O-line with returning starters (some shifting)

[WestCoastRam]

Let's say we resign Barksdale. Restructure JLong and he rehabs successfully. And - ugh - keep Wells. Would this be what our Oline would look like:

Robinson - Long - Wells - Saffold - Barksdale

Would you be okay with that? Let's switch out Wells because I can't see anyone wanting to keep him (and the only reason I kept him in was to make the title of the post work

Now how does that look?

Robinson - Long - ??? - Saffold - Barksdale

I get interested in it as Fisher has stated that he'd like to see Long and Barksdale back.

 

[rams24/7]

:seizure:

In all seriousness though I will be very disappointed if EITHER Wells or Long return. It would confirm that Fish & Snead are denial about our biggest weakness on the team. Long is coming off of 2-straight torn ACLs and won't even be ready come week 1. Wells is also old and injury prone.

We need the youth movement on our OL! I'd be ok if we resign Barks for the right price; not the best RT but certainly not the worst. Above average, young enough, and healthy. That would leave us with only 2 open OL spots. I think we can address one in FA and one in the draft.

Imo its 60/40 we resign Barks. So in that scenario:

Robinson
AJ Cann (2nd round)
Rodney Hudson
Saffold
Barksdale

 

[Mojo Ram]

Would you be okay with that?

 

[ChrisW]

:seizure:

In all seriousness though I will be very disappointed if EITHER Wells or Long return. It would confirm that Fish & Snead are denial about our biggest weakness on the team. Long is coming off of 2-straight torn ACLs and won't even be ready come week 1. Wells is also old and injury prone.

We need the youth movement on our OL! I'd be ok if we resign Barks for the right price; not the best RT but certainly not the worst. Above average, young enough, and healthy. That would leave us with only 2 open OL spots. I think we can address one in FA and one in the draft.

Imo its 60/40 we resign Barks. So in that scenario:

Robinson
AJ Cann (2nd round)
Rodney Hudson
Saffold
Barksdale

Scherff could be a lot of fun at either RT or LG.

 

[Barrison]

High draft pick to replace Long and pay Wisniewski and we'll have a studly OL for next season

 

[Ramhusker]

This is our key to success. Fix it or flounder through another season missing the window of greatness that our current skill level of the rest of the team could produce. Please fix this!

 

[Jorgeh0605]

i would be ok with it but we have to still have to draft replacements. Thats a lot of money on that o line though. I tend to think we keep Long though. And i personally would not resign Barksdale

 

[Mackeyser]

If either Long or Wells stay, I'll wager we don't break 8 wins.

It's that simple. Either is enough to weaken the OL enough to prevent the offense from breaking through.

In this case...one guy is BAD enough to affect the team to a significant degree. And that includes a healthy Bradford, btw...

 

[12intheBox]

I'd take Long back at either RT or at guard - so long as the price is right. Wells I'm much less interested in - but even he has some value at a significantly reduced cap number.

Bringing either or both back wouldn't stop me from drafting O line early and often - it would just give me a little more flexibility to bring the rookies along at their own pace.

 

[Dodgersrf]

^I'm with Mojo

 

[jjab360]

No, I would not be okay with that.

We need young, talented, healthy players on this OL and we need them now.

 

[Dodgersrf]

I'm going to take the fact that we tried to go back up for Martin, a telling sign that Snead will go after his olinemen this offseason. Draft and/or FA.

 

[yrba1]

I'd be horrified if Wells is back on the roster.

 

[Yamahopper]

Gr&RS aside. Drawing names out of a hat of a bunch of fat guys would yield better results.

 

[Dodgersrf]

Let's say we resign Barksdale. Restructure JLong and he rehabs successfully. And - ugh - keep Wells. Would this be what our Oline would look like:

Robinson - Long - Wells - Saffold - Barksdale

Would you be okay with that? Let's switch out Wells because I can't see anyone wanting to keep him (and the only reason I kept him in was to make the title of the post work

Now how does that look?

Robinson - Long - ??? - Saffold - Barksdale

I get interested in it as Fisher has stated that he'd like to see Long and Barksdale back.

Be careful brother. I suggested Longs days are over at T, so maybe put him at G earlier last year. I was almost run out of ROD.

 

[Mackeyser]

We still got the pitchforks and torches for anyone who thinks Long has a place on this OL. They're just back in the shed...

 

[Boffo97]

I'm pretty sure Long's done, no matter what position he's playing. His contract lets us cut him for a small amount this offseason, so I don't see any way we don't do that.

My solution: Resign Barksdale, and we have only two holes on the OL: C and RG. Sign a free agent for one of them, then use any draft pick that's not #10 overall to fill the other one. Boom. Done. Let's roll.

 

[Dodgersrf]

I'm pretty sure Long's done, no matter what position he's playing. His contract lets us cut him for a small amount this offseason, so I don't see any way we don't do that.

My solution: Resign Barksdale, and we have only two holes on the OL: C and RG. Sign a free agent for one of them, then use any draft pick that's not #10 overall to fill the other one. Boom. Done. Let's roll.

Our luck signing FA linemen the past 7 years has been bleak.
If we could get a solid center or guard in FA, I would be very pleased.
Even then, I would still like to see 2 early picks on the position.

 

[Boffo97]

Our luck signing FA linemen the past 7 years has been bleak.
If we could get a solid center or guard in FA, I would be very pleased.
Even then, I would still like to see 2 early picks on the position.

In that position, I would strongly disagree.

I'm of the school of thought that no matter how paranoid your are about a position, you don't take depth with early picks. Picking depth picks later, that's just fine, and there will be some great people for that if Snead and Boudreau are smart enough to find them.

If we don't get an FA stud for the line though, then yeah, we'd be forced to take picks early... but I would still hope that wouldn't include another tackle at #10.

 

[Dodgersrf]

In that position, I would strongly disagree.

I'm of the school of thought that no matter how paranoid your are about a position, you don't take depth with early picks. Picking depth picks later, that's just fine, and there will be some great people for that if Snead and Boudreau are smart enough to find them.

If we don't get an FA stud for the line though, then yeah, we'd be forced to take picks early... but I would still hope that wouldn't include another tackle at #10.

I'm ok with that.
However, if this draft is deep at the oline and a good player is ther, we should take him. I don't like reaching on guys. I prefer to go BPA in with the pick you have or move around for best value.
With that said, move around and pick up a couple.of quality olinemen.
I want starting caliber depth at the position. I'm tired of seeing our qbs getting pounced into the ground. Which we've been seeing since the Bulger era. Our defense is solid. Our wr's are young. Let's fix this line this year for years to come with solid young talent and lots of depth.