View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:40 am



Reply to topic  [ 127 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson 
Author Message
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:05 am
Posts: 863
Location: Mount Vernon, Iowa
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
I am so tired of the "inferior competition" argument. If a guy can play, a guy can play period. Remind me who Pierre Garcon played against? What about Cecil Shorts? Tony Romo? Fred Jackson? Hell, Jerry Rice and Deacon Jones went to Mississippi Valley State for Christ's sake.

_________________
www.aspoonfulofsports.blogspot.com
www.aspoonfulofsports.com


Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:05 am
Profile WWW
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 3875
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
No... no... no no no no no NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

For the love of god enough with the stupid drafting. Yay lets trade up for an elite tackle who likely won't last past his rookie deal anyways.

to hell with that... teams around the league are doing just fine with their late 1st round, 2nd round and 3rd round offensive lineman and we're sitting here talking about moving up from 12 to get one?

No... a resounding no. Take a darn play maker already... im so freaking tired of the drafting that way... PLAY MAKERS are what win games...


Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:32 am
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6557
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
PLAY MAKERS are what win games...

You got it.


Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:39 am
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 7532
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Makchell wrote:
PLAY MAKERS are what win games...

You got it.


Yup. It would make no sense to invest so highly in "playmakers" in free agency, only to then use your top asset this Off Season on a lineman.

I tend to think something gets done with Winston, but I'm 51/49 on that.


Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:10 am
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6557
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Yup. It would make no sense to invest so highly in "playmakers" in free agency, only to then use your top asset this Off Season on a lineman.

I tend to think something gets done with Winston, but I'm 51/49 on that.


You can never have enough playmakers. I wouldn't mind an OL, but to trade up is crazy. A "playmaking" DE would be nice as well. It would upgrade the secondary and disrupt the QB.


Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:42 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21597
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
I have to agree with the playmaker approach.

Listen, offensive linemen used to be a higher priority when the league was a run first league, because you needed guys that could push the pile. Also, run first teams deployed vertical passing games with 7 step drops, so in those cases it was critical to have an elite left tackle giving the quarterback time to drop back 7 steps and gun the ball downfield.

In today's game, teams are deploying more quick passing, 3 step drops, moving pockets, shotgun, rollouts, pistol etc, so while offensive linemen are still important, it is more important to have players that will create yards after the catch. That's where players like Mike Wallace, Dustin Keller, and yes... Tavon Austin come in. Especially Tavon Austin, who will be shifty, quick and have a 5th gear.

I'm onboard with Tavon Austin or the tight end from Notre Dame.

_________________
Image


Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:52 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5839
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
I agree with the analysts saying the recent QB signings/deals points toward an OL run in the first round. If Arizona lands Palmer I'd bet on them grabbing Johnson.

Despite my attempt to stir up some trade talk controversey in my mock I think the smart money is on Austin or Eifert with OL being drafted in the 2nd and 3rd round.

Its quite possible that Joeckel, Fisher, Johnson, Warmack and Cooper are all gone by the 11th pick, especially with Buffalo needing to replace Levitre and San Diego needing to replace Vasquez.


Mon Apr 01, 2013 10:40 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3093
Location: MA.
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
IamPZ wrote:
No... no... no no no no no NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

For the love of god enough with the stupid drafting. Yay lets trade up for an elite tackle who likely won't last past his rookie deal anyways.

to hell with that... teams around the league are doing just fine with their late 1st round, 2nd round and 3rd round offensive lineman and we're sitting here talking about moving up from 12 to get one?

No... a resounding no. Take a darn play maker already... im so freaking tired of the drafting that way... PLAY MAKERS are what win games...



ABSOLUTELY! Jimmy Johnson never,never drafted lineman early.....And he had the best

Lineman are coached up...Pouncy was a great pick. But at 12 this year with this team,

NO


Mon Apr 01, 2013 10:52 am
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6291
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Quote:
SI's Peter King noted that the OT market "is going to be on fire" during the early parts of the first-round.
"I will be surprised if Joeckel, Fisher and Johnson aren't taken in the first 11 picks," King writes. Obviously San Diego picks at No. 11. King suggests the Cardinals and Bills as two candidates to possibly trade up, potentially with the Raiders. The tackles are likely seen as proven commodities, which some think will be hard to find in this class.


Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:11 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:22 am
Posts: 1480
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Kev1321 wrote:
IamPZ wrote:
No... no... no no no no no NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

For the love of god enough with the stupid drafting. Yay lets trade up for an elite tackle who likely won't last past his rookie deal anyways.

to hell with that... teams around the league are doing just fine with their late 1st round, 2nd round and 3rd round offensive lineman and we're sitting here talking about moving up from 12 to get one?

