Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, GSUeagles14 said:

This isnt about  last year though, who is your center this year. And did you seriously just call Jenkins better than Nelson?

I can certainly understand why Nelson would be the more popular pick and I don’t see much reason to argue guard play anyway but if anyone had an argument against Nelson last year it was Jenkins. No reason to believe he won’t continue to be that guy next year. Losing Linsley does hurt a lot though and it remains to be seen if they can come even close to replacing his level of play. 

Edited by Rodjahs12
Link to post
Share on other sites

Green Bay at 16 is goofy.

First Bakhtiari is the best LT in the game as they said. He might not be back for week 1 but I would guess he plays by October.

Second, what are they talking about with Wagner as 'the starter last year at RT'

  • Jenkins played 1037 snaps
  • Patrick played 939 snaps
  • Linsley played 734 snaps (missed 3 games) 
  • Turner played 884 snaps (missed 2 games)
  • Bakhtiari played 710 snaps (missed 4 games)
  • Wagner only played 610 snaps.

How is Wagner 'the starter' in that scenario? (he only started 9 games, mostly due to injuries)

My understanding is that Wagner was the 3rd tackle, who played mostly due to injuries and line shuffling.

Was I missing something?

AFAIK Turner is not first up to take Wagner's RT job. It was Turner's job last year, they just slid him around when they needed to for injuries.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2021 at 5:04 PM, SkippyX said:

Green Bay at 16 is goofy.

First Bakhtiari is the best LT in the game as they said. He might not be back for week 1 but I would guess he plays by October.

Second, what are they talking about with Wagner as 'the starter last year at RT'

  • Jenkins played 1037 snaps
  • Patrick played 939 snaps
  • Linsley played 734 snaps (missed 3 games) 
  • Turner played 884 snaps (missed 2 games)
  • Bakhtiari played 710 snaps (missed 4 games)
  • Wagner only played 610 snaps.

How is Wagner 'the starter' in that scenario? (he only started 9 games, mostly due to injuries)

My understanding is that Wagner was the 3rd tackle, who played mostly due to injuries and line shuffling.

Was I missing something?

AFAIK Turner is not first up to take Wagner's RT job. It was Turner's job last year, they just slid him around when they needed to for injuries.

You probably have a point, but you are missing the amount of uncertainty. Two of your six players are outright gone, your best player is limited, and there is significant reshuffling to do.

The parts are there, but the fits are untried and injuries are a big deal. For example, Bahktiari may become the best LT at some point in the season, but he won't be in September. PFF is saying that the OL will be pretty average, at least at first.

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

So rank them 6 or 8 or 10, not 16.

Use Philly at 13 as an example.

  • Their LT is a nothing (Dillard). He was bad in year 1 and injured in year 2. Its pure hope that he can play.
  • Brooks has had 2 major injuries in 3 years.
  • Johnson was injured a bunch last year
  • Kelce will be 34 and took a step back last year. (he's still very good)
  • Mailata was a great run blocker but meh vs the pass

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

With Bahktiari out, you likely have Jenkins playing out of position to cover one of the OT. So no C, no LG, and unsettled situations at both OT. Lucas Patrick is probably the best player on the line. Are you still saying that is better than the Eagles? 

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

PFF's OL grades are frustrating. Their individual grades tend to put too much blame on one guy and have no real bearing as to player talent to improve, just player performance on a single play/game. Their group grades are better, but articles like this are meh. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2021 at 6:05 PM, ttitansfan4life said:

2000 yard rusher and the 7th least amount of sacks given up last season on top of returning a pro bowl LT…. Ranked 15th…. What a joke

Packers managed to be 5th in yards per attempt rushing and 5th in Sack% allowed and ranked 16th. 

What the hell???

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Packers managed to be 5th in yards per attempt rushing and 5th in Sack% allowed and ranked 16th. 

What the hell???

Player losses and injuries. There is quality material to build with but only one player starting the season at the same position he played last year. Add it up and GB starts in the middle of the pack. 

At least they have a QB.

 

J

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2021 at 5:04 PM, SkippyX said:

Green Bay at 16 is goofy.

First Bakhtiari is the best LT in the game as they said. He might not be back for week 1 but I would guess he plays by October.

Second, what are they talking about with Wagner as 'the starter last year at RT'

  • Jenkins played 1037 snaps
  • Patrick played 939 snaps
  • Linsley played 734 snaps (missed 3 games) 
  • Turner played 884 snaps (missed 2 games)
  • Bakhtiari played 710 snaps (missed 4 games)
  • Wagner only played 610 snaps.

How is Wagner 'the starter' in that scenario? (he only started 9 games, mostly due to injuries)

My understanding is that Wagner was the 3rd tackle, who played mostly due to injuries and line shuffling.

Was I missing something?

AFAIK Turner is not first up to take Wagner's RT job. It was Turner's job last year, they just slid him around when they needed to for injuries.

