Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Tangentially Panthers related - Interesting note on Offensive Lines


UNCrules2187

Recommended Posts

So the Cowboys SBNation blog had the opportunity to interview the author of FO's Almanac, Scott Kacsmar. While this is about the Cowboys (specifically why Kacsmar didn't like the Zach Martin pick), there's interesting nuggets here that pertain to the Panthers, specifically the question about our offensive line:

 

Personally, I'm not a big fan of using premium resources on interior linemen. I won't get into a huge essay about it, but I don't believe the variation in performance of guards or centers is great enough to use first-round picks. Leonard Davis was considered a bust at tackle for six years, but he went to Dallas, moved to right guard and was suddenly a Pro Bowl player. That's hard to buy.
 
If you want a run-heavy offense, then you need a better line, but that's not what Dallas is built for these days. I believe if you have a really good quarterback like Romo, then you don't need to focus on the interior line that much when there are more important positions to fix. Romo's sack rate has been fairly consistent with a tight range of 3.2 to 6.5 percent. The season it was the lowest (2010) was the year he broke his collarbone. Injuries can happen on any play. The play in which Romo came up very hobbled against Washington last year was actually a blown block by Tyron Smith, who is the best lineman on the team. I've thrown Smith under the bus twice now in this questionnaire, but it just goes to show how even your best assets can negatively impact your season with one play.
 
The Smith pick was great to get a franchise left tackle, but I think loading up with Travis Frederick and Zack Martin was overkill. It's nothing personal against those players, but I think the Cowboys had more pressing needs. We're not too excited about the safety position, but that could have been improved with a pick like Eric Reid (2013 draft) or Ha Ha Clinton-Dix. Romo just needed someone to snap him the ball properly (sorry, Phil Costa). Historically, the greatest centers in NFL history were not first-round picks, which is very unusual. The guy on pace to be the best first-round center ever is Nick Mangold. Maybe if the Jets had a good quarterback we'd see a better offense, but having Mangold and D'Brickashaw Ferguson did little to change their success. One of the few great lines to recently have a big impact was in Kansas City a decade ago (2002-05) with Willie Roaf, Brian Waters and Will Shields. However, like Dallas, that team didn't have a defense and never won a playoff game together.
 
Top three needs of a team should be a head coach, a quarterback and a defense. Building a great offensive line is a pipe dream in the salary cap era. Those who think they have the best assets usually don't have anything worth protecting, like Cleveland with Joe Thomas and Alex Mack. The 2008 Steelers and 2013 Seahawks won Super Bowls with pretty lousy lines and their quarterbacks under a lot of pressure. They still won because they had the No. 1 defense, and the quarterback delivered when he had to. Romo hasn't had a top 10 defense since 2009, which is not coincidentally the year he won his only playoff game. A quarterback's best friend is not his offensive line or running game, it's a great defense. It's hard to have one if you're taking guards and centers with first-round picks.
 

 

 

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2014/8/7/5976479/five-questions-with-football-outsiders-about-the-dallas-cowboys-2014

 

The bottom paragraph seems to describe the Panthers to a T. 

 

So why is FO forever harping on our lack of offensive line talent? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes when i heard some media outlets and even fellow fans here on the Huddle suggesting right before the draft that we might take a guard with the first pick, the very thought of taking a guard made blood shoot from my eyes for these very reasons

Pics or it didn't happen

Sent from my XT1080 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tackles arent exactly the position on the OL where you want to be weak, but I agree with the premise and agree overall that our strengths are more important than the perceived weaknesses. We've got a good team. Let's go out and shut people up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How? The kid played well last year. Will be a beast.

Warmack played well, but so did Larry Warford, who went at the top of 3 instead of the top of 1.  Warford was close to flawless. 

 

from the article: it talks about the '08 Steelers and '13 Seahawks won with bad lines, but that suggests the value of a QB that handles pressure very well.  Not all good QBs have that as their strongest point.  

 

 

 

Also reminds me of the ideal of the dominant LT being a thing of the past, that having a good line is better than having one good player.   Relatedly, Carolina pays exactly one OL high, and he's the guy who makes the calls. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting point, but I am not completely sold.  BPA vs need, and value relative to the position should be taken into account regardless in my opinion.

 

Edit: Pie for the info and the use of the word "tangentially".  That's a new one for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting point, but I am not completely sold. BPA vs need, and value relative to the position should be taken into account regardless in my opinion.

Edit: Pie for the info and the use of the word "tangentially". That's a new one for me.

If you didn't skip out of trig or calculus you would know it

Sent from my XT1080 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I def believe this.

Wilson was the 3rd highest sacked QB last year.

Can't really remember a SB team that had a dominant OL.

Cowboys oline made that offense what it was

Sent from my iPhizzle while pooping using CarolinaHizzle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...