49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Their OL was terrific - no sacks.

Our OL wasn't terrific.

There needs to be a heavy focus in the off season on FA & the draft.

I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with you. But this is the WZ. Haha.

This is my position too.

We see the receipts daily in here. Well, I don't. LOL

Yeah, great QBs can transcend bad OLines - kind of takes. You need both.

"Good enough but I want to draft a T, G & C next year with the first 3 picks." LOL

So you DON'T think it's good enough?

Que the "Pivot!" meme.

Well, folks who haven't seen the dynasty years (again I understand it's pre-cap years) can't conceive of how *perfect* the 49er teams were in those years - with Eddie D.'s money and whatnot. Nowadays, the Cap really forces parity, and no team can be strong everywhere. But that's not what I'm saying - I'm saying they can't have *weaknesses* anywhere. I think there is a difference.

You need *both* a good OLine *and* a good QB. You don't need both to be elite. I think maybe folks are reading *elite* in there instead of just *good.* (p.s. to win a Superbowl, you can't have *any* weakness anywhere, currently the 49er OLine is good, but not great)

Originally posted by Giedi:
Well, folks who haven't seen the dynasty years (again I understand it's pre-cap years) can't conceive of how *perfect* the 49er teams were in those years - with Eddie D.'s money and whatnot. Nowadays, the Cap really forces parity, and no team can be strong everywhere. But that's not what I'm saying - I'm saying they can't have *weaknesses* anywhere. I think there is a difference.

You need *both* a good OLine *and* a good QB. You don't need both to be elite. I think maybe folks are reading *elite* in there instead of just *good.* (p.s. to win a Superbowl, you can't have *any* weakness anywhere, currently the 49er OLine is good, but not great)

Well tier one is elite last I checked. That is the bar so we are told.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
Well, folks who haven't seen the dynasty years (again I understand it's pre-cap years) can't conceive of how *perfect* the 49er teams were in those years - with Eddie D.'s money and whatnot. Nowadays, the Cap really forces parity, and no team can be strong everywhere. But that's not what I'm saying - I'm saying they can't have *weaknesses* anywhere. I think there is a difference.

You need *both* a good OLine *and* a good QB. You don't need both to be elite. I think maybe folks are reading *elite* in there instead of just *good.* (p.s. to win a Superbowl, you can't have *any* weakness anywhere, currently the 49er OLine is good, but not great)

Well tier one is elite last I checked. That is the bar so we are told.

uh oh Geid said good enough ..NC gonna ban you

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Their OL was terrific - no sacks.

Our OL wasn't terrific.

There needs to be a heavy focus in the off season on FA & the draft.

I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with you. But this is the WZ. Haha.

This is my position too.

We see the receipts daily in here. Well, I don't. LOL

Yeah, great QBs can transcend bad OLines - kind of takes. You need both.

"Good enough but I want to draft a T, G & C next year with the first 3 picks." LOL

So you DON'T think it's good enough?

Que the "Pivot!" meme.

Well, folks who haven't seen the dynasty years (again I understand it's pre-cap years) can't conceive of how *perfect* the 49er teams were in those years - with Eddie D.'s money and whatnot. Nowadays, the Cap really forces parity, and no team can be strong everywhere. But that's not what I'm saying - I'm saying they can't have *weaknesses* anywhere. I think there is a difference.

You need *both* a good OLine *and* a good QB. You don't need both to be elite. I think maybe folks are reading *elite* in there instead of just *good.* (p.s. to win a Superbowl, you can't have *any* weakness anywhere, currently the 49er OLine is good, but not great)

Yeah, all weaknesses get exposed in the playoffs. It's the great reveal. Some are finally exposed as glaring. Others aren't as severe or as bad as originally thought.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Pressure rate
Brock- 41.9%
Love- 40.0%

49ers O line- 14 hurries, 3 hits, 1 sack
Packers O line- 14 hurries, 3 hits, 0 sacks.

What I thought. Similar rates. Difference is GB doesn't play a super soft zone that allows for easy dump offs for 5-7 yards every time.

Another difference is that our DLine is supposed to be **much better** than the Packers DLine.

Not according to pressure stats. The playoff pressure stats had GB 2nd in O line and 3rd in DL. The 49ers were ranked 9th in O line and 5th DL.

Green Bay did a number on the Cowboys, and the Cowboys are a much more pass oriented club than we are. Not saying the stats are wrong, but that it's (Maybe) telling you a different story than what is really going on. Point being, is that our DLine is *supposedly* much better than the GB DLine and our OLine didn't do very well in the GB game. So maybe our OLine is a lot worse than I thought. I haven't rewatched the game yet - I want to see how Tampa and Detroit do first.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Pressure rate
Brock- 41.9%
Love- 40.0%

49ers O line- 14 hurries, 3 hits, 1 sack
Packers O line- 14 hurries, 3 hits, 0 sacks.

What I thought. Similar rates. Difference is GB doesn't play a super soft zone that allows for easy dump offs for 5-7 yards every time.

Another difference is that our DLine is supposed to be **much better** than the Packers DLine.

Not according to pressure stats. The playoff pressure stats had GB 2nd in O line and 3rd in DL. The 49ers were ranked 9th in O line and 5th DL.

Green Bay did a number on the Cowboys, and the Cowboys are a much more pass oriented club than we are. Not saying the stats are wrong, but that it's (Maybe) telling you a different story than what is really going on. Point being, is that our DLine is *supposedly* much better than the GB DLine and our OLine didn't do very well in the GB game. So maybe our OLine is a lot worse than I thought. I haven't rewatched the game yet - I want to see how Tampa and Detroit do first.

Yea. Results are usually a better indicator than mainstream perception.

The actual difference in the game was 3rd ranked playoff pressure QB rose to the occassion while the 6th ranked playoff pressure QB crumbled.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Pressure rate
Brock- 41.9%
Love- 40.0%

49ers O line- 14 hurries, 3 hits, 1 sack
Packers O line- 14 hurries, 3 hits, 0 sacks.

What I thought. Similar rates. Difference is GB doesn't play a super soft zone that allows for easy dump offs for 5-7 yards every time.

Another difference is that our DLine is supposed to be **much better** than the Packers DLine.

Not according to pressure stats. The playoff pressure stats had GB 2nd in O line and 3rd in DL. The 49ers were ranked 9th in O line and 5th DL.

Green Bay did a number on the Cowboys, and the Cowboys are a much more pass oriented club than we are. Not saying the stats are wrong, but that it's (Maybe) telling you a different story than what is really going on. Point being, is that our DLine is *supposedly* much better than the GB DLine and our OLine didn't do very well in the GB game. So maybe our OLine is a lot worse than I thought. I haven't rewatched the game yet - I want to see how Tampa and Detroit do first.

Yea. Results are usually a better indicator than mainstream perception.

were the 9th anf 5th rankings due to only one game played and not 2 ?

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Yea. Results are usually a better indicator than mainstream perception.

The actual difference in the game was 3rd ranked playoff pressure QB rose to the occassion while the 6th ranked playoff pressure QB crumbled.

Amazing what happens when the QB doesn't crumble. It's like it's the difference or something.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Pressure rate
Brock- 41.9%
Love- 40.0%

49ers O line- 14 hurries, 3 hits, 1 sack
Packers O line- 14 hurries, 3 hits, 0 sacks.

What I thought. Similar rates. Difference is GB doesn't play a super soft zone that allows for easy dump offs for 5-7 yards every time.

Another difference is that our DLine is supposed to be **much better** than the Packers DLine.

Not according to pressure stats. The playoff pressure stats had GB 2nd in O line and 3rd in DL. The 49ers were ranked 9th in O line and 5th DL.

Green Bay did a number on the Cowboys, and the Cowboys are a much more pass oriented club than we are. Not saying the stats are wrong, but that it's (Maybe) telling you a different story than what is really going on. Point being, is that our DLine is *supposedly* much better than the GB DLine and our OLine didn't do very well in the GB game. So maybe our OLine is a lot worse than I thought. I haven't rewatched the game yet - I want to see how Tampa and Detroit do first.

Yea. Results are usually a better indicator than mainstream perception.

were the 9th anf 5th rankings due to only one game played and not 2 ?

The rankings were based on playoff teams vs playoff teams during the regular season. Every team typically plays 6-8 playoff teams during the regular season.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
People are getting confused here. This isn't about the need to upgrade at OL. We all want that. This about the team we have now.

choose your OL view:
1. NCs side is that we have no chance of winning this year. Something he said before the season and placed a bet on with the poster Smokey

2. While we don't have the best OL, we can win and possibly win a ship with this team

Or just reject that paradigm and you can argue that long term this team needs to adjust their approach the OL and make it more of a priority, especially if they're going to utilize Purdy more as a pure passer in shotgun...etc.

100% what I'm saying. It's like Sith speak. When the reality is more fluid and somewhere in the middle.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Their OL was terrific - no sacks.

Our OL wasn't terrific.

There needs to be a heavy focus in the off season on FA & the draft.

I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with you. But this is the WZ. Haha.

This is my position too.

Yes we really need to invest more and develop guys. GB has all 5 guys starting home grown ? And their starters are very good. Thats fantastic output.

For sure when their rt went down we saw a difference, but as someone told me the entire league has o-line issues especially with depth due to the new cba etc.

Aside banks nobody we drafted has panned out very well. Thats mcg, mck, burford, Moore, zeickjl or whatever etc etc. it's a bad spot on this team and I hope Kyle tries something new with it. No idea if it's drafting or coaching or both.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Right, but they scout well, coach well and continually draft OL. It's what has enabled them to have really good OLs going back to the 90s. They prioritize it and continually come up with Pro Bowl level OLs like Elgton Jenkins.

In 2022, the 49ers drafted Tyrion Davis Price and Danny Gray in the 3rd round. Neither look like they have a long term future here. In the 4th, the Packers took Romeo Doubs and Zach Tom, both look like exceptional players and are starters in their second seasons. Tom in particular looks like a very good tackle and would have been an outstanding fit for the 49ers as well and was brought up by many here as a great fit for the OL.

Scouting has to improve on the 49ers early picks. If they're going to be paying Purdy big money eventually, they can't keep whiffing on their earlier picks and OL needs to be more of a priority.

Tom was a 4th rounder just like Burford. It's the picking the right guy and developing him issue that's going on more than anything. It's not the Pack are prioritizing it more.

Do need to be better with their 3rd rounders but I'm not for missing on 3rd round OL either.

Indeed. Stop reaching. Draft capital is premium for keeping our team affordable. We have to use it better.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
People are getting confused here. This isn't about the need to upgrade at OL. We all want that. This about the team we have now.

choose your OL view:
1. NCs side is that we have no chance of winning this year. Something he said before the season and placed a bet on with the poster Smokey

2. While we don't have the best OL, we can win and possibly win a ship with this team

Or just reject that paradigm and you can argue that long term this team needs to adjust their approach the OL and make it more of a priority, especially if they're going to utilize Purdy more as a pure passer in shotgun...etc.

This! I think its imperative that the Niners place a big priority on the OL because of the weakness on the right side and the very likely possibility that Trent retires. No one can argue that the 49ers have a great OL or that its clearly not the weakest part of the offense. With our skill players a great OL would make them unstoppable.

While the Niners have several holes to fill (OT, OG, C,CB, S, and edge), I think its a year where it makes total sense to load up on the OL and take a corner high in the draft.

The draft plan is clear. No need to complicate this.. id through DT in there as the top need after OT, OG, and CB. Our inability to control/stop the running game is masked by our ability to score and playmakers elsewhere.. we need a DT that can shut down those inside runs as well as short yardage. Hoping we take one in the 4th and in the 6th or 7th. We need someone that can play in year one.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
This! I think its imperative that the Niners place a big priority on the OL because of the weakness on the right side and the very likely possibility that Trent retires. No one can argue that the 49ers have a great OL or that its clearly not the weakest part of the offense. With our skill players a great OL would make them unstoppable.

While the Niners have several holes to fill (OT, OG, C,CB, S, and edge), I think its a year where it makes total sense to load up on the OL and take a corner high in the draft.

100%. CB, fill out the OL and find a decent run stuffing DT somewhere.

Not even just improving pass protection but they also need to be able to run just as well to the right side, something that they've lost without McGlinchey.

Agree. And this can be done in this draft. Don't just hand starting jobs. Draft 3 guys and let them compete. I doubt anyone without experience will beat out Brendel, but Burford and McKivitz can be beat. I hope they are because it would immediately improve our depth if McKivitz and Brendel were on the bench.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
People are getting confused here. This isn't about the need to upgrade at OL. We all want that. This about the team we have now.

choose your OL view:
1. NCs side is that we have no chance of winning this year. Something he said before the season and placed a bet on with the poster Smokey

2. While we don't have the best OL, we can win and possibly win a ship with this team

Or just reject that paradigm and you can argue that long term this team needs to adjust their approach the OL and make it more of a priority, especially if they're going to utilize Purdy more as a pure passer in shotgun...etc.

100% what I'm saying. It's like Sith speak. When the reality is more fluid and somewhere in the middle.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
Their OL was terrific - no sacks.

Our OL wasn't terrific.

There needs to be a heavy focus in the off season on FA & the draft.

I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with you. But this is the WZ. Haha.

This is my position too.

Yes we really need to invest more and develop guys. GB has all 5 guys starting home grown ? And their starters are very good. Thats fantastic output.

For sure when their rt went down we saw a difference, but as someone told me the entire league has o-line issues especially with depth due to the new cba etc.

Aside banks nobody we drafted has panned out very well. Thats mcg, mck, burford, Moore, zeickjl or whatever etc etc. it's a bad spot on this team and I hope Kyle tries something new with it. No idea if it's drafting or coaching or both.

if you want to talk future, point out the lock OL picks towards the end of the rounds.. pointing out issues is easy

With Todd Bowles, you're going to see what unit pass protection really means. Good or bad (Cowboys). Goff is far closer to Jimmy Garoppolo in pocket mobility too. Can they hold? He sees ghosts once he starts getting consistent pressures/hits too. So fun to watch!

Now that I'm thinking more about it, I'm not sure what would be the worst matchup for our OL. The Lions front or Bowles blitz packages?

^ what does it matter? You've already stated they can't win it all due to the OL.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
^ what does it matter? You've already stated they can't win it all due to the OL.

Hes rooting to not lose money to Smokey. Don't kid yourself