Lang visited (UPDATE: signs with Lions)

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
  • Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?
    User avatar
    nash72
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 479
    Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:33 am


  • 10-6, 10-5-1 two playoff appearances with one division title and 2-2 in the playoffs isn't subpar by any objective standard of measurement. Especially by the other 24 teams you were, in fact better then over that span.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • OpHawk wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:
    LegendKiller wrote:
    Since XLIX our record has been getting progressively worse. Players are getting older. More players are getting injured. More issues are coming up....o-line has been getting worse and now one of the worst in the league. Running game has been a disaster due to o-line and Lynch leaving. Our defense isn't as stout as it once was due to FA and injuries. We now don't have a starting CB opposite Sherm. These are all MAJOR issues. No run game, no o-line, older players, injuries...these are all critical shortcomings that NO team can overcome and win a Super Bowl without fixing. Not a pessimist, I'm a realist. Can't deny the facts.

    Nothing you present as facts are actually facts.


    Did you read his first sentence?

    good grief man you live in your own alternate universe


    Did you?

    This was his first sentence, "Since XLIX our record has been getting progressively worse."

    2015 10-6

    2016 10-5-1

    So our record actually improved by half a game from 2015 to 2016. His first sentence was factually incorrect.
    User avatar
    Chapow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2256
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:38 pm


  • nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?


    It's baffling that people rail on about it less than 24 hours after the FO missed out on trying to sign improvement.. might be interesting to see what happens tomorrow?
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 11386
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?

    Why? Given it's fact that between year one and two the biggest jump in improvement occurs. And the it's fact that continuity is critical for improvement on OL. Far more than any other position group. And FA isn't over or the fact that some teams above us in the draft that need serious OL may allow a couple elite types to drop to us or make it more realistic to trade up because they signed OL in FA to address their issues.
    Last edited by Josea16 on Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • Uncle Si wrote:
    nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?


    It's baffling that people rail on about it less than 24 hours after the FO missed out on trying to sign improvement.. might be interesting to see what happens tomorrow?


    Yeah, the fans have only been complaining about the Oline for the last 24 hours. OK

    Whats going to be so interesting about tomorrow? The FA pool gets thinner with each passing day. Hey, at least we overpaid for some mediocre, crippled lineman that probably wont even be ready by the beginning of the season. That's an improvement over what we have I suppose. Its not like we aren't in the running for AP either. Everybody knows he'll be a huge difference maker.
    User avatar
    nash72
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 479
    Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:33 am


  • Uncle Si wrote:
    Seymour wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:
    Couple things: losing out on Lang sucked but clearly they are trying to address it and realize Joeckel is not the only addition.

    This team was built through the draft. They have confidence they can address issues there.


    Not the oline. 2 of the starters were brought in as free agents, and one was drafted by Holmgren.


    Good gracious.

    Super Bowl winning Oline wasn't drafted? Who cares who did it. It's a significant part of how they build the team...they tried for Lang. Maybe see how week 2 of free agency goes?


    Read your statement again.

    Uncle Si wrote:This team was built through the draft. They have confidence they can address issues there.


    Why would anyone be confident THEY can do it (Draft oline well) when their record on misses proves otherwise?? We all should care "who did it" because it needs to happen NOW. No, correction, 2 years ago! They tried like hell last year, and look at the cluster %$#@ that created.

    I am not all that bothered about losing Lang, as they had cards stacked against them there. I'm concerned Joeckel was a big swing and a miss that will cost us.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1005
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Why? So we sign Russell Okung at 13M a year long term? Face it the market went into crazyland almost immediately.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • Seymour wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:
    Seymour wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:
    Couple things: losing out on Lang sucked but clearly they are trying to address it and realize Joeckel is not the only addition.

    This team was built through the draft. They have confidence they can address issues there.


    Not the oline. 2 of the starters were brought in as free agents, and one was drafted by Holmgren.


    Good gracious.

    Super Bowl winning Oline wasn't drafted? Who cares who did it. It's a significant part of how they build the team...they tried for Lang. Maybe see how week 2 of free agency goes?


    Read your statement again.

    Uncle Si wrote:This team was built through the draft. They have confidence they can address issues there.


    Why would anyone be confident THEY can do it (Draft oline well) when their record on misses proves otherwise?? We all should care "who did it" because it needs to happen NOW. No, correction, 2 years ago! They tried like hell last year, and look at the cluster %$#@ that created.

    I am not all that bothered about losing Lang, as they had cards stacked against them there. I'm concerned Joeckel was a big swing and a miss that will cost us.


