Offensive Line and Winning

[RichH55]

And Moton was on the Franchise Tag - so calling him a FA is relatively unhelpful CBS

[RichH55]

Trent Williams was aquired by the Niners in a trade.

Jensen never hit FA, the GOAT said he wasn't retiring before FA started.

Here is an article saying Williams was an unrestricted FA.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tren ... teams/amp/

You’re right about Jensen. He technically didn’t make FA. I stand corrected.

Found this too:

"According to ESPN's Adam Schefter, Williams also had talks with the Kansas City Chiefs and Chicago Bears prior to returning to San Francisco."

Not going to make Dplank feel any better

[wab]

Here is an article saying Williams was an unrestricted FA.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tren ... teams/amp/

You’re right about Jensen. He technically didn’t make FA. I stand corrected.

Found this too:

"According to ESPN's Adam Schefter, Williams also had talks with the Kansas City Chiefs and Chicago Bears prior to returning to San Francisco."

Not going to make Dplank feel any better

Yeah, there was a brief moment where there was a feeling that Williams might come to the Bears. I also wanted Alex Cappa (who would look pretty ok at RG right now).

[HurricaneBear]

Trent Williams was aquired by the Niners in a trade.

Jensen never hit FA, the GOAT said he wasn't retiring before FA started.

Here is an article saying Williams was an unrestricted FA.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tren ... teams/amp/

You’re right about Jensen. He technically didn’t make FA. I stand corrected.

I thought you meant when the 49ers originally got Trent Williams.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/290 ... iams-49ers

[dplank]

I'll just say this:

If guards grow on trees, then there's no excuse to be starting a guy like Sam Mustipher or Dakota Dozier at RG. Either decent guards are harder to find than this, or Poles simply doesn't care to do anything about it. If his actual plan was to play a rookie draft pick there, I'd think they'd be getting reps with the ones now over Mustipher and Dozier. Dozier is now gone, why not pick up an established vet just in case a rookie doesn't emerge?

[Grizzled]

Premium OTs are drafted high and relatively few hit FA. Premium IOL comes from lower rounds but, then many more of them are drafted lower.

[RichH55]

I'll just say this:

If guards grow on trees, then there's no excuse to be starting a guy like Sam Mustipher or Dakota Dozier at RG. Either decent guards are harder to find than this, or Poles simply doesn't care to do anything about it. If his actual plan was to play a rookie draft pick there, I'd think they'd be getting reps with the ones now over Mustipher and Dozier. Dozier is now gone, why not pick up an established vet just in case a rookie doesn't emerge?

Not unfair

Though there are some guys still out there.

My uneducated guess - they will wait until closer to year.

A) Why do OTAs in the heat when you don't have to?

B) If you are going to be on a 1 year prove it deal - you want to go to a place you have the greatest chance of playing. And right now its silly season / hope springs eternal etc. Ankles are going to get rolled, ACLs torn, promising rookie in June ragdolled in exhibition game once too many times. Starting role and an extra million

[dplank]

I hope you’re right

[RichH55]

I hope you’re right

Ideally a guy will step up and its not even an issue

[dave99]

From the DBB
https://www.dabearsblog.com/2022/danneh ... ins-inside

Perhaps Jenkins can prove to be better than one of or both the other young tackles once pads come on. It seems just as likely that there is something about the way Jenkins moves that has the team doubting his ability. We know from his college tape and the little bit he played last year that Jenkins can move people, but he really struggled in pass protection as a rookie. It was easy to chalk up his rookie struggles as him not being in playing shape after back surgery, but his pre-training camp demotion makes it clear there is something the new Bears staff doesn’t like.

A move inside to guard would minimize Jenkins’ struggles in pass protection and emphasize his physicality. He is similar to Kyle Long in that nobody wants to match up with him in a phone booth, but he may not have the feet or length to match-up outside.

As an aside, it would make sense it only makes for Pace/Nagy to draft an injured RT with plans to move him to the blind side and then have him prosper at RG.

[Rusty Trombagent]

From the DBB
https://www.dabearsblog.com/2022/danneh ... ins-inside

Perhaps Jenkins can prove to be better than one of or both the other young tackles once pads come on. It seems just as likely that there is something about the way Jenkins moves that has the team doubting his ability. We know from his college tape and the little bit he played last year that Jenkins can move people, but he really struggled in pass protection as a rookie. It was easy to chalk up his rookie struggles as him not being in playing shape after back surgery, but his pre-training camp demotion makes it clear there is something the new Bears staff doesn’t like.

