Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

2017 OL Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 49, 50, 51 ... 55, 56, 57  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
justo


Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 14346
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 4791
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Iamcanadian wrote:
Short arms are usually the kiss of death for an OT in the NFL and they are generally moved inside where it is of less importance although longer arms are always desired by every OLmen. Very hard to deliver a solid punch if the DLmen has longer arms than you do.


I feel like this is commonly overstated. The high profile OL I've seen that simply couldn't cut it outside because of his arms (and not feet, which is usually the problem that puts guys inside) was Pugh who measured in at like 31.5" (despite big draft insisting "he can play tackle" ad nauseum.) Yet we bring up the "he's got short arms" thing with guys who measure like 33.25", which is certainly in the "good enough" category.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 68408
PostPosted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
justo


Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 14346
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ragnarok


Joined: 17 Oct 2016
Posts: 851
Location: Washington, DC
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

justo wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason


I'd disagree with this strongly. I would say that C is just about as important as LT in this era. Having an elite C that can make the line calls and keep the pocket from being pushed into the QB is every bit as needed as a LT to watch the blind side. Especially with quick passing games. It's much easier for a QB to step up into the pocket than it is for one to avoid a rush coming straight up the middle.
_________________
Come join BDL!

Seriously, we're awesome. We all may or may not have mild-at-best psychological issues, but we are damn fun.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 68408
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

justo wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason


Yea, there is a pecking order because teams generally like to leave their LT on an island. Point is, though, that intelligent teams will use players to their fullest potential and scheme in such a way to mask weaknesses and play up strengths.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
goldfishwars


Joined: 27 Mar 2011
Posts: 11931
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ragnarok wrote:
justo wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason


I'd disagree with this strongly. I would say that C is just about as important as LT in this era. Having an elite C that can make the line calls and keep the pocket from being pushed into the QB is every bit as needed as a LT to watch the blind side. Especially with quick passing games. It's much easier for a QB to step up into the pocket than it is for one to avoid a rush coming straight up the middle.


I donít know if I would go this far, but at some point the league will have noticed the rapid improvement teams have seen where investments at the center position have taken place. Atlanta and Oakland saw a big uptick in offensive line performance after their FA splashes on Rodney Hudson and Alex Mack. The likes of the Cowboys, Colts and the Bears have all seen their high draft picks at the position rewarded. There arenít many teams who regret the decision to spend either FA money or high draft capital in the position that then regret that decision afterwards. Browns and Cameron Erving would be the obvious exception.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3527
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 7:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

goldfishwars wrote:
Ragnarok wrote:
justo wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason


I'd disagree with this strongly. I would say that C is just about as important as LT in this era. Having an elite C that can make the line calls and keep the pocket from being pushed into the QB is every bit as needed as a LT to watch the blind side. Especially with quick passing games. It's much easier for a QB to step up into the pocket than it is for one to avoid a rush coming straight up the middle.


I donít know if I would go this far, but at some point the league will have noticed the rapid improvement teams have seen where investments at the center position have taken place. Atlanta and Oakland saw a big uptick in offensive line performance after their FA splashes on Rodney Hudson and Alex Mack. The likes of the Cowboys, Colts and the Bears have all seen their high draft picks at the position rewarded. There arenít many teams who regret the decision to spend either FA money or high draft capital in the position that then regret that decision afterwards. Browns and Cameron Erving would be the obvious exception.


I think the one big difference is that you can get a good to great C without having elite measurables. Game IQ and intelligence and enough athleticism / functional strength are key to a successful C. A successful LT needs all of the physical traits (size length footwork agility) to survive on an island in traditional schemes.

I agree 100 percent with jrry's point that elite interior O is devalued relative to LT and that's a market inefficiency worth exploiting. I don't mind if DEN drafts Lamp and uses him as a one year stopgap at LT out of pure necessity but long term his greatest value will be as a top 3 OG. Which I think his ceiling is clearly at.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
goldfishwars


Joined: 27 Mar 2011
Posts: 11931
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
I think the one big difference is that you can get a good to great C without having elite measurables. Game IQ and intelligence and enough athleticism / functional strength are key to a successful C. A successful LT needs all of the physical traits (size length footwork agility) to survive on an island in traditional schemes.


You can definitely get a good center without elite measurables, but I think guys with a combination of the skill-set you correctly identified can be as difficult to find as a left tackle that ticks all the atheleticism thresholds. Functional strength in particular is an area where lesser prospects or converted tackles tend to have their biggest issues when playing the position. Itís one of the reasons I really like Pat Elflein coming out this year, heís not a great athlete (tested very similar to Travis Frederick) Ė but he is smart and you can really see that wrestling back being put to good use.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ragnarok


Joined: 17 Oct 2016
Posts: 851
Location: Washington, DC
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 8:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
goldfishwars wrote:
Ragnarok wrote:
justo wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason


I'd disagree with this strongly. I would say that C is just about as important as LT in this era. Having an elite C that can make the line calls and keep the pocket from being pushed into the QB is every bit as needed as a LT to watch the blind side. Especially with quick passing games. It's much easier for a QB to step up into the pocket than it is for one to avoid a rush coming straight up the middle.


I donít know if I would go this far, but at some point the league will have noticed the rapid improvement teams have seen where investments at the center position have taken place. Atlanta and Oakland saw a big uptick in offensive line performance after their FA splashes on Rodney Hudson and Alex Mack. The likes of the Cowboys, Colts and the Bears have all seen their high draft picks at the position rewarded. There arenít many teams who regret the decision to spend either FA money or high draft capital in the position that then regret that decision afterwards. Browns and Cameron Erving would be the obvious exception.


I think the one big difference is that you can get a good to great C without having elite measurables. Game IQ and intelligence and enough athleticism / functional strength are key to a successful C. A successful LT needs all of the physical traits (size length footwork agility) to survive on an island in traditional schemes.

I agree 100 percent with jrry's point that elite interior O is devalued relative to LT and that's a market inefficiency worth exploiting. I don't mind if DEN drafts Lamp and uses him as a one year stopgap at LT out of pure necessity but long term his greatest value will be as a top 3 OG. Which I think his ceiling is clearly at.


I don't disagree here. Bakhtiari is the only guy I can think of in recent history who is a franchise LT without some of those physical traits. And he has elite feet. But still obviously an outlier. However, you could argue that that level of game IQ and intelligence is just as rare as those physical LT traits. And especially with a young QB, having a guy that can take over those line calls while holding the pivot steady can be as beneficial as that stud LT. One less thing to worry about on the mental side which can help them play faster. I'd put C as 2nd most important at the least and think the argument can be made that it's just as important as LT.

And I'm not sure if NFL teams hold interior as devalued compared to LTs. It seems like the interior guys are getting longer contracts that are just as lucrative as LTs. But that is more true in the draft.
_________________
Come join BDL!

Seriously, we're awesome. We all may or may not have mild-at-best psychological issues, but we are damn fun.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 68408
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

goldfishwars wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
I think the one big difference is that you can get a good to great C without having elite measurables. Game IQ and intelligence and enough athleticism / functional strength are key to a successful C. A successful LT needs all of the physical traits (size length footwork agility) to survive on an island in traditional schemes.


You can definitely get a good center without elite measurables, but I think guys with a combination of the skill-set you correctly identified can be as difficult to find as a left tackle that ticks all the atheleticism thresholds. Functional strength in particular is an area where lesser prospects or converted tackles tend to have their biggest issues when playing the position. Itís one of the reasons I really like Pat Elflein coming out this year, heís not a great athlete (tested very similar to Travis Frederick) Ė but he is smart and you can really see that wrestling back being put to good use.


Elflein scares me. I don't think he's going to be bad in the NFL, but he looked overwhelmed by very talented college DLs. My concern is that top NFL DLs will abuse him.(basically, he'll be a solid starter)

IMO, Chase Roullier has the best skill-set of the Centers in this draft (not counting the potential converts).
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3527
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ragnarok wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
goldfishwars wrote:
Ragnarok wrote:
justo wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason


I'd disagree with this strongly. I would say that C is just about as important as LT in this era. Having an elite C that can make the line calls and keep the pocket from being pushed into the QB is every bit as needed as a LT to watch the blind side. Especially with quick passing games. It's much easier for a QB to step up into the pocket than it is for one to avoid a rush coming straight up the middle.


I donít know if I would go this far, but at some point the league will have noticed the rapid improvement teams have seen where investments at the center position have taken place. Atlanta and Oakland saw a big uptick in offensive line performance after their FA splashes on Rodney Hudson and Alex Mack. The likes of the Cowboys, Colts and the Bears have all seen their high draft picks at the position rewarded. There arenít many teams who regret the decision to spend either FA money or high draft capital in the position that then regret that decision afterwards. Browns and Cameron Erving would be the obvious exception.


I think the one big difference is that you can get a good to great C without having elite measurables. Game IQ and intelligence and enough athleticism / functional strength are key to a successful C. A successful LT needs all of the physical traits (size length footwork agility) to survive on an island in traditional schemes.

