Offensive Line and Winning

[The Marshall Plan]

There has been some odd back and forth with @dplank and I in one corner and then a cornucopia of other people in the other corner on the issue of the offensive line. Where we stand personnel wise. The importance of high draft picks. High profile FAs. Etc.

Since data is our friend I’ll let that do the talking….

Scroll down to the table labeled “Super Bowl Winning Offenses”.

From 1989 to 2015 the winning team of the Super Bowl had an offense that ranked in the top 10 of the league on average. Is it easier or harder to attain a Top 10 ranking in offense with a crappy OL or an above average to great OL? That answer should be obvious.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat- ... se-part-ii


Go to the bottom 3rd of this page.

Look for “O-Lines Of The Last 5 Super Bowl Winners”. This is from 2019.

Note how the sack rate has been in the top of the league. Then all but one team, the Philadelphia Eagles who won entirely on luck, had adjusted line yards in the middle to top half of the league.

https://edge.twinspires.com/nfl/how-imp ... s-success/

So now, what increases the probability of obtaining an above average or an elite OL?

Cast off FAs, UDFAs and low round draft choices like we’ve been doing for the better part of two decades?

Or….

Spending real money on high quality FAs and using high round draft choices?

Given that, I don’t see how anybody can agree with what Poles, who is former OL, has done so far.

[LacertineForest]

I'm inclined to agree that the approach taken so far is not going to produce great results this year, and why I think 6 wins is about where this team ends up.

However, I think Poles has a long-term vision that will start to really take shape next year. I think he would have been more aggressive in drafting lineman at higher picks of he felt the value was there, but knowing where this team is now and all of its needs, he smartly selected high-value picks in areas of need (hard not to qualify for that as basically everywhere was an area of need).

Spending money on FA lineman didn't make a ton of sense, yet, unless they found a young guy who they felt like would be a cornerstone for the franchise. I think Poles is realistic on the ceiling for this team and may even be banking on that to position himself where he wants for next year's draft. The more you invest to win today, the more you might hurt those chances to win tomorrow. I think after we see what they have this year, Poles will push forward with the plan to truly rebuild the line.

Maybe I am completely off on this and Poles really thinks this line can be good - I don't know the game nearly as well as most of the others around here, and I could just be taking out of my ass.

Everyone wants to see this thing fixed right away, but we're going to have to be patient. The Bears had a shit roster, low draft capital, and no salary cap room. Poles had to burn it all down and see what was left before he can rebuild. We're still just getting started.

[dplank]

Good post Lacertine, the only part I’d challenge is your take on spending FA money, yet. I just posted this on another thread so I’ll put the short version here.

Free agents at need positions don’t magically appear every off season or when it’s convenient for our rebuild. Armstead was available this year, and now is off the market for the next 5 years - he gone. So while it would be perfect had he been available next year, he wasn’t, so I’d have secured him this year and he’s still have 4 years in our “window”, plus would benefit in 2022 by getting acclimated to Fields / Monty AND would also have a side benefit for Fields 2022 safety and development.

I’m less upset by his draft, I get what he did and like it. Gordon and Brisker seemed to be a significantly higher grade than any OL in those slots AND were needs as well. So really, I get it. I could quibble over Jones in rd 3 but I like him too. That said, I get annoyed when homers start forecasting greatness from 5th and 6th round draft choices. It happens, yes, but not very frequently as a % over time.

[Grizzled]

Top OTs typically come out of the 1st round. Occassionally we see a deal go down like an Orland Brown or another top OT being traded. Just as infrequently a top OT hits the FA market. I don't know if Armstead took a deal predicated on playing time, which I doubt; there are always more teams looking for top OTs than them being available. So I'm not surprised Poles passed on him. I wouldn't be surprised if he takes one high next year if this year's OL combinations don't work out as hoped.

[LacertineForest]

Good post Lacertine, the only part I’d challenge is your take on spending FA money, yet. I just posted this on another thread so I’ll put the short version here.

Free agents at need positions don’t magically appear every off season or when it’s convenient for our rebuild. Armstead was available this year, and now is off the market for the next 5 years - he gone. So while it would be perfect had he been available next year, he wasn’t, so I’d have secured him this year and he’s still have 4 years in our “window”, plus would benefit in 2022 by getting acclimated to Fields / Monty AND would also have a side benefit for Fields 2022 safety and development.

I’m less upset by his draft, I get what he did and like it. Gordon and Brisker seemed to be a significantly higher grade than any OL in those slots AND were needs as well. So really, I get it. I could quibble over Jones in rd 3 but I like him too. That said, I get annoyed when homers start forecasting greatness from 5th and 6th round draft choices. It happens, yes, but not very frequently as a % over time.

