LT vs RT

[Mark S]

There has been a lot of speculation that many players that played LT in college would be best fit for RT in the NFL, and they would be really great RTs at that.

So say we draft for example, La'el Collins, who draft analysts predict will be a great RT in the NFL. But that leaves our LT spot wide open.

Say we haven't addressed LT with an upgrade over Remmers in free agency. The project is to move Remmers to LT and see how he plays out there.

Or you keep La'el at LT and keep Remmers where is at RT

Well question is, would you rather have a predicted pro-bowl RT and average to below-average LT, or would you rather LT and RT both be average and good enough, but nothing extraordinary?

Just a question, this scenario will probably not play out but just something I was wondering about.

[Bj-Monster23]

What you want is to get protection and upgrade the offensive line. If you see a tackle in the draft and he can play right tackle with the potential to move to left tackle. You don't pass that up.

[The Huddler]

Idk just win the superbowl

[t96]

I just want Cam the least sacked QB in the league.

[top dawg]

I don't want a below average LT under any circumstances.

[The Huddler]

Personally, I want the best O-line in the league. The money involved would be well worth it.

[t96]

Personally, I want the best O-line in the league. The money involved would be well worth it.

 

It's easier said than done, but that would be huge. If the Cowboys and us swapped o-lines last year they'd have been at best 5-11 and we'd have been at least 12-4.

[London Loves Luke]

Sign two FA tackles. Drafted tackles have been rubbish recently and there's no need to experiment with a rookie when you've got NFL starters available to fill needs.

 

 

[Captain Morgan]

I don't want a below average LT under any circumstances.

 

 

unless that's all we can do to make our team better, and that is very likely what will happen.

[LinvilleGorge]

There's no way I pass on a potentially dominate RT at #25 simply because I also need a LT.  That isn't a very logical line of thinking IMO.

[Soul Rebel]

Honestly, I think the "LT must be elite" and "RT can be whatever" thought is diminishing now. Back in the 80's and 90's the best DE lined up opposite the 'blindside' of the QB.  For right handed QBs, that means the LT has to be  your best tackle, and the RT could be whatever....but that LT had better be Jonathan Ogden or else.

 

Now, I think DEs are so freakish and can be moved around all over, that it's not as important as the past.  

 

Ideally, yes I'd love our most talented T to be the LT, but I think if you can get an All-Pro caliber RT, you do.  4 insanely talented linemen will protect Cam no matter if the LT is strongest or weakest.  We can run dual TE sets and chip Dickson or Williams back to help the LT too.  

 

The combination of Norwell-Kalil-Turner-Stud RT will be enough to compensate for a weak LT, IMO.

[O-Ther]

There's no way I pass on a potentially dominate RT at #25 simply because I also need a LT.  That isn't a very logical line of thinking IMO.

 

Some Huddlers are stuck in the Polian, Capers, Seifert, Hurney way of drafting to fill a need. 18 years of that is hard to break after only 2 Gettleman years.

 

Some Huddlers have adapted more quickly to the new paradigm than others.

[panthers34]

Scouts over react when it comes to college LTs. I feel like they say that every LT would be better if they moved inside or to RT even if that player has no experience at anything besides LT. They just overreact since LT is the most important position on the line. 

 

Anyways if we draft a LT in the first he will more than likely stay there  

[MadHatter]

Sign two FA tackles. Drafted tackles have been rubbish recently and there's no need to experiment with a rookie when you've got NFL starters available to fill needs.

 

You are NOT going to get a top LT in free agency....teams do not let them go.