Pet Peeve of the Day: "Some People"

Depending on who you ask, I am either gifted with the opportunity to pursue my creative ambitions in a non-traditional academic setting, or I'm being lazy, worthless and shiftless in a place full of people that never worked an honest trade in their lives. Either way, I'm at a liberal arts college.

"Oh, Darling, isn't it avant-garde?"

Well, liberal arts colleges apparently have a habit of attracting them who say things like "Those people" when referring to folk that are wrong, biased and/or backwards. This just drives me crazy. We were discussing why Americans hold this and that horrible opinion of Muslims, and some girl starts chirping about how "they" were ignorant, or misled by the media, or just plain stupid. News flash: You're in this country with the rest of us, and just because you're sitting in a well-furnished room in an Islam class doesn't mean you get to look down on the dumb proleteriat, you ass.

Anyway, that's my pet peeve of the moment. Moving on, I've got a roundup of a few links:

From Der Spiegel, via the lovely Veronika Apfl, we have this tidbit about an owl who had too much Schnapps somewhere in Germany. The owl was reportedly found slurring its words and singing Bavarian showtunes in the parking lot of a local pub. http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,740157,00.html

Its eyes are crossed!!

From POLITICO, we have the report of House Republicans rolling out a whopping $2.5 trillion in cuts to federal spending, which would be saved over the next ten years or so. I applaud the spirit, but no matter its status as the instant death of political ambitions, someone's going to have to tackle Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid someday. And let's not forget the sprawling defense budget. Neither of those things are addressed in the House's package, according to POLITICO. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47896.html#ixzz1BeOo9CY8

Along the same lines, we have a column in yesterday's Washington Post by GOP presidential prospect Tim Pawlenty in which he lays the wood to Obama's rhetoric: The choice isn't necessarily between raising the debt limit and defaulting on our obligations. We can stop the budget ballooning in size. I don't like Pawlenty's Tea Party-esque shots--'Washington insiders say this can't be done', or empty words like "Set some priorities and then cut funding for just about everything else" but it's hard to disagree with his other points. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/21/AR2011012103415_pf.html

From a couple of days ago, we have a report from the GAO about what DADT was actually costing the government to enforce. Try upwards of $193 million over the life of the policy. You want a place to cut the defense budget, I found one! http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-170

And the cool Wikipedia science-y link of the day: Black holes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole "Black holes in fiction" is also a fun read.

I'm going to eat "those sandwiches". Later, blogosphere!

Gotta Love Them Democrats

On the coming fight to keep the health care bill intact: "It gives us Democrats a further chance to talk sense into the American people." -Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, quoted in Politico. Well, gee, aren't we all just dying to have things carefully explained to us until we understand the rationale just as well as the politicians? After all, we can't oppose the bill because we dislike the expansion of government power, it has to be because we don't understand. Gah.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47862.html#ixzz1BZMYDrZD

Look, the proposal to repeal health care will of course die in the Senate, and we'll have two more years of Republicans talking about how it erodes our national freedom and Democrats blathering about how nothing less will do. But the Democrats could at least pretend not to be talking down to the American people while they're selling it. Condescension is, after all, a surefire way to win support from a skeptical public.

Howdy!

I'm just back to college, and while that means I am seeing a great many lovely people who I haven't hung out with in almost eight months, it also means that classes are starting and blogging opportunities aren't as numerous as they otherwise might be. Also, I'm starting to gear up for Junior I.S., which I've just learned cannot in fact be a creative project, which throws my entire scheme that I cooked up over winter break into the garbage can.

You know, I'm looking out the window and feeling whimsical, and what the hell: I don't think I've ever in my life seen something and fallen in love at first sight. Books, maybe, and reading and all that, but looking at my favorite things of all, I don't think I can point to a single one that I didn't hate at the start. Classical music? Hated that. Hated playing it, hated the cello, hated listening to it, back when I was being made to do it. Nowadays it's my favorite genre (well, top two) and playing it is one of my great loves.

Wooster? Welllll.... I didn't hate it, but I didn't give a damn about it either. I wanted to go to the University of Minnesota, or maybe Madison, or even Reed College on the West Coast. Pretty much anywhere else. I'm not sure I even blinked when I got the acceptance letter from Wooster, much less jumped for anything, including joy. But six rejection letters later, Wooster was my best option, and I've spent a wonderful two years here (and a half in DC).

