for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Ongoing OL Issues since.... 2012?

GiantsRage2007 : 11/11/2019 9:33 am
Why can't the Giants seem to get even average OL play?

Is it the coaching or the players?

Why is the OL such a problem for us since like 2012?

I see teams like Pittsburgh and New England have 3 or 4 UDFA on the line and they perform, while we have had 2 first round picks and at least a 2nd rounder not return for a 2nd contract with us (FLowers, Pugh, Richberg).

Countless FA OL have come in and not performed as well.

Is it the OL coaches we brought in? The scheme every head coach has wanted to run? The players? Are we snake-bit? WTF? Why does this continue to be an issue?

It just seems ridiculous that 1 team can have both trouble identifying talent and trouble being able to coach that talent in one position group for so long.
I know this may sound crazy...  
M.S. : 11/11/2019 9:39 am : link

...but I thought the Giants had brought their offensive line up to around the "average" mark by the latter part of last season!

In any event, what we have now is much worse than what the Giants finished with at the end of last season.

And there are three people who own that: Gettleman, Pat Shurmur and Hal Hunter.
The OL wasn't very good in 2011 either.  
Section331 : 11/11/2019 9:41 am : link
The run game was dead last in the league, although their pass pro was slightly better.
RE: I know this may sound crazy...  
GiantsRage2007 : 11/11/2019 9:42 am : link
In comment 14674867 M.S. said:
Quote:

...but I thought the Giants had brought their offensive line up to around the "average" mark by the latter part of last season!

In any event, what we have now is much worse than what the Giants finished with at the end of last season.

And there are three people who own that: Gettleman, Pat Shurmur and Hal Hunter.


I thought that too - that we were "close" by the end of last year... things were getting better. Kinda sad that "average" is the new "great" around this team...

It's pretty frustrating that's for sure.
The scarier thing is its not like they didn't invest premium picks  
Ben in Tampa : 11/11/2019 9:43 am : link
into the position. Four of the last Seven drafts they've taken an OL in round 1 or 2.

Thought for sure this year’s line would be at least average  
BillT : 11/11/2019 9:49 am : link
And there were media projections that said the same thing. Hard to believe they are as bad as this and I mean before the injuries. Solder and Remmers are epically bad yet there is a ton of tape out there where they played far better. Hard to figure.
The offensive line is a good look into how bad this team has been  
an_idol_mind : 11/11/2019 9:56 am : link
when it comes to finding talent.

After 2011, the Giants very clearly needed a better offensive line. The team kept Kevin Boothe as a starter, moved Diehl to right tackle, started Will Beatty, and drafted a running back in the first round.

2013 began with the same line in place, save for an aging Diehl moved to guard and a rookie Justin Pugh at right tackle.

2014 kept Beatty at left tackle, brought in a rookie Weston Richburg at left guard, and added journeymen J.D. Walton and John Jerry as starters.

In 2015, the team made a real effort to overhaul the line by adding a top 10 pick and a high-priced free agent in Geoff Schwartz. Unfortunately, the top 10 pick was Ereck Flowers.

2016 saw no draft pick spent on either line and no significant change on the offensive line save the addition of Bobby Hart.

2017 again saw no major investment in the offensive line, save for a late draft pick on Adam Bisnowaty.

2018 saw Hernandez drafted in the second round and Solder brought in as a free agent. Unfortunately, the jury is still out on Hernandez and Solder has been a disappointment.

Now we're in 2019 and the team tried to revamp the line only to fall on their faces again.

The Giants waited way too long to seriously address the offensive line problem, and when they have tried they've missed on their draft picks and free agent signings. That's kinda what's happened all over the team, but the offensive line sticks out because it's been a problem all decade and multiple combinations of coaches and GMs have failed to solve it.
I believe the biggest issue in the past has been the coaching.  
eclipz928 : 11/11/2019 9:57 am : link
Pat Flaherty had been the OLine coach throughout Tom Coughlin's entire tenure, with only a handful of seasons with good production from that unit.

What I thought was a surprisingly under-discussed topic here over the summer was how Flaherty was fired as the Dolphins OLine coach right in the middle of training camp (after being fired the year before by the Jaguars). That's a highly unusual timing for a personnel decision like that which points to a pretty significant failure.

