Is our OL set OR do we need to upgrade OG?

In comment 15281075 Jimmy Googs said:

Quote:

did games 9-12 the NYG would have won the NFCE. The fact is the competition was better, the stakes were higher and they didn’t make the grade. More development needed as we all know...

Because these young guys got a good number of snaps last year with no real camp, well, I have to believe with a full camp they will get it together and perform better.
Is the OL capable of being elite? Probably not this year; however, they could be one of the better run blocking OL's.

In comment 15281127 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

Who knows?

Truth, who knows? Until the pre-season game reports come in and you see what the starting lineups are consistently; until the games; and especially until the first few games are played you won't know what you truly have.

I do predict a strong run blocking unit, especially on the left and behind TE.

In comment 15281150 Zeke's Alibi said:

Quote:

They run block well and pass block poorly, which is fine when you can stay balanced or focus on run game. They aren’t going to look good when we are playing from large deficits. I don’t fault them in that spot. With an improved team, we aren’t going to see them in that situation as much.

Pass blocking poorly is a fatal flaw that will keep the Giants from benefiting from their biggest offseason investments. It’s why per snap he’s lead the league in first quarter turnovers both years.

The Giants have to protect Jones much, much better. He got beat like a bag all season.

In comment 15281007 Zeke's Alibi said:

Quote:

In comment 15281006 christian said: Quote: In comment 15280960 Zeke's Alibi said: Quote: I don’t think that many have expectations of the OL that are high. You don’t need a great OL, but you do need a competent one, or you’re sunk. The OL looked pretty competent last year in the second half of the year. Guard will definitely be a spot they look to upgrade very early next year. I tend to view the season as Coughlin did - over four, four game periods. The first two quarters were a disaster, the third quarter was strong, and the fourth was another bad showing. The Giants couldn’t pass protect or run block we’ll against the better teams on their schedule. They were held under 300 yards in three straight games, and 26 total points. When Jones was banged up, and the Giants really needed to rely on their ground game, it went south. Jones being hurt was a great opportunity for the line to make a difference. That 1-3 showing to end the year was the reason two of those guys are gone. Competent for me would be, can this line put the Giants in the position to win 9 games and have a fair shot at the playoffs. For that outcome I believe Lemieux, Hernandez, and Peart will have to take big leaps forward. I don’t think that’s a high odds proposition. Pinning the offensive woes on them in last 4 games isn’t applicable though. They were bad against the Cards, competent in Browns and Ravens game, and good against the Cowboys. Pinning the offensive woes on them with everything else going on isn’t close to accurately portraying how they did as a unit. Didn’t think the gameplan against Cards did them any favors either.

Excusing them for being lousy throughout the season and then using the excuse they didn't have camp (no team did) while being in the worst conference ever in the modern era and still having a rating by PFF as 31st OL isn't accurately portraying how awful the unit was either.

Is the continue developing the young guys in your system, growth from more time playing as a unit, investments and more consistency in coaching. Those things should all help. How much, no one can say with certainty. The answer can’t always be, go out and sign an established veteran.

without a qualifier.

There's no cause for blind optimism other than that being the path you choose to take.

It’s the only unit on the team without an established veteran, good player. You have 5 positions to fill — I’m surprised the Giants didn’t add a proven player to their presumptive starting 5.

To me it’s a matter of likelihoods. The Giants are banking on Hernandez to have a renaissance, Peart, and Lemieux to develop into solid starters in their second year. All under a first time NFL position coach.

If the Giant field a competent offensive line this year, it’s nothing short of a miracle.

to go 5-1 in the division if not better. Three of the OL were either rookies or playing a new position. A big factor in OL's development is knowing your opponent and tape is far different than actual experience. They have that now. I think Thomas in particular will benefit.

You also don't need all five lineman to be studs. You need some to stand out. You can scheme to help others provided you get serviceable effort. Offense can dictate so they have the advantage here. Don't forget the impact that Rudolph will have on the OL as well. This will help Peart.

Excusing them for being lousy throughout the season and then using the excuse they didn't have camp (no team did) while being in the worst conference ever in the modern era and still having a rating by PFF as 31st OL isn't accurately portraying how awful the unit was either.

Other teams missed a pre-season, but they didn't have a new coaching staff, new systems and a line that had never played together before.
Missing pre-season hurt the Giants much more than anyone else where there wasn't a new coaching staff.
They played two rookies and a guy new to his position.
Fleming was new and only Hernandez was a hold over.
That's close to the perfect Storm.
Of all units the O line is dependent on continuity. And they barely had time for introductions ...good thing they wear the names on the jersey.
They also featured a tight end that couldn't block and that didn't help.
Let's give them a pre-season, a year within the same system, some help at the skill positions and then make judgements.

to add to the unit, and I thought they would. Seems the guy from the Texans might have been the fallback. Turner is still out there. At this point, wouldn't think they'd want him to miss OTAs and training camp because of the message it sends.