Writing? Sheeeesh. I used to despise the paper-writing process. When I was a freshman in high school, I had so much disdain for English classes that I'd populate my rough drafts with characters they mentioned in The Boondocks. I thought the whole "Brainstorm-Outline-Rough Draft-Final Draft" was just a bunch of meaningless assignments they thought up to torture you, rather then assist you, and cheerfully ignored them all. Now I'm an Engrish major, which means signing up to go through a whole season of the same, and surprisingly enough I don't hate the idea.

I'm not sure what it means that a lot of the things I've had the most fun with, I had to be dragged into kicking and screaming, except to keep a careful eye on the next thing circumstance makes me do that looks like the most boring, tedious, exasperating junk since the SATs. Might just be fun.

Collected Packers vs. Falcons Game Observations

-The Packers had a decent amount of success defending Turner when he tried to run straight up the middle. When he went to the outside on power plays, particularly to the left side and even more particularly when the right guard pulled across to the left, he had a lot of success. Sam Baker, their left tackle, was able to seal off the defensive end or whoever was there in nickel pretty frequently, and the OLB allowed himself to be blocked away by the FB or a TE. Bottom line was that they opened big holes for Turner on the edge. If the Packers can close those gaps on the edge, defending the run gets a lot easier.

Ryan looked good against the blitz, not getting rattled and finding his check-down man pretty frequently. He preferred to flip it to the RB or TE rather then scramble, but if you watch the film, he has a particular kind of delivery for those throws. He did it five times in the game. It’s like a little, lazy overhand flip that’s all arm. It works well, and he only throws it when there’s no defender around, but if someone gets in the neighborhood of such a lackadaisically thrown ball, that’s an interception waiting to happen.

The only way to tackle Michael Turner that consistently worked was to grab him around the ankles. It’s not a good way to reliably tackle anybody, but time after time, people would hit Turner in the upper body or thighs and just slide off. This happened a lot when defenders were trying to catch him from behind, but the few times defenders were able to meet him in the hole, he could be stood up with a good old-fashioned hit.

(If a fight breaks out, there is no way I am not yelling "Falcon PAWNCH!!" at my TV.)

The Packers tried a couple of wrinkles-the no-huddle offense, inserting T.J. Lang as an extra TE-that are normally the Falcons’ turf, and neither of them worked that well. I feel like we let the Falcons dictate the game to us on offense, particularly in our extensive use of the Big Five package. Rodgers scrambled out of that a few times, and made hay out of the underneath routes, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable exposing him to the Falcons’ rush without at least a back in the backfield. We have to have a credible threat to run.

Speaking of the line, John Abraham was pretty much nullified by Chad Clifton. The Falcons rushed three and dropped eight, or four and seven, a high percentage of the time, and Clifton was able to take away Abraham (who had 13 sacks this year) pretty effectively. If he does to Abraham what he did to Trent Cole, the Falcons don’t have much of a pass rush behind him.

Our receivers looked noticeably faster on turf then they do on natural grass. Also, as poor as our tackling was at all levels of the defense (a major thing we need to do to win), the tackling in the Falcons’ secondary was just as bad. They were awful trying to get Jennings, Nelson and Driver to the ground. The Packers’ WR corps could have a big day running after the catch if that keeps up.

The Falcons aren’t afraid to run seven-step drops when they’re in unfavorable down and distances, such as after a sack. The Packers only got pressure a few times against a stout Atlanta line, and every time they blitzed, Ryan found an uncovered back or Tony Gonzalez in the flat. Dom Capers will have to manufacture pressure somehow, although in this game there didn’t seem to be many different blitzes that he used, nor complex ones.

Any day I get to use this picture is a good day.

The field-position game was an understated part of why the Packers lost the first time around. Sam Shields would get taken down around the 15 yard line, Tramon Williams fair caught the ball inside the 20 or actually went backwards on one abortive punt return, and penalties got the Packers moved back whenever they had a decent return. Getting the ball out to the 20, 25, 30, would provide a huge boost to the offense that they just didn’t get the first time around.

The Packers converted two third and ones on the only drive where they had success in that area. However, that was only by going way downfield to Jennings and Jordy Nelson, not to mention that running plays failed both times on second down. Not much to say about that, except if the Packers can run the ball against the Falcons, the entire offense will open up and their entire defense will be very beatable. Right now, they’re blitzing every play because there isn’t even the threat of a run, and when there is a run they shut it down. If Starks can give the Packers a running game worth a tinker’s damn, this Falcons defense will be a pretty easy matchup.

