Colt Mccoy And The O-Line Myth
-
Rich is a puss.
-
I do not jump to conclusiions, all i say is based on numbers and facts for fifty years
the best is OL is a "dime a dozen"
keep spinning otherwise bs while we keep losing and spending our best resources on teh OL over and over
In other words, you can't refute any facts I just threw at you. Typical..
In other words, you can't refute any facts I just threw at you. Typical..
Actually, I really like what you said above and referenced below, It represents a thoughful intelligence based viewpoint,
So because a team got sacked a lot and still won the game you are jumping to the conclusion that offensive linemen are a dime a dozen? Pittsburgh also won the turnover battle which is a much bigger factor in winning games. I have stated this before, but I'll do it again. Sacks aren't everything. Dalton wasn't sacked but how much was he hurried and flushed out of the pocket? The answer is a lot. He was 15-30 with 2 picks. The Steelers defense combined with Leon Hall and A.J. Green's injuries helped to win that game. Roethisberger, while good, hangs around in the pocket too long to try and make plays which results in more sacks than your average quarterback. It was a close game and still could have gone either way, so you really don't have any substance to support your dime a dozen theory here.
So my many decades of viewing and understanding the game and what constitutes winning doesn't have substance and is typical, There is nothing typical about understanding and knowing "OL guys are a dime a dozen", rather it is atypical and based who wins and loses games and what factor the oline really played. I your reference above, you clearly stressed the importance of turnovers, which they are. I used my premise about sacks not jumping to any conclusions but another example of "OL being a dime a dozen".
If Ben had not gotten sacked at all would you be giving credit to the OLine for getting it done, hell yah, if they had lost, would you be blaming on the OL, hell yah. The fallacy of it all is that any of the 32 olines in the game playing for the Steelers in that game would have won. What does suppport my dime a dozen theory is fourty years of pro football winners and losers and rag tag patchwork OLines winning Super Bowls. Check the starters on the OL in NO's Super Bowl win, and where they came from. Check and see how many OL guys are cut by one team and then starting for another, an often and regular occurance.. The easiest part of a team to fix is the Oline and that is why they are a dime a dozen. And you are correct, sacks aren't everything and turnovers are more important, and vastly more important than both is scoring and that is mostly a byproduct of offensive players who touch the ball and defensive players who make turnovers, the former way more important. When you add all the positions up on a football team in importance, at the bottom of the list is the OL
The least talented guys in pee wee football are put on the offensive line and that never changes right up through the pros, and the least talented guys are the easiest to replace in any sport, unjump that conclusion
Further, three players cut by the Browns and one dumped started in the Super Bowl three of them on winning teams, in recent years. LT Oben, LT Brown, C O"Hara, and C Faine, dime a dozen, not good enough to start or even play for the Browns but good enough to be a starter in the Super Bowl
-
In other words, you can't refute any facts I just threw at you. Typical..
Actually, I really like what you said above and referenced below, It represents a thoughful intelligence based viewpoint,
So because a team got sacked a lot and still won the game you are jumping to the conclusion that offensive linemen are a dime a dozen? Pittsburgh also won the turnover battle which is a much bigger factor in winning games. I have stated this before, but I'll do it again. Sacks aren't everything. Dalton wasn't sacked but how much was he hurried and flushed out of the pocket? The answer is a lot. He was 15-30 with 2 picks. The Steelers defense combined with Leon Hall and A.J. Green's injuries helped to win that game. Roethisberger, while good, hangs around in the pocket too long to try and make plays which results in more sacks than your average quarterback. It was a close game and still could have gone either way, so you really don't have any substance to support your dime a dozen theory here.
So my many decades of viewing and understanding the game and what constitutes winning doesn't have substance and is typical, There is nothing typical about understanding and knowing "OL guys are a dime a dozen", rather it is atypical and based who wins and loses games and what factor the oline really played. I your reference above, you clearly stressed the importance of turnovers, which they are. I used my premise about sacks not jumping to any conclusions but another example of "OL being a dime a dozen".
If Ben had not gotten sacked at all would you be giving credit to the OLine for getting it done, hell yah, if they had lost, would you be blaming on the OL, hell yah. The fallacy of it all is that any of the 32 olines in the game playing for the Steelers in that game would have won. What does suppport my dime a dozen theory is fourty years of pro football winners and losers and rag tag patchwork OLines winning Super Bowls. Check the starters on the OL in NO's Super Bowl win, and where they came from. Check and see how many OL guys are cut by one team and then starting for another, an often and regular occurance.. The easiest part of a team to fix is the Oline and that is why they are a dime a dozen. And you are correct, sacks aren't everything and turnovers are more important, and vastly more important than both is scoring and that is mostly a byproduct of offensive players who touch the ball and defensive players who make turnovers, the former way more important. When you add all the positions up on a football team in importance, at the bottom of the list is the OL
The least talented guys in pee wee football are put on the offensive line and that never changes right up through the pros, and the least talented guys are the easiest to replace in any sport, unjump that conclusion
Further, three players cut by the Browns and one dumped started in the Super Bowl three of them on winning teams, in recent years. LT Oben, LT Brown, C O"Hara, and C Faine, dime a dozen, not good enough to start or even play for the Browns but good enough to be a starter in the Super Bowl
Actually, I really like what you said above and referenced below, It represents a thoughful intelligence based viewpoint,
So because a team got sacked a lot and still won the game you are jumping to the conclusion that offensive linemen are a dime a dozen? Pittsburgh also won the turnover battle which is a much bigger factor in winning games. I have stated this before, but I'll do it again. Sacks aren't everything. Dalton wasn't sacked but how much was he hurried and flushed out of the pocket? The answer is a lot. He was 15-30 with 2 picks. The Steelers defense combined with Leon Hall and A.J. Green's injuries helped to win that game. Roethisberger, while good, hangs around in the pocket too long to try and make plays which results in more sacks than your average quarterback. It was a close game and still could have gone either way, so you really don't have any substance to support your dime a dozen theory here.
So my many decades of viewing and understanding the game and what constitutes winning doesn't have substance and is typical, There is nothing typical about understanding and knowing "OL guys are a dime a dozen", rather it is atypical and based who wins and loses games and what factor the oline really played. I your reference above, you clearly stressed the importance of turnovers, which they are. I used my premise about sacks not jumping to any conclusions but another example of "OL being a dime a dozen".
If Ben had not gotten sacked at all would you be giving credit to the OLine for getting it done, hell yah, if they had lost, would you be blaming on the OL, hell yah. The fallacy of it all is that any of the 32 olines in the game playing for the Steelers in that game would have won. What does suppport my dime a dozen theory is fourty years of pro football winners and losers and rag tag patchwork OLines winning Super Bowls. Check the starters on the OL in NO's Super Bowl win, and where they came from. Check and see how many OL guys are cut by one team and then starting for another, an often and regular occurance.. The easiest part of a team to fix is the Oline and that is why they are a dime a dozen. And you are correct, sacks aren't everything and turnovers are more important, and vastly more important than both is scoring and that is mostly a byproduct of offensive players who touch the ball and defensive players who make turnovers, the former way more important. When you add all the positions up on a football team in importance, at the bottom of the list is the OL
The least talented guys in pee wee football are put on the offensive line and that never changes right up through the pros, and the least talented guys are the easiest to replace in any sport, unjump that conclusion
Further, three players cut by the Browns and one dumped started in the Super Bowl three of them on winning teams, in recent years. LT Oben, LT Brown, C O"Hara, and C Faine, dime a dozen, not good enough to start or even play for the Browns but good enough to be a starter in the Super Bowl
I agree with this post.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login