Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, NinerNation21 said:

I think Banks starts at RG, Brunskill is the first lineman off the bench for any spot, I think McKivitz and Moore are battling for the 2nd off the bench for a G spot, and McKivitz/Skule/Coleman are battling for the 2nd of the bench for a T spot. 

I think we keep about 8 or 9 lineman:

Starters: Williams, Tomlinson, Mack, Banks, McGlinchey

Reserves: Brunskill, Moore, McKivitz, Coleman/Skule (if they keep 9)

I think we keep 8. Coleman hasn't played in years and Skule wasn't really any good anyway, so they should be safe on the PS. But a true swing T could be something we scour the waiver wire for as well

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 49ersfan said:

I think we keep 8. Coleman hasn't played in years and Skule wasn't really any good anyway, so they should be safe on the PS. But a true swing T could be something we scour the waiver wire for as well

We’ll see. I think they’re won’t to keep 8 but given how many injuries this line sustained previous years. Would not be upset or surprised if they keep that 9th swing...they both suck though so might not even matter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 49ersfan said:

I think we keep 8. Coleman hasn't played in years and Skule wasn't really any good anyway, so they should be safe on the PS. But a true swing T could be something we scour the waiver wire for as well

I could see Brunskill moving back to the swing tackle role. Banks is almost guaranteed to be a starter as a 2nd rounder. I don't want to just pencil him as the starter, he needs to earn it but I'd be very surprised if he wasn't. McKivitz could be in the mix as the swing guy as well but I just think its Brunskill's job to lose if they're smart about it. If they try to make him the back-up center after last year then they've learned absolutely nothing from last year. Brunskill has no business@Center. 

I think guys like Coleman and Skule will be fighting to make the roster and look like prime PS candidates.

I see Moore battling McKivitz as the heir apparent@RT. Really depends on how Moore looks on the edge comapred to inside@OG. Really had hoped they would draft a late round center to maybe groom under Mack but didn't happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 757-NINER said:

I could see Brunskill moving back to the swing tackle role. Banks is almost guaranteed to be a starter as a 2nd rounder. I don't want to just pencil him as the starter, he needs to earn it but I'd be very surprised if he wasn't. McKivitz could be in the mix as the swing guy as well but I just think its Brunskill's job to lose if they're smart about it. If they try to make him the back-up center after last year then they've learned absolutely nothing from last year. Brunskill has no business@Center. 

I think guys like Coleman and Skule will be fighting to make the roster and look like prime PS candidates.

I see Moore battling McKivitz as the heir apparent@RT. Really depends on how Moore looks on the edge comapred to inside@OG. Really had hoped they would draft a late round center to maybe groom under Mack but didn't happen.

We haven’t brought anyone in at back up center. There’s still time if we wanted to, but right now it looks like Brunskill is the guy at backup at all 5 spots.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, NinerNation21 said:

We haven’t brought anyone in at back up center. There’s still time if we wanted to, but right now it looks like Brunskill is the guy at backup at all 5 spots.

And I think that would be a huge mistake imo. Brunskill, as versatile as he is, is not a center. Trying to make him the backup to Mack is just asking for trouble. The Banks pick, along with the picks@RB led me to believe Shanny was going to shift to a more physical rushing attack, between the tackles. That's just not Brunskill's skillset inside....or anywhere if we're being honest. Still a ways to go before TC but I hope that isn't the line of thought heading into this season@back-up center.

Edited by 757-NINER
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 757-NINER said:

And I think that would be a huge mistake imo. Brunskill, as versatile as he is, is not a center. Trying to make him the backup to Mack is just asking for trouble. The Banks pick, along with the picks@RB led me to believe Shanny was going to shift to a more physical rushing attack, between the tackles. That's just not Brunskill's skillset inside....or anywhere if we're being honest. Still a ways to go before TC but I hope that isn't the line of thought heading into this season@back-up center.

I think this may be a misconception that I'd be worried with subscribing to. Banks, while a large man, is not overly powerful and not really stellar in gap/power schemes. He actually looks better in zone scheme, despite being a poor athlete. His high-end technique and IQ allows him to be in the right position to gain leverage on zone runs. When asked to straight up body a DT and wash him out of a gap, he tends to struggle. Shanny said the reason they love Banks so much is because he's really, really good at pass protection, especially on play action passes and because he fits well in the zone scheme. 

With Sermon, yeah he makes his money between the tackles, but mainly through the inside zone runs. He's really good on outside zone stuff as well, but his crazy burst, power, and vision help him to be exceptional running between the tackles in the inside zone.

Mitchell I know less about and haven't done a deep dive into his game, so there isn't much I can say about him other than he's a young Mostert - fast, lean, good vision, and unrefined in the passing game.

I do agree with you that I think Brunskill is at his best when he's defending EDGE rushers and not stout interior guys. I was actually hoping we would bring Garland back, but that appears to be out of the picture now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, NinerNation21 said:

I think this may be a misconception that I'd be worried with subscribing to. Banks, while a large man, is not overly powerful and not really stellar in gap/power schemes. He actually looks better in zone scheme, despite being a poor athlete. His high-end technique and IQ allows him to be in the right position to gain leverage on zone runs. When asked to straight up body a DT and wash him out of a gap, he tends to struggle. Shanny said the reason they love Banks so much is because he's really, really good at pass protection, especially on play action passes and because he fits well in the zone scheme. 

With Sermon, yeah he makes his money between the tackles, but mainly through the inside zone runs. He's really good on outside zone stuff as well, but his crazy burst, power, and vision help him to be exceptional running between the tackles in the inside zone.

Mitchell I know less about and haven't done a deep dive into his game, so there isn't much I can say about him other than he's a young Mostert - fast, lean, good vision, and unrefined in the passing game.

I do agree with you that I think Brunskill is at his best when he's defending EDGE rushers and not stout interior guys. I was actually hoping we would bring Garland back, but that appears to be out of the picture now.

What mean is, I think we'll ultized more man blocking principles, depending on down/distance, area of the field, etc. I know we're not going to completely abandon the zone-blocking scheme. Its the virtual foundation of the offense. But guys like Banks & Moore to me, signal a concentrated effort to get more power and physicality between the tackles and move away from the 'finesse' type of OG generally associated with the zone-blocking scheme.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 757-NINER said:

What mean is, I think we'll ultized more man blocking principles, depending on down/distance, area of the field, etc. I know we're not going to completely abandon the zone-blocking scheme. Its the virtual foundation of the offense. But guys like Banks & Moore to me, signal a concentrated effort to get more power and physicality between the tackles and move away from the 'finesse' type of OG generally associated with the zone-blocking scheme.

I would agree with that. I think our team philosophy is versatility and being able to use gap and zone depending on our matchups makes us a more dangerous team. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NinerNation21 said:

I would agree with that. I think our team philosophy is versatility and being able to use gap and zone depending on our matchups makes us a more dangerous team. 

I think also people are reading a bit into the Banks pick - the team wants him to play at about 325, which he was reportedly at for his pro day. They want enough size for short yardage and some gap versatility while still running a lot of outside zone. Banks wouldn't have been my pick for that idea, but hey. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
1 hour ago, Oregon Ducks said:

:)

So far, he has done everything he can do to earn significant playing time. He has not been challenged often yet, so that will be a big test for him when he does. That's the only thing I'm waiting to see happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...