Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 73 to 84 of 147
  1. #73

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?



    to the OP... Nope, not in the slightest. LT is still the 2nd most important position on the offensive side of the ball, and perhaps even moreso then any single defensive position.




  2. #74
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    11,867
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?

    Thank You. That's what I said too. That's why the top LTs are the top 5 picks in the draft.
    Everyone needs/wants one.

    As for footwork, KO was moved to LG because of all the guys breezing by him on the end,
    same with Oher on the other end. From everything I read and saw they had slow footwork.
    You really can't teach that. You either have it or you don't but Castillo is still the one who
    can make KO a LT or at least be better than what we got.

    I really don't see any in this draft that can help except the top 2 or 3 that will go high and
    it will cost Oz an arm and leg to trade up. Even the guy from Fla State and Englandwho is really a project and Ravens brought him in months ago will probably go high and he only
    has 1 year of experience, I think. Maybe 2 but he was playing Rugby over in England
    and here in the states, yet he will be drafted in the first round after protecting his
    QB well.
    UBER RAVENS FAN AND HISTORIAN GURU.




  3. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    27,227
    Blog Entries
    3
    Footwork is absolutely something that can be taught. It is the same concept as running a route as a receiver. Hardly any player comes into the league polished. Even the top flight guys have to be coached up. What would be the point of having positional coaches if every prospect drafted automatically had proper footwork or ran impeccable routes?

    What cannot be taught is having long arms, which Oher does not have.

    Whether or not their footwork is poor has nothing to do with the change up before the playoffs and everything to do with Jah Reid getting hurt and them turning to a guy who can only play LT (McKinnie). Had Jah stayed healthy, McKinnie may have continued to ride the pine. Would the Ravens have won it all with that set up? Maybe, but who really knows (or cares)? They did win, so the point is moot.

    Out of curiosity, do you have anything at all as a source for your belief that "poor footwork" was the cause of the OL shuffling?

    Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  4. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    27,227
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    to the OP... Nope, not in the slightest. LT is still the 2nd most important position on the offensive side of the ball, and perhaps even moreso then any single defensive position.
    Couldn't disagree with you more. QB's and receivers could be argued to impact games more than OT's. 10-15 years ago, you would be right. The way the NFL is now puts the onus on the QB and receivers.

    I think a legitimate argument could even be made for corners, safeties, and pass rushers having more of an impact on today's NFL than OTs.

    That is just kind of the way the game is now.

    Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  5. #77

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Couldn't disagree with you more. QB's and receivers could be argued to impact games more than OT's. 10-15 years ago, you would be right. The way the NFL is now puts the onus on the QB and receivers.

    I think a legitimate argument could even be made for corners, safeties, and pass rushers having more of an impact on today's NFL than OTs.

    That is just kind of the way the game is now.

    Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
    yep, we disagree by a LOT...

    Yu brin up WR's? Really? How manysuperbowls do Calvin Johnson, Larry Fitz, Andre Johnson, Randy Moss, AJ Green, Ju;lio Jones, etc... the list can go on... have COMBINED. The answer is still zero.

    I would MAYBE agree with Corner. MAYBE. Offensively there is not a positiion that is close. Heck, TE is quite possibly more important then WR in today's NFL. WR is among the lower tier positions.




  6. #78
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Where Ravens Fans Roam Free
    Posts
    1,917

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?

    Three of the top 5 picks in this year's draft could be LTs. To me, that speaks volumes about the importance of a LT in the NFL. A team can certainly win with a serviceable LT (just as a team can win with a serviceable QB), but it doesn't change the fact that LT is a coveted position.




  7. #79

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?

    In answer to the OP, quite simply yes. Trying to argue with the who believe it to be overly important is like arguing with creationist or flat earthers, no matter how much empirical evidence you show them, they refuse to believe it. Very few people on this earth possess the quality to play the position, so when you can draft one, it makes sense. Using this year’s draft is even a weaker argument. There have been 4 guards drafted in the top 10 in the draft since 1980. Two are projected to go this year. The skill position players are weak this year.

    You really don't have to look much further than the Ravens to see how overrated the position is. People like to say, look how the offense took off when the put McKinney in, while down playing the rest of the changes. You could just as easily say, if LT was so important why, have the Ravens won almost twice as many playoff games (9) without Ogden, than with him(5). I don't think there could have been a much bigger drop off at that position. I know you can point to Flacco, but if LT was really the end all be all, would a QB that has never made a pro bowl really make that much more a difference than going from arguably the greatest LT of all time, to what many of the biggest defenders of the position call the worst LT in the game? Especially when an argument could be made that the rest of the team is worse (at least older) than when JO was playing.




  8. #80

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoeJangles View Post
    In answer to the OP, quite simply yes. Trying to argue with the who believe it to be overly important is like arguing with creationist or flat earthers, no matter how much empirical evidence you show them, they refuse to believe it. Very few people on this earth possess the quality to play the position, so when you can draft one, it makes sense. Using this year’s draft is even a weaker argument. There have been 4 guards drafted in the top 10 in the draft since 1980. Two are projected to go this year. The skill position players are weak this year.

    You really don't have to look much further than the Ravens to see how overrated the position is. People like to say, look how the offense took off when the put McKinney in, while down playing the rest of the changes. You could just as easily say, if LT was so important why, have the Ravens won almost twice as many playoff games (9) without Ogden, than with him(5). I don't think there could have been a much bigger drop off at that position. I know you can point to Flacco, but if LT was really the end all be all, would a QB that has never made a pro bowl really make that much more a difference than going from arguably the greatest LT of all time, to what many of the biggest defenders of the position call the worst LT in the game? Especially when an argument could be made that the rest of the team is worse (at least older) than when JO was playing.
    strawman.... EVERYONE knows that QB is the most important position in all of pro sports. You answered your own question. We won in spite of our QB when JO was here, and since have won in spite of not having a great LT. Great teams can be constructed with less then stellar players at ANY position, including QB, but doing so with merely adequate QB's is the hardest.

    And Oher isn't the worst... Arizona doesn't possess a better LT, Bushrod is equalish.... MIA is probaly worse off at the moment... With Gaither cut the Chargers have no one... that might be it though.

    what could be funny to some though, is that within 48 hours there is likely to be at least 3 teams with not only 1, but 2 better LT's than the Ravens. Cheifs/Pats/Rams.




  9. #81

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?

    I am still trying to figure out how the second most important position on a team does not contribute to wins, almost the inverse. Again, there is no point arguing.




  10. #82

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoeJangles View Post
    I am still trying to figure out how the second most important position on a team does not contribute to wins, almost the inverse. Again, there is no point arguing.
    because it DOES contribute to wins. Just not in a visible way to peopel that watch football at a very basic, elementary level.

    What do you think is the second most important position. I can easily punch as many holes in that theory as you are with this theory. A LT on terrible team isnt going to make a team great, just as a WR, RB etc wont either. ONLY a QB has the opportunity to change the dynamic of a team. Even then, it's hard to do alone.




  11. #83
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    27,227
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post

    because it DOES contribute to wins. Just not in a visible way to peopel that watch football at a very basic, elementary level.
    So...basically anyone who is disagreeing with you only watch football at a very basic and/or elementary level?

    That's interesting.

    Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  12. #84

    Re: Is having a great LT overrated?

    Just like every other position DOES contribute to wins. Again if it was as important as you say there is no way we win the Superbowl last year. Especially since, as you say "within 48 hours there is likely to be at least 3 teams with not only 1, but 2 better LT's than the Ravens. Cheifs/Pats/Rams. " Unless you believe Joe is that much better than Brady that he could overcome that.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland