DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Offensive line

Agree. Schwartz won't win as an individual, but the OL as a whole works well.

I think starters are fine. Problem lies when we lose a one. The group dies off. I think depth doesn't match. It is why things go South.

The problem was McQuistan. He was the guy who was supposed to be able to step in at guard and/or tackle if someone went down and he was terrible. If we can find a good backup guard we could be set with Michael Bowie being our backup tackle.

I stated earlier, here or in another thread, Browns need one interior and exterior backup. Yea, we lost Mack this year. What happens if Schwartz and/or Thomas go down?

I wonder if Bitonio will be groomed as Thomas's backup.

I don't think Bitonio can play left tackle. My guess is that Bowie or Schwartz would get the first shot at left tackle if Thomas every missed a snap. Bowie can definitely play right tackle in a pinch (that's his natural position). If Joe Thomas gets hurt we are screwed either way.

Sorry about that Tab, I know you never site stats. Bugs had mentioned the Oline was ranked 6th. Didn't mean to lump you in to the category, my mistake.

IMO I don't believe just adding depth at Oline is going to cut it in 2015.

What I believe a lot of people are overlooking is Macks opt out clause in his contract. If we don't prepare a viable answer at C with some decent investment in the draft combined with quality depth at G, we are setting ourselves up for a possible disaster.

I also believe a lot of people are taking a lot for granted here. We acquired Paul Mcquistan in the FA market who was formerly from Seattle with 40 starts and many claimed he was the answer to our G problem. We saw how that went.

Now they're all saying that Michael Bowie is a solid answer to our OT depth with only having 8 starts in Seattle. Not so quick my friends......

Bowie is more talented than McQuistan. McQuistan was a disaster waiting to happen the moment we signed him.

Also, I don't view as anything more than a backup right tackle. I am not an expert on the subject, but from what I have read Bowie can't play inside or on the left.

I'm not saying he can't fill in as a RT for depth. What I'm saying is he has very little NFL experience for anyone to base his actual capabilities on. I believe it would be a huge leap of faith to simply assume he could fill that role.

To me it's very much like reading a college scouting report and taking it as gospel that's how a kid will play in the NFL.

I'm not overlooking it, that's for sure. There is a good chance Mack will opt out if another team is willing pony up the 24 mil for 3 year deal. We need one very solid guy on the right side, and maybe draft a stud center that can long snap and also take over for Mack if all goes sour. Adding just depth helps but that amounts to putting a band aid on a broken leg IMO.

I'm not sure we need to draft a C who can "step right in", but more one with the speed and balance to play in the ZBS. I mean he will have a year to mature before Mack could leave. You want a good insurance policy there, but at the same time you don't want to send a signal to Mack that you no longer want him here.

I very much agree with you about the right side, but only in a quality depth role at G. Someone who could at least challenge Grecco. I believe as a whole we have a very good starting OL. I don't believe you need a total stud at every position. I mean if a RT happens to be BPA at your pick, I don't believe you simply walk away from him because I'm certainly an OL guy, but I don't see it as a need.

I think we should, and at least hope we will know a lot of what they think about him after the FA signing period and draft. I would like to believe if they don't see him as quality depth at the OT position we would see some investment in that department.

A solid RT offers us a bunch. Don't think it can be a rookie. If Mack stays and stays healthy, maybe. But maybe we are exaggerating need. I don't think Scwartz is where we need the position to be, not yet.

Have stated before and still believe that we need to decide what we are. All teams need to run and pass; but which is our strength. Right now, it seems we must run given our QB situation. But we need to choose players that build our strength so we can be effective. Wish we had high-powered O and could put up big passing numbers every game. Right now, we are so-so in both.

Do you think we'll keep the ZBS? If so, which OC that is available utilizes the ZBS?

Tom Cable <-- Interesting thought!
Dennis Allen
Greg Knapp
Rick Dennison

Isn't Allen a defensive coach?

All guys have ties to the Raiders. Maybe Cable. Not sure. I don't think any of them are close to Shanny.

You are correct. He was big, as head coach, pushing to bringing ZBS to Oakland. I maybe stretching for OC...

We lost Jason Pinkston in training camp.. health issues.. when we lost him, we lost what little solid depth we had.

That's actually a good point. I forgot about that.

j/c

I wouldn't mind seeing at least 2 draft picks go to our OL. If ever there was a lesson regarding attrition, what happened after Mack went down would be it.

I also remember folks saying we should trade out some of our DL depth at the start of 2014... [facepalm]

This really is the first time since 99 that we have a chance to draft without huge gaping holes on both sides of the ball. Teams that get to the postseason have injuries too.... the difference is the quality of players they plug in when their #1's go down.

.02

I get what you are saying, but it would have been wise to trade Phil Taylor.

just wondering why you think we could get anything for him? takes 2 to make a trade right?

I don't think we could now, but before the season started I believe we could have gotten something.......maybe a 4th rounder.

In my case, it's hindsight- but I can't really argue the point at all. Perhaps others saw it in Phil before last season. I still held out hope.

Dude really annoys me- in a Gerard Warren ("Big Money/"Little Penny") kind of way. He'll do something absolutely beastly 2-3 times in a single game, then disappear for 2-3 weeks. That kind of production can be expected from almost anyone. He was touted as a major talent, and we took him in the 1st round. I still think his best year was his rookie season. Since then... uninspiring, at best. Very disappointing, given his draft position and paycheck. A guy with his skills that should be making pro bowls every year. I think he's lazy... and that's unforgivable in a team sport where others are relying on you.

Knowing him like I do now, I'd have traded him out... as long as I took someone else (younger and hungrier) for the D7. Our depth concerns aren't as dire as in years past, but they still haven't been eliminated on D, as last year's attrition/performance stats bear out.

Sure hope the hitting doesn't involve our QB. It's growing old watching us trot out 3 QB's each year as we digress year after year and throw blame at the QB's and not the lack of talent that helps to protect them.

i think pettine hung on to the whole line to see what he actually had. one year later we just may see a shakeup in the DL roster. hopefully he will replace the weak links with guys that will play to his vision.
i don't care who he trades/cuts as long as we get stronger as a unit. we MUST stop the run if we want to have a stronger defense.

It is hindsight in a way, however some of us were discussing Phil last year. I think your take on him is on the money.

I just don't what his value would be right now. He's had the same issues for 2-3 years now.

I certainly think he replaceable. Hughes is turning out to be a solid player against the run. I hated that pick, but I was wrong about the guy. He is a nice rotational player. I would much rather see Hughes and Kitchen man the nose than Taylor.

Cleveland Browns position rundown: Offensive tackle

Under contract: Joe Thomas, Mitchell Schwartz, Vinston Painter, Michael Bowie, Andrew McDonald.

Free agents: None, though Schwartz has just one year left on his rookie deal.

The good: Thomas remains one of the league’s best. He’s never missed a snap, plays hard during every play and has been to the Pro Bowl in every one of his eight seasons. He is a rare combination of talent, smarts and dependability, and when his career ends he’ll be introduced in Canton five years later.

The bad: Schwartz gets mixed reviews. Fans get on him and he gives up sacks, but coaches like him. Pro Fooball Focus had him as the 33rd-ranked tackle in the league, and his seven sacks given up were tied for sixth highest in the league (Thomas gave up two). Schwartz had 22 QB hurries, which ranked 25th. In run blocking, PFF had Schwartz ranked 70th among tackles.

The money: Thomas is set to be paid $8.8 million, $8.3 million and $8.8 million the next three seasons, when his cap cost is $10.2 million, $9.5 million and $10 million. That’s not an insignificant cost, and is worth watching if Thomas’ play falls off. There’s no real reason to believe that will happen, though. If anyone deserves to retire as a Cleveland Brown, it’s Thomas.

Free-agency need: Depth is always a priority on the offensive line, but GM Ray Farmer has to do better than he did a year ago when his depth signing was Paul McQuistan.

Draft priority: It will be interesting to see how the Browns view Schwartz. It would be safe to say that if the best player on the board in the first three rounds is a right tackle, the Browns will take him.

http://espn.go.com/blog/cleveland-browns...=espnapi_public

That's mean.