A move inside to guard would minimize Jenkins’ struggles in pass protection and emphasize his physicality. He is similar to Kyle Long in that nobody wants to match up with him in a phone booth, but he may not have the feet or length to match-up outside.

As an aside, it would make sense it only makes for Pace/Nagy to draft an injured RT with plans to move him to the blind side and then have him prosper at RG.

This is exactly where my thinking is at. The notion that our coaching staff/braintrust (headed by two ex offensive linemen) cant see his ability because pads arent on feels kind of silly to me.
I'm 100% not ruling out a potential switch to guard, but I think the chances of him contributing at guard THIS SEASON feels like slim to none... or more like "if he's forced into playing guard this season things have gone horribly sideways."

hope i'm wrong!

[Grizzled]

There are OTs drafted to play OT who failed but then moved inside and did well. Jenkins could be the latest and it wouldn't be a failure on the Bears' part, just a misevaluation. Hardly unknown when drafting college players.

[HurricaneBear]

From the DBB
https://www.dabearsblog.com/2022/danneh ... ins-inside

Perhaps Jenkins can prove to be better than one of or both the other young tackles once pads come on. It seems just as likely that there is something about the way Jenkins moves that has the team doubting his ability. We know from his college tape and the little bit he played last year that Jenkins can move people, but he really struggled in pass protection as a rookie. It was easy to chalk up his rookie struggles as him not being in playing shape after back surgery, but his pre-training camp demotion makes it clear there is something the new Bears staff doesn’t like.

A move inside to guard would minimize Jenkins’ struggles in pass protection and emphasize his physicality. He is similar to Kyle Long in that nobody wants to match up with him in a phone booth, but he may not have the feet or length to match-up outside.

As an aside, it would make sense it only makes for Pace/Nagy to draft an injured RT with plans to move him to the blind side and then have him prosper at RG.

Unfortunately, the most fitting end to the Pace/Nagy era would totally be Jenkins being a RG or a bust when they pegged him as a LT with no backup plan.

[dplank]

From the DBB
https://www.dabearsblog.com/2022/danneh ... ins-inside

Perhaps Jenkins can prove to be better than one of or both the other young tackles once pads come on. It seems just as likely that there is something about the way Jenkins moves that has the team doubting his ability. We know from his college tape and the little bit he played last year that Jenkins can move people, but he really struggled in pass protection as a rookie. It was easy to chalk up his rookie struggles as him not being in playing shape after back surgery, but his pre-training camp demotion makes it clear there is something the new Bears staff doesn’t like.

A move inside to guard would minimize Jenkins’ struggles in pass protection and emphasize his physicality. He is similar to Kyle Long in that nobody wants to match up with him in a phone booth, but he may not have the feet or length to match-up outside.

As an aside, it would make sense it only makes for Pace/Nagy to draft an injured RT with plans to move him to the blind side and then have him prosper at RG.

Unfortunately, the most fitting end to the Pace/Nagy era would totally be Jenkins being a RG or a bust when they pegged him as a LT with no backup plan.

Lol

[The Cooler King]

I'm confused about the FO article choice used here which basically gives a big qualifying shrug as to the topic proposed:

Note: the importance of the offensive line is not lost on us. The problem is the time crunch with the regular season about to start, so I did not have time to complete an offensive line study. Unlike the skill positions, we really cannot just focus on one offensive lineman as the whole starting unit needs analyzed. Due to the nature of the position, our data is really just limited to career experience (draft status, seasons played, games started) and adjusted line yards. It is worth noting how the 2008 Steelers, 2011 Giants, 2013 Seahawks, and 2015 Broncos have been accused of having the worst offensive line in the league those years. Three of those teams had a No. 1 defense as well as quarterbacks capable of managing pressure in unique ways. Not much of a study is needed to conclude that the quality of Super Bowl-winning offensive lines was much better in the '90s than in today's game. This is something we could approach at a later date with more time and care.)