No... a resounding no. Take a darn play maker already... im so freaking tired of the drafting that way... PLAY MAKERS are what win games...



ABSOLUTELY! Jimmy Johnson never,never drafted lineman early.....And he had the best

Lineman are coached up...Pouncy was a great pick. But at 12 this year with this team,

NO


Yes! I agree.

_________________
Don't give up. Don't ever give up." - Jim Valvano


Last edited by rodneyfaile on Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:12 am, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:17 pm
Profile WWW
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6291
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Quote:
Armando Salguero of the Miami Herald considers the Dolphins "not likely" to draft West Virginia WR Tavon Austin with the No. 12 overall pick.
We never saw it as a likely landing spot, either. Dolphins GM Jeff Ireland has long struggled to evaluate skill-position talent, and Austin is arguably the premier offensive skill player in this year's draft. Austin could still be drafted by the Bucs at No. 13, Panthers at No. 14, or Rams at 16th overall.


Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:17 pm
Profile
Phinfever Draft Insider
Phinfever Draft Insider
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:14 pm
Posts: 3423
Location: Columbia, SC
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
cspooner13 wrote:
I am so tired of the "inferior competition" argument. If a guy can play, a guy can play period. Remind me who Pierre Garcon played against? What about Cecil Shorts? Tony Romo? Fred Jackson? Hell, Jerry Rice and Deacon Jones went to Mississippi Valley State for Christ's sake.


I know what you mean cspoon. A lot of folks would not draft a guy on this board because they did not play for a BCS school. Plenty of kids that go to smaller school are just as talented, but had academic issues in a lot of cases.

Talented scouts can find talent.

_________________
Image


Mon Apr 01, 2013 7:45 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
IamPZ wrote:
No... no... no no no no no NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

For the love of god enough with the stupid drafting. Yay lets trade up for an elite tackle who likely won't last past his rookie deal anyways.

to hell with that... teams around the league are doing just fine with their late 1st round, 2nd round and 3rd round offensive lineman and we're sitting here talking about moving up from 12 to get one?

No... a resounding no. Take a darn play maker already... im so freaking tired of the drafting that way... PLAY MAKERS are what win games...


We already added playmakers in Mike Wallace and Dustin Keller. But they won't be able to do squat if Tannehill is on his butt the entire day. You can blab all day long about the need for playmakers, but in my opinion games are decided in the trenches. If you don't have a good offensive line, you're run game will stink and you're quarterback will be running for his life all game long. If you don't have a good defensive front, the runningbacks will chew you up and the quarterback will pick you apart. It's that simple.
We have a glaring hole at RT. If we don't sign Eric Winston, we had better draft someone in either the 1st or 2nd round, because otherwise Tannehill won't be able to get the ball to his playmakers.


Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:51 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6291
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Quote:
We already added playmakers in Mike Wallace and Dustin Keller. But they won't be able to do squat if Tannehill is on his butt the entire day. You can blab all day long about the need for playmakers, but in my opinion games are decided in the trenches. If you don't have a good offensive line, you're run game will stink and you're quarterback will be running for his life all game long. If you don't have a good defensive front, the runningbacks will chew you up and the quarterback will pick you apart. It's that simple.
We have a glaring hole at RT. If we don't sign Eric Winston, we had better draft someone in either the 1st or 2nd round, because otherwise Tannehill won't be able to get the ball to his playmakers.


This


Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:59 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:22 am
Posts: 1480
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Long has had injury problems and isn't even on the Dolphins now.

If using the #1 overall pick on an OL wasn't bad enough, now we should trade several picks to move up and take one?

No thanks.

OT is a big need, but you can find excellent OL players later in the draft.

_________________
Don't give up. Don't ever give up." - Jim Valvano


Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:19 am
Profile WWW
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 3875
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
rodneyfaile wrote:
Long has had injury problems and isn't even on the Dolphins now.

If using the #1 overall pick on an OL wasn't bad enough, now we should trade several picks to move up and take one?

No thanks.

OT is a big need, but you can find excellent OL players later in the draft.


To quote swerve... "This"


Tue Apr 02, 2013 8:17 am
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:35 am
Posts: 1318
Location: Lakeland, Fl
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
swerve13 wrote:
Quote:
We already added playmakers in Mike Wallace and Dustin Keller. But they won't be able to do squat if Tannehill is on his butt the entire day. You can blab all day long about the need for playmakers, but in my opinion games are decided in the trenches. If you don't have a good offensive line, you're run game will stink and you're quarterback will be running for his life all game long. If you don't have a good defensive front, the runningbacks will chew you up and the quarterback will pick you apart. It's that simple.
We have a glaring hole at RT. If we don't sign Eric Winston, we had better draft someone in either the 1st or 2nd round, because otherwise Tannehill won't be able to get the ball to his playmakers.


