Interesting OL article by Ross Tucker from 2008

[*ochocincos*]

I just came across this article from Ross Tucker that he actually wrote back in 2008 on the importance of each of the five OL positions and which positions should be paid the most based on their typical responsibilities.
https://www.si.com/more-sports/2008/04/04/oline-rankings

To summarize from most important/physically difficult:
1) Left Tackle (going against the elite edge rushers, highest chance for not only a sack but also fumble since protecting blind side)
2) Right Tackle (most often left one-on-one with strong-side defender but does get help from TEs more compared to LT and also RB/FB blocks)
3) Right Guard (also typically left one-on-one with the better interior rusher, deemed by many to be much harder than LG because RG typically doesn't get help like LG)
4) Left Guard (most often getting help from C and typically blocking the least elite pass rusher on the line)
5) Center (just from a physical standpoint, the C is typically just expected to help block another defender blocked by a guard. however, their value comes in their intelligence needed to make proper calls or adjustments for the OL)

I'd say that where this might be changed up in today's NFL is the higher occurrence of dominant NTs. This puts more physical responsibility on the center more than a decade ago on top of their intellectual value they need to have to make proper calls and adjustments. Also RG and RT are pushing closer to LT importance because of the trend of more elite pass rushers at LDE and 3T.

Why am I bringing this up? Because the Bengals' best (and highest paid) OL this year is their LG, which is considered the fourth or even fifth easiest position of all the OL positions to play. The Bengals MUST invest in a good LT and the right side of the line if it wishes to compete again.

[*PhilHos*]

(11-10-2017, 03:04 PM)ochocincos Wrote: 5) Center (just from a physical standpoint, the C is typically just expected to help block another defender blocked by a guard. however, their value comes in their intelligence needed to make proper calls or adjustments for the OL)

The bold is why I think Center, if not the most important position, is at least the 2nd most important position on the OL. 

[*ochocincos*]

(11-10-2017, 03:37 PM)PhilHos Wrote: The bold is why I think Center, if not the most important position, is at least the 2nd most important position on the OL. 

What I think though is this article is eye-opening into the perspective of Mike Brown.
We've always heard he deemphasizes the interior OL, especially center, and it might be because of the above.
My counter though would be that if this is Mike Brown's thinking, this article was from about a decade ago and Mike Brown's thinking might also be somewhat outdated due to a shift in how defenders are attacking the OL.

[RoyleRedlegs]

Here's where I draw my issues with this, while I think the overall descriptions he says are accurate, this also doesn't pay any factor into offensive scheme.
This is pretty standard for a pro-I, run between the tackles OL. If a team runs a spread or option based offense the roles shift a bit. Or a team that values outside runs will likely value a guard who can pull over a guard who can't regardless of L/R designation.
Left tackle being #1 only matters if your QB is a righty. so on the off chance you have a southpaw QB, does LT magically become less important and RT more important?
This also doesn't count for defensive alignments. I'd bet there are much more hybrid or odd fronts now than in 2008 and that because of that roles have shifted.

On top of that, the alignment of a 3T over a RG is only in a true "base". Geno has plenty of reps over the LG/C. It largely comes down to matchups and where teams shift the strong side.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-10-2017, 04:00 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Here's where I draw my issues with this, while I think the overall descriptions he says are accurate, this also doesn't pay any factor into offensive scheme.
This is pretty standard for a pro-I, run between the tackles OL. If a team runs a spread or option based offense the roles shift a bit. Or a team that values outside runs will likely value a guard who can pull over a guard who can't regardless of L/R designation.
Left tackle being #1 only matters if your QB is a righty. so on the off chance you have a southpaw QB, does LT magically become less important and RT more important?
This also doesn't count for defensive alignments. I'd bet there are much more hybrid or odd fronts now than in 2008 and that because of that roles have shifted.

On top of that, the alignment of a 3T over a RG is only in a true "base". Geno has plenty of reps over the LG/C. It largely comes down to matchups and where teams shift the strong side.

Yep, understood. I think it's fair to say though that things have changed in the past decade in terms of schemes (offensive and defensive) rather than just go the "traditional" route like described in the article. But at least for me, I found the article informative.
EDIT - And I think it's safe to say the LG in any scheme is not the most important position on the OL and deserving of being the highest paid.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-10-2017, 04:05 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Yep, understood. I think it's fair to say though that things have changed in the past decade in terms of schemes (offensive and defensive) rather than just go the "traditional" route like described in the article. But at least for me, I found the article informative.

