BlueOne":3q43udtd said:
How does Cable escape significant blame for our O-line troubles? It has consistently been the teams weak point since he has been here and it's not like we haven't invested capital in it.
BlueOne":3q43udtd said:
Maybe I'm just not that aware of the rest of the league, but do most teams invest more in the O-line than the Seahawks? My first thought is no.
I'll start with the salary paid perspective:
Seattle ranks 31st in salary paid to it's offensive line in the NFL. The bottom 6 are:
32: Det 12.5m
31: Sea 14.3m
30: Buf 17.1m
29: KC 17.8m
28: TB: 19.2m
27: Chi: 19.9m
Those are the only teams that pay under 20m on their OL position group. Obviously Seattle is WAY under the norm, and if they replace Okung, they'll be 32nd next year at roughly HALF the combined salary of the 31st team in OL pay.
Obviously we haven't used UFA at all to spike the position group, except to sign street free agents (Gallery, Giacomini, Winston etc.)
That leaves the draft. Since 2011 I'll limit to the top 4 rounds. I'll just include the top 6, since they should be rookie laden.
Buf: 1st (0), 2nd (2), 3rd (1), 4th (1)
Chi: 1st (2), 2nd (0), 3rd (1), 4th (0)
Det: 1st (2), 2nd (0), 3rd (2), 4th (0)
KC: 1st (1), 2nd (3), 3rd (1), 4th (0)
Sea: 1st (1), 2nd (1), 3rd (1), 4th (2)
TB: 1st (0), 2nd (1), 3rd (0), 4th (0)
Really TB stands out here. We selected 5 total picks in the Cable era. Tying for most. Buffalo has spent roughly the same capital if one were to use 'the chart' Detroit and Chicago spent WAY more in capital than Seattle despite having one fewer selection in this range.
TB has entirely neglected it's OL although that's partially due to the fact they used UFA to add talent and are just this year getting out from under some mega deal whiffs.
Honestly, if we use either actual cash, or weighted draft position by use of the chart -- Seattle has barely invested in the line at all relative to the league. And whatever investments we've made by draft have basically been allowed to walk out the door. Even going forward, it's pretty easy to see that Seattle will be in the bottom 3 of salary committed to the position group for the next couple years at least. Since it's very possible both Okung and Sweezy are each allowed to depart for cap reasons.
I'd also point out the obvious, that the 2011 draft skews our outward understanding of Seattle having invested in the OL. But what is most often forgotten, is in that offseason, Seattle was horribly depleted in the OL group. Not even having enough camp bodies to fill our 9 man final roster. We were obliged to dip heavy into the OL pool out of sheer necessity -- without the ability to bolster the unit with UFA journeymen since we were in a cap cutting rebuild.
On the other hand, we don't know the immediate scenarios by which all other teams selected their OL early either. Ultimately, Seattle definitely hasn't invested in OL by way of Salary. And of those least invested teams -- Seattle is fairly significantly behind all but two of them in terms of draft investment. Those other two generally are annual locks for top 5 overall picks.
Seattle is currently competing for championships, while doing so with an investment level in the OL that is amongst the dregs and mediocre of the league. The reality is, Seattle is financing all of these big second deals to impact players elsewhere on the team on the backs of Cable's labors. And that reliance on turning draft day turds into gold is going to steepen over the next two years. His work is absolutely essential to the current model for our roster.
I can easily see Seattle getting down into the 9m to 12m range for the entire OL group in terms of salary for 2016.