Lang visited (UPDATE: signs with Lions)

[pugs1]

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.

 

[StoneCold]

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.

 

[rcaido]

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.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

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.

 

[chris98251]

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.

 

[Uncle Si]

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.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

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.

 

[Seymour]

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.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

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.

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.

 

[Uncle Si]

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.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

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..

We guaranteed Joeckel 7.25M, and he sucks. So why wouldn't we bump Lang's guarantee 1.5M, even for a 2nd or 3rd year?

You're right, these are not mutually exclusive, but the math/guarantee amounts are. We overpaid for a terrible lineman and wouldn't overpay for a good one?

What sense does that make? If our FO wants us to think they're consistent in not wanting to overpay for Lang, then why overpay for a far worse lineman?

I understand not wanting to overpay for Lang guaranteeing future cap space, but this is all risky...........so I'd rather overpay and take a risk on a pro bowl proven guard for 2-3 years than a bust that stinks for one year. Isn't that what we've been doing with horrible success on guys like Webb and Joeckel?

 

[Uncle Si]

Maybe they don't share your assertions on Joeckel?

You illogically assume they didn't go up 1.5 mill because of Joeckel. Perhaps they had a number for Lang and that was that

 

[iigakusei]

You do have to wonder if Lang was so amazing - why didn't Green Bay match Detroit's offer? Didn't he say he would give them a chance to match?

 

[Seymour]

You do have to wonder if Lang was so amazing - why didn't Green Bay match Detroit's offer? Didn't he say he would give them a chance to match?

They have a very good oline to begin with, and their spending was in the mid $20M + for the oline before re-signing Lang. They likely have a structure with position group spending that they were attempting to stay within.

 

[scutterhawk]

trying.

So we should be happy that Carry Williams and Webb type signings are taking place because they are trying?

Go ahead, and believe if you like. I don't believe in the every kid deserves a trophy mentality.[/quote]
Snivel, Snivel, Snivel, Sob, Sob, Sob. :roll:

 

[nash72]

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

OMG. Now I know what i'm dealing with here. Winning games on the road is not the teams MO. Actually its the opposite. Please defend your post and tell me how the Seahawks are so good at winning away playoff games. Lol. Theres no facepalm big enough for your statement.

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?

I'm not sure what your going on about to be honest or what your asking, but please do prove to me how the Seahawks are some away playoff juggernaut as you claim. The ball is clearly in your court. I'll be waiting.

We're pretty good with picks where it's important.

I guess the Oline positions are deemed unworthy of any consideration then.

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.

I live 20 minutes away from Pittsburgh so i'm well aware of the Patriot envy. Also who is getting serious about beating the Patriots like a drum? Tom Brady wanted to know as he was picking up yet another SB ring. (his 2nd in the past 3 years)

You want to know who has been aggressive in FA? The Patriots. Want to know who hasent done jack in FA? Well, you get the picture now.

 

[nash72]

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?

I'm a drummer too (I kid you not) as well as my son. All I can say about the teaching aspect is dont you love the kids that come in and you know no matter how much they practice they just dont have it and are never going to get it? Thats how I feel about our Oline right now.

I realize rookies struggle but our line is so bad (historically bad) that the left tackle who is protecting our franchise QB's blindside was a basketball player that never played the position before. How long do you wait for that to become serviceable?

 

[nash72]

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?

Exactly

 

[scutterhawk]

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?

No, what's "Baffling", is that you and a couple others have "Tapped Out"........Misery Loves Company, and your NON-EXPERT OPINIONS are proof of NOTHING.

 

[nash72]

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?

No, what's "Baffling", is that you and a couple others have "Tapped Out"........Misery Loves Company, and your NON-EXPERT OPINIONS are proof of NOTHING.

Tapped Out is to strong a term. Disappointed with the FO and coaching while being realistic is a better way of saying it.

If the team signs Peterson, then you'll really see my lid flipped.