49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Yup. Lions getting stomped.

What most of us on this forum want

That 1 outlier is going to be rooting his ass off for the lions in hopes he can come gloat immediately after

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
I think NC's main idea is that you need both. It helps if you have a elite OLIne (for lack of a better word) vs a good OLine for sure. I think the Elite stuff got mixed up with the Jimmy QB stuff. I.e. Elite OLine vs Just a good enough QB - can a Jimmy type QB win a Superbowl? My position has always been yes, but that OLine has to be elite - some examples are Nick Foles and his Eagle Line etc....

Purdy is a generational QB and because of that --- despite the play of the 49er OLine in the GB game, he was able to pull it out. To me that's a definition of a generational QB. Jimmy would have struggled against GB yesterday - I agree. He's a good QB, but not a Generational one like Purdy. That Green Bay team yesterday was much better than the team Jimmy played last time in the playoffs.

No his point has always been you need to be elite at both. Not good. Tier 1

i don't buy Jimmy could win with the Lions. Too many dumb throws.

In end if you have an elite QB, coach and defense you have a shot.

Jimmy was 10 minutes and a first down conversion away from a win. But for Person getting bull rushed in the Superbowl and knocking down that Jimmy 3 yard slant pass. (as an example of how a Nick Foles type of QB can win given a elite OLine). I've read NC's points and I've always thought he's saying simply that you need both to win games - but to win a Superbowl you need one of them to be elite and the other good. That's just *my opinion* of what he is saying. Your reading may be more correct. You can ask NC.

Originally posted by Giedi:
Jimmy was 10 minutes and a first down conversion away from a win. But for Person getting bull rushed in the Superbowl and knocking down that Jimmy 3 yard slant pass. (as an example of how a Nick Foles type of QB can win given a elite OLine). I've read NC's points and I've always thought he's saying simply that you need both to win games - but to win a Superbowl you need one of them to be elite and the other good. That's just *my opinion* of what he is saying. Your reading may be more correct. You can ask NC.

Tier 1 QB and OL. Self explanitory

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

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.

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

Agree. Stats can only tell you what happened, not what is going to happen. Stats can give you some deeper insights and a quicker read as to the overall strength of a NFL ballclub. I use stats to see if what I see on film is what I can see in the stats. Pressure stats, for example, can be from a weak OLine to a very talented blitzing team. So to me - without looking at the film - stats are meaningless to me. You need both. Just like you need both a good OLine and a good QB to win games.

You act like I don't watch the games. 🤣 Of course the stats are used to confirm what I see on film. Why do you think you are different than me when it comes to that? Actually, you need an elite QB, an elite HC and an elite defense since the very beginning of modern football. Guess what? We have all 3.

There definitely folks here who espouse their opinions, but really don't watch the game (not you). But you can tell who they are by how they word their opinions.

Elite depends on a lot of things. Elite may not be elite at the moment - stat wise. Green Bay's offense came on strong in the latter half of the season this year. They weren't elite at the beginning, but they gave us a hell of a scare yesterday. Same thing happened in 1989. 49ers barely squeak into the playoffs with a 10-6 record. Statistically they weren't at the top at either defense or offense - more towards the top of the upper quartile in terms of stats. But they ended up winning #3 Superbowl despite not really dominating on a lot of statistical categories that year.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

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

What are you saying if I don't like our o line play I have to know who to draft otherwise shut up? That's why they pay Kyle, John and all the scouts no? That's their job. I'm the fan who gets to observe and opine. I am counting on them tho.

if you want to gate keep on what should be talked about here, then you should actually start the conversation. Personally i would like to get away from all the NC gloating about us not having a chance to win. but that won't happen

You lost me. I was agreeing with Phoenix's comment and then elaborated on Geidi's comment.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

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

What are you saying if I don't like our o line play I have to know who to draft otherwise shut up? That's why they pay Kyle, John and all the scouts no? That's their job. I'm the fan who gets to observe and opine. I am counting on them tho.

if you want to gate keep on what should be talked about here, then you should actually start the conversation. Personally i would like to get away from all the NC gloating about us not having a chance to win. but that won't happen

You lost me. I was agreeing with Phoenix's comment and then elaborated on Geidi's comment.

my bad.. but it would be nice to get some real future OL talk here

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

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.

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

Agree. Stats can only tell you what happened, not what is going to happen. Stats can give you some deeper insights and a quicker read as to the overall strength of a NFL ballclub. I use stats to see if what I see on film is what I can see in the stats. Pressure stats, for example, can be from a weak OLine to a very talented blitzing team. So to me - without looking at the film - stats are meaningless to me. You need both. Just like you need both a good OLine and a good QB to win games.

You act like I don't watch the games. 🤣 Of course the stats are used to confirm what I see on film. Why do you think you are different than me when it comes to that? Actually, you need an elite QB, an elite HC and an elite defense since the very beginning of modern football. Guess what? We have all 3.

There definitely folks here who espouse their opinions, but really don't watch the game (not you). But you can tell who they are by how they word their opinions.

Elite depends on a lot of things. Elite may not be elite at the moment - stat wise. Green Bay's offense came on strong in the latter half of the season this year. They weren't elite at the beginning, but they gave us a hell of a scare yesterday. Same thing happened in 1989. 49ers barely squeak into the playoffs with a 10-6 record. Statistically they weren't at the top at either defense or offense - more towards the top of the upper quartile in terms of stats. But they ended up winning #3 Superbowl despite not really dominating on a lot of statistical categories that year.

we all watch the game and film, only NC has admitted he doesn't watch.

why are you even talking about elite anyways ? Do you believe the 49ers can win.. because your buddy is saying we have no chance ?

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Giedi:

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.

