Draft Countdown Forums

Go Back   Draft Countdown Forums > Draft Countdown Forums > 2014 NFL Draft Forum

2014 NFL Draft Forum Discuss the 2014 NFL Draft

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-19-2012, 08:06 AM    (permalink
killxswitch
Mage Bros
All-Pro
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,714
Reputation: 2507551
killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackluck View Post
If you're a GM, and your team is in a position to take an elite LT, but you take a WR instead, you won't be GM for that team much longer.
If the choice is Calvin Johnson or Joe Thomas, I take Megatron 10/10 times and so does anyone else with a brain.
__________________

i done stole dis sig
killxswitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 08:16 AM    (permalink
Blackluck
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NH
Posts: 487
Reputation: 140366
Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Blackluck is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Yeah because a Calvin Johnson is available every year. Good call.
Blackluck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 08:21 AM    (permalink
killxswitch
Mage Bros
All-Pro
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8,714
Reputation: 2507551
killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.killxswitch is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackluck View Post
Yeah because a Calvin Johnson is available every year. Good call.
Nor is a Joe Thomas available every year. Or are you comparing an elite LT prospect and an average WR prospect? Because that is stupid, of course a GM would pick the LT.
__________________

i done stole dis sig
killxswitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 08:29 AM    (permalink
Sloopy
Pro Bowler
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,782
Reputation: 180000
Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CowboysBeastMode View Post
if im facing the giants i'd rather have elite lt to handle jpp one on one, if i have to double him then you get tuck on an mismatch inside, having a elite left tackle at least gives you flexibility on how to block the other guys.
If you have an elite guard who can go one on one with Tuck you have flexibility on how to block JPP.

This was the point I made to Cmarq, this is a rather circular argument, but the guard option is cheaper and requires less resources.
__________________

I PITY THE FOOL WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME
BK sig is straight sex
THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland Indians
Chelsea FC
Quote:
Originally Posted by keylime_5 View Post
Miller is visual sex on the field.
Sloopy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 08:32 AM    (permalink
cmarq83
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,217
Reputation: 2050333
cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Other than the fact that it is:

This doesn't change the fact that pressure up the middle is the most effective way to disrupt the passing attack and it always has been.

Guys like Ngata and Wilifork make it possible for the outside pressure to be more successful by demanding double teams and the like to avoid such pressure up the middle.

I don't think I should have to explain why stats aren't the end all be all of an argument, nor is the NFL a stat driven league.
There are also very few of these types of guys in the league. Even the elite guys like Grubbs, Mangold, Mankins, and Yanda double on these guys the majority of the time, so having an elite guy hardly means you can shut down a Wilfork or a Ngata.

There are no dominant interior rushers like there were in years past. Some teams like the Giants do have success by switching DE's inside on passing downs, but the vast majority of teams get the most rush from the outside. Stats aren't a be all end all, but it's a very steep decline from DT sacks to DE sacks over the past 15 years. I think that paints a pretty clear picture. You claimed pressure has started coming more from the inside. You made it up, and have no basis to back it up. Statistically everything goes against you.

Quote:
Your building straw men. Did I ever say that having a LT would be preventative in winning a SB? No. I am pointing out that they aren't a necessary piece, like a franchise QB, good defense, etc. Yet they get paid like they are.
Can you get by without one, yes. However, you pretty much need a HOF QB, an elite talent virtually everywhere on your team, and elite coaching to do so. Most GM's can't instantaneously make this happen, and making personnel decisions assuming that is going to happen is a recipe for failure. Also, your claim that they get paid outrageous sums has been thoroughly debunked throughout this thread. They are well under DE's and QB's, and are in line with virtually every other position. Joe Thomas's contract is an outlier, and the standard contract for a franchise LT has pretty much been 6 years 60 million.

Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisburger, and Eli Manning don't need elite OT's. However, they all at one point or another have lost seasons because their teams couldn't keep them upright. There are certain times when things work out perfectly and they end up winning it all, but they're better off with someone elite protecting their blindside than not. The reason they don't have elite guys is pretty simple, they never pick high enough to get a premium LT, and the teams with the elite guys haven't drafted the QB's they need to be successful yet. However, I think that will change very soon as some teams with great QB's have young emerging offensive tackles like Houston, Denver, New England, and Green Bay. Saying that OT's are a bad value is a lazy argument, you could look at the extraneous factor that the recent SB winners have not had elite OT's, or you could simply look at their teams in aggregate and realize why they won the SB.

The argument boils down to if you'd rather spend $2 million extra for an elite Tackle over an elite guard. To me it's a no brainer. People are using an oversimplification of certain teams successes to diminish the role of LT's in the NFL.

Your point saying that it is cheaper to build without having elite offensive tackles isn't really true. Having a Mankins or a Gross doesn't really change the decision making process for how teams build their offensive lines. Tackles are the more valuable and difficult position to fill. You can compensate by leaving a TE in to block, or by chipping with your running back, but in doing so you're reducing your options in the passing game. You can build with elite guards, but it's still not really a cheaper solution. The Saints are paying about $20 million annually to keep their 2 elite guard line together. You don't think Jordan Gross, a pair of $5 million guys, and two cheap options could get you the same or better result?

