Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

That's comes back around to not doing anything on those vets until AFTER week one. The last thing you want is to pick up a vet prior to week one and be committed to their salary for the full 17 weeks if they break down again.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I'm sure there are teams with a surplus of O lineman who also have deficiencies at other spots in the roster.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Not as many as you might think. Especially at tackle. They had a whole segment on Moving the Chains a couple of weeks ago talking about the shortage of decent tackles in the league today and the reasons why. They included the elimination of development in college due to limitations put in place by the NCAA and the recent trend of athletic big guys moving from o-line in high school and college to the more glamorous d-line. They did their usual 20 point scale of grading all teams' tackle corps and they said that scores were coming in lower than ever.

There were a small handful of teams in decent shape, but the vast majority were in, to differing degrees, the same dilemma we're facing. Some depth IS available, but the supply is greatly exceeded by the demand. A couple of teams may be willing to move some depth, but it ain't going to be cheap. We're going to have to outbid half the league. I hope we can, but I'm simply not counting on it. I hope I'm wrong. More accurately, I hope that all the guys on NFL Radio were wrong.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I am not totally sure how this works. I know if they are signed after week 1 their salary is not guaranteed but I am not sure if they can be outright cut if injured without an injury settlement. I wonder what the Saints actually ended up paying Dez Bryan for example. It might be that in some cases a player could be cut for poor performance, or cut if they are injured and recover but there is no longer a spot for them, or perhaps if they have a setback with an existing injury. But I am not sure if a veteran signed after week 1 can be cut if they suffer a new injury or reinjure something that had healed, until they are cleared to take the field again.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

You've basically restated what I've been saying - someone will become available, possibly an upgrade, it will be above market price...

However!!

We cannot afford to sit on our hands and leave this glaring issue unresolved especially with our early schedule.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I think part of the problem is that if an oline is surplus, its hard to tell if they would be much of an upgrade. If they are a young surplus oline they probably played with the backups in preseason games that may not have been at full speed. If they performed well in limited game action the previous season, its hard to say if that limited game action was what prevented the flaws in their technique and the limits to their durability from becoming clear, which might be part of why they were not slated to take over long term for their current team. If they were drafted in a high round, the team probably would have drafted them to start and played them with the ones and be moving on from a veteran not their top draft pick, so a young surplus oline is likely to have been drafted in later rounds or be an undrafted free agent, coming with all the questions that caused them to not be a top draft pick, limited on-field NFL experience to answer those questions, and one of the only data points being their current team being willing to let them walk.

If the surplus oline is a veteran, you do have lots of game tape, but likely the recent tape is not great, and their current team is likely letting them go for a younger player. There is a great chance they are breaking down with injuries, have lost a step, or were a system players whose deficiencies their team has had to cover for over the years.

With other positions on offense and defense there are more situational rotations from goal line packages to 3rds and long and 4 receiver sets to 4th down and short with 2 TE where there is a lot of opportunity for backups to get game time and stand out as the positions on the field. Yet there are pretty much only 5 oline on the field at a time. With backup oline they almost never see the field unless someone is hurt or on weird special teams and situational packages. When someone is hurt and a backup oline fills in, you get a limited number of matchups and it can be hard to tell if the team is having to give them a lot of help or if they just handled an impressive assignment one week well because Bosa was nursing a sore back or because the game plan quickly shifted to their strength.

In the end, I think its smarter to look at surplus oline as 'competition' than a definite upgrade. But we do need competition.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I'm betting on familiarity with a player who they recently scouted but couldn't bring in.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Yeah. That's basically the way I see it.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I can't believe I'm agreeing with Bako on this, but I'm not sure I'd want to give up what it would take to get an actual upgrade if it's too costly. For example, a 2025 3rd rounder for a player that's a backup upgrade and would only play significant snaps due to injury.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Who makes that trade? Seriously.

I'm reading day 3 pick is most common.