I agree with you there about Armstead (I haven't been following along - were there reports of even any interest from the Bears?), but it would have made a lot of sense to at least secure one piece this year. I can only guess that Poles felt like he was too old, and he didn't want to give up that much money for a 30-year-old when we're still so far away. That being said, unless Poles is going to make additional 1st round draft picks start appearing or Braxton Jones / someone else on the roster can actually be that OT for us, it's a tall order to do without bending a bit on your requirements (age, salary, etc).

[LacertineForest]

I wouldn't be surprised if he takes one high next year if this year's OL combinations don't work out as hoped.

If we're in that situation and he doesn't take one high next year, then yikes. Then I think it's fair to start sounding the alarm bells.

[Kylo Bearen]

I’m less upset by his draft, I get what he did and like it. Gordon and Brisker seemed to be a significantly higher grade than any OL in those slots AND were needs as well. So really, I get it. I could quibble over Jones in rd 3 but I like him too. That said, I get annoyed when homers start forecasting greatness from 5th and 6th round draft choices. It happens, yes, but not very frequently as a % over time.

Its better to have the second to third best safety and/or corner coming out the draft than fifteenth best OT. The more high ranked caliber player will help the team moreso than a mediocre one.

While offensive line and receiver are positions of need so to was the secondary. Now they've become a strength for the team

[Teddy KGB]

There has been some odd back and forth with @dplank and I in one corner and then a cornucopia of other people in the other corner on the issue of the offensive line. Where we stand personnel wise. The importance of high draft picks. High profile FAs. Etc.

Since data is our friend I’ll let that do the talking….

Scroll down to the table labeled “Super Bowl Winning Offenses”.

From 1989 to 2015 the winning team of the Super Bowl had an offense that ranked in the top 10 of the league on average. Is it easier or harder to attain a Top 10 ranking in offense with a crappy OL or an above average to great OL? That answer should be obvious.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat- ... se-part-ii


Go to the bottom 3rd of this page.

Look for “O-Lines Of The Last 5 Super Bowl Winners”. This is from 2019.

Note how the sack rate has been in the top of the league. Then all but one team, the Philadelphia Eagles who won entirely on luck, had adjusted line yards in the middle to top half of the league.

https://edge.twinspires.com/nfl/how-imp ... s-success/

So now, what increases the probability of obtaining an above average or an elite OL?

Cast off FAs, UDFAs and low round draft choices like we’ve been doing for the better part of two decades?

Or….

Spending real money on high quality FAs and using high round draft choices?

Given that, I don’t see how anybody can agree with what Poles, who is former OL, has done so far.

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.

[Moriarty]

I’m less upset by his draft, I get what he did and like it. Gordon and Brisker seemed to be a significantly higher grade than any OL in those slots AND were needs as well. So really, I get it. I could quibble over Jones in rd 3 but I like him too. That said, I get annoyed when homers start forecasting greatness from 5th and 6th round draft choices. It happens, yes, but not very frequently as a % over time.

Its better to have the second to third best safety and/or corner coming out the draft than fifteenth best OT. The more high ranked caliber player will help the team moreso than a mediocre one.

While there's some value to that general philosophy, in this particular case, there were only 5 OTs and 4 IOL off the board when the Bears drafted, while there were already 9 CBs taken. So it's not like they got an elite corner prospect and would have been stuck with a schmuck at OL.

[HurricaneBear]

There has been some odd back and forth with @dplank and I in one corner and then a cornucopia of other people in the other corner on the issue of the offensive line. Where we stand personnel wise. The importance of high draft picks. High profile FAs. Etc.

Since data is our friend I’ll let that do the talking….

Scroll down to the table labeled “Super Bowl Winning Offenses”.

From 1989 to 2015 the winning team of the Super Bowl had an offense that ranked in the top 10 of the league on average. Is it easier or harder to attain a Top 10 ranking in offense with a crappy OL or an above average to great OL? That answer should be obvious.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat- ... se-part-ii


Go to the bottom 3rd of this page.

Look for “O-Lines Of The Last 5 Super Bowl Winners”. This is from 2019.

Note how the sack rate has been in the top of the league. Then all but one team, the Philadelphia Eagles who won entirely on luck, had adjusted line yards in the middle to top half of the league.

https://edge.twinspires.com/nfl/how-imp ... s-success/

So now, what increases the probability of obtaining an above average or an elite OL?

Cast off FAs, UDFAs and low round draft choices like we’ve been doing for the better part of two decades?

