Kapadia w/Brock March 6th "Seahawks have drafted 14 Olinemen

[Sgt. Largent]

Assertions that the Seahawk offensive line was "the worse" in the league is an exaggeration. IMO

The Browns, forty-niners and Rams all had offensive lines with poorer season performances ....... to name three.

Is this where we're at now, having the piece of mind that we weren't THE worst line, just bottom 5?

It's not an exaggeration, the line was crap, the worst line in franchise history........if you don't believe me just ask Russell's 84 injuries last year.

 

[Jville]

Assertions that the Seahawk offensive line was "the worse" in the league is an exaggeration. IMO

The Browns, forty-niners and Rams all had offensive lines with poorer season performances ....... to name three.

Is this where we're at now, having the piece of mind that we weren't THE worst line, just bottom 5?

It's not an exaggeration, the line was crap, the worst line in franchise history........if you don't believe me just ask Russell's 84 injuries last year.

Such a retort is an emotional exaggeration.

 

[chris98251]

Assertions that the Seahawk offensive line was "the worse" in the league is an exaggeration. IMO

The Browns, forty-niners and Rams all had offensive lines with poorer season performances ....... to name three.

That's some amazing company to be in, Glad were in the thick of things there.

 

[LolaRox]

In their defense, the majority of the picks they've spent have been pretty late. Britt will get a second contract. Paying mediocre players is one of the worst things you can do, so I don't blame them for letting the guys walk, Okung being the exception. However, with Okung, the timing of his injury and choosing to represent himself kind of took the decision out of the Hawks hands.

Not sure what you mean by pretty late, but 46% of the OL drafted were drafted in the 3rd round or higher.
I must be forgetting someone because I only came up with 13 since 2010.

6 OL - 1-3 rounds
2 OL - 4th round
5 OL - 6th and 7th rounds

Really no excuse for them not to have better results.

Dallas has proven that a stacked O-line can mask defensive deficiencies (at least enough to make the playoffs)..

Dallas also used 4 of 5 high 1st round picks to assemble their line, so kinda hard to follow that blueprint without stinking for a decade or so.
My point is 14 of 14 O-line draft picks since the PC/JS era began has resulted in zero 2nd contracts and very little development, so it's time to change our philosophy of saving on the line to spend elsewhere.
Either spend more on the line, or figure out why you're terrible at drafting and developing............but you can't stink at both.

Dallas' main starters from last year 3 - 1st rounders, 1- 4th rounder and 1 - UFA. Only one of their 1st rounders was a top 10 pick.

Seahawks have had similar talent (based on draft position) but haven't been able to make it work to the level of the Cowboys.

 

[getnasty]

If anyone has a list of the 14 players that would be cool to lazy to do it myself. I wouldn't say we've done horrible in drafting we just don't value paying guys who become free agents. Would you trade Kam and Jimmy Graham for Okung and Sweezy? I wouldn't but those are the decisions your faced with and Seattle has made it clear time and time again they'll roll the dice with unproven OLmen. John Moffitt was the one pick that I truly hate today.

 

[LolaRox]

1st round - Okung, Carp, Ifedi
2nd - Britt
3rd - Moffitt, Odhiambo
4th - Poole, Glo
6th - Hunt, Scott, Sokoli
7th - Sweezy, Bowie, Seymour

*added Sokoli

 

[Seafan]

1st round - Okung, Carp, Ifedi
2nd - Britt
3rd - Moffitt, Odhiambo
4th - Poole, Glo
6th - Hunt, Scott
7th - Sweezy, Bowie, Seymour

again not sure of the 14th unless they're including Unger from 2009.

Sokoli is the missing OL.

 

[LolaRox]

Thanks Seafan, totally blanked on him.

Another convert project who I believe is back to playing defense for someone else.

 

[hawk45]

I brought this up when free agency started as to why we needed to overspend if we had to to get guys like Lang, because our FO obviously has no idea what they're doing when it comes to drafting O-linemen.

IMO there needs to be a philosophy shift to stop bargain bin shop for linemen and trusting Cable to turn basketball players into competent tackles in half a season.

If that means less money elsewhere, so be it, Pete and John have had a very high success rate in drafting defensive players, so I'm just fine with not having 70% of our cap space on that side of the ball.

Spot on. Pete and coaches have made good pieces out of lower draft picks or UDFAs at many different positions. Pete's glaring flaw is treating Cable as if he can do the same with zero evidence.
I trust Pete to replace CB2 or an LB if we let those walk. We have no answers post Okung or post Breno for that matter.

Then again when they spend money they light 7 mil on fire for joeckel whom they could have had for pocket change or just not signed. So I give up.

At the OL we are the pre org change Mariners. Default pessimism is the only realistic outlook.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

But I want to see the same 5 guys up front that ended the season there![/b]

I'll never understand this when it would be so easy to upgrade.

A second year of play often serves as an upgrade.

 

[hawk45]

A second year of play has not served as an upgrade on the OL and most specifically at tackle.
Remember when Garry Gilliam was assumed to be on such an upward trajectory that folks were penciling him in at LT? Good times.
Fant is just as likely to go either way or not improve much. We have precisely one conversion project success story in sweezy who was t worth a second contract. And that was at guard.
After one year of play Justin Britt was so improved at tackle they moved him inside to fail at guard.
Who are the examples of cable draftees at tackle who have improved in a linear fashion?

 

[MontanaHawk05]

A second year of play has not served as an upgrade on the OL and most specifically at tackle.
Remember when Garry Gilliam was assumed to be on such an upward trajectory that folks were penciling him in at LT? Good times.
Fant is just as likely to go either way or not improve much. We have precisely one conversion project success story in sweezy who was t worth a second contract. And that was at guard.
After one year of play Justin Britt was so improved at tackle they moved him inside to fail at guard.
Who are the examples of cable draftees at tackle who have improved in a linear fashion?

In case you haven't noticed, Britt is now the best lineman we have, and one of the conference's better centers. He wouldn't have become that for us if we'd have jettisoned him when you wanted (which seems to be, "after his first year or bust").

Sure, it took a third year for Britt. So what. We have a QB who can make up for the deficiencies of the OL and has done so magnificently even while gimpy. If there's any team in the NFL that can afford time for lineman growth, it's this one.

Fant is a gamble, sure. In that situation, you judge him off potential. Does he have the tools? Has he shown enough flashy plays to merit development? Is he cheap in the meantime? The answer to all three questions is yes. Cable just has to get him consistently owning.

I'm not as excited about Gilliam, but Michael Bennett is.

You don't hand out permanent judgments to players for a bad rookie year. You just don't. You bring in competition to motivate them, and then leave them in the mix. That's exactly what Seattle has done.

 

[Subzero717]

Assertions that the Seahawk offensive line was "the worse" in the league is an exaggeration. IMO

The Browns, forty-niners and Rams all had offensive lines with poorer season performances ....... to name three.

What metric are you using to measure? Joe Thomas by himself is better than the line we started last year.