Offensive Lines in the Playoffs

[MTK]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

So 2 teams with nearly all high picks and 2 teams with nearly all low picks

I think that what we've learned is just that you need good linemen and it doesn't matter where you got them from

Pretty much. And when you ignore an old and often injured OL group for too many years, you end up 4-12.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Pretty much. And when you ignore an old and often injured OL group for too many years, you end up 4-12.

Matty:

The OL at the start of 2009 was aging at 3 positions (LT, C, RG) and had seen "spotty performance" in the past from its RT. [I'm trying to be polite here; Stephon Heyer may have been the worst starting RT in the league in Week 1. If not the worst, then surely in the bottom 5.]

The OL backups on the roster at the beginning of the season just weren't very good players. That is called "bad roster assembly". That is the reason the Redskins will have such a high draft pick in April 2010.

[Dirtbag59]

Indianapolis Colts, New York Jets, New Orleans Saints, Minnesota Vikings have the four best offensive lines in the NFL -- that's why they're all one win away from the Super Bowl - ESPN

Looks like Ruhskins was ahead of the curve.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Pretty much. And when you ignore an old and often injured OL group for too many years, you end up 4-12.

No doubt. I wouldn't mind seeing some other stats on the matter such as ages.. how the teams acquired them if not drafted by them.. how long they've played with each other, etc and to see if there's more of a telling story there

but yeah.. oft-injured guys that are getting older and declining definitely isn't the most solid foundation.. we had plenty of the late picks and undrafted, but they definitely weren't starter quality and maybe only serviceable as backups