OT, QB-Which comes first?

[Ranching]

You think that can hide a poor O-line? I don't think so. Your QB is going to take a beating just like Troy did before Jimmy got him an O-Line to protect him.

I do....done it many times. Have you ever come up with a game plan???

 

[JoeKing]

I do....done it many times. Have you ever come up with a game plan???

Yes, I have. Do you think you are the only person here that has ever coached? You do, don't you? You like to shove that experience in other people's faces as if it makes you better than them.

 

[Ranching]

36987"]Yes, I have. Do you think you are the only person here that has ever coached? You do, don't you? You like to shove that experience in other people's faces as if it makes you better than them.[/QUO




Well, if you have...why do you ask. You know you it can be done. I only shove down peoples throat that don't know what they are talking about because they are annoying

 

[Blitzen]

And all beaten by some kid who plays fantasy football and Madden all day

Yawn. I'm hardly the first to propose this line of thinking. See Carson Palmer. See Pat Mahomes. Romo, Rodgers... Development can take time and the team sometimes decides to do it from the sideline. Sometimes takes years.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

Yawn. I'm hardly the first to propose this line of thinking. See Carson Palmer. See Pat Mahomes. Romo, Rodgers... Development can take time and the team sometimes decides to do it from the sideline. Sometimes takes years.

Yawn. It is 2021. Rookie QBs are playing, especially 1st rd picks.

 

[Blitzen]

Yawn. It is 2021. Rookie QBs are playing, especially 1st rd picks.

And they were playing when all the players I mentioned went through clipboard development. Mahomes was drafted a whopping 4 years ago. It's not an old or new concept. Definitely the road less traveled. You are correct though. Lots of teams decide to play the guy quick and it is definitely motivated to some extent by quick return on investment.

 

[Blitzen]

36987"]Yes, I have. Do you think you are the only person here that has ever coached? You do, don't you? You like to shove that experience in other people's faces as if it makes you better than them.[/QUO


Well, if you have...why do you ask. You know you it can be done. I only shove down peoples throat that don't know what they are talking about because they are annoying

From what I've seen across the league, the main reason a QB gets sacked or hit a bunch is due to poor play from the OL (lots of times as a result of circumstances beyond the coaches control, ie multiple injuries, lots of new faces, lower talent level).

Wouldn't Jimmy have wanted to protect Troy with better play design to avoid the number of hits he took? Was it Jimmy and the offensive coaches fault for lack of good play design?

 

[Ranching]

From what I've seen across the league, the main reason a QB gets sacked or hit a bunch is due to poor play from the OL (lots of times as a result of circumstances beyond the coaches control, ie multiple injuries, lots of new faces, lower talent level).

Wouldn't Jimmy have wanted to protect Troy with better play design to avoid the number of hits he took? Was it Jimmy and the offensive coaches fault for lack of good play design?

Jimmy was a long time ago....his scheme wouldn't work today. He'll, it didn't even work in Miami.....

 

[Blitzen]

Jimmy was a long time ago....his scheme wouldn't work today. He'll, it didn't even work in Miami.....

So you believe the main reason that QB's get sacked a bunch is poor play design, and not because the OL is inexperienced or much less talented than their opponent?

 

[Bullflop]

Since we're in need of a backup offensive tackle and a backup QB, whichever one comes first that's a quality find should be signed ASAP.

Going into the regular season with OT's whose durability is in question would be extremely foolish to ignore. Dak must be protected.

As the same token, a good backup QB should also be available, in the event that our starting QB goes down with an injury.

If both are available, I'd prefer for the backup OT to be the first priority and the backup QB to be the second priority.

 

[JoeKing]

36987"]Yes, I have. Do you think you are the only person here that has ever coached? You do, don't you? You like to shove that experience in other people's faces as if it makes you better than them.[/QUO




Well, if you have...why do you ask. You know you it can be done. I only shove down peoples throat that don't know what they are talking about because they are annoying

It was a rhetorical question. I said I don't think it can be done. To be more specific, IMO, it can't be done for 4 quarters. The opposing coach should be able to figure it out.

No, you narcissistically gloat when you think you know more than others. Rather than teaching what you know, you get annoyed and "shove it down their throat"... your words not mine. I have no doubt you know more about coaching. I'm not going to pretend otherwise. I have no knowledge of how you hide a weak O-line with play calling for an entire game. For that reason, I believe when building a team, an O-line is better to have first before a QB. Common sense says you abandon that plan if a rare high-quality QB comes available. Which I believe was one of your points. But that was never the question. The OP told as much a few posts back.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

Since we're in need of a backup offensive tackle and a backup QB, whichever one comes first that's a quality find should be signed ASAP.

Going into the regular season with OT's whose durability is in question would be extremely foolish to ignore. Dak must be protected.

As the same token, a good backup QB should also be available, in the event that our starting QB goes down with an injury.

If both are possible, I'd prefer for the backup OT to be the first priority and the backup QB to be the second priority.

Have you looked at the backup QBs and OTs for other teams? Mike White, Geno Smith, Franks, Rudolph, Haskins, Barkley, Tim Boyle, McSorely (hurt?), Walker, Flacco, Allen, Wolford, Eason, Glennon, Henne (think the Chiefs are winning with him?), Mond, etc.

Good luck going through the backup OTs on other teams. Stealers have Chaz Green. Good luck trying to find a backup better than Steele and Knight and Nsehke and Farniok. Any new OT will need weeks to get up to speed and learn the system.

Always good to look around but don’t expect much.

 

[AKATheRake]

We almost got Troy killed by going QB first.

You have to take the leader of your team when you get the chance.

He got through it because he was what he was.

Result = 3 Super Bowl's and a dynasty.

