MrThortan":28rn9lnk said:Hasn't the line been weak for a couple years now? I have heard fans wanting the Seahawks to improve the line for a while now, not only for the run, but to protect Wilson as well. I do hope this is the season where they really focus on beefing up the o-line with some quality players. Their willingness to trade Unger makes me suspect they have plans in motion.
Hawkfan77":34ymwbwm said:You're obviously not paying attention to the resources they have put into the OL so why even comment?
Popeyejones":cxeyj3ak said:Hawkfan77":cxeyj3ak said:You're obviously not paying attention to the resources they have put into the OL so why even comment?
:lol:
Okay, why don't you explain it to me, and in the process you can also explain it to all your fellow Hawks fans in this thread and all the other threads over the last few years questioning why the Hawks aren't addressing the o-line.
O-lineman are 5 of a team's 22 starters.
In the last three years the Hawks have made 18 picks in the first five rounds and only one of them has gone to O-Line.
In the last three years the Hawks have also traded away or let walk four of their five starting O-lineman, and haven't replaced a single one with a FA signing with any salary cap ramifications at all.
So, by all means, please explain to me the resources the Seahawks have been pouring into the O-line since the start of their run.
(Or perhaps you are just pissy because we disagreed in the Knighton thread and you're expressing that by making a bad argument in this one?)
cacksman":1kapyrr1 said:Seattle is undefeated (as in all wins and zero losses) in the last 8 games Unger has missed.
Basis4day":2kmp49m6 said:Popeyejones":2kmp49m6 said:Hawkfan77":2kmp49m6 said:You're obviously not paying attention to the resources they have put into the OL so why even comment?
:lol:
Okay, why don't you explain it to me, and in the process you can also explain it to all your fellow Hawks fans in this thread and all the other threads over the last few years questioning why the Hawks aren't addressing the o-line.
O-lineman are 5 of a team's 22 starters.
In the last three years the Hawks have made 18 picks in the first five rounds and only one of them has gone to O-Line.
In the last three years the Hawks have also traded away or let walk four of their five starting O-lineman, and haven't replaced a single one with a FA signing with any salary cap ramifications at all.
So, by all means, please explain to me the resources the Seahawks have been pouring into the O-line since the start of their run.
(Or perhaps you are just pissy because we disagreed in the Knighton thread and you're expressing that by making a bad argument in this one?)
Last i checked the Draft is more than 5 rounds and there is more ways to get players than veteran FA pickups.
Popeyejones":3hhtyp5d said:Basis4day":3hhtyp5d said:Popeyejones":3hhtyp5d said:Hawkfan77":3hhtyp5d said:You're obviously not paying attention to the resources they have put into the OL so why even comment?
:lol:
Okay, why don't you explain it to me, and in the process you can also explain it to all your fellow Hawks fans in this thread and all the other threads over the last few years questioning why the Hawks aren't addressing the o-line.
O-lineman are 5 of a team's 22 starters.
In the last three years the Hawks have made 18 picks in the first five rounds and only one of them has gone to O-Line.
In the last three years the Hawks have also traded away or let walk four of their five starting O-lineman, and haven't replaced a single one with a FA signing with any salary cap ramifications at all.
So, by all means, please explain to me the resources the Seahawks have been pouring into the O-line since the start of their run.
(Or perhaps you are just pissy because we disagreed in the Knighton thread and you're expressing that by making a bad argument in this one?)
Last i checked the Draft is more than 5 rounds and there is more ways to get players than veteran FA pickups.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Rounds 1 & 2: projected starters
Rounds 3-5: Projected backups who you hope grow into starters
Rounds 6-7: Filling out the depth chart or practice squad.
If you think plugging in lineman from the 6th and 7th round is dedicating resources to your O-line...nah, you don't actually think that.
As for those "more ways to get players than veteran FA pickups" and through the draft, don't be coy, what are they? Just come out and explain how the Hawks have been dedicating resources to their O-line.
It certainly hasn't been through the draft, through FA pickups, through trades or through extensions. So what is it?
Before we forget, I also want to remind that I said that I think this is a strategic decision by the Hawks coaching staff, and ultimatelly a really smart one.
Popeyejones":1qsrxyvk said:Hawkfan77":1qsrxyvk said:You're obviously not paying attention to the resources they have put into the OL so why even comment?
:lol:
Okay, why don't you explain it to me, and in the process you can also explain it to all your fellow Hawks fans in this thread and all the other threads over the last few years questioning why the Hawks aren't addressing the o-line.
O-lineman are 5 of a team's 22 starters.
In the last three years the Hawks have made 18 picks in the first five rounds and only one of them has gone to O-Line.
In the last three years the Hawks have also traded away or let walk four of their five starting O-lineman, and haven't replaced a single one with a FA signing with any salary cap ramifications at all.
Basis4day":1evmjeta said:Round 3-5 Projected Backups... yeah. If you don't know what the Hawks do in the 5th rd through their roster you really don't know our team at all.
Considering we took a DT in the 7th and turned him into a starting RG and won a SB in the last two years behind a strong rushing attack i'd say they know what they're doing with the O-Line
volsunghawk":3bugwn4b said:I think the debate over the resources put into the O-line can be viewed in a couple of different ways, sure.
