FA Center list still available

[ztboiler]

Yeah rolling the dice on Satele and McGlynn last season, and not picking up one of the many better cheap FA guards prior to 2013 season were brilliant decisions.

 

Taking someone like Luck and having him fail would be "it didn't work out ideally" ... Hoping that Satele and McGlynn were going to magically become good is either gambling or crossing your fingers and "hoping & praying", and either way it was a bad idea.

As a fan, I get that we are all tired of OL issues.  Grigson inherited a fanbase that was already tired of OL issues when he arrived.  

 

This can be a McGlynn/Satele conversation, but that story has been done, and the decisions behind their place in the story go a lot deeper than you described.  Roster decisions are tied to multiple years - we both know this. 

 

Beginning with 2013 Grigson has added:

G. Cherilus

D. Thomas

K. Holmes

H. Thornton

J. Mewhort

L. Louis

X. Nixon

 

Those are very proactive and positive additions of OL talent that are still at various stages of maturation.  You can criticize the end result, and you can criticize being unlucky with injuries, but I'm not sure it is fair to characterize any of it as a gamble from the perspective of a GM in the NFL.

[Superman]

Yeah rolling the dice on Satele and McGlynn last season, and not picking up one of the many better cheap FA guards prior to 2013 season were brilliant decisions.

 

Taking someone like Luck and having him fail would be "it didn't work out ideally" ... Hoping that Satele and McGlynn were going to magically become good is either gambling or crossing your fingers and "hoping & praying", and either way it was a bad idea.

 

A cheap guard? We signed Donald Thomas. Then drafted Hugh Thornton. It sucks that Donald Thomas got hurt, but both of those were good moves. 

 

It also sucks that the evaluations on Satele and McGlynn were off, but both of them are gone now. There's no sense crying over those decisions, and there's less sense in defending them. It's over now. 

[esmort]

As a fan, I get that we are all tired of OL issues.  Grigson inherited a fanbase that was already tired of OL issues when he arrived.  

 

This can be a McGlynn/Satele conversation, but that story has been done, and the decisions behind their place in the story go a lot deeper than you described.  Roster decisions are tied to multiple years - we both know this. 

 

Beginning with 2013 Grigson has added:

G. Cherilus

D. Thomas

K. Holmes

H. Thornton

J. Mewhort

L. Louis

X. Nixon

 

Those are very proactive and positive additions of OL talent that are still at various stages of maturation.  You can criticize the end result, and you can criticize being unlucky with injuries, but I'm not sure it is fair to characterize any of it as a gamble from the perspective of a GM in the NFL.

 

 

2013 - I liked G. Cherilus, I even liked the D. Thomas move ... Even though I liked the Thomas acquisition he still had question marks he was not as much of a known quantity as some players that were available which is fine, but that still left another guard position unfilled.  There should have been a minimum of one more guard brought in to fill McGlynns spot making McGlynn G/C depth, and one could argue that a second G/C could have been brought in as an upgrade and dumped McGlynn altogether. That doesn't even take into account doing something about the center position. 

 

Drafting Hughes and Thornton was not a legitimate plan B, you can't pin your hopes that two mid round rookie lineman can step in.

 

We know how that set of decisions turned out.

 

2014 - We draft Mewhort ... ok I can get on board with that.  But, again you have enough ??? you think he might decide to have a plan B .... D. Thomas - coming off injury he is again an unknown, Thornton - showed some flashes, but overall underwhelming, still a big unknown, Holmes - No significant reps, hes an unknown, and Mewhort - a rookie

 

Louis, Nixon, etc .... they are just depth.

 

I will give him 2012 our hands were tied, but he has now had 2 off seasons and drafts to fix arguably our biggest issue and it is still a mess.  Two years of off seasons + two drafts and plenty of money the OL should have been a stone wall by now ... instead we are scrambling to patch together a mediocre OL.  He should have just ponied up the cash/draft picks and fixed it already, instead it often seems like he is trying to be the "smartest guy in the room" and he will show everyone he can fix it his way .... well its not working. 

 

A cheap guard? We signed Donald Thomas. Then drafted Hugh Thornton. It sucks that Donald Thomas got hurt, but both of those were good moves.

