The OL checks another box.
It was good enough to run rampant over most teams last year, and the 2 tackles who are in the NFL now, underperformed.
"3 Seniors, 5 Juniors, 2 RS sophomores, and 4 RS freshmen, one of which, Jaelyn Duncan, is a 4-star recruit who can really move, has cracked the starter spot at LT it looks like, and caught a pass in the Spring game."
Optimism man.
So the line was good, but loses two guys. Not just two guys, but NFL guys, one of whom was basically getting the same treatment as Duncan. But using NFL guys should be bad, but those NFL guys underperformed, so not as much of a loss.
We move over the running rampant on most teams. This ... it turns out to be a little less clear. They ran rampant on oddly half the teams they played, really rampant. And then were kinda not great against half. Yes, they just mushed five of the six worse run defenses in the league (that's a good sign), and got held below 4.4 YPC six times, to 4.0 or fewer five.
Beyond that, the run success was boom or bust, which tends to reflect less on the line. More than 22 percent of their carries went for loss. They were a bit above average in how often their runs went 5 or more yards. (Pass pro was statistically just dreadful)
And that's all before we look at the departure of a very run-friendly system and going to a Scottie Montgomery offense. I did not realize he took over there. Not sure how to feel about that. (Enjoy the O-line hire)
Anyway, not to say that precludes the line from being good, but I don't know it checks a box. Granted, all offseason O-line hype is to a degree muddled. It's hard to measure and prone to getting puffed up everywhere, especially since the line tends to be on average more lamented.
