Early offensive line predictions

[PackAttack12]

I think this will be an interesting discussion to have.

- signed Billy Turner to a 4 year deal.
- drafted Jenkins early
- Cole Madison to return after missing last year
- Bulaga decision looming
- Lane Taylor's current fit schematically?
- still have a lot invested in Spriggs (took 3 draft picks to get him by the way... )


Just wanted to get a gauge on where everyone stands in regards to the future of this position group. What is your take? And/or what do you think is the direction that Gute and company are going? What is your early (pre-training camp) prediction for our starting 5 for 2019?

 

[tynimiller]

I believe Lane Taylor ends up on outside looking in. Cole Madison will sure up a back up internal role. Bakhtiar, Jenkins, Linsley, Turner, Bulaga I suspect to be starting line.

 

[gbgary]

i think it starts off as expected...bakh, taylor, linsley, turner, bulaga...until someone gets hurt. then the shuffle begins.

 

[Dantés]

I think our starting lineup week one (assuming health) will be:

Bakhtiari - Jenkins - Linsley - Turner - Bulaga

I think that Spriggs is basically a lock to make the roster as a backup because he plays tackle.

Taylor, Patrick, Madison, Light, and Pankey will be fighting for roster spots.

Moving forward, RT is the position of concern. I think Spriggs will have this TC and season to demonstrate that he has made the progress necessary to be considered an heir apparent to Bulaga. I doubt that will be the case, but unless they view Turner as the future RT (which I don't think is the case) then there really isn't anyone in house to take that job.

If Spriggs successfully seizes his opportunity, then we basically know what the lineup will look like in 2020-- just switch Spriggs' name in for Bulaga's and keep drafting depth. If he fails to demonstrate progress, then I think both he and Bulaga will walk and RT becomes a gaping hole that will need to be filled either in FA or in the 1st round next year.

Targeting FA's this far out in advance is an exercise in futility because guys will inevitably get resigned or tagged or hurt. But these are the notable tackles currently slated to be FA's in 2020:

• Andrew Whitworth (38)
• Anthony Castonzo (32)
• Kelvin Beachum (30)
• La'el Collins (27)
• Joe Staley (36)
• Marcus Gilbert (32)
• Jason Peters (38)
• Daryl Williams (28)
• Demar Dotson (34)
• D.J. Humphries (26)
• Halapoulivaati Vaitai (27)

There will potentially be an interesting number of older veterans on the market next offseason. I suppose the Packers could potentially sign an older guy and take the pressure off of taking a tackle super early.

Anyone who is both young and competent is going to make a ton of money (see: Brown, Trent). GB will likely be priced out after their most recent shopping spree.

In Dane Brugler's 2020 mock draft (which he said should be treated more like a "watch list" of prospects), four tackle prospects appear:

• Andrew Thomas, UGA: "One of the few offensive tackles who shut down Kentucky’s Josh Allen last season, Thomas started at right tackle as a true freshman in 2017 before kicking over to left tackle in 2018. He replaced 2018 first-rounder Isaiah Wynn and there was little to no drop-off."
• Tristan Wirfs, IA: "Iowa continues to pump out premier offensive linemen and tight ends. If he continues on his strong play from last season, Wirfs absolutely has top-10 potential. He is a powerful drive-blocker in the run game and stays balanced in pass protection, not allowing speed to stress him."
• Walker Little, STAN: "Entering his third season as Stanford’s starting left tackle, Little has steadily improved in each of the past two seasons and is poised for an All-American junior campaign in 2019. He has the size and movements, but his mental development will be key."
• Liam Eichenberg, ND: "A Cleveland native, Eichenberg took over for Mike McGlinchey this past season as the Irish’s starting left tackle and played well. He moves well on his feet and uses bend to slide/redirect to pass-rushers or move bodies in the run game."

 

[PikeBadger]

I think our starting lineup week one (assuming health) will be:

Bakhtiari - Jenkins - Linsley - Turner - Bulaga

I think that Spriggs is basically a lock to make the roster as a backup because he plays tackle.

Taylor, Patrick, Madison, Light, and Pankey will be fighting for roster spots.

Moving forward, RT is the position of concern. I think Spriggs will have this TC and season to demonstrate that he has made the progress necessary to be considered an heir apparent to Bulaga. I doubt that will be the case, but unless they view Turner as the future RT (which I don't think is the case) then there really isn't anyone in house to take that job.

If Spriggs successfully seizes his opportunity, then we basically know what the lineup will look like in 2020-- just switch Spriggs' name in for Bulaga's and keep drafting depth. If he fails to demonstrate progress, then I think both he and Bulaga will walk and RT becomes a gaping hole that will need to be filled either in FA or in the 1st round next year.

