that you have boiled your argument down to the 49ers just having bad luck?

Definitely agree on this. The opposition always has a role in the performance of our own team's various squads.

Originally posted by 49ersRing:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I am not going to continue to have multiple conversations at the same time. This is the O line thread and It is currently getting derailed. I will say this before I stop responding to this topic. None of you have provided why a pass heavy game plan against the 6th ranked yds/game and #1 ranked yds/att pass defense is a better strategy than a run heavy game plan against the 13th ranked yds/game and 27th ranked yds/att defense. Which is the basis of my entire argument.

There's no reason you can't address those examples provided above. But either way, your gameplan gets perverted when you turn the ball over multiple times. I have no problem with you thinking we should have come in run heavy. The disagreement is in blaming a plan that was largely effective outside of poor execution from an MVP candidate nobody would have expected coupled with some unfortunate luck.

I'm happy Brock had the experience. Got a free look at a potential SB opponent and he's consistently shown to learn from the bulk of his mistakes.

Are you one of the posters that thought I was crazy thinking Brock would only throw 1 TD pass against the ravens while you yourself stated that he will throw 5? I expressed my concern about believing Brock would have an MVP type of game against the ravens. No one took me seriously than either.

It was tankle that predicted Brock would throw 5 TDs, which wasn't even the most optimistic thing people were predicting before that game.

I probably would have also predicted something like that also - considering how well the team was doing going into the Ravens game. What I didn't take account of was the MVP talk and how it got to (In my opinion) both Brock and Kyle. I'm with Mr. YakBros. You don't have a game plan that goes to the strength of the opposition, but rather to it's weakness - specially if it's *your Strength* against the opponent's *weakness.* I.e. why unnecessarily handicap yourself that way unless something else was more important than the win.

Originally posted by Giedi:
I probably would have also predicted something like that also - considering how well the team was doing going into the Ravens game. What I didn't take account of was the MVP talk and how it got to (In my opinion) both Brock and Kyle. I'm with Mr. YakBros. You don't have a game plan that goes to the strength of the opposition, but rather to it's weakness - specially if it's *your Strength* against the opponent's *weakness.* I.e. why unnecessarily handicap yourself that way unless something else was more important than the win.

So you would've predicted 5 TD passes with a run heavy gameplan?

I don't think it got anyone. Brock is a gunslinger and takes risks. They backfired vs Baltimore.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
I probably would have also predicted something like that also - considering how well the team was doing going into the Ravens game. What I didn't take account of was the MVP talk and how it got to (In my opinion) both Brock and Kyle. I'm with Mr. YakBros. You don't have a game plan that goes to the strength of the opposition, but rather to it's weakness - specially if it's *your Strength* against the opponent's *weakness.* I.e. why unnecessarily handicap yourself that way unless something else was more important than the win.

So you would've predicted 5 TD passes with a run heavy gameplan?

I don't think it got anyone. Brock is a gunslinger and takes risks. They backfired vs Baltimore.

Sure, the explosives would still have been there in my opinion. Rams and Stafford put up around close to 30 points (I think) on the Ravens.

Saw this on FB and thought it was relevant. I am willing to bet that TTT will show a close correlation with the fluctuations in these rates as well.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Saw this on FB and thought it was relevant. I am willing to bet that TTT will show a close correlation with the fluctuations in these rates as well.

just more proof that QB transcends the OL, not the other way around

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Saw this on FB and thought it was relevant. I am willing to bet that TTT will show a close correlation with the fluctuations in these rates as well.

Great philosophical discussion right here. You're spot on on TTT and pre and post snap decisions. Brady as a classic pocket passer needed to be top notch in those 2 areas to become a GOAT. The answer is, "both" for me. In NE, he had perhaps the best OL coach in the business coupled with an OC who thrived with Brady centric on those 2 areas of strength plus Brady's freedom at audibles.

As to the Bucs, they've had a tier 1 OL and top 5 OL in talent every year per BT/TW even before Tom arrived. Adding a tier 1 QB to a tier 1 OL is always a great combo. It resulted in a Superbowl win.

The flip side is also true. When Brady's OL went down to injuries, he was a totally different QB and retired. Even more so, Winston and Mayfield are on the other end of QB style... they rely on mobility, off script and high TTT. That puts added stress on an OL and hits, pressures and sacks naturally increase. OL's like the Bucs and Lions help non-tier 1 QB's make the playoffs.

In short, it's not one or the other for me. It's a marriage. They BOTH can have a pretty significant effect on each other, good and bad, no matter the talent level.

Since there seems to be some revisionist history, TB did not have a tier 1 or top 5 OL prior to Tom arriving, quite the opposite in fact

Those O line's were twice as good with Tom Brady behind center then they were with those other QB's. Unless someone can prove that those O line's drastically changed personnel before and after Brady, that chart should clearly put this debate to bed.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Those O line's were twice as good with Tom Brady behind center then they were with those other QB's. Unless someone can prove that those O line's drastically changed personnel before and after Brady, that chart should clearly put this debate to bed.

They didn't . They were horrific prior to Tom both in PP and run blocking, and it's all documented in #s and rankings. . Good rule of thumb is to always fact check what certain folks say