You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 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 offensive line?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 12, 13, 14  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Denver Broncos
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Counselor


Joined: 31 Jan 2017
Posts: 2091
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AKRNA wrote:
Counselor wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
Counselor wrote:
Wish we would have taken the Cowboys trade down to 28. They would have moved up to get Harris. We would still have a likely shot at our choice of OT. And if not Ram and Robinson were still there. It's all hindsight but if Ram and CamRob are better than Bolles..:


Lets just hope fans don't freak out if the other two perform better than Bolles this year. I fully expect it and have mentioned it before.

IMO, he'll start leaving both in the dust from year two on.


When he is already 26...


I just don't get the hang up with Bolles age. Lots of O Linemen play well into their 30's. Zimmerman turned 25 in his rookie year and played another 12 at the top of his profession. Tony Jones retired at 34 after 13 years in the league.

Bruce Mathews wasn't much as an O Lineman his 1st 5 years in the league. He got his 1st all pro when he turned 27 and was a pro-bowl selection every year until he retired at 40. He arguably played his best ball from 31 to 40 with 10 straight pro-bowl selections and 5 1st team all pro.

Anyway, age just doesn't have a detracting factor in the trenches. Older is usually better with few exceptions.


You can't just go around using all pro players as possibilities. That's fantasy land logic.
_________________
In reference to concern about Joshua Dobbs' Knees

48 1/2ers wrote:
Ostriches have inverted knees and they're pretty athletic...


GIF of Ostrich Running Here...

The Wheat Grass Shooting Hippies made me get rid of it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Counselor


Joined: 31 Jan 2017
Posts: 2091
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't hate the player let me make that clear. Way better than the Dambrailo selection even at pick 20. I just think a trade down and taking Cam Rob would have been better.
_________________
In reference to concern about Joshua Dobbs' Knees

48 1/2ers wrote:
Ostriches have inverted knees and they're pretty athletic...


GIF of Ostrich Running Here...

The Wheat Grass Shooting Hippies made me get rid of it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 6952
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2017 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Counselor wrote:
I don't hate the player let me make that clear. Way better than the Dambrailo selection even at pick 20. I just think a trade down and taking Cam Rob would have been better.


We'll know in two or three years.

As far as just using all-pro's in my other argument I didn't. I don't think Tony Jones ever made a pro-bowl.

The point is, regardless of starting age O Lineman play 10+ years barring injury. Billy Bryan played a dozen years for Denver, no pro-bowls.
I think outside of QB, O Lineman have more longevity than any other position. D Linmen are similar.

The reasoning is pretty simple. High speed collisions, crazy cuts, etc. don't occur in the trenches. Just large strong men beating on each other every play. The frequency of career ending injuries is fairly rare.

Also, the loss of a step or two in speed doesn't factor in where in most skill positions it's critical. Lose a step, lose your job.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thebestever6


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 3182
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 12:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AKRNA wrote:
Counselor wrote:
I don't hate the player let me make that clear. Way better than the Dambrailo selection even at pick 20. I just think a trade down and taking Cam Rob would have been better.


We'll know in two or three years.

As far as just using all-pro's in my other argument I didn't. I don't think Tony Jones ever made a pro-bowl.

The point is, regardless of starting age O Lineman play 10+ years barring injury. Billy Bryan played a dozen years for Denver, no pro-bowls.
I think outside of QB, O Lineman have more longevity than any other position. D Linmen are similar.

The reasoning is pretty simple. High speed collisions, crazy cuts, etc. don't occur in the trenches. Just large strong men beating on each other every play. The frequency of career ending injuries is fairly rare.

Also, the loss of a step or two in speed doesn't factor in where in most skill positions it's critical. Lose a step, lose your job.


Denver needed and wanted a left tackle thats not what Cam Rob or Ryan Rams translate too. Thats why the Seahawks traded out and the Giants took a Te.

