Cardinal's future try to get the best offensive line possible

cardsunsfan

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Apr 25, 2003
Posts
4,735
Reaction score
162
Location
Arizona
We finally have a long term QB. The important thing is keeping him protected, even more so than a big time receiver. The Oline protects the qb and helps the running game so it helps in a multitude of ways. Teams today have decide what their strengths are going to be with the Cap and I feel this is the most important area. NFL is about offense now, and having a poor DL or Corner is most likely not going to get the other players injured.... I think New England thinks the OL is the most important thing as well and they have done pretty well over the years.. not many flashy players except for maybe Gronk other than the QB.
 

Gandhi

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Posts
2,018
Reaction score
2,866
Location
Denmark
We finally have a long term QB. The important thing is keeping him protected, even more so than a big time receiver. The Oline protects the qb and helps the running game so it helps in a multitude of ways. Teams today have decide what their strengths are going to be with the Cap and I feel this is the most important area. NFL is about offense now, and having a poor DL or Corner is most likely not going to get the other players injured.... I think New England thinks the OL is the most important thing as well and they have done pretty well over the years.. not many flashy players except for maybe Gronk other than the QB.

I’m sorry, CSD, but your basic premise is wrong.

First, the Cardinals certainly have prioritized the offensive line during Keim’s tenure with two out of six first round picks being offensive linemen, and nine out of a total of 42 draft picks being offensive linemen (the next most targeted position group are wide receivers with six). In the same period, they have signed 19 offensive linemen from outside the organization to the active roster (not counting draftees), with three of them being on huge 5-year deals. I don’t know if they have addressed another unit more, but I doubt it.

In the same timeframe the Patriots have had 49 draftpicks and have spent 10 of them on offensive linemen (nine on defensive linemen, and eight on linebackers), but only one in the first round. They have brought in 19 offensive linemen through free agency as well, but none of them have been on big contracts.

You are right, though, that they have an effective offensive line, and I think it has almost everything to do with their offensive line coach, Dante Scarnecchia. My theory is that most of their success (if not all of it) are due to continuity in the coaching staff and the front office, and Scarnecchia has been with them forever. He knows exactly what he needs to make their offensive line effective, in part because he knows what Tom Brady needs in an offensive line. Of the five starters right now, four of them they have drafted themselves, while two of their four backups have joined them from other teams. Of the nine players, I am willing to bet that none of them would get what is considered a big contract on the open market, but they fit exactly into the Patriots’ offensive line because of Scarnecchia, and thus, according to my theory, you can’t just copy what they do because it is the result of many, many years of coaching and knowledge.
 

splitsecond

ASFN Addict
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Posts
5,582
Reaction score
1,536
Location
Chandler, AZ
If we use our top 5 pick this year on a lineman and not a playmaker I am going to lose my mind. Josh needs weapons - it is CLEAR that weapons win in this league now. Look at Kansas City, the Rams and the point that CLEVELAND put up yesterday.

Which reminds me, we should be firing Milks and making a run at Haley in the offseason.
 

Goldfield

Formally known as BEERZ
Joined
Sep 13, 2002
Posts
10,504
Reaction score
2,320
Location
ASFN
I get what your saying. But shouldn’t you always be trying to put together the best Oline?
 

Chopper0080

2021 - Prove It
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
28,283
Reaction score
40,300
Location
Colorado
Eagles - good offensive line
Pats - good offensive line
Rams - good offensive line
Jags - good offensive line
Chiefs - good offensive line
Ravens - good offensive line
Titans - good offensive line
Saints - good offensive line

There seems to be a trend here that we may want to follow. I believe it is easier to find WRs than OL, so I put a higher priority on those. I am good taking shots on 3rd round WRs and signing mid level vets in FA.
 

Garthshort

ASFN Addict
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Posts
9,497
Reaction score
5,753
Location
Scarsdale, NY
Chopper, I know it's a lot more work, but do you know how the above teams acquired their OL's? Trades, drafts, or FA?
 

Gandhi

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Posts
2,018
Reaction score
2,866
Location
Denmark
Chopper, I know it's a lot more work, but do you know how the above teams acquired their OL's? Trades, drafts, or FA?

I can answer that, and save Chopper the time. I hope it’s okay.

The Eagles has two of their own draftees and three free agents.

The Patriots has four of their own draftees and one free agent (actually acquired through trade).

The Rams has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Jaguars has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Chiefs has four of their own draftees and one free agent.

The Ravens has five of their own draftees.

The Titans has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Saints has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

So, while I’m not that good at statistics, I doubt we can say anything definitive from that list, other than it is important to develop some of your own drafted players, but I guess there is nothing new in that. Six of the teams has at least one of their high draft picks (first- or second round) starting, and the only reason the Patriots haven’t is that their first round pick from this year got injured. Four of the teams has two of their high draft picks starting.

There probably is no blueprint to get a good offensive line.
 