Predators of the Office Ecosystem

In our last foray into the wide world of the Office Ecosystem, we outlined the life cycle of the herd beast known as Paper, without which the entire ecosystem would cease to function. This time, we will attempt to detail some of these various behaviors, in order to illustrate for the scientifically inclined reader the peculiar nature of the beasts living therein.

As we discussed last time, Documents generally require some sort of material to bond them together upon their release from the Printer. Documents which travel in packs, called Position Papers, have greater genetic diversity and are thus much more likely to spawn new Post-It Notes. Single-Page Documents, meanwhile, are doomed (with only rare exceptions) to uneventful ignorage as Inter-Office Memos, which are inevitably seized upon by the alpha predators in this environment. I refer here, of course, to the Recycling Bin, the Trash Can and the Shredder, which we will discuss momentarily.

This bonding material can take many forms, and over time a variety of different organisms have evolved to fill this need. Banana Clips and Paper Clips will leech some nourishment from the Document when they are attached, but will also provide bonding material for the Documents. Once the Documents have been clipped, it is generally very difficult for multiple Clips to attach. Thus, the Clips which get to the Document first command a huge advantage over their competition. Many Clips have evolved bright, fluorescent plumage for this reason, even going so far as neon green or sickly pink to attract attention.

Their biggest competition is the Stapler, which is an ecosystem in itself. The Stapler attempts to root its offspring, or ‘Staples’, in as many documents as possible to ensure the best chance of survival. This organism will sometimes wander throughout the Office in hopes of securing the best possible Documents, and thus the most opportunities for their offspring to survive to adulthood (where they will become new Staplers, with the intermediate, adolescent stage of ‘pocket Staplers’ in between). The Staple Removers prey on this tendency, and rely on Staples as their largest food source; in fact, scientists discovered this menacing predator during a long-term ecological study of the Staple population in one Office. They were mystified when only a small percentage of the Staple population survived to adult Staplerhood, but the appearance of the Removers cleared up the confusion.

Staple Removers, besides eating Staples, assist another predator that feeds off of Documents. It has been theorized by leading scientists that the Staple Remover and the Shredder actually exist in symbiosis, with the one making its den near the other and preying on passing Documents. Noted vellogist Stephen McCoy has observed Staple Removers attacking Documents and removing the Staples, making them more vulnerable to the Shredder (which then gobbled up the Documents). The Staples’ removal makes the document easier for the Shredder to digest and throws the ‘sheaf’ of Documents into confusion, upon which the Shredder can capitalize. Trash Cans and Recycling Bins do not require such specialized treatment of their Documents, and are more prevalent in more Office environments then the Shredders. However, in official Office environments such as those in Washington D.C., Shredders thrive. This phenomenon is so far unexplained, as is the appearance of Burn Bags, which appear to feed off the Shredder’s waste products.

Other predators of Paper and Documents include Scissors, Hole Punchers and Binders (which can swallow entire reams of Paper whole, before spending months-often years-digesting them on a Shelf).

Pens and Pencils form their own segment of the ecological web. It is speculated that Pens compete with Ink Cartridges to dispense Ink onto Paper; however, scientific analysis has revealed that the two species dispense very different kinds of Ink. For example, Cartridges come in several different varieties (reddish, yellowish, blueish and black) which combine to form Printer Ink, which is nearly always black. Pens, meanwhile, dispense all different colors of Ink. We can tentatively say that the two species share a common ancestor, which we have dubbed Quillus featherii, or the Quill. However, absent the discovery of a fossil Quill, the genealogy of this piece of our history may remain forever unknown.

Hello Again, Blogosphere

Okay,  so,  if I were a phenomenally awesome person I would preface this triumphant return (as if) to my blogspot page with some kind of adaptation from The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air theme song. As it is, I'd like to take a minute (just sit right there) and describe how I returned to my old Internet lair.

It's... probably immaterial to anyone but me, but there came a time where posting things on a Facebook page felt stultifying instead of helpful , depressing instead of inspiring. I'm not saying an equally impersonal Blogspot.com page is necessarily any better , but at least I'm not putting all my content directly into Facebook and its copyright laws. I've written tens, probably hundreds of thousands of words over all my notes, that are nominally the property of Facebook and I'm not crazy about that. Photos, too.