I really think Bolles will be better than people think I think his valleys will be solid play. He has the want too and physical ability. These are two things you can't coach.
_________________
Props to Deadpulse for the Sig:

Big Palooka wrote:
"They don't have to worry about him making consistent passes. They will win another 2-3 max with him at QB."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iLikeDefense


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 3724
Location: San Diego--Mile High West
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

At this point I am starting think that we should kick the tires on Dunlap and/or Franklin (props to BF2010 predicting Franklin would be cut) as I think we are walking on thin ice with the current players we have.
_________________

^ Joe_is_the_best with the sig.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iLikeDefense wrote:
At this point I am starting think that we should kick the tires on Dunlap and/or Franklin (props to BF2010 predicting Franklin would be cut) as I think we are walking on thin ice with the current players we have.


Jeff Davidson knows both really well from last year in SD. If they have anything left unless the $ is insane you'd think we'd be interested. At the very least both would seem to be upgrades on Stephenson and Billy Taylor. If we pass it can't be said the staff and FO weren't aware of their play/etc. If either or both are simply done though it could be their reason to pass.

No matter what though if the staff don't take either and they play well on cheap deals, better than our depth guys (if they are needed) then criticism will be fair. For now though Davidson & McCoy should get the benefit of the doubt.

Chargers really nailed this draft - Lamp & Feeney (along with Dion Dawkins) were the top tier of G. Great value picks. Would not surprise me if both start this year. With upgrading C with their second year guy Max Tuerk that's a huge upgrade short and long term (even though that Okung contract was awful).
_________________
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
AnAngryAmerican


Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 19487
Location: Loveland, CO
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AKRNA wrote:
Counselor wrote:
I don't hate the player let me make that clear. Way better than the Dambrailo selection even at pick 20. I just think a trade down and taking Cam Rob would have been better.


We'll know in two or three years.

As far as just using all-pro's in my other argument I didn't. I don't think Tony Jones ever made a pro-bowl.

The point is, regardless of starting age O Lineman play 10+ years barring injury. Billy Bryan played a dozen years for Denver, no pro-bowls.
I think outside of QB, O Lineman have more longevity than any other position. D Linmen are similar.

The reasoning is pretty simple. High speed collisions, crazy cuts, etc. don't occur in the trenches. Just large strong men beating on each other every play. The frequency of career ending injuries is fairly rare.

Also, the loss of a step or two in speed doesn't factor in where in most skill positions it's critical. Lose a step, lose your job.

The age is a concern for a number of reasons.

One, as an undersized OT it's more difficult for him to improve base strength. Yes, he can add weight and muscle; I'm 35 and weight about 180 but I could get up 200 pretty quickly. The concern with Bolles being undersized is that he's not going to grow the way a 20 or 21 year old who was similarly slightly-statured could be reasonably expected to. His base frame size is maxed out. For a team that says its intent on running a power scheme drafting a finesse OT who weighed in at under 300lbs was a foolish decision, plain and simple.

Two, Bolles is extremely raw in his technique and has only one year of Division One experience. And that one year came in a gimmick offense on a team that plays in a finesse conference that doesn't play defense or have NFL-like size on the DL. He has less time to learn than a 20 or 21 year old would. A raw, inexperienced 20 year old. Really, the only major difference between Bolles and Sambrailo is that Sambrailo played in a pro-style offense for three years in FoCo.

Three, you're incorrect that OTs have a long shelf life. Yes there are exceptions like Gary Zimmerman or Andrew Whitworth but they are far from the norm. Truth is most OTs begin to drop off in their early 30s. Orlando Pace retired at 33, Willie Roaf and Walter Jones both at 34. And those are Hall of Famers whose careers probably lasted a year or two longer than they should have based on their reputation and football acumen.
_________________
big_palooka:

bhslinebacker wrote:
AAA is right, as he usually is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AnAngryAmerican


Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 19487
Location: Loveland, CO
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thebestever6 wrote:
Denver needed and wanted a left tackle thats not what Cam Rob or Ryan Rams translate too. Thats why the Seahawks traded out and the Giants took a Te.

I really think Bolles will be better than people think I think his valleys will be solid play. He has the want too and physical ability. These are two things you can't coach.

Whenever I read/hear people say things like this I have no choice but to chalk it up to blind homerism and loyalty to Elway and franchise.

