Seattle is dead last in OL spending

[xgeoff]

... I mean Okung, Sweezy, Breno and even Carp were good to above average lineman.

I so wholeheartedly disagree with this. None of these guys impressed me as above average when they were here. And frankly that's not necessarily a criticism of these guys. I think the problem is Cable. These guys were, IMO, just OK when they were here, and often below average.

Then they leave and go to another team and play very well, if not great. What does that say? It says your OLine coach sucks! I don't know what he's doing, or why Pete likes him so much, but I am incredibly disappointed with Tom Cable.

 

[mrt144]

... I mean Okung, Sweezy, Breno and even Carp were good to above average lineman.

I so wholeheartedly disagree with this. None of these guys impressed me as above average when they were here. And frankly that's not necessarily a criticism of these guys. I think the problem is Cable. These guys were, IMO, just OK when they were here, and often below average.

Then they leave and go to another team and play very well, if not great. What does that say? It says your OLine coach sucks! I don't know what he's doing, or why Pete likes him so much, but I am incredibly disappointed with Tom Cable.

Seriously, especially with Sweezy, he was never above average at anything except run blocking, on a good day. If all your ex-wives have wonderful and prosperous lives after divorcing you, maybe you're the consistent problem, not the ex-wives.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

... I mean Okung, Sweezy, Breno and even Carp were good to above average lineman.

I so wholeheartedly disagree with this. None of these guys impressed me as above average when they were here. And frankly that's not necessarily a criticism of these guys. I think the problem is Cable. These guys were, IMO, just OK when they were here, and often below average.

Then they leave and go to another team and play very well, if not great. What does that say? It says your OLine coach sucks! I don't know what he's doing, or why Pete likes him so much, but I am incredibly disappointed with Tom Cable.

They all played well here too, just not well enough for management to reward them with a 2nd contract. OR that's just not Pete and John's philosophy with the O-line. They obviously think Cable can work miracles, and it's just not true.

Does that mean we should have given them all 2nd contracts for big money? No, but IMO we should have given serious consideration to keeping 1 or 2 of them to stabilize the line and continue the continuity.

Instead of this dysfunctional system of year after year of new faces, instability and 6-8 games until the line gets their crap together.

 

[Jville]

Cap expenditure rankings are, at best, a trailing reflection of talent acquisition, development and retention.

Going Into 2013, the cap ranking for the offensive line was #1. In that same year, the defensive backfield was already into it's 4th year of rebuilding and yet still ranked only #28.

Three years later, going into 2016, that retained and now expensive defensive backfield is now ranked #1 in cap cost. Where as, the ranking for the offensive line, whose rebuild began only last year, is listed at only #32.

Connecting the dots: When it comes to rebuilding, rotating thru one or two position groups at a time can facilitate competitive maintenance from year to year. Seahawk cap history seems to reflect that approach.

 

[dogorama]

Y'all hated the OL when it was expensive, too.

We had no frame of reference of how bad it could be.

Eh. If I'd said "It could be a lot worse" back then, I'd have been laughed off the toilet.

Besides, mediocre offensive lines have appeared in and won Super Bowls before. Colts, Steelers, Packers, Cardinals, 2013 Seahawks. It happens more often than you think.

I would kill for a "mediocre" line.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Cap expenditure rankings are, at best, a trailing reflection of talent acquisition, development and retention.

It partly that, but payroll is only half the story.

The real indictment on this regime, and it's really the only glaring failure of the way Pete and John draft is that they've allocated 30% of our draft capital towards the O-line in their tenure.....................and here we are with five new lineman and one of the worst, if not THE worst offensive line in the league.

 

[mrt144]

Cap expenditure rankings are, at best, a trailing reflection of talent acquisition, development and retention.

It partly that, but payroll is only half the story.

The real indictment on this regime, and it's really the only glaring failure of the way Pete and John draft is that they've allocated 30% of our draft capital towards the O-line in their tenure.....................and here we are with five new lineman and one of the worst, if not THE worst offensive line in the league.