 

It also sucks that the evaluations on Satele and McGlynn were off, but both of them are gone now. There's no sense crying over those decisions, and there's less sense in defending them. It's over now. 

 

In response to bolded ... I am saying there were good FA guards available cheap we should have picked up at least one more in addition to Donald Thomas.  The fact that D. Thomas was not a Levitre or Vasquez type acquisition was even more reason to get at least one more FA G as insurance.  I don't believe Thornton was drafted to play last year, getting another FA guard would not have prohibited us from drafting him.

 

Both of you mention that we should just move past Satele and Mcglynn, but with Grigson having such a small body of work it is impossible to judge Grigson's ability to build, evaluate, address, etc ... the OL without including them.  You can't evaluate why the line is what it is without including them. How the line is currently built is a direct result of his horrible decision to keep them last year, they have to be included in the "equation".

[ztboiler]

2013 - I liked G. Cherilus, I even liked the D. Thomas move ... Even though I liked the Thomas acquisition he still had question marks he was not as much of a known quantity as some players that were available which is fine, but that still left another guard position unfilled.  There should have been a minimum of one more guard brought in to fill McGlynns spot making McGlynn G/C depth, and one could argue that a second G/C could have been brought in as an upgrade and dumped McGlynn altogether. That doesn't even take into account doing something about the center position. 

 

Drafting Hughes and Thornton was not a legitimate plan B, you can't pin your hopes that two mid round rookie lineman can step in.

 

We know how that set of decisions turned out.

 

2014 - We draft Mewhort ... ok I can get on board with that.  But, again you have enough ??? you think he might decide to have a plan B .... D. Thomas - coming off injury he is again an unknown, Thornton - showed some flashes, but overall underwhelming, still a big unknown, Holmes - No significant reps, hes an unknown, and Mewhort - a rookie

 

Louis, Nixon, etc .... they are just depth.

 

I will give him 2012 our hands were tied, but he has now had 2 off seasons and drafts to fix arguably our biggest issue and it is still a mess.  Two years of off seasons + two drafts and plenty of money the OL should have been a stone wall by now ... instead we are scrambling to patch together a mediocre OL.  He should have just ponied up the cash/draft picks and fixed it already, instead it often seems like he is trying to be the "smartest guy in the room" and he will show everyone he can fix it his way .... well its not working. 

 

 

In response to bolded ... I am saying there were good FA guards available cheap we should have picked up at least one more in addition to Donald Thomas.  The fact that D. Thomas was not a Levitre or Vasquez type acquisition was even more reason to get at least one more FA G as insurance.  I don't believe Thornton was drafted to play last year, getting another FA guard would not have prohibited us from drafting him.

 

Both of you mention that we should just move past Satele and Mcglynn, but with Grigson having such a small body of work it is impossible to judge Grigson's ability to build, evaluate, address, etc ... the OL without including them.  You can't evaluate why the line is what it is without including them. How the line is currently built is a direct result of his horrible decision to keep them last year, they have to be included in the "equation".

All disappointment is a result of unmet expectations.  Your expectation, as stated, was to build a stone wall in 2 off-seasons given our cap space and draft picks.  I can't think of a single example where a rebuilding team with high cap space was able to combine their resources to build a stone wall in 2 off-seasons....consequently, I didn't expect that.

 

I expected to see the talent added, giving consideration to long term cap ramifications, that could make incremental progress while maturing into a top notch NFL O-line.  I believe that is exactly what has happened, and that there is still ample time on the clock for that outcome to reveal itself.  I like this plan, and these players, because it looks the most like a sustainable O-line building model that has worked in this league - but they all take time to mature. 

 

To say that Grigson has missed thus far is to say that he misevaluated talent added in the last 2 off-seasons.  There is no evidence of that yet.

 

I was quite disappointed that McGlynn was even on the team in 2013, because my expectation was that he wasn't good enough and we had 9 players that were better.  I did not expect nor want another FA starter at G because Reitz had already shown starter traits and Link was a good enough back up to win games while Thornton and Holmes developed.  Satele was always going to get a second year to prove himself - always.  In fairness to the McGlynn decision, his versatility did help us win a few games along the way in the 2 years he was here, and he was available when others were not healthy or still learning their positions.