    They drafted two of the starting 5 of the 2013 super bowl team.... yes?

    Joeckel is a risk. They obviously see that.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 11386
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • nash72 wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:
    nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?


    It's baffling that people rail on about it less than 24 hours after the FO missed out on trying to sign improvement.. might be interesting to see what happens tomorrow?


    Yeah, the fans have only been complaining about the Oline for the last 24 hours. OK

    Whats going to be so interesting about tomorrow? The FA pool gets thinner with each passing day. Hey, at least we overpaid for some mediocre, crippled lineman that probably wont even be ready by the beginning of the season. That's an improvement over what we have I suppose. Its not like we aren't in the running for AP either. Everybody knows he'll be a huge difference maker.



    Nope. Just complaining about not signing an FA target for that long.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 11386
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • I wanted the Hawks to sign Lang too, but I figured he'd go back to GB.
    I thought it was a longshot to begin with. It would have been nice but it would have put us pretty tight against the cap.
    Forward.
    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!
    User avatar
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 21601
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


  • Uncle Si wrote:They drafted two of the starting 5 of the 2013 super bowl team.... yes?

    Joeckel is a risk. They obviously see that.


    Look, you said they built this team through the draft. I said not oline.

    You just proved my point as true, but carry on as I'm done with this madness.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1005
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Seymour wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:They drafted two of the starting 5 of the 2013 super bowl team.... yes?

    Joeckel is a risk. They obviously see that.


    Look, you said they built this team through the draft. I said not oline.

    You just proved my point as true, but carry on as I'm done with this madness.

    He did just say they drafted 2 of the current 5 and we all know Britt is very good/possibly elite so why all the angst given you were proven objectively wrong? OL is in fact a part of the team right? They absolutely know it's an issue and I sincerely doubt they sit on their ass and don't try something else beyond Lang.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • Geez Louise, the negativity is incredible, so Lang didn't sign here, Boo Hoo. On to plan B or C. There is little doubt the FO wants to add a veteran player to the OLine, I wouldn't bet against them finding a way to get that done.

    I really disagree with the since XLIX post. In quantifiable terms it is wrong. The Hawks have made it to the divisional round of the playoffs both seasons since. Last year the team overcame early adversity and played well towards the end of the year despite some key injuries.

    Some perspective give is needed by a few here. Imagine being a Panthers fan this season.
    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: 3782
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 pm


  • nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?


    'Cuz Britt?
    'Cuz 3 rookies?

    What makes it so baffling?
    Grahamhawker
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1382
    Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:19 pm
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Grahamhawker wrote:
    nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?


    'Cuz Britt?
    'Cuz 3 rookies?

    What makes it so baffling?

    So you're actually going to include Britt in this mess. Enough hyperbole. You prove it to me right now that Britt has anything to do with the current bad state of the OL. I'm curious and patient. I figure it's the fact we played 3 rookies and a second year guy with him while he became among the top at his position? And had running backs that couldn't stay healthy if their life depended on it. I'm curious so please explain.
    Last edited by Josea16 on Sun Mar 12, 2017 9:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • bigskydoc wrote:I'm not counting this as a total loss for the front office. My opinion is/was that there were two goals in hosting Lang. 1 - Bring him in to upgrade the O-line. 2 - Even if we can't bring him in, set the market price high enough that Green Bay couldn't/ wouldn't match it thus weakening one of our key obstacles to another SB. (I don't see Detroit as any obstacle.). In fact it is entirely possible that the primary goal was just to ensure that he isn't playing for GB next year.

    I think they successfully negotiated this, and I'm reasonably happy with the outcome. They set a price that they knew GB wouldn't/ couldn't match, and perhaps set a price that they felt Detroit would match.

    Great thoughts bigdoc
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2411
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


  • bigskydoc wrote:I'm not counting this as a total loss for the front office. My opinion is/was that there were two goals in hosting Lang. 1 - Bring him in to upgrade the O-line. 2 - Even if we can't bring him in, set the market price high enough that Green Bay couldn't/ wouldn't match it thus weakening one of our key obstacles to another SB. (I don't see Detroit as any obstacle.). In fact it is entirely possible that the primary goal was just to ensure that he isn't playing for GB next year.

    I think they successfully negotiated this, and I'm reasonably happy with the outcome. They set a price that they knew GB wouldn't/ couldn't match, and perhaps set a price that they felt Detroit would match.

