Why a franchise LT is nonsense

Thats a little bit over the top comparing LT to fullback...you don't even have to roster a fullback but someone has to man LT every single offensive snap...you cant have consistently bad LT play and expect to have a good offense.

I think "Franchise" left tackle is outdated but you do need a good player there and it is worth spending resources to get one..unlike a fullback.

Probably right about 'franchise'. But it's an important role: why do NFL FOs pay them more than most positions? Why do so many consistently go in the first round? They line up and compete directly against another 'value' position DE, and are the chief protectors of the most important position QB.

Not a #1 pick or a 9 million per yr contract, they just do not make as much of a difference as people seem to think they do. It would be far better to take an impact player with high value resources.

My one caveat is, a Tackle can be just hot garbage the way Colombo was, that is more the exception than the rule.

"Limbo wrote:

Probably right about 'franchise'. But it's an important role: why do NFL FOs pay them more than most positions? Why do so many consistently go in the first round? They line up and compete directly against another 'value' position DE, and are the chief protectors of the most important position QB.

B/c the NFL has it wrong, what real value is there when the D simply flips their premium passrusher on your RT and let's mr 9 millie/#1 pick battle it out with a scrubbini?

This thread really makes no sense. Branden Albert is one of the best pass protectors in the league, there isn't a huge difference between him and the potential best. There are other aspects, there is run blocking, there is salary cap cost, there is age, there is injury history, etc. and so on.

Just guessing what the potential difference between an elite LT and a bad LT rather than actually making some attempt to figure it out is just lazy innuendo. Furthermore, you can just ****ing watch. If you can't tell me the difference of the impact between D'Anthony Bastite and Joe Thomas just watching maybe like a series or two, you need to take up a different sport, this one isn't for you.

The "offensive linemen don't matter much unless they are really super bad" argument is really the most intellectually bankrupt idea that has made its way around here in some time.

Yeah, as PFF points out what a 2% upgrade?

To put that into context, a single rookie for us who scored say 8 Td's, would be how large of an upgrade over 12's wr's corps Td production?

A defense can always flop their De, offenses cannot flop a LT to face them at RT, and yet, this meme persists.

"padre31 wrote:

Think about that for a moment..2% upgrade?

Really, now compare say Albert to Martin in terms of pressures allowed, say it's as high as 10% more pressures..you are looking at maybe what, 20 more pressures or sacks in 700 plays?

Put that cornerstone LT stuff to bed, it deserves it's grave of outdated ideas like a Fullback.

Obviously the GM's in the league don't agree with you, since the thinking at this time is that three LT's will probably be taken within the first 10 picks next Thursday. You might think a cornerstone LT is as outdated as a Fullback, but I bet 32 starting QB's in the NFL would disagree with you.

"jw3102 wrote:

Obviously the GM's in the league don't agree with you, since the thinking at this time is that three LT's will probably be taken within the first 10 picks next Thursday. You might think a cornerstone LT is as outdated as a Fullback, but I bet 32 starting QB's in the NFL would disagree with you.

Do show me the recent list of Top 10 drafted offensive lineman who are on winning teams?

"padre31 wrote:

Yeah, as PFF points out what a 2% upgrade?

You're making an argument against what the Chiefs are doing, not what the Dolphins are doing.

"padre31 wrote:

A defense can always flop their De, offenses cannot flop a LT to face them at RT, and yet, this meme persists.

I'm not sure you understand what "meme" means. The idea that a franchise left tackle is basically football orthodoxy, and has been for several decades. A meme is basically an amateur creation that is often crowd sourced, and is difficult to take at face value or satirical in nature.

Hey, wait, that is exactly what your idea is.

Perhaps you might want to consider attaching a picture of a cat to the idea that franchise tackles aren't important? "Can I has wide receiver plz?", maybe?

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gs_rn=9&gs_ri=psy-ab&gs_mss=cat+vomeronasal&tok=nhauyo7i71bsA6sVY0f34w&cp=7&gs_id=r&xhr=t&q=cat+pictures&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45512109,d.eWU&biw=1280&bih=937&ion=1&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=qL5xUf7BOIjG9gTvzIGQDw

I can see both sides of the argument .I think what has changed is if you draft a LT high and he proves to be very good at his job you will only have him as long as his rookie contract lasts .After that they price themselves out of the market or take up an inordinate amount of the teams cap.It used to be that you could depend on that LT lasting at least 10 yrs.

So there are dimishing returns on an investment on a LT .That would mean that you would have to draft a LT every 4 yrs or so .

To me, I agree with your point about paying a guy 9 million a year or so to play LT. Especially when we are in the position to be able to move up a few spots, get a LT you can plug in and play week 1, for the mere cost of the rookie pay scale for what.. 4 or 5 years now? To me, that exact point screams to me that we are likely going to trade up, and draft a LT early. The fact of the matter is, you need an excellent player at that position. You can't deny that. You almost need a first round talent to play there right away. Our current roster does not give us the luxury of being able to draft one in the later rounds and let him develop. We need someone who can play the position ASAP, I dont see Ireland and company paying Albert 8-9 million a year. If they wanted to do that they'd have likely kept Long.