 

[waving monkey]

nobody is required to be stupid if the QB is selected first. QB is so much more important and if one is there to selected you take him and dont look back.2nd round if a rated OT is there you take him.
Sure QB get hurt because of olines but let another QB take the beating and the hot rookie sets and learns and stays healthy.

 

[gimmesix]

Would you take Tony Mandarich before Troy. Jimmie could have done that

Based on how Mandarich turned out, that's not really a fair comparison. Would you take Troy over Tyron Smith? Hall of Fame QB or Hall of Fame LT?

I'd pick Troy every time. There are more successful tackles taken in the first round than quarterbacks, so you've got a better shot at finding an LT than quality QB. Of course, that might be an argument for taking the more sure bet.

The argument might be more like would you take Carson Wentz or would you take Tyron Smith?

 

[plasticman]

Which would be more successful, a QB who is a 4th round pick with starting tackles that were drafted in the 1st round or a QB drafted in the 1st round protected by tackles drafted in the 4th round?

In 2020 there was 24 teams with at least one starting OT drafted in the 1st or 2nd round. There was even 9 teams in which both OT's were drafted in the 1st or 2nd round.

In 2020 there was 23 teams whose starting QB was drafted in the 1st or 2nd round. This means there really isn't enough meaningful data on which to draw a specific conclusion but there are some intriguing pieces of information.

Three starting QB's were drafted in the 3rd round or lower and 5 of the 6 starting tackles on those teams were drafted in the 1st or 2nd round.

Very interesting to note that two teams last season had starting tackles in which neither of them were drafted in the 1st or 2nd round. I say very interesting because of the current status of those team's starting QB's last season. They are the Lions and the Packers.

The Packers starting tackles were drafted in the 3rd round and 4th round. Both starting tackles for the Lions were drafted in the 5th round. Good luck, Goff.

Both Cleveland's starting tackles were drafted in the top ten overall as were San Fransisco's. Atlanta's starting tackles are both 1st round picks as are Houston's. Teams with a 1st rounder on one end and a 2nd rounder on the other are the Colts, Vikings, Dolphins, and Bucs. Both Jaguar's starting tackles are 2nd rounders.

Then, of course, there are the tackles for the Cowboys who are listed as the starters for the season based on most number of starts with a minimum of 9. Both were undrafted free agents, one a rookie, one in his 2nd season. You would be hard pressed to find a pair in NFL history that were less qualified.

 

[JoeKing]

That wasn't my question. I was trying to see if you were building a team, and had a great young QB would you try to roll the dice if you knew the OL was likely going to give up an inordinate amount of big hits.

Sure, it still worked out with Troy but it's also been proven that choosing that route can lead to early catastrophic injury or significant developmental impairment (that alters the career trajectory) to the most valuable resource on the roster. Romo, even admitting it himself, needed the four years development from the sidelines.

When the Cowboys signed Romo, he was not the high-quality QB your premise proposes. He did need four years to develop. The QB that better fits your premise is Aikman who was NFL-ready when he was drafted. His career could have taken a less successful course if he didn't have the wherewithal to survive his rookie season. Jimmy quickly piecemealed a decent O-Line to protect him and the rest is history.

 

[Cowpolk]

When the Cowboys signed Romo, he was not the high-quality QB your premise proposes. He did need four years to develop. The QB that better fits your premise is Aikman who was NFL-ready when he was drafted. His career could have taken a less successful course if he didn't have the wherewithal to survive his rookie season. Jimmy quickly piecemealed a decent O-Line to protect him and the rest is history.

Romo knows the game better than Aikman ever did. And he still proves it every week of the season. His body failed him not his talent.

 

[Bullflop]

Have you looked at the backup QBs and OTs for other teams? Mike White, Geno Smith, Franks, Rudolph, Haskins, Barkley, Tim Boyle, McSorely (hurt?), Walker, Flacco, Allen, Wolford, Eason, Glennon, Henne (think the Chiefs are winning with him?), Mond, etc.

Good luck going through the backup OTs on other teams. Stealers have Chaz Green. Good luck trying to find a backup better than Steele and Knight and Nsehke and Farniok. Any new OT will need weeks to get up to speed and learn the system.

Always good to look around but don’t expect much.

No, I'm not interested in that, since it seems a bit pointless to me. If the Cowboys want a player currently on another team, they'll do their own homework. Someone should be available when the final cuts are made. Other than that, we'll see what's what when the right time presents itself.

 

[buybuydandavis]

It's obvious that every team must figure out how to get very good quarterback play and very good offensive line play to have consistent very good offensive production throughout a game.

One goes with the other, but often young quarterbacks with high pedigree (highly drafted) go to clubs with poor offensive line play. They are expected to run and dodge for their lives till the offensive line woes are solidified.

These young QB’s might take too many sacks (Carr) or take an injury (Burrow) early in their career that can skew their later production and abilities.

Good OL play has something to do with coaching, but most of the top level OL come with rounds 1-3, so it seems like a squad's willingness to spend high picks on the position is the biggest indicator for OL success.

I wanted to know your thoughts on what you would do with a young highly drafted QB (like Trevor Lawrence) when confronted with the reality of poor OL play and all that comes with it. Do you sit the QB till you can further develop and protect him? Seems like it can yield great results (Romo, Rodgers, Mahomes, Palmer, etc) for their individual play. Fans might cry over it, but I would be inclined to tell them to shove it while building a better foundation.

A bad oline makes it harder to excel, but with the growing QB and WRs protections tilting the game toward passing success, the risk of "spoiling" young QB prospects behind a bad oline has gone down a lot.

And there is an opportunity cost in *not* playing a QB too. Slows his development, even in practice.

I don't think there is much sense in sitting QBs to protect them anymore.