[Superman]

In response to bolded ... I am saying there were good FA guards available cheap we should have picked up at least one more in addition to Donald Thomas.  The fact that D. Thomas was not a Levitre or Vasquez type acquisition was even more reason to get at least one more FA G as insurance.  I don't believe Thornton was drafted to play last year, getting another FA guard would not have prohibited us from drafting him.

 

Both of you mention that we should just move past Satele and Mcglynn, but with Grigson having such a small body of work it is impossible to judge Grigson's ability to build, evaluate, address, etc ... the OL without including them.  You can't evaluate why the line is what it is without including them. How the line is currently built is a direct result of his horrible decision to keep them last year, they have to be included in the "equation".

 

There's always a lower tier free agent guard that you can grab. I'm not sure what "good" guards were out there last offseason that were reasonable choices for us. As for insurance, whether they anticipated starting Thornton right away or not, he was the insurance, I think. 

 

As for Satele and McGlynn, my point is not that they aren't part of the picture. It's just that that part of the picture is complete. You say the way the line is built now is a result of keeping them last year, but I disagree, because they are both gone. We have veteran depth along the interior line (aside from center, where Costa would have been), and we have young players who look to be the future core of the offensive line. There is no tangible carryover from keeping Satele and McGlynn.

 

Last thing, in the early part of the season last year, the offensive line was making strides. Donald Thomas got hurt early, but even after that for a few weeks, the line play was decent, particularly in the run game. That's never included when talking about Grigson's ability to build, evaluate, address, etc., the offensive line. People like to harp on the negative, almost to the exclusion of the positive. In reality, the overhaul of the offensive line has been dramatic, in just two seasons, and hopefully it pays dividends. I feel like continually bringing up the absolute worst linemen that we had is crying over spilled milk, and at this point, the milk has been cleaned up and there's a new carton in the fridge already.

[esmort]

All disappointment is a result of unmet expectations.  Your expectation, as stated, was to build a stone wall in 2 off-seasons given our cap space and draft picks.  I can't think of a single example where a rebuilding team with high cap space was able to combine their resources to build a stone wall in 2 off-seasons....consequently, I didn't expect that.

 

Stonewall might be a bit of an exaggeration, we weren't even able to attain mediocre though.  If you look at who was available to him in FA and the draft during the past 2 seasons we could have assembled a top tier offensive line (even if not the "stonewall").

 

I expected to see the talent added, giving consideration to long term cap ramifications, that could make incremental progress while maturing into a top notch NFL O-line.  I believe that is exactly what has happened, and that there is still ample time on the clock for that outcome to reveal itself.  I like this plan, and these players, because it looks the most like a sustainable O-line building model that has worked in this league - but they all take time to mature. 

 

To say that Grigson has missed thus far is to say that he misevaluated talent added in the last 2 off-seasons.  There is no evidence of that yet.

 

I know you and others want to ignore it ... but keeping McGlynn and Holmes last season is an obvious misevaluation.  The fact they are gone now does not mean he did not misevaluate them last off season.

 

I was quite disappointed that McGlynn was even on the team in 2013, because my expectation was that he wasn't good enough and we had 9 players that were better.  I did not expect nor want another FA starter at G because Reitz had already shown starter traits and Link was a good enough back up to win games while Thornton and Holmes developed.  Satele was always going to get a second year to prove himself - always.  In fairness to the McGlynn decision, his versatility did help us win a few games along the way in the 2 years he was here, and he was available when others were not healthy or still learning their positions.

 

Reitz showed flashes, but I would not have went into the season with him penciled in as the starter.  Even if he was dead set in giving Satele a second year to prove himself, that didn't mean he could not have had a plan B; there should have been a good C on the roster for the very predictable situation that Satele did not improve.

[esmort]

There's always a lower tier free agent guard that you can grab. I'm not sure what "good" guards were out there last offseason that were reasonable choices for us. As for insurance, whether they anticipated starting Thornton right away or not, he was the insurance, I think. 