First off, our planned starters were Okung/Carpenter/Unger/Sweezy/Britt.
That's 2 1st round picks, 2 2nd round picks, and a converted DL grabbed in the 7th round to serve as the RG. Many people would suggest that amounts to a great deal of resources (4 high round picks) put into the line. Of course, this doesn't stick to your "last three years" parameter.
On the flipside, we haven't looked interested in keeping our O-line starters during Carroll's tenure. In fact, the only lineman we ever gave an extension to is the one we just shipped off to New Orleans.
That's either a tacit acknowledgment that we haven't done a great job at drafting O-linemen or we don't consider the unit to be important enough to pour dollars into.
2 first round draft picksPopeyejones":1j4gjdj4 said:Basis4day":1j4gjdj4 said:Round 3-5 Projected Backups... yeah. If you don't know what the Hawks do in the 5th rd through their roster you really don't know our team at all.
Considering we took a DT in the 7th and turned him into a starting RG and won a SB in the last two years behind a strong rushing attack i'd say they know what they're doing with the O-Line
You're shifting the argument. You're now claiming that I said that the Hawks don't know what they're doing with their O-line, when I said that in recent history they haven't been dedicating resources to their O-Line.
It's particularly annoying because you're now accusing me of the exact opposite of the point I was arguing: my point, quite clearly expressed I thought, was that I think they DO KNOW WHAT they're doing with their O-Line.
Remember, your argument is that the Hawks HAVE BEEN putting resources into their O-Line as of late. You've just been, while alluding to them, refusing to specify what those resources are. That they're starting a converted 7th round defensive tackle at offensive guard is really, really, really, really not a strong point for your argument, so I don't know why you're bringing that up (it's like you're pulling my trump card for me :lol: ).
You are getting the Niner fan treatment.Popeyejones":2e2mvj3l said:Basis4day":2e2mvj3l said:Round 3-5 Projected Backups... yeah. If you don't know what the Hawks do in the 5th rd through their roster you really don't know our team at all.
Considering we took a DT in the 7th and turned him into a starting RG and won a SB in the last two years behind a strong rushing attack i'd say they know what they're doing with the O-Line
You're shifting the argument. You're now claiming that I said that the Hawks don't know what they're doing with their O-line, when I said that in recent history they haven't been dedicating resources to their O-Line.
It's particularly annoying because you're now accusing me of the exact opposite of the point I was arguing: my point, quite clearly expressed I thought, was that I think they DO KNOW WHAT they're doing with their O-Line.
Remember, your argument is that the Hawks HAVE BEEN putting resources into their O-Line as of late. You've just been, while alluding to them, refusing to specify what those resources are. That they're starting a converted 7th round defensive tackle at offensive guard is really, really, really, really not a strong point for your argument, so I don't know why you're bringing that up (it's like you're pulling my trump card for me :lol: ).
Thats how bad organizations view the draft, naturally being a 49ers fan you would view the draft the same. Low expectations for your organization who isn't very good at drafting.Popeyejones":7xmxfteq said:Basis4day":7xmxfteq said:Popeyejones":7xmxfteq said:Hawkfan77":7xmxfteq said:You're obviously not paying attention to the resources they have put into the OL so why even comment?
:lol:
Okay, why don't you explain it to me, and in the process you can also explain it to all your fellow Hawks fans in this thread and all the other threads over the last few years questioning why the Hawks aren't addressing the o-line.
O-lineman are 5 of a team's 22 starters.
In the last three years the Hawks have made 18 picks in the first five rounds and only one of them has gone to O-Line.
In the last three years the Hawks have also traded away or let walk four of their five starting O-lineman, and haven't replaced a single one with a FA signing with any salary cap ramifications at all.
So, by all means, please explain to me the resources the Seahawks have been pouring into the O-line since the start of their run.
(Or perhaps you are just pissy because we disagreed in the Knighton thread and you're expressing that by making a bad argument in this one?)
Last i checked the Draft is more than 5 rounds and there is more ways to get players than veteran FA pickups.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Rounds 1 & 2: projected starters
Rounds 3-5: Projected backups who you hope grow into starters
Rounds 6-7: Filling out the depth chart or practice squad.
If you think plugging in lineman from the 6th and 7th round is dedicating resources to your O-line...nah, you don't actually think that.
As for those "more ways to get players than veteran FA pickups" and through the draft, don't be coy, what are they? Just come out and explain how the Hawks have been dedicating resources to their O-line.
It certainly hasn't been through the draft, through FA pickups, through trades or through extensions. So what is it?
Before we forget, I also want to remind that I said that I think this is a strategic decision by the Hawks coaching staff, and ultimatelly a really smart one.
Gibbs gets a lot of credit. Pretty sure he is not the originator, though. My guess is a lot of football concepts finally got a good label under guys like him and Mudd.HoustonHawk82":1snp4jtl said:On Zone blocking scheme for a moment, who did that originate from?
Was that a Gibbs' concept Scotte, or did he just "guru" it?