O-Line Talk: “LT, What Are They Even Good For?”

[warfelg]

19 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said:

I think I wouldn't cross O-line off the list completely for need. If there is a can't miss, elite dude sitting there at LT or LG, I'd probably take him. I also wouldn't be upset to take a highly touted C, because Cole probably isn't the long term dude. But I agree with you, 43, and pouncey on the issue. I'm fully on board with looking CB or premium D-line with the early pick. Moore has his warts, but so did AV and we did just fine with him at LT. Dotson has all the talent in the world, he just can't seem to put it together. I will give him credit, though, he's looking a lot better now than he did early. Cole is pretty steady. Daniels and Chuks are good and locked up. I think fans in general need to realize that the days of completely dominant powerhouse O-lines are a thing of the past. Also those stifling 00s defense are the same. No defense in the league can stifle teams like our late 00s, or the Ravens of the early 00s could. The rules just don't allow it.

IMO the “it’s good enough” logic got us to where we’ve been the past decade. If BPA is a LT, thinking Moore could grow shouldn’t stop you from taking him. 

[3rivers]

question to everyone here regarding the OL. We were all harsh on the OL up until recently. 

How much of that was the result of Mitch, Canada and Najee than the OL? It all factors in, defences can stack the box and the run game was bad. Opposition was tough as well , which factors into this . 

Moving forward, the offence has it much easier and Kenny and RB's that appear to be getting it done (for a change) . 

Same OL but different results.  Are they getting that much better or was much of the problem elsewhere?

fire canada regardless

[CKSteeler]

2 hours ago, 3rivers said:

question to everyone here regarding the OL. We were all harsh on the OL up until recently. 

How much of that was the result of Mitch, Canada and Najee than the OL? It all factors in, defences can stack the box and the run game was bad. Opposition was tough as well , which factors into this . 

Moving forward, the offence has it much easier and Kenny and RB's that appear to be getting it done (for a change) . 

Same OL but different results.  Are they getting that much better or was much of the problem elsewhere?

fire canada regardless

The offense has not done the OL any favors for years, going back into 2019. The team has played small ball or just been ineffective getting it down field, and the running backs have been subpar. 

There was a definite talent issue. The talent still isn't overwhelming. I'll agree with Warfelg that I'm not opposed to drafting a great prospect if they are there in round one. But I think the major issue right now isn't talent, but a combination of inexperience and a poor offensive gameplan. Most teams aren't running the ball without a threat of throwing the ball more than 5 yard down field in the modern NFL.

[Raidersfan1]

Draft Dawand Jones. Draft Jordan Morgan.

Draft tackles. Kick your tackles, that can't play tackle, into guard.

Then increase the competition at guard.

Maybe something like this... (To start)

 

LT - Jordan Morgan (R) 

LG - Braeden Daniels (R)

C - Mason Cole 

RG - Chuks Okorafor/Dan Moore

RT - Dawand Jones (R) 

6th man - Chuks/Dan Moore 

Flex - Dotson 

Snowman - Kendrick Green

 

That's it. Eight. Dress seven.

 

 

 

[Raidersfan1]

That's probably too much for them.. I could see LG and RT. But they'd dig in on the Chuks/Dan Moore dream.

When in reality, only one should start, and it's probably best neither of them do.

The offensive line is poor bc you have bad players. The offensive line is bad bc of poor coaching.

These are very simple concepts. Don't let a false glimmer of hope shield you from the truth.

It's awful.

[MOSteelers56]

I think we can all agree that the main problem on our line is the left side. I think realistically we will upgrade one of the two spots, LT and LG. Obviously we'd all probably rather upgrade Moore since we've got a chance to grab an elite LT prospect. I do want to pose a question, though. Of Moore and Dotson, which would improve more by having a quality teammate next to them? My guess is it would be Moore. If we could get an elite LG next to him, I think he probably reaches his ceiling(whether that is high enough to warrant keeping him on the line is another question). My view is that Dotson will probably continue making mental mistakes regardless of who is starting to his left. 

Ideally, I would like to improve both spots, but if we only make one move for that area my take is that we should look to improve Dotson. 

[warfelg]

3 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said:

I think we can all agree that the main problem on our line is the left side. I think realistically we will upgrade one of the two spots, LT and LG. Obviously we'd all probably rather upgrade Moore since we've got a chance to grab an elite LT prospect. I do want to pose a question, though. Of Moore and Dotson, which would improve more by having a quality teammate next to them? My guess is it would be Moore. If we could get an elite LG next to him, I think he probably reaches his ceiling(whether that is high enough to warrant keeping him on the line is another question). My view is that Dotson will probably continue making mental mistakes regardless of who is starting to his left. 

Ideally, I would like to improve both spots, but if we only make one move for that area my take is that we should look to improve Dotson. 

I agree with Moore being the one that would improve more with an elite player/quality player next to them but in a wildly different way.

 

Put a quality LT next to him at LG and Moore becomes a ProBowl quality player.

[MOSteelers56]

13 minutes ago, warfelg said:

I agree with Moore being the one that would improve more with an elite player/quality player next to them but in a wildly different way.

 

Put a quality LT next to him at LG and Moore becomes a ProBowl quality player.

I think Moore was recruited as an OG out of high school. I think he was strictly an OT in college. 

[Raidersfan1]

45 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said:

I think Moore was recruited as an OG out of high school. I think he was strictly an OT in college. 

Obviously, the most important part of creating solutions is to solve the problem the first time, regardless of need. 

Dan Moore is a decent NFL guard in the NFL... The standard is the standard (for a reason)

The 7.58 or there about plays with his size and strength (capitalized... At guard)

There might be FIVE (bold, underlined) left tackles on this planet. That's the standard...

A Dan Moore and Dawand Jones pairing at right guard and right tackle is a solution that solves 60% of that disarray (Cole-Moore-Jones)

That would be a successful off-season. And it's decent considering asset allocation.

I'm happy.

[Raidersfan1]

____

[warfelg]

1 hour ago, MOSteelers56 said:

I think Moore was recruited as an OG out of high school. I think he was strictly an OT in college. 

Yea some of the bigger schools wanted them there. His kick out of the two point stance is really deep. It causes his hips to open too much exposing the power rushers to get under him and speed guys to get inside of him. At guard he wouldn’t need a deep drop, which means he can keeps his hips more square and match both really well. Additionally his leverage and power is really good in the run game. The running game going left has been really good because him and Dodson push well. So putting him in at LG and letting him get downhill on run blocks would really unlock the run game. 

[jebrick]

I think they would do well getting Vorhees in the 3rd or 4th round.  A good lunchpailer at LG would be great.

[MOSteelers56]

15 hours ago, jebrick said:

I think they would do well getting Vorhees in the 3rd or 4th round.  A good lunchpailer at LG would be great.

I've heard really good things about him. We could use a heady style of LG, like Ramon Foster, next to Moore(or the new rookie). Especially after having Brain Fart Dotson for the last couple years.