It's amazing isn't it? I remember opining last year that perhaps 2015 was a test to see if the experiment in being as bare bones as possible at O Line could be successful. I guess making the playoffs and winning on a shank is all the validation PC/JS need that their process works.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

People talk about what the Broncos did after the Hawks destroyed them in the SB (mostly, try to rebuild their Defense to be more like the Hawks) but I suspect the Hawks took a similar approach after we got 1st-half shellacked by the Panthers in the playoffs; except that what needed rebuilding for the Hawks was the OL. And so that's what the decision was, with so-far tepid results but with big potential if you listen to the coaches - who actually have no good reason to lie in their optimistic assessment.

 

[dogorama]

if you listen to the coaches - who actually have no good reason to lie in their optimistic assessment.

Coaches are politicians, they only tell you what they want you to know. The truth lies somewhere between what they tell us and what we believe.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Cap expenditure rankings are, at best, a trailing reflection of talent acquisition, development and retention.

It partly that, but payroll is only half the story.

The real indictment on this regime, and it's really the only glaring failure of the way Pete and John draft is that they've allocated 30% of our draft capital towards the O-line in their tenure.....................and here we are with five new lineman and one of the worst, if not THE worst offensive line in the league.

It's amazing isn't it? I remember opining last year that perhaps 2015 was a test to see if the experiment in being as bare bones as possible at O Line could be successful. I guess making the playoffs and winning on a shank is all the validation PC/JS need that their process works.

It's many things.

1. Missing on "Cable" guys like Carp, Moffit, and hopefully not Ifedi, Glowinski and Britt. When you draft a O-lineman in the first couple rounds, you need to hit on them.

2. Being a run first physical style offense is the exact opposite of the lineman coming out of college. Very few pro style offenses exist, let alone are producing NFL ready and quality lineman. Makes the learning curve years and not months trying to teach technique.

3. Reliance on Cable making chicken salad out of chicken you know what. IMO Pete and John have leaned FAR too heavily on Cable to save them spending so much cap space on the defense. Continually hoping Cable has these project lineman ready by week one is not only unrealistic, but it's killing Russell.

4. Which leads me to Russell. Pete and John are also leaning too much on Russell running around making plays for a line that can't block anybody.......................and now it's come back to bit us in the butt.

 

[mrt144]

4. Which leads me to Russell. Pete and John are also leaning too much on Russell running around making plays for a line that can't block anybody.......................and now it's come back to bit us in the butt.

I hate to make this comparison but

We're like the Colts if the Colts had a top 5 Defense.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

if you listen to the coaches - who actually have no good reason to lie in their optimistic assessment.

Coaches are politicians, they only tell you what they want you to know. The truth lies somewhere between what they tell us and what we believe.

I suppose there is some truth in that but the Hawkblogger article in the recently-posted thread is by someone I consider pretty candid; and he echoes much of what Cable said.

Bevell too, when asked why they have passed so many times, basically said it is because the run game was not (yet) working - for the same reasons Cable had mentioned even though he had not listened to Cable who preceded him by 15 minutes yesterday.

I find all of PC (despite his poer of positive thing mentality), DV and Cable to be serious, candid and credible. They answer questions very directly.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

... I mean Okung, Sweezy, Breno and even Carp were good to above average lineman.

I so wholeheartedly disagree with this. None of these guys impressed me as above average when they were here. And frankly that's not necessarily a criticism of these guys. I think the problem is Cable. These guys were, IMO, just OK when they were here, and often below average.

Then they leave and go to another team and play very well, if not great. What does that say? It says your OLine coach sucks! I don't know what he's doing, or why Pete likes him so much, but I am incredibly disappointed with Tom Cable.

They all played well here too, just not well enough for management to reward them with a 2nd contract. OR that's just not Pete and John's philosophy with the O-line. They obviously think Cable can work miracles, and it's just not true.

Does that mean we should have given them all 2nd contracts for big money? No, but IMO we should have given serious consideration to keeping 1 or 2 of them to stabilize the line and continue the continuity.

Instead of this dysfunctional system of year after year of new faces, instability and 6-8 games until the line gets their crap together.

