NFL is just catching up with the need for interior lineman

[sirlancemehlot]

Centers.  Guards.  The grunts of the lineman, a position that has long been undervalued and overlooked...until recently.

     Lineman in general have traditionally been thought of as the biggest, slowest and least athletic members of NFL teams and as such, have traditionally been considered interchangeable; positions filled with journeyman and late rounders.  Hold-the-fort guys.  Utility personnel.

     For at least one position, left tackle, that all changed when Lawrence Taylor ended the career of Joe Theisman, breaking the Hall of Fame quarterback, literally and permanently.  Gastineau, Reggie White, Bruce Smith and, of course, Taylor, forced scouts, coaches and GM's to re-think their value charts come draft day.  A superior blind-side offensive tackle became a commodity every team needed, and would pay for at a premium.  The offensive side of the trench had to be able to at least stalemate the defensive side, or seasons would be lost.  For that reason left tackles have been drafted top ten nineteen times since the 2002 draft.  In only one draft in the last decade, the 2005 draft, has a tackle not been taken top ten (Jammal Brown was taken #13).  There have been six tackles taken top three in that span, including two taken #1 overall.

     It has been the development of the outside pass rusher that has made this necessary.  Drafting tackles high is a direct response to the dominance of the rush-end and rush OLB that have altered the way offenses have had to adjust personal and blocking schemes.  Now, it seems, there is a new defensive trend: the planet-theory defensive tackle.

     The days of Joe Klecko blowing up the center and slipping passed the guard have come to an end.  If Lawrence Taylor changed the rush DE and OLB position, then Warren Sapp changed the inside "3 technique" and more.  Interior defensive lineman are now enormous, fast, powerful, and athletic enough to dunk a basketball.

     The DT is Geno Atkins.  Gerald McCoy.  Ndamukong Suh.  Vince Wilfork. Dontari Poe.  Marcel Dareus.  Kyle Williams.  Nick Fairley.  Sheldon Richardson.  Brandon Mebane.  Terrance Knighton.  Jonathan Banineaux.  Jay Ratliffe.  Kevin Williams.  Even J.J. Watt and Mohammed Wilkerson.

The NFL has noticed.  Centers and guards are now important.

     The dominant running game seems to be a thing of the past.  It's a passing league, many say, and they are right.  But they have the wrong idea as to why.  Certainly rules have changed favoring receivers over corner backs (again, prompting a run on good man-to-man corners in response).  Safety measures are in place to save the WR from head shots, and QBs from knee, head, neck or any other shots.  So that's why it's a passing league now, right?  Not necessarily.  The dominant running back has become a thing of the past.  The greats we have in our midst spend most of their time recovering from surgery.  The high hopes for the Darren McFaddens of the world have become injury riddled disappointments, season after season.  Even the mighty Adrian Peterson has been the victim of a serious injury.  It's come to the point where the massive DT's and lightening quick DE's have all but eliminated the true run-first systems.  Teams have transitioned from the feature-back, to the backfield by committee and, in doing so, have devalued the draft rankings of running backs.  In 2013 the first running back drafted, Giovanni Bernard, was taken at number 37, and the next wasn't taken until #58.

     This takes us to the new trend in drafting.  The "catching up" if you will, of the league's more progressive teams.  How do you combat overpowering defensive tackles that devour running backs and collapse the pocket?  Simple.  You draft Maurkice Pouncey.  Ben Grubbs.  Jonathan Cooper.  Chance Warmack.  You do what many teams have started doing in recent drafts.  You raise the value of the interior offensive lineman.  For every action, there must be an equal, and opposite reaction.  That reaction, it seems, is a shift towards the offensive line.  In 2013, seven of the top eleven players taken were offensive lineman.  Two of them were guards.  Three guards were top 20.  Drafting trends over the past decade have born out the fact that interior lineman are becoming more valuable, as defensive lineman are becoming more dominant.  From Mangold, to Grubbs to DiCastro to the Pouncey  brothers to Cooper, Warmack, Long and Warford, interior lineman are on the cusp of a spike in value.  Teams will need to target, and pay the best of them to establish the run, and save their quarterbacks from being carted off the field.  We still wont remember their names.  At least, we wont remember the good ones.  The bad lineman, though, those we never forget.
 