So I've been working on this blog, here, and I think that's what I'll continue to do. Tisdel's Tirades will remain on Facebook in the form of that page, but the updates will come through here and be posted on there as links. That way, you don't have to have a Facebook account to find and/or comment on my stuff, and hopefully I can appeal to people outside my immediate circle of friends, which is I guess my main motivation. Please don't get me wrong here; I love that the people I love are at least in a position to read me, but I'd like to at least maintain the illusion that I can appeal to a broader demographic (i.e. the rest of the Internet). That wasn't gonna happen on the Facebook page.

Shoot, I'm even thinking of creating a Twitter account.

Okay. I don't plan to let this post stand on its own; there's a bunch of stuff I've got written that should be up here in the next few days. I'm flying back to Wooster, OH for my second semester (junior year) on Sunday, so there will undoubtedly be a break in service. We apologize in advance for the interruption. *bows*

Thanks for reading, everybody. Hopefully I'll put out content that's worth your time and interest.

Cheers!
-Andy Tisdel
1/13/11

The Packers' Prospects for Picking a Left Tackle

My team, the Green Bay Packers, is in dire need of a young left and a right tackle to stabilize our offensive line. Since GM Ted Thompson strongly prefers to acquire players through the draft, I set out to determine where the 32 present starters at left tackle came from in the NFL came from and in what round they were drafted. To gain an appreciation for which tackles were and are currently the best in the business, I decided to list the players from each conference that made the Pro Bowl in the 2000-2009 regular season (hence the 2001-2010 Pro Bowls) and figure out what rounds dominated the conversation. However, given the inherent flaws in the Pro Bowl, I also determined to find a football database that graded left tackles, see which tackles were graded the best over that same ten-year period and organize them by round.

Pictured: excellence.

My hypothesis heading into the project was that a clear majority of LTs currently active in the NFL would turn out to be former first-round picks. I further surmised that both the most effective tackles over the last ten years, and the majority of Pro Bowl tackles over that same period, would be first-rounders. The justification for this was my premise that first-round LTs are generally the only ones who possess a LT's unique skill set (size, bulk, quick feet, long arms, good punch, etc.) and thus would grade out the best over time. My object was to figure out what the Packers' odds are of getting a good left tackle in the upcoming draft, in which we pick 23rd and thus will likely miss the top prospects.

Currently Active:

I began by simply taking a census of left tackles currently active in the NFL, at the end of the 2009 season. I went to each team’s website, found their depth chart and identified the starting tackles for every one. For teams that had had to replace their tackle during the season, I tracked down the originals and wrote their name and the word “Preferred” by the man.

AFC

Colts: Charlie Johnson (sixth)
Titans: Michael Roos (second)
Texans: Duane Brown (first)
Jaguars: Eugene Monroe (first)

Steelers: Max Starks (third)
Browns: Joe Thomas (first)
Ravens: Jared Gaither (fifth, supplemental)
Bengals: Andrew Whitworth (second)

Jets: D’Brickashaw Ferguson (first)
Patriots: Sebastian Vollmer (second) [Preferred: Matt Light, second]
Dolphins: Jake Long (first)
Bills: Jonathan Scott (fifth)

Chargers: Marcus McNeill (second)
Raiders: Mario Henderson (third)
Chiefs: Branden Albert (first)
Broncos: Ryan Clady (first)

NFC

Bears: Chris Williams/Orlando Pace (first, first)
Packers: Chad Clifton (second)
Lions: Jeff Backus (first)
Vikings: Bryant McKinnie (first)

49ers: Joe Staley (first)
Cardinals: Jeremy Bridges (sixth)
Rams: Alex Barron (first)
Seahawks: Sean Locklear (third) [Preferred: Walter Jones, first]

Cowboys: Flozell Adams (second)
Eagles: Jason Peters (undrafted)
Redskins: Levi Jones (first) [Preferred: Chris Samuels, first]
Giants: David Diehl (fifth)

Saints: Jermon Bushrod (fourth) [Preferred: Jammal Brown, first]
Buccaneers: Donald Penn (undrafted)
Panthers: Jeff Otah (first) [Preferred: Jordan Gross, first]
Falcons: Sam Baker (first)

