Vela - Chicken or Egg: Offensive or Defensive Line?

Vela - Chicken or Egg: Offensive or Defensive Line?





Chicken or Egg: Offensive or Defensive Line?

Posted by Rafael at Monday, January 14, 2013

While we debate whether Dallas should draft an offensive or defensive lineman high, a look at what the final four have done to build their offensive lines:

AFC
New England
LT -- Nate Solder, 1st round pick
LG -- Logan Mankins, 1st round pick
C - Ryan Wendell, UFA
RG -- Dan Connolly, UFA
RT -- Sebastian Vollmer, 2nd round pick

Baltimore
LT -- Bryant McKinnie -- 1st round pick for Minnesota
LG -- Kelechi Osemele -- 2nd round pick
C -- Matt Birk -- 6th round pick for Minnesota
RG -- Marshall Yanda, 3rd round pick
RT -- Michael Oher, 1st round pick

NFC
San Francisco
LT -- Joe Staley, 1st round pick
LG -- Mike Iupati, 1st round pick
C -- Jonathan Goodwin, 5th round pick for Jets
RG -- Alex Boone, UFA
RT -- Anthony Davis, 1st round pick

Atlanta
LT -- Sam Baker, 1st round pick
LG -- Justin Blalock, 2nd round pick
C -- Todd McClure, 7th round pick
RG -- Peter Konz, 2nd round pick
RT -- Tyson Clabo, UFA

All of the finalists have invested heavily in their offensive lines. All of them have had some luck on late-round selections and on un-drafted free agents, but the fact remains that at least three starters on each of these teams were high round picks by the home team.

Compare this to the projected starters on the current Cowboys line:
LT -- Tyron Smith, 1st round pick
LG -- Nate Livings, UFA
C -- Phil Costa, UFA
RG -- Mackenzy Bernadeau, 7th round pick
RT -- Doug Free, 4th round pick/Jermey Parnell, UFA

Now, compare it to the last above-average Cowboys line, the '07 edition, which had a strong pedigree:
LT -- Flozell Adams, 2nd round pick
LG -- Kyle Kosier, 7th round pick for 49ers
C -- Andre Gurode, 2nd round pick
RG -- Leonard Davis, 1st round pick for Cardinals
RT -- Marc Colombo, 1st round pick for Bears

You get what you pay for, and as we well know, the Cowboys have not been willing to pay for top round offensive linemen. They can convince themselves that they don't need to do it, and lean on Bill Callahan one more year, but he likely knows what Hudson Houck learned in '09, '10 and '11, once that '07 bunch got old together. There's no substitute for talent.

Sooner or later, you need to stop fooling yourself and make the investment. It does not have to be in the first round, but it needs to be in the high rounds and in multiples of more than one.

Pretty stunning correlation there.

The correlation is stunning but Im not shocked that the succesfull teams have built their offenses from the trenches

superpunk said:

Pretty stunning correlation there.

Keep reading...

Pretty big disparity between the haves and have nots.

It's not stunning that our GM can't see the correlation.

Come on down Jonathan Cooper!

..or Chance Warmack.

I have no confidence that our GM will admit the gaffs of signing Livings and Bernadeau. And I have no confidence that they're willing to move on from their Costa love affair. I have no confidence our GM has the sensibilities to draft an interior Olineman with a premium pick.

It's not a coincidence that Tyron Smith was the only Olineman he's ever taken in round one.

Going back to what Vela said in his other article, Jerry is a creature of habit and trying to replicate what worked in the past. Well... those dynasty lines were built from cast offs and garbage players. Kennard, Tuinei, Newton etc. Not a 1st rounder in the bunch. Only Stepnoski and Larry Allen were high picks.

But Tony Wise shaped them into a formidable unit. Jerry thinks coaching is all you need.

So we'll draft a safety or a DE or something sexy in round one - which will address a need, but not our biggest need at all.

Supposedly, there was a heavy emphasis on D-linemen made to our scouting department. Now, I know we changed schemes but with the lack of production and age of our current d-linemen, it could still be the focus.

Midswat said:

But Tony Wise shaped them into a formidable unit.

Keep reading...

Having the GOAT finding holes didn't hurt.

How many of those coaches call their own plays?

And if you want to notice anything else... those HCs not only appear to develop players, BUT... they also develop coaches.

What player and/or coach has Garrett developed?

Midswat said:

I have no confidence that our GM will admit the gaffs of signing Livings and Bernadeau. And I have no confidence that they're willing to move on from their Costa love affair. I have no confidence our GM has the sensibilities to draft an interior Olineman with a premium pick.

Keep reading...

Well Mid, if you look at the successful examples listed, what you will notice is that you really don't need a stud or high draft pick at Center. The highest drafted Center on that list is the 49ers's Goodwin, who wasa 5th round draft pick. The rest of the Centers were either UFA (Patriots), 6th round (Ravens), and 7th round (Falcons).

One thing for sure, all the examples listed, their LTs were ALL 1st rounders.

Bottomline is that in every example, including ours from 2007, no LESS than THREE OLinemen were 1st and 2nd round draft picks.

So getting just Warmack is not going to get it done. Maybe get Fredrics from Wisconsin, and put him at OG and keep Bernadeau at Center. But as you said, Jones won't do this. Either way, I still doubt that it would make Garrett a better playcaller.

Fact that we are going to the 4-3 and Garrett's playcalling duties are being stripped, to me is evidence enough that we will not be getting OL in either the 1st or 2nd.

I actually now wish that Garrett would remain the playcaller.

1.) Because we would probably go OL in the 1st or 2nd.
2.) Because it would still expose Garrett as being a flawed playcaller.

You can get away with having scrap for the Dline in most cases, but with the Oline... you need to get the top of the line.

I wonder what their picks look like on the defensive side of the ball.

The article does mistake correlation for causation though - maybe.

You can't just invest high picks in linemen. You've got to hit. For example teams like KC and Cincy I think have invested high picks, the Rams as well, and missed. And they are perpetually terrible.

He could have just wrote "Evaluate players better, and don't be afraid to invest heavily in one area". Which seems to be what we've done, only we've built from the outside in which hasn't worked yet.

KC's line is actually pretty stout.

Bob Sacamano said:

KC's line is actually pretty stout.

Keep reading...

and?

eagles are a good example of a team who draft the shit out of defensive linemen and completely suck at it

superpunk said:

and?

Keep reading...

You said they missed.

I think the correlation is that those teams have good lines, which they invested highly in, as well as QBs, or they have QBs that they can get the most out of.

I think the list is flawed anyways, none of those teams have won a championship yet. Go back at the list of the past winners and look at their Olines.

Bob Sacamano said:

You said they missed.

I think the correlation is that those teams have good lines, which they invested highly in, as well as QBs, or they have QBs that they can get the most out of.

Keep reading...

Exactly. They have good teams. They've hit more often than not. So the idea that because other teams who are winning have hit on high first rounders and big investments and we should do the same is flawed - and if we extrapolate that out to do what everyone seems to be demanding and just throw high picks and money at OL we'd be flawed too. Our line isn't bad because we've failed to throw resources at it, it's bad because we've made bad decisions on those resources.

bkeavs said:

The correlation is stunning but Im not shocked that the succesfull teams have built their offenses from the trenches

Keep reading...

Most successful teams don't run the generic Air Coryell offense either.

As for the topic, you have to look OL if you are Dallas......or any team in a similar position.

The OL protects the most important piece on the team, the QB.