I agree 100 percent with jrry's point that elite interior O is devalued relative to LT and that's a market inefficiency worth exploiting. I don't mind if DEN drafts Lamp and uses him as a one year stopgap at LT out of pure necessity but long term his greatest value will be as a top 3 OG. Which I think his ceiling is clearly at.


I don't disagree here. Bakhtiari is the only guy I can think of in recent history who is a franchise LT without some of those physical traits. And he has elite feet. But still obviously an outlier. However, you could argue that that level of game IQ and intelligence is just as rare as those physical LT traits. And especially with a young QB, having a guy that can take over those line calls while holding the pivot steady can be as beneficial as that stud LT. One less thing to worry about on the mental side which can help them play faster. I'd put C as 2nd most important at the least and think the argument can be made that it's just as important as LT.

And I'm not sure if NFL teams hold interior as devalued compared to LTs. It seems like the interior guys are getting longer contracts that are just as lucrative as LTs. But that is more true in the draft.


Yeah, it's not necessarily so commonplace to find high-game IQ interior OL with the athleticism and functional strength. But as you alluded to in your last line and jrry's pointed out, there's a huge market inefficiency in the draft - Mack was taken at 1.21, Frederick was taken late Rd 1 (and while he clearly worked out, DAL was roundly criticized for reaching way too soon - they've been vindicated, but the fact it was seen as a 1-2 round reach shows how C is devalued). Hudson was 2.55 and Matt Paradis was a 5th round pick. The NFL draft doesn't measure game IQ / intelligence well in the college OL system, partially because the college game's lack of complexity compared to the NFL, it's not a skill that stands out easily. So it's definitely an area where teams can find insane value, or get better players from the draft at much lower prices....for now, anyways. The fact Lamp is being projected behind the top 3 OT's is a reflection of the market inefficiency jrry is talking to.

It's why I really support taking Lamp as the #1 OL overall, no matter what your team's OL needs are this year - long-term, elite O players, no matter at C, G or T, are elite difference makers nowadays. I totally agree with jrry's assertion that you are better off with an elite interior OL than an average T. I just think Lamp can stopgap for DEN at LT for 1 year until we have a better solution, then blossom inside for us, but that's just specific to our situation.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The LBC


Global Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 34857
Location: Where We Can't Have Nice Things
PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Iamcanadian wrote:
Short arms are usually the kiss of death for an OT in the NFL and they are generally moved inside where it is of less importance although longer arms are always desired by every OLmen. Very hard to deliver a solid punch if the DLmen has longer arms than you do.


I feel like this is commonly overstated. The high profile OL I've seen that simply couldn't cut it outside because of his arms (and not feet, which is usually the problem that puts guys inside) was Pugh who measured in at like 31.5" (despite big draft insisting "he can play tackle" ad nauseum.) Yet we bring up the "he's got short arms" thing with guys who measure like 33.25", which is certainly in the "good enough" category.

The 32 1/4" benchmark is rooted in Robert Gallery - as that was his exact arm length.

That said, I agree it gets used a bit too much as a end-all/be-all. It's not ideal for an OT, and especially for an LOT (where you've tended to see the trend of the longer, athletic edge-rushers lined up on the blind side), but you've got guys with sub-33" arms who have found success (to the point that they've been paid very well on second-contracts) in the NFL of late and stuck at OT. Duane Brown has sub-33" arms. Riley Reiff has 33 1/4" (someone really going to argue 1/4" is the drop that breaks the levy?); same with Bryan Bulaga. Jake Long (who was, at minimum, a productive starter prior to his knee injury) has sub-33" arms.

This is one of those things where, because OT and LOT are premium positions, people hyper-scrutinize the position and often times look for anything that can differentiate between guys. It's not dissimilar to the arguments we see made about the preferred size of QB's, WR's, TE's, etc. Would you prefer to have a prospect that fits the prototype measurables that Tyron Smith has (6'5", 307, 36 3/8" arms, 11" hands)? Clearly. But instances where you find a guy with those measurables that also has the requisite athleticism and quality tape are exceedingly rare and often require a Top 10 pick (and that's really the rub because the "arm length" threshold was initially put in to scrutinize whether an OL was "worth a Top 10 pick").