It's not a bad article by any means but it's very limited in scope IMO. 
Steadfast adherence to things like this are why the NFL is so far behind the times compared to other levels of football in some ways.

I wouldn't want my OL beholden to these "abilities" or "attributes" 
that seems silly to me. 
Placing a value hierarchy on OL like these seems awful similar to how we end up in a situation like we are now tbh 

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-10-2017, 04:05 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Yep, understood. I think it's fair to say though that things have changed in the past decade in terms of schemes (offensive and defensive) rather than just go the "traditional" route like described in the article. But at least for me, I found the article informative.
EDIT - And I think it's safe to say the LG in any scheme is not the most important position on the OL and deserving of being the highest paid.

Well ours is because he's the only one not on a rookie deal. So that sort of skews that a bit. 
That's a pretty rare situation 

[*ochocincos*]

(11-10-2017, 04:14 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Well ours is because he's the only one not on a rookie deal. So that sort of skews that a bit. 
That's a pretty rare situation 

I fully understand that's why, but none of the current players are deserving of more than what Boling is being paid, and it's also why this line is in shambles. This team needed to pay for OL talent because the talent they had was bad. Hopefully they learned from this "let's give Ogbuehi, Fisher, and Bodine one more year to develop" experiment and pick better players and/or pay for proven players in FA.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-10-2017, 04:13 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: It's not a bad article by any means but it's very limited in scope IMO. 
Steadfast adherence to things like this are why the NFL is so far behind the times compared to other levels of football in some ways.

I wouldn't want my OL beholden to these "abilities" or "attributes" 
that seems silly to me. 
Placing a value hierarchy on OL like these seems awful similar to how we end up in a situation like we are now tbh 

And I think you hit on how the NFL has evolved. Teams have wanted to get away from these hardline traits/schemes and try to do different things to become (more) successful.
I thought I expressed that in my OP, but I guess I didn't emphasize that enough by trying to point out some differences between now and then

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-10-2017, 04:17 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I fully understand that's why, but none of the current players are deserving of more than what Boling is being paid, and it's also why this line is in shambles. This team needed to pay for OL talent because the talent they had was bad. Hopefully they learned from this "let's give Ogbuehi, Fisher, and Bodine one more year to develop" experiment and pick better players and/or pay for proven players in FA.

this is a 2-3 year rebuild. 
The FA crop is not good. 

This is a good guard draft class. Should draft often. 
This is a weak tackle and center class thus far.
I've only seen one guy I'd call a first round tackle and a bunch lumped together after that. 

We can probably fix the IOL in this draft if we are smart. Draft guys who have versatility behind them so you aren't pigeonholed. 
Isaiah Wynn from UGA is a great example. LT right now at UGA but he's 6'2 so he's a guard in the NFL. Could play left or right. 
KC McDermott from The U is another. Taller but not a tackle except maybe in an emergency. 
Both guys seem to be bullies on the line too. 

Billy Price and Mason Cole are probably the prize centers in this class. Cole stuck at LT this year and he's struggling but he plays a lot like Zack Martin did at ND and a move back inside will do him wonders. Price has experience at G and C so he should be a top priority for Bengals scouts. 

As for tackles, it's all about McGlinchey in the first but after that you are looking at a lot of projection and upside guys. We are looking at a top 5-8 pick. 
I'm not even sure I'd take McGlinchey there. 

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

RRL beat me to it on how this can change up by scheme and whether your QB is a righty or not.

Geno lines up against the LG all the time. We need to get a decent RG in FA like Norwell that Pistons spoke of.

Draft an OT in the first and top Center in the 2nd and we might be alright with a new O-line coach.

This passive zone blocking scheme needs to go IMHO. Get back to the big maulers and physicality.

We are way too cute out there, don't like it.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-10-2017, 04:23 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: this is a 2-3 year rebuild. 
The FA crop is not good. 

This is a good guard draft class. Should draft often. 
This is a weak tackle and center class thus far.
I've only seen one guy I'd call a first round tackle and a bunch lumped together after that. 

