Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Green Bay's DL THAT Good Or Our OL THAT Bad?

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
  • It's an honest question that I don't think there's a clear answer to. Of course fresh after a loss we are all pissed so we will say and feel things we may not feel several days from now after the harsh reality of the loss has worn off. If I had a dollar for every time I felt differently a few days removed from a loss I could buy a nice airbrush system for my RC aircraft.

    Knee jerk is to say OUR OL SUCKS PERIOD END OF STORY!!! And while the tape may suggest as much, I am not so sure that's quite the whole truth. Certainly, we can all agree that the lack of chemistry and time to bond is a MAJOR factor in the way they were pushed around, but what was it about the Packers DL that played THAT impressively for the entire game?

    Dom Capers? Incredibly aggressive game planning? I can't believe the Packers DL is as good as they looked today. So that tells me it is on our OL. Perhaps it's as simple as the Packers feasting on the Perfect Storm which was an OL that is clearly in transition and starting backups and players not used to each other. Is that all it was or was the Packers DL really THAT good?
    Image

    There are three certainties in life. Death, taxes and the perpetual shuffling of the Seattle Seahawks offensive line.
    User avatar
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 11244
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


  • Both!

    Our OLine was however just awful, if not pressure given up off the ages, it was coming up the middle too. forget run blocking, andpassblocking didn't happen all day.
    Until we develop a pass rush that will cause opposing teams to be forced to scheme to defend it we will never be able to consistently take the final step. The interior rush needs improvement. The OLine clearly still needs work.

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions at last after 38 seasons. Awesome!!!
    jammerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4365
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 pm


  • OL has been this bad all last season against many, many teams. It's the OL.
    anonFAFA
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 36
    Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:09 am


  • LOL, can't tell if serious? This offensive line is atrocious! Over half a year to prepare for the first game of the season and our superstar QB is sacked on the first play on our first possession. They stink! Players like Britt having a football camp is a complete joke! You play in the league for 2 years and think you're some kind of star? Sorry suckers, the GB D isn't that great. Pete and John need to stop thinking they can skimp on our line, period!
    SpokaneHawks
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 192
    Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 6:55 am


  • No, Aros, I've wondered about this, too. What if that D-line goes up against other good lines and makes them look a bit foolish? I'll feel just a tad better.

    But that also means our O-line had better look improved against mediocre teams.

    All of this is yet to be seen.

    Fingers crossed.

    AH
    ____________
    BLUE and GREEN...
    User avatar
    Ad Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1558
    Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 8:25 am


  • I watch teams moving the ball and scoring on GB all the time. The Falcons will score 30 plus next week, just watch.

    For whatever reason, we can't do anything against them. Just look at Wilson's numbers in his last 4 games vs them... 2014 NFCCG and regular season games in 2015, 2016, and today.

    Ugly. They have some good players, but we make them look way better than they actually are.
    User avatar
    FlyingGreg
    * Master Chief *
     
    Posts: 9158
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
    Location: San Diego, CA


  • We'll see next week.
    User avatar
    Bobblehead
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1933
    Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:52 am


  • Good news: your offense never has to play your defense. That would be really ugly.
    User avatar
    ptisme
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 773
    Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:22 am


  • The Oline has deteriorated further every consecutive year since our title year. This will be the worst group we have seen yet by seasons end I fear.

    What if GB's DL is actually sub-average? What if they suck?

    Think about what this could look like if one or two of the current starters misses significant time.

    We could be in for a truly catastrophic season up front.
    User avatar
    OpHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 299
    Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 9:26 am


  • ptisme wrote:Good news: your offense never has to play your defense. That would be really ugly.


    Wilson would be carted off the field, unfortunately. :|
    "Our Quarterback is a Bad Man!" - Michael Robinson
    User avatar
    Foghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1335
    Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:43 am
    Location: The Desert


  • It's our line. See Tampa game last year. See every ram game. See every game with a top 15 line
    cymatica
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 970
    Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2014 7:40 am


  • Foghawk wrote:
    ptisme wrote:Good news: your offense never has to play your defense. That would be really ugly.


    Wilson would be carted off the field, unfortunately. :|

    I couldn't even imagine
    User avatar
    ptisme
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 773
    Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:22 am


  • cymatica wrote:It's our line. See Tampa game last year. See every ram game. See every game with a top 15 line


    The Tampa game last year is when I said to myself that we weren't a contender for the title. The way they ran through our oline was damning.

    This game today looked a lot like that at times.
    User avatar
    OpHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 299
    Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 9:26 am


  • Bookmark my post folks:

    If our O line looks bad it's because it is bad. If an opposing D line looks good its because our OL is bad. If an opposing D line looks bad, its because they are bad. The only way for the O line to rise above this heuristic is to consistently do well against all opponents, good and bad.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3257
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • I believe the Packers were 6th in the league last year in sack so there DL is a good one. At the same time our OL is horrible.
    getnasty
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2011
    Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 8:22 pm


  • I saw their d-line individual players bull rush our O-line players one on one and win all game long. Is that because they're that good, or are just that bad. Hard to say anymore.