The table reads as follows:
1st round: 15
2nd: 6
3rd: 3
4th: 1
5th: 2
6th: 2
7th: 0
Undrafted/supplemental: 3
Total: 32

When we add in the number of preferred starters, such as Seattle’s Walter Jones or New Orleans’ Jammal Brown that were placed on injured reserve during the season (since this data was gathered by going to each team’s Web page and looking at their depth chart), the total climbs to 18 first-round left tackles and 7 second-round picks. The argument is already taking shape that left tackles at the top of the draft are generally the only ones who can survive and flourish in the NFL because only they possess the rare combination of qualities that mark the position. However, merely saying that first-round physical talent enables players to lock down their spots proves nothing, least of all what makes the top left tackles. To get a better idea of who the best tackles have been over the past ten years, let’s have a look at who went to the Pro Bowl during that time.

Pro Bowl:

“RT” denotes “right tackle”, and a running count of the number of berths filled is noted after each year. Teams are not noted.

2010: Joe Thomas (first), Ryan Clady (first), Jake Long (first), Jason Peters (undrafted), Bryant McKinnie (first), Jon Stinchcomb (first, RT). Total: five first, one undrafted.

2009: J. Thomas (first), Peters (undrafted), Samuels (first), Walter Jones (first), Michael Roos (second), Jordan Gross (first). Total: nine first, one second, two undrafted.

2008: Flozell Adams (second), Joe Thomas (first), Samuels (first), Peters (undrafted), Matt Light (second), Jones (first). Total: twelve first, three second, three undrafted.

2007: Jonathan Ogden (first), Jones (first), Flozell Adams (second), Jammal Brown (first), Willie Roaf (first), Willie Anderson (RT, first). Total: seventeen first, four second, three undrafted.

2006: Anderson (RT, first), Ogden (first), Tarik Glenn (first), Jones (first), Orlando Pace (first), Samuels (first). Total: twenty-three first, four second, three undrafted.

2005: Anderson (RT, first), Roaf (first), Pace (first), Tra Thomas (first), Ogden (first), Jones (first). Total: twenty-nine first, four second, three undrafted.

2004: Ogden (first), Roaf (first), Brad Hopkins (first), Adams (second), Pace (first), Jones (first). Total: thirty-four first, five second, three undrafted.

2003: Ogden (first), Roaf (first), Lincoln Kennedy (first, RT), Jones (first), T. Thomas (first), Pace (first). Total: forty first, five second, three undrafted.

2002: Kennedy (first, RT), Ogden (first), Jones (first), Pace (first), Samuels (first), James Williams (undrafted, RT). Total: forty-five first, five second, four undrafted.

2001: Ogden (first), Hopkins (first), Kennedy (first, RT), Pace (first), Roaf (first), Korey Stringer (first, RT). Total: fifty-one first-rounders, five second-rounders, four undrafted.
Total: 60 berths.

The numbers, as the viewer can see, are heavily skewed towards first-round picks. Of the 60 Pro Bowl berths to be filled from the 2000-2009 seasons and the 2001-2010 Pro Bowls, 44/50 (88%) were filled by first-rounders. When including right tackles, the numbers are 51/60 or 85%. Second-rounders make up 4/50 (8%) and 5/60 (8%), and the remaining 3/50 (6%) and 4/60 (7%) were undrafted players.

The number of players is also fairly telling:

Joe Thomas: 3 (first)
Ryan Clady: 1 (first)
Jake Long: 1 (first)
Jason Peters: 3 (undrafted)
Bryant McKinnie: 1 (first)
Jason Stinchcomb: 1 (RT) (first)
Flozell Adams: 3 (second)
Chris Samuels: 4 (first)
Matt Light: 1 (second)
Walter Jones: 8 (first)
Michael Roos: 1 (second)
Jordan Gross: 1 (first)
Jonathan Ogden: 7 (first)
Jammal Brown: 1 (first)
Willie Roaf: 5 (first)
Willie Anderson: 3 (RT) (first)
Tarik Glenn: 1 (first)
Orlando Pace: 6 (first)
Brad Hopkins: 2 (first)
Lincoln Kennedy: 3 (RT) (first)
Tra Thomas: 2 (first)
Jamie Williams: 1 (RT) (undrafted)
Korey Stringer: 1 (first)