    Hmm, love it if that was a factor. So like Frank Herbert's Dune series. A game within the game move. If you can't make a direct move mess your competitors up however possible. :D
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • Josea16 wrote:
    nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?

    Why? Given it's fact that between year one and two the biggest jump in improvement occurs. And the it's fact that continuity is critical for improvement on OL. Far more than any other position group. And FA isn't over or the fact that some teams above us in the draft that need serious OL may allow a couple elite types to drop to us or make it more realistic to trade up because they signed OL in FA to address their issues.

    Wow Josea. Usually you and me are at loggerheads. But tonight you are spot on brilliant!
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2411
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


  • Siouxhawk wrote:
    Josea16 wrote:
    nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?

    Why? Given it's fact that between year one and two the biggest jump in improvement occurs. And the it's fact that continuity is critical for improvement on OL. Far more than any other position group. And FA isn't over or the fact that some teams above us in the draft that need serious OL may allow a couple elite types to drop to us or make it more realistic to trade up because they signed OL in FA to address their issues.

    Wow Josea. Usually you and me are at loggerheads. But tonight you are spot on brilliant!

    Well we're talking OL and not Jackson. You're a good dude Souixhawk and it's totally legal if I agree with you on some things without any issues right? Don't mistake that I really wished we could have snagged Lang but it's fact we were being used as leverage like Jared Allen did. So go plan B. At least try for a tier two veteran and if not successful wait for the draft and see what opportunities open up to us. Russell Wilson was everyone beyond Earl Thomas in the drafted core correct?
    Last edited by Josea16 on Sun Mar 12, 2017 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • Siouxhawk wrote:
    Josea16 wrote:
    nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:
    Its baffling isn't it?

    Why? Given it's fact that between year one and two the biggest jump in improvement occurs. And the it's fact that continuity is critical for improvement on OL. Far more than any other position group. And FA isn't over or the fact that some teams above us in the draft that need serious OL may allow a couple elite types to drop to us or make it more realistic to trade up because they signed OL in FA to address their issues.

    Wow Josea. Usually you and me are at loggerheads. But tonight you are spot on brilliant!

    Well we're talking OL and not Jackson. You're a good dude Souixhawk and it's totally legal if I agree with you on some things without any issues right? Don't mistake that I really wished we could have snagged Lang but it's fact we were being used as leverage like Jared Allen did. So go plan B. At least try for a tier two veteran and if not successful wait for the draft and see what opportunities open up to us. Russell Wilson was one correct?

    Exactly correct! You get it.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2411
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


  • I'll quit beating the dead horse, but the whole continuity concept with the offensive line doesn't fly with me. That line last season wasn't just bad, it was the worst I have ever seen at the professional level. No amount of continuity is going to overcome the lack of talent. If improving from horrid to pretty much dismal is everybodys gauge of success, then so be it.
    User avatar
    nash72
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 479
    Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:33 am


  • nash72 wrote:I'll quit beating the dead horse, but the whole continuity concept with the offensive line doesn't fly with me. That line last season wasn't just bad, it was the worst I have ever seen at the professional level. No amount of continuity is going to overcome the lack of talent. If improving from horrid to pretty much dismal is everybodys gauge of success, then so be it.
    Britt by himself makes this compete nonsense and Joekel has ALL physical tools to be elite. He wasn't the second pick in the 1st round as some elaborate troll job. Because of Wilson we only need barely average. Didn't you see which teams went insane and what they have at quarterback? They have to spend way more on that position group to compete with us. :D

    You have two choices and something lucky in the NFL.

    1. Get an elite quarterback and build around him like Atlanta
    2. Be Baltimore, Seattle 2012-13 or Tampa Bay back in the late 1990's and go for elite defense
    3. Or have Russell Wilson and be balanced much like the 2017 Tampa Bay team..... curiously they have a really good decently mobile and big armed quarterback yes? Spooky familiar right?
    4. Just an average OL 4-5 seconds at best and you will be shocked
    5. Accept the rules favor offense and quarterbacks especially good quarterbacks.
    Last edited by Josea16 on Sun Mar 12, 2017 10:49 pm, edited 8 times in total.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • nash72 wrote:I'll quit beating the dead horse, but the whole continuity concept with the offensive line doesn't fly with me. That line last season wasn't just bad, it was the worst I have ever seen at the professional level. No amount of continuity is going to overcome the lack of talent. If improving from horrid to pretty much dismal is everybodys gauge of success, then so be it.