Targeting FA's this far out in advance is an exercise in futility because guys will inevitably get resigned or tagged or hurt. But these are the notable tackles currently slated to be FA's in 2020:

• Andrew Whitworth (38)
• Anthony Castonzo (32)
• Kelvin Beachum (30)
• La'el Collins (27)
• Joe Staley (36)
• Marcus Gilbert (32)
• Jason Peters (38)
• Daryl Williams (28)
• Demar Dotson (34)
• D.J. Humphries (26)
• Halapoulivaati Vaitai (27)

There will potentially be an interesting number of older veterans on the market next offseason. I suppose the Packers could potentially sign an older guy and take the pressure off of taking a tackle super early.

Anyone who is both young and competent is going to make a ton of money (see: Brown, Trent). GB will likely be priced out after their most recent shopping spree.

In Dane Brugler's 2020 mock draft (which he said should be treated more like a "watch list" of prospects), four tackle prospects appear:

• Andrew Thomas, UGA: "One of the few offensive tackles who shut down Kentucky’s Josh Allen last season, Thomas started at right tackle as a true freshman in 2017 before kicking over to left tackle in 2018. He replaced 2018 first-rounder Isaiah Wynn and there was little to no drop-off."
• Tristan Wirfs, IA: "Iowa continues to pump out premier offensive linemen and tight ends. If he continues on his strong play from last season, Wirfs absolutely has top-10 potential. He is a powerful drive-blocker in the run game and stays balanced in pass protection, not allowing speed to stress him."
• Walker Little, STAN: "Entering his third season as Stanford’s starting left tackle, Little has steadily improved in each of the past two seasons and is poised for an All-American junior campaign in 2019. He has the size and movements, but his mental development will be key."
• Liam Eichenberg, ND: "A Cleveland native, Eichenberg took over for Mike McGlinchey this past season as the Irish’s starting left tackle and played well. He moves well on his feet and uses bend to slide/redirect to pass-rushers or move bodies in the run game."

I think the fact that an OT was not drafted says an awful lot about what Packers staff and management feel about the current tackles on the roster.

 

[Do7]

Question you guys. How many seconds in your estimation should a QB have to throw the ball typically? I'm asking because we know Rodgers has a tendency to hold the ball, and there are times where the line does implode forcing Rodgers to scatter around or get sacked.

 

[mradtke66]

Question you guys. How many seconds in your estimation should a QB have to throw the ball typically? I'm asking because we know Rodgers has a tendency to hold the ball, and there are times where the line does implode forcing Rodgers to scatter around or get sacked.

2.5 ball is out, but that is somewhat scheme dependent.

A three step drop, for example, is usually faster. Or it should be in west-coast derived schemes. 1, 2, 3 steps, the 3rd becomes your plant, turn and throw.

WR screens are faster still--snap, open stance to that side of the formation, ball out.

While they are certainly times when the OL can get beat, in general, our line has been more than capable of holding up their end of the bargain. Barbre (spelling?) early in Rodgers career was someone who wasn't.

Spriggs getting beat with outside in moves is (typically, anyway) still adequate for 3 step drops.

 

[Dantés]

I think the fact that an OT was not drafted says an awful lot about what Packers staff and management feel about the current tackles on the roster.

It could... or it could have been happenstance.

There wasn't a RT prospect on the board worthy of the 12th pick.

Safety was the biggest, immediately glaring hole on the roster.

So basically #44 was the first chance to address the position, and they took an iOL. So either they like their OT situation, they really don't like their iOL situation, or both. My personal guess is that they would have liked to draft a tackle but felt interior offensive line was the bigger need.

I would also argue that #44 was also their last chance to address OT with a prospect who has a strong chance to start in 2020. After Scharping came off the board, I didn't love many of the remaining choices.

 

[Mondio]

I'm leaning towards it being they saw guys that could really give them a chance at a dominant defense over a guy that maybe would be a decent Tackle and took the chance at dominance.

 

[Dantés]

Question you guys. How many seconds in your estimation should a QB have to throw the ball typically? I'm asking because we know Rodgers has a tendency to hold the ball, and there are times where the line does implode forcing Rodgers to scatter around or get sacked.

Totally varies depending on play design. I would say asking OL to consistently block for more than 3 seconds is asking a ton. But sometimes play action will both help the protection while also lengthening the amount of time to throw. Think about a PA roll out that you see so often in Shanahan style offenses... long time to throw, but the mechanics of the play actually helps the line.

A time to throw of about 2.75 seconds was average in 2018. The quickest TT guys were all older pocket passers or guys who really struggle under pressure. Derek Carr (2.55), Ben Roethlisberger (2.55), Drew Brees (2.59), Andy Dalton (2.61), Tom Brady (2.61), and Philip Rivers (2.62) were quickest.