Last edited by cmarq83 : 04-19-2012 at 09:09 AM.
cmarq83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 08:42 AM    (permalink
scottyboy
Coolio Cat
Legend
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Stalking Brian Leonard and Raymell Rice
Posts: 24,529
Reputation: 4254137
scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.scottyboy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloopy View Post
If you have an elite guard who can go one on one with Tuck you have flexibility on how to block JPP.

This was the point I made to Cmarq, this is a rather circular argument, but the guard option is cheaper and requires less resources.
yeah, but on passing downs, then you have Osi and Kiwanuka coming at you and you're ****** no matter what.

ok, I'm sorry, I'll stop trolling with my pass rush boner
__________________
We ALL bleed scarlet
New York Giants Super Bowl 46 Champs
UNITED: I actually attend the college I root for
Quote:
Originally Posted by PalmerToCJ View Post
BTW, if it's 3rd and 97... I'm throwing a screen pass to Brian Leonard and he will convert.
scottyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 08:43 AM    (permalink
cmarq83
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,217
Reputation: 2050333
cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saints-Tigers View Post
Think about it that way. Bushrod is a 5 mill per year player, and Evans is an 8 million dollar per year player. Evans impact DWARFS Bushrod's, and he's so good up the middle that it allows the Saints to avoid Bushrod's side to the point that he really never hurts us.

Find all the tackles making 8 million per year. I'd take Evans for 8 million over them EASY.
How about 3x all pro Michael Roos for 7 million a year?
cmarq83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 08:51 AM    (permalink
cmarq83
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,217
Reputation: 2050333
cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloopy View Post
If you have an elite guard who can go one on one with Tuck you have flexibility on how to block JPP.

This was the point I made to Cmarq, this is a rather circular argument, but the guard option is cheaper and requires less resources.
Or if you have an elite tackle you can use a more natural double team in the middle to stop Tuck and let your TE's and RB's go out to catch passes, giving you a more options on the play.
cmarq83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 09:14 AM    (permalink
Sloopy
Pro Bowler
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,782
Reputation: 180000
Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmarq83 View Post
There are no dominant interior rushers like there were in years past. Some teams like the Giants do have success by switching DE's inside on passing downs, but the vast majority of teams get the most rush from the outside. Stats aren't a be all end all, but it's a very steep decline from DT sacks to DE sacks over the past 15 years. I think that paints a pretty clear picture. You claimed pressure has started coming more from the inside. You made it up, and have no basis to back it up. Statistically everything goes against you.
The fact is that more overpowering pass rushers are coming into the league that play DT or NT.

Your only argument is that stats from the position have gone down in the past 15 years. Stats are not the end all be all.

As you yourself point out, correlation does not equal causation (even if you used it wrong: Elite LTs weren't going up or down or staying stagnant across a period of time, they just weren't there in recent super bowls) just because sack #s are declining, does not mean that so too are the # of premier interior pass rushers are declining either.

Nor does it mean that teams would not prefer to generate pressure up the middle (this is like football 101, if I have to explain this to you then you can't be helped)

Also since I don't have the time or patients to find a stat that doesn't matter anyway, please link your evidence that this decline over the last 15 years has actually occurred from the DT position. Something tells me that NFL.com doesn't keep records of DT sacks vs DE sacks overall over the last 15 years


Quote:
Can you get by without one, yes. However, you pretty much need a HOF QB,
You pretty much need a franchise QB regardless of your LT situation.

Quote:
Also, your claim that they get paid outrageous sums has been thoroughly debunked throughout this thread.
Your still building straw men, my point is that I can get similar results with less money and less resources.

This point has been proven over and over again throughout this thread, it doesn't matter what the sum of money is, my option is still cheaper.

Quote:
Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisburger, and Eli Manning don't need elite OT's. However, they all at one point or another have lost seasons because their teams couldn't keep them upright.
Lets put the Peyton thing to rest, it wasn't just LT that caused this, it was failure along the entire OL. No they didn't have an elite LT, they also had ****** guards and RTs and Jeff Saturday has been overrated for years.

The same goes for Ben Roethlisburger, the only bright spot on that line was Pouncey and when he went down there was a noticeable difference along the line as well.

Eli's team has lost seasons for more reasons than that OL

The same can be said for Brady.

Quote:
There are certain times when things work out perfectly and they end up winning it all, but they're better off with someone elite protecting their blindside than not. The reason they don't have elite guys is pretty simple, they never pick high enough to get a premium LT, and the teams with the elite guys haven't drafted the QB's they need to be successful yet. However, I think that will change very soon as some teams with great QB's have young emerging offensive tackles like Houston, Denver, New England, and Green Bay.
This MAY come true and you MAY prove me wrong, I think that this would still be an example of why you need a great QB more than one for a great LT but whatever.