Ultimately, arm length is a tick in the "concern" column it's not an irreparable one, unless we're talking someone with say 30" arms (as then you're talking a 5-6" differential between the OL and the edge players he's being asked to block).
_________________

MathMan wrote:
I think I'm obfuscating all over the place!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Iamcanadian


Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 224
Location: Wallaceburg, Ontario, Canada
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ragnarok wrote:
justo wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason


I'd disagree with this strongly. I would say that C is just about as important as LT in this era. Having an elite C that can make the line calls and keep the pocket from being pushed into the QB is every bit as needed as a LT to watch the blind side. Especially with quick passing games. It's much easier for a QB to step up into the pocket than it is for one to avoid a rush coming straight up the middle.


his is simply not true. The OC, on passing plays, is used mostly to double team whichever OG is having difficulty defending the interior pass rush. It is because of the OC that you usually have 3 blockers handling any pass rush from 2 defenders, which is why teams pay far less for interior linemen than they do for OT's especially LT's.

Most LT's are asked to defend the QB from the pass rush on their own and the great ones can do that quite easily. The RT may require the TE to help or the RB, but generally the LT is n his own to defend the QB's blindside.

Every NFL team consider the LT position to be the 2nd most offensive position on a football team, because they want to keep their QB's healthy. Qb's can see a pass rush coming from the right side or up the middle and bale out of the pocket if that happens, but while concentrating on finding an open receiver, they simply cannot know what is happening on their blindside and that is why almost every NFL team has spent multiple choices on drafting LT's if they need one and in any draft where a decent LT prospect is available, you will find them drafted in the top 5. THis is why LT's make a heck of a lot more money than interior linemen or RT's for that matter.

There is zero proof that LT's have lost their importance on the offense. They are paid the most money, they are drafted by far, at the highest draft position, even going #1 overall on occasion. NE took Solder, a LT in round 1, but has no round 1 interior OLmen currently on their roster that BB drafted, yet continues to win and paid Solder the most money of all their OLMen, so it appears that you think you know more about how to build a winner than BB does. I don't think so.
_________________
and proud of it!!


Last edited by Iamcanadian on Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:50 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Iamcanadian


Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 224
Location: Wallaceburg, Ontario, Canada
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

goldfishwars wrote:
Ragnarok wrote:
justo wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
justo wrote:
*Von Miller mostly rushes against right tackles with TE or backfield help

NFL teams aren't running as many five-man routes as fans suggest sometimes. Also matters which side has the 3-tech in your no TE looks. 1-tech side has an open B gap for the pass-rusher to counter into. 3-tech side doesn't.


So it's not 1 on 1 vs. 3 on 2? Wink
Right tackles get as much help as IOL at least. I know people like to think positional value doesn't matter, but LT>>>>OG/RT>>>>OC. There's a pecking order for a reason


I'd disagree with this strongly. I would say that C is just about as important as LT in this era. Having an elite C that can make the line calls and keep the pocket from being pushed into the QB is every bit as needed as a LT to watch the blind side. Especially with quick passing games. It's much easier for a QB to step up into the pocket than it is for one to avoid a rush coming straight up the middle.


I donít know if I would go this far, but at some point the league will have noticed the rapid improvement teams have seen where investments at the center position have taken place. Atlanta and Oakland saw a big uptick in offensive line performance after their FA splashes on Rodney Hudson and Alex Mack. The likes of the Cowboys, Colts and the Bears have all seen their high draft picks at the position rewarded. There arenít many teams who regret the decision to spend either FA money or high draft capital in the position that then regret that decision afterwards. Browns and Cameron Erving would be the obvious exception.


Nobody is saying an OC isn't an important position, but it simply does not compare to the LT position in either drafting position or FA money. LT's rarely go on the FA market as teams will pay them top dollar to remain put or franchise them. OC's and OG's hit the FA market all the time, because teams won't pay them top dollar to keep them or franchise them.

Most NFL OC's and OG's are drafted in round 2 or 3, with an occasional late round 1 selection. Round 3 is where most are drafted, which tells you an awful lot about the importance the NFL GM's give the position. Arizona spent a high pick on Jonathan Cooper in a very weak draft year and dumped him off to NE within 3 years and NE's other OG was taken in round 4. Their OC was also taken in round 4. Their RT was taken in round 2 and their LT was drafted in round 1 and I think BB knows how to build a winner.

Sure OC's who have proven themselves in the league will get a decent pay day in FA, but teams still consider them replaceable parts rather than difference makers like they do the LT position. Ask any NFL QB, and they will shutter to think of playing on a team without a solid LT to defend their blindside, but know they have a far better chance of escaping an interior pass rush that they can see developing, where 3 OLmen are defending against 2 DT types.

When you see OG's and OC's consistently get drafted top 10 and higher than LT's, then comer back to me with this argument, until then, it holds no water.
_________________
and proud of it!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 49, 50, 51 ... 55, 56, 57  Next
Page 50 of 57

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group