OT, QB-Which comes first?

[Ranching]

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?

It's both, but I still wouldn't pass on a QB

 

[Ranching]

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.

I get annoyed and don't teach because in the past, some have thrown ot the, you were just a HS coach. I guess my defense mechanism kicks in. Apologies to you and @Blitzen

 

[DuncanIso]

Gotta have the LT.

the Last Super Bowl is a great example.

 

[Blitzen]

It's both, but I still wouldn't pass on a QB

Neither would I. That was not the premise. My subject line was not about whether you would choose a stud OT or QB (I said as much in my original post).

The premise was whether as a team builder you would want to develop a QB by playing him first, or developing a solid OL first before playing the stud QB (if given very poor talent on the OL).

I generally call BS about play design being as equal as talent/inexperience when attributing blame for sacks happening in the NFL. There are groups of rare talent that alter what happens on each snap of the ball.

If your team is going to protect the QB consistently throughout an entire season, they will need either high end talent or very good talent combined with experience on the OL. Aaron Donald and many others sometimes wreck even the fastest developing plays (and it has nothing to do with how the play was designed).

The NFL has quite a few players that will get their sacks or hits (that alter plays) because they are just way more talented and quick than a play can be designed. Tom Brady was beaten by a Broncos squad several years ago because their OL could not protect him for longer than 2 seconds. And their entire offensive game plan and scheme is based on quick reads and getting rid of the ball as fast as possible (in fact they were the very best at doing it).

Not close to equal in my opinion. OL talent and experience will yield better results than general tweaks to play-calling when you are talking about consistent protection and offensive production.

 

[Ranching]

That's true. You can design all passing plays that take virtually no time to develop. However, if a team actually plans on scoring much at all the team must stretch th

I get annoyed and don't teach because in the past, some have thrown ot the, you were just a HS coach. I guess my defense mechanism kicks in. Apologies to you and @Blitzen

@JoeKing no reply? I rescind my apology.....

 

[JoeKing]

I get annoyed and don't teach because in the past, some have thrown ot the, you were just a HS coach. I guess my defense mechanism kicks in. Apologies to you and @Blitzen

Apology accepted, I'm over it. My coaching experience was so long ago I barely ever think about it, nothing like you've done. I coached junior high football while I was in college and later I coached flag football in the Air Force for several years.

 

[JoeKing]

@JoeKing no reply? I rescind my apology.....

Dang dude. I've had other things to do today. I replied to you as soon as I finally got online.

 

[quickccc]

QB ... not even close, imo .

You might have a chance with getting away with a Brandon Knight having to play OT in a pinch emergency, ..and if you're screwd enuff you
can manage a Cam Irvin signing that can get you by,.

.. but QB is still remains just too hard and difficult to get quality that you need .. both on a starter stand part ..and apparently as a capable backup capacity. ...

 

[quickccc]

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.

How did we go about building an OL around Romo ..?

We went big on FA spending with Leonard Davis, Columbo and Kosier while we drafted Flozell Adams and Andre Gurode - oddly while they made several pro bowlers they were not always the most consistent, or IQ heady competitors.

And they were eventually exposed to the likes of the Giants and Vikes ,,,so Cowboys were of f to a new brand, new rebuild of the OL but primarily thru the draft.
ala Smith, Martin and Fredricks -while Collins was a blessing per extraordinary rare undrafted situations and it remains that strategy per NFL draft as of today.

 

[CowboyRoy]

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.

Taking a RB instead of oline in the first round for jags was dumb. Meyers first big mistake.

 

[Blitzen]

Taking a RB instead of oline in the first round for jags was dumb. Meyers first big mistake.

Agreed. A good to very good OL make average RBs and WRs look like superstars and average QBs look like competent starters. Line play on both sides still determines the game outcome (before any other positions, have to have bare minimum play before anything else).

 

[CowboyRoy]

Agreed. A good to very good OL make average RBs and WRs look like superstars and average QBs look like competent starters. Line play on both sides still determines the game outcome (before any other positions, have to have bare minimum play before anything else).

They already had one of the best backs in the nfl in James Robinson. Really really dumb move. Was a great draft for lineman too.