Investing in O-Line

[jhern87]

Really don't understand our philosophy in regards to spending money on our offense. We pay guys like Graham, Baldwin and Kearse then can't even get them the ball because our line is so bad. It would seem the most logical way to build the team would be to provide Russ with a serviceable line that would allow us to run the ball and then in-turn open up the passing game. Really hope the spending strategy for our offense changes.

 

[hawkfan68]

Gilliam and Sowell are the weak links of the OL. Seahawks seem to solidified the middle of the line. They need to find some tackles in the offseason. Both tackles were terrible tonight.

 

[randomation]

Give the Browns a 1st for Thomas and be done.

 

[Hawks46]

We got beat on the edges tonight.

The problem is, when that happens you...you run the ball. You want to tire pass rushers out.

We were terrified of running the ball this game. It was fairly pathetic.

 

[LolaRox]

I don't think it's their philosophy to not invest in o-line. It's seems they pay their best players regardless of position. They have invested draft capital in them online but none of them have earned 2nd contracts , at least not at the amount they were asking.

I don't think you can build a team to win forever if you overpay mediocre talent. My problem is how this team drafts and develops o-line

Who would you have liked them to pay?

 

[ludakrishna]

This how Russell probably feels

 

[jhern87]

I don't think it's their philosophy to not invest in o-line. It's seems they pay their best players regardless of position. They have invested draft capital in them online but none of them have earned 2nd contracts , at least not at the amount they were asking.

I don't think you can build a team to win forever if you overpay mediocre talent. My problem is how this team drafts and develops o-line

Who would you have liked them to pay?

It's hard to say who I'd like for them to pay when I don't know who is/was available. All I know is where the money is now and how it's translating to what we're seeing on the field. Our offensive line is so bad that they have to hold defenders on every play so their QB doesn't get obliterated. I understand that their strategy is to find value at O-line but it's obviously not working.
This year they finally used some picks on O-lineman, let's just hope they finally pan out and we're able to hang onto them when/if that happens.

As far as "paying the best talent" goes I think it's obvious that their strategy is to try to win without paying their O-line, look no further than us not resigning guys after their rookie deals are up. My main point is our offense would be much more successful and consistent spending $ on the O-line rather than skill position players. Then find WR's, TE's & RB's in the draft.

 

[Skansi82]

As far as "paying the best talent" goes I think it's obvious that their strategy is to try to win without paying their O-line, look no further than us not resigning guys after their rookie deals are up. My main point is our offense would be much more successful and consistent spending $ on the O-line rather than skill position players. Then find WR's, TE's & RB's in the draft.[/quote]

I think it's worth noting that although it's not shown in terms of the salary cap, the team did invest significant "capital" on the O-Line in last year's draft. From all that I've heard, Ifeidi and Ohdiambo have both met/exceeded expectations and will pay dividends for years to come.

Clearly decisions over the last couple years to lock down key players like Russell, Sherman, Cam, Bennett, Avril, Baldwin, KJ, and Earl have limited their cap space to sign O-lineman. Which one of those deals did they miss on? I would also push back on them spending a lot of money on their "skill players". If you ignore the cap hit from Marshawn, they are paying just over 22 million for their top 3 receivers, 1 TE, and 2 running backs this year. Compare that to most decent teams in the NFL and I think you'll find that to be on the low end.

 

[timmat]

Another problem with the "investing in O line via the draft" approach is that unless you are talking about the rare top, top college guy, O lineman take time to develop. There are certain positions in the NFL where rookies can be very successful, but it seems that O line is usually not one of them. I'd hate to see the era of our Generation D go by with an offense that sputters, and an O line that finally looks OK after a few more years have past, but a few of our guys on D start losing a step.

The time is now with this absolutely amazing, historical defense to put together multiple championships. If we could just be a middle-of-the-pack scoring offense, we'd cruise.

So if we have to leverage a bit of the future to bring in O line talent now - but that's all it takes for another title or two - then pull that trigger if we can make it fit.

 

[mrt144]

I don't think it's their philosophy to not invest in o-line. It's seems they pay their best players regardless of position. They have invested draft capital in them online but none of them have earned 2nd contracts , at least not at the amount they were asking.

I don't think you can build a team to win forever if you overpay mediocre talent. My problem is how this team drafts and develops o-line

Who would you have liked them to pay?

I've said this dozens of times but if your rostering mentality is to get the most bang for your buck on a rookie contract and let them go elsewhere afterwards because of market inefficiencies at the position, you have to be way better about your draft picks and scouting. The Seahawks seemingly have gone a weird direction where they reckon, "if we aren't going to keep anyone for a 2nd contract, why devote scouting resources to finding the best available players for 3-4 years as rookies? Why can't we just get a guy who is paid like a rookie, has many years in the NFL and is similarly expendable at any point?"

 

[JSeahawks]

It works fine when Russell Wilson can be Russell Wilson. He cant right now do to his leg issues.