    Be patient my friend Chicken Little 72. We are all Seahawk brothers.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2411
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


  • Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Right, because returning 7 of your 8 linemen doesn't do anything, I mean chemistry isn't important on the Oline.

    Because experience and development mean jack squat, it's not like:

    Seahawks started a rookie college TE/ex basketball player at LT.

    It's not like their 2nd year LG was a first time starter who had growing pains moving from his more natural side.

    Or their 3rd year OC was an expert snapper who by all means was thrusted into a leadership role.

    Or their rookie RG was a natural at the position.

    Or their 3rd year RT was a converted TE that regressed likely because of playing next to a rookie that spent his entire off-season training to be the LT, only to lose valuable TC time because of a knee scope, where he was forced back to RT because Jemarcus Webb was horrible both physically and mentally.

    It's not like the 3 other linemen weren't made up of 1yr, 1m free agent or 2 rookies.

    I mean damn 4 rookies made half the group they ended the season with. Only 1 player of that 8 had more than 3 years of experience.

    It's not like a young, very inexperience offensive line with little chemistry together didn't have to block for an immobile Russell Wilson, 2 oft-injured RBs, 1 a 2nd year player coming off a broken leg, the other a rookie who was more of a specialist than a workhorse forced to carry the load because the other 2 RBs on roster, was a blockhead who didn't run the right plays and tripped over his own feet when he had big holes and another rookie trying find his game in this system.

    I mean damn, we should just give up now because experience doesnt matter, growth doesnt matter, development doesnt matter, chemistry doesnt matter, nor does the concepts of a healthier QB whose bread and butter is being elusive as all hell and adding at least 489 yards of rushing offense.

    Nor does healthier RBs, who in their own right had to build their own chemistry and feel for their Olines.

    That's not going to improve. Shit because players don't ever develop, they never improve, they don't learn from experience or build any familarity or chemistry together.

    I guess it's time to throw in the towel, I won't watch the the Seahawks this season because there's no reason to.

    The team sucks. The team cant learn or develop or build chemistry. I mean who would have thought this team won 10 games last season for as much as they are incapable of doing nothing to improve. Everything is going to be the same. Same injuries. Same performance. Same schedule. Same struggles. Same regressions. Same distractions. Because this team isn't human, they are robots set to their specifications, with out the program to transcend and learn from their mistakes.
    Last edited by Pandion Haliaetus on Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
    WE ALL WE GOT, WE ALL WE NEED!!!!!!!!!!!
    Pandion Haliaetus
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3094
    Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:07 pm


  • It's not like Pandion doesn't know how to lay down the logic! You Chicken Littles should pay attention to hin.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2411
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


  • While I tend to agree with the optimistic camp, can we wait to emphasize the positives until season ticket renewals have completed along with the seat upgrade process? Everything is going terribly, everybody will get hurt, and our players will get worse next year if anything. The smart move is to sit out a couple of seasons and then pick things up again in 2020.
    User avatar
    AgentDib
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3023
    Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • Josea16 wrote:
    nash72 wrote:I'll quit beating the dead horse, but the whole continuity concept with the offensive line doesn't fly with me. That line last season wasn't just bad, it was the worst I have ever seen at the professional level. No amount of continuity is going to overcome the lack of talent. If improving from horrid to pretty much dismal is everybodys gauge of success, then so be it.
    Britt by himself makes this compete nonsense and Joekel has ALL physical tools to be elite. He wasn't the second pick in the 1st round as some elaborate troll job. Because of Wilson we only need barely average. Didn't you see which teams went insane and what they have at quarterback? They have to spend way more on that position group to compete with us. :D

    You have two choices and something lucky in the NFL.

    1. Get an elite quarterback and build around him like Atlanta
    2. Be Baltimore, Seattle 2012-13 or Tampa Bay back in the late 1990's and go for elite defense
    3. Or have Russell Wilson and be balanced much like the 2017 Tampa Bay team..... curiously they have a really good decently mobile and big armed quarterback yes? Spooky familiar right?
    4. Just an average OL 4-5 seconds at best and you will be shocked
    5. Accept the rules favor offense and quarterbacks especially good quarterbacks.


    This post was hysterical. Ok Britts good. Does that mean the other 4 positions are good too? The tackle and guard positions were absolute trainwrecks last season and will be again this season.

    Joekel's so awesome that if he gets hurt again or sucks as much as he has the past 4 seasons, he'll probably be out of the league. His draft position doesn't dictate how bad he is. We need tackles and he played better at guard if that tells you anything.