Your merely postulating and it has no consequence on this argument.

Quote:
Saying that OT's are a bad value is a lazy argument, you could look at all the extraneous factor that the recent SB winners have not had elite OT's, or you could simply look at their teams in aggregate and realize why they won the SB.
I didn't even say OTs are a bad value, I said that LT is a bad value considering their net value to the team as opposed to other positions along the OL.

Again my my point is that while an elite LT certainly doesn't hurt you, it CLEARLY ISN'T A NECESSARY FACTOR TO WINNING A SB.

Yet you continue to skip over that fact and build a straw man of some other argument.


Quote:
Your point saying that it is cheaper to build without having elite offensive tackles isn't really true
How is it not REALLY true? It MOST DEFINITELY is, does 2-4 $million extra for a LT than a guard not make the guard cheaper? Why yes, it does.


Quote:
Having a Mankins or a Gross doesn't really change the decision making process for how teams build their offensive lines. Tackles are the more valuable and difficult position to fill. You can compensate by leaving a TE in to block, or by chipping with your running back, but in doing so you're reducing your options in the passing game
The Saints don't really seem to be taking anything away from their passing game when they keep a guy in to help block.

Or are you proposing even bigger #'s for that offense?

If only they had a LT

Quote:
The Saints are paying about $20 million annually to keep their 2 elite guard line together. You don't think Jordan Gross, a pair of $5 million guys, and two cheap options could get you the same or better result?
Other than the fact that they are paying them roughly 15 million a year if you just took their average per year salaries and added them together:

Since your setting the bar at 20 million, that gives you Jordan Gross and one 5 million dollar guy. On the other hand you could have TWO Elite Guards and a 5 million dollar guy.

I take the two elite guards and a 5 million dollar average guy at LT (say Matt Light :P ) over Jordan Gross and one 5 million dollar guy. I don't really see your point.
__________________

I PITY THE FOOL WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME
BK sig is straight sex
THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland Indians
Chelsea FC
Quote:
Originally Posted by keylime_5 View Post
Miller is visual sex on the field.
Sloopy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 09:16 AM    (permalink
Sloopy
Pro Bowler
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,782
Reputation: 180000
Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmarq83 View Post
How about 3x all pro Michael Roos for 7 million a year?
Yea, I'd take Jahari Evans over Roos for the same money.

Evans is a better guard than Roos is a LT.
__________________

I PITY THE FOOL WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME
BK sig is straight sex
THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland Indians
Chelsea FC
Quote:
Originally Posted by keylime_5 View Post
Miller is visual sex on the field.
Sloopy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 09:38 AM    (permalink
Sloopy
Pro Bowler
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,782
Reputation: 180000
Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

I think a better case for your argument might actually come to fruition this year.

In the bottom of round one, you have Mike Adams and Cordy Glenn in front of you. You didn't have to trade up for either, because of rookie contracts both will be the same amount of money who do you take?

Cost and resources would be the same (at least initially) and relative values are unknown (as opposed to your Evans v Roos)

I would probably go LT and take Mike Adams (partially cus I'm a damn homer :P )

I think we can both agree that their is empirical evidence, both for and against, both of our cases.

I think we can also agree that an elite QB is pretty handy as well as a good coach and overall team.

Furthermore, there is no formula for winning a SB, it just happens
__________________

I PITY THE FOOL WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME
BK sig is straight sex
THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland Indians
Chelsea FC
Quote:
Originally Posted by keylime_5 View Post
Miller is visual sex on the field.
Sloopy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 09:56 AM    (permalink
CDCB14
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,067
Reputation: 79506
CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Keep preaching it Sloopy.

LT has the importance as every other position. I don't care if it's the "blind side," a sack is a sack. Who cares if the blind side is protected if you have 3 guys in your face from pressure up the middle and you can't run the ball to save your life? Oh I forgot we're all good because the blind side is protected and the left tackle is looking pretty.... Please.

The notion that positions like center, guard, safety, etc. are less important have never made sense to me. If your interior OL is weak you aren't going anymore come playoff time if you even make it that far. I don't care if both of your tackles are Orlando Pace in is prime, it won't matter.
CDCB14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 10:00 AM    (permalink
jojo
Rookie
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: State of Golden Insincerity
Posts: 401
Reputation: 59934
jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.jojo is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
The Saints don't really seem to be taking anything away from their passing game when they keep a guy in to help block.
Sloopy makes good points here about pass blocking, the scheme (front 3 stopping shortest route to QB + keeping helpers, TEs/RBs in) is worth > a big-$ elite OT.

Even more valuable & more often noted by game announcers b/c it's apparent is "pocket presence," QB escapability & mobility, that you in in a few like Brees, who makes it look easy & natural. Or in Alex Smith, who had to take the long painful uphill route to evade the rush over the last 6 yrs. & 7 OCs via Smith-friendly shotgun/pistol formations, even then he's only moderately successful at it.

