mondry wrote: It'd be one thing if we were like the #1 line in football pre injuries but the bottom line is that they weren't very good to begin with
Injuries have played a huge role in not getting the most out of this line. I'm not sure we've ever seen what the "top" offensive linemen we have on our roster can all do together as a healthy unit.
2012:
LT Matt Kalil (Pro Bowl)/asset
LG: Charlie Johnson (awful) liability
C: John Sullivan (Pro Football Writers Association's All-Pro team)/asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (below average in first seasons starting)/liability
RT: Phil Loadholt (average player at this point, not great in pass protection & above-average run-blocker)/neutral-asset
2013:
LT Matt Kalil: Injury-plagued/liability
LG: Charlie Johnson: liability
C: John Sullivan: asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (improving)/asset
RT: Phil Loadholt (improving)/asset
2014:
LT: Matt Kalil: Injury-plagued/liability
LG: Charlie Johnson (older/awful)/liability
C: John Sullivan (top-5 center)/asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (3 games)/Vladimir Ducasse (awful/liability)
RT: Phil Loadholt (12 games)/Mike Harris (average/neutral)
2015:
LT: Matt Kalil: (healthy-ish): Average/neutral
LG: Brandon Fusco (playing out of primary position): liability
C: Joe Berger: asset
RG: Mike Harris: asset
RT: TJ Clemmings: liability
We have yet to see what a healthy line of Kalil, LG, Sullivan, Fusco/Harris, Loadholt looks like. The LG spot has been a liability since 2009. It's possible that if they shore up the LG spot (and Kalil stays healthy) that the rest of those guys can actually field a good-great unit.
By moving on you can wipe the slate clean. With a new o-line coach we should go all out on getting the guys he wants and rebuild the whole thing if necessary. Chemistry and cohesion shouldn't even be a factor for a line that was mediocre under more ideal circumstances.
I'm not sure how losing two of your top offensive linemen can be considered ideal circumstances. And it's really, really unlikely a team fields the type of change many have advocated over the course of a single offseason. If we see
two new starters come opening day I'd be pretty surprised, actually.
With that said if Sparano likes a guy, then of course we can keep him. But imagine Sparano says he doesn't want any of these guys or half of them or whatever. We gotta make moves to inspire change and stop aiming for "hopefully we can be mediocre" and instead try and be great.
We also must be careful to change for the sake of change. If anything I think what we've also seen are depth limitations. Losing two starters really screwed a lot up. Getting Sullivan and Loadholt back
could be/feel like signing two of the league's top offensive linemen (conservatively top-10 at their respective positions), assuming their full recoveries.