PDA

View Full Version : Rating Offensive Lines



suitanim
04-10-2012, 08:44 AM
Thought this would be interesting. Some of these are from 2010. Hardly matters...

24th out of 32
http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/38453/179/matchups?pg=3

23rd out of 32
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/752574-nfl-power-rankings-ranking-all-32-offensive-lines-in-the-nfl-for-2011/page/11

24th out of 32
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-olinerankings061810

25th out of 32 (note: Rank at end of 2010 was 32nd out of 32)
http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/02/22/ranking-the-2011-offensive-lines-part-1/

27TH out of 32
http://football.about.com/od/fantasyfootball/a/Offensive_Line.htm

28th out of 32
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904106704576582863603744104.html

And this goes on and on. The consensus across every outlet I could find has us somewhere in the mid-20's. I'm not going to editorialize, because there's no need...this speaks for itself.

TMC
04-10-2012, 09:23 AM
At least we are consistent.

suitanim
04-10-2012, 09:24 AM
.............................................

El-Gonzo Jackson
04-10-2012, 10:59 AM
Yeah, pretty much what I would expect. We did have a bunch of injuries to players and have to shuffle around a bit the past 2 years, but even with no injuries, I think we could only be a middle of the road O line.

I still think that keeping Kraig Urbik would have been a smart move in the long run. He isnt going to be a pro bowler, but probably be a solid O lineman for 10 years in the league. Fact is that he wasnt Kuglers guy and didnt stand out enough to beat out Legursky, Foster, Essex at Guard.

oneforthetoe
04-10-2012, 11:41 AM
Yeah, pretty much what I would expect. We did have a bunch of injuries to players and have to shuffle around a bit the past 2 years, but even with no injuries, I think we could only be a middle of the road O line.

I still think that keeping Kraig Urbik would have been a smart move in the long run. He isnt going to be a pro bowler, but probably be a solid O lineman for 10 years in the league. Fact is that he wasnt Kuglers guy and didnt stand out enough to beat out Legursky, Foster, Essex at Guard.

And all those guys you mentioned can play more than one position, assumng that Foster could still fill in at RT. I am all for flexability, but I wonder sometimes if the Steelers put too much emphasis on that aspect of a offensive linemen's game. The best players at a line position often tend to be guys you see only play that position.

ShutDown24
04-10-2012, 02:13 PM
And all those guys you mentioned can play more than one position, assumng that Foster could still fill in at RT. I am all for flexability, but I wonder sometimes if the Steelers put too much emphasis on that aspect of a offensive linemen's game. The best players at a line position often tend to be guys you see only play that position.

I would have to agree to an extent. I think it's great to have guys who can move all over, particularly for an injury prone line like ours... But three guys who can play several positions? That seems like overkill to me. I'd rather have most of my linemen perfect their craft at one spot than be average at four.

El-Gonzo Jackson
04-10-2012, 03:55 PM
And all those guys you mentioned can play more than one position, assumng that Foster could still fill in at RT. I am all for flexability, but I wonder sometimes if the Steelers put too much emphasis on that aspect of a offensive linemen's game. The best players at a line position often tend to be guys you see only play that position.

You are only gonna dress 2 reserve O linemen on sunday. The ones that can play multiple positions will dress.

Urbik was the #3 center behind Legursky and also played RT at Wisconsin. Seemed plenty flexible to me.

oneforthetoe
04-11-2012, 12:54 AM
I wasn't talking about Urbik specifically, but your point well taken. It just seems to me that the more flexabiltiy many of these linemen show, often the less skilled they are at any one position. Of course, I can find exceptions to my rule. I remember Faneca moving out to LT a few times. I like Essex as a game day back-up. Thus, let's concentrate on a starting (soon) guard in the second or third round.

suitanim
04-11-2012, 05:30 AM
The Pro Football Focus looks like it might be a pretty solid site. I haven't fully vetted it yet, but will...they had us with the worst OL in 2010....and we went to the Super Bowl that year.