 

I'm assuming they're just taking a literal interpretation. Wagner started 9 games last year, plus the two in the postseason. Assuming he started all of those 9 games at RT, he was the starter for most of the 2020 season at RT. In that sense, there will be a different starter at RT than they had most of last year. I can understand the logic. For the Chiefs, as an opposite example, last year our starter at RT was supposed to be Schwartz. But he was injured most of the year, and Mike Remmers stepped in. Remmers may be the starter at RT this year, if so, would it be logical to describe him as a new starter for us? I would argue no. We're returning the guy who started most of last year at that spot.

But, really it's a semantics thing. I think the bigger point from their end is they have had Turner consistently graded lower than Wagner over the past few years. So regardless of who we want to call the starter last year, in PFF's view, they are going to be starting a worse player at RT than they did for most games last season. Like, this is their actual paragraph on the matter:

Quote

Right tackle is more of a question mark heading into the season after last year’s starter, Rick Wagner, departed. Wagner’s 78.2 overall grade ranked 24th among tackles, and that production will be difficult to replicate. Billy Turner is first up to replace Wagner after posting a 70.5 overall grade last season across left tackle, right tackle and right guard. Turner had graded between 55.0 and 65.0 in his previous three full seasons.

It strikes me as more about the quality downgrade than Turner or Wagner being backups versus starters.

 

 

For the record, I do think Green Bay will end up much higher on this list in practice than they are in PFF's predictions. I don't know who Green Bay's OL coach is, but it does feel like they consistently churn out average at minimum players across the OL. I do understand PFF's ranking based on their grades, though. Green Bay is losing their second and third highest graded offensive lineman from last year, and their highest graded is coming back from a major injury. PFF clearly isn't nearly as high on Elgton Jenkins as Packers fans, and regardless of who was planned to be the starter, they do have Turner as a downgrade from Wagner. And then I don't think anyone would argue losing LInsley won't be a downgrade somewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like their OL grades are the most off to me. Good was our best guard last year. PFF had Jackson as a fair amount better and I watch every snap more than once.

OL is pretty subjective and somewhat difficult to grade though.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2021 at 6:04 PM, SkippyX said:

Green Bay at 16 is goofy.

First Bakhtiari is the best LT in the game as they said. He might not be back for week 1 but I would guess he plays by October.

Second, what are they talking about with Wagner as 'the starter last year at RT'

  • Jenkins played 1037 snaps
  • Patrick played 939 snaps
  • Linsley played 734 snaps (missed 3 games) 
  • Turner played 884 snaps (missed 2 games)
  • Bakhtiari played 710 snaps (missed 4 games)
  • Wagner only played 610 snaps.

How is Wagner 'the starter' in that scenario? (he only started 9 games, mostly due to injuries)

My understanding is that Wagner was the 3rd tackle, who played mostly due to injuries and line shuffling.

Was I missing something?

AFAIK Turner is not first up to take Wagner's RT job. It was Turner's job last year, they just slid him around when they needed to for injuries.

 

True. They should probably be lower. Closer to Atlanta's 25-ish.

LT - Jake Matthews - top 10 LT who played every snap

LG - Likely rookie Jaylen Mayfield

C - Matt Hennessy who is also unproven

RG - Chris Lindstrom who was a top 10 OG at either LG or RG

RT - Kaleb McGary who is an average RT (plus in the run, minus in the pass) who needs to prove things.

 

Green Bay has:

LT - Bakhtiari for 1/2 the season is still unproven for the entire season after his injury - unproven like ATL's LG

LG - Jenkins - Solid starter like Atlanta's LT

C - Replacing Linsley with Josh Myers if I had to guess. - Rookie like one of Atlanta's spots

RG - Patrick - solid like Atlanta's RG

RT - Turner returning to start every snap. - but like Atlanta's RT, he's not a plus player at RT right now, more of an average player. 

 

So yeah, 16 is wonky. Should be closer to 25.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ravens offensive line:

A very good LT coming off a serious injury, not yet able to practice
A starting G and RT that were just let go by their prior teams
The other two starting roles will go to whichever mid-late round guy in the pipeline wins the spot. Most likely 2 guys playing a position for the first time in the NFL.

12th best in NFL. Seems legit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

27th is way too low for the Vikings. They will likely be relying on two rookies, but they are upgrades over Reiff and Dozier. Vikings quietly have one of the youngest O-Lines in the NFL with the potential for them to have an elite unit within a couple years.

I would put them in the 16ish range.

Edited by Nozizaki
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll say this about PFF's rating of OL;

 

They are VERY keen on the notion that a line is as good as it's weakest link. That's why you may see a team that has a couple studs ranked quite low. Whereas if a line has 5 above average to good players, chances are they are in top 10

 

I'm not saying they're right, but I see their logic and I know that's how they rate OLs

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Nozizaki said:

27th is way too low for the Vikings. They will likely be relying on two rookies, but they are upgrades over Reiff and Dozier. Vikings quietly have one of the youngest O-Lines in the NFL with the potential for them to have an elite unit within a couple years.

I would put them in the 16ish range.

You don't know that, though. No matter how bad you think the guys that rookies are replacing were, you never actually know that the rookies will be upgrades.

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...