(12-16-2018, 07:43 PM)JagFanatic24 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-16-2018, 09:46 AM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]Oh yeah, that less than 1% of his runs where he goes untouched and can build up speed for 90 yards. Yeah, he's freakishly fast in that scenario. The other 99%+ of his carries he is not fast at all. I'll stand by my point that his speed in no way compares to Taylor. Strength, sure...that was implied in size. I readily admit he's a glorified short yardage back.
I don’t think any team or anybody could replace a back like Fred Taylor. He missed 55 games and still retired amongst the greats.
He could literally score from anywhere on the field and on any play. 1 crease and he’s gone. 14 for 176.
If you look at his playoff game against Miami, he did things that no other player could ever do, including Emmitt Smith. Barry could.
What I’m trying to get at, is Taylor could have been top 3 if he wasn’t hurt early on, so if Coughlin was trying to put Fournette next to Taylor then that’s on Tom.
Coughlin didn't know with any certainty when he drafted Taylor that he would become a borderline HOFer. You have to take a leap of faith with any draft pick. I'm quite sure that when both players came out of college Coughlin saw the same qualities. It's only with hindsight that you know for sure how a player will perform in the NFL. It's amazing how many people don't seem able to grasp this pretty simple concept. And to be fair, Fornette's only in his second year, we don't know what the verdict will be when he finally hangs up the cleats.
(12-16-2018, 07:57 PM)hb1148 Wrote: [ -> ]Coughlin didn't know with any certainty when he drafted Taylor that he would become a borderline HOFer.
No, but when he looked at Fournette he should have seen that he was borderline bad. It wasn't hard to see this coming beforehand.
(12-16-2018, 07:57 PM)hb1148 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-16-2018, 07:43 PM)JagFanatic24 Wrote: [ -> ]I don’t think any team or anybody could replace a back like Fred Taylor. He missed 55 games and still retired amongst the greats.
He could literally score from anywhere on the field and on any play. 1 crease and he’s gone. 14 for 176.
If you look at his playoff game against Miami, he did things that no other player could ever do, including Emmitt Smith. Barry could.
What I’m trying to get at, is Taylor could have been top 3 if he wasn’t hurt early on, so if Coughlin was trying to put Fournette next to Taylor then that’s on Tom.
Coughlin didn't know with any certainty when he drafted Taylor that he would become a borderline HOFer. You have to take a leap of faith with any draft pick. I'm quite sure that when both players came out of college Coughlin saw the same qualities. It's only with hindsight that you know for sure how a player will perform in the NFL. It's amazing how many people don't seem able to grasp this pretty simple concept. And to be fair, Fornette's only in his second year, we don't know what the verdict will be when he finally hangs up the cleats.
Its a given that you will only know for "certain" with the grace of hindsight. That doesn't excuse poor process and decision making at the time of the event, which is what the Fournette pick was.
Even if Fournette had ran for 1,200 10 TDs and 5 ypc both of these seasons it would have been a bad decision
(12-16-2018, 08:07 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]No, but when he looked at Fournette he should have seen that he was borderline bad. It wasn't hard to see this coming beforehand.
(12-16-2018, 08:18 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Its a given that you will only know for "certain" with the grace of hindsight. That doesn't excuse poor process and decision making at the time of the event, which is what the Fournette pick was.
Even if Fournette had ran for 1,200 10 TDs and 5 ypc both of these seasons it would have been a bad decision
Revisionism. He was considered the top running back in the draft at the time. He ran for 2000+ yards as a sophomore. The Jags wanted a running back because they didn't think Yeldon was going to be an every down back. If you want to say that taking a running back that high is risky then I would agree, but "risky" and "bad" aren't necessarily the same.
(12-16-2018, 09:10 PM)hb1148 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-16-2018, 08:07 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]No, but when he looked at Fournette he should have seen that he was borderline bad. It wasn't hard to see this coming beforehand.
(12-16-2018, 08:18 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Its a given that you will only know for "certain" with the grace of hindsight. That doesn't excuse poor process and decision making at the time of the event, which is what the Fournette pick was.