Just think what we could have done with even a middle-of-the-road 15th ranked OL?

zulater
04-11-2012, 05:47 AM
The Pro Football Focus looks like it might be a pretty solid site. I haven't fully vetted it yet, but will...they had us with the worst OL in 2010....and we went to the Super Bowl that year.

Just think what we could have done with even a middle-of-the-road 15th ranked OL?

Just think what we could have done last season if Ben hadn't got his ankle rolled up on.

ShutDown24
04-11-2012, 08:06 AM
Thought this would be interesting. Some of these are from 2010. Hardly matters...

24th out of 32
http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/38453/179/matchups?pg=3

23rd out of 32
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/752574-nfl-power-rankings-ranking-all-32-offensive-lines-in-the-nfl-for-2011/page/11

24th out of 32
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-olinerankings061810

25th out of 32 (note: Rank at end of 2010 was 32nd out of 32)
http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/02/22/ranking-the-2011-offensive-lines-part-1/

27TH out of 32
http://football.about.com/od/fantasyfootball/a/Offensive_Line.htm

28th out of 32
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904106704576582863603744104.html

And this goes on and on. The consensus across every outlet I could find has us somewhere in the mid-20's. I'm not going to editorialize, because there's no need...this speaks for itself.

Just looking over these again, nearly all of them are from 2010 (I know, you mentioned some were). I guarantee these rankings would be improved upon now. If you look back at last season's line, Starks and Gilbert are both upgrades over Scott and Adams. Pouncey had another year under his belt and Kemoeatu being benched was addition by subtraction. As it stands, with Gilbert/Legursky/Pouncey/Foster/Colon - the line is really not much worse than middle of the pack. Should be between 16 - 22 or something like that at this point. Not that offensive linemen "rankings" can be based off of too much other than pressure allowed (which is nullified by the fact that Ben is our QB) and opinion.

suitanim
04-11-2012, 09:26 AM
I disagree. I think Pouncey regressed in his sophomore season. Kemo was the starter for most of the year, and Legursky is a stop-gap. Foster and Gilbert show promise, and Colon coming back is an upgrade. But I think the whole problem can be summed up by the arguable statement that Max Starks may have been our best and most consistent OL last year. I have us in the mid-20's at the very, very best. Most of the guys on our line would not start on most other NFL teams.

I'm hoping that it's Gilbert/new guy/Pouncey(bouncing back)/Foster/Colon and that Foster and Gilbert continue to improve. If we HAD a middle-of-the-road OL, we would have won a couple more games, scored more points, had homefield, and probably would have gone to, and won, another Super Bowl. We were a team that needed to play at home last year...with a slightly better line, even that may have not necessarily been the case.

El-Gonzo Jackson
04-11-2012, 09:31 AM
The Pro Football Focus looks like it might be a pretty solid site. I haven't fully vetted it yet, but will...they had us with the worst OL in 2010....and we went to the Super Bowl that year.

Just think what we could have done with even a middle-of-the-road 15th ranked OL?

Never been a fan of sites that rely on metrics to judge players performance. Especially something like O line where you can have 1 or 2 bad players ruin the statistics of the entire unit.

Remember a few years ago when some poster was saying that Mewelde Moore was the best RB in the NFL because Football Outsiders.com said he had the best DVOA?? That was rich.:rofl2:

suitanim
04-11-2012, 09:44 AM
That's why I posted from half a dozen sites. Some were subjective, some were objective, all reached the same conclusions. Instead of my just posting my opinion so it can be ripped apart, I posted from external sources. But it IS my opinion that our OL is bad. Unacceptably bad. I also know why there will have to be a narrative that tries to exaggerate their ability...but the OL is a major, major issue with this team. I cannot see how we can improve much over last years performance without an upgrade.

fansince'76
04-11-2012, 10:20 AM
Remember a few years ago when some poster was saying that Mewelde Moore was the best RB in the NFL because Football Outsiders.com said he had the best DVOA?? That was rich.:rofl2:

There was another one even earlier who claimed Najeh Davenport should have been starting over Willie Parker for the same reason. :rolleyes:

But to the point of the thread, I agree, our OL is definitely a weakness and has been for quite a while now.

