Anybody else been doing this in their mocks over the last week or two since we've known Schwartz will be returning?
I still see the logic in going OT in the 1st, but with Schwartz on deck for 2021, that means we have two tackles in Schwartz and Niang, with Fisher set to return by playoffs time at least.
We have LDT coming back and some depth options, and I'm currently assuming this team bends over backwards to bring back Remmers.
This team does have needs at center and LG, but I assume they slide Allegretti to center and get a decent FA at LG, or maybe they keep Allegretti where he was and invest at center. Either way, plugging the dam on the OL isn't as daunting now as it was before.
Meanwhile, the team is starving for better tertiary options after Hill and Kelce, and are absolutely dying for better DE talent and linebacker options. (And secondary depth, but every team in the NFL always has secondary depth issues.)
I'm finding myself more and more going DE and WR and LB in the early rounds, and holding off on OL until the midrounds. I've had a couple mocks where I haven't gone OL at all, which I know is unreasonable.
But considering what this team has been able to find at OL in the mid to late rounds, I think it's an interesting proposition that we should prepare ourselves for: a fanbase that will convulse at a lack of draft picks at a perceived need. [Reply]
1. You don't know if Fisher is coming back this year, at all, or in 2 months. I'm definitely fine with mocks excluding a 1st round tackle but there needs to be a plan there. If they put Niang there and he sucks, then what? If they put Niang there and he excels, then you need an RT for next year. So, see next...
2. Do you remember the free agent tally on the offensive line?
Here's a reminder:
2021
Austin Reiter, OC
Kelechi Osemele, OG
Mike Remmers, OG
Stefen Wisniewski, OG
Daniel Kilgore, OC
Andrew Wylie, OG (RFA)
2022
Eric Fisher, OT
Mitchell Schwartz, OT
Laurent Duvernay-Tardif, OG
Martinas Rankin, OT
Prince Tega Wanogho, OT (ERFA)
Darryl Williams, OC (ERFA)
Addressing the line "not at all" is clearly not an option. Filling the holes with only late-round options is likely not good practice. There has to be at least one pick before the end of 4 to the OL and I'd argue no less than 2 picks to the OL overall.
Flashy things are great and all but they don't win football games by themselves. Ignore the trenches and you're doomed to fail. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Focus on the trenches and ignore other holes and you'll fail just the same.
Did anyone at any point suggest ignoring other holes?
I'll give you a clue. No.
What has been suggested is to either ignore the Oline or continue to fill it with 6th round picks. That's ridiculous, at best.
Ignoring other things would be to suggest that we take a LT in the 1st, a OC in the 2nd and take a guard and swing tackle later. And that very well wouldn't be a terrible idea. That said, nobody has advocated for it because of needs at WR, DE, LB, SS, and CB. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
Did anyone at any point suggest ignoring other holes?
I'll give you a clue. No.
What has been suggested is to either ignore the Oline or continue to fill it with 6th round picks. That's ridiculous, at best.
Ignoring other things would be to suggest that we take a LT in the 1st, a OC in the 2nd and take a guard and swing tackle later. And that very well wouldn't be a terrible idea. That said, nobody has advocated for it because of needs at WR, DE, LB, SS, and CB.
You said they must take an offensive linemen before the end of the 4th and at least 2 overall.
It's the same thing, you're basically mandating how they use their picks regardless of how the draft falls.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
You said they must take an offensive linemen before the end of the 4th and at least 2 overall.
It's the same thing, you're basically mandating how they use their picks regardless of how the draft falls.
It doesn't work that way.
Yes, you need to get a player that at least has the capability to see the field this year. I don't think you fill the voids coming with a couple of 6th round picks. It's foolish. You all want our QB to get piss pounded into oblivion, go for it. I don't. [Reply]
I think we need to come out of the draft with a LT and a OC. I guess we can debate for the next couple of months on how large an investment to make and whether we see these as permanent fixtures or merely temporary fixes.
My personal preference would be to move on from Fisher. Awkward timing, being injured when he is due for a new contract. htismaqe has correctly pointed out that we don't know the extent of Fisher's injury and he may very well come back 100%. I am not sure I would take that leap of faith. I would prefer to invest a draft pick at this time, as opposed to invest a new contract in a player coming off an achilles injury. Doesn't have to be a 1st round pick necessarily, but should be a significant investment if we are looking for a permanent fix.
I would also favor drafting one of the top three or four centers in this draft, which probably requires a 2nd or 3rd round pick. I guess I would listen to arguments if someone wants to tell me there isn't much drop off from a 3rd round OC to a 5th round OC, or if someone wants to suggest Allegretti at OC and drafting a LG with a lower pick.
Short version: I think we need to draft two OL. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
Yes, you need to get a player that at least has the capability to see the field this year. I don't think you fill the voids coming with a couple of 6th round picks. It's foolish. You all want our QB to get piss pounded into oblivion, go for it. I don't.
The QB isn't going to be piss pounded into oblivion if they don't dedicate X number of draft picks to the offensive line. There's more than one way to address it for one and two, they're not going to have a game all season next year where the starting line is as banged up as the Super Bowl. It's not even probable.
You're outlining a worst case scenario and suggesting it should be assumed to be the new status quo. It won't ever be.
I have no qualms with drafting OL, even high, but the idea that they MUST do this or that is just false. The draft doesn't work that way and I sincerely hope we're not going to spend all offseason bitching about the QB getting "piss pounded" just because there were unrealistic expectations about the draft. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Dante84:
Well, in the presser this morning, Veach shared that they expect both Mitch and Fish to be back by/around Week 1 (Fish targeting mid-August return).
If that's true:
Fisher
LDT
CENTER
Niang
Schwartz
...with some of our holdovers gives us a little more room to operate in FA and the Draft.
I've seen Landon Dickerson getting mocked in the 1st at center.
Besides injuries, anyone have any thoughts on him? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Dante84:
Well, in the presser this morning, Veach shared that they expect both Mitch and Fish to be back by/around Week 1 (Fish targeting mid-August return).
If that's true:
Fisher
LDT
CENTER
Niang
Schwartz
...with some of our holdovers gives us a little more room to operate in FA and the Draft.
Fisher being projected to return is good for the team and good for the draft. Probably not good for any FA projections. [Reply]
I remember the 2018 draft all people wanted to talk about was little Ed Oliver.
Jeffery Simmons was injured and people kept forgetting about him or moving him into the 2nd in mocks.
I liked Simmons so much more that I refused to even care about the injury as Simmons would still be far superior when he returned in the middle of his rookie campaign.
Hopefully medicals leak out before the draft. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
The QB isn't going to be piss-pounded into oblivion if they don't dedicate X number of draft picks to the offensive line. There's more than one way to address it for one and two, they're not going to have a game all season next year where the starting line is as banged up as the Super Bowl. It's not even probable.
You're outlining a worst-case scenario and suggesting it should be assumed to be the new status quo. It won't ever be.
I have no qualms with drafting OL, even high, but the idea that they MUST do this or that is just false. The draft doesn't work that way and I sincerely hope we're not going to spend all offseason bitching about the QB getting "piss pounded" just because there were unrealistic expectations about the draft.
What way do they have to address it other than 1) shitstains for FAs or 2) the draft?
I'm not looking at just 2021. They can make it through 2021 with some vet min guys and maybe 1 draft pick. It's 2022 when they all hit the market that's most concerning. Do you want 4 new offensive linemen in 2022? And maybe that's being facetious on my part a bit... at least 2. You could re-sign Fisher, you have Allegretti, and you have Niang. Still going to need a couple of depth guys and it's probable you'll need 2 starters. [Reply]