Question for the OL Detractors

No

no and honestly its not even close IMO. OBJ literally has changed games with this current oline

would do this. Lineman can be found, and mid tier or even bottom tier lines have won championships (see Pats, Packers, etc). Having a gamechanging WR is a massive leg up on your opponent week in and week out. It simply isn't a debate.

is that it's not guaranteed that OBJ would be a Cowboy if the Giants selected Zach Martin.

Remember Stephen Jones had to veto Jerrah's desire to draft Johnny Football with that pick.

All of that being said, there were other ways JR could've addressed the OL and still taken OBJ in the 1st in that draft. So no, I would still want OBJ.

I'm so glad that you are only a hypothetical GM.

a single person in the world who understands football that would take Martin over OBJ. It's not even close.

I wasn't all that enamored with OBJ as a prospect. I thought he'd be a good player - much like Greg Jennings - but I had absolutely no idea he'd become such a phenom.

that even if the OL is weak, we are not in any position to conclude that the reason for the weakness was that it was mishandled or that anyone in particular is to blame.

It appears that most personnel decisions are made by a consensus of opinions, not by a single person. So if there are 5 starters on the OL, there have been a minimum of 5 separate personnel decisions, with no doubt different facts and circumstances behind each decision.

I would not do it either. I honestly wanted a gauge to see how horrific people think the Giants OL is. Keep in mind in the salary cap era that tradeoffs have to be made. Not that OBJ is a huge cap hit right now, but planning has to be done for his next contract.

what offensive lineman would you have rather had than him. The Giants O-Line, providing this new coach is a good coach, will come around and Eli and Beckham will make lots of plays

would have been a nice addition last year ; )

OBJ over Martin all day

In comment 13094856 Pork Chop said:

Quote:

I would not do it either. I honestly wanted a gauge to see how horrific people think the Giants OL is. Keep in mind in the salary cap era that tradeoffs have to be made. Not that OBJ is a huge cap hit right now, but planning has to be done for his next contract.

But what does one have to do with the other?

Would you have traded LT in 1984 to strengthen some other position? Some players are so valuable they are untradeable and Beckham is one of them imo.

i'd cry. A lot. I'm talking legit ugly face crying. If they traded him for a fucking interior offensive lineman? I'd go postal.

In comment 13094862 Rjanyg said:

Quote:

would have been a nice addition last year ; ) OBJ over Martin all day

Agree on both points.

but why would you trade a once in a generation player for an offensive lineman -- it just doesn't make an iota of sense

Pre-Madonna!

for 500, Pork Chop.

I am gauging how far people would go for a better OL. For the record, I would not do it. But I see a lot of bitching on here about the OL and how it's the front office's fault.

As the FO's fault per se. I just don't think the players are playing well. Specifically Flowers and Jerry.

Newhouse has always been an abysmal player. That's the only one I'd pin on Reese. It's a joke that he's been our RT for going on two seasons.

In comment 13094856 Pork Chop said:

Quote:

I would not do it either. I honestly wanted a gauge to see how horrific people think the Giants OL is. Keep in mind in the salary cap era that tradeoffs have to be made. Not that OBJ is a huge cap hit right now, but planning has to be done for his next contract.

You know, whenever I read questions like this I go to the bottom line. In this case, would Martin's contributions on the OL have yielded more offense than OBJ did? Not likely. No matter how good a lineman is he's still one person on a line. There may have been a slightly better running game (as long as the runs were to his side) and somewhat better passing game. On the other hand OBJ can change games singlehandedly in the blink of an eye. Special WR's and running backs can do that. Looking at it that way it's not even a question for me.

is the weak-link, and the front office's fault for letting it go too long, you can't really fault them this past off-season. There were too many hole to address, plus none of the FA OTs wanted to play RT. It was expected that with all the holes something wouldn't be addressed, and that happened to be the O-line.

In comment 13095031 Pork Chop said:

Quote:

I am gauging how far people would go for a better OL. For the record, I would not do it. But I see a lot of bitching on here about the OL and how it's the front office's fault.

Its weird that you're boiling down years of poor choices on the oline to the singular event of drafting OBJ over Zach Martin.

I happen to agree with the FO that its not ideal to use premium picks on the offensive line, but they have completely struck out in the mid to late rounds AND free agency so rounds 1 and 2 are all that's left. I'm still interested to see the cumulative pro bowls Pugh, Richburg, and Flowers will net when all is said and done.

OBJ for 5 offensive lineman