mansquatch wrote:Listening to the radio this AM, Mike Florio was discussing with Paul Allen how Offensive Line woes are common across the league right now. That doesn’t help us, but perhaps this is a trend in the league and not just an issue we have?
That's a complex question. It could go as deep as the development/training of bigger/faster defensive linemen compared to injuries and talent.
I get the general view that solid OL play is important, but in terms of an offense is the difference between and “average” NFL OL and a great one determined simply by the talent of the guys blocking or is it a function of the guys they are blocking for? I’m sure it is a mix of both, but take a few examples. The 49ers had a great OL, maybe the best in football, and Kaepernick was never been more than average. By contrast, GB has never invested much in their OL and they are routinely the #1 offense.
I think, like you elude to, they're symbiotic. I think the truly elite quarterbacks can almost transcend most "problems" (meaning perhaps a lack of quality receivers and/or offensive line). The better, more accurate the decision-maker behind center, the better the offense will fare. Conversely, a guy that takes longer to make a decision and release the ball is going to need a "better", more consistent offensive line to find an open receiver. This, of course, is just taking into account pass-blocking.
Spotrac.com is a good site to look at things like this. For example, in 2015 the Vikings are #13 in amount allocated to the offensive line. For comparison, Green Bay is #14. The Jets are #1 (followed by the Raiders, Cardinals and Redskins).
Here are the top-5-spending offensive lines the last couple of years (by cap dollars):
2014: Redskins, Jets, Saints, Broncos, Seahawks (MIN: #18, GB: #14, SF #10)
2013: Seahawks, Buccaneers, Titans, Redskins, Browns (MIN: #10, GB #20, SF #18)
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/2 ... sive-line/
What jumps out here to me is that some teams invest heavily and end up having dynamic offenses (Denver, Seattle, New Orleans), while others spend a lot on the offensive line but have offenses in the lower-tier of the league. Of course there are variables in play (did a guy get a ton of cash via free agency and stopped trying? Was there a coaching change and the expensive guys had a hard time adapting or weren't a schematic fit? Are you getting high-quality line play from guys still on their first/rookie contracts?) and these can't be taken at face value but it provides a bit of information as far as a team's "value" of having a "good" offensive line. Something to keep in mind that Seattle has dropped to #29 this year and Denver to #26 (8.58 & 9.83% of cap dollars allocated, respectively) and I expect both to still have productive offenses.
I’m sure there are counter examples, but I’m not sure having issues here means we are DOA. It certainly isn’t going to help us, but I do not think it means we are just done for.
I don't think we're "done for" either, but a lot hinges on their play as the old saying goes: "Everything starts up front." Teddy has shown that he can perform well under pressure, but I don't think it's a stretch to pine for offensive line play like we've all seen the Patriots have in years past when Brady literally can STAND STILL for seemingly five seconds and wait for someone to get open. The more time to throw, the bigger the holes the RB can run through the better. And the fewer hits on "Skinny Knees" Teddy, the better as well. Not only from a physical but psychological standpoint. You do often wonder how many quarterbacks are "ruined" by absorbing so many hits, especially early in their careers. That's not to say that's all on line line if they perpetually hold onto the ball too long. However I'm not sure how much of a fluke it was that Romo had his best year behind what many considered to be the best offensive line in football. The Cowboys were #8 last year and #23 this year in terms of cap space allocated to that position group.
Another question, why do teams let blue chip OL like Iupati or Jake Long walk if they are so critical to the success of an offense? Did Steve Hutchinson break Seattle, much less make the Vikings elite when he shifted teams?
I think it really is a case-by-case basis. In the case of Long, he has an extensive injury history. But it was reported he was offered more money from Miami than he signed for in St. Louis but he ultimately chose St. Louis because of "a disconnect with the front office." But a real effort was made by the Dolphins to retain him, signaling their understanding he was a key player for them. Iupati, as is the case almost universally these days, was looking for a big payday and sounds like he priced himself out of their plans (I just looked and the 49ers have about $10 of 2015 cap space remaining and Iupati signed a five-year, $40 million contract with $22.5 million guaranteed, including a $6 million signing bonus and an initial roster bonus of $4 million. Another $5 million is available through incentives). And perhaps he wanted out of the train wreck that seems to be San Francisco (understandably).
But, ultimately, guys like Long, Iupati, etc. are just one of the five guys on the line. He might shore up his guard position but if the tackle position is still a dumpster fire, he may have done his job but the stat sheet will still be filled with hurries/sacks. It's also important to remember that even if a team invests a lot in their offensive line, their top guys could end up injured so it will appear on the stat sheet that the team isn't getting the return when they may not be operating at full strength.
I think we a greater share of issues along the OL, but I’m not 100% sold on the doom and gloom.
Sorry for the long reply. Ultimately I don't think there's a lot of gloom (yet...zero regular season sacks given up!) but I don't think anyone disagrees that the offensive line isn't important. The Vikings were a team with significant issues last year who did very little to fix them over the offseason. Their depth is troubling. Arguably their best offensive lineman (Loadholt) is out for the season. They replaced him with a fourth-round rookie. Their second-best (or best), Sullivan, has missed like 13 straight practices. Kalil is a huge wild card that is coming off two consecutive sub-par seasons (conservatively a bottom-10 NFL starting left tackle). Harris is a converted tackle that has started all of 17 games (none at guard I don't think). As a unit they ranked 28th in average yards per carry (3.0) this preseason (yes, without Peterson) and generated very little running room.
There seems to be more reasons for worry than for optimism with this group. At least from my perspective.