Bolles' ceiling is a middle-of-the-road LT if his coaches can scheme around his physical and mental limitations. The nasty demeanor thing makes for a nice soundbite coming out of Dove Valley for the Denver media cheerleaders to hype, but it sounds like a recipe for penalties to me. Remember Bolles led all D1 OTs in penalties in his one year playing in Utah's gimmick offense.

Furthermore, given his physical limitations, his advanced age, his lack of experience and his shortcomings between the ears, he will take a season or two to learn and adapt to the NFL and, as most (non-QBs/kickers) NFL players do, will begin to drop off physically in his early-30s. So, we spent a first round pick on a guy for the 2019, '20 and '21 seasons. Excellent use of draft capital there. Rolling Eyes
_________________
big_palooka:

bhslinebacker wrote:
AAA is right, as he usually is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AnAngryAmerican


Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 19487
Location: Loveland, CO
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
No matter what though if the staff don't take either and they play well on cheap deals, better than our depth guys (if they are needed) then criticism will be fair. For now though Davidson & McCoy should get the benefit of the doubt.

Well, they did coach for a team that went a combined 9-23 in the last two seasons. Those guys always deserve the benefit of the doubt.
_________________
big_palooka:

bhslinebacker wrote:
AAA is right, as he usually is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AnAngryAmerican wrote:
Broncofan wrote:
No matter what though if the staff don't take either and they play well on cheap deals, better than our depth guys (if they are needed) then criticism will be fair. For now though Davidson & McCoy should get the benefit of the doubt.

Well, they did coach for a team that went a combined 9-23 in the last two seasons. Those guys always deserve the benefit of the doubt.


Sure but McCoy isn't coming as HC. Like how Norv Turner & Wade Phillips were disasters as HC but actually awesome coordinators. I'm not sold that McCoy will succeed either here FWIW although pairing with Musgrave gives more hope it can work (McCoy on his own has not been nearly as successful as when he's paired with a brighter mind - Whisenhunt OC / Manning QB).

Remember thought that the above comment was directed at McCoy / Davidson's evaluation of whether Dunlap & Franklin are worth bringing in or not - they had direct first hand knowledge of what each guy had left at the end of the season last year. If they pass on either or both guys it's hard to criticize now....if either or both guys are better than our depth guys and just as expensive or cheaper then by all means they deserve any and all criticism sent their way.
_________________
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
thebestever6


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 3182
PostPosted: Mon May 15, 2017 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AnAngryAmerican wrote:
thebestever6 wrote:
Denver needed and wanted a left tackle thats not what Cam Rob or Ryan Rams translate too. Thats why the Seahawks traded out and the Giants took a Te.

I really think Bolles will be better than people think I think his valleys will be solid play. He has the want too and physical ability. These are two things you can't coach.

Whenever I read/hear people say things like this I have no choice but to chalk it up to blind homerism and loyalty to Elway and franchise.

Bolles' ceiling is a middle-of-the-road LT if his coaches can scheme around his physical and mental limitations. The nasty demeanor thing makes for a nice soundbite coming out of Dove Valley for the Denver media cheerleaders to hype, but it sounds like a recipe for penalties to me. Remember Bolles led all D1 OTs in penalties in his one year playing in Utah's gimmick offense.

Furthermore, given his physical limitations, his advanced age, his lack of experience and his shortcomings between the ears, he will take a season or two to learn and adapt to the NFL and, as most (non-QBs/kickers) NFL players do, will begin to drop off physically in his early-30s. So, we spent a first round pick on a guy for the 2019, '20 and '21 seasons. Excellent use of draft capital there. Rolling Eyes


Arkna covered all this and Jm not one to beat a dead horse. It's not blind homerism it is was it is. Are there concerns with Bolles I can't lie they are there. If he irons everything oit I see no reason why he can't be better than Okung.

And also, even with his age and concerns he still translates better to left tackle than Robinson or Rams.

And draft capitol that is overblown people complain about capital but they are the firat ones that are willing to trade a firat for Thomas or Staley. Who are older and have a high cap number.