I guess the subtle point here is even the best impact rookie LT has a steep learning curve vs. NFL-quality edge rushers that leaves his QB vulnerable, & OCs have to develop countermeasures like a 3-step drop, high %age patterns like slants, & putting extra TEs or blocking backs in to help.
jojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 12:08 PM    (permalink
cmarq83
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,217
Reputation: 2050333
cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
The fact is that more overpowering pass rushers are coming into the league that play DT or NT.

Your only argument is that stats from the position have gone down in the past 15 years. Stats are not the end all be all.

As you yourself point out, correlation does not equal causation (even if you used it wrong: Elite LTs weren't going up or down or staying stagnant across a period of time, they just weren't there in recent super bowls) just because sack #s are declining, does not mean that so too are the # of premier interior pass rushers are declining either.

Nor does it mean that teams would not prefer to generate pressure up the middle (this is like football 101, if I have to explain this to you then you can't be helped)

Also since I don't have the time or patients to find a stat that doesn't matter anyway, please link your evidence that this decline over the last 15 years has actually occurred from the DT position. Something tells me that NFL.com doesn't keep records of DT sacks vs DE sacks overall over the last 15 years
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&statist icCategory=SACKS&season=2000&seasonType=REG&experi ence=null&tabSeq=0&qualified=true&Submit=Go

Do a scan of the past 15 years. It's a fairly obvious dropoff. I don't have the stats in aggregate, but obviously someone with eyes can see that your claim isn't true.

Pass rush up the middle is the most valuable, but unfortunately it is also far more rare. Players don't have the pass rushing options up the middle because oftentimes they don't have the space, or are getting doubled because Olines naturally outman Dlines in the middle in most formations. Teams would love to get pressure up the middle, but unfortunately it is a lot more difficult to do. Since you're more likely to get a double team, give me the better guy at the position where there is going to be one on one matchups.


Quote:
You pretty much need a franchise QB regardless of your LT situation.
Agreed, however if you don't (and this is 80% of teams) and you're trying to build an O-line which position will help more?


Quote:
Your still building straw men, my point is that I can get similar results with less money and less resources.

This point has been proven over and over again throughout this thread, it doesn't matter what the sum of money is, my option is still cheaper.
Except it hasn't, your argument is that Guards provide you the same value as tackles, and your only evidence is that their teams are more successful. You neglect to mention that the teams with the better guards also have the better QB's. You keep talking about football 101, but anyone who has ever played or coached the game knows that Tackle is the more difficult and valuable position. You're the one who is trying to go against convention, not me.

Quote:
Lets put the Peyton thing to rest, it wasn't just LT that caused this, it was failure along the entire OL. No they didn't have an elite LT, they also had ****** guards and RTs and Jeff Saturday has been overrated for years.

The same goes for Ben Roethlisburger, the only bright spot on that line was Pouncey and when he went down there was a noticeable difference along the line as well.

Eli's team has lost seasons for more reasons than that OL

The same can be said for Brady.
I wasn't trying to make that point when I mentioned Manning. I have yet to say anything like that in this thread.


Quote:
This MAY come true and you MAY prove me wrong, I think that this would still be an example of why you need a great QB more than one for a great LT but whatever.

Your merely postulating and it has no consequence on this argument.
I agree that you need a great QB, but you keep saying you get a better value out of guards than tackles. Your evidence is that most SB winning teams haven't had great OT's, however, most teams haven't had great offensive guards either. The common factor is that they all have great QB's, coaching, and defense.

Quote:
I didn't even say OTs are a bad value, I said that LT is a bad value considering their net value to the team as opposed to other positions along the OL.

Again my my point is that while an elite LT certainly doesn't hurt you, it CLEARLY ISN'T A NECESSARY FACTOR TO WINNING A SB.

Yet you continue to skip over that fact and build a straw man of some other argument.
Yes, but you could make that argument about any position in the league sans QB. No SB winning team recently has had a shutdown CB, yet I think most teams would certainly like one, and if given the opportunity would pay to keep one.

I have never said it was necessary, my argument is simply that I'd pay $2 million extra for a franchise LT over a franchise G. That is how it's gone in the league so far, and that is how it's going to continue to stay. Teams can always get good guards on the market. There are hardly ever tackles on the market.

Quote:
How is it not REALLY true? It MOST DEFINITELY is, does 2-4 $million extra for a LT than a guard not make the guard cheaper? Why yes, it does.

The Saints don't really seem to be taking anything away from their passing game when they keep a guy in to help block.

Or are you proposing even bigger #'s for that offense?

If only they had a LT
YOU DON'T GET THE SAME VALUE OUT OF THE 2 POSITIONS! Your example is that the Saints have been successful despite only having the average Bushrod at Tackle. They're invested heavily on their offensive liner, and they have Brees, Graham, Colston, Sproles, Moore, Henderson, Ingram, and others. Do you think that their success could be coming from more than the fact that they have 2 great guards and an average tackle?