[The Cooler King]

This is a pretty interesting article that looks at position groups as it relates to spending. And OL doesn't stick out with spending and results compared to other O positions. But spending, broadly speaking, does.
https://towardsdatascience.com/nfl-team ... bc2859d321

[The Marshall Plan]

This is a pretty interesting article that looks at position groups as it relates to spending. And OL doesn't stick out with spending and results compared to other O positions. But spending, broadly speaking, does.
https://towardsdatascience.com/nfl-team ... bc2859d321

This article compliments what I’m saying rather well.

Go towards the bottom with the horizontal bar chart. Within OL it stratifies the spending by win groups.

The teams with the most wins spent the most on the OL. 19.2%.

[The Cooler King]

This is a pretty interesting article that looks at position groups as it relates to spending. And OL doesn't stick out with spending and results compared to other O positions. But spending, broadly speaking, does.
https://towardsdatascience.com/nfl-team ... bc2859d321

This article compliments what I’m saying rather well.

Go towards the bottom with the horizontal bar chart. Within OL it stratifies the spending by win groups.

The teams with the most wins spent the most on the OL. 19.2%.

Not exactly. The best teams over that period spent the most on every position group, except QB. Relative to other groups, it was a modest overspend, but less than the overspend on TE and RB, relative to the median. More of an overspend than WR though. And those differences disappear in the second group.

The article also shows that as a group, OL make up about 35% of total spending. If we exclude QBs that means they take up a little less than half the cap spend and also play half the spots on the field at a time. So no evidence of a even a league wide belief of any outsized importance.

[dplank]

There’s a lot of ways to skin the cat here. If you land on a good player in the draft, particularly in the lower rounds like we have many of, then you get a nice cost reduction for years. And there’s no reason to spend if you have a highly functional line in place already. For me it’s not just about spending money, it’s about doing whatever it takes to solve it. Pace simply didn’t try hard enough, nor did Angelo.

So if you can get performance without spending - GREAT! But you shouldn’t allow yourself to be bottom barrel for any reason, and if spending (even overspending) is necessary then you do it. Poles IMO is rolling the dice here at both T and RG, not a proven commodity in the bunch. Could it work out? Yes. But it’s a big risk to Fields safety and development, a risk that I think is a mistake.

[HurricaneBear]

There’s a lot of ways to skin the cat here. If you land on a good player in the draft, particularly in the lower rounds like we have many of, then you get a nice cost reduction for years. And there’s no reason to spend if you have a highly functional line in place already. For me it’s not just about spending money, it’s about doing whatever it takes to solve it. Pace simply didn’t try hard enough, nor did Angelo.

So if you can get performance without spending - GREAT! But you shouldn’t allow yourself to be bottom barrel for any reason, and if spending (even overspending) is necessary then you do it. Poles IMO is rolling the dice here at both T and RG, not a proven commodity in the bunch. Could it work out? Yes. But it’s a big risk to Fields safety and development, a risk that I think is a mistake.

I think you nailed everything but your last sentence. Any player could let a surprise rusher free that could end Fields career. IMO the biggest improvement to Fields safety is Fields seeing things quicker and processing better and reading defenses. If he doesnt get better at that he's not the guy anyways and then we probably are drafting a new QB with our top pick next season.

Also a question. Doesnt a strong running game, and I expect the Bears to finish top 3 in rushing attempts this year, lower the impact of a "weaker" offensive line? You played on the line and would know far better than me, doesn't it really help a line like ours to keep pounding the rock? All that "keep the D on their heels" and "lineman like to be moving forward not dropping back in pass protect" that I hear announcers say. My thought is they do that, throw in some play action early in the season, and teams wont be able to just attack our line/QB like they did under Nagy.

EDIT - I do not expect this line to be better than middle of the pack at best for reasons you have outlined. But I also think that is enough for this season.

[wab]

If Fields needs a perfect situation on the OL, he's not the generational QB we all hope he is.

[Heinz D.]

I think you nailed everything but your last sentence. Any player could let a surprise rusher free that could end Fields career. IMO the biggest improvement to Fields safety is Fields seeing things quicker and processing better and reading defenses. If he doesnt get better at that he's not the guy anyways and then we probably are drafting a new QB with our top pick next season.

Absolutely. And a lot of people don't realize that Fields improved in that area last season, even under the questionable tutelage of Nagy. Fields had some pretty underwhelming stats...but a lot of those come from his first few games. Which were not good.

