Priorities in Line

Mercury22 · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 12329 Location: the 50 yard line

The Offensive line looks to me to be in pretty damn sad shape. Sadly, we have 2 very, very strong pieces in Long and Pouncey, and I believe Icognito will suffice. Beyond that, we could be in trouble. While Martin was a high pick, he has looked lost and out matched thus far. Artis Hicks just got yanked from the season and that leaves John Jerry, who I have some hope for, but has yet to show anything. The real problem, as I see it, is the depth. Or lack thereof, I should say. Here is the chart as I see it:

LT: Jake Long, Will Yeatman
LG: Richie Incognito, Nate Garner
C: Mike Pouncey, Josh Samuda
RG: John Jerry
RT: Jonathan Martin, Ray Feinga

If Long's knee flares up, who plays for him? If Martin proves to much of a liability out there, what do we do? Does anyone else see the horrific depth we have and have major concerns about Tannehill's ability to stay off the mat for most of the season?
_________________
"22 players are involved in every football play. To value precisely the activity of one of them, it is first necessary to account for the actions of the other 21"

Fins20??SBChamp · Joined: 30 Dec 2010 Posts: 408 Location: Tampa

I personally would like to watch a few real games before I formulate my opinion about the O-Line. But I understand your concerns. But it cannot be worse than when Colombo was the starting RT.
_________________

Deets · Joined: 16 Oct 2004 Posts: 12660 Location: Red Sox Nation

I wouldn't worry about Martin. Rookie offensive line generally start by looking lost. Nate Solder for the Patriots was Nate Holder for most of his rookie season and he wound up learning to play properly by the end. Martin will adjust by midseason.
_________________
"well, they got X player I wanted but they clearly overpaid" is the battle cry of bitter and ignorant football fans

FF Member #67

Mercury22 · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 12329 Location: the 50 yard line

Yeah, my concerns are less with the starters and much more with the lack of depth. I see nothing past the starters. Martin is a concern, for sure, but I agree, Deets, on the job training will allow him to grow. If he doesn't grow we are in deep doo-doo.
_________________
"22 players are involved in every football play. To value precisely the activity of one of them, it is first necessary to account for the actions of the other 21"

phinmun · Joined: 29 Dec 2007 Posts: 2231 Location: South Carolina

Uh...think about your question, Merc. It doesn't really make sense. Why would you think a team that struggles to field 5 decent players at the same time would be holding anything back as depth?

Do you expect to feel good about the depth when you don't even feel good about the starters? The 2nd string is the 2nd string because they got outplayed by the starters.

We won't feel good about the depth anywhere on this team until we have decent starters in place. Only then can we look at the depth and start judging what we've got.

Right now, if Jake Long goes down, we're probably flat screwed. I wouldn't try and make chicken salad out that that situation. Let's just hope it doesn't happen.

If Long plays well this year and we re-sign him and Martin's play continues to improve, I'll be very happy. If we're going into next years draft knowing we have decent play at the guard positions and we just have to add another piece or two to the line, fine, that's easily do-able. One G in the 2nd round and we'll be in great shape.

Russ57 · Joined: 25 Aug 2008 Posts: 538

Martin is an "interesting" player to me. IMHO he is weak and slow. That normally spells diaster for a RT.

On the upside he has good technique, intelligence, and anticipation. I was roasted before for suggesting he good be a decent "finesse" LT in a zone blocking scheme.

This upcoming game should be a tough test for him. Now if I sound down on him, or concerned, I'd be a lot more worried in I had the Texan's right side OL. Our DL could have a field day if we scheme correctly.

Mercury22 · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 12329 Location: the 50 yard line

WaterBear56 · Joined: 26 Jul 2010 Posts: 2878

Nate Garner and Josh Samuda are both guys that I feel will do fine replacing anyone but Long and Pouncey. Samuda reportedly fits our scheme and beat out veteran Cook while Garner's knock is injury concerns but he can play both guard and tackle at the same level as Incognito, Jerry, and Martin, without the upside of course.

Our line has a lot of questions like if they will be able to handle the scheme shift or if Martin will develop and if Pouncey will continue to develop or if Incognito will continue to have penalties and if Jerry will lose some weight but the overall talent is there enough so that our oline isn't a weakness especially if we can get half of the answers right.

Deets · Joined: 16 Oct 2004 Posts: 12660 Location: Red Sox Nation

I dunno. For starters you see real talent. For backups you see guys that have gained the coaching staff's respect. If our coaching staff has good taste and a good system we can make the backups look nice. However, backups rarely look nice on paper.
_________________
"well, they got X player I wanted but they clearly overpaid" is the battle cry of bitter and ignorant football fans

FF Member #67

phinmun · Joined: 29 Dec 2007 Posts: 2231 Location: South Carolina

bpastermack · Joined: 17 Feb 2009 Posts: 12072

I know very little about any of these backups other than Garner, who has come in as a backup in the past and played solid. But I will say that Murtha and Cook were both solid backups according to most people you ask, but neither even made the team. Having said that, you have to assume the current backups are better than those guys were.
_________________

Russ57 · Joined: 25 Aug 2008 Posts: 538

I dunno. I tend to reach the conclusion that the players we keep offer the best combination of........youth, low salary, upside, work ethic, character, and injury history.

I see a big change in how the current coaching staff values players and team makeup. I think they see no point in having a backup player, that is making decent money, that has proven they will never amount to starter material. I also think they don't care how good you are if you don't have the work ethic they desire. I think they value lunch pail guys, who show up to work, do their job, keep their mouth shut, get with the program, and stay out of trouble.

I'd be less surprised with a first round LB'er next year than WR.

phinmun · Joined: 29 Dec 2007 Posts: 2231 Location: South Carolina

Mercury22 · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 12329 Location: the 50 yard line

Maddogg · Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 7:45 pm Post subject:

I do think that our offensive line problems and for the most part all of our problems go back to our drafts.

There is plenty of blame to spread around for the overall talent level on the Dolphins. But the fact is we have not drafted well, add in the regime changes over the past decade and you lose the consistency needed for an NFL team.

Mr. Ross has to fully support a philosophy not for one to three years but more a course than will span at least five years before Miami can have an inkling of being in Super Bowl conversations.
_________________