GBMelBlount
04-11-2012, 11:49 AM
And all those guys you mentioned can play more than one position, assumng that Foster could still fill in at RT. I am all for flexability, but I wonder sometimes if the Steelers put too much emphasis on that aspect of a offensive linemen's game. The best players at a line position often tend to be guys you see only play that position.

So the good news is if one of our mediocre starters gets hurt there are three more mediocre guys that can take his place. nice...

SteelMember
04-11-2012, 12:21 PM
So the good news is if one of our mediocre starters gets hurt there are three more mediocre guys that can take his place. nice...

That's about it. Very little drop off in talent on the depth chart. Problem is, it's not very far to fall if there was. :doh:

ALLD
04-11-2012, 02:30 PM
I don't understand all the negativity, we are definitely in the top 25.

XxKnightxX
04-11-2012, 03:25 PM
I don't understand all the negativity, we are definitely in the top 25.

Does that make us Bowl Eligible? :chuckle:

SteelGhost
04-11-2012, 04:56 PM
I disagree. I think Pouncey regressed in his sophomore season. Kemo was the starter for most of the year, and Legursky is a stop-gap. Foster and Gilbert show promise, and Colon coming back is an upgrade. But I think the whole problem can be summed up by the arguable statement that Max Starks may have been our best and most consistent OL last year. I have us in the mid-20's at the very, very best. Most of the guys on our line would not start on most other NFL teams.

I'm hoping that it's Gilbert/new guy/Pouncey(bouncing back)/Foster/Colon and that Foster and Gilbert continue to improve. If we HAD a middle-of-the-road OL, we would have won a couple more games, scored more points, had homefield, and probably would have gone to, and won, another Super Bowl. We were a team that needed to play at home last year...with a slightly better line, even that may have not necessarily been the case.

QFT. Some more TD's instead of FG's would have made a HUGE difference.

El-Gonzo Jackson
04-11-2012, 05:03 PM
That's why I posted from half a dozen sites. Some were subjective, some were objective, all reached the same conclusions. Instead of my just posting my opinion so it can be ripped apart, I posted from external sources. But it IS my opinion that our OL is bad. Unacceptably bad. I also know why there will have to be a narrative that tries to exaggerate their ability...but the OL is a major, major issue with this team. I cannot see how we can improve much over last years performance without an upgrade. But, as you said earlier, hopefully Gilbert and Foster improve, Pouncey regains health and so to Colon. I think health has been a major issue the past couple years. I think we had adequate linemen that could do the job if they could stay healthy and had the opportunity. I expect to see further upgrading in the draft, similar to what has happened the past 2 years.


There was another one even earlier who claimed Najeh Davenport should have been starting over Willie Parker for the same reason. :rolleyes:

But to the point of the thread, I agree, our OL is definitely a weakness and has been for quite a while now. No arguements there. I've been hoping that we add some young talent to the O line since at least 2008 when I was yelling for Jeremy Zuttah in the 2nd, then Carl Nicks in the 4th. Every year its been hope for more youth, but disappointed with the release of Urbik and late round misses.

I still think you can find decent interior linemen and RT's in rounds 3-5 if you do your scouting. The blue chip LT's you need to try and use a premium pick with.

ALLD
04-11-2012, 05:54 PM
Load up on picks for both lines and find the best K in the draft.

suitanim
04-12-2012, 05:47 AM
An upgrade can certainly come in the form of our own players growing and becoming better at their jobs. Remember, James Harrison was a practice squad player who was cut before he was NFL Defensive MVP.

I don;t care HOW we upgrade, and who ends up where, just that we DO upgrade. The OL has been unacceptably bad for a few years now.

GoSlash27
04-12-2012, 06:10 AM
Has anyone addressed the issue of Ben's playing style? Normally when people criticize the o-line, somebody points out that Ben scrambles a lot and that's nearly impossible to defend without holding. Not that I necessarily agree, but that seems to be the organization's position.