One trap to fall into when looking at this data would be to assume that the data is skewed towards first-rounders because several of the all-time great left tackles were playing in this decade. Walter Jones, Orlando Pace, Willie Roaf and Jonathan Ogden accounted for 26/60, or 43%, of available Pro Bowl berths in this time between the four of them, but the rest of the berths were also generally filled by fellow first-rounders. Of the 23 tackles listed (left and right), 18 were first-round picks. Three were second-rounders and two undrafted. Among the 18 left tackles, 14 were first-rounders, three were second-rounders and one was undrafted. No matter how you slice it, by number or by berths, first-round draft picks dominate the conversation among Pro Bowlers in the last ten years.

PFF rankings:

However, having Pro Bowl data is not enough. I wanted to go back and rank the top three tackles for each year in the study and see how they correlated with the Pro Bowl data, as well as how many first-rounders were contained in the top ten. This would also serve as a critique on the Pro Bowl and a way to see whether the best tackles in a given year were actually the ones selected. The only website I was able to find that gives comprehensive grades for all offensive tackles was profootballfocus.com, a site that claims to analyze every play for every given year and provide overall rankings of every player at that position in the NFL. I ended up ranking the top left tackles in two categories: their overall ranking on the site and their pass-blocking rating.

The only problem was that profootballfocus.com only had data for the 2008 and 2009 seasons, so my data comes exclusively from the period after which most of the great left tackles had retired, and a new breed of tackles had entered the fray. This lends added weight to the argument that, even without the several great left tackles skewing the results, first-round LTs still dominate the position.

Among pure LTs, defined here as those who started a majority of their games at LT in the 2009 NFL season:
-16 starts unless otherwise noted
-PB denotes a Pro Bowl berth


Overall:

1. Joe Thomas, CLE (First) PB
2. Jake Long, MIA (First) PB
3. Sebastian Vollmer, NE (Second) Eight games at LT, four at RT.
4. Jared Gaither, BAL (Supplemental) 11 games.
5. D’Brickashaw Ferguson, NYJ (First)
6. Jeff Backus, DET (First)
7. Andrew Whitworth, CIN (Second)
8. Ryan Clady, DEN (First) PB
9. Jordan Gross, CAR (First)
10. Jason Peters, PHI (Undrafted) PB

Pass-blocking:

1. Jake Long (first) PB
2. Joe Thomas (first) PB
3. Jared Gaither (supplemental)
4. Jason Peters (undrafted) PB
5. Andrew Whitworth (second)
6. D’Brickashaw Ferguson (first)
7. Sebastian Vollmer (second)
8. Jeff Backus (first)
9. Ryan Clady (first) PB
10. Chad Clifton (second)


The 2009 PFF results coincide pleasingly with the Pro Bowlers of the year, reaffirming (to my surprise) that the Pro Bowl often does get more or less the right players right. As the reader may have expected, six of the top ten overall tackles are first-rounders, and two more are second-rounders. The pass-blocking numbers are five and three respectively. Bryant McKinnie is not represented, ranking 33rd overall and 19th in pass-blocking, as he gave up the second-most sacks among LTs at nine. The other Pro Bowler, Jon Stinchcomb, is of course a right tackle.


The 2008 edition:

Overall:

1. Matt Light (second)
2. Michael Roos (second) PB
3. D’Brickashaw Ferguson (first)
4. Joe Thomas (first) PB
5. Jake Long (first)
6. Jared Gaither (supplemental)
7. Walter Jones (first) (12 games) PB
8. Donald Penn (TB), undrafted
9. Mark LeVoir (New England, four games) undrafted. Excised for insufficient time.
9b. Bryant McKinnie (first)
10. Chris Samuels (first). PB

Pass-blocking:

1. Michael Roos (second) PB
2. D’Brickashaw Ferguson (first)
3. Joe Thomas (first) PB
4. Jared Gaither (supplemental)
5. Jake Long (first)
6. Matt Light (second)
7. Walter Jones (first) PB
8. Bryant McKinnie (first)
9. Jordan Gross (first) PB
10. Tra Thomas (first)


Overall shows six firsts and two seconds; pass-blocking shows seven firsts and two seconds. Jason Peters (undrafted) is the only Pro Bowler who does not make an appearance.

