49ers Offensive Line

Originally posted by NCommand:
What's worse?

Having a massive blind spot for the OL that costs you multiple Superbowls or spending a gazillion resources on a DL that can't close out Superbowls?

Choice 3. Not having a DL that can't even get you to the Super Bowl to being with. Unlike that "s**t" OL that's gotten them to multiple SBs and NFCC

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
What's worse?

Having a massive blind spot for the OL that costs you multiple Superbowls or spending a gazillion resources on a DL that can't close out Superbowls?

Choice 3. Not having a DL that can't even get you to the Super Bowl to being with. Unlike that "s**t" OL that's gotten them to multiple SBs and NFCC

You get an F for not answering the question.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
What's worse?

Having a massive blind spot for the OL that costs you multiple Superbowls or spending a gazillion resources on a DL that can't close out Superbowls?

Choice 3. Not having a DL that can't even get you to the Super Bowl to being with. Unlike that "s**t" OL that's gotten them to multiple SBs and NFCC

You get an F for not answering the question.

It's a loaded question that lacked the whole picture 😉

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
What's worse?

Having a massive blind spot for the OL that costs you multiple Superbowls or spending a gazillion resources on a DL that can't close out Superbowls?

Choice 3. Not having a DL that can't even get you to the Super Bowl to being with. Unlike that "s**t" OL that's gotten them to multiple SBs and NFCC

You get an F for not answering the question.

It's a loaded question that lacked the whole picture 😉

Fine, good enough to get there. Not good enough to close when it mattered. They're both egregious in the end if the end-goal is to win a Superbowl. Just two sides of the same coin; one from neglect, one from oversaturation of resources with poor results.

I wonder where Laken Tomlinson ends up. I wouldn't mind having him back as a swing guard - he was good for us. Hopefully we could get him cheap cause he had a rough year last year. He has to be better than Burford. lol dude is just awful and so disappointing, I had high hopes for him.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
What's worse?

Having a massive blind spot for the OL that costs you multiple Superbowls or spending a gazillion resources on a DL that can't close out Superbowls?

Choice 3. Not having a DL that can't even get you to the Super Bowl to being with. Unlike that "s**t" OL that's gotten them to multiple SBs and NFCC

Yea I mean realistically you can't solve all of it in FA. We had to focus on value not dishing out huge money and I think we did a very good job getting good talent on cost controlled deals. Most of the clear upgrades on the OL got significant money that we weren't dishing out on any position.

What I hope the plan is....that we focused on other areas of need where we were able to get strong options in at affordable prices. Then we focus heavily on OL in the draft where it's strong. Truth is we need to walk away with multiple rookies who actually contribute as rookies this year.

Originally posted by tankle104:
I wonder where Laken Tomlinson ends up. I wouldn't mind having him back as a swing guard - he was good for us. Hopefully we could get him cheap cause he had a rough year last year. He has to be better than Burford. lol dude is just awful and so disappointing, I had high hopes for him.

He would be excellent depth and security.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Fine, good enough to get there. Not good enough to close when it mattered. They're both egregious in the end if the end-goal is to win a Superbowl. Just two sides of the same coin; one from neglect, one from oversaturation of resources with poor results.

We don't even make it as far as we did if they didn't go heavy on DL acquisitions. That's just the truth of it.
Muffed punt, OPOY fumbles, egregious no calls on their OL, Brock missing some reads, Dre gets hurt, missed EP….any of that changes and we're not talking about the OL.

BUT imo need meets value for SF in this draft. We all agree they need to infuse YOUNG good talent on the OL. How the roster is built and what they got in FA, they should be able to move around to get the guys they're targeting.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Fine, good enough to get there. Not good enough to close when it mattered. They're both egregious in the end if the end-goal is to win a Superbowl. Just two sides of the same coin; one from neglect, one from oversaturation of resources with poor results.

We don't even make it as far as we did if they didn't go heavy on DL acquisitions. That's just the truth of it.
Muffed punt, OPOY fumbles, egregious no calls on their OL, Brock missing some reads, Dre gets hurt, missed EP….any of that changes and we're not talking about the OL.

BUT imo need meets value for SF in this draft. We all agree they need to infuse YOUNG good talent on the OL. How the roster is built and what they got in FA, they should be able to move around to get the guys they're targeting.

The Oline / Dline did more than enough to put them in position to win the game, but you can't have that many (the bold) reasons and expect to beat a good team that knows how to win in SBs (with exceptional HC and GOAT QB). Period

That being said, 49ers aren't getting back to SB unless they upgrade the lines. So far the Dline looks improved on paper and they got a good CB. Of course they're not done with signing and plus the draft. 49ers could end up with a much better team than last season (put the league on alert).

Originally posted by NCommand:
What's worse?

Having a massive blind spot for the OL that costs you multiple Superbowls or spending a gazillion resources on a DL that can't close out Superbowls?

Once again showing that QB play doesn't matter to him. OL is at fault for everything. Never needed a "Tier 1" QB.

Whats actually worse is everything you have been suggesting the last 8 years. Infinitely worse.

Originally posted by pillageDatazz:
The Oline / Dline did more than enough to put them in position to win the game, but you can't have that many (the bold) reasons and expect to beat a good team that knows how to win in SBs (with exceptional HC and GOAT QB). Period

That being said, 49ers aren't getting back to SB unless they upgrade the lines. So far the Dline looks improved on paper and they got a good CB. Of course they're not done with signing and plus the draft. 49ers could end up with a much better team than last season (put the league on alert).

Because in reality, despite his posts about team losses and the like, he puts the blame of every loss solely on the OL. No other factors matter. Nothing else costs the team games.

He will be rooting for the Lions again all season.

The o line neglected again. The brass only focus on D line and gadget players for special teams. O line is good enough is the mentality of the GM. I would be ok with them focusing on dl to improve against the run. Nope. More pass rushers who fall down in the 4th. They don't close out games. We need to score 30 to have a chance at winning. We need to score. We need to protect the qb and we need better run blocking. Offense wins games. Defense keeps you in games. Wake the f**k up lynch.

We have a ton of draft picks with a deep class. A FA would have cost a ton and there were not that many options.

They could even bundle a few picks and move up a bit. I think by the end of the draft everyone will calm down.

They have a plan. Wait for it. Nothing neglected.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
What's worse?

Having a massive blind spot for the OL that costs you multiple Superbowls or spending a gazillion resources on a DL that can't close out Superbowls?

Once again showing that QB play doesn't matter to him. OL is at fault for everything. Never needed a "Tier 1" QB.

Whats actually worse is everything you have been suggesting the last 8 years. Infinitely worse.

Patrick Mahomes is a mere pawn. It is the "INSIDE OL" that is critical now,...as he has admittedly been saying since the beginning of....

.

.

.

.

....this week?

-

Gotta love our Hyperbole King.

So our entire starting offensive line from last year that got us to the Super Bowl is resigned/returning. And now we have the chance to upgrade at certain positions that were weak, ie RT, RG, C & hell, maybe even find a future replacement for Banks next year seeing what the going rate for guards is currently in free agency. I may be in the minority but I feel good about our line because I'm confident we are going to upgrade at least one spot on the line with someone like Latham, Mims or Barton. I also think Lynch and Shanny are probably going to look for a long term answer at C in this draft pretty early, like 3rd or 4th round.