 

[Uncle Si]

Russ B

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...eahawks-o-line-if-your-name-is-russell-wilson

 

[hawkfan68]

The Seahawks could have picked up Jake Long last week. The Vikings grabbed him. He was a FA. While he's not great, he's definitely better than the two starting tackles the Seahawks have. He was a former 1st pick in the 2008 draft. He wasn't all that expensive either.

 

[brimsalabim]

I don't think it's their philosophy to not invest in o-line. It's seems they pay their best players regardless of position. They have invested draft capital in them online but none of them have earned 2nd contracts , at least not at the amount they were asking.

I don't think you can build a team to win forever if you overpay mediocre talent. My problem is how this team drafts and develops o-line

Who would you have liked them to pay?

I've said this dozens of times but if your rostering mentality is to get the most bang for your buck on a rookie contract and let them go elsewhere afterwards because of market inefficiencies at the position, you have to be way better about your draft picks and scouting. The Seahawks seemingly have gone a weird direction where they reckon, "if we aren't going to keep anyone for a 2nd contract, why devote scouting resources to finding the best available players for 3-4 years as rookies? Why can't we just get a guy who is paid like a rookie, has many years in the NFL and is similarly expendable at any point?"

That plan might work for one or two line positions but not for the full five!

 

[Jville]

The Seahawks have no preconceived cap investment philosophy. There are no position by position budget allowance. Just an every day commitment to look for ways to improve their 53 man roster.

 

[West TX Hawk]

Right or wrong, Pete is notoriously stubborn. He's had great success doing things his way and he's not going to change his philosophy of:

a) with a mobile QB, OL is the least priority of concern
b) Do not pay Olinemen a 2nd contract because replacable talent is always available at cheaper than market value
c) Invest heavily and the most cap dollars to the entire D
d) With a specialized system (ZBS), below average talent can be coached up to adequate standards, i.e. system players

The problems with this formula have reared its ugly head this year as Wilson is now a hobbled tortoise with a great arm, albeit a very intelligent tortoise who can outsmart these fast hare defensive ends sometimes but can't outrun them.

IMO a change in philosophies should be entertained by Pete but I really doubt he will.

 

[sdog1981]

Are you kidding me? Mods can we get a sticky with Seahawks draft history so we don't have to waste time on this.

The problem is Tom Cable he is a charlatan he looks like an Oline coach he talks like an Oline coach so everyone thinks he is a good Oline coach. Tom Cable sucks and he is sucking the life out of this offense. Check out all the investing the Seahawks have done with Cable, who is just a black hole for player development.


2011: First two picks of that draft are Oline men. They then Add 7 offensive linemen in free agency

2012: No draft picks. Add 7 Linemen in free agency

2013: two draft picks. Add 5 Linemen in free agency

2014: two draft picks. 5 free agents

2015: 3 of 8 total draft picks are Linemen. 4 free agents

2016: 3 draft picks including teams first pick.

Look below this is how much draft capital the team has wasted on Tom Cable's doorstep. He has wasted a player from every round but the 5th. That is 13 players and he can't find 3? Pete is entering the "loyal to a fault" phase of his tenure with the Seahawks.

1st 2
2nd 1
3rd 2
4th 2
5th
6th 3
7th 3

 

[McGruff]

Really don't understand our philosophy in regards to spending money on our offense. We pay guys like Graham, Baldwin and Kearse then can't even get them the ball because our line is so bad. It would seem the most logical way to build the team would be to provide Russ with a serviceable line that would allow us to run the ball and then in-turn open up the passing game. Really hope the spending strategy for our offense changes.

I hink the strategy is to pay players who are good at hat they do, regardless of position. WE have invested fairly significant capital into the line, it just hasn't developed into the kind of quality you give 2nd contracts to.

 

[McGruff]

I don't think it's their philosophy to not invest in o-line. It's seems they pay their best players regardless of position. They have invested draft capital in them online but none of them have earned 2nd contracts , at least not at the amount they were asking.

I don't think you can build a team to win forever if you overpay mediocre talent. My problem is how this team drafts and develops o-line

Who would you have liked them to pay?

Or what he said.

 

[mrt144]

Really don't understand our philosophy in regards to spending money on our offense. We pay guys like Graham, Baldwin and Kearse then can't even get them the ball because our line is so bad. It would seem the most logical way to build the team would be to provide Russ with a serviceable line that would allow us to run the ball and then in-turn open up the passing game. Really hope the spending strategy for our offense changes.

I hink the strategy is to pay players who are good at hat they do, regardless of position. WE have invested fairly significant capital into the line, it just hasn't developed into the kind of quality you give 2nd contracts to.

If you dont have an example to prove the rule vis a vis O line it raises the question to me at least, what does a 2nd contract o lineman drafted in seattle play like to warrant it? Isnt Okung the only one during the JSPC tenure to get one or did Unger? Also who drafted Okung?