I'm not cooku for cocoa puffs over Bolles but given where the Broncos have been picking and his ceiling thats not a bad gamble.
_________________
Props to Deadpulse for the Sig:

Big Palooka wrote:
"They don't have to worry about him making consistent passes. They will win another 2-3 max with him at QB."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thebestever6 wrote:
AnAngryAmerican wrote:
thebestever6 wrote:
Denver needed and wanted a left tackle thats not what Cam Rob or Ryan Rams translate too. Thats why the Seahawks traded out and the Giants took a Te.

I really think Bolles will be better than people think I think his valleys will be solid play. He has the want too and physical ability. These are two things you can't coach.

Whenever I read/hear people say things like this I have no choice but to chalk it up to blind homerism and loyalty to Elway and franchise.

Bolles' ceiling is a middle-of-the-road LT if his coaches can scheme around his physical and mental limitations. The nasty demeanor thing makes for a nice soundbite coming out of Dove Valley for the Denver media cheerleaders to hype, but it sounds like a recipe for penalties to me. Remember Bolles led all D1 OTs in penalties in his one year playing in Utah's gimmick offense.

Furthermore, given his physical limitations, his advanced age, his lack of experience and his shortcomings between the ears, he will take a season or two to learn and adapt to the NFL and, as most (non-QBs/kickers) NFL players do, will begin to drop off physically in his early-30s. So, we spent a first round pick on a guy for the 2019, '20 and '21 seasons. Excellent use of draft capital there. Rolling Eyes


Arkna covered all this and Jm not one to beat a dead horse. It's not blind homerism it is was it is. Are there concerns with Bolles I can't lie they are there. If he irons everything oit I see no reason why he can't be better than Okung.

And also, even with his age and concerns he still translates better to left tackle than Robinson or Rams.

And draft capitol that is overblown people complain about capital but they are the firat ones that are willing to trade a firat for Thomas or Staley. Who are older and have a high cap number.

I'm not cooku for cocoa puffs over Bolles but given where the Broncos have been picking and his ceiling thats not a bad gamble.


TBE6 it's fine if people don't agree - but let's also be accurate with the points made. No one this offseason has even remotely talked about trading a 1st round pick for Thomas, or Staley, or Veldeheer. That's the very definition of a straw man argument. Look at page 4 here, people were split on if Thomas is even worth a 2nd round pick, and the trade scenario discussed (1.20 for 1.33 & Thomas), as the CLE poster candyman pointed out, was putting Thomas at a 3rd-round value. And even then, most pointed out it was likely moot with CLE building their OL - but there wasn't even consensus on a 2nd round pick. And Staley was talked about as a Day 3 price, same with Veldeheer. If you look at page 52-54 of the College Prospects thread, and the other threads this offseason, same theme - Day 3 picks for other LT's that aren't Joe Thomas, and unclear consensus on even a Rd2-3 pick for Thomas (and most agreeing CLE likely isn't dealing anymore regardless). It doesn't help your case by trying to attach statements to others where none were made.

With Bolles, it's simple - Elway confirmed he had calls to move back. We now know that DAL was looking to move up to get Charles Harris (taken at 22) - http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/nfl/dallas-cowboys/cowboys-corner-blog/article150050752.html The price to move from 28 to 20 is usually a 3rd/4th or a 2nd (and we give back a 5th). Some (like Counselor), would prefer we had taken Robinson/Ramczyk at 28, and accumulated the extra value. Others (myself included), would have taken Foster 1.20 and then gone G later on, and thought long-term with the draft. Finally, a 3rd contingent (UK & grizmo IIRC) would have explored moving up to 1.18 (as Elway did explore this, but for Bolles), and leapfrogged OJ Howard. Ultimately, no one knows yet how this will turn out.

If Bolles is a great LT (and AKRNA's point that it may not be year 1 is fair, we are looking at a 4-year deal, but by end of 2018 season the picture will be clear), well, few will complain with hindsight. But, if Ramczyk/Robinson are just as good or better, then the added value argument has merit. Likewise, if Foster or Howard (although you'd have to factor in the uncertainty of the cost to move up for Howard) are amazing, elite players, well over who we play there during the next 4 years, and Bolles is just OK, or worse, at LT (or only plays RT), then that criticism is fair too (realizing that positional value means if Bolles is a good, top 6-12 LT range player, that's more valuable than a top 6-12 guy at other positions except QB/CB/EDGE-DE - but that gap goes away if the other player is top 3-4, true elite). In the end, no one will know for now. But let's keep the points clear.
_________________
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.