    We only need barely average because of Wilson? That barely average just about got him killed last season. Great job by the FO there. Other teams don't have to spend way more than us on the Oline, but they do because its kind of important.

    Your going to get your wish wanting this team to be like the balanced Tampa Bay Buccaneers as the 9-7 years are right around the corner if they aren't here already.
    User avatar
    nash72
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 479
    Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:33 am


  • nash72 wrote:
    Josea16 wrote:
    nash72 wrote:I'll quit beating the dead horse, but the whole continuity concept with the offensive line doesn't fly with me. That line last season wasn't just bad, it was the worst I have ever seen at the professional level. No amount of continuity is going to overcome the lack of talent. If improving from horrid to pretty much dismal is everybodys gauge of success, then so be it.
    Britt by himself makes this compete nonsense and Joekel has ALL physical tools to be elite. He wasn't the second pick in the 1st round as some elaborate troll job. Because of Wilson we only need barely average. Didn't you see which teams went insane and what they have at quarterback? They have to spend way more on that position group to compete with us. :D

    You have two choices and something lucky in the NFL.

    1. Get an elite quarterback and build around him like Atlanta
    2. Be Baltimore, Seattle 2012-13 or Tampa Bay back in the late 1990's and go for elite defense
    3. Or have Russell Wilson and be balanced much like the 2017 Tampa Bay team..... curiously they have a really good decently mobile and big armed quarterback yes? Spooky familiar right?
    4. Just an average OL 4-5 seconds at best and you will be shocked
    5. Accept the rules favor offense and quarterbacks especially good quarterbacks.


    This post was hysterical. Ok Britts good. Does that mean the other 4 positions are good too? The tackle and guard positions were absolute trainwrecks last season and will be again this season.

    Joekel's so awesome that if he gets hurt again or sucks as much as he has the past 4 seasons, he'll probably be out of the league. His draft position doesn't dictate how bad he is. We need tackles and he played better at guard if that tells you anything.

    We only need barely average because of Wilson? That barely average just about got him killed last season. Great job by the FO there. Other teams don't have to spend way more than us on the Oline, but they do because its kind of important.

    Your going to get your wish wanting this team to be like the balanced Tampa Bay Buccaneers as the 9-7 years are right around the corner if they aren't here already.
    God you're serious? Welcome to actually liking a team in the pale grey. This is a playoff team that actually wins games away from home so sit down, relax and understand when your team is actually the bad boy. Excuse me moderators but it's past time for a little education. If they don't care to, I do care to stop your ridiculous bullshit. Convince me straight up I'm wrong and you are right. Waiting all day/night. Unless you figure we have the number one pick and multiple other 1st round picks like that trainwreck called Cleveland?

    We're pretty good with picks where it's important. And come on don't all of you hate how boring the AFC is since 2001? Hint for you I live in deep red AFC country and the fans of this crap conference are beyond tired of the status quo hence I'm glad some teams beyond Seattle are starting to get serious about beating New England and Tom Brady like a drum. As they deserve like Denver. Give me someone beyond Baltimore, Denver, Pittsburgh and New England for god sake.
    Last edited by Josea16 on Mon Mar 13, 2017 5:07 am, edited 2 times in total.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • Pandion Haliaetus wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Right, because returning 7 of your 8 linemen doesn't do anything, I mean chemistry isn't important on the Oline.

    Because experience and development mean jack squat, it's not like:

    Seahawks started a rookie college TE/ex basketball player at LT.

    It's not like thier 2nd year LG was a first time starter who had growing pains moving from his more natural side.

    Or thier 3rd year OC was an expert snapper who by all means was thrusted into a leadership role.

    Or thier rookie RG was a natural at the position.

    Or thier 3rd year RT was a converted TE that regressed likely because of playing next to a rookie that spent his entire off-season training to be the LT, only to lose valuable TC time because of a knee scope, where he was forced back to RT because Jemarcus Webb was horrible both physically and mentally.

    It's not like the 3 other linemen weren't made up of 1yr, 1m free agent or 2 rookies.

    I mean damn 4 rookies made half the group they ended the season with. Only 1 player of that 8 had more than 3 years of experience.

    It's not like a young, very inexperience offensive line with little chemistry together didn't have to block for an immobile Russell Wilson, 2 oft-injured RBs, 1 a 2nd year player coming off a broken leg, the other a rookie who was more of a specialist than a workhorse forced to carry the load because the other 2 RBs on roster, was a blockhead who didn't run the right plays and tripped over his own feet when he had big holes and another rookie trying find his game in this system.