Also a question. Doesnt a strong running game, and I expect the Bears to finish top 3 in rushing attempts this year, lower the impact of a "weaker" offensive line? You played on the line and would know far better than me, doesn't it really help a line like ours to keep pounding the rock? All that "keep the D on their heels" and "lineman like to be moving forward not dropping back in pass protect" that I hear announcers say. My thought is they do that, throw in some play action early in the season, and teams wont be able to just attack our line/QB like they did under Nagy.

And your thought is correct. Everyone is thrilled Nagy is gone, but about half of the fanbase then turns around and has some sort of cognitive disconnect--thinking that Fields rookie performance is somehow unrelated to the guy screwing up the offense. That's silly. I also expect the Bears to run a lot this coming season, and not just in bursts here and there. I think we will see a consistent, and potent, rushing attack. Something Nagy couldn't bring himself to do. And that will help Fields immensely.

I do not expect this line to be better than middle of the pack at best for reasons you have outlined. But I also think that is enough for this season.

I think that's a reasonable forecast, there.

If Fields needs a perfect situation on the OL, he's not the generational QB we all hope he is.

Something for everyone doing pearl-clutching over the O-line to consider. Absolutely true, If Fields is a good QB, he doesn't need the best line in the league. Sure, that would be cool and all, but I don't think it's necessary.

[dplank]

If Fields needs a perfect situation on the OL, he's not the generational QB we all hope he is.

I agree with this sentiment completely. However, I think you are missing the inverse of this logic. That is: No QB can survive an OL situation that looks roughly like the Cleveland game last year, or countless others that looked similar to that disaster. And most certainly not if that OL situation isn't at least offset by having elite weapons to throw to, which we do not have here.

I'm not seeking perfection, I'm seeking to avoid disaster. There's a big difference in those two thoughts. Our OL has disaster POTENTIAL - doesn't mean it will be one, but it has major question marks at 3 positions out of 5. If Mustipher plays like, well, Mustipher and neither Borom nor Jenkins shows anything, it will be a complete disaster. Again, for those that just want to argue - I'm not claiming that I know this is what's going to happen - I'm just being realistic that this is a distinct possibility given where each of these guys are in their careers right now.

[Heinz D.]

I'm not seeking perfection, I'm seeking to avoid disaster. There's a big difference in those two thoughts. Our OL has disaster POTENTIAL - doesn't mean it will be one, but it has major question marks at 3 positions out of 5. If Mustipher plays like, well, Mustipher and neither Borom nor Jenkins shows anything, it will be a complete disaster. Again, for those that just want to argue - I'm not claiming that I know this is what's going to happen - I'm just being realistic that this is a distinct possibility given where each of these guys are in their careers right now.

I think Poles and Flus are hoping that a move to guard in a zone blocking scheme will bring out the best in Mustipher, and that's why he's still on the team, and getting so many reps with the first string. I gotta tell ya...I think they're probably WAY off base with that. (And I imagine that will become clear once the pads are on, but you never know.) If it ends up happening, I pray to the football gods that I'm wrong...but I would be VERY uncomfortable if Mustipher ends up being our starting RG. But at least he wouldn't be at C, I suppose.

[Teddy KGB]

You had me right up until the end.

Spending money on who you deem to be high quality is a recipe for disaster, because the players who ACTUALLY ARE high quality DO NOT HIT THE MARKET, except on VERY rare occasion.

Instead, you end up paying average to slightly above average talent money you would normally ONLY pay those high quality players on YOUR OWN team.

We're not a player or two away from a Super Bowl.

What's your rush?

Besides - you don't BUY the high quality players...

You DRAFT them.

By your logic then nobody should sign a FA ever. You must’ve gotten that from the losers at ChiCitySports.

Great players hit the market all the time.

Armstead
Jensen
Scherff
Trent Williams
Orlando Brown via trade

Just off the top of my head. No I’m not doing yet again another Google search only for you to dismiss it anecdotally without any proof.

It's funny you bring up the garbage heap that is ChyCitysports, when you are behaving exactly as one of their trolls, moving to personal attacks when someone disagrees with your opinion.


Let's see if you can calm down and have a rational discussion.

You can get good players from free agency. The ones you deem high quality likely would not be the ones I deem high quality. You only on rare occasion pick up pro bowlers in free agency.