    If I had to guess I would say we are just that bad. It just really sucks to watch.
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2373
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


  • kf3339 wrote:I saw their d-line individual players bull rush our O-line players one on one and win all game long. Is that because they're that good, or are just that bad. Hard to say anymore.

    If I had to guess I would say we are just that bad. It just really sucks to watch.




    Did we slow them down?
    User avatar
    Bobblehead
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1933
    Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:52 am


  • Our o-line is not good enough to let Russ sit in the pocket and wait for plays to develop. We need to dink and dunk like most teams do to handle pressure. Too much emphasis on getting those "explosive plays" when all the offense needs to do at minimum is get a few first downs to give the defense a break. The Pack had a 2-1 advantage in time of possession. Any defense no matter how great will get exposed being on the field that long.
    User avatar
    12thbrah
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 700
    Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:42 am


  • mixture of both.. Daniels is a beast


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    User avatar
    DJ_CJ
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 234
    Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:48 pm
    Location: Cedar Rapids, IA


  • Unfortunately, our OL is just that bad. It would be nice if the Packer DL was good, because it would mean maybe we could compete with other decent DL. Watch the playoff games against DAL and ATL. The Packers line was getting close to no pressure on Dak or Matty Ice. Honestly, seeing how thoroughly they worked us over, I can see damn near half the DL we play wrecking our line and gameplan.

    JAX, LA x2, ARI x2, NYG, HOU, PHI.... that's eight freaking games against DL that I would consider better than the Packers' .... shoot, by the time we play them, I'd say ATL would be better as well. I know that last year it was a Jekyll and Hyde, and the line played well against PHI and somewhat against BUF but damn. The freaking Jags got 10 sacks today against a Houston OL I would say is marginally better than ours without Duane Brown.... and that was in Houston! We have to travel there for a 10am game. :(
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 559
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR



  • R E L A X. It's going to take some time to come together. I was at the 49er game today and watched a completely inept offense. Steady lads, it's coming.
    User avatar
    PlinytheCenter
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3387
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:47 pm
    Location: In Bruges


  • getnasty wrote:I believe the Packers were 6th in the league last year in sack so there DL is a good one.


    Well that is true. They were 6th last year in sacks so they aren't some scrub DL suddenly appearing out of nowhere. For what it's worth.
    Image

    There are three certainties in life. Death, taxes and the perpetual shuffling of the Seattle Seahawks offensive line.
    User avatar
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 11244
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


  • Green Bay is generally considered to have above average but not top-end lines on both sides of the ball. Seahawks are considered to have an awesome defensive line and a terrible offensive line.

    One approach to team-building clearly won out today.
    SeahawksCanuck
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 57
    Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:39 pm


  • SeahawksCanuck wrote:Green Bay is generally considered to have above average but not top-end lines on both sides of the ball. Seahawks are considered to have an awesome defensive line and a terrible offensive line.

    One approach to team-building clearly won out today.


    Eh, I think GB has had an elite OL for a couple years now. They were at their peak in run and pass blocking in 2014 when Rodgers was the MVP, and they're still elite at pass blocking if their starting 5 are playing. Losing Bulaga really hurt them this game, but they still won. :/
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 559
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


  • Our O-line is dat bad!
    When we need GB to beat someone you can count on that defense to disappear.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 23038
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


  • Our O-line is dat bad!
    When we need GB to beat someone you can count on that defense to disappear.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 23038
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


  • adeltaY wrote:Eh, I think GB has had an elite OL for a couple years now. They were at their peak in run and pass blocking in 2014 when Rodgers was the MVP, and they're still elite at pass blocking if their starting 5 are playing. Losing Bulaga really hurt them this game, but they still won. :/


    In addition to Bulaga not playing, they also lost their pro-bowl guard (Lang) and starting center (Tretter) to FA this year.

    They're far from elite at this point (and TBF have always been a bit overrated because Rodgers is a straight up genius in the pocket, and in manipulating movement inside the tackle box more generally).

    Re: the Packers defense, they were 6th in sacks last year, but that's a bit inflated because they had an unsustainable level of QB hurries result in sacks (sacks are pretty random, and hurries are a much better and more stable measurement of pass rush productivity).

    They were middle of the pack in terms of hurries, and last year were a below average defense overall by DVOA.

    Each year in the NFL really is a different year and they did spend their first four picks in the draft on defense this year, but none of their draft picks on defense have been able to crack the starting lineup.

