Interesting discussion of the OLine and how various teams lines rated compared to where the teams ended up at the end of the season. Not a huge correlation. Suggests elite QBs compensate for OLine problems. I remember how Eli got pounded throughout the year, but especially by SF in the playoffs, and kept coming back. Wonder how he would do with an elite OLine at this elevated stage of his career? How much does the LT matter?
- ( New Window
Like the "Are we better with Osi or the draft picks or trade that we can get for Osi" argument. Is there a right answer?
left OT will always be important - a serious blindside shot can aideline any QB, no matter how elite
but QB's like Brady, Eli, Peyton, etc have great awareness and pocket presence so it mitigates the pass rush to an extent. Look at how much Eli was pressured this year and he still had a career year. Our guy is only getting better and he's doing so with a banged up line and diminished run game.
an "elite" QB (and his corresponding salary) make the LT position even more important (assuming the QB is right handed)?
the franchise has a large percentage of its salary cap tied up in one player. if that player goes down, the season is essentially over (nod to Jeff Hostetler for creating the exception to that rule).
this is one of those argue-the-opposite-of-conventional-widom-to-create-web-hits articles.
...a QB who makes fast decisions and gets rid of the ball quickly.
And what makes the left tackle more important is an offensive coordinator who calls long pass plays that require the QB to hold onto the ball longer.
So the Giants have a bit of both. It's a wash.
before Puke Pettiougt? Point: Oline is the new RB. Devalued, in a period where, 6-6 - 312lb men with 35" arms are a plenty. You can get a prototypical LT in the 6th round for cripes sake. We just did. Youhave to develope them but it's a small price to pay to pick up a unique CB or pass rushing talent.
It's three (T, G, C) or five depending on how you count. Tackles aren't devalued, but for the Giants, guards and centers seem to be, somewhat. The Giants once drafted a center #1 overall. Highly unlikely that ever happens again.
Accorsi's stated draft philosophy for O linemen, which seems to be more or less shared by Reese, is that he didn't believe in drafting offensive line in the first round "unless it's a stud tackle." That pretty much fits what the Giants have done since EA arrived. They'll draft a tackle pretty much anytime and a guard in the 2nd if they think he's really good (Snee). Otherwise they tend to look for undervalued prospects later in the draft, then develop them, or they sign veteran free agents.
because many good teams have that dominant blindside rusher. Are the Packers better off with someone to stop JPP and Osi? I think so.
Notably, going the other way is a recent NYTimes Blog piece titled "N.F.L. Evolution: The Eminence of the Left Tackle and Other Myths" (see link). The author makes the argument that the quick strikes, spreads, shotguns etc. have lessened the important of the position (though the author doesnt concede that LTs were ever as important as some argued). He points out that the best teams have just okay LTs, while the best LTs are often on bad teams -- informative, but not proof IMO. He further argues that interior OLs have gained in importance with the new-fangled offenses and more up the middle blitzing; I generally agree that we hear a lot more about Guards than we ever did before, and the notion of paying Guards like LTs is pretty new (other than Hutchinson, who has been paid that way for a while now). http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/n-f-l-evolution-the-eminence-of-the-left-tackle-and-other-myths/
- ( New Window
Elite QB, or not, it's about protecting the most important player on the field as much as possible. Just ask Joe Theismann.
...is because those are the teams drafting in the top five or so (when guys like Orlando Pace, Walter Jones, Jake Long, Joe Thomas and Ryan Clady get drafted).
I recently read a book, whose title and author I forget, which tried to argue with statistics the the left tackle (LT) position was somewhat overrated based on the distribution of where sacks come from (basically spread all across the line) The author argued that the upgrading of the LT position relative to the rest of the line was an artifact of the fact that in the 1980's that was who had to try to block Lawrence Taylor (LT). Absent that unique defensive talent (LT), there was no reason LT (left tackle) should make so much more than the rest of the line.
I didn't find the statistical analysis entirely convincing--for example, it didn't take into account about double teams. However, it did make me think, and if you watch where the Giants' got sacks last season, even the RDEs got a lot of them stunting over the middle, where it is shorter to get to the QB, he is less able to escape and you are generally facing an interior lineman who isn't as good a pass blocker as the LT. Perhaps the case should be made for balance across the OL, as teams can often force the weakest link.
on how long you want your QB to remain elite. Just like any other position, the damage accumulates over time.
I think it's more a luxury position than a need position. The last 2 superbowl teams didn't have a great oline, just a great Qb.
With the way blocking schemes can be set up with double team blocks or a TE helping, etc, I don't feel a elite LT is a necessity.
If you want that Qb to keep playing.