 

Slauson, Schwartz, Wharton .... Colon, Rinehart, Boothe 

 

As for Satele and McGlynn, my point is not that they aren't part of the picture. It's just that that part of the picture is complete. You say the way the line is built now is a result of keeping them last year, but I disagree, because they are both gone. We have veteran depth along the interior line (aside from center, where Costa would have been), and we have young players who look to be the future core of the offensive line. There is no tangible carryover from keeping Satele and McGlynn.

 

Had we gotten one or more of the above listed players there very well could have been "carryover", changing the makeup of the current line and depth.

 

Last thing, in the early part of the season last year, the offensive line was making strides. Donald Thomas got hurt early, but even after that for a few weeks, the line play was decent, particularly in the run game. That's never included when talking about Grigson's ability to build, evaluate, address, etc., the offensive line. People like to harp on the negative, almost to the exclusion of the positive. In reality, the overhaul of the offensive line has been dramatic, in just two seasons, and hopefully it pays dividends. I feel like continually bringing up the absolute worst linemen that we had is crying over spilled milk, and at this point, the milk has been cleaned up and there's a new carton in the fridge already.

 

I agree he has made a lot of changes, but a lot of those changes were just depth changes with mediocre vets that no one really thought were going to be starters(though we always hope).  Adding the rookies is great, but they are unknown mid rounders and not the "elite early round start and make an impact day 1" picks (Mewhort maybe being the one exception), so for the most part they don't address the immediate needs. So really the only change he has made that has come in and made a big contribution thus far is G. Cherilus. 

 

Hopefully he proves me and all the naysayers wrong this year, but if the OL ranks in the lower half of the league this season I think Irsay needs to put Grigson on notice.

[Superman]

 

There's always a lower tier free agent guard that you can grab. I'm not sure what "good" guards were out there last offseason that were reasonable choices for us. As for insurance, whether they anticipated starting Thornton right away or not, he was the insurance, I think. 

 

Slauson, Schwartz, Wharton .... Colon, Rinehart, Boothe

 

As for Satele and McGlynn, my point is not that they aren't part of the picture. It's just that that part of the picture is complete. You say the way the line is built now is a result of keeping them last year, but I disagree, because they are both gone. We have veteran depth along the interior line (aside from center, where Costa would have been), and we have young players who look to be the future core of the offensive line. There is no tangible carryover from keeping Satele and McGlynn.

 

Had we gotten one or more of the above listed players there very well could have been "carryover", changing the makeup of the current line and depth.

 

Last thing, in the early part of the season last year, the offensive line was making strides. Donald Thomas got hurt early, but even after that for a few weeks, the line play was decent, particularly in the run game. That's never included when talking about Grigson's ability to build, evaluate, address, etc., the offensive line. People like to harp on the negative, almost to the exclusion of the positive. In reality, the overhaul of the offensive line has been dramatic, in just two seasons, and hopefully it pays dividends. I feel like continually bringing up the absolute worst linemen that we had is crying over spilled milk, and at this point, the milk has been cleaned up and there's a new carton in the fridge already.

 

I agree he has made a lot of changes, but a lot of those changes were just depth changes with mediocre vets that no one really thought were going to be starters(though we always hope).  Adding the rookies is great, but they are unknown mid rounders and not the "elite early round start and make an impact day 1" picks (Mewhort maybe being the one exception), so for the most part they don't address the immediate needs. So really the only change he has made that has come in and made a big contribution thus far is G. Cherilus.

 

Hopefully he proves me and all the naysayers wrong this year, but if the OL ranks in the lower half of the league this season I think Irsay needs to put Grigson on notice.

 

 

I generally disregard older players who don't switch teams, assuming that they weren't very interested in leaving in the first place. Having Travelle Wharton would have been great, but comments from him suggest that he was either going to re-sign with the Panthers or retire. Willie Colon and Chad Rinehart were basically average (better than McGlynn, but that's another story). Kevin Boothe was below average. Schwartz and Slauson had really good years last season, but both were kind of journeymen, and it would have been hard to project them playing as well as they did. And both signed with teams that essentially promised them a starting spot. They would have been great for us, but that would have been in lieu of McGlynn, and the staff was obviously committed to McGlynn. Big mistake, but sometimes GMs and coaches make mistakes.

