So we are going to be a run-first team with no O-line?

TwistedHusky · Mar 12, 2015

Admitting I have no idea how the Graham thing will work out, but acknowledging we really needed someone to score besides Marshawn in the RZ, it seems like the Seahawks are taking a tremendous leap of faith here.

This team is built to run the ball.

Not just the offense either. Our defense is fast and smaller, and one things that allows our defense to be effective is they can get rest because the offense has prolonged drives that rest ours (while tiring the opposing defense, which in turn gets us longer drives later).

We lost 2 key parts of running the ball, at least, and that even assume Okung can continue to play and be effective.

There was an interview where the guy (ESPN sports reporter) was talking about how Marshawn averages almost 1 yard less per carry when Unger is out. Yes, I know we won many of the games Unger was out, but were those teams great run defenses and if so, how did our run game do?

Because the eye test was pretty clear in letting us know that we are nowhere near as effective without Unger when we try to run the ball.

I don't need to be talked off a ledge here. I am legit confused and we be more interested in perspectives on whether we continue our run first approach, go to a more conventional approach (in spite of the danger it might pose to the effectiveness of our defense) or something else.

I know we needed someone to catch the ball, it just feels weird that gutting our run effectiveness is the right approach. I am also worried about how this affects Lynch's effectiveness near the goal line. Isn't he one of the top 3 TD threads in all of football?

Leaving aside the other stuff about Graham that worry me, the weirdest part is it feels like we are going to have to go into the season with 2 double doors where offensive linemen used to be.

Any thoughts on what I am missing here?

marko358 · Mar 12, 2015

It's March 12. Our first game is in September. Plenty of time to address the O-Line.

Basis4day · Mar 12, 2015

TwistedHusky":12eukokx said:
Admitting I have no idea how the Graham thing will work out, but acknowledging we really needed someone to score besides Marshawn in the RZ, it seems like the Seahawks are taking a tremendous leap of faith here.

This team is built to run the ball.

Not just the offense either. Our defense is fast and smaller, and one things that allows our defense to be effective is they can get rest because the offense has prolonged drives that rest ours (while tiring the opposing defense, which in turn gets us longer drives later).

We lost 2 key parts of running the ball, at least, and that even assume Okung can continue to play and be effective.

There was an interview where the guy (ESPN sports reporter) was talking about how Marshawn averages almost 1 yard less per carry when Unger is out. Yes, I know we won many of the games Unger was out, but were those teams great run defenses and if so, how did our run game do?

Because the eye test was pretty clear in letting us know that we are nowhere near as effective without Unger when we try to run the ball.

I don't need to be talked off a ledge here. I am legit confused and we be more interested in perspectives on whether we continue our run first approach, go to a more conventional approach (in spite of the danger it might pose to the effectiveness of our defense) or something else.

I know we needed someone to catch the ball, it just feels weird that gutting our run effectiveness is the right approach. I am also worried about how this affects Lynch's effectiveness near the goal line. Isn't he one of the top 3 TD threads in all of football?

Leaving aside the other stuff about Graham that worry me, the weirdest part is it feels like we are going to have to go into the season with 2 double doors where offensive linemen used to be.

Any thoughts on what I am missing here?

How often since Wilson has been here have we had the same O-Line play multiple games in a row?

Seanhawk · Mar 12, 2015

Yes, the rest of FA signing period, the Draft, and the rest of the off-season.

McGruff · Mar 12, 2015

8 man Spread formation with a center, Wilson and Lynch. Takes all the linemen and linebackers off the field.

Sgt. Largent · Mar 12, 2015

marko358":xstf2n0r said:
It's March 12. Our first game is in September. Plenty of time to address the O-Line.

Logic and reason have no place in this thread.

Hawkfan77 · Mar 12, 2015

It's March 12th

Okung-Bailey-Lewis-Sweezy-Britt played several games last year and the outcome turned out fine.

I dont understand the overreaction

nash72 · Mar 12, 2015

Yeah, Unger was cool and all, but he wasn't instrumental in our winning games or how we play (6-0 without him last season). We all know Carpenter was mediocre and probably played as good as he possibly could last year due to a contract season, but he's easily replaced also. Lets face it, the line pretty much sucked with both of them playing so whats the issue again?

DJrmb · Mar 12, 2015

So we are going to be a run-first team with no O-line?

So how is that different from the last 2 years???

Attyla the Hawk · Mar 12, 2015

I would say availability has played a pretty key role in who we have kept and who we let walk.

Unger and Carpenter had pretty extensive injury histories. Same with Miller at TE.

If I had to hazard a guess, Okung probably walks next year.

gowazzu02 · Mar 12, 2015

So your stressing about Carp and Unger leaving? How about we just play the guys that played when they were hurt the past few years???

Or gasp.... sign some guys or maybe just maybe draft someone? You know kinda like the guy that started all year at RT last year, or maybe the right guard who played DT in college..... Trust one thing they can teach oline how to run block....