Even if Fournette had ran for 1,200 10 TDs and 5 ypc both of these seasons it would have been a bad decision
Revisionism. He was considered the top running back in the draft at the time. He ran for 2000+ yards as a sophomore. The Jags wanted a running back because they didn't think Yeldon was going to be an every down back. If you want to say that taking a running back that high is risky then I would agree, but "risky" and "bad" aren't necessarily the same.
Its not revisionism to say taking a RB at #4 over a QB when we desperately needed one was a bad move. That was the reality at the time. It was poor process and decision making at the time of the event.
(12-16-2018, 09:21 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Its not revisionism to say taking a RB at #4 over a QB when we desperately needed one was a bad move. That was the reality at the time. It was poor process and decision making at the time of the event.
It wasn't just a poor process, it was a poor evaluation too. There were a lot of people who had a lot of valid critiques of LF predraft, and those people have turned out to be right. You could take out every single non running back in the draft, and Fournette still would have been a bad pick at 4 in a RB only draft.
(12-16-2018, 09:31 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (12-16-2018, 09:21 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Its not revisionism to say taking a RB at #4 over a QB when we desperately needed one was a bad move. That was the reality at the time. It was poor process and decision making at the time of the event.
It wasn't just a poor process, it was a poor evaluation too. There were a lot of people who had a lot of valid critiques of LF predraft, and those people have turned out to be right. You could take out every single non running back in the draft, and Fournette still would have been a bad pick at 4 in a RB only draft.
All of that can be true. I'm just making point that even if he ended up being really good and they had correctly evaluated him as the #1 back, it still would have been a bad move at the time. Basically, it's indefensible whatever way you look at it
Passing on Lamarr Jackson seems like a big error now. If they were going with Bortles because his mobility gave them the best chance to win, why wouldn't they consider drafting Jackson?
Bortles showed them some fools gold with the playoff games. Before that he would of probably been atleast benched this year starting out.
Ouch when accounting for sacks Kessler only had a net of 20 yards passing. Ouch!
To be honest, not benching Bortles at halftime vs the Titans in 2016 was the BAD choice. That was his lowest point.
Then all of the sudden he woke up and forget how to properly throw a football.
If they were sold on Blake then Fournette was the pick. There were rumors that Coughlin didn’t want Bortles, and some of us thought Mahommes or Watson would be the pick.
But thinking like that means we messed up on bringing Cousins or Smith in. The bottom line is for whatever reason they backed Bortles and it sank the ship.
That’s not on Fournette, IMO that’s on Bortles not living up to his extension. He got paid and then turned back into Blake Bortles.
Guys, HELLO, our ENTIRE OFFENSIVE LINE IS GONE. WAKE UP!
(12-15-2018, 10:07 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (12-15-2018, 08:36 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I love how Dave's boss is somehow absent in all of this Bortles talk.
Tom Coughlin had to approve it, people. And I'm still waiting on the "he was talked into it" crowd to show me a shred of evidence to support that rumor. Smells like a load of crap to me.
Tom also gets a share of the blame in the Fournette pick and the neglect of the O-Line.
I don't think the offensive line was neglected. We signed an All-Pro guard to a big contract. That was our most expensive and notable offseason acquisition. That's hardly neglecting the offensive line.
The problem with the offensive line is they all got injured.
Secondly, I disagree with everyone who's down on Fournette. His problem is, he doesn't have an offensive line in front of him. They all got injured.
They drafted a guard that should have been good and drafted a RT that is a mystery. Fine. It was too little - too late.
Signing Norwell (who looked pretty average when healthy) just wasn't enough. Not only did they fail to find competition for Cann at RG (who struggled run blocking in 2017) they did nothing to help the bottom of the depth chart.
They had exactly Shatley and Wells as decent depth and everything else was crap. I mean really bad. Go sign Flowers off the street bad. We've all known this for three years now. The fact that Chris Reed was even on the team tells me the line as a complete unit of the roster was too much of an afterthought for a team that espouses running the football like they do.
Also important to note: they waited a year too long to draft a potential replacement for Parnell. Now that kid is coming off injury - but he wasn't active as a backup even when he was healthy. Not a good sign.
Meanwhile - teams had another year of tape to see Parnell abused by speed rushers and implement a gameplan to take advantage of the weakness.
I know they didn't "do nothing" and the Norwell signing was big, but they should have done more over the past two offseasons than they did IMO.