OP
OP
C

cardsunsfan

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Apr 25, 2003
Posts
4,735
Reaction score
162
Location
Arizona
I wonder if it has to do with having an OL that fits your scheme and is very smart vs one with the most athletic ability? Patriots are known for getting the non sexy, steady, smart players. Maybe that is even more true for the Oline. I was saying we should draft high, well.. because we are not as good as the patriots at evaluating talent. I agree Josh Rosen can extend plays which helps with the Oline but he did get hurt in college. I think our goal to consistent success is making sure Rosen doesn't get hurt. Anything that can help that is a big bonus. Almost no really good QB doesn't make their team relevant every year. I'd love it if that was us. I liked Palmer, but I was only wondering when he would get hurt or when his production would drop off the cliff due to age. If Rosen can show consistency by the end of next year, I'll be the happiest I've been with the Cardinals... Lets get the right GM and coach though. I don't want to be stuck with them because Rosen plays well...
 

conraddobler

I want my 2$
Joined
Sep 1, 2002
Posts
20,052
Reaction score
237
The number one secret to good oline play is the oline coach.

It's double bonus time if that coach can spot talent and help draft. You absolutely have to hit on your oline picks, it's not just drafting them, it's hitting a very high percentage of home runs when you do.

This typically takes YEARS of good drafting and bad drafting can take YEARS to recover from.

David Johnson needs this as much as Rosen needs it. This goes to the GM, they have to find the coach that they trust to both coach them up and help pick them.

Whatever we're doing is only working so well here now.
 

WindCardinal

All Star
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Posts
927
Reaction score
750
Location
Abilene TX
I personally don’t think the line is in shambles. It’s definitely better than last year. We need a new LG and RT but we are set at LT C and RG
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
13,017
Reaction score
23,173
I personally don’t think the line is in shambles. It’s definitely better than last year. We need a new LG and RT but we are set at LT C and RG
Idk, Wetzel has looked decent. LG, I fully agree with.
 

RugbyMuffin

ASFN IDOL
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Posts
30,485
Reaction score
4,877
Eagles - good offensive line
Pats - good offensive line
Rams - good offensive line
Jags - good offensive line
Chiefs - good offensive line
Ravens - good offensive line
Titans - good offensive line
Saints - good offensive line

There seems to be a trend here that we may want to follow. I believe it is easier to find WRs than OL, so I put a higher priority on those. I am good taking shots on 3rd round WRs and signing mid level vets in FA.


Yes, but is that talent or coaching ?

Joe Thomas stated he didn't listen to a lot of coaches because they had NO IDEA what they were talking about.

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
 

NeverSayDieFan

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Posts
2,864
Reaction score
210
Anytime I hear "Cardinals offensive line", my mind immediately goes back to the mid 70's and Dierdorf, Young, Banks, Dobler, and Finnie. They were the BEST! :)

Mark in SC :)
 

Chopper0080

2021 - Prove It
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
28,283
Reaction score
40,300
Location
Colorado
I think offensive lines need resources invested in them, quality coaching, and a scheme that asks them to do what they can do. The more consistency that you can add, the better.

The point is that, IMO, quality offensive linemen are harder to find than WRs. It isn't that WRs are less important, it is that they are more abundant. I don't know if you have to go with the Dallas Cowboys approach of using a bunch of high draft picks, but I do believe that you have to continue to add players to the mix. I look at the Titans line and believe that they used a nice blend of draft picks and free agents to put together a top of the NFL unit.

In our situation, I think we could be in a decent place if Humphries can get a little more consistent, and stay healthy. Humphries, Cole, and Pugh make up a decent group even if you believe that Pugh is average at best. Shipley as a backup C is valuable. Wetzel IMO is a decent swing OT. That is 5 of the 8 or 9 roster spots you want to dedicate to offensive linemen.
 

Cbus cardsfan

Back to Back ASFN FFL Champion
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
21,463
Reaction score
7,632
I think DJ and the rookie C have looked good. Iupati is done. Pugh looks ok. I never did see the reason they let Bobby Massie walk. I always liked his game.

Those 4(had they kept Massie) would’ve been the makings of a good OL.

I don’t see any can’t miss WRs in this draft, even though I like the kid from Ole Miss, so I’m looking at DL for the Cards. I’m not looking at LT in round 1 as long as DJ keeps playing like he has.
 

LarryStalling

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Posts
1,144
Reaction score
112
I’m sorry, CSD, but your basic premise is wrong.

First, the Cardinals certainly have prioritized the offensive line during Keim’s tenure with two out of six first round picks being offensive linemen, and nine out of a total of 42 draft picks being offensive linemen (the next most targeted position group are wide receivers with six). In the same period, they have signed 19 offensive linemen from outside the organization to the active roster (not counting draftees), with three of them being on huge 5-year deals. I don’t know if they have addressed another unit more, but I doubt it.

In the same timeframe the Patriots have had 49 draftpicks and have spent 10 of them on offensive linemen (nine on defensive linemen, and eight on linebackers), but only one in the first round. They have brought in 19 offensive linemen through free agency as well, but none of them have been on big contracts.