We can probably fix the IOL in this draft if we are smart. Draft guys who have versatility behind them so you aren't pigeonholed. 
Isaiah Wynn from UGA is a great example. LT right now at UGA but he's 6'2 so he's a guard in the NFL. Could play left or right. 
KC McDermott from The U is another. Taller but not a tackle except maybe in an emergency. 
Both guys seem to be bullies on the line too. 

Billy Price and Mason Cole are probably the prize centers in this class. Cole stuck at LT this year and he's struggling but he plays a lot like Zack Martin did at ND and a move back inside will do him wonders. Price has experience at G and C so he should be a top priority for Bengals scouts. 

As for tackles, it's all about McGlinchey in the first but after that you are looking at a lot of projection and upside guys. We are looking at a top 5-8 pick. 
I'm not even sure I'd take McGlinchey there. 

I have Wynn in my most recent mock with McGlinchey in the first. If by chance Wynn could make it at OT, I think he and McGlinchey could make for nice bookends. But regardless of where Wynn would end up, I think he'd be a high quality player on the OL in the NFL. Maybe it's Alabama bias, but I also have Bradley Bozeman as a mid-round C. I don't think the Bengals though should go OL with their first 3-4 picks because that would show pure neglect for the middle of the defense and potential vacancies left by Atkins and/or Dunlap after next year.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-10-2017, 04:34 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I have Wynn in my most recent mock with McGlinchey in the first. If by chance Wynn could make it at OT, I think he and McGlinchey could make for nice bookends. But regardless of where Wynn would end up, I think he'd be a high quality player on the OL in the NFL. Maybe it's Alabama bias, but I also have Bradley Bozeman as a mid-round C. I don't think the Bengals though should go OL with their first 3-4 picks because that would show pure neglect for the middle of the defense and potential vacancies left by Atkins and/or Dunlap after next year.

I haven't gone in depth on Bozemen yet but I'm not sure if he's more Ryan Kelly or Barrett Jones. 

The chances of Wynn sticking at OT in the NFL are so slim. Quick research shows the shortest OTs in the NFL right now are around 6'3"
A lot of this would hinge on Wynn having incredible arm length for his size. 

[*ochocincos*]

(11-10-2017, 04:41 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: I haven't gone in depth on Bozemen yet but I'm not sure if he's more Ryan Kelly or Barrett Jones. 

The chances of Wynn sticking at OT in the NFL are so slim. Quick research shows the shortest OTs in the NFL right now are around 6'3"
A lot of this would hinge on Wynn having incredible arm length for his size. 

How much of an upgrade would you see this compared to what we have now....
LT - McGlinchey
LG - Boling
C - Bozeman
RG - Wynn
RT - Andre Smith (would need to re-sign)

[XenoMorph]

(11-10-2017, 03:04 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I just came across this article from Ross Tucker that he actually wrote back in 2008 on the importance of each of the five OL positions and which positions should be paid the most based on their typical responsibilities.
https://www.si.com/more-sports/2008/04/04/oline-rankings

To summarize from most important/physically difficult:
1) Left Tackle (going against the elite edge rushers, highest chance for not only a sack but also fumble since protecting blind side)
2) Right Tackle (most often left one-on-one with strong-side defender but does get help from TEs more compared to LT and also RB/FB blocks)
3) Right Guard (also typically left one-on-one with the better interior rusher, deemed by many to be much harder than LG because RG typically doesn't get help like LG)
4) Left Guard (most often getting help from C and typically blocking the least elite pass rusher on the line)
5) Center (just from a physical standpoint, the C is typically just expected to help block another defender blocked by a guard. however, their value comes in their intelligence needed to make proper calls or adjustments for the OL)

I'd say that where this might be changed up in today's NFL is the higher occurrence of dominant NTs. This puts more physical responsibility on the center more than a decade ago on top of their intellectual value they need to have to make proper calls and adjustments. Also RG and RT are pushing closer to LT importance because of the trend of more elite pass rushers at LDE and 3T.