This


I agree that the LT position is a huge hole in Miami's roster right now. I think another option is to trade a 2nd round pick to KC and give Branden Albert a decent 4 year contract. Then you have addressed a real need and still have your first round pick to grab someone else. I don't think KC will sit on Albert for more than a 2nd round pick as they don't want to pay him the $9.828 million franchise tender he received this offseason.

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 02, 2013 8:23 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3093
Location: MA.
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
If KC wants a 2nd so bad we should give them a 2nd and 1st for the number 1.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 8:37 am
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6557
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
but in my opinion games are decided in the trenches.

I respect your opinion. My opinion is that games are won by QBs.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:09 am
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 11:34 am
Posts: 898
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
I'm starting to think that Ireland's strategy is to see if he can fix the OT problem in the draft, and failing that, have Winston's # on speed dial after it's over.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:16 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:22 am
Posts: 1480
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
TEAMS win games.

_________________
Don't give up. Don't ever give up." - Jim Valvano


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:16 am
Profile WWW
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:23 pm
Posts: 4470
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
wkloiber13 wrote:
We already added playmakers in Mike Wallace and Dustin Keller. But they won't be able to do squat if Tannehill is on his butt the entire day. You can blab all day long about the need for playmakers, but in my opinion games are decided in the trenches. If you don't have a good offensive line, you're run game will stink and you're quarterback will be running for his life all game long. If you don't have a good defensive front, the runningbacks will chew you up and the quarterback will pick you apart. It's that simple.
We have a glaring hole at RT. If we don't sign Eric Winston, we had better draft someone in either the 1st or 2nd round, because otherwise Tannehill won't be able to get the ball to his playmakers.

If a team has 5 OLman working as a unit, then none of them have to be top 5 picks. Its proven. If a team has five top 5 OLman not working as a unit, then it will not matter that they were top 5 picks.

Miami has invested greatly in the OL & they still struggle.

Working as a unit is what wins the battle, not the skill level. Games can be won in the trenches as the Giants proved with their DL dominance in the SB, but more games are won by the QB.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:16 am
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 7532
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Dphins4me wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
We already added playmakers in Mike Wallace and Dustin Keller. But they won't be able to do squat if Tannehill is on his butt the entire day. You can blab all day long about the need for playmakers, but in my opinion games are decided in the trenches. If you don't have a good offensive line, you're run game will stink and you're quarterback will be running for his life all game long. If you don't have a good defensive front, the runningbacks will chew you up and the quarterback will pick you apart. It's that simple.
We have a glaring hole at RT. If we don't sign Eric Winston, we had better draft someone in either the 1st or 2nd round, because otherwise Tannehill won't be able to get the ball to his playmakers.

If a team has 5 OLman working as a unit, then none of them have to be top 5 picks. Its proven. If a team has five top 5 OLman not working as a unit, then it will not matter that they were top 5 picks.

Miami has invested greatly in the OL & they still struggle.

Working as a unit is what wins the battle, not the skill level. Games can be won in the trenches as the Giants proved with their DL dominance in the SB, but more games are won by the QB.


Look no further than the Patriots for an example of this. Their line last year was patchwork for most of the season, yet they were one of the better units in the league in both pass protection and run blocking.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:27 am
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 7532
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
wkloiber13 wrote:
You can blab all day long about the need for playmakers, but in my opinion games are decided in the trenches. If you don't have a good offensive line, you're run game will stink and you're quarterback will be running for his life all game long.


Having a solid OL is good enough. Solid at the playmaking positions isn't.

Top picks should be devoted to premium positions on the outside: WR, TE, DE, CB.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:29 am
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6557
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Look no further than the Patriots for an example of this. Their line last year was patchwork for most of the season, yet they were one of the better units in the league in both pass protection and run blocking.

Yep, they have a QB that reads defenses and gets rid of the ball fast. No running around, no gimmicks, no running game, no defense yet they make it to the AFC chammionship year after year. It's the QB folks. Draft an OL or 3, sure, but trading up is silly.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:33 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21597
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Phins Rock wrote:
Look no further than the Patriots for an example of this. Their line last year was patchwork for most of the season, yet they were one of the better units in the league in both pass protection and run blocking.


Ranked 9th in pass blocking and 2nd in run blocking according to PFF.

However, they did have a tackle taken #17 overall in 2011, a tackle selected 58th overall in 2009 and a guard selected #32 overall in 2005 as the top 3 players taking the most snaps on their offensive line.