Or….

Spending real money on high quality FAs and using high round draft choices?

Given that, I don’t see how anybody can agree with what Poles, who is former OL, has done so far.

I agree with you that their needs to be more focus on the offensive line in Chicago.

Could you tell me out of those Super Bowl winning lines, how many of those players were first round draft choices? Second? Maybe I am wrong but I'm thinking it is less than you would think.

Armstead which has been brought up many times was a 3rd round pick.

Ryan Jensen who myself and dplank both wanted was a 6th round pick.

Ryan Bates who was heavily debated and coveted here this offseason? undrafted

Offensive line is one of the positions where lower round players can make a name from themselves. There are far more factors to what makes up a good offensive line than you are selling here. Philosophy and scheme are both important as well as coaching since the offensive line unlike any other position group needs to work as 1. Poles has seem to put effort into that. It is still to be determined if he has added talent or not.

[Stormtrooper]

Its obviously not a short term rebuilding plan by those in charge. That's ok on the face of it, and do think the OL can perform better than some think they will. Wishful thinking? Yeah probably but hell what else is there to do but hope?

Regardless, I think next year's draft we are going to hit OL hard.

[The Marshall Plan]

There has been some odd back and forth with @dplank and I in one corner and then a cornucopia of other people in the other corner on the issue of the offensive line. Where we stand personnel wise. The importance of high draft picks. High profile FAs. Etc.

Since data is our friend I’ll let that do the talking….

Scroll down to the table labeled “Super Bowl Winning Offenses”.

From 1989 to 2015 the winning team of the Super Bowl had an offense that ranked in the top 10 of the league on average. Is it easier or harder to attain a Top 10 ranking in offense with a crappy OL or an above average to great OL? That answer should be obvious.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat- ... se-part-ii


Go to the bottom 3rd of this page.

Look for “O-Lines Of The Last 5 Super Bowl Winners”. This is from 2019.

Note how the sack rate has been in the top of the league. Then all but one team, the Philadelphia Eagles who won entirely on luck, had adjusted line yards in the middle to top half of the league.

https://edge.twinspires.com/nfl/how-imp ... s-success/

So now, what increases the probability of obtaining an above average or an elite OL?

Cast off FAs, UDFAs and low round draft choices like we’ve been doing for the better part of two decades?

Or….

Spending real money on high quality FAs and using high round draft choices?

Given that, I don’t see how anybody can agree with what Poles, who is former OL, has done so far.

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.

[The Marshall Plan]

There has been some odd back and forth with @dplank and I in one corner and then a cornucopia of other people in the other corner on the issue of the offensive line. Where we stand personnel wise. The importance of high draft picks. High profile FAs. Etc.

Since data is our friend I’ll let that do the talking….

Scroll down to the table labeled “Super Bowl Winning Offenses”.

From 1989 to 2015 the winning team of the Super Bowl had an offense that ranked in the top 10 of the league on average. Is it easier or harder to attain a Top 10 ranking in offense with a crappy OL or an above average to great OL? That answer should be obvious.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat- ... se-part-ii


Go to the bottom 3rd of this page.

Look for “O-Lines Of The Last 5 Super Bowl Winners”. This is from 2019.

Note how the sack rate has been in the top of the league. Then all but one team, the Philadelphia Eagles who won entirely on luck, had adjusted line yards in the middle to top half of the league.

https://edge.twinspires.com/nfl/how-imp ... s-success/

So now, what increases the probability of obtaining an above average or an elite OL?

Cast off FAs, UDFAs and low round draft choices like we’ve been doing for the better part of two decades?

Or….

Spending real money on high quality FAs and using high round draft choices?

Given that, I don’t see how anybody can agree with what Poles, who is former OL, has done so far.

I agree with you that their needs to be more focus on the offensive line in Chicago.

Could you tell me out of those Super Bowl winning lines, how many of those players were first round draft choices? Second? Maybe I am wrong but I'm thinking it is less than you would think.

Armstead which has been brought up many times was a 3rd round pick.

Ryan Jensen who myself and dplank both wanted was a 6th round pick.

Ryan Bates who was heavily debated and coveted here this offseason? undrafted

Offensive line is one of the positions where lower round players can make a name from themselves. There are far more factors to what makes up a good offensive line than you are selling here. Philosophy and scheme are both important as well as coaching since the offensive line unlike any other position group needs to work as 1. Poles has seem to put effort into that. It is still to be determined if he has added talent or not.

There’s a difference between drafting a crapshoot in a later round versus paying for a known quantity. You’re comparing apples and oranges.