The Giants weren't exactly an offensive juggernaught in the playoffs, and had problems rushing the football all year. They have elite talent elsewhere on the team at QB, WR, DE, and in the secondary. Those compensated enough, and the line held up well enough for most of the playoffs to avoid major problems. Besides for the 49ers they also didn't face a number of great defenses that could rush the passer in the playoffs.


Quote:
Other than the fact that they are paying them roughly 15 million a year if you just took their average per year salaries and added them together:

Since your setting the bar at 20 million, that gives you Jordan Gross and one 5 million dollar guy. On the other hand you could have TWO Elite Guards and a 5 million dollar guy.

I take the two elite guards and a 5 million dollar average guy at LT (say Matt Light :P ) over Jordan Gross and one 5 million dollar guy. I don't really see your point.
Don't base it off what they're making this year, that is downright idiotic. A team could sign an elite tackle for 5 million this year and have it escalate in later years, but it still makes more sense to go by the average. Grubbs is making 2.8 million this year, but he's not making that over the life of the contract. Grubbs makes about 7 mil annually, Evans 8, and Bushrod 5. That gives you $20 mil. So we're at the same point we were before.

Jordan Gross costs you $10 million a year on average, not $15 million.
cmarq83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 12:25 PM    (permalink
cmarq83
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,217
Reputation: 2050333
cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloopy View Post
I think a better case for your argument might actually come to fruition this year.

In the bottom of round one, you have Mike Adams and Cordy Glenn in front of you. You didn't have to trade up for either, because of rookie contracts both will be the same amount of money who do you take?

Cost and resources would be the same (at least initially) and relative values are unknown (as opposed to your Evans v Roos)

I would probably go LT and take Mike Adams (partially cus I'm a damn homer :P )

I think we can both agree that their is empirical evidence, both for and against, both of our cases.

I think we can also agree that an elite QB is pretty handy as well as a good coach and overall team.

Furthermore, there is no formula for winning a SB, it just happens
I just think all things being equal the LT is the most important position on the offensive line. You can make it work with elite players elsewhere, but it's far and away the easiest schematically with an elite LT. You pay for quality on the offensive line, regardless of position. Whether you pay Carl Nicks $9.5 mil or Joe Thomas $12 you still are taking up a lot of resources. It is not however, an appropriate assumption to say that all positions have the same contribution to success. This isn't really much of an argument, and I don't really have anything more to say to back this up. If you have terrible players on your OL your line is going to suck regardless. Your method is slightly cheaper, but you don't end up getting the same result. You need to vary schematically what you do to compensate for a bad left tackle, because at the end of the day Jermon Bushrod can't block Aldon Smith or Jared Allen one on one. If you have elite weapons all over the field you can compensate, but most teams do not have the luxuries the Saints do.

So you say you can keep somebody in to block, but what is really better, having the flexibility to run a wider variety of plays by giving yourself more options in the passing game, or saving $2 million? Considering some of the players you get for $2 million I'd consider it a fairly easy choice.
cmarq83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 01:32 PM    (permalink
Sloopy
Pro Bowler
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,782
Reputation: 180000
Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmarq83 View Post
Do a scan of the past 15 years. It's a fairly obvious dropoff. I don't have the stats in aggregate, but obviously someone with eyes can see that your claim isn't true.
Just because sack #s have gone down for DT does not mean that we are seeing some of the best athletes at the position that we have ever seen.

Big time athletes at the DE/OLB position have been around since the 80's but DT's have become more athletic, dynamic, and important in recent years.

Stats don't show it, doesn't mean that it isn't true.

Quote:
Teams would love to get pressure up the middle, but unfortunately it is a lot more difficult to do. Since you're more likely to get a double team, give me the better guy at the position where there is going to be one on one matchups.
This is a matter of opinion. In fact, the success of the 3-4 defense is reliant on the fact that you have big men in the middle who can demand double teams. If you didn't, double teams could be shifted to the valuable outside pass rushers.

Likewise, if you had a guard inside who could take on these big interior OL one-on-one, you could indeed shift that double team to the outside and neutralize that outside pass rush.

Quote:
Agreed, however if you don't (and this is 80% of teams) and you're trying to build an O-line which position will help more?
I think we both know we very in opinion here, I think that having interior OL who can keep a clean pocket is way more valuable for a young QB JMO.

With an elite LT you may have his backside protected but if he's running for his life from pressure from the opposite side or up the middle, it really doesn't matter.


Quote:
Except it hasn't, your argument is that Guards provide you the same value as tackles, and your only evidence is that their teams are more successful. You neglect to mention that the teams with the better guards also have the better QB's.
Joe Flacco? Josh Freemen?

Quote:
You keep talking about football 101, but anyone who has ever played or coached the game knows that Tackle is the more difficult and valuable position. You're the one who is trying to go against convention, not me.
Ah, the inevitable, "if you've ever played football," argument.

I knew plenty of kids who played football on my high school football who couldn't tell you jack **** about blocking schemes or interior pressure. It was enough trying to get them to do their own job, much less understanding every nuance of the game.