You are right, though, that they have an effective offensive line, and I think it has almost everything to do with their offensive line coach, Dante Scarnecchia. My theory is that most of their success (if not all of it) are due to continuity in the coaching staff and the front office, and Scarnecchia has been with them forever. He knows exactly what he needs to make their offensive line effective, in part because he knows what Tom Brady needs in an offensive line. Of the five starters right now, four of them they have drafted themselves, while two of their four backups have joined them from other teams. Of the nine players, I am willing to bet that none of them would get what is considered a big contract on the open market, but they fit exactly into the Patriots’ offensive line because of Scarnecchia, and thus, according to my theory, you can’t just copy what they do because it is the result of many, many years of coaching and knowledge.

I propose though that 9 out of 42 is actually about right. considering a team has 22 starters and 5 offensive lineman. Now the problem seems to be the proficiency of the OL they acquire. Lots of questionable choices.
 

Gandhi

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Posts
2,018
Reaction score
2,866
Location
Denmark
I propose though that 9 out of 42 is actually about right. considering a team has 22 starters and 5 offensive lineman. Now the problem seems to be the proficiency of the OL they acquire. Lots of questionable choices.

I agree, Larry, and if your point are that they acquire players that, for some reason, doesn’t match well, I would agree with that too.

I can understand the problem right now as they have not only changed the lineup, but also the offensive line coach, the offensive coordinator and the head coach, so preferences and execution might be a bit up in the air. However, I don’t understand why it was continuously a problem during the last regime, as they had the same offensive line coaches, offensive coordinator (who was even an offensive lineman himself) and head coach. Within five years the systems, techniques, cohesions and so on should be clear to everyone, and it should function. Now, they did have injuries among the group, so the cohesion was ruined, and obviously the replacements where whorse players as well, but that happens to everyone.

Now, my view is that most of the league has issues with their offensive lines, and that most of them are only as good as the Cardinals’ where with Josh Rosen as the quarterback. It shouldn’t be an excuse, though, and not even an explanation because I think they should always strive to be the best, so it’s only to say that it certainly is a very difficult thing to make it more than only functional. By the way, if you think about, often the best offensive lines also have the best quarterbacks behind them.
 

JeffGollin

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
20,472
Reaction score
3,056
Location
Holmdel, NJ
I can answer that, and save Chopper the time. I hope it’s okay.

The Eagles has two of their own draftees and three free agents.

The Patriots has four of their own draftees and one free agent (actually acquired through trade).

The Rams has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Jaguars has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Chiefs has four of their own draftees and one free agent.

The Ravens has five of their own draftees.

The Titans has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Saints has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

So, while I’m not that good at statistics, I doubt we can say anything definitive from that list, other than it is important to develop some of your own drafted players, but I guess there is nothing new in that. Six of the teams has at least one of their high draft picks (first- or second round) starting, and the only reason the Patriots haven’t is that their first round pick from this year got injured. Four of the teams has two of their high draft picks starting.

There probably is no blueprint to get a good offensive line.
What this suggests is that a few teams have the secret sauce while others (like us) evidently do not. Solution points to doing a better job evaluating and developing OL talent (which in turn suggests hiring better OL coaches and scouts).

My (pre-Coach Mac) mantra used to be: "Pardon me but what about the offensive line?" - that's how low a priority the Cards made it. Things have improved since then, but the team has to make this a higher priority.

However, problem is - we have other fish to fry (like WR)...
 

Jetstream Green

Kool Aid with a touch of vodka
Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Posts
29,476
Reaction score
16,649
Location
San Antonio, Texas
An OL also needs consistency. We need to keep what works in place to whatever degree we can and see if we can field basically the same OL for a few seasons. Humphries is a legit LT, seem to have a legit young center in Cole, and hopefully Pugh will be good enough. Iupati is not the answer and neither is Andre Smith in accomplishing a unit which excels where the whole working as one is greater than the parts
 

Shaggy

Site Owner Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Posts
9,048
Reaction score
2,989
Location
Arizona
I can answer that, and save Chopper the time. I hope it’s okay.

The Eagles has two of their own draftees and three free agents.

The Patriots has four of their own draftees and one free agent (actually acquired through trade).

The Rams has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Jaguars has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Chiefs has four of their own draftees and one free agent.

The Ravens has five of their own draftees.

The Titans has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

The Saints has three of their own draftees and two free agents.

So, while I’m not that good at statistics, I doubt we can say anything definitive from that list, other than it is important to develop some of your own drafted players, but I guess there is nothing new in that. Six of the teams has at least one of their high draft picks (first- or second round) starting, and the only reason the Patriots haven’t is that their first round pick from this year got injured. Four of the teams has two of their high draft picks starting.

There probably is no blueprint to get a good offensive line.

Nice stats analysis Gandhi, but I'm going to be a grammar cop here. Everywhere you say "has", it needed to be "have".
 
Top