If people knew Armstead and Jensen would turn out the way they did then they would’ve gone in the first round right?

So my stance is to spend the money on known quantities and use high draft choices to increase the odds of success.

I do freely admit that this draft fell in a way where going BPA in the second for both picks made total sense.

However not addressing the OL via FA is inexcusable.

[RichH55]

The arguments against Armstead only get stronger as the years go by.

If you are worried about a guy who is 31 and never played a full season - it doesn't give you more warm fuzzies because he's now 32.

Dplank - Really weird question for you. For JUST a 2023 perspective only as to Armstead

Would it be better if in 2022 - Armstead played every snap in 17 games....or if say he had an injury that cost him 1 game and then another injury (non- major surgery) - Let's say a high ankle sprain that causes him to miss another 6 games....so he played like 9-10 games.

For 2023 which would be better?

[Moriarty]

I agree with you that their needs to be more focus on the offensive line in Chicago.

Could you tell me out of those Super Bowl winning lines, how many of those players were first round draft choices? Second? Maybe I am wrong but I'm thinking it is less than you would think.

Someone else can research those teams, maybe. For the 2 Bear SB teams, it was:

1/3*/U/6*/1
and
1/1/2*/3*/5

* what the round would be today - rounds were shorter in the past
3/4 OTs were (high) R1 picks (and the exception was well-established when brought in as a FA, not a flier where the Bears got lucky)

For reference, current 2022 probable lineup is:

5/2/U/U?/2

Offensive line is one of the positions where lower round players can make a name from themselves. There are far more factors to what makes up a good offensive line than you are selling here. Philosophy and scheme are both important as well as coaching since the offensive line unlike any other position group needs to work as 1. Poles has seem to put effort into that. It is still to be determined if he has added talent or not.

That's shaky on the accuracy.
All positions have examples of players from later who hit. However, when you rank positions in terms of "go early or good luck", OT comes out at nearly the top of the list.

[RichH55]

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

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.

Jensen I think technically signed before he hit the market (nitpicking) - Don't think Trent Williams ever actually hit the market though.

And I think it's more accurate to say this: Very good Interior OL hit the market pretty consistently - that is true.

Dplank and others are quite correct to note that good Tackles don't hit the market all that often

[HurricaneBear]

That's shaky on the accuracy.
All positions have examples of players from later who hit. However, when you rank positions in terms of "go early or good luck", OT comes out at nearly the top of the list.

There are 5 positions on the offensive line. I never once specified tackle only. The league is littered with successful lower round Gs and Cs. How many teams have bookend 1st round tackles?(I honestly have no clue on that one but I suspect not many) The Bears could easily use their probable top 10 pick on an OT next season. And the OT people are upset about as a FA this season, Armstead, was a 3rd rounder.

[RichH55]

I agree with you that their needs to be more focus on the offensive line in Chicago.

Could you tell me out of those Super Bowl winning lines, how many of those players were first round draft choices? Second? Maybe I am wrong but I'm thinking it is less than you would think.

Someone else can research those teams, maybe. For the 2 Bear SB teams, it was:

1/3*/U/6*/1
and
1/1/2*/3*/5

* what the round would be today - rounds were shorter in the past
3/4 OTs were (high) R1 picks (and the exception was well-established when brought in as a FA, not a flier where the Bears got lucky)

For reference, current 2022 probable lineup is:

5/2/U/U?/2

Offensive line is one of the positions where lower round players can make a name from themselves. There are far more factors to what makes up a good offensive line than you are selling here. Philosophy and scheme are both important as well as coaching since the offensive line unlike any other position group needs to work as 1. Poles has seem to put effort into that. It is still to be determined if he has added talent or not.

That's shaky on the accuracy.
All positions have examples of players from later who hit. However, when you rank positions in terms of "go early or good luck", OT comes out at nearly the top of the list.

Yes. I think it is ultra-important to note the difference between OT and OG/C

Guards grow on trees

[HurricaneBear]

Yes. I think it is ultra-important to note the difference between OT and OG/C

Guards grow on trees

I wish the Bears could have had a few more of those trees over the course of my lifetime. We probably wouldn't be having this discussion if they had.

[The Marshall Plan]

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

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.

Jensen I think technically signed before he hit the market (nitpicking) - Don't think Trent Williams ever actually hit the market though.

And I think it's more accurate to say this: Very good Interior OL hit the market pretty consistently - that is true.

Dplank and others are quite correct to note that good Tackles don't hit the market all that often

Jensen went back to TB when The GOAT said he wasn’t retiring. I think he was a FA.

Williams was an unrestricted FA when the 49’ers signed him to a mega deal.