(12-17-2018, 11:07 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-15-2018, 10:07 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think the offensive line was neglected. We signed an All-Pro guard to a big contract. That was our most expensive and notable offseason acquisition. That's hardly neglecting the offensive line.
The problem with the offensive line is they all got injured.
Secondly, I disagree with everyone who's down on Fournette. His problem is, he doesn't have an offensive line in front of him. They all got injured.
They drafted a guard that should have been good and drafted a RT that is a mystery. Fine. It was too little - too late.
Signing Norwell (who looked pretty average when healthy) just wasn't enough. Not only did they fail to find competition for Cann at RG (who struggled run blocking in 2017) they did nothing to help the bottom of the depth chart.
They had exactly Shatley and Wells as decent depth and everything else was crap. I mean really bad. Go sign Flowers off the street bad. We've all known this for three years now. The fact that Chris Reed was even on the team tells me the line as a complete unit of the roster was too much of an afterthought for a team that espouses running the football like they do.
Also important to note: they waited a year too long to draft a potential replacement for Parnell. Now that kid is coming off injury - but he wasn't active as a backup even when he was healthy. Not a good sign.
Meanwhile - teams had another year of tape to see Parnell abused by speed rushers and implement a gameplan to take advantage of the weakness.
I know they didn't "do nothing" and the Norwell signing was big, but they should have done more over the past two offseasons than they did IMO.
I agree with Marty here.
In 2017, they drafted Cam Robinson in the 2nd round. This year, they added Norwell.
In 2017, I would have been all for adding another T if Dion Dawkins were available with our 3rd round pick, but Buffalo traded up into the bottom of the 2nd round to get him in front of us. Feeney, I don't believe, was a scheme fit.
This year, I was all for Will Hernandez at 29. But I'm not sure his drafting solves our depth problem.
Hernandez would not have started over Norwell, and if he started over Cann, Cann likely would have been cut. Even if Cann is the top backup at both guard spots for this year, it doesn't solve the main problem of losing our LT for the year in week 2.
Very few teams can survive that and then all of the subsequent injuries to the offense generally and the offensive line in particular. Most teams keep 9-10 offensive linemen. The Jaguars have lost at least 6, including the top 3 LTs. Interestingly enough, the prior TC era Jaguars were one of the few teams who could lose their LT and still maintain a decent level of pass protection, because they had another guy who could play LT very well in Ben Coleman. But as a general rule, losing your starting LT makes pass protection very difficult.
(12-17-2018, 11:21 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 11:07 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]They drafted a guard that should have been good and drafted a RT that is a mystery. Fine. It was too little - too late.
Signing Norwell (who looked pretty average when healthy) just wasn't enough. Not only did they fail to find competition for Cann at RG (who struggled run blocking in 2017) they did nothing to help the bottom of the depth chart.
They had exactly Shatley and Wells as decent depth and everything else was crap. I mean really bad. Go sign Flowers off the street bad. We've all known this for three years now. The fact that Chris Reed was even on the team tells me the line as a complete unit of the roster was too much of an afterthought for a team that espouses running the football like they do.
Also important to note: they waited a year too long to draft a potential replacement for Parnell. Now that kid is coming off injury - but he wasn't active as a backup even when he was healthy. Not a good sign.
Meanwhile - teams had another year of tape to see Parnell abused by speed rushers and implement a gameplan to take advantage of the weakness.
I know they didn't "do nothing" and the Norwell signing was big, but they should have done more over the past two offseasons than they did IMO.
I agree with Marty here.
In 2017, they drafted Cam Robinson in the 2nd round. This year, they added Norwell.
In 2017, I would have been all for adding another T if Dion Dawkins were available with our 3rd round pick, but Buffalo traded up into the bottom of the 2nd round to get him in front of us. Feeney, I don't believe, was a scheme fit.
This year, I was all for Will Hernandez at 29. But I'm not sure his drafting solves our depth problem.
Hernandez would not have started over Norwell, and if he started over Cann, Cann likely would have been cut. Even if Cann is the top backup at both guard spots for this year, it doesn't solve the main problem of losing our LT for the year in week 2.
