How upset would you be if we drafted o line with first 2 picks?

[Lovethefish]

I would be disappointed if we go O-line at 11 & 43. Here are some thoughts:

If we draft OL at 11 & 43 it would mean that we allocated minimal or no FA assets to OL. This would prove a mistake for following reasons-
I like the FA Guard and Center market. Guys like Jensen Pugh Norwell Fulton are appealing.
If you fail to sign any OL help you are hamstringing your approach to the draft.
Appears to be stronger OL FA pool in contrast to the Def FA talent this off season.
If you go OL 11/43, you probably are bypassing BPA especially at 11.

 

[Blake the great]

I would be pissed because I don't care what anyone says, no guard is going to make us that much better. We have tried drafting a guard and OT for years and here we are. Just spend the money on a guard in free agency for Christ sake and draft a difference maker at a skilled position in the first. There will always be a solid guard in free agency to be had, but luke kuehely' s don't ever become free agents. And a playmaker like that, would be more of an impact than even a steve Hutchinson guard.

 

[miamiron]

The line isn't as bad as people are making it out to be, certainly not to the point of investing an entire draft into it.

And before the tired "you want our QB to get killed" line, we had the 11th best pass blocking despite a statue QB.

Fix the defense.

and that #11 stat only takes into consideration sacks
does not take QB hits or QB hurries into consideration

Should be we were 11th in SACKS allowed and that's a far cry from
saying we were 11th in pass blocking

 

[Gonzo]

and that #11 stat only takes into consideration sacks
does not take QB hits or QB hurries into consideration

Should be we were 11th in SACKS allowed and that's a far cry from
saying we were 11th in pass blocking

Eagles had more QB hits too. I'm sure you'll find a stat to justify the claim if you keep digging though. Fact is, the Eagles pass protection wasn't better and even if you can find something to show that it was (stats out there to fit any view, really), it would only be marginally. Certainly not enough to support the constant doom and gloom about it and MOST certainly not enough to justify blowing the top picks YET AGAIN on the o-line.

If you want to use the Eagles as a barometer for anything, use them to justify fixing the godawful defense.

 

[miamiron]

Eagles had more QB hits too. I'm sure you'll find a stat to justify the claim if you keep digging though. Fact is, the Eagles pass protection wasn't better and even if you can find something to show that it was (stats out there to fit any view, really), it would only be marginally. Certainly not enough to support the constant doom and gloom about it and MOST certainly not enough to justify blowing the top picks YET AGAIN on the o-line.

If you want to use the Eagles as a barometer for anything, use them to justify fixing the godawful defense.

Not sure why your bringing up the Eagles offensive line since I never mentioned them
I just mentioned you cant say we had the 11th best pass blocking offensive line when you
limited to sacks allowed with no mention of QB hits or hurries. QB pressures are more than just sacks allowed

 

[Gonzo]

Not sure why your bringing up the Eagles offensive line since I never mentioned them
I just mentioned you cant say we had the 11th best pass blocking offensive line when you
limited to sacks allowed with no mention of QB hits or hurries. QB pressures are more than just sacks allowed

Good point, got it confused with another thread where I had to point out that the pass blocking isn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be, where the Eagles were brought up as a goal for pass protection.

And spare me the lecture, I've seen enough of the dumb PFF articles. We were amongst the top in lowest QB hits allowed too (as I already pointed out). Like I said, I'm sure you can find some stat out there calculated by some nerd that supports literally whatever view you have. Doesn't change the fact that the pass protection was fine, particularly with the absurd amount we've already invested into it.

 

[rent this space]

The line definitely improved in the 2nd half of the season, not being run by a coke-head probably helped. They also seemed better without the $9 million RT, rescinding that 5th year option on James might be a good idea, too.

 

[ColoradoFin]

I think we need to take the BPA in round one....if most of our top need guys are off the board, then we should trade down. I would love to draft Will Hernandez in round two if he is there. He isn’t that tall but he is a bulldozer:

Will Hernandez, G, UTEP
Height: 6-2. Weight: 340. Arm: 32.38. Hand: 9.75.
Projected 40 Time: 5.25.
Projected Round (2018): 1-2.

 

[CedarPhin]

I think we need to take the BPA in round one....if most of our top need guys are off the board, then we should trade down. I would love to draft Will Hernandez in round two if he is there. He isn’t that tall but he is a bulldozer:

Will Hernandez, G, UTEP
Height: 6-2. Weight: 340. Arm: 32.38. Hand: 9.75.
Projected 40 Time: 5.25.
Projected Round (2018): 1-2.

He'd be a great pick. Could definitely see him in the 2nd.

 

[Oraclepz]

I wouldn't be mad .. I don't care who we draft as long as they're good players