Once again, first- and second-round picks show up as the best overall LTs and the best pass-blockers. My theory from the start of the project therefore remains, although slightly modified; LT prospects coming out of college who are sufficiently talented to be picked in the first round are generally the best tackles in the NFL. Tackles with the necessary skills (again, quick feet, height, weight and muscle, a good punch and so on) may occasionally drop to the early second round; Flozell Adams of the Cowboys, Michael Roos of the Titans and Matt Light of the Patriots were picked 38th, 41st and 48th respectively. However, tackles picked in later rounds simply do not have the physical tools to play LT at the highest level. Not a single third-to seventh-round tackle, left or right, has made the Pro Bowl in the past ten years. None were evident in the PFF rankings, either.

The sole problem with this conclusion presented by the data is the presence of undrafted players that nevertheless play left tackle at the highest level. Jason Peters and Jamie Williams made the Pro Bowl, and names such as Jared Gaither (supplemental draft) and Donald Penn are evident in the PFF rankings. The discerning reader may demand an explanation for this, but their concerns can easily be put to rest.

The simple answer is that not all prospects are created equal, and that players with the physical tools to play the position may fall out of consideration to be drafted because of other concerns. For example, Jared Gaither had academic problems at the University of Maryland and, instead of going back to school for another year, declared for the supplemental draft (thus falling out of what would’ve been serious consideration for a junior or senior year’s draft). Other players switched positions. Jason Peters never played a snap on the O-line in college, instead going undrafted as a tight end. Jamie Williams had both problems, coming from an obscure school as a defensive tackle, but eventually switched to right tackle.

So players with the physical tools to play LT can sometimes escape notice in the draft, beat the odds and start in the NFL at a high level, but their stories are as varied as they are unlikely. First- and second-round picks remain overwhelmingly the best option for NFL teams looking to secure their left tackle position. It should be noted that there is a measure of inflation in these numbers; given the pressing need for LTs in the NFL, LT prospects may be taken earlier then they otherwise would, but the dominance of first- and second-round picks is unchanged.

To return finally to the problems facing Ted Thompson, Chad Clifton (drafted in 2000 with the 44th pick) is in decline and at the end of his contract. Mark Tauscher, the longtime Green Bay right tackle who returned from ACL surgery halfway through the year to bail out Allen Barbre, is also not tenured for next year. Clifton is at present the best pass-blocker on the roster, backed up by promising guard/tackle T.J. Lang and guard Daryn Colledge. Based on the historical data, the Packers have a deep and serious need to draft a LT in the first or second rounds of the draft as a designated successor to Clifton, who will likely return on a one-year contract so the Packers can groom the eventual draft pick. Vladimir Ducasse is being bandied around as a legitimate second-round pick for the Pack, as is Charles Brown in the first. I’ll be studying LT prospects more in the coming weeks, but right now all I can say is this: short of scouting out a Jason Peters-type gem, the Packers absolutely must draft a LT in the first or second round. Attempts to fill the position in later rounds statistically will not work.

Edit: After a comment by Jersey Al, I decided to go through and see where each of the first-round offensive tackles that I mentioned were actually picked in the first round.

Joe Thomas: 3rd overall. Ryan Clady: 12th overall. Jake Long: 1st overall. Bryant McKinnie: 7th overall. Chris Samuels: 3rd. Walter Jones: 6th. Jordan Gross: 8th. Jonathan Ogden: 4th. Jammal Brown: 13th. Willie Roaf: 8th. Wilie Anderson: 10th. Tarik Glenn: 19th. Orlando Pace: 1st. Brad Hopkins: 13th. Lincoln Kennedy: 9th. Tra Thomas: 11th. Korey Stringer: 24th.

I guess historically, I was wrong in my original conclusion that the Packers must draft a LT prospect at No. 23. Only two of the tackles listed were picked lower then No. 13, and they attended just one Pro Bowl apiece in the time I surveyed.

One explanation for this trend might be that the top prospects are taken extremely high in the draft and tend to fly off the board very quickly; last year's top three prospects in Jason Smith, Andre Smith and Eugene Monroe all vanished within the first eight picks. So after the teams with major needs have filled them, teams who still need a LT but are now without a top prospect on the board can either overreach for a player or wait until the second round. That would explain the relatively large number of tackles picked in the early second round. I would guess that the top prospects only rarely make it down to No. 23 on the list, which is why we see so few of them in the Pro Bowl data.