Why am I bringing this up? Because the Bengals' best (and highest paid) OL this year is their LG, which is considered the fourth or even fifth easiest position of all the OL positions to play. The Bengals MUST invest in a good LT and the right side of the line if it wishes to compete again.

that's very skewd when looking at the current bengals though... because 2 of the are on rookie deals.. Fisher and Obg..  Also RG Hopkins I believe is on a rookie deal too...    luckly we got to see what we have before we extended them or paid them big.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-10-2017, 04:47 PM)ochocincos Wrote: How much of an upgrade would you see this compared to what we have now....
LT - McGlinchey
LG - Boling
C - Bozeman
RG - Wynn
RT - Andre Smith (would need to re-sign)

I can't comment on Bozeman yet. 
Wynn would definitely be an upgrade. 
Hopkins looks completely different after his series of injuries. Really unfortunate situation. 

I'd rather roll with Fisher again at RT than Smith. 
If his heart issue is resolved, then I think he deserves another shot. 

[*ochocincos*]

(11-10-2017, 04:53 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: that's very skewd when looking at the current bengals though... because 2 of the are on rookie deals.. Fisher and Obg..  Also RG Hopkins I believe is on a rookie deal too...    luckly we got to see what we have before we extended them or paid them big.

Bodine is too. That makes four of the five starting OL on rookie deals. And Andre was re-signed for just $3 mill. Problem is that all of those players have been bad.
Point is that the Bengals' plan to have these spots around Boling being occupied by cheaper contracts has really hurt the entire team because all those cheap contracts are on players who are underperforming/bad.
You'd think the Bengals would have recognized this in the past few years of developing Ogbuehi, Fisher, Bodine, and Hopkins, but they took the gamble and it didn't pay off. This gamble also could have meant the window of competing in the playoffs is closed if Royle's statement of needing 2-3 years to rebuild this OL really is the case. By that point, we might no longer have the likes of Dunlap, Atkins, or even AJ.

[Shake n Blake]

(11-10-2017, 04:23 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: this is a 2-3 year rebuild. 
The FA crop is not good. 

This is a good guard draft class. Should draft often. 
This is a weak tackle and center class thus far.
I've only seen one guy I'd call a first round tackle and a bunch lumped together after that. 

We can probably fix the IOL in this draft if we are smart. Draft guys who have versatility behind them so you aren't pigeonholed. 
Isaiah Wynn from UGA is a great example. LT right now at UGA but he's 6'2 so he's a guard in the NFL. Could play left or right. 
KC McDermott from The U is another. Taller but not a tackle except maybe in an emergency. 
Both guys seem to be bullies on the line too. 

Billy Price and Mason Cole are probably the prize centers in this class. Cole stuck at LT this year and he's struggling but he plays a lot like Zack Martin did at ND and a move back inside will do him wonders. Price has experience at G and C so he should be a top priority for Bengals scouts. 

As for tackles, it's all about McGlinchey in the first but after that you are looking at a lot of projection and upside guys. We are looking at a top 5-8 pick. 
I'm not even sure I'd take McGlinchey there.

I'm really hoping we trade back, nab McGlinchey and get another pick in the process. If they're going to rely 100% on the draft, they'd better be proactive and specifically targeting guys, rather than standing pat and reaching or going BPA.

The extra pick would be helpful anyways, because we need to use multiple picks on the line while also filling other holes. Unless we really knock it out of the park, rebuilding this line really could take 2-3 years.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-10-2017, 09:01 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I'm really hoping we trade back, nab McGlinchey and get another pick in the process. If they're going to rely 100% on the draft, they'd better be proactive and specifically targeting guys, rather than standing pat and reaching or going BPA.

The extra pick would be helpful anyways, because we need to use multiple picks on the line while also filling other holes. Unless we really knock it out of the park, rebuilding this line really could take 2-3 years.

I mean, we will have 0 poker face because teams know we NEED linemen. 
If we trade back I'd expect a team to jump us in return tbh

[HarleyDog]

(11-10-2017, 09:01 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I'm really hoping we trade back, nab McGlinchey and get another pick in the process. If they're going to rely 100% on the draft, they'd better be proactive and specifically targeting guys, rather than standing pat and reaching or going BPA.

The extra pick would be helpful anyways, because we need to use multiple picks on the line while also filling other holes. Unless we really knock it out of the park, rebuilding this line really could take 2-3 years.

BPA has been successful to us in the past. But your right, it's not an option at this point. IMO, We have to get certain positions in our sites and go straight at them. Then we have to get our bench warmers on the field and let them show their talent. Marvins been here too long and his ways of thinking won't work anymore, while understanding many of his ways never worked at all!