    I mean damn, we should just give up now because experience doesnt matter, growth doesnt matter, development doesnt matter, chemistry doesnt matter, nor does the concepts of a healthier QB whose bread and butter is being elusive as all hell and adding at least 489 yards of rushing offense.

    Nor does healthier RBs, who in thier own right had to build their own chemistry and feel for thier Olines.

    That's not going to improve. Shit because players don't ever develop, they never improve, they don't learn from experience or build any familarity or chemistry together.

    I guess it's time to throw in the towel, I won't watch the the Seahawks this season because there's no reason to.

    The team sucks. The team cant learn or develop or build chemistry. I mean who would have thought this team won 10 games last season for as much as they are incapable of doing nothing to improve. Everything is going to be the same. Same injuries. Same performance. Same schedule. Same struggles. Same regressions. Same distractions. Because this team isn't human, they are robots set to thier specifications, with out the program to transcend and learn from their mistakes.
    Dude, you have no reason to be mean unless you actually explain.:)
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • ChickenLittle72 wrote:
    ChickenLittle12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?


    I teach Drums and guitar to people of all ages, and it is abundantly clear that practice makes for a much better player.

    I also played football all the way through college and the same applies.

    It has also been proven that rookies struggle in the NFL and we had 3 on the line last year, and one moved to a new position. If you can't see and understand these things then why even waste your time watching or typing?
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 34621
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm


  • We're re-signing Chris Gray and Chris McIntosh and some other guy named Chris next week. Book it.

    This thread sucks. The best thing about it is that TJ Lang clowned two insufferable fan bases (Seattle and Green Bay) and signed with Detroit in the end.

    Our line will be fine. It will get us to 10-6 or 11-5 the key being one or two home playoff games. The defense needs to get a little better for this upcoming season.

    Barf bags.
    User avatar
    Slick
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 941
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 7:52 am
    Location: Woodinville, WA


  • Slick wrote:We're re-signing Chris Gray and Chris McIntosh and some other guy named Chris next week. Book it.

    This thread sucks. The best thing about it is that TJ Lang clowned two insufferable fan bases (Seattle and Green Bay) and signed with Detroit in the end.

    Our line will be fine. It will get us to 10-6 or 11-5 the key being one or two home playoff games. The defense needs to get a little better for this upcoming season.

    Barf bags.

    The best thing about this thread is we may have gotten Seymour to stop straight trolling. You? It might be harder. Or easier your choice.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • Just want to point out the result of throwing money at FA OL is the Vikings OL last year. Most expensive in the league and arguably as bad as ours. But please feel free to complain we didn't make Okung the highest paid LT in the league.
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1295
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


  • To be fair I went through this thread and only read Si's posts but I don't fault the team for missing out on Lang. Seems like they did a reasonable job and made a good offer and he chose to stay home. Can't fault them for that.

    As for moving forward I fall into both camps (not a surprise to some I'm sure). I don't have much faith that last years unit will be markedly better. I know all about the jump from year 1 to year 2 and how they should be better but they were historically bad, all time bad in some areas. I do have some faith that Pete/John won't run the same unit out there again because they know it spells disaster. We see that already in Joeckel and there is still time to add another couple of pieces to the mix.
    Adopt a Rookie: C.J. Prosise
    User avatar
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6150
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:05 pm
    Location: Tri-Cities, Washington


  • Josea16 wrote:
    Grahamhawker wrote:
    nash72 wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:what gets me are the posters here saying the o line is bound to improve with another year under their belt???? maybe joeckel adds something but the holes and horrible players are still there. like i said this is the year wilson goes down for the season...


    Its baffling isn't it?


    'Cuz Britt?
    'Cuz 3 rookies?

    What makes it so baffling?

    So you're actually going to include Britt in this mess. Enough hyperbole. You prove it to me right now that Britt has anything to do with the current bad state of the OL. I'm curious and patient. I figure it's the fact we played 3 rookies and a second year guy with him while he became among the top at his position? And had running backs that couldn't stay healthy if their life depended on it. I'm curious so please explain.


    Actually I was trying to say that expecting significant improvement isn't baffling, because Britt improved (a lot) and three of the other starters were rookies that should be expected to improve.

    It has been covered.

    Pandion H. reinforced it most thoroughly.
    Grahamhawker
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1382
    Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:19 pm
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Sorry then. GH.
    Josea16
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 346
    Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 2:27 am


  • jammerhawk wrote:Geez Louise, the negativity is incredible, so Lang didn't sign here, Boo Hoo. On to plan B or C. There is little doubt the FO wants to add a veteran player to the OLine, I wouldn't bet against them finding a way to get that done.