Very few teams can survive that and then all of the subsequent injuries to the offense generally and the offensive line in particular. Most teams keep 9-10 offensive linemen. The Jaguars have lost at least 6, including the top 3 LTs. Interestingly enough, the prior TC era Jaguars were one of the few teams who could lose their LT and still maintain a decent level of pass protection, because they had another guy who could play LT very well in Ben Coleman. But as a general rule, losing your starting LT makes pass protection very difficult.
Losing the LT was the worst case scenario for this offense and I said so at the time. Losing the
second LT was a dagger to the heart. I'm not asserting that they should have had some miracle plan to solve the pass rush issues associated with starting your 3rd and 4th options at LT. I'm saying they should have addressed the RT situation the year prior and I'm not limiting that to the draft or the Smoot pick. I'm also saying they were too content with Cann and the overall depth coming into this season.
Bottom line - adding legit competition at RT in 2017 and legit competition for RG in 2018 would have bolstered those positions and aided the depth pool.
I feel they were too complacent about the line over the last several years, but the last two years are the topic at hand. I just hope they can find pieces for the right side this offseason (maybe they have one of them) - not to mention build adequate depth.
Wells and Shatley are both (ostensibly) hitting free agency. So they'll have to start from scratch finding affordable backups.
(12-17-2018, 11:45 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 11:21 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with Marty here.
In 2017, they drafted Cam Robinson in the 2nd round. This year, they added Norwell.
In 2017, I would have been all for adding another T if Dion Dawkins were available with our 3rd round pick, but Buffalo traded up into the bottom of the 2nd round to get him in front of us. Feeney, I don't believe, was a scheme fit.
This year, I was all for Will Hernandez at 29. But I'm not sure his drafting solves our depth problem.
Hernandez would not have started over Norwell, and if he started over Cann, Cann likely would have been cut. Even if Cann is the top backup at both guard spots for this year, it doesn't solve the main problem of losing our LT for the year in week 2.
Very few teams can survive that and then all of the subsequent injuries to the offense generally and the offensive line in particular. Most teams keep 9-10 offensive linemen. The Jaguars have lost at least 6, including the top 3 LTs. Interestingly enough, the prior TC era Jaguars were one of the few teams who could lose their LT and still maintain a decent level of pass protection, because they had another guy who could play LT very well in Ben Coleman. But as a general rule, losing your starting LT makes pass protection very difficult.
Losing the LT was the worst case scenario for this offense and I said so at the time. Losing the second LT was a dagger to the heart. I'm not asserting that they should have had some miracle plan to solve the pass rush issues associated with starting your 3rd and 4th options at LT. I'm saying they should have addressed the RT situation the year prior and I'm not limiting that to the draft or the Smoot pick. I'm also saying they were too content with Cann and the overall depth coming into this season.
Bottom line - adding legit competition at RT in 2017 and legit competition for RG in 2018 would have bolstered those positions and aided the depth pool.
I feel they were too complacent about the line over the last several years, but the last two years are the topic at hand. I just hope they can find pieces for the right side this offseason (maybe they have one of them) - not to mention build adequate depth.
Wells and Shatley are both (ostensibly) hitting free agency. So they'll have to start from scratch finding affordable backups.
So besides maybe trading up for Dawkins, who would you have drafted at RT?
Only two Ts were drafted in the first round that year, none above 20 with Garrett Bolles in Denver. The Saints drafted Ramczyk at 32, right before the Jaguars drafted Robinson in the 2nd round. Only one T was taken in the 3rd round that year, and that was Arturo Garcia for the Patriots (drafted 85th overall-not currently on their roster per profootballreference.com or patriots.com.
Zach Banner? Julien Davenport?
Last year wasn't a great year for tackles at all.
Considering the money you gave to Parnell as a FA, free agency wasn't a particularly viable option either.
I think that because almost all of his 1st rd picks have been busts or close to it (minus Ramsey of course and Fournette could be an injury liability), Caldwell needs to go. He hung onto Bortles way too long and has missed a lot. He's not the level of Gene Smith or even good ol' Shack lol, but he should have done much better.
(12-17-2018, 12:06 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 11:45 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Losing the LT was the worst case scenario for this offense and I said so at the time. Losing the second LT was a dagger to the heart. I'm not asserting that they should have had some miracle plan to solve the pass rush issues associated with starting your 3rd and 4th options at LT. I'm saying they should have addressed the RT situation the year prior and I'm not limiting that to the draft or the Smoot pick. I'm also saying they were too content with Cann and the overall depth coming into this season.
Bottom line - adding legit competition at RT in 2017 and legit competition for RG in 2018 would have bolstered those positions and aided the depth pool.
I feel they were too complacent about the line over the last several years, but the last two years are the topic at hand. I just hope they can find pieces for the right side this offseason (maybe they have one of them) - not to mention build adequate depth.
Wells and Shatley are both (ostensibly) hitting free agency. So they'll have to start from scratch finding affordable backups.
So besides maybe trading up for Dawkins, who would you have drafted at RT?
Only two Ts were drafted in the first round that year, none above 20 with Garrett Bolles in Denver. The Saints drafted Ramczyk at 32, right before the Jaguars drafted Robinson in the 2nd round. Only one T was taken in the 3rd round that year, and that was Arturo Garcia for the Patriots (drafted 85th overall-not currently on their roster per profootballreference.com or patriots.com.
Zach Banner? Julien Davenport?
Last year wasn't a great year for tackles at all.
Considering the money you gave to Parnell as a FA, free agency wasn't a particularly viable option either.
Ideally they'd get out of that #4 pick and have a large number of options for a number of positions, though we have no idea if a viable partner could be had.
And yes, it was a tough draft to find a tackle after the first if they can't get out of #4. And you make a good point about FA versus Parnell's contract.
Perhaps the hindsight strategy I suggested is not the best. They'd have had to move around from their spots or take a chance on a 4th round tackle in 2017 (which still would aid the depth situation but wouldn't likely supplant Parnell or fix the spot longterm) The only other option I see for RT would have been Brian O'Neill instead of DJ Chark in the 2018 draft. He's playing pretty well at RT for the vikes as a rookie from what I gather.
I'm just exasperated from watching a #4 pick run into brick walls and seeing Cann and Parnell whiff on stunts and speed moves in protection.
Alas - I don't have the miracle cure retrospectively or otherwise beyond trading down in that 2017 draft or re-doing the 2018 draft to an unknown outcome. I just know that based on the way that line looked early on, and obviously down the stretch, they didn't do enough.
(12-17-2018, 12:54 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 12:06 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]So besides maybe trading up for Dawkins, who would you have drafted at RT?
Only two Ts were drafted in the first round that year, none above 20 with Garrett Bolles in Denver. The Saints drafted Ramczyk at 32, right before the Jaguars drafted Robinson in the 2nd round. Only one T was taken in the 3rd round that year, and that was Arturo Garcia for the Patriots (drafted 85th overall-not currently on their roster per profootballreference.com or patriots.com.
Zach Banner? Julien Davenport?
Last year wasn't a great year for tackles at all.
Considering the money you gave to Parnell as a FA, free agency wasn't a particularly viable option either.
Ideally they'd get out of that #4 pick and have a large number of options for a number of positions, though we have no idea if a viable partner could be had.
And yes, it was a tough draft to find a tackle after the first if they can't get out of #4. And you make a good point about FA versus Parnell's contract.
Perhaps the hindsight strategy I suggested is not the best. They'd have had to move around from their spots or take a chance on a 4th round tackle in 2017 (which still would aid the depth situation but wouldn't likely supplant Parnell or fix the spot longterm) The only other option I see for RT would have been Brian O'Neill instead of DJ Chark in the 2018 draft. He's playing pretty well at RT for the vikes as a rookie from what I gather.
I'm just exasperated from watching a #4 pick run into brick walls and seeing Cann and Parnell whiff on stunts and speed moves in protection.
Alas - I don't have the miracle cure retrospectively or otherwise beyond trading down in that 2017 draft or re-doing the 2018 draft to an unknown outcome. I just know that based on the way that line looked early on, and obviously down the stretch, they didn't do enough.
Some of the backups played better last year than they did this year before they got hurt, and I think that altered their thinking going into this off-season.
I can't say they neglected the offensive line since Caldwell has been here. His first draft pick was Joeckel. He brought in Zane Beadles as a free agent. Neither worked out. He brought in Linder and Bowanko in '14. He brought in Parnell, Wisniewski and Cann in15. Kelvin Beachum arrived in 2016. The way I see it, one guy changes your entire analysis:. Branden Albert. If Branden Albert had the desire to play for us, he would have provided the depth at both tackle positions and maybe even guard. He would have been better than Wells if he were behind Robinson at LT, and certainly would push Parnell at RT. If he starts over Robinson, Robinson provides depth at both T spots.
(12-17-2018, 08:13 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 12:54 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Ideally they'd get out of that #4 pick and have a large number of options for a number of positions, though we have no idea if a viable partner could be had.
And yes, it was a tough draft to find a tackle after the first if they can't get out of #4. And you make a good point about FA versus Parnell's contract.
Perhaps the hindsight strategy I suggested is not the best. They'd have had to move around from their spots or take a chance on a 4th round tackle in 2017 (which still would aid the depth situation but wouldn't likely supplant Parnell or fix the spot longterm) The only other option I see for RT would have been Brian O'Neill instead of DJ Chark in the 2018 draft. He's playing pretty well at RT for the vikes as a rookie from what I gather.
I'm just exasperated from watching a #4 pick run into brick walls and seeing Cann and Parnell whiff on stunts and speed moves in protection.
Alas - I don't have the miracle cure retrospectively or otherwise beyond trading down in that 2017 draft or re-doing the 2018 draft to an unknown outcome. I just know that based on the way that line looked early on, and obviously down the stretch, they didn't do enough.
Some of the backups played better last year than they did this year before they got hurt, and I think that altered their thinking going into this off-season.
I can't say they neglected the offensive line since Caldwell has been here. His first draft pick was Joeckel. He brought in Zane Beadles as a free agent. Neither worked out. He brought in Linder and Bowanko in '14. He brought in Parnell, Wisniewski and Cannot in 15. Kelvin Beachum arrived in 2016. The way I see it, one guy changes your entire analysis:. Branden Albert. If Branden Albert had the desire to play for us, he would have provided the depth at both tackle positions and maybe even guard. He would have been better than Wells if he were behind Robinson at LT, and certainly would push Parnell at RT. If he starts over Robinson, Robinson provides depth at both T spots.
I see your point. "Neglecting" may be the wrong choice of words, I guess. They did some things to attempt to help the line. Some of the moves you cite are certainly worthy of saying they didn't "neglect" positions. Others are worthy of saying there was a lack of commitment. Either way - the accumulated lack of talent in that front five has been incredibly detrimental. Whatever effort was put forth - it was often poorly timed or misguided completely.
(12-17-2018, 12:04 AM)JagJohn Wrote: [ -> ]Passing on Lamarr Jackson seems like a big error now. If they were going with Bortles because his mobility gave them the best chance to win, why wouldn't they consider drafting Jackson?
Because Jackson does not fit their scheme of old school football. Bortles mobility was more about the oline not blocking. If they would have ran Blake like Lamar runs we would have won more games and probalby won the division.
(12-17-2018, 11:02 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-17-2018, 08:13 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]Some of the backups played better last year than they did this year before they got hurt, and I think that altered their thinking going into this off-season.
I can't say they neglected the offensive line since Caldwell has been here. His first draft pick was Joeckel. He brought in Zane Beadles as a free agent. Neither worked out. He brought in Linder and Bowanko in '14. He brought in Parnell, Wisniewski and Cannot in 15. Kelvin Beachum arrived in 2016. The way I see it, one guy changes your entire analysis:. Branden Albert. If Branden Albert had the desire to play for us, he would have provided the depth at both tackle positions and maybe even guard. He would have been better than Wells if he were behind Robinson at LT, and certainly would push Parnell at RT. If he starts over Robinson, Robinson provides depth at both T spots.
I see your point. "Neglecting" may be the wrong choice of words, I guess. They did some things to attempt to help the line. Some of the moves you cite are certainly worthy of saying they didn't "neglect" positions. Others are worthy of saying there was a lack of commitment. Either way - the accumulated lack of talent in that front five has been incredibly detrimental. Whatever effort was put forth - it was often poorly timed or misguided completely.
The biggest problem with the oline was bringing in a so called expert to coach them, then promoting same slime ball to HC. Any oline coach with any skill can coach a back up guy to be at least some what competent. This idiot has startes as turn styles. I would have to say that since bolony marony has been here out oline has been the worst in the league.