[RichH55]

That's shaky on the accuracy.
All positions have examples of players from later who hit. However, when you rank positions in terms of "go early or good luck", OT comes out at nearly the top of the list.

There are 5 positions on the offensive line. I never once specified tackle only. The league is littered with successful lower round Gs and Cs. How many teams have bookend 1st round tackles?(I honestly have no clue on that one but I suspect not many) The Bears could easily use their probable top 10 pick on an OT next season. And the OT people are upset about as a FA this season, Armstead, was a 3rd rounder.

It's a fair point on OT early in draft next year

In looking over top flight OT - that is mainly where you find them

[The Marshall Plan]

Someone else can research those teams, maybe. For the 2 Bear SB teams, it was:

1/3*/U/6*/1
and
1/1/2*/3*/5

* what the round would be today - rounds were shorter in the past
3/4 OTs were (high) R1 picks (and the exception was well-established when brought in as a FA, not a flier where the Bears got lucky)

For reference, current 2022 probable lineup is:

5/2/U/U?/2



That's shaky on the accuracy.
All positions have examples of players from later who hit. However, when you rank positions in terms of "go early or good luck", OT comes out at nearly the top of the list.

Yes. I think it is ultra-important to note the difference between OT and OG/C

Guards grow on trees

We must not have good gardeners then. We can’t grow them for shit. Same thing for OT and C.

[HurricaneBear]

Jensen I think technically signed before he hit the market (nitpicking) - Don't think Trent Williams ever actually hit the market though.

And I think it's more accurate to say this: Very good Interior OL hit the market pretty consistently - that is true.

Dplank and others are quite correct to note that good Tackles don't hit the market all that often

Jensen went back to TB when The GOAT said he wasn’t retiring. I think he was a FA.

Williams was an unrestricted FA when the 49’ers signed him to a mega deal.

Trent Williams was aquired by the Niners in a trade.

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

[HurricaneBear]

Yes. I think it is ultra-important to note the difference between OT and OG/C

Guards grow on trees

We must not have good gardeners then. We can’t grow them for shit. Same thing for OT and C.

So we have come to the root of the problem. Where do we find good gardeners?

[The Marshall Plan]

Yes. I think it is ultra-important to note the difference between OT and OG/C

Guards grow on trees

I wish the Bears could have had a few more of those trees over the course of my lifetime. We probably wouldn't be having this discussion if they had.

This is an excellent point.

For as long as I can remember the identity of this team was Bears Football. The defense. The running game.

There were a few exceptions. The Cutler trade. Hiring Trestman.

Even with McNagy, that idiot’s Claim To Fame here was being the HC when Fangio and that defense put the team on their back in 2018 and carried us into the playoffs. They won in 2018 because of Bear Football.

We’ve never successfully built a team for the modern NFL. Meaning, get a true franchise QB, protect him, and score points. We tried with Cutler but then that OL was a fucking disaster.

[RichH55]

Jensen I think technically signed before he hit the market (nitpicking) - Don't think Trent Williams ever actually hit the market though.

And I think it's more accurate to say this: Very good Interior OL hit the market pretty consistently - that is true.

Dplank and others are quite correct to note that good Tackles don't hit the market all that often

Jensen went back to TB when The GOAT said he wasn’t retiring. I think he was a FA.

Williams was an unrestricted FA when the 49’ers signed him to a mega deal.

I don't think either of them actually made it to the Unrestricted Part of FA was my point - I thought they signed before FA technically opened - though I could be misremembering (*)

They certainly got close enough for your overall point....but their current teams didn't let them leave the building either - and there is something of an incumbent advantage there

(*) And some of it is semantics - like if Trent Williams agreed to the deal the night before FA - he still would have had a good idea of what was being offered generally in the league

[RichH55]

We must not have good gardeners then. We can’t grow them for shit. Same thing for OT and C.

So we have come to the root of the problem. Where do we find good gardeners?

Our Guards last year were borderline good

[The Marshall Plan]

Jensen went back to TB when The GOAT said he wasn’t retiring. I think he was a FA.

Williams was an unrestricted FA when the 49’ers signed him to a mega deal.

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.

[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.

I think Williams agreed to the deal March 16th (News broke at like 4:30 AM on the 17th) - but it would IIRC been within the legal tampering period - so its close enough to being true, true unrestricted. I cede.

Though I think it shows incumbent advantage - though even then the 49ers had to break the Bank

[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.

Also from article: (And you can probably copy and paste the last part for every FA year)
Trent Williams, Taylor Moton lead thin crop of free agent offensive tackles