TAinLack. Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 True. But this is the only brand new thread on the same topic. LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 If only that was as clever as you think it is. Perhaps not, but maybe because I used all of your own words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 (edited) A popular myth that bounces around here from time to time is that the offensive line isn't important because it's really the QB that makes the difference. Certainly a good QB can sometimes mask an offensive line's deficiencies, just as sometimes the ugly guy gets the girl or the 120 lb guy beats up the 220 lb guy. But usually the ugly guy watches the hot girl make out with the pretty boy, the 220 lb guy pounds the 120 lb guy's face, and the QB behind the pourous O-line gets his ass handed to him. Let's take a few arguments one by one: 1. A great O-line doesn't matter, but a strong pass rush can make all the difference. So a great pass rusher can make all the difference but a guy who can nullify that pass rusher's impact is a waste? If you can't see the internal inconsistency in that statement I'm sure I can't help you. 2. But Aaron Rogers and Big Ben had success without great lines. Not only are those 2 of the most well equipped QBs to play behind a bad line, (Both are fairly mobile, Ben is had to bring down, and Rogers has a quick release and plays in a quick release offense) their teams have suffered when their linemen have been injured. Both teams have invested heavily in O-line in recent years for that very reason. You don't see Brees or Brady playing behind scrubs. 3. But the teams with the best LTs like the Dolphins and Browns suck. Right, but LT is one position on a line of 5 players. No one in the history of the world [who doesn't have a chronic drooling problem] has ever claimed that a good LT is a panacea. An LT can't make a QB accurate or get a WR open. However he can stop a pass rusher from taking the QBs head off before the play develops. 4. But look at what round SB LTs have been taken. Look at what round lots of SB positions have been drafted. Justin Tuck was drafted in the 3rd and Osi Umenyiora in the 2nd. Victor Cruz and Wes Welker went undrafted. Jared Allen wasn't in the SB but he's the best pass rusher in the game and he was taken in the 4th. Good teams usually have good offensive lines regardless of where their LT was drafted. Edited March 19, 2012 by Trader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 We need us some offensive line dog gammit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted March 19, 2012 Author Share Posted March 19, 2012 Last year the Jets D physically beat up our offense. Adding a big tough physical O-lineman (regardless of rd) would definitely help on that front. We've got good players buy other than Wood I don't know that any of these guys are all that physically imposing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 There are 700 threads regarding this topic already. And in every one you have gon eon the record as saying you do not think OL is as important as WR or another position. Yet anyone who knows anything about football , knows that no other single group(OL=5 guys) controls the game more then them. Its that simple. If you have a great Oline you have a good team. You can run and pass. You allow your defense to rest. You dictate the pace of the game. Look no further then the NFL leading rusher of all time. E. Smith played behind the greatest oline for a long time. He did not have the talent Barry Sanders had. IMHO if you pick the right OT at 10, this team is much better then a wr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 A popular myth that bounces around here from time to time is that the offensive line isn't important because it's really the QB that makes the difference. Certainly a good QB can sometimes mask an offensive line's deficiencies, just as sometimes the ugly guy gets the girl or the 120 lb guy beats up the 220 lb guy. But usually the ugly guy watches the hot girl make out with the pretty boy, the 220 lb guy pounds the 120 lb guy's face, and the QB behind the pourous O-line gets his ass handed to him. Let's take a few arguments one by one: 1. A great O-line doesn't matter, but a strong pass rush can make all the difference. So a great pass rusher can make all the difference but a guy who can nullify that pass rusher's impact is a waste? If you can't see the internal inconsistency in that statement I'm sure I can't help you. 2. But Aaron Rogers and Big Ben had success without great lines. Not only are those 2 of the most well equipped QBs to play behind a bad line, (Both are fairly mobile, Ben is had to bring down, and Rogers has a quick release and plays in a quick release offense) their teams have suffered when their linemen have been injured. Both teams have invested heavily in O-line in recent years for that very reason. You don't see Brees or Brady playing behind scrubs. 3. But the teams with the best LTs like the Dolphins and Browns suck. Right, but LT is one position on a line of 5 players. No one in the history of the world [who doesn't have a chronic drooling problem] has ever claimed that a good LT is a panacea. An LT can't make a QB accurate or get a WR open. However he can stop a pass rusher from taking the QBs head off before the play develops. 