In fact, teams on any level lower than the NFL value big maulers who can keep their pocket clean and open holes in the run game, because NFL caliber LTs are not available.

They scheme around it by chipping with TEs and RBs

Furthermore, you are acting again as though, because it's what we have been told all our lives by analysts on TV, it must be true.

Quote:
I agree that you need a great QB, but you keep saying you get a better value out of guards than tackles. Your evidence is that most SB winning teams haven't had great OT's.
No, I use the fact that most SB winning teams haven't had great LTs as evidence to why you DON'T NEED ONE.

Quote:
however, most teams haven't had great offensive guards either. The common factor is that they all have great QB's, coaching, and defense
In one way or another, they usually have some solid OL play overall (yes great QBs etc.)

The facts are that you can put together a solid OL with less resources and a cheaper price tag without having an elite OT.

So if you don't need one, and you can still win with a cheaper option. My question to you is, why wouldn't you?

Quote:
Yes, but you could make that argument about any position in the league sans QB. No SB winning team recently has had a shutdown CB, yet I think most teams would certainly like one, and if given the opportunity would pay to keep one.
Asante Samuel, Jabari Greer, Charles Woodson and Ty Law say hello :P (if you want to include all DBs who were "elite") Troy Polamolu and Nick Collins

Quote:
I have never said it was necessary, my argument is simply that I'd pay $2 million extra for a franchise LT over a franchise G. That is how it's gone in the league so far, and that is how it's going to continue to stay. Teams can always get good guards on the market. There are hardly ever tackles on the market.
Which is why, you have to spend valuable resources on them when the same value can be had with a guard.

Just because that has been how the league has gone so far does not mean that it will continue to, you should know this.


Quote:
YOU DON'T GET THE SAME VALUE OUT OF THE 2 POSITIONS! Your example is that the Saints have been successful despite only having the average Bushrod at Tackle. They're invested heavily on their offensive liner, and they have Brees, Graham, Colston, Sproles, Moore, Henderson, Ingram, and others. Do you think that their success could be coming from more than the fact that they have 2 great guards and an average tackle?
My comment about the Saints has to do with your comment about having to chip taking away from their passing game.


Quote:
Don't base it off what they're making this year, that is downright idiotic. A team could sign an elite tackle for 5 million this year and have it escalate in later years, but it still makes more sense to go by the average. Grubbs is making 2.8 million this year, but he's not making that over the life of the contract. Grubbs makes about 7 mil annually, Evans 8, and Bushrod 5. That gives you $20 mil. So we're at the same point we were before.
I'm not sure who you are referring to in regards to this, Matt Lights average is 4 mil per year and the average of Grubbs and Evans combined is 15 mil.

Quote:
Jordan Gross costs you $10 million a year on average, not $15 million.
I did forget to add 5 mill to the Jordan Gross OL.

Still, the two elite guard and a solid LT with two bargain players line will most certainly yield better results than the line consisting of an Elite tackle two solid players and two bargain players

both lines contain two bargain players. For the sake of argument, lets say that cancels each other out.

both lines contain an elite player. For the sake of argument, lets say that cancels each other out.

Both lines have a solid player. For the sake of argument, lets say that cancels each other out.

It comes down to the fact that an elite guard trumps the solid player on the elite LT line.

The elite guard line trumps the elite tackle line in overall talent and costs less while preserving precious resources. I don't know how I can make this any clearer.
__________________

I PITY THE FOOL WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME
BK sig is straight sex
THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland Indians
Chelsea FC
Quote:
Originally Posted by keylime_5 View Post
Miller is visual sex on the field.
Sloopy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 01:46 PM    (permalink
CDCB14
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,067
Reputation: 79506
CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.CDCB14 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloopy View Post
The elite guard line trumps the elite tackle line in overall talent and costs less while preserving precious resources. I don't know how I can make this any clearer.
/thread. (10 char)
CDCB14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 01:46 PM    (permalink
brat316
bhaarat316
All-NFLDC
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 13,926
Reputation: 1082329
brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.brat316 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

I think it has more to do with the Qb.

Or else explain the Bucs, Vikings, Colts, Zona, Seahawks
__________________
brat316 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 01:51 PM    (permalink
Sloopy
Pro Bowler
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,782
Reputation: 180000
Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bhaarat316 View Post
I think it has more to do with the Qb.

Or else explain the Bucs, Vikings, Colts, Zona, Seahawks
Well this is obvious :P
__________________

I PITY THE FOOL WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME
BK sig is straight sex
THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland Indians
Chelsea FC
Quote:
Originally Posted by keylime_5 View Post
Miller is visual sex on the field.
Sloopy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 02:10 PM    (permalink
Loftin
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 64
Reputation: 45009
Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Loftin is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

I think there is a lot of merit to the argument that the benefit of a stud LT is less than at other positions. However, when you look at teams who invested first round picks on a LT, they almost all have one thing in common: TERRIBLE blocking. Having an above average LT may not have a big letdown from having an elite one, but these teams usually are desperate at the position and now have QB issues.