Agree Sarge.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Cap expenditure rankings are, at best, a trailing reflection of talent acquisition, development and retention.

It partly that, but payroll is only half the story.

The real indictment on this regime, and it's really the only glaring failure of the way Pete and John draft is that they've allocated 30% of our draft capital towards the O-line in their tenure.....................and here we are with five new lineman and one of the worst, if not THE worst offensive line in the league.

It's amazing isn't it? I remember opining last year that perhaps 2015 was a test to see if the experiment in being as bare bones as possible at O Line could be successful. I guess making the playoffs and winning on a shank is all the validation PC/JS need that their process works.

It's many things.

1. Missing on "Cable" guys like Carp, Moffit, and hopefully not Ifedi, Glowinski and Britt. When you draft a O-lineman in the first couple rounds, you need to hit on them.

2. Being a run first physical style offense is the exact opposite of the lineman coming out of college. Very few pro style offenses exist, let alone are producing NFL ready and quality lineman. Makes the learning curve years and not months trying to teach technique.

3. Reliance on Cable making chicken salad out of chicken you know what. IMO Pete and John have leaned FAR too heavily on Cable to save them spending so much cap space on the defense. Continually hoping Cable has these project lineman ready by week one is not only unrealistic, but it's killing Russell.

4. Which leads me to Russell. Pete and John are also leaning too much on Russell running around making plays for a line that can't block anybody.......................and now it's come back to bit us in the butt.

Also agree with your 4 points here.

 

[Seymour]

if you listen to the coaches - who actually have no good reason to lie in their optimistic assessment.

Coaches are politicians, they only tell you what they want you to know. The truth lies somewhere between what they tell us and what we believe.

I suppose there is some truth in that but the Hawkblogger article in the recently-posted thread is by someone I consider pretty candid; and he echoes much of what Cable said.

Bevell too, when asked why they have passed so many times, basically said it is because the run game was not (yet) working - for the same reasons Cable had mentioned even though he had not listened to Cable who preceded him by 15 minutes yesterday.

I find all of PC (despite his poer of positive thing mentality), DV and Cable to be serious, candid and credible. They answer questions very directly.

Hilarious, but false IMO. Just yesterday Pete was asked a seriously legit question about why Jimmy wasn't targeted when single covered by a 6' defender in the red zone. Pete completely dodged the question and said "pretty tough to see from 90 rows up" to the reporter and ignored the question. Better then 50% of what you hear out of any of them is tailored to protect and cover for the team.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

^ Bevell was asked the same question and answered it perfectly well. Dial it up, watch that presser too.

A lot of posters here seem to think that a steady diet of RW to JG is the euphoria we all need. Even in NE where they have amazing rapport and timing with it, you still don't see a constant stream of predictable Brady to Gronk plays. It's the other plays that allow it to work, occasionally.

 

[Seymour]

^ Bevell was asked the same question and answered it perfectly well.

Never heard Bevell, but that makes 50% correct? :stirthepot:

 

[CodeWarrior]

Another peculiarity of Seattle is their willingness to swap player positions on the OL. I know PC/JS value versatility, but perhaps they value it to a fault. Seattle does more plug and play on the OL than any other team in football, be it conversion projects or position changes.

I can't think of another team that drafts tackles only to plug them in at guard so willingly.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

^ Bevell was asked the same question and answered it perfectly well.

Never heard Bevell, but that makes 50% correct? :stirthepot:

Ha

But maybe it's appropriate that DB went into it far more than what PC's 'from 90 rows up' (meaning from the casual fans' perspective) answer was, given that DB is who calls takes all the info and field-context then calls the plays in.

 

[chris98251]

These press conferences and interviews at this time is damage control, the run game isn't there yet, we blocked well but RB didn't have patience, pass protection was 100 percent when you see sacks, easy to see from 90 rows up, we are working hard on this and it will get better all things that people do that are deflections. Pete isn't Rex Ryan, don't expect him to tell us or the press who he is holding accountable other then himself taking any heat.