I wouldn't call that patchwork. They've invested high picks on three of their top offensive linemen.

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:35 am
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 7532
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Rich wrote:
Phins Rock wrote:
Look no further than the Patriots for an example of this. Their line last year was patchwork for most of the season, yet they were one of the better units in the league in both pass protection and run blocking.


Ranked 9th in pass blocking and 2nd in run blocking according to PFF.

However, they did have a tackle taken #17 overall in 2011, a tackle selected 58th overall in 2009 and a guard selected #32 overall in 2005 as the top 3 players taking the most snaps on their offensive line.

I wouldn't call that patchwork. They've invested high picks on three of their top offensive linemen.


Mankins missed 6.5 games. Donald Thomas got a lot of snaps (mostly at LG, but started 2 games and got decent snaps in a 3rd at RG as well), Dan Connolly was a full time starter, Nick McDonald started 4 games, (one of them at LG the others at RG), a guy named Ryan Wendell was the full time Center, and Marcus Cannon got nearly 200 snaps playing both RT and LT, as well as getting 12 snaps at RG one game.

If that's not patchwork, I don't know what is.

They do have talent there. Solder, Vollmer and Mankins were all high picks. But Miami arguably has more invested than that, having 3 top 75 picks along the OL and a FA in Incognito who isn't cheap.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:54 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21597
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Phins Rock wrote:
Mankins missed 6.5 games. Donald Thomas got a lot of snaps (mostly at LG, but started 2 games and got decent snaps in a 3rd at RG as well), Dan Connolly was a full time starter, Nick McDonald started 4 games, (one of them at LG the others at RG), a guy named Ryan Wendell was the full time Center, and Marcus Cannon got nearly 200 snaps playing both RT and LT, as well as getting 12 snaps at RG one game.

If that's not patchwork, I don't know what is.

They do have talent there. Solder, Vollmer and Mankins were all high picks. But Miami arguably has more invested than that, having 3 top 75 picks along the OL and a FA in Incognito who isn't cheap.


A guard missing 6 games and a back up getting snaps at both tackle positions as part of a rotation sounds like what an offensive line would typically go through in a season. Guys will miss games and the back ups have to step up. This happens everywhere.

Their starting center was an undrafted free agent.... from 2008, and a player they had been developing for a while. He beat out Dan Koppen for the job.

Nate Solder led the team in offensive snaps. Ryan Wendell (previously mentioned starting center) was second. Vollmer was fourth. For some context, Brady was third in offensive snaps. So their book-ends at tackle played plenty of snaps as well as their starting center.

Say what you want about Wendell, but he beat out a proven player and played at a high level. Rated 4th overall at center by PFF.

Dan Connolly and Logan Mankins were 7th and 8th respectively.

So one starter missed significant time due to injury. Woe is me...

This is not patchwork. This is typical.

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:09 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:22 am
Posts: 1480
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
The OL will have a much easier time pass blocking if the QB fires the ball quickly and completes passes. They will have an easier time run blocking if they respect the potency of that passing game and are not able to stack the line. If Tannehill can use his new targets and avoid blitzes, I think we will be fine without Long. It's sad that for a while, the best player on the Dolphins was a LT.

_________________
Don't give up. Don't ever give up." - Jim Valvano


Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:59 am
Profile WWW
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 7532
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Rich wrote:
Phins Rock wrote:
Mankins missed 6.5 games. Donald Thomas got a lot of snaps (mostly at LG, but started 2 games and got decent snaps in a 3rd at RG as well), Dan Connolly was a full time starter, Nick McDonald started 4 games, (one of them at LG the others at RG), a guy named Ryan Wendell was the full time Center, and Marcus Cannon got nearly 200 snaps playing both RT and LT, as well as getting 12 snaps at RG one game.

If that's not patchwork, I don't know what is.

They do have talent there. Solder, Vollmer and Mankins were all high picks. But Miami arguably has more invested than that, having 3 top 75 picks along the OL and a FA in Incognito who isn't cheap.


A guard missing 6 games and a back up getting snaps at both tackle positions as part of a rotation sounds like what an offensive line would typically go through in a season. Guys will miss games and the back ups have to step up. This happens everywhere.

Their starting center was an undrafted free agent.... from 2008, and a player they had been developing for a while. He beat out Dan Koppen for the job.

Nate Solder led the team in offensive snaps. Ryan Wendell (previously mentioned starting center) was second. Vollmer was fourth. For some context, Brady was third in offensive snaps. So their book-ends at tackle played plenty of snaps as well as their starting center.

Say what you want about Wendell, but he beat out a proven player and played at a high level. Rated 4th overall at center by PFF.