Case in point: Houston. When the Texans drafted Duane Brown in the first round, they had never had a good LT. David Carr had all the ability in the world, but he was getting destroyed and it eventually got to his head. Matt Schaub had an injury his first season in Houston, and everyone was seeing a repeat. The same thing will happen to Stafford if the Lions can't improve their OT situation. Brown made the Houston offense significantly better by plugging a major hole.

Another point to consider is longevity. Elite LT's typically stay at that high of a level for longer periods of time (mid- to late-30s). RBs and WRs usually regress significantly after about age 30.
Loftin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 02:28 PM    (permalink
Raiderz4Life
All-NFLDC
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: R4L 3:16 says I just whipped your ass
Posts: 14,449
Reputation: 3091693
Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Raiderz4Life is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

I just read through a great deal of this thread and skimmed through the rest. I will say I agree that LT isn't as important as it used to be and I wouldn't want my team to have a massive contract tied to one.

But really the biggest thing I wanted to say is....I always love Iamcanadian's "I'm right cuz GMs and HCs do what I'm saying therefore you're wrong" arguments hahaha
__________________

Props to BK for the sig
"Dying ain't much of a living, boy" -Josey Wales
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitanHope View Post
R4L does security, and strips on the weekend.
He told me the best part is being able to wear the same uniform to both jobs.
Raiderz4Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 03:06 PM    (permalink
cmarq83
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,217
Reputation: 2050333
cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

I really need to stop this because I have a lot of work to do, and this is honestly taking up way too much time.

The DT thing is basically fact, guys like Sapp and Glover are out of the game. There are fewer dominant interior rushers who either get sacks or push the pocket. There is far more talent on the outsides than on the inside of D-Lines now, and it's a pretty hard argument to make against. The claim that there is more inside pressure than before is pretty baseless, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that. Stats are not the end all, but in this case it goes extremely strongly against your point.

Tackles are more valuable than guards. If you consider the kinds of blocks they make on a play by play basis, they're more challenging. They operate in space more, require more length, a stronger hand punch, and the leverage to seal an edge for a RB. That is why the learning curve is generally steeper for tackles entering the NFL rather than guards. When teams are picking OL prospects they'll generally ask first if they have the feet to play LT, if not then RT, and if not they'll slide them down to G. Why do they do this? Because tackle is the more difficult position to fill. Can teams get around it? Yes, but if they can fill it then they're in pretty good shape for the future.

It may be pretty cliche to say that if you've never played it you can't know, but in this case it's generally true. If you actually watch what the 2 positions do over the course of the game it's fairly obvious which one takes the more diverse skill set.

Elite OG's =/= Elite OT's, I'm taking this as my opinion when I do my evaluations of those lines while you don't. So when we look at these situations at the end, we're going to come to different conclusions. You will say you get a better value from Grubbs, Evans, and Bushrod while I'd prefer an elite tackle and two good offensive guards. You're not going to find as good of a tackle for $5 million on the market as you can a guard. I'll take a $10 million OT and 2 $5 million OG's over 2 $7.5 million OG and a $5 million tackle. If I'm an offensive coordinator and I see what kind of plays I can run with a great blindside protector, and satisfactory players inside vs. great inside guys and a satisfactory blindside protector, I choose what I can get with the great blindside protector. If my QB has good pocket presence he'll be able to avoid and stand in tough vs. guys who are coming at his face, but he has no way to see what is coming from his blindside.

There is really no way of proving either person's point without a control group, but I don't think it is so simple to say that since a guard dominant team has worked for the Saints that it works in all situations. QB's play a major role, and if I'm given a choice I'd pick a dominant tackle over a dominant guard + $2 million in cap space to help him out.
cmarq83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 03:17 PM    (permalink
FUNBUNCHER
All-Pro
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Dodge City
Posts: 7,576
Reputation: 1199061
FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.FUNBUNCHER is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Good luck finding 'cheap', good OTs. The better than average LTs get paid a premium because those type of athletes are usually playing on the other side of the football.

I don't mind a guy like Joe Thomas or Jake Long getting paid because they are exceptional.
__________________
FUNBUNCHER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 03:37 PM    (permalink
cmarq83
Pro Bowler
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,217
Reputation: 2050333
cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.cmarq83 is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

I just think people jump to draw conclusions way too quickly in situations like this. The Browns and Dolphins aren't further away from a SB because they have Joe Thomas and Jake Long. Have the past few SB winners had better OG's than OT's, yes, this isn't deniable. However, in the NFL today if you have an elite QB you're in the discussion for a SB almost by default. The question is what you have besides them. Some SB caliber teams have great LBers, others have great D Lines, others have great secondaries, others have dominant lines.

The point is that Franchise Tackles can be another piece, and in most cases they're a piece I'd select over other franchise type offensive lineman. People act like their contracts are these huge anchors, but in most situations we're talking like a $2 million a year difference between LT and other elite OL positions. Go through your team's roster and see the type of guys making $2 million. Would you not sacrifice one of those guys to swap out Carl Nicks for Joe Thomas?