    Probably not what many people want to hear this morning, but it is the truth.
    User avatar
    Popeyejones
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4339
    Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:58 am


  • Popeyejones wrote:
    adeltaY wrote:Eh, I think GB has had an elite OL for a couple years now. They were at their peak in run and pass blocking in 2014 when Rodgers was the MVP, and they're still elite at pass blocking if their starting 5 are playing. Losing Bulaga really hurt them this game, but they still won. :/


    In addition to Bulaga not playing, they also lost their pro-bowl guard (Lang) and starting center (Tretter) to FA this year.

    They're far from elite at this point (and TBF have always been a bit overrated because Rodgers is a straight up genius in the pocket, and in manipulating movement inside the tackle box more generally).

    Re: the Packers defense, they were 6th in sacks last year, but that's a bit inflated because they had an unsustainable level of QB hurries result in sacks (sacks are pretty random, and hurries are a much better and more stable measurement of pass rush productivity).

    They were middle of the pack in terms of hurries, and last year were a below average defense overall by DVOA.

    Each year in the NFL really is a different year and they did spend their first four picks in the draft on defense this year, but none of their draft picks on defense have been able to crack the starting lineup.

    Probably not what many people want to hear this morning, but it is the truth.

    Green Bay's defense is completely different from last year. They signed House in FA to start at RCB. Both their starting corners last year played with torn groins that required surgery this off season. Remember in the playoffs against the Falcons when Randall was playing 12 yards off his receiver? Those guys are healthy and aggressive.
    They also run a different defense now where they replaced an ILB with a safety. They are a much faster and healthy defense right now.
    User avatar
    ptisme
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 773
    Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:22 am


  • We better HOPE that GB's D-line is just that good............cause what I saw yesterday from our O-line?

    That was historically bad, like one of the worst O-line performances I've ever seen............and I've watched 40 years of Hawk football, so that's REALLY saying something.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12285
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • FlyingGreg wrote:I watch teams moving the ball and scoring on GB all the time. The Falcons will score 30 plus next week, just watch.

    For whatever reason, we can't do anything against them. Just look at Wilson's numbers in his last 4 games vs them... 2014 NFCCG and regular season games in 2015, 2016, and today.

    Ugly. They have some good players, but we make them look way better than they actually are.


    The frequency which the GB Defense was cutting through our O-Line says it all....Our O-Line is still a long ways out.
    I sure hope that they are all great students of the game and can find a way to patch up all the holes; can Y'all imagine what they are going to look like when going up against the Rams D?????
    An aside...The bias for GB by the Officials was disturbing.
    The Seahawks Defense got called for Pass Interferences, + an uncalled for ejection on Lane????
    Several times, GB's D was BLATANTLY getting away with grabbing Graham's jersey.
    Shitty Officiating can screw up a game pretty quick, this game is proof of that......These guys get paid to do this?....Seriously??????
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6215
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • Capers knows how to attack Bevells offense, has done it over and over, they also attack our weaknesses and over load on it, the line is that weakness, we get the Packers seemingly pretty early most times so the learning curve of late season heroics has not kicked in yet.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 22149
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Definitely most of the blame goes to the continued porous OL. The Packers' D started off last year in the top 10. But then we saw how they fared later down the road an versus a skilled offense in Atlanta. I would say they're above average. But the OL seems to be, once again, the Achilles Heel of the Seahawks O.
    The Gemini Method
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 1
    Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:18 am


  • The Gemini Method wrote:Definitely most of the blame goes to the continued porous OL. The Packers' D started off last year in the top 10. But then we saw how they fared later down the road an versus a skilled offense in Atlanta. I would say they're above average. But the OL seems to be, once again, the Achilles Heel of the Seahawks O.

    They started off in the top 10 then lost all their corners...
    User avatar
    ptisme
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 773
    Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:22 am


  • Isn't that a rookie LT, left to block Perry all alone?



    Our DL is pretty good, although Matthews appears to be in decline. I would say it was a combination of a subpar OL against a pretty solid DL.
    Image
    User avatar
    PackerNation
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 615
    Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:29 am
    Location: Austin, Texas


  • Seattle had 42 sacks in 2016, Green Bay had 40.

    Last years defensive woes for the Packers was the secondary, not their front seven. They have a damn good unit, the stats at the end of the year will show this.

    Book it.
    "Practice without improvement is meaningless" - Chuck Knox
    User avatar
    Hawk_Nation
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2323
    Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:40 pm
    Location: South Seattle


  • Hawk_Nation wrote:Seattle had 42 sacks in 2016, Green Bay had 40.

    Last years defensive woes for the Packers was the secondary, not their front seven. They have a damn good unit, the stats at the end of the year will show this.

    Book it.


    Julius Peppers doesn't play for the Packers anymore.
    ctrcat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 845
    Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:50 am




It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:05 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online