However there are plenty of decent players but you have to be careful not to overspend otherwise you end up like the 1990s Snyder Redskins who were always spending out their ass on free agents and ending up with a bad team and in cap hell.

There's a time and a place to use free agency and it's best uses are usually in the second and third waves after the spending craze has died down. You can get a lot of very serviceable and very productive players who can help contribute in those rounds of free agency.

But if you are looking for a highly valuable and highly expensive free agent, that free agent better be the final piece you need for a Super bowl because usually there are some severe cap ramifications that come with it.

The Bears are nowhere near that.

Situationally speaking, it makes zero sense for the Bears to go out and spend like crazy this off season. They had a draft. Everyone's getting used to the new system. Matt Nagy was so incompetent that a proper assessment likely could not be completely done so you may end up wasting money on a position that's redundant if you were to spend this off season, and so on and so forth.

Next year will be more interesting and very much a very unique year for the Bears.

I believe they will have far and away the most cap space of any team. They will have a year under this new system to be able to evaluate and see exactly what they need.

So I wouldn't be surprised in an abnormal year where all the players have been evaluated during the 2022 season against what Poles and Flus are trying to do, if the Bears did spend a bit more and front loaded a lot of contracts to fill in some holes going into the 2023 season.

Beyond that we will see. The Bears aren't going anywhere in 2022 anyway. So to get all worked up over what they are doing is stupid. They had their draft and they are going to use this year to evaluate everything.


Have a little patience for a change.

[dplank]

Patience needs to also consider safety and development for our most important asset. That's where I see things differently and this point never seems to get addressed.

[RichH55]

If Fields needs a perfect situation on the OL, he's not the generational QB we all hope he is.

I agree with this sentiment completely. However, I think you are missing the inverse of this logic. That is: No QB can survive an OL situation that looks roughly like the Cleveland game last year, or countless others that looked similar to that disaster. And most certainly not if that OL situation isn't at least offset by having elite weapons to throw to, which we do not have here.

I'm not seeking perfection, I'm seeking to avoid disaster. There's a big difference in those two thoughts. Our OL has disaster POTENTIAL - doesn't mean it will be one, but it has major question marks at 3 positions out of 5. If Mustipher plays like, well, Mustipher and neither Borom nor Jenkins shows anything, it will be a complete disaster. Again, for those that just want to argue - I'm not claiming that I know this is what's going to happen - I'm just being realistic that this is a distinct possibility given where each of these guys are in their careers right now.

He played poorly beyond the Cleveland game though. Not mentioned. (The he played better later in the year is actually not really true. It's 1 half of 1 game that people want to remember and hang their hat on)

OLine last year INCLUDING Cleveland game was like 22nd- 23rd best or so (actually higher on some measures). INCLUDING all of the Mustipher etc. Not mentioned. Including kind of bad RT play. Not mentioned. It was not even a disaster LAST YEAR

Joe Burrow as a Rookie - with a worse OL - Looked good (NO CHASE).. Justin Herbert ditto (First game he basically had hours notice). Joe Burrow with a worse OL last year (Insert your Chase defense here) looked oceans better. Joe Burrow isn't Aaron Rodgers. Neither is Justin Herbert.

We can never address that though. We have to make the excuses ahead of time

Justin Fields took too many Sacks and held the ball too long AT OHIO STATE.

Good luck arguing he didn't have Elite Weapons or a good OL there. That's gonna be an uphill battle.

Saying OL is important and that we can improve ours (TRUE!) - is not the same as this line is a disaster.

[dplank]

We can have a separate thread on this if you want but this type of deviation is how the core discussion melts down. If I start responding to it, Pus and Bearfacts et all will just start yelling at me that I’m jumping all over the place.

I think you are right in some regards and wrong in others so direct me to where you’d like to have that conversation.

To this discussion, there is no sane argument that suggests you can allow protection breakdowns like the Cleveland game without negatively impacting your QB.

[wab]

Patience needs to also consider safety and development for our most important asset. That's where I see things differently and this point never seems to get addressed.

I think I’ve tried to address it. It’s not like he’s going to have free rushers coming at him every play. They are going to lean more heavily on the running game, and the improved route concepts should help Fields not be a sitting duck.

[wab]

Rich is correct though in that Fields has a history of taking sacks and has a history of holding the ball too long. That’s related to the OL discussion as far as how they are perceived.

And not every game was like the Cleveland game.