Considering how rarely we threw it, you can practically double that number when comparing it to other guards over the past 2 seasons. Guards simply cannot give up that many sacks. I'm not going to say that Ducasse is that big of an upgrade in pass protection because I simply don't know, yet. However, I can say in good confidence that Ducasse has a lot more potential.
They need to shoot the suspense killers. I hated that. I read a news article about how they should ban calling players right before they are picked because it destroys the suspense and by the time Goodell announces it is old news.
Greene averaged 5 YPC last year, will LT do that this year? I know we all think things will be fine but some of the moves we made have been questionable and there is nothing wrong w/ "experts" questioning these moves. Does it mean anything? no, it an opinion of one person, why do people get so worked up? The funny thing is that if he said we were SB favorites we'd see a thread w/ posters telling us how great this writer is.
Another inaccurate response (not yours; the one you replied to). This is NOT the Kendall situation, not even close in so many ways. Yes.
Stats are subjective for OL, we don't know his assigment, we don't know if it was the fault of the QB. Faneca wasn't great but you guys are acting like he was Mike Haight.
Again, you can call it subjective all you want; it's not a coincidence that he allowed more sacks than the other four members of the OL -- all of who were protecting the same QB (and that includes two different QBs).
where are these #s coming from? can you post the link. and I never said he was great but you guys are acting like he was awful and that's just not true. There's no way we would have had the OL we had last year if we had a link as weak as you are making faneca out to be.
I don't care about the exact numbers, but the ones I saw him get beat on were bad...like him getting shoved right back into Sanchez bad. For me it wasn't the amount of sacks that bothered me, but when he did give up a sack, he was totally manhandled. That's not good.
5 yards/carry isn't the only stat that will judge LT's effectiveness in replacing Greene. LT will be much more effective in the passing game than Greene (seeing that he didn't catch a single pass in 2009), which will make up for the decrease in yds/carry from Greene (which I agree, he likely won't beat 5 yds/carry). Not to mention all the other intangibles he provides. I'm not saying I know it for a fact, but he has a good chance to be a successful replacement. I don't really care who he's replacing as long as he provides results.
And furthermore, TJ had like 58 Receiving Yards; Tomlinson will surpass both Greene's and TJs combined Receiving Total. As much as we're "ground-&-pound," I think the addition of Holmes and Tomlinson means we're passing more this year -- the CS is probably ready to put more on Sanchez. If that's the case, then you don't want your Franchise QB's blindside protectors to be a liability, which Faneca is.
BTW, if there's one concern I have about losing Faneca, it's his durability. The guy doesn't miss a game.
we are definitely going to be throwing more now w/ more weapons and w/ our QB being a 2nd year QB. Our rushing #s will not look as good as year ago, I just hope the efficiency is still there. We would have been fine w/ faneca, better than we will likely be w/o him for this year but he's gone and it's time to move on.
My biggest problem is the continuity of the OL, they were working on 35 straight games starters(inclduing postseason). Those guys were in synch w/ one another, there will be growing pains w/ the young LG.
By the way, looking at those #s: Faneca allowed 6.5 sacks last year. He allowed 5 or more in 7 of his 12 seasons. he was 1st team all-pro(not pro bowl) in 2004 and 2007 in years he allowed 6 and 6 1/2 sacks.
As it's probably been said, he doesn't to replace the 5 ypc. Greene got as a backup last season. LT will probably average 5 all purpose yards for every touch, receptions and carries.
