PFT NYJ Draft Needs -- Not A Word About the OL...!

You're not making any sense dude.

So we shouldn't be "collecting resumes" but we *should* draft a guy who may or may not be ready from Day 1?

And how the hell is it so hard to concede that adding Alan fuckin' Faneca and Damien Woody just might have improved our OL? Because if you acknowledge those moves then you can't become a cliche spouting poet about what the OL should be?

 

We could definitely use more help along the O-line in terms of depth but we no longer need to spend an early pick there. LB and WR need way more attention at this point. We basically have 2 legit WRs on the roster right now. They can use one of the 4th rounders on the O-line, and make a few depth signings later this spring and summer.

 

I keep hearing that we should use 4th and late rounders on the OL this year. The problem with that is that the OL talent is top heavy in this draft. There are some fantastic prospects, especially RTs. But as soon as you get past the top half of the 2nd round the talent drops off significantly.

That's the problem, if teams are going to take advantage of the significant OL talent in this draft available in the draft, they have to go 1st or 2nd (maybe 3rd if you get lucky). There is a reason that so many Olineman are projecting to go 1st round and high 2nd this year.

Then the question, do you go OL at the expense of other positions taking a much less talented player later? That is a tough question. I would say go OT in the second, but I can certainly see the argument against it.

 

Have to agree. I would love nothing more than pure power football. Shoving the ball down the throats of opponents and daring them to stop it.

 

Yeah and? The talent drop between the top OL prospects and later rounds is pretty significant this year. Once you get past the 2nd the difference is apparent. However the top tier Olinemen available early are extremely talented. My point remains the same.

 

Workout numbers are kind of useless when talking about Olinemen. The only way to really gauge them is to watch film.

If you watch some film on guys like Cherilus, Long, Clady, Williams and then watch film on some of the guys projected to go in rounds 3-5, you will see the difference. And yes I have watched film, clips, and games with these guys, I take a particular interest in the OL. It is not like other years. And of course there are always diamonds in the rough, that is not an argument for or against position. But if you are talking about building REAL OL depth and substantial prospects, and not long term projects like Bender, teams are going to be hard pressed to find one on the second day.

I am not a scout, and if you want to go by these draft sites all the power to ya. It is just my opinion based on what I have seen. Also like I said even if what I am saying is the case, I am not sure given the needs of the team I am can understand not going OL in the second. But based on the talent available this year, and our drafting position in the 2nd, it is hard to argument against going OL. We'll see.

 

I have no idea what you are agruing with me over, or what point you are trying to make.

We basically agree, I just evaulate the talent differently. As for evaulating OL, the only real way to evaluate Olinemen is during gametime situations. The three most important factors to Olinemen are intelligence, technique, and size, in that order. So combine numbers are not really that useful.

 

Ah, sorry took your intention wrong. I'll go back then.

Technique is very very important to Olinemen. Even moreso than strength or speed. But you can't tell tehnique by any combine numbers, or practice for that matter. Only way to see it is during gametime situations.

The type of defense doesn't really affect Oline play all that much. You still have to cover your gaps, help your fellow OL, open holes, and protect the QB. Nothing changes that much for the OL, expect on blitzes.

How much help they give or get comes with the territory. More than any other unit, good Oline gel, they cover for one another. So you can just as easily stand out if you are good, as you can be overlooked on a bad Oline. Just look ar Brick last year, he looked bad often because he had to cover for the human turnstile Clarke next to him.

Of course, but isn't that true with any position?

Of course. I am sure there is going to be at least one or more good Olineman coming out of the later rounds. I am not a scout, I can't go to all these small schools and watch all that tape. But from what I have seen, there is a big talent gap between the top OL and the ones projected to go in later rounds. That is just my impression though, I could be 100% wrong.

Well coaching can always help. Especially with a guy like Callahan there. Like I said before the three most important factors for the OL are intelligence, technique, and size. Speed, strength, and agilility are more of icing on the cake. Size and intelligence can't be taught, but technique can. But there has to be some talent there to begin with. That is where the coaches come in. Good technique can cover up a lack of size. Just take a look at the Colts Oline. They are realitively undersized for an NFL Oline. But they have a great Oline coach in Howard Mudd, and all are very smart players.

Anyway we have gone off on a bit of a tangent. I still think OL is a big need. Depth especially, and Moore is just not starting calibur. Cherlius as the RT is my perfect draft. They could shift Woody to RG and Moore as backup. That gives a starting line-up of Brick, Faneca, Mangold, Woody, Cherilus with Bender, Moore and Montgomery as backups. THAT is a friggin dominant Oline.

 

This is the epitome of the good and bad of football forums. Any idiot that never watched a player play can come and opine on him.

Revis had a lot of tackles because noone was scared of him? Is that your pinpoint analysis? Is that the ray of light you bring to the forum?

He are a few ideas for you.......... Maybe he played up on the line to support the run. Maybe he is one of the few CB's in the league that is a sure thing as a tackler. Maybe the run defense was so bad he played similar to a safety in certain spots. Maybe he had a terrible DL in front of him for 1/2 a season and the opposing QB had all night. Maybe you watched him in the one and only bad game he had against the Bills. My guess is you never saw him play you just come in here to pollute this place as every single thread you post in ends up with you fellating <insert Raider here>.

 

Well Bender is extremely raw. If you watch him play he has decent size and knows his assignments, but doesn't have great technique. That comes from playing at such a small school, with not the best of coaching. Callahan IMO is going to do wonders for his development. He is a project pick. A guy you want to get dividends from 3-5 years down the road.

As for Montgomery, I am not content with him at all. He would definitely be the weakest play in the unit, even as a backup. But you can't have all first rounders as backups. And I don't think he was nearly as bad as Clarke. But Montgomery is not a starter, he is a guy that can come in and give Faneca a breather. I worry if Faneca gets hurt.

Woody had his pro-bowl year as a RG for NE. He did play well at RT for 6 games, and I think he would be fine. But I think the reason he played poorly at RG in Detroit is because the rest of the Oline was god awful. Like I said before, the Oline only plays well as a unit. It is hard to play at a probowl level when you are covering the assignments for the guy next to you. Again, with Callahan, I think his play is going to improve significantly this year.

 

Out of every position on the field in the NFL, OL tend to be the most durable.

Shockey is a 250 pound TE whose had multiple injuries before and had a a guy fall on his leg in a very awkward position. Mangold played hurt all last year, how many games did he miss? Mawae played with a friggin club on his hand. Most OL-men pride themselves on durability and toughness, and to say Faneca has been lucky for 8 straight seasons seems a little ridiculous.

What happens if Brady dies? Injuries happen, but you're talking fucking hypothetical situations with meh-probability possibilities why? To run on this ridiculous hypothesis that we didn't improve the OL?

Lets see...Woody can play any spot on the OL...Moore can play both G positions...Wade Smith can/has played on all spots...Bender has been talked about both at T and G...and we haven't even had the draft or camp cuts/signings yet.

Where did I say that?