I think the Giants had been handicapped by poor coaching for some time, but certainly at least in recent years, there's been a deficit of talent on the line as well.
RE: The scarier thing is its not like they didn't invest premium picks  
Coach Red Beaulieu : 11/11/2019 10:09 am : link
In comment 14674885 Ben in Tampa said:
Quote:
into the position. Four of the last Seven drafts they've taken an OL in round 1 or 2.

Mystifying. Accorsi built the oline that slapped around Ray Lewis and prime Ravens D out of a 2nd rounder, nepotism and sacks of donuts. Certainly chemistry plays a part, having around a lunch pail bleed blue type guy like Diehl.
Must be the NJ water...  
penkap75 : 11/11/2019 10:10 am : link
Even with completely different GM, coaches, and players, we get the same results.
Most of Accorsi's  
RollBlue : 11/11/2019 10:17 am : link
O-Lines sucked.
Guys who were  
Les in TO : 11/11/2019 10:21 am : link
Deemed problems for us are starting on other teams including Newhouse Hart Flowers Richburg and Pugh.

Guys who were decent players on other teams have looked like crap for us Omameh Solder Zeitler Remmers

I don’t know if it’s something to do with the strength and conditioning or nutrition but the Giants should be dedicating a project team to work on this
OL and LBs  
jeff57 : 11/11/2019 10:23 am : link
Seems like forever.
It is likely 90% coaching, 10% talent  
AdamBrag : 11/11/2019 10:23 am : link
I can't think of an offensive linemen in recent history who has significantly improved while on the Giants.

The Giants used to be able to draft offensive linemen late and then develop them. Now they can't even draft offensive linemen high and have them play. They either need to bring in a very good offensive line coach or they need to draft polished offensive linemen (can't draft a guy like Will Hernandez who is going to need further development in the NFL).
I tried explaining this on another thread  
.McL. : 11/11/2019 10:50 am : link
OL represents 23% of theplayers on the field 5 out of 22.

If you go back to 2013 when they took Pugh. The Giants have spent between 13 and 14% of their total draft capital. By 2016, they had an inkling that the Pugh and Richburg picks weren't panning out as hoped. And Flowers had not looked good as a rookie. SO what did they do as far as "investing" in the position. Since Flowers, they have "invested" less than 4% of their draft capital on the OL. Gettleman knowing he needed 5 new OL, has "invested" only 8%.

So when people say that the Giants have "invested" enough, don't kid yourself. The Giants have barely invested in the position group as a whole at all. This is what you get when you don't draft OL.

Look at it this way. even if Pugh made it as an RT, Richburg as a C, Flowers an an LT, and Hernandez as a G, the team would still be short a G, and have some aging vets in Pugh and Richburg that would need replacement. And the team would have 0 depth.

Don't buy the narrative that the Giants have made the appropriate investment in the OL. They haven't.
The turnover rate of the offensive line unit  
eclipz928 : 11/11/2019 10:57 am : link
is lower compared to most other positions - no team is going to use 23% of their draft picks on the offensive line.
RE: I tried explaining this on another thread  
GiantsRage2007 : 11/11/2019 11:01 am : link
In comment 14675084 .McL. said:
Quote:
OL represents 23% of theplayers on the field 5 out of 22.

If you go back to 2013 when they took Pugh. The Giants have spent between 13 and 14% of their total draft capital. By 2016, they had an inkling that the Pugh and Richburg picks weren't panning out as hoped. And Flowers had not looked good as a rookie. SO what did they do as far as "investing" in the position. Since Flowers, they have "invested" less than 4% of their draft capital on the OL. Gettleman knowing he needed 5 new OL, has "invested" only 8%.

So when people say that the Giants have "invested" enough, don't kid yourself. The Giants have barely invested in the position group as a whole at all. This is what you get when you don't draft OL.

Look at it this way. even if Pugh made it as an RT, Richburg as a C, Flowers an an LT, and Hernandez as a G, the team would still be short a G, and have some aging vets in Pugh and Richburg that would need replacement. And the team would have 0 depth.