In comment 15281728 Grizz99 said:

Quote:

Other teams missed a pre-season, but they didn't have a new coaching staff, new systems and a line that had never played together before. Missing pre-season hurt the Giants much more than anyone else where there wasn't a new coaching staff. They played two rookies and a guy new to his position. Fleming was new and only Hernandez was a hold over. That's close to the perfect Storm. Of all units the O line is dependent on continuity. And they barely had time for introductions ...good thing they wear the names on the jersey. They also featured a tight end that couldn't block and that didn't help. Let's give them a pre-season, a year within the same system, some help at the skill positions and then make judgements.

1-- So other teams with new coaching staffs can never be successful? In other words- more excuses from posters like grizz.

2-- The OL that "never played before" is ripe for the same excuse this year - after another bad season if it happens we can count on grizz and others will say the following season that "This is actually year 1 with one of the most young OL's- so wait until 2022."

3-- A full season doesn't count. It's only the games that the unbias Giants fan- grizz wants to count that matter.

4-- Giants lose their best OL from last year. So for Grizz and posters like him - let's not count that he's gone instead let's cherry pick games grizz wants to count and and use that data and pretend that it's relevant despite they are now missing last year's best OLineman.

5-- Our division was a historic joke. But let's pretend like it wasn't and use "awww poor baby" excuse.

6-- What next from posters like grizz? The OL and Giants have to play too many night games or too many late 4:00 games? It's too windy? Too cold?

Please let's stop with the excuses. We're better than that.

In comment 15282033 giantstock said:

Quote:

In comment 15281728 Grizz99 said: Quote: Other teams missed a pre-season, but they didn't have a new coaching staff, new systems and a line that had never played together before. Missing pre-season hurt the Giants much more than anyone else where there wasn't a new coaching staff. They played two rookies and a guy new to his position. Fleming was new and only Hernandez was a hold over. That's close to the perfect Storm. Of all units the O line is dependent on continuity. And they barely had time for introductions ...good thing they wear the names on the jersey. They also featured a tight end that couldn't block and that didn't help. Let's give them a pre-season, a year within the same system, some help at the skill positions and then make judgements. 1-- So other teams with new coaching staffs can never be successful? In other words- more excuses from posters like grizz. 2-- The OL that "never played before" is ripe for the same excuse this year - after another bad season if it happens we can count on grizz and others will say the following season that "This is actually year 1 with one of the most young OL's- so wait until 2022." 3-- A full season doesn't count. It's only the games that the unbias Giants fan- grizz wants to count that matter. 4-- Giants lose their best OL from last year. So for Grizz and posters like him - let's not count that he's gone instead let's cherry pick games grizz wants to count and and use that data and pretend that it's relevant despite they are now missing last year's best OLineman. 5-- Our division was a historic joke. But let's pretend like it wasn't and use "awww poor baby" excuse. 6-- What next from posters like grizz? The OL and Giants have to play too many night games or too many late 4:00 games? It's too windy? Too cold? Please let's stop with the excuses. We're better than that.

I'm not sure excuses is the right word but some facts are clear: this was a young OL with no real camp working a new system and we sucked. Sucked really bad at times and gave D. Jones and our run game no chance.

I expect more continuity and more push in the run game this year. There will be breakdowns as this is again still a young OL but as the season progresses I see the potential of our being a top third run blocking unit and perhaps average pass protect for an overall slightly above average OL. But we must stay healthy and develop that necessary continuity to achieve victory.

In comment 15282826 SGMen said:

Quote:

In comment 15282033 giantstock said: Quote: In comment 15281728 Grizz99 said: Quote: I'm not sure excuses is the right word but some facts are clear: this was a young OL with no real camp working a new system and we sucked. Sucked really bad at times and gave D. Jones and our run game no chance. I expect more continuity and more push in the run game this year. There will be breakdowns as this is again still a young OL but as the season progresses I see the potential of our being a top third run blocking unit and perhaps average pass protect for an overall slightly above average OL. But we must stay healthy and develop that necessary continuity to achieve victory.

I think "excuses" is in part. Again I'll say other teams didn't have camp too. And again- the Giants played in a division that was historically bad.

Once Barkley went down and as season progressed it was obvious that the Giants were a crappy team, where was the concern of the Giants running game? How hard were you game-planning Gallman vs Jones?

Yes it-s possible the everything could be okay. But it is also possible that losing your best OLinemen and playing teams that now will focus again on stopping Barkley while forcing Jones to beat them will keep Giants from not being good yet again. Wouldn't your 1st priority be to worry about jones and do what you can to rattle him in a passing league?