Last edited by Broncofan on Tue May 16, 2017 8:51 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3609
PostPosted: Tue May 16, 2017 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Moving forward, I think the OL questions raised by Orlando Franklin's release and King Dunlap still being on the market, with Jeff Davidson as our OL coach (who only was in SD for 1 year, but it was 2016, so he'd know what they seem to have left), it begs the questions:

1. Is Dunlap better than Stephenson as a swing LT/RT? Both can play both positions (in theory for Stephenson, we know Dunlap has). Both are on 1-year deals at this stage. Cutting Stephenson would save 2M, so not like Dunlap is going to cost more - heck, it might even save us money. Without the $ factoring in, Dunlap seems to profile as a better power scheme fit, and again, he knows McCoy/Stephenson's power blocking scheme, too. Dunlap has been cleared from the alleged DV incident with no charges pending and no NFL investigation. Big Q is if he's healthy enough to help as he did miss last 3 games of 2016.

2. Is Franklin better than Garcia/Schofield/McGovern (who is also playing swing C)? Here, I'm not as convinced - Franklin really struggled badly last year, and while Schofield wasn't great, he was serviceable. If the current staff feel Garcia is ahead of Schofield, it's hard to see taking Franklin above either guy, given how badly Franklin's play has regressed the last 2 years, and his age/mileage. McGovern's power-fit and his learning to play C really makes him too valuable to take over a G-only guy at Franklin's level of decline, Schofield also offer RT versatility in a real pinch (not great RT play, obv, but versatility really matters a lot with backups).

If we look at our starting 5 and then add Schofield / McGovern / Stephenson / Sambrailo, that 9 OL. The only way we can justify bringing on Dunlap IMO is cutting either Stephenson or Sambrailo. While people can certainly make a case for Sambrailo, he's cheaper and younger, so in theory there's more room for improvement. I'd certainly have no hopes he will be anything more than a backup this year, but I think that's already the case with Stephenson, and he offers more savings. I think Dunlap for Stephenson makes a lot of sense. Franklin for the 3 G's we have already, I'm not nearly as sold - and unlike Stephenson, we don't save a lot of $, either. Again, Davidson and McCoy had first-hand knowledge of where both guys are at performance-wise - so if they pass on either, or both, it's hard to say they don't have a better idea of where those 2 are at. It's just hard to believe they're worse than Stephenson/Sambrailo, at least in Dunlap's case.
_________________
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
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 6952
PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AnAngryAmerican wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
Counselor wrote:
I don't hate the player let me make that clear. Way better than the Dambrailo selection even at pick 20. I just think a trade down and taking Cam Rob would have been better.


We'll know in two or three years.

As far as just using all-pro's in my other argument I didn't. I don't think Tony Jones ever made a pro-bowl.

The point is, regardless of starting age O Lineman play 10+ years barring injury. Billy Bryan played a dozen years for Denver, no pro-bowls.
I think outside of QB, O Lineman have more longevity than any other position. D Linmen are similar.

The reasoning is pretty simple. High speed collisions, crazy cuts, etc. don't occur in the trenches. Just large strong men beating on each other every play. The frequency of career ending injuries is fairly rare.

Also, the loss of a step or two in speed doesn't factor in where in most skill positions it's critical. Lose a step, lose your job.

The age is a concern for a number of reasons.

One, as an undersized OT it's more difficult for him to improve base strength. Yes, he can add weight and muscle; I'm 35 and weight about 180 but I could get up 200 pretty quickly. The concern with Bolles being undersized is that he's not going to grow the way a 20 or 21 year old who was similarly slightly-statured could be reasonably expected to. His base frame size is maxed out. For a team that says its intent on running a power scheme drafting a finesse OT who weighed in at under 300lbs was a foolish decision, plain and simple.