Josh Allen (3.22), Lamar Jackson (3.1), Russell Wilson (3.01), Deshaun Watson (3.01), and Aaron Rodgers (2.95) were the slowest.

What you notice about that bottom five is that, with the exception of Green Bay, those were all run heavy, play action teams with young athletes at QB. Rodgers is athletic, but he was playing hurt. And he wasn't using PA nearly as often as the other guys, largely because Green Bay didn't run the ball.

Interesting: the next slowest TT was Jared Goff (2.94), which I think had a ton to do with the fact that they led the league in % of play action passes in their passing game (36%).

Houston and Buffalo both ran PA 24% of the time, Baltimore 28%, and Buffalo 33%. Green Bay only used PA on 20% of their passes.

Expect to see a lot more of it. Tennessee was 6th in PA attempts in 2018 with 29%, LA as mentioned was 1st with 34%, and SF under Shanahan was 11th at 26%. LA and SF were also top 5 in yds/play off of play action last year (9.4 and 9.1 respectively). Tennessee was 15th at 8.1, but I think that had more to do with personnel than anything.

 

[Dantés]

I'm leaning towards it being they saw guys that could really give them a chance at a dominant defense over a guy that maybe would be a decent Tackle and took the chance at dominance.

I totally understand the first round. There really was not a tackle for them at #12 even if they wanted one. It came out late in the process that Dillard is considered a LT only. They could have waited for McGary but they went up and addressed a bigger, more immediate need with a guy who stood apart for them at the position.

To me it all comes down to pick #44. Scharping was there and they chose Jenkins. Jenkins is a superior prospect, so it's hard to say whether they took Jenkins because of value, greater perceived need, or both. But I don't think we should necessarily assume that they love their OT's. Once the top couple of tiers were gone, it might have just made more sense to run it back with Spriggs one more time and see where they end up in 2020.

Turner and Madison's tackle versatility probably made them feel more comfortable about it as well.

Yosh Nijman, OT from VTU, is a hyper talented athlete. If he takes to coaching, it will be interesting to see what he can do.

 

[Quientus]

https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing#yards

 

[gbgary]

Question you guys. How many seconds in your estimation should a QB have to throw the ball typically? I'm asking because we know Rodgers has a tendency to hold the ball, and there are times where the line does implode forcing Rodgers to scatter around or get sacked.

2.5 secs max (in the pocket)! he'll have to take sacks once in a while...it's unavoidable sometimes...but if it happens after he's ignored open guys, THAT'S a problem. if that happens at the rate it's been happening...look for 6-10.

 

[PikeBadger]

2.5 secs max (in the pocket)! he'll have to take sacks once in a while...it's unavoidable sometimes...but if it happens after he's ignored open guys, THAT'S a problem. if that happens at the rate it's been happening...look for 6-10.

Rodgers MUST make changes in his game or we’ll see more of the same old problems we’ve seen for about 4 years. He is probably never going to see as good a pass blocking line as he had from 2010-2014.

 

[tynimiller]

Rodgers MUST make changes in his game or we’ll see more of the same old problems we’ve seen for about 4 years. He is probably never going to see as good a pass blocking line as he had from 2010-2014.

False IMO. Rodgers takes FAR too long sometimes. He must get trust check downs in the flats way more than he typically is willing to do. You cannot expect a line to consistently hold for 4, 5 or more seconds each play.

 

[OldSchool101]

Bakhtiari - Jenkins - Linsley - Turner - Bulaga

I think that Spriggs is basically a lock to make the roster as a backup because he plays tackle.

Taylor, Patrick, Madison, Light, and Pankey will be fighting for roster spots.

What about McCray?

 

[HardRightEdge]

The default assumption is that a well-paid FA OG and a #44 pick capabable of playing OG will be starters at those positions that can stand an upgrade.

When it comes to the bench, the 53 man roster is one thing. The 46 man game day roster is another. 8 OL on game day is something of a luxury to be avoided if it can be managed. So positional flexibility among the starters and the bench players is critical in order suit up 7 OL. In any position group you're looking to cover 2 potential injuries which is why positional flexibility is valued. OL is no different.

46 players is not a lot to cover all the injury contingencies, sub package players, and field the special teams.

So, look at starter losses at every combination of two players in a position group and see how the remaining starter shuffles and guys off the bench might work, and not just in the OL. It's premature to judge. We'll have to see who gets work where in preseason and how they handle it.

The picture changes quite a bit if Dan Quinn's idea gets any traction:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...nd-game-day-active-rosters-beyond-46-players/

It does beg the questions, "Why only 46?" or "Why not all 53?"