Pass blocking,,, well thats yet to be seen . But we made the superbowl back to back years with horrendous pass blocking, so it can only improve.

KiwiHawk · Mar 12, 2015

Coincidence does not imply causation.

Did Lynch's YPC drop because of the lack of Unger, or because we faced tougher defenses? I'm gonna go with tougher defenses, because that's a much more obvious and therefore more reasonable explanation.

Carolina
San Fransisco
Arizona
St Louis

That's 7 games against tough defenses.

Mojambo · Mar 12, 2015

DJrmb":2gj96tkz said:
So we are going to be a run-first team with no O-line?

Click to expand...

So how is that different from the last 2 years???

/thread

bandiger · Mar 12, 2015

Eh, we have had a revolving door O-line for the last two years, why worry

Popeyejones · Mar 12, 2015

For awhile I was confused by how little resources the Hawks were dedicating to the O-line.

Over time I've decided that it's part of their strategy, because it's too weird for it not to be.

Every team has units they emphasize and de-emphasize in terms of capital (be it draft or financial), and I think the Seahawks have just made the conscious decision that they'll pull resources from the offensive line and put it into other units (the secondary, the d-line).

It's really the only way to describe it.

And in a way I think it kind of makes sense:

*Lynch has already made it quite clear that he doesn't need a dominate O-Line to dominate (unlike a guy like DeMarco Murray, or as we learned with the Eagles line injuries last year, Lesean McCoy).

*The game planning and style of play of Wilson also doesn't require a dominate O-Line.

His passes are disproportionately of the (pre-snap) one read and throw variety, which doesn't require a dominate O-Line.

For passes that aren't of that style, Wilson still relies (too much IMO) on his internal clock and bails from the top of pocket at 3 seconds regardless of if he's getting pressure or not (rather than stepping into it if he is getting pressured or staying at the top of it if he isn't until he is). Maybe he does this because of his height, or because it's just the way he plays and PC accepts it, or because he hasn't learned how to do it yet. Regardless though, it's what he does, and it doesn't require a dominate O-Line if your QB plays that way. If anything the way that Wilson plays would really piss off lineman who are celebrated for their pass blocking ability.

So, I dunno, I think that's what's happening, and given the particularities of the skill players who could potentially be affected by it, I think it's actually a pretty smart strategy.

Seahawk Sailor · Mar 12, 2015

It is a position of great worry to me, but yes, there is plenty of time left before things get sorted out. We can address it if we pick linemen early and often in the draft. We can also address it with solid free agents, like say Evan Mathis, who the Eagles are reportedly shopping. There's time, and PC/JS will address it. I have a feeling that's now their number one priority.

Jville · Mar 12, 2015

Seems to me a lot of guards being shopped. Carpenter got his deal just in time.

MrThortan · Mar 12, 2015

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 · Mar 12, 2015

Popeyejones":2rsu0khy said:
For awhile I was confused by how little resources the Hawks were dedicating to the O-line.

Over time I've decided that it's part of their strategy, because it's too weird for it not to be.

Every team has units they emphasize and de-emphasize in terms of capital (be it draft or financial), and I think the Seahawks have just made the conscious decision that they'll pull resources from the offensive line and put it into other units (the secondary, the d-line).

It's really the only way to describe it.

And in a way I think it kind of makes sense:

*Lynch has already made it quite clear that he doesn't need a dominate O-Line to dominate (unlike a guy like DeMarco Murray, or as we learned with the Eagles line injuries last year, Lesean McCoy).

*The game planning and style of play of Wilson also doesn't require a dominate O-Line.

His passes are disproportionately of the (pre-snap) one read and throw variety, which doesn't require a dominate O-Line.

For passes that aren't of that style, Wilson still relies (too much IMO) on his internal clock and bails from the top of pocket at 3 seconds regardless of if he's getting pressure or not (rather than stepping into it if he is getting pressured or staying at the top of it if he isn't until he is). Maybe he does this because of his height, or because it's just the way he plays and PC accepts it, or because he hasn't learned how to do it yet. Regardless though, it's what he does, and it doesn't require a dominate O-Line if your QB plays that way. If anything the way that Wilson plays would really piss off lineman who are celebrated for their pass blocking ability.

So, I dunno, I think that's what's happening, and given the particularities of the skill players who could potentially be affected by it, I think it's actually a pretty smart strategy.

You're obviously not paying attention to the resources they have put into the OL so why even comment?

Hawkfan77 · Mar 12, 2015

MrThortan":1p2qrmvl 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.

The OL has not been weak. Their pass pro has left something to be desired but it is one of the best run blocking OLs in the NFL...and we are, ya know, a run first team. So I think the OL woes get overblown a bit around here

So we are going to be a run-first team with no O-line?

Well-known member

New member

Active member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Similar threads