    I really disagree with the since XLIX post. In quantifiable terms it is wrong. The Hawks have made it to the divisional round of the playoffs both seasons since. Last year the team overcame early adversity and played well towards the end of the year despite some key injuries.

    Some perspective give is needed by a few here. Imagine being a Panthers fan this season.


    The Panthers season was rough, but the Falcons blowing a 25 point lead was worth it all. Only the Falcons and Seahawks truly whipped the Panthers last year, and extra rest for Kuechly and others, the return of Peppers and others, premium draft ammo combined with the indelible image of Arthur Blank on the sideline during OT in Houston and the mood is all time great in Carolina.
    ctrcat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 772
    Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:50 am


  • My only complaint about how our FO handled the Lang deal is why did they rush and sign Joeckel for 8M when Lang should have been priority #1.

    From what Clayton said we could have thrown another 1.5M at Lang and probably got him. If that's true, then why the hell spend 8M on Joeckel when you could have used some of that money to get a much better lineman in Lang?
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 10697
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:My only complaint about how our FO handled the Lang deal is why did they rush and sign Joeckel for 8M when Lang should have been priority #1.

    From what Clayton said we could have thrown another 1.5M at Lang and probably got him. If that's true, then why the hell spend 8M on Joeckel when you could have used some of that money to get a much better lineman in Lang?

    Ummm because it's not just about 2017...the hawks have a cap model and they won't throw it out the window because you want him more than Joekel
    GREEDY PUNK PAUL ALLEN, THIS LOSS IS ON YOU.
    "I don't give a crap WHAT you gotta pay, Kam is worth it and I don't want to lose a shot at another SB cuz you - a freaking BILLIONAIRE, are cheapskating Kam over a freaking $900,000.
    You cheapskate."
    SalishHawkFan SEP 13, 2015 1:47 PM
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3258
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • Do all the doom and gloomers remember when Pete and John went hard after Manning? So what happened. They get dissed by Peyton and come up with Russell and the rest is history! Plan B or C could be ready to blossom in our system. The guy they pickup in the draft who they never would have selected if they signed Lang could be a HoFer! The OL last year would have looked better if anyone playing behind it stayed healthy. I have no doubt the OL this year will be better the question is how much better.
    I would rather have an army of Dogs led by a Pug than an army of Pugs led by a Dog. ~Napoleon
    User avatar
    pugs1
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 574
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:41 pm
    Location: Jackson, Mississippi


  • pugs1 wrote:Do all the doom and gloomers remember when Pete and John went hard after Manning? So what happened. They get dissed by Peyton and come up with Russell and the rest is history! Plan B or C could be ready to blossom in our system. The guy they pickup in the draft who they never would have selected if they signed Lang could be a HoFer! The OL last year would have looked better if anyone playing behind it stayed healthy. I have no doubt the OL this year will be better the question is how much better.


    Ugly dog, good post. My Oline is half full.
    Russell has some stats that aren't Superb? Ow! Love his balls anyways!

    SC
    User avatar
    StoneCold
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2343
    Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 10:29 am


  • Yeah Lang should have been the main focus. Also Joeckle contract just seem desperate & not very team friendly. If he fails then we gambled 8million, if he turns out great, he's a free agent & leaves or we going to have pay him to keep.

    My main problem is that when i heard about us trying to target Lang, i felt we had no chance. Im surprise how close we got him. I think i would have been excited to actually overpay a proven lineman.

    It is what it is, i do feel our O-line is going to get much better then last year which isn't saying much. Still at times, they did look quite decent protecting our QB when we were not facing the top Ds. With Fant, i still have hope for him but Gilliam needs to go.
    User avatar
    rcaido
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 259
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:47 pm


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:My only complaint about how our FO handled the Lang deal is why did they rush and sign Joeckel for 8M when Lang should have been priority #1.

    From what Clayton said we could have thrown another 1.5M at Lang and probably got him. If that's true, then why the hell spend 8M on Joeckel when you could have used some of that money to get a much better lineman in Lang?