 

Had we gotten one or more of the above listed players there very well could have been "carryover", changing the makeup of the current line and depth.

 

 

I don't really want to do the whole six degrees of separation / butterfly effect thing, though. Sure, maybe things would be different now, especially if we signed someone who really performed well for us. But that's really hard to project at the time.

 

As of this moment, we're past the Satele/McGlynn nonsense. I'm glad for that, and optimistic about the young guys.

 

I agree he has made a lot of changes, but a lot of those changes were just depth changes with mediocre vets that no one really thought were going to be starters(though we always hope).  Adding the rookies is great, but they are unknown mid rounders and not the "elite early round start and make an impact day 1" picks (Mewhort maybe being the one exception), so for the most part they don't address the immediate needs. So really the only change he has made that has come in and made a big contribution thus far is G. Cherilus.

 

Hopefully he proves me and all the naysayers wrong this year, but if the OL ranks in the lower half of the league this season I think Irsay needs to put Grigson on notice.

 

 

A lot of people wanted a complete overhaul of the offensive line, overnight. That's virtually impossible to do (between injuries and poor performances from FAs), and even trying is very expensive. If you get it wrong, it's even more expensive. It's frustrating, and requires patience, but the measured approach generally pays dividends, and is more efficient.

 

Also, most teams don't build their line on "elite early round start and make an impact day 1" guys. The guy people are pining for in the other thread was a UDFA who finally started performing at a high level in his third year, and after a position switch. Evan Mathis, one of the best guards in the league, was a third rounder who bounced around for six years before he got to Philly and really started playing well. The centers most people wanted us to sign in FA were all late round picks or UDFAs who took time to start playing at a high level. 

 

So it's kind of shortsighted to pronounce that these mediocre vets and mid round draft picks can't/won't address the immediate needs.

 

On that last line, I must disagree, based on the overhaul of the roster and addition of good players in other areas. Even if I agreed that Grigson was absolutely terrible at building an offensive line, that doesn't undo everything else. He's not perfect, he has made mistakes, and hopefully we're moving in the right direction away from those mistakes. But so many have latched on this offensive line thing (as if it's easy to rebuild an offensive line in two years, or as if every other team has great line play) as if it's the be-all and end-all to grading the front office, and I disagree. That's a very narrow perspective.

[ztboiler]

 

Stonewall might be a bit of an exaggeration, we weren't even able to attain mediocre though.  If you look at who was available to him in FA and the draft during the past 2 seasons we could have assembled a top tier offensive line (even if not the "stonewall").

 

 

I know you and others want to ignore it ... but keeping McGlynn and Holmes last season is an obvious misevaluation.  The fact they are gone now does not mean he did not misevaluate them last off season.

 

Keeping Satele and McGlynn can be determined to be a misevaluation in hindsight, but I'm talking about talent evaluations in the additions made during the last 2 seasons.  There are no misses evident there yet.  Only some misfortune.  I can live with that.  Satele and McGlynn are the first and won't be the last players to get the opportunity to stay a year longer than they should.  Satele had enough talent to merit the mid-level contract he got - and was considered a solid signing at the time.  He was always going to get 2 years...period - that was the structure of his contract.  

 

If nothing else, the Satele signing reinforces why you don't want to try to do too much through free agency - and Grigson has structured and spent very wisely since then.

 

 

Reitz showed flashes, but I would not have went into the season with him penciled in as the starter.  Even if he was dead set in giving Satele a second year to prove himself, that didn't mean he could not have had a plan B; there should have been a good C on the roster for the very predictable situation that Satele did not improve.

 

Reitz didn't have to be penciled in as a starter necessarily to be part of a good plan - he'd proven he could play.  As for a plan B at center, we had a good one last year.  McGlynn played just fine at C when called upon and the line improved with Link at RG.  We won games with that configuration and Grigson deserves credit for that.  Furthermore, Holmes was drafted to develop, the very definition of the traditional plan B in the NFL.  It was all in place.

 

Criticize that McGlynn was still around to play RG - nobody can justify it.  By then end of the year, not even the staff could, but it's one mistake, not justification for scrapping a plan that is otherwise very promising.