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

Agree. Stats can only tell you what happened, not what is going to happen. Stats can give you some deeper insights and a quicker read as to the overall strength of a NFL ballclub. I use stats to see if what I see on film is what I can see in the stats. Pressure stats, for example, can be from a weak OLine to a very talented blitzing team. So to me - without looking at the film - stats are meaningless to me. You need both. Just like you need both a good OLine and a good QB to win games.

You act like I don't watch the games. 🤣 Of course the stats are used to confirm what I see on film. Why do you think you are different than me when it comes to that? Actually, you need an elite QB, an elite HC and an elite defense since the very beginning of modern football. Guess what? We have all 3.

There definitely folks here who espouse their opinions, but really don't watch the game (not you). But you can tell who they are by how they word their opinions.

Elite depends on a lot of things. Elite may not be elite at the moment - stat wise. Green Bay's offense came on strong in the latter half of the season this year. They weren't elite at the beginning, but they gave us a hell of a scare yesterday. Same thing happened in 1989. 49ers barely squeak into the playoffs with a 10-6 record. Statistically they weren't at the top at either defense or offense - more towards the top of the upper quartile in terms of stats. But they ended up winning #3 Superbowl despite not really dominating on a lot of statistical categories that year.

we all watch the game and film, only NC has admitted he doesn't watch.

why are you even talking about elite anyways ? Do you believe the 49ers can win.. because your buddy is saying we have no chance ?

Not defending NC in any way, he's big enough to defend himself. I'm just saying your interpretation (in my opinion) of NC"s comments are a bit off as he's a 49er fan and wants the 49ers to win. Again, I could be dead wrong and you can be absolutely right. But that can be all cleared up easy.

I share his opinion that you need *both* a good OLine and a good *QB* to win games in the NFL. Now to win *championships* is really a different question. Going into a Superbowl game - you have to have the highest level of standards. Anything less is a loss. Again, *my* opinion -- Not NC's or any other persons opinion.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
Jimmy was 10 minutes and a first down conversion away from a win. But for Person getting bull rushed in the Superbowl and knocking down that Jimmy 3 yard slant pass. (as an example of how a Nick Foles type of QB can win given a elite OLine). I've read NC's points and I've always thought he's saying simply that you need both to win games - but to win a Superbowl you need one of them to be elite and the other good. That's just *my opinion* of what he is saying. Your reading may be more correct. You can ask NC.

Tier 1 QB and OL. Self explanitory

Yeah but Nick Foles? Can you give me a explanation?

Originally posted by Giedi:
Not defending NC in any way, he's big enough to defend himself. I'm just saying your interpretation (in my opinion) of NC"s comments are a bit off as he's a 49er fan and wants the 49ers to win. Again, I could be dead wrong and you can be absolutely right. But that can be all cleared up easy.

I share his opinion that you need *both* a good OLine and a good *QB* to win games in the NFL. Now to win *championships* is really a different question. Going into a Superbowl game - you have to have the highest level of standards. Anything less is a loss. Again, *my* opinion -- Not NC's or any other persons opinion.

For the 5000th time that isn't his opinion Geidi. If it was he wouldn't continually bring up tier 1. He'd said over and over there were only 2 tier 1 OLs. So if you need a tier 1 OL to win it has to be the best of the best.

Reality is he thinks you need an elite OL and that will make the QB win. It's why he picked the Lions for his bet. He doesn't actually value the QB position. Never has.

According to his precious Thorn rankings the 49ers O line is good.

Originally posted by Giedi:
Yeah but Nick Foles? Can you give me a explanation?

I'm not the one that has ever set that standard. Ask him.

Nick Foles got on a run just like Joe Flacoo did. It can happen. But an elite QB is how you consistently win and compete for SBs.

Well, there's no such perfect formula but when you start with the trenches, you've increased your odds of prediction greatly.

TrenchWarfare and Brandon Thorn had another great year of playoff predictions based on their assessments of (just) the trenches coming in. All the weaker trench teams are gone and only the top remain. There will always be outliers and the Cowboys and Eagles ended up having far more issues than their trench play; which was a total waste of talent for both in the end.

DL/OL Aggregate | Playoff Seeding | Record
1. Cowboys 3. (2) | 2 | 12-5 - Eliminated
6. Eagles 1. (3.5) | 5 | 11-6 - Eliminated
2. 49ers 7. (4.5) | 1 | 12-5
5. Chiefs 6. (5.5) | 3 | 11-6
10. Lions 2. (6) | 3 | 12-5
8. Ravens 8. (8) | 1 | 13-4
9. Texans 5. (7) | 4 | 10-7 - Eliminated
4. Browns 12. (8) | 5 | 11-6 - Eliminated
13. Bucs 4. (8.5) | 4 | 9-8 - Eliminated
3. Steelers 14. (8.5) | 7 | 10-7 - Eliminated
7. Packers 11. (9) | 7 | 9-8 - Eliminated
11. Rams 10. (10.5) | 6 | 10-6 - Eliminated
12. Bills 9. (10.5) | 2 | 11-6 - Eliminated
14. Dolphins 13. (13.5) | 6 | 11-6 - Eliminated

Lions vs. 49ers:
49ers #2 DL vs. Lions #2 OL
49ers #7 OL vs. Lions #10 DL

Chiefs vs. Ravens:
Chiefs #6 OL vs. Ravens #8 DL
Chiefs #5 DL vs. Ravens #8 OL

In terms of trench matchups, it doesn't get more even than this. Pick'em.

The next step is to pivot to the QB's. There's no denying each of the 4 played at an MVP level for stretches and/or have that ability. Mahomes, Jackson, Goff & Purdy.

It starts in the trenches...

Go 9ers!

Originally posted by YACBros85:

what does this mean..