Two, Bolles is extremely raw in his technique and has only one year of Division One experience. And that one year came in a gimmick offense on a team that plays in a finesse conference that doesn't play defense or have NFL-like size on the DL. He has less time to learn than a 20 or 21 year old would. A raw, inexperienced 20 year old. Really, the only major difference between Bolles and Sambrailo is that Sambrailo played in a pro-style offense for three years in FoCo.
Three, you're incorrect that OTs have a long shelf life. Yes there are exceptions like Gary Zimmerman or Andrew Whitworth but they are far from the norm. Truth is most OTs begin to drop off in their early 30s. Orlando Pace retired at 33, Willie Roaf and Walter Jones both at 34. And those are Hall of Famers whose careers probably lasted a year or two longer than they should have based on their reputation and football acumen.


I can't tell if you're being serious, deliberately obtuse or just stirring the pot. It's hard to tell lately.

Anyway, looking at the comparison to Sambrailo it has to be the latter so no response from me is proper.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AnAngryAmerican


Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 19487
Location: Loveland, CO
PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AKRNA wrote:
AnAngryAmerican wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
Counselor wrote:
I don't hate the player let me make that clear. Way better than the Dambrailo selection even at pick 20. I just think a trade down and taking Cam Rob would have been better.


We'll know in two or three years.

As far as just using all-pro's in my other argument I didn't. I don't think Tony Jones ever made a pro-bowl.

The point is, regardless of starting age O Lineman play 10+ years barring injury. Billy Bryan played a dozen years for Denver, no pro-bowls.
I think outside of QB, O Lineman have more longevity than any other position. D Linmen are similar.

The reasoning is pretty simple. High speed collisions, crazy cuts, etc. don't occur in the trenches. Just large strong men beating on each other every play. The frequency of career ending injuries is fairly rare.

Also, the loss of a step or two in speed doesn't factor in where in most skill positions it's critical. Lose a step, lose your job.

The age is a concern for a number of reasons.

One, as an undersized OT it's more difficult for him to improve base strength. Yes, he can add weight and muscle; I'm 35 and weight about 180 but I could get up 200 pretty quickly. The concern with Bolles being undersized is that he's not going to grow the way a 20 or 21 year old who was similarly slightly-statured could be reasonably expected to. His base frame size is maxed out. For a team that says its intent on running a power scheme drafting a finesse OT who weighed in at under 300lbs was a foolish decision, plain and simple.

Two, Bolles is extremely raw in his technique and has only one year of Division One experience. And that one year came in a gimmick offense on a team that plays in a finesse conference that doesn't play defense or have NFL-like size on the DL. He has less time to learn than a 20 or 21 year old would. A raw, inexperienced 20 year old. Really, the only major difference between Bolles and Sambrailo is that Sambrailo played in a pro-style offense for three years in FoCo.
Three, you're incorrect that OTs have a long shelf life. Yes there are exceptions like Gary Zimmerman or Andrew Whitworth but they are far from the norm. Truth is most OTs begin to drop off in their early 30s. Orlando Pace retired at 33, Willie Roaf and Walter Jones both at 34. And those are Hall of Famers whose careers probably lasted a year or two longer than they should have based on their reputation and football acumen.


I can't tell if you're being serious, deliberately obtuse or just stirring the pot. It's hard to tell lately.

Anyway, looking at the comparison to Sambrailo it has to be the latter so no response from me is proper.

The comparison is of the two as draft prospects.

Like Bolles, Ty was regarded as more a finesse OT who had questions about his core strength and his lower body build. Both were regarded as a good athletes for the position who demonstrated good footwork but questions abound regarding how well they can hold up against stronger, more physical defensive fronts they will see in the NFL relative to their college competition. Both were considered better fits for zone-blocking offenses than for a man scheme.

And I made a mistake with what I said earlier, Ty was actually a four-year starter at CSU in McElwain's (and for one year, Fairchild's) pro-style offense , not a three-year starter.
_________________
big_palooka:

bhslinebacker wrote:
AAA is right, as he usually is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Denver Broncos All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 12, 13, 14  Next
Page 13 of 14

 
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