    Ummm because it's not just about 2017...the hawks have a cap model and they won't throw it out the window because you want him more than Joekel


    If our cap model says to spend 8M on a terrible lineman and not 9-10M on a good one, then our cap model sucks.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 10697
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • With our current situation I expect us to depend on coaching and a lot of it from OTA's thru pre season to improve what we have, I appears were still looking for that Power back but our line is going to be pretty much what we have had, depending on a guy we signed that has a injury history to step us up to average isn't really a great bet.
    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: 20279
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:My only complaint about how our FO handled the Lang deal is why did they rush and sign Joeckel for 8M when Lang should have been priority #1.

    From what Clayton said we could have thrown another 1.5M at Lang and probably got him. If that's true, then why the hell spend 8M on Joeckel when you could have used some of that money to get a much better lineman in Lang?

    Ummm because it's not just about 2017...the hawks have a cap model and they won't throw it out the window because you want him more than Joekel


    If our cap model says to spend 8M on a terrible lineman and not 9-10M on a good one, then our cap model sucks.


    They clearly wanted both.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 11386
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • Uncle Si wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:My only complaint about how our FO handled the Lang deal is why did they rush and sign Joeckel for 8M when Lang should have been priority #1.

    From what Clayton said we could have thrown another 1.5M at Lang and probably got him. If that's true, then why the hell spend 8M on Joeckel when you could have used some of that money to get a much better lineman in Lang?

    Ummm because it's not just about 2017...the hawks have a cap model and they won't throw it out the window because you want him more than Joekel


    If our cap model says to spend 8M on a terrible lineman and not 9-10M on a good one, then our cap model sucks.


    They clearly wanted both.


    I know. My point is if Clayton's research is true that we didn't want to come up another 1.5M for Lang, then the only reason for that would be we already overpaid for Joeckel.

    I don't mind our FO sticking to their guns and not overpaying for Lang, but 1.5M? C'mon, that's nothing to get a much better lineman than Joeckel.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 10697
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:My only complaint about how our FO handled the Lang deal is why did they rush and sign Joeckel for 8M when Lang should have been priority #1.

    From what Clayton said we could have thrown another 1.5M at Lang and probably got him. If that's true, then why the hell spend 8M on Joeckel when you could have used some of that money to get a much better lineman in Lang?


    This is what is most distubring to me as well. Joeckel was beat out at tackle by a 7th round pick that was released by Pittsburgh, moved to guard where he was equally as poor, then completely blows his knee out. We made him the priority to sign to a player friendly contract instead of going for the far more certain upgrade first, which tied our hands with $$ flexibility.
    We have burned our chance to have the luxury to take project type players over the last 2 years as was shown on the field. Now it looks like more mis-calculated attempts to fix what turned into a disaster last season.
    Given the history since Cable has been here, this all makes it very difficult to have faith in their attempts to build a competent oline. Of course people are growing impatient.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1005
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:My only complaint about how our FO handled the Lang deal is why did they rush and sign Joeckel for 8M when Lang should have been priority #1.


    Those weren't mutually exclusive.

    Sgt. Largent wrote:From what Clayton said we could have thrown another 1.5M at Lang and probably got him. If that's true, then why the hell spend 8M on Joeckel when you could have used some of that money to get a much better lineman in Lang?


    It looks like it would have not just been the 1.5m extra. The guarantees that Detroit added were extremely high. That's looking like a locked in 3 year deal.

    I'd guess we'd have been fine upping the numbers. But would have been ill advised to match the guarantees. And that has nothing to do with Joeckel's deal. That impacts all of the next 2 years' deals

    2018:

    Graham
    Chancellor
    Britt
    Rawls

    2019:

    Avril
    Thomas
    Sherman
    Wright
    Clark
    Lockett


    The 2019 guarantees would kill us. Not the 1.5m APY increase.
    User avatar
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1767
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:
    If our cap model says to spend 8M on a terrible lineman and not 9-10M on a good one, then our cap model sucks.


    They clearly wanted both.


    I know. My point is if Clayton's research is true that we didn't want to come up another 1.5M for Lang, then the only reason for that would be we already overpaid for Joeckel.

    I don't mind our FO sticking to their guns and not overpaying for Lang, but 1.5M? C'mon, that's nothing to get a much better lineman than Joeckel.


    We had the cap room. So you're only assuming Joeckels signing played a part. It didn't... obviously as they tried to get them both. I'm sure they will try and get another one elsewhere.

    This is the same GM that has signed players like Bennett and Avril, drafted the likes of Wilson, Sherman, Thomas, etc and traded for Harvin and Graham. I'd suggest there are other options which is why the other 1.5 million wasn't offered.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 11386
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


PreviousNext


It is currently Wed Mar 22, 2017 2:14 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online