Dan Connolly and Logan Mankins were 7th and 8th respectively.

So one starter missed significant time due to injury. Woe is me...

This is not patchwork. This is typical.


What you're saying about Wendell is part of my point...You should be able to develop guys into those roles. You shouldn't have to be investing highly into each individual position along the OL.

We can argue the other stuff, but the point I was trying to make is that the Patriots got good play out of a lot of different names at different positions, and really never took a step back. They have a great scheme, great coaching and their offense is revolved around a quick passing game and setting up the run with the pass. That's why their OL is good; not because they have 5 Pro Bowl players.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:36 am
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:23 pm
Posts: 4470
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
I just feel the term "Elite" tackle is overblown. We seem to have gotten to a point that is the tackle is not considered "Elite" then we believe they are not very good. Teams need a talented tackle, but not what one would call "Elite" in order to win.

I have no issue with drafted OLman in Rd. 1, but if you are at the top of the 1st Rd & need play makers, then get the guy that scores the points first.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:46 am
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6291
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Rich wrote:
Phins Rock wrote:
Look no further than the Patriots for an example of this. Their line last year was patchwork for most of the season, yet they were one of the better units in the league in both pass protection and run blocking.


Ranked 9th in pass blocking and 2nd in run blocking according to PFF.

However, they did have a tackle taken #17 overall in 2011, a tackle selected 58th overall in 2009 and a guard selected #32 overall in 2005 as the top 3 players taking the most snaps on their offensive line.

I wouldn't call that patchwork. They've invested high picks on three of their top offensive linemen.


exactly Rich. The best tackles, just the same as QB's, are still taken in the 1st round.
Joe Thomas, Ryan Clady are the best in the league.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:17 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3093
Location: MA.
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
The Patriots is a good example (Solder sucks by the way).

I"ll give you another..The Steelers line that just went to a Superbowl was not good...Pouncey was a rookie and missed the big games with injury.

Great qb. Though.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:25 pm
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 3875
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
swerve13 wrote:
Rich wrote:
Phins Rock wrote:
Look no further than the Patriots for an example of this. Their line last year was patchwork for most of the season, yet they were one of the better units in the league in both pass protection and run blocking.


Ranked 9th in pass blocking and 2nd in run blocking according to PFF.

However, they did have a tackle taken #17 overall in 2011, a tackle selected 58th overall in 2009 and a guard selected #32 overall in 2005 as the top 3 players taking the most snaps on their offensive line.

I wouldn't call that patchwork. They've invested high picks on three of their top offensive linemen.


exactly Rich. The best tackles, just the same as QB's, are still taken in the 1st round.
Joe Thomas, Ryan Clady are the best in the league.


How many superbowls have they been to?


Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:25 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6291
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
It'd be different if we already had 1 really good offensive tackle, but we don't. We don't know what will happen with Jonathan Martin, As of right now he's not very good, and then we lost Jake Long. Fact is this team's BIGGEST weakness is offensive tackle.

They've spent money everywhere but there.
That spells doom for tannehill in his 2nd season.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:29 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3093
Location: MA.
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
We lost Jake Long who was also not very good.....We can draft one after the 1st round


Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:34 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21597
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Kev1321 wrote:
(Solder sucks by the way).


Ranked 17th in the NFL at the tackle position (includes left and right tackles) according to PFF.

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:46 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21597
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
IamPZ wrote:
Joe Thomas, Ryan Clady are the best in the league.


How many superbowls have they been to?[/quote]

Joe Staley was rated the best tackle in the NFL by PFF. He just played in a Superbowl. He was the 28th overall pick in the 2007 draft.

Also, Michael Oher of the Ravens was a 1st round pick.

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:47 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6291
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
well Ryan Clady plays for the team that currently looks like it has the best shot at winning the Super Bowl this year.
It's not Joe Thomas' fault that he's been protecting the blindside of bad quarterbacks.
We think we already have a very good QB, so now we just need to get him protection.
It's a combination of players that win a Super Bowl. Not just the quarterback, Not just Tavon Austin. LOL


Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:58 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 6291
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: NOW we should trade up for Lane Johnson
Quote:
How many superbowls have they been to?

Joe Staley was rated the best tackle in the NFL by PFF. He just played in a Superbowl. He was the 28th overall pick in the 2007 draft.

Also, Michael Oher of the Ravens was a 1st round pick.


Let's just draft nothing but QB's and WR's this year. Because according to some of you that's all it takes to win a Super Bowl these days.


Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:01 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 127 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FINesse and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2010 phpBB Group.
Designed by Coots & IamPZ - Phinfever.com.