I think they view LT as a "franchise position" but from an elite talent perspective only, not an elite salary perspective. Which is why I think we will draft one early.

"padre31 wrote:

Yeah, as PFF points out what a 2% upgrade?

To put that into context, a single rookie for us who scored say 8 Td's, would be how large of an upgrade over 12's wr's corps Td production?

A defense can always flop their De, offenses cannot flop a LT to face them at RT, and yet, this meme persists.

A 2% upgrade over one of the best pass protectors in the league, all this does is highlight that KC shouldn't be looking to go OT with the #1, not that taking an OT at #1 is wrong.

I don't have the PFF stats but didn't Martin allow a ridiculous number of pressures last year (something like 56 if I remember right)? If you have the chance to draft someone that will cut that number in half, you are getting a 50% upgrade. Those extra 28 plays might actually end up producing more touchdowns.

Also, I thought the perception is that it's easier to play tackle in a ZBS, in other words you don't need Jake Long and Tony Bosselli's out there, is this wrong?

"brandon27 wrote:

To me, I agree with your point about paying a guy 9 million a year or so to play LT. Especially when we are in the position to be able to move up a few spots, get a LT you can plug in and play week 1, for the mere cost of the rookie pay scale for what.. 4 or 5 years now? To me, that exact point screams to me that we are likely going to trade up, and draft a LT early. The fact of the matter is, you need an excellent player at that position. You can't deny that. You almost need a first round talent to play there right away. Our current roster does not give us the luxury of being able to draft one in the later rounds and let him develop. We need someone who can play the position ASAP, I dont see Ireland and company paying Albert 8-9 million a year. If they wanted to do that they'd have likely kept Long.

I think they view LT as a "franchise position" but from an elite talent perspective only, not an elite salary perspective. Which is why I think we will draft one early.

No, you do not, you need merely an avg player and offensive skill position talent that scores Td's.

In Cinci, by any measure AJ Green was far more a key to making the playoffs 2 yrs in a row then Andre Smith, who basically was a bust until last yr.

"padre31 wrote:

Do show me the recent list of Top 10 drafted offensive lineman who are on winning teams?

Top 10 picking teams generally did worse then .500 the year before... You know to pick in the top 10...

You can find value all over, but the probability rate of a player becoming the # one at his position I would assume percentage wise would drop over the course of the draft... So give me 20 third round OT and give me 20 first round OT...

BTW I would not call the LT an unskilled position.They are skilled at getting huge contracts more that some starting QBs .Think about that.

Probably moot. It's looking like they are going to eventually sign Brandon Albert.

"padre31 wrote:

Think about that for a moment..2% upgrade?

Really, now compare say Albert to Martin in terms of pressures allowed, say it's as high as 10% more pressures..you are looking at maybe what, 20 more pressures or sacks in 700 plays?

Put that cornerstone LT stuff to bed, it deserves it's grave of outdated ideas like a Fullback.

2% increase in offense would have meant that the Fins would have won three more games last year (NYJ, Az, Indie)

just saying….

"PhinsRDbest wrote:

Also, I thought the perception is that it's easier to play tackle in a ZBS, in other words you don't need Jake Long and Tony Bosselli's out there, is this wrong?

The differences between blocking schemes are fundamentally about how a player figures out whom he is supposed to block. I don't think one is easier than the other, fundamentally an elite left tackle is going to be put on an island against elite edge rushers regardless.

"padre31 wrote:

Think about that for a moment..2% upgrade?

Really, now compare say Albert to Martin in terms of pressures allowed, say it's as high as 10% more pressures..you are looking at maybe what, 20 more pressures or sacks in 700 plays?

Put that cornerstone LT stuff to bed, it deserves it's grave of outdated ideas like a Fullback.

Doesn't take but one of those 20 to end your QB's season...

A great LT isnt going to make a bad QB or RB great, but a terrible one is going to make a good QB or RB far less effective. Football is a team sport.

I can agree the LT payroll is a bit out of hand when 10 mill of 125 ish mill is going to one man. Problem is this is the guy standing on the blindside of most QB's so we have to ponder is it worth a few extra BIG hits to your QB? Most QB's won't be able to take that kind of constant punishment and maintain good play or health. So if that's the going price to shore up your blind side we are kinda screwed from the start or recycling QB's on a regular basis.

"padre31 wrote:

Do show me the recent list of Top 10 drafted offensive lineman who are on winning teams?

Umm ok. Ryan Kalil.
In 2010, 3 teams drafted Oline in the top 11 and ALL MADE THE PLAYOFFS last year. Wups.

During the past 5 years, 10 teams drafted a tackle in the top twelve.
Their combined record the year prior to drafting their tackle was 45-114, obviously none making the playoffs.
Their combined 2012 record jumped to 89-69 with 6 of 10 teams making the playoffs last year alone.

What were you saying, Pods?

Agreed. The difference between the best LT and a serviceable LT is so marginal when compared to the differences between skill positions such as WR, QB, TE ect when you're talking about the best compared to serviceable.