4. But look at what round SB LTs have been taken. Look at what round lots of SB positions have been drafted. Justin Tuck was drafted in the 3rd and Osi Umenyiora in the 2nd. Victor Cruz and Wes Welker went undrafted. Jared Allen wasn't in the SB but he's the best pass rusher in the game and he was taken in the 4th. Good teams usually have good offensive lines regardless of where their LT was drafted. Very good post! I'd like to expand on your point #3. A good offensive line provides good run blocking and (more importantly) good pass protection. A guy like Trent Dilfer isn't going to produce all that much anyway, whether you give him good pass protection or not. With a guy like him under center, much of the potential benefit of a good OL is wasted. But if you give a guy like Kurt Warner good pass protection, he will physically destroy the opposing defense! The combination of an elite QB and good pass protection is a very potent one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 And in every one you have gon eon the record as saying you do not think OL is as important as WR or another position. Yet anyone who knows anything about football , knows that no other single group(OL=5 guys) controls the game more then them. Its that simple. If you have a great Oline you have a good team. You can run and pass. You allow your defense to rest. You dictate the pace of the game. Look no further then the NFL leading rusher of all time. E. Smith played behind the greatest oline for a long time. He did not have the talent Barry Sanders had. IMHO if you pick the right OT at 10, this team is much better then a wr. I'm generally in agreement with Bill from NYC's posts about the importance of the offensive line. Even so, I think your post goes a little too far! A good or even great OL, alone, doesn't guarantee you the ability to pass, or that you'll have a good team. In 1998, the Rams had the Greatest Show on Turf--one of the best offenses the NFL had ever seen. Their OL was anchored by Hall of Fame LT Orlando Pace. They had a good RB in Marshall Faulk. In 2000, the Ravens had an offense which went five straight games without scoring a touchdown. They also had a very good OL, anchored by a Hall of Fame-level LT Jon Ogden. They had a good RB in Jamal Lewis. Both teams' OLs provided good to very good pass protection. Giving good pass protection to Tony Banks or Trent Dilfer is like giving $100,000 worth of art equipment to a fifth-rate artist. Most of the potential benefit is wasted. But giving good pass protection to Kurt Warner is like giving that expensive art equipment to Leonardo da Vinci. Every last drop of potential will be squeezed out of it. I'll grant that the '98 Rams had a much better receiving corps than the Ravens of 2000. (Even if the Ravens did have Hall of Fame TE Shannon Sharpe.) But most of the difference between those two teams' offenses was because of QB play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanInUticaTampa Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 The Bills should be all set on the interior with Levitre, Wood, and Urbik, plus Rinehart and Colin Brown. That's a lot of talent and good depth. Agreed. And I think harriston is a good backup for both tackles, but they need a levity starter at lt if they aren't going to sign bell, which is obvious. Otherwise our line is in good shape Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You herd it hear last Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 (edited) At a minimum the Bills need an NFL caliber starting LT and a quality backup C/G due to the uncertainty about Wood I think they got something for that now... sorry, i haven't had an opportunity like that in about 20 months... low hanging fruit (no pun intended there...really) Edited March 19, 2012 by madtowntobuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb62 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 That is why you just need to draft players that are great at any position. When the Raiders won the SB it was because you needed two great cover corners. When the Ravens won "D" wins SB's, when the 49's won gotta have a Joe Montana, great players at any postion win SB's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Allan in MD Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 A popular myth that bounces around here from time to time is that the offensive line isn't important because it's really the QB that makes the difference. Certainly a good QB can sometimes mask an offensive line's deficiencies, just as sometimes the ugly guy gets the girl or the 120 lb guy beats up the 220 lb guy. But usually the ugly guy watches the hot girl make out with the pretty boy, the 220 lb guy pounds the 120 lb guy's face, and the QB behind the pourous O-line gets his ass handed to him. Let's take a few arguments one by one: 1. A great O-line doesn't matter, but a strong pass rush can make all the difference. So a great pass rusher can make all the difference but a guy who can nullify that pass rusher's impact is a waste? If you can't see the internal inconsistency in that statement I'm sure I can't help you. 2. But Aaron Rogers and Big Ben had success without great lines. Not only are those 2 of the most well equipped QBs to play behind a bad line, (Both are fairly mobile, Ben is had to bring down, and Rogers has a quick release and plays in a quick release offense) their teams have suffered when their linemen have been injured. Both teams have invested heavily in O-line in recent years for that very reason. You don't see Brees or Brady playing behind scrubs. 3. But the teams with the best LTs like the Dolphins and Browns suck. Right, but LT is one position on a line of 5 players. No one in the history of the world [who doesn't have a chronic drooling problem] has ever claimed that a good LT is a panacea. An LT can't make a QB accurate or get a WR open. However he can stop a pass rusher from taking the QBs head off before the play develops. 4. But look at what round SB LTs have been taken. Look at what round lots of SB positions have been drafted. Justin Tuck was drafted in the 3rd and Osi Umenyiora in the 2nd. Victor Cruz and Wes Welker went undrafted. Jared Allen wasn't in the SB but he's the best pass rusher in the game and he was taken in the 4th. Good teams usually have good offensive lines regardless of where their LT was drafted. How is this a popular myth? Anyone with this perspective is either not a fan or quite stupid and not warranting comment. Draft an OT at 10, pleeese. Round two, a linebacker with some fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts