Football is littered with cliches. 

 

One is how important "protecting the QBs blind side" really is.

 

It dawned on me while watching the Jags play throughout the year that Cam Bradfield did an OK job out there.  He's not good by any means, but I firmly believe that Cam Bradfield could block for the Patriots this Sunday and Tom Brady wouldn't miss a beat.

 

Curiously, our offensive line play improved by quite a lot after Monroe was traded and Joeckel were hurt.

 

Now, by no means am I saying Joeckel is a bad player or will be a bad player.  I think Joeckel can and will become a pro bowler for us.  I just don't really think it's that big of a deal either way.

 

Joeckel being an average LT or a good LT or even an elite LT is not going to change the # of wins we get significantly enough to warrant such a high draft choice. 

 

Getting a QB with half decent awareness is much more important than who the LT (or RT for that matter) is.  You can put Blaine Gabbert or another guy with bad pocket awareness behind the best offensive line in football and it still won't matter.  Pressures will happen.  A good QB needs to be good enough to get out of the jam, stay collected, and make the plays. 

 

I think drafting decent guys with some upside in the lower 1st and the mid rounds every year is a great way to always have enough big uglies.  You DON'T need to draft a lineman in the top 5.

 

 

Just think about it.  During any point last year, did you ever say "man we really need to upgrade our left tackle position!!"  I didn't.  If anything, the interior of the offensive line needs a lot of work.  Pass rushing needs a lot of work.  Defensive playmaking and offensive playmaking in general need a lot of work.  QB needs the most work.  I just honestly don't think our LT was a big reason we went 4-12. 

 

Conversely, do you think "Yes, Luke Joeckel is coming back!  Our offensve will be so much better instantly (which is what a 2nd pick overall should do to your offense)!!"  I don't.  I think he'll play well.  Heck, he may even make the pro bowl.  I just don't think it'll be that big of a deal regardless. 

 

You need to be serviceable, and that's about it. 

 

 

Thoughts?

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

The year before I remember how much of a revolving door RT was .

---

The year before I remember how much of a revolving door RT was .

Whimper will be missed. Britton though, he never caught a TD.

---

I'm happy letting patzor and joeckel develop for a while


QB de are far more important needs right now and there is talent available at those positions in this draft

---

I think people get way to caught up on the intricacies of each position.

 

The fact is, every play comes down to each member of the OL blocking someone, when its a run, you hit someone and drive them, when its a pass, you hold your ground. If one of your OL is dominant and athletic enough to block in space and you can guarantee he will only get beat on 5-10 plays per year, then he is worth a top 5 pick.  I disagree on that being a game winning trait. We are not going to see cut ups of Luke Joeckel on ESPN blocking an elite pass rusher while the QB throws that winning TD pass, but if he is making a block that a weaker OT wouldn't, he is just as big a part of that score as anyone else.

 

By the same token, if you have Tony Bosseli on one side and Guy Whimper on the other, you still have problems because they work as a unit so having a strong unit is probably more important than having that elite blindside protector.

 

The example you give of the OL as a unit playing poorly with Monroe in the lineup shows this perfectly because Monroe was our best player on the line, but the rest of the unit wasn't working well. Everyone was saying the OL sucked and overall it did, but that doesn't mean everyone sucked. The fact that the OL as a unit started playing better once Monroe had gone is probably more down to weaker opponents in the 2nd half of the year than not having than not having a better player anchoring the line and hopefully some of it was down to them getting better as individuals as the season went on too.

 

Good topic, I hope it stays on track.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

I don't like the ideal of taking an OT that high but it worked out for the Jags with Boselli... a top 5 pick, in my opinion, should be used on a QB, WR or a DE.... althought no pick is a guarantee that it's not going to e a bust I just think you need a game-changer by taking one of the three I listed...

 

A QB can and will make the OL better if that QB is a top tier QB... a WR is a game changer and I know you can find one in the later rounds but looking at some of the WR's taken in the top 5 picks has worked out for the teams that have... a DE can change a game in a blink of the eye with a sack, hurry, forced fumble and other ways...

---

[url=http://home.comcast.net/~midimusic2006/mp3/sec/Tennessee__Rocky_Top.mp3][/url]</P><P>
;
 </P> <DIV class=b2></DIV>
;
 

I swear if we take an OT in the 1st................... :verymad:

---

 

 

By the same token, if you have Tony Bosseli on one side and Guy Whimper on the other, you still have problems because they work as a unit so having a strong unit is probably more important than having that elite blindside protector.

 

The example you give of the OL as a unit playing poorly with Monroe in the lineup shows this perfectly because Monroe was our best player on the line, but the rest of the unit wasn't working well. Everyone was saying the OL sucked and overall it did, but that doesn't mean everyone sucked.

 

I think that kind of makes my point.  Why spend the 2nd overall pick on a lineman when even his excellent play can be ruined by the incompetence of the guy next to him? 