Don't buy the narrative that the Giants have made the appropriate investment in the OL. They haven't.


I had read something that Bill Polian said to draft a qb in every draft, late round, or whenever... cause you can never have a good enough backup qb and you can trade him for an asset, and when you're looking for 'the guy' you keep trying....

I bring this up because I think this is what the best teams do with OL as well.. they draft a OL player every draft. Maybe not 1st or 2nd round, but at least every seaon they dedicate some capital to improving the line be it through competition or just straight replacing guys.

I know DG said he needed to fix the line, but in 2 drafts he took Hernandez in Rd2 and then a 7th round flier on big George.... seems like if you really wanted to rebuild it, you'd have taken maybe 2 guys each year? AND brought in FA as well...

Again... whatever they are doing, isn't working.
RE: RE: I tried explaining this on another thread  
.McL. : 11/11/2019 11:13 am : link
In comment 14675115 GiantsRage2007 said:
Quote:
In comment 14675084 .McL. said:


Quote:


OL represents 23% of theplayers on the field 5 out of 22.

If you go back to 2013 when they took Pugh. The Giants have spent between 13 and 14% of their total draft capital. By 2016, they had an inkling that the Pugh and Richburg picks weren't panning out as hoped. And Flowers had not looked good as a rookie. SO what did they do as far as "investing" in the position. Since Flowers, they have "invested" less than 4% of their draft capital on the OL. Gettleman knowing he needed 5 new OL, has "invested" only 8%.

So when people say that the Giants have "invested" enough, don't kid yourself. The Giants have barely invested in the position group as a whole at all. This is what you get when you don't draft OL.

Look at it this way. even if Pugh made it as an RT, Richburg as a C, Flowers an an LT, and Hernandez as a G, the team would still be short a G, and have some aging vets in Pugh and Richburg that would need replacement. And the team would have 0 depth.

Don't buy the narrative that the Giants have made the appropriate investment in the OL. They haven't.



I had read something that Bill Polian said to draft a qb in every draft, late round, or whenever... cause you can never have a good enough backup qb and you can trade him for an asset, and when you're looking for 'the guy' you keep trying....

I bring this up because I think this is what the best teams do with OL as well.. they draft a OL player every draft. Maybe not 1st or 2nd round, but at least every seaon they dedicate some capital to improving the line be it through competition or just straight replacing guys.

I know DG said he needed to fix the line, but in 2 drafts he took Hernandez in Rd2 and then a 7th round flier on big George.... seems like if you really wanted to rebuild it, you'd have taken maybe 2 guys each year? AND brought in FA as well...

Again... whatever they are doing, isn't working.


I agree with Polian's approach for QBs as to how the OL should be approached. OL players take more time than other positions to develop, and many fail. A good team needs to have a constant pipeline of developing talent. If you hit on too many, you can trade some at a premium to teams like the Giants.
whats the constant?  
Paulie Walnuts : 11/11/2019 11:43 am : link
Chris Mara and the scouting department
I've been ranting like a lunatic since before  
idiotsavant : 11/11/2019 12:03 pm : link
Macadoo that you need coaches who know how to, and often do, on a play to play basis, integrate successful line run action into helping ol outcomes on pass plays.

Ranting that (at that time) shanny then at falcons was one example of this, as a HC prospect.

We STILL have never implemented those concepts whatsoever, since, occasionally under coughlin passing off trap runs or some shit ?

It's the exact same weakness Macadoo had.
Don’t know  
joeinpa : 11/11/2019 12:08 pm : link
But getting it fixed will put this team back on the winning path
RE: I tried explaining this on another thread  
Platos : 11/11/2019 1:45 pm : link
In comment 14675084 .McL. said:
Quote:

Don't buy the narrative that the Giants have made the appropriate investment in the OL. They haven't.


correct. I hate that false narrative that "if flowers/pugh etc panned out.."

NO. they were the wrong picks at the wrong time. if we didn't blow so many mid-round picks on project DE's and other bullshit positions that also didn't pan out we wouldn't be in this mess.

we still do it with gettleman, hopefully this year he figures it out.

1 first rounder doesn't make up for the other 4 linemen and 2 7th's definitely don't make solid depth.
Back to the Corner