We've got big trouble on the OL.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Time will tell, imo its far to early to jump to any conclusions.

Yup. I agree. My limited point was that in the opening quarter of the opening preseason game, the FO's emphasis on WR, and, specifically, their targeting of Garcon received positive reinforcement. Time, as you say, may change that. However, the first news was good news.

Originally Posted by 30gut

Garcon didn't do anything special last night.
That is not meant as a slight but as an objective observation.

Again, see above. No, he did nothing eye popping - good or bad. He performed routine plays in the manner a true No. 1 WR should. Against vanilla D - he found the spots, made the catches and displayed some nice YAC ability. All things we lacked in our No. 1 WR spot last year.

Originally Posted by 30gut

On the other hand isolating the RT: Polumbus was often pushed back and as whole the 1st unit run blocking was poor.
The pass protection was good because it was well schemed by situation.

As someone said, Polumbus was going against MW. In limited play, in a preseason game against a vanilla D, he performed adequately against an elite D-end.

As to the scheme, I absolutely agree. I also think that scheme as to blocking covers a host evils. W/out WR's who can consistently make individual YAC contributions, however, your passing game is consistently limited to the the distance the QB can accurately throw the ball downfied.

Originally Posted by 30gut

Griffin had well defined reads, got the ball out quick the Bills didn't blitz and were not in pin the ears back pass rush mode.
IIRC all his throws were out under 2.8-2.8 seconds.

Yup. All true ... and, in a situation wherein the passing game should function well, with Griffin, Garcon and Polumbus, it did. That's a good thing and was not necessarily true of the 2nd and 3rd team offenses. Further, it has not been true of our 1st team offenses in past preseasons.

Originally Posted by 30gut

I think an objective look tells us we shouldn't/can't glean anything conclusive from 1 preseason game.

And, again, I agree as to the term conclusive. What we can say, and which you seem to be fighting tooth and nail not to say, is "They looked good". You may add as many disclaimer's to the bottom line as you wish, but the truth is that both the player's and the FO should get a preliminary passing grade based on this 1st outing.