Also- other teams will have continuity too. Do you recall when Giants first got Solder and Omamweh (the thought by many on here was that at least Omammweh can play i.e. availability - vs Pugh) and moved Flowers to RT? What was the thought? That we'd be better right? Then the next year wasn't their the excuse that Solder was hurt and other excuses for him? And their was the thought that now we're better at RG and RT too?

And whether we were better or weren't - there was always excuses but at some point if they were actually better - they still sucked, right? So-- isn't it possible that this year - that we could see an improvement (despite missing last year's best OLieman) but the degree that they improve still shows that they still aren't good?

For example, when Giants beat Seattle the prevalent thought was "That game shows what we are." While what do you think fans from Seattle think? They either think it was a major letdown game that it was primarily their team didn't come ready to play or they just needed this year to tweak a minor issue or two and now this year they felt they fixed it. Now won't they be talking about "continuity" etc the same here the Giants fans are talking?

This is a pretty fair post.

The optimism in this OL, versus the recent past ones, has to be mostly around if there is true promise in the young guys to grow into plus-type players in their roles.

Guys like Solder, Omameh, Fleming and even Zeitler for instance had already reached whatever ceilings they had before becoming NY Giants. And unfortunately the only thing that occurred was a decline in their play while on our roster. Any optimism expressed with them would have to have been a turnaround or even stabilization in their career progression which is not typical.

We have seen Thomas, Gates, Lemeiux and even some of Peart play already. They had a lot to learn, had plenty of bumps in the road last season and now the question is there upward potential in all of their respective talents now that 2020 is behind them. And is that potential enough to get them on a career progression path that turns them into plus-type players.

I don't think it has to be all of them, but there needs to be some reasonable mixture of plus and average players on the 5-man OL. And certainly no more than one below average type.

discussing the OL is basically a daily thread now, but no matter what is discussed here isn't going to change what will happen. we don't even know what should or shouldn't be done, and frankly, even the speculation is made without the right information.

When we ask if the OL should be upgraded, it not only assumes that a new addition would be an upgrade, but that the player he's replacing is relegated to being a backup or no longer on the team. That's a decision only the coaches can know and make. DG drafted Trai Turner. If there was interest in bringing him in now, it would have been done or the coaches could have said they don't need him brought in now.

Replacing Thomas, Lemieux, Hernandez, Gates or Peart means that a young player will have his growth retarded, if the coaches believe each of those players can improve. And because of that, using the term "upgrade" from a fan's perspective can only be based on our perception of a player who we know little to nothing about. I've heard people say Turner is an immediate upgrade and I have no idea if that's true. The flipside is the people saying that have no idea either.

This doesn't have to be blind faith in the coaches on this topic, but it truly is an argument almost every fan is too ignorant to state with any sort of competence.

In comment 15282990 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

discussing the OL is basically a daily thread now, but no matter what is discussed here isn't going to change what will happen.

Thanks for the ground breaking insights Big Red. Here some us were thinking what we discussed on BBI was going to change what the Giants did! The pressure is o.f.f.

In comment 15282990 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

discussing the OL is basically a daily thread now, but no matter what is discussed here isn't going to change what will happen. we don't even know what should or shouldn't be done, and frankly, even the speculation is made without the right information. When we ask if the OL should be upgraded, it not only assumes that a new addition would be an upgrade, but that the player he's replacing is relegated to being a backup or no longer on the team. That's a decision only the coaches can know and make. DG drafted Trai Turner. If there was interest in bringing him in now, it would have been done or the coaches could have said they don't need him brought in now. Replacing Thomas, Lemieux, Hernandez, Gates or Peart means that a young player will have his growth retarded, if the coaches believe each of those players can improve. And because of that, using the term "upgrade" from a fan's perspective can only be based on our perception of a player who we know little to nothing about. I've heard people say Turner is an immediate upgrade and I have no idea if that's true. The flipside is the people saying that have no idea either. This doesn't have to be blind faith in the coaches on this topic, but it truly is an argument almost every fan is too ignorant to state with any sort of competence.

I think the easiest answer is that we will be going with the young group posted above:

Thomas-Lemiuex-Gates-Hernandez-Peart - a very young group indeed but there is surely potential. In Judge and the coaches I believe.

But I think every team has its eyes open to upgrading if they can. To me Hernandez is the weak link until proven otherwise.

While he has struggled, he has rings and NFL experience. He seems like a leader and hopefully he has another year in the gas tank to serve as our swing tackle.

Thomas-Lemiuex-Gates-Hernandez-Peart - may this group stay healthy and whole through the year to the point where they are dominant by year end when it counts the most.