Is having a franchise LT a necessity? No. However, you can say that about any position besides QB. The Pats almost won the SB last year without a secondary, a pass rush, or any receivers who could go deep. It doesn't diminish the importance of any of those positions. It just means they had a lot of talent elsewhere. I just think the excess value you get from paying a franchise tackle outweighs the extra cost over paying a franchise guard.
cmarq83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2012, 03:50 PM    (permalink
Sloopy
Pro Bowler
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,782
Reputation: 180000
Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.Sloopy is kind of a big deal around here, people know him.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmarq83 View Post
The DT thing is basically fact, guys like Sapp and Glover are out of the game. There are fewer dominant interior rushers who either get sacks or push the pocket. There is far more talent on the outsides than on the inside of D-Lines now, and it's a pretty hard argument to make against. The claim that there is more inside pressure than before is pretty baseless, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that. Stats are not the end all, but in this case it goes extremely strongly against your point.
In place of Sapp and Glover there is Suh, Wilifork, Ngata, Justin Smith, Justin Tuck, Richard Seymour, Casey Hampton, Jonathan Babineaux, Cullen Jenkins, Jay Ratliff... the list goes on.

The DT position isn't primarily a run stuffing one anymore and the players playing the position are bigger, faster, and more athletic than they have ever been.

I don't need stats to show me that, and you are just hiding behind a weak argument of stats.

Quote:
Tackles are more valuable than guards. If you consider the kinds of blocks they make on a play by play basis, they're more challenging. They operate in space more, require more length, a stronger hand punch, and the leverage to seal an edge for a RB. That is why the learning curve is generally steeper for tackles entering the NFL rather than guards. When teams are picking OL prospects they'll generally ask first if they have the feet to play LT, if not then RT, and if not they'll slide them down to G. Why do they do this? Because tackle is the more difficult position to fill. Can teams get around it? Yes, but if they can fill it then they're in pretty good shape for the future.
I understand it is more difficult to play, but I would still venture to say that center is more difficult to play than tackle any day of the week and you don't have to pay them anywhere near as much and I would argue they are just as vital to to OL and offense.

Quote:
It may be pretty cliche to say that if you've never played it you can't know, but in this case it's generally true. If you actually watch what the 2 positions do over the course of the game it's fairly obvious which one takes the more diverse skill set.
Your right, center takes a more diverse skill set of any of the OL positions :P (see what I did here? because C is obviously the harder position to play)

Furthermore, through playing football, I realize that this LT love affair is really only present at the pro level.

As I said, most lower tier leagues (high school, varying amateur and college levels, even in division one football) big maulers in the middle and centers are highly valued to keep a clean pocket for the QB because those skill sets, both at DE and LT, simply do not exist at most of those levels.

In high school, you may face one guy a year at DE who is seriously enough of a problem that an average (relatively) LT would struggle all game long.

Meanwhile the scrum that is the middle of the LOS can be quite annoying if your interior OL can't keep them from pushing the pocket or open holes in the running game.

Quote:
You're not going to find as good of a tackle for $5 million on the market as you can a guard.
Not true

many 2nd tier OTs can be found for about 5 mil a year. Joe Staley, Matt Light, Chad Clifton, Bryant McKinnie etc.

Quote:
I'll take a $10 million OT and 2 $5 million OG's over 2 $7.5 million OG and a $5 million tackle. If I'm an offensive coordinator and I see what kind of plays I can run with a great blindside protector, and satisfactory players inside vs. great inside guys and a satisfactory blindside protector, I choose what I can get with the great blindside protector.
I think a line of Jahari Evans, Benn Grubbs and one of the OTs listed above will give you way more scheme versatility (especially in the run game) than that of a line consisting of Jordan Gross and 2nd tier guards.

Quote:
If my QB has good pocket presence he'll be able to avoid and stand in tough vs. guys who are coming at his face, but he has no way to see what is coming from his blindside.
If my guy has good pocket presence, he will step up into my clean pocket and make the throw. Furthermore, his pocket presence will include an internal clock allowing him to know how fast the outside rush could earliest get there and throw it after his drop instead of dicking a round with the ball.

Quote:
There is really no way of proving either person's point without a control group, but I don't think it is so simple to say that since a guard dominant team has worked for the Saints that it works in all situations. QB's play a major role, and if I'm given a choice I'd pick a dominant tackle over a dominant guard + $2 million in cap space to help him out.
Actually, it has worked for more than just the Saints. It has worked for the Ravens, Patriots and Buccaneers as well.

While the relative level of success of teams like the Dolphins, Broncos, and Browns has been far less with their 2nd tier guards and elite LTs.
__________________

I PITY THE FOOL WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME
BK sig is straight sex
THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Baltimore Ravens
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland Indians
Chelsea FC
Quote:
Originally Posted by keylime_5 View Post
Miller is visual sex on the field.
Sloopy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.