Quote
dzrams
Quote
zn
Quote
dzrams
Quote
zn
Quote
dzrams
The rationale for the decline in the OL hasn't only been injury, it's been lack of experience and then injury.
What I'm seeing is that Goff needs a top 5 OL. Without that, we shouldn't expect him to do well. So they need some experience and a bit of luck to avoid injuries.
Well not just lack of experience, and then injury PLUS
even more lack of experience.
It's also that from the start, both tackles had regressed.
The good news is that they have a lot of young talent getting experience. That depends on Noteboom's recovery, but there's Edwards and Evans too. Maybe Corbett too.
Agree with most of that.
I'm not so certain thought that we can say the tackles had regressed to the point where we pin the OL struggles on that. As one very wise poster told me a few weeks ago, when the entire OL struggles, individual grades don't mean much. And in fact, it's a fallacy to act like we have a bead on individual players.
I'm kind of just giving you a hard time but how do you assess the tackles individually when the whole OL was not functioning as a cohesive unit?
Here's where we differ.
You can play 2 newcomers if the tackles hold up.
When both tackles regressed it meant that adding newcomers compounded the issues.
...
But the part I'm confused on is how we can know the tackles regressed when the whole unit is not cohering and struggling. Saying the tackles aren't playing well is making an assessment on individual players but this wise person told me it's a fallacy to think I can do that.
To me, if we buy into the rationale that the entire unit struggles and lack of coherence makes them all look bad as individuals, then it is impossible to assign more blame to the tackles. The regression we're seeing could be them covering for the inexperience inside.
Look at their numbers. More sacks, more penalties, more pressures, less running game production. Plus you could see it.
One of the major reasons the OL was out of whack was the OTs regressing.
....