[T0mShane]

Er ah. Guards have been drafted in the first and second round...forever. Rare is the pick that justifies that draft slot. Peep this: http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/positions/g

[New York Mick]

Er ah. Guards have been drafted in the first and second round...forever. Rare is the pick that justifies that draft slot. Peep this: http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/positions/g

Look at your drunk Irish ass dropping some knowledge

[sirlancemehlot]

Er ah. Guards have been drafted in the first and second round...forever. Rare is the pick that justifies that draft slot. Peep this: http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/positions/g

Nowhere in op did it say guards were never taken in the first and second rds. Every position has been taken in the first and second rds. How many guards have been targeted too ten to fifteen? That's the measure of rising draft value. Cooper and Warmack were both taken top ten in 2013. If anything, the chart you listed shows the trend toward picking interior lineman higher in more recent drafts versus drafts a decade ago.

The graphic shows something remarkable in fact. Take a look at how many guards were taken #1 in the past thirty years. Take a look at how many went top fifteen. Then take a look at who the guards taken top ten were. Chris Naole in 1997. Mike munchak in 82 and Bruce Mathews in 83. Take a look at the names of the top guards taken since 1980 and you'll see that nearly all of them were career starters and nearly half of them have been to Hawaii. In fact interior lineman have a far lower bust rate than any skill position. Thanks for the graphic.

[T0mShane]

Nowhere in op did it say guards were never taken in the first and second rds. Every position has been taken in the first and second rds. How many guards have been targeted too ten to fifteen? That's the measure of rising draft value. Cooper and Warmack were both taken top ten in 2013. If anything, the chart you listed shows the trend toward picking interior lineman higher in more recent drafts versus drafts a decade ago.

The graphic shows something remarkable in fact. Take a look at how many guards were taken #1 in the past thirty years. Take a look at how many went top fifteen. Then take a look at who the guards taken top ten were. Chris Naole in 1997. Mike munchak in 82 and Bruce Mathews in 83. Take a look at the names of the top guards taken since 1980 and you'll see that nearly all of them were career starters and nearly half of them have been to Hawaii. In fact interior lineman have a far lower bust rate than any skill position. Thanks for the graphic.

Teams are drafting guards higher now because of the rookie cap. Otherwise Warmack and Cooper don't sniff the top of the first round. It's an important position, but it's still a devalued position. The reason for the spike in sacks by DTs is because teams pass the ball significantly more than they run it now, and your better athletes know that DL is where the money is. The highest paid guard makes $6 mil. The highest paid DT--which is also a devalued position--makes $9 mil. In your face.

[whodeawhodat]

I was bludgeoned on this board for wanting a guard at 9 this past draft.  I now see that I am a visionary and people just fear my gift...

[Jetsfan80]

I was bludgeoned on this board for wanting a guard at 9 this past draft.  I now see that I am a visionary and people just fear my gift...

 

This offense would still suck, but at least we wouldn't be talking about Dee Milliner's megabust potential.

[JiFtheOracle]

This offense would still suck, but at least we wouldn't be talking about Dee Milliner's megabust potential.

 

No, instead we'd be talking about how big a bust Warmack is and how ridiculous it was that we took a Guard that early.  Or we'd be praying that Cooper is the same when he returns to action next season.

[Jetsfan80]

No, instead we'd be talking about how big a bust Warmack is and how ridiculous it was that we took a Guard that early.  Or we'd be praying that Cooper is the same when he returns to action next season.

 

Is Warmack a bust?  I haven't noticed at all.  I guess I just assumed that if you're gonna take a guard top 10 he ought to be able to slip right in and be your rock for 10 years.

[Greenseed4]

nice write-up, SirLance. 

[Jetscode1]

I'd rather have my team good at drafting QBs but liked the article anyway.

[Integrity28]

Look at your drunk Irish ass dropping some knowledge

 

Tomshane is Irish? I thought he was Gayish.

[sirlancemehlot]

nice write-up, SirLance.

Thank you Mr. Seed. It's nice that someone appreciates my hard work an infallible opinion. And doesn't end his response with the phrase: " In your face!"

Hear that, Tom? Hah. Greenseed likes my prose. Suck it!

[T0mShane]

Thank you Mr. Seed. It's nice that someone appreciates my hard work an infallible opinion. And doesn't end his response with the phrase: " In your face!"

Hear that, Tom? Hah. Greenseed likes my prose. Suck it!

Your prose is lovely, English major. It's your love of fat men that gives me the creeps. IYF

[BroadwayJoe12]

Is Warmack a bust?  I haven't noticed at all.  I guess I just assumed that if you're gonna take a guard top 10 he ought to be able to slip right in and be your rock for 10 years.

 

He's not a bust according to rational football observers, but to this board and the average Jets' fan, yes, he most certainly would be considered a bust. If we drafted an offensive guard with the 9th overall pick and he wasn't playing like a pro-bowler by now, people would be calling him an epic bust, asking if anyone even bothered to scout him and yearning for an offensive play-maker like Keenan Allen who was drafted in the third. Chance isn't even the best rookie OG, as that title would go to Larry Warford. The thing is, outside of a couple running backs, there really hasn't been an offensive skill position player drafted in the first round who's had a consistent impact (Austin had a few plays and Cordarelle is coming on as of late). 

[Larz]

the second most important need in football is to protect the QB.  the shortest path to the QB is up the middle.  so yeah, you gotta be strong up the middle

[Sperm Edwards]

The part I had difficulty with is the theory that teams don't run as much because RBs are being drafted later. This part makes no logical sense. A good, bad, or great, or whatever RB is so regardless of his draft slot. Coaches don't say to themselves "let's not run the ball because our lead tailback was only drafted in round 3, after our gap-shooting DT and LG, but we'd be running him the ball more if we drafted this identical RB a round or two earlier."

RBs are drafted lower because (save some obvious exceptions) any one's individual importance is seen as being lower, not the other way around.

[Kleckineau]

It took 40 years but the NFL finally realized the AFL was in fact more entertaining product, vertical passing game, high scores, etc hence the rules changes that now make it nearly impossible to play pass defense and the importance of drafting great athletes on the o-line to make it happen. 

[sirlancemehlot]

The part I had difficulty with is the theory that teams don't run as much because RBs are being drafted later. This part makes no logical sense. A good, bad, or great, or whatever RB is so regardless of his draft slot. Coaches don't say to themselves "let's not run the ball because our lead tailback was only drafted in round 3, after our gap-shooting DT and LG, but we'd be running him the ball more if we drafted this identical RB a round or two earlier."

RBs are drafted lower because (save some obvious exceptions) any one's individual importance is seen as being lower, not the other way around.

Huh? No, I think you may have misread that part. RBs are being drafted lower because the position has been devalued. The position has been devalued because Dlineman have evolved into 350 Lb monsters who can move, and the OL who block them aren't capable of making the running lanes anymore. The few feature backs left are getting broken and the running back by committee approach is basically the norm. That's what it said. It was a statement about draft value.

[slats]

Two guards were drafted high this year because they were excellent prospects in an otherwise weak draft. There's no great trend going on. The RB position is devalued largely because of their short shelf life. Teams have responded to that by going to committee more, and going to committee devalues the position further. It's really a plug & play spot, which was why I was critical of Idzik making his biggest offseason moves at the position (Ivory and Goodson). It's a position I'd draft practically every year, and almost never spend FA money on.

[sirlancemehlot]

Your prose is lovely, English major. It's your love of fat men that gives me the creeps. IYF

Mrs. Crusher and I are deeply offended. SIS (Suck It Shane)

[SenorGato]

Speaking of interior linemen...Gabe Jackson in the draft (I'm thinking/hoping 3rd) please! 

[sirlancemehlot]

http://blog.gulflive.com/mississippi-press-sports/2013/12/football_mississippi_states_ga.html

Guards. The new left tackles.

[T0mShane]

All the best revolutions start in Mississippi.

[sirlancemehlot]

All the best revolutions start in Mississippi.

Elitist

[T0mShane]

LMS LANCE

[sirlancemehlot]

I'm just going to assume that means, Love Me Some Lance. Because the alternative is vulgar.

[Sperm Edwards]

Huh? No, I think you may have misread that part. RBs are being drafted lower because the position has been devalued. The position has been devalued because Dlineman have evolved into 350 Lb monsters who can move, and the OL who block them aren't capable of making the running lanes anymore. The few feature backs left are getting broken and the running back by committee approach is basically the norm. That's what it said. It was a statement about draft value.

 

OK then I misunderstood your position.

 

It's devalued mostly because of the rules.  There are rules in place that give the receiver (and the QB throwing it) an on-paper advantage.  There are no such rules granting RBs (or those blocking for them).  It's as even as it was in the past (offense vs. defense).  So for every new-breed defensive lineman, one could argue there's a new-breed offensive lineman to counter him.

 

The best RBs in the business are still the best.  I think teams are just wising up to the stupidity of slavishly handing the ball off to the same RB 20-25 times per game when said RB isn't a particularly special runner once the ball is in his hands.  So you'll still see handoff after handoff to types like AP and Lynch, who are special runners in addition to their ability to be comparatively durable rather than being one or the other like most.  

 

Also, frankly, it's easier to build an effective ground game by going bananas on the OL than by trying to find another Peterson or Lynch type.  Also it's more sustainable even if the RB you have isn't a particularly special runner in terms of making people miss, breaking tackles, or just flat-out outrunning people.  Look how dominant Thomas Jones looked for us.  There was nothing special about his game. He wasn't particularly powerful or fast or elusive, but he put up gobs of yards and TDs when we had a dominant OL. When our OL sucked in '07, the same (healthy) RB Thomas Jones was crap.  Going RBBC helps keep your best guy healthy and fresh for the season, and OLmen are less likely to get hurt than RBs.  So unless you have some crazy-special talent (who is also special at avoiding injury), that, combined with special rules for passing offense that don't exist for rushing offense, is (IMO) mostly why the position has been de-valued in both the draft and FA.

 

But if you do have one of those types of RBs, coaches are still going to give those RBs as many carries as the game situation will allow.  Look at how talented Seattle's young QB is.  Meanwhile pretty much no other starting QBs (or teams as a whole) throw as few pass attempts as Seattle's Russell Wilson does.  And they're doing just fine.  If someone isn't open, and there's some room in front of him, he bolts.  They'll continue to do that until Lynch retires, until the defense doesn't keep it close enough to keep running in the absence of putting up points, or until Wilson gets injured like RGIII.

 

Also I just don't think there have been a lot of awesome-talent RBs to come out in recent years.  Statistically it shouldn't matter, but these are individuals not statistics, and the RBs that have come out just haven't been that awesome.  Even the 2 I mentioned above both came out in the same draft. 

[TuscanyTile2]

Look at your drunk Irish ass dropping some knowledge

 

This literally made me laugh out loud.

[sirlancemehlot]

OK then I misunderstood your position.

 

It's devalued mostly because of the rules.  There are rules in place that give the receiver (and the QB throwing it) an on-paper advantage.  There are no such rules granting RBs (or those blocking for them).  It's as even as it was in the past (offense vs. defense).  So for every new-breed defensive lineman, one could argue there's a new-breed offensive lineman to counter him.

 

The best RBs in the business are still the best.  I think teams are just wising up to the stupidity of slavishly handing the ball off to the same RB 20-25 times per game when said RB isn't a particularly special runner once the ball is in his hands.  So you'll still see handoff after handoff to types like AP and Lynch, who are special runners in addition to their ability to be comparatively durable rather than being one or the other like most.  

 

Also, frankly, it's easier to build an effective ground game by going bananas on the OL than by trying to find another Peterson or Lynch type.  Also it's more sustainable even if the RB you have isn't a particularly special runner in terms of making people miss, breaking tackles, or just flat-out outrunning people.  Look how dominant Thomas Jones looked for us.  There was nothing special about his game. He wasn't particularly powerful or fast or elusive, but he put up gobs of yards and TDs when we had a dominant OL. When our OL sucked in '07, the same (healthy) RB Thomas Jones was crap.  Going RBBC helps keep your best guy healthy and fresh for the season, and OLmen are less likely to get hurt than RBs.  So unless you have some crazy-special talent (who is also special at avoiding injury), that, combined with special rules for passing offense that don't exist for rushing offense, is (IMO) mostly why the position has been de-valued in both the draft and FA.

 

But if you do have one of those types of RBs, coaches are still going to give those RBs as many carries as the game situation will allow.  Look at how talented Seattle's young QB is.  Meanwhile pretty much no other starting QBs (or teams as a whole) throw as few pass attempts as Seattle's Russell Wilson does.  And they're doing just fine.  If someone isn't open, and there's some room in front of him, he bolts.  They'll continue to do that until Lynch retires, until the defense doesn't keep it close enough to keep running in the absence of putting up points, or until Wilson gets injured like RGIII.

 

Also I just don't think there have been a lot of awesome-talent RBs to come out in recent years.  Statistically it shouldn't matter, but these are individuals not statistics, and the RBs that have come out just haven't been that awesome.  Even the 2 I mentioned above both came out in the same draft.

I agree with the above wholeheartedly. I'd add that though there may be fewer special backs entering the league as of late, there have been some excellent lineman, particularly in the past few drafts. And if a team can't draft the next AP, it's likely in their best interests to get a Thomas Jones and then draft the next Alan Faneca or Mike Iupati. The interior Dlineman position has changed quite a bit. I think the biggest athletic guys are drawn to the Dline positions over the Oline positions traditionally and that has tipped the scales to that side of the trench. It's decent theory I think. Though as you mention there are likely several factors that have caused the true feature back offenses to get away from putting all the eggs in one basket.