 

Maybe spending a 2nd AND a 3rd round pick and improving 2 offensive line positions instead of just 1 (at #2 overall) is the better way to go.  I tend to think it is.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

No. 1 elite tackle is enough. 2 is overkill at the position. especially when we have an average young tackle already. he has room to grow as well

---

I think that kind of makes my point.  Why spend the 2nd overall pick on a lineman when even his excellent play can be ruined by the incompetence of the guy next to him? 

 

Maybe spending a 2nd AND a 3rd round pick and improving 2 offensive line positions instead of just 1 (at #2 overall) is the better way to go.  I tend to think it is.

 

Why get a great corner if your other corner sucks? Why get a great WR if you have no QB? etc etc. A great player no matter what his position can only do his job and if he does his job better than most then he is an asset to the team.

 

I used to play OL, you wouldn't catch me complaining about spending a 2nd and 3rd on offensive linemen. Everyone remembers what Taylor and MJD did in the 05-07 teams, but that OL was a killer. Barnes - Manuwai - Meester- Naeole - Williams. If I remember rightly they were all picked in the first 3 rounds too.

 

The other thing to consider is when we drafted Monroe and Joeckel, part of the reason they were picked is that they were the best guys available.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

QB's still in the playoffs:

 

Brees, Brady, Manning, Luck, Wilson, Rivers, Kaep, Newton.

 

It's all about the QB. Find that first and then put pieces around them.

---

QB's still in the playoffs:

 

Brees, Brady, Manning, Luck, Wilson, Rivers, Kaep, Newton.

 

It's all about the QB. Find that first and then put pieces around them.

 

 

Truth

---

Why get a great corner if your other corner sucks? Why get a great WR if you have no QB? etc etc. A great player no matter what his position can only do his job and if he does his job better than most then he is an asset to the team.

 

I believe a great corner is far more important than a great tackle.  I think your offensive line needs to be "good enough" and basically not a weakness, but drafting someone #2 overall may be overkill.  I just don't see them making an impact to warrant a 2nd overall pick.

 

I used to play OL, you wouldn't catch me complaining about spending a 2nd and 3rd on offensive linemen. Everyone remembers what Taylor and MJD did in the 05-07 teams, but that OL was a killer. Barnes - Manuwai - Meester- Naeole - Williams. If I remember rightly they were all picked in the first 3 rounds too.

 

None of those guys were top 5 picks.  Naole was like the 10th pick overall for the Saints but they ended up parting ways with him because he was kind of a disappointment for being drafted so high.

 

I agree, having a bunch of 2nd-3rd rounders that have pretty good talent is an excellent way of building your line.  Mix in a free agent or so and you can be set. 

 

The other thing to consider is when we drafted Monroe and Joeckel, part of the reason they were picked is that they were the best guys available.

 

That might be true - but when you look at the top lineman drafted in recent memory, you can't really say any of them turned their franchise around.  Heck, most of them haven't even turned their offense around.  They might be good players, but I think they belong in the mid 1st round or lower.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

Teams find success in beating Brady and Manning by getting pressure on them. If you give them all day to throw, they will pick your secondary apart. The O-lines for Brady and Manning teams, especially the LT position, are very important. In Jag's history, Boselli was worth a top pick in order to keep Brunell clean long enough to let Smith and McCardell's routes fully develop.

Today, if Joeckel can be the premium LT as expected, especially with a new QB coming in, he will have been worth the selection.

---

A good QB will make up for inadequate play along the offensive line. QBs in Indy haven't had good tackles in years and they are doing alright.

---

<!-- isHtml:1 --><!-- isHtml:1 -->

No.

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

I don't like the ideal of taking an OT that high but it worked out for the Jags with Boselli... a top 5 pick, in my opinion, should be used on a QB, WR or a DE.... althought no pick is a guarantee that it's not going to e a bust I just think you need a game-changer by taking one of the three I listed...

 

A QB can and will make the OL better if that QB is a top tier QB... a WR is a game changer and I know you can find one in the later rounds but looking at some of the WR's taken in the top 5 picks has worked out for the teams that have... a DE can change a game in a blink of the eye with a sack, hurry, forced fumble and other ways...

 

It worked with Boselli but the game has changed to a wide open passing game.  Quick passes to playmakers make the OT position less relevant.   I agree with you -- QB-WR-DE

---

Teams find success in beating Brady and Manning by getting pressure on them. If you give them all day to throw, they will pick your secondary apart. The O-lines for Brady and Manning teams, especially the LT position, are very important. In Jag's history, Boselli was worth a top pick in order to keep Brunell clean long enough to let Smith and McCardell's routes fully develop.


Today, if Joeckel can be the premium LT as expected, especially with a new QB coming in, he will have been worth the selection.

 

I think you said it yourself.  Brady and Manning are the key words there.  THEY are the important ones, not the offensive lineman.  Brady makes it happen even with below average O linemen.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

When you don't have a good LT it's imperative that you get one.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

If you have a statue playing QB, like Byron Leftwich, then I agree you may need an elite left tackle or an elite offensive line.

 

But in today's NFL the quarterback needs to be more mobile, mobile enough to extend his own protection...

 

I mean seriously, even Cam Bradfield coupled with a QB with above average awareness can be your starter at LT, and he wasn't even drafted.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>