I believe the smaller game day roster is traditionally viewed as a challenge to the coach's and GM's abilities to construct a roster and develop players with positional flexibility. Maybe that's eventually going to be viewed as antique in what has become an increasingly specialized game. We'll see where it goes, if anywhere at all.

In the mean time, rather than evaluate players solely on their viability at their position listed in the roster you have to ask, "what else can they do?"

 

[PikeBadger]

The default assumption is that a well-paid FA OG and a #44 pick capabable of playing OG will be starters at those positions that can stand an upgrade.

When it comes to the bench, the 53 man roster is one thing. The 46 man game day roster is another. 8 OL on game day is something of a luxury to be avoided if it can be managed. So positional flexibility among the starters and the bench players is critical in order suit up 7 OL. In any position group you're looking to cover 2 potential injuries which is why positional flexibility is valued. OL is no different.

46 players is not a lot to cover all the injury contingencies, sub package players, and field the special teams.

So, look at starter losses at every combination of two players in a position group and see how the remaining starter shuffles and guys off the bench might work, and not just in the OL. It's premature to judge. We'll have to see who gets work where in preseason and how they handle it.

The picture changes quite a bit if Dan Quinn's idea gets any traction:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...nd-game-day-active-rosters-beyond-46-players/

It does beg the questions, "Why only 46?" or "Why not all 53?"

I believe the smaller game day roster is traditionally viewed as a challenge to the coach's and GM's abilities to construct a roster and develop players with positional flexibility. Maybe that's eventually going to be viewed as antique in what has become an increasingly specialized game. We'll see where it goes, if anywhere at all.

In the mean time, rather than evaluate players solely on their viability at their position listed in the roster you have to ask, "what else can they do?"

The 46 versus 53 question opens up a supersized can of worms for the NFLPA in my opinion. Would lead to a heckuva internal fight among members about how much the additional 7 are to be paid. That would make for interesting theater.

 

[Pkrjones]

The 46 versus 53 question opens up a supersized can of worms for the NFLPA in my opinion. Would lead to a heckuva internal fight among members about how much the additional 7 are to be paid. That would make for interesting theater.

I don't think pay factors in at all. Most, if not all, of the "additional 7" guys would be low-end pay guys still on rookie deals, so per-game-roster-bonuses wouldn't factor in (usually per game bonuses are for 2nd contract, higher-priced guys). These guys all get the same each week, whether they're active or not on game day. Am I missing something?

 

[tynimiller]

What about McCray?

McCray IMO is our most important back up. Many forget about him though for some reason.

 

[HardRightEdge]

McCray IMO is our most important back up. Many forget about him though for some reason.

McCray was lauded for his serviceable performance as an emergency fill-in at OT. And everybody likes a UDFA grinder story. However, whether at OG or OT, his body of work has been just that--serviceable.

He missed weeks 4 and 5 last season with a shoulder injury, Bell took over, and McCray didn't get his job back until Bell was injured mid-game in week 13. If Bell were still around, a guy the Packers didn't think was worth keeping, McCray would be 3-deep at RG.

If Taylor loses his job to Jenkins, which I believe is the default assumption at this point, it's worth considering he filled in at LT. At this point, without McCray there are OT backup options with some combination of McCray, Spriggs or Turner moving over.

The Packers did exercise the exclusive rights option on McCray at sub-$1 mil for one year with no guarantee, so he'll be in camp fighting for a job. But he's squarely on the bubble. His odds go up or down depending on whether the Packers keep 8 or 9 OL on the 53 man roster.

 

[Dantés]

I left McCray out of the list of guys who will be in competition due to an oversight. I'm sure he will be in the mix. But I don't think he's a lock for the roster at all.

 

[OldSchool101]

https://lombardiave.com/2019/05/01/packers-53-man-roster-predictions-2019-nfl-draft/6/

It’s interesting. What a coincidence that this article came out just this am and also left out McCray. Hmmm... Interesting coincidence
Hey guess he’s a forgetful kinda guy! That’ll be good for him when it comes to final cutdown

 

[Half Empty]

False IMO. Rodgers takes FAR too long sometimes. He must get trust check downs in the flats way more than he typically is willing to do. You cannot expect a line to consistently hold for 4, 5 or more seconds each play.

Just wondering. Seems like you're just stating what the two guys above you said, just in slightly different terms. Don't understand the 'false' comment. Just for my own edification, can you explain?

 

[HardRightEdge]

The 46 versus 53 question opens up a supersized can of worms for the NFLPA in my opinion. Would lead to a heckuva internal fight among members about how much the additional 7 are to be paid. That would make for interesting theater.

Are you sure you're not confusing 53 man game day inactives with the practice squad?

Game day inactives are paid like anybody else worthy of a job toward the bottom of the roster. If anything, the owners would have the beef in paying guys subject to the league minimums who are not available to play any given week.