Seahawks must prioritize O-line?

Discuss your thoughts about anything draft related. Mocks, College and Pro. Knock yourselves out!!! RATING: PG-13
Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:10 am
  • I'm sure half the board will reply: "Duh, of course we have to address the O-line", but several members of .NET were hoping we'd draft OL last year only to be dismissed by those who thought our OL was fine. Clearly it is not fine and the talent / durability issues still remain. In a division that features some of the best pass rushers and front sevens in the league, this has to be our top priority.

    LT: Okung when healthy is an above average LT. He gets into his stance off the snap faster than any OL I can remember, but his injuries have limited his agility. I think the line would benefit by moving him to the right side. I do not see him as a great blind side protector. LT is the second most important position on offense and we need someone we can rely on being healthy and starting every game. Okung has missed 19 regular season games in four years. This really destroys continuity up front and sets the entire offense back since the other lineman have to routinely switch positions to compensate.

    LG: Carpenter and McQ = Terrible. McQ battles but is limited athletically and Carp is a disaster of a draft pick and a barely competent NFL player. If this was the only position upgraded in the off-season the Seahawks would become worlds better. Cut Carp and keep McQ as a versatile backup. Draft a guard or a tackle that can move inside.

    C: Unger is solid but has durability issues. Jean Pierre is capable but I'd like to see us draft another center.

    RG: Sweezy??? A couple years into this experiment and I still don't know what we have with this guy. He has some nice tools and is a competitor but he misses a lot of blocks. I think his mobility would fare better in Chip Kelly's system than ours. Our scheme really requires a true road grader RG. Still, if the coaches wanted to give him one more year to see if all that potential can coalesce I wouldn't complain.

    RT: We know Breno is a Cable player attitudinally. We know Pete loves tough guys. We also know that this is another position that is ripe for an upgrade.

    Tom Cable: It is time we stopped giving this guy lemons to turn into lemonade. Maybe it's an ego thing that he thinks he can take 7th rounders and turn them into solid players. He has done it so, ego or otherwise, he deserves credit. But we need better than just solid players on the OL. If he can turn a 7th rounder into a starting RG can we please give him a first rounder that he can make a Hall of Famer? Please!?

    2014 NFL Draft

    I would go Guard in the first round but this draft looks a little weak at guard right now so perhaps grab a tackle that can kick inside and provide a little insurance for Okung and Breno. Any players you guys like that might be there when we select 32nd overall? Auburn's Greg Robinson would be perfect but he will probably go earlier if he declares. Cyril Richardson would make an ideal RG but probably lacks the versatility that the coaches want. Who else?
    "It was so loud Derrick Coleman heard it."
    User avatar
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 502
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:44 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:45 am
  • Richardson played LT when RG3 was playing for Baylor. He's got plenty of versatility. He could probably man the RT spot. He has that kind of athleticism.

    I'd say this OG class is strong. It certainly isn't last years' class. That was almost historically good. Even the 2nd tier guys were outstanding and probably will achieve pro bowl status at some point. But there are OGs worthy of being picked in the traditional high 20s to mid 30s this year. There are legitimate day 1 starters and they should be available where we pick.

    We should get an OT if we can. Their positional value is just simply higher. But if a run develops there -- we can afford to upgrade our interior.

    Next offseason could feature a really strong position battle. Bowie and Bailey should both be well versed in the system and capable of really competing for starter roles. Adding a day 1 starter at one of the guard positions would really push up the competition levels at RG and RT. This is a team that prides itself on competition. Realistically, I would be fine if Sweezy or Carpenter beat out the competition. If they raise their games as a result of it -- the team benefits. But I do think it's time both of them really felt the heat and either kick up their games or step aside for someone that will.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 733
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:49 am
  • Guard in the 1st round of this years draft is a losing proposition.
    P-Rich fo life
    User avatar
    ImTheScientist
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2612
    Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:14 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 10:07 am
  • We will be picking in the late 1st round, which means any OL we will be looking at is most likely a 2nd round value. We would be potentially passing on superior talent at WR, DT. This is when picks like James Carpenter happen. You force a pick based on need rather than playing the board.

    While I agree the OL has struggled, I don't think they are nearly as bad as you suggest. I'd actually argue that a lack of perimeter threats would help the OL more than actually drafting an OL, because right now, opposing defenses have no reason to be threatened by our passing game.

    Nobody is ever happy about the OL because it's only the bad stuff that gets attention. In hindsight, people will talk about great OL, but at the time, it's not like Okung is getting on Sportscenter for a good block.

    And regarding Cyril Richardson, I'd caution about any OL from Baylor who plays in that gimmick system. All recent Baylor OL have been utterly disastrous in the NFL. If the right guy is there ie Cedric Ogbuehi, Cyrus Kuoandjio, then go for it. I don't want us picking guys like Cyril or David Yankey over Odell Beckham or Ra'Shede Hageman just to fill a need.
    Mtjhoyas
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 316
    Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 2:03 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 10:57 am
  • Mtjhoyas wrote:We will be picking in the late 1st round, which means any OL we will be looking at is most likely a 2nd round value. We would be potentially passing on superior talent at WR, DT. This is when picks like James Carpenter happen. You force a pick based on need rather than playing the board.

    While I agree the OL has struggled, I don't think they are nearly as bad as you suggest. I'd actually argue that a lack of perimeter threats would help the OL more than actually drafting an OL, because right now, opposing defenses have no reason to be threatened by our passing game.

    Nobody is ever happy about the OL because it's only the bad stuff that gets attention. In hindsight, people will talk about great OL, but at the time, it's not like Okung is getting on Sportscenter for a good block.

    And regarding Cyril Richardson, I'd caution about any OL from Baylor who plays in that gimmick system. All recent Baylor OL have been utterly disastrous in the NFL. If the right guy is there ie Cedric Ogbuehi, Cyrus Kuoandjio, then go for it. I don't want us picking guys like Cyril or David Yankey over Odell Beckham or Ra'Shede Hageman just to fill a need.


    I agree 100% I wouldn't touch a Player off the Baylor OL. I think JS is smart enough to pick the BPA.
    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 Starter
     
    Posts: 492
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:41 pm
    Location: Jackson, Mississippi


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:53 am
  • I few OL options in the draft, assuming the 1-st round pick is NOT used on OL (WR or DL instead?).

    OLT-James Hurst, could drop to rounds 3-4-5, has been a solid late first or early/mid 2nd rounder prior to his broken leg in his bowl game. Highly regarded by many, but injury drops him down a round or 2.
    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1904 ... and-return.

    OT-Billy Turner, Rd 5/6 developmental OT with very good skills. Needs technique coaching.
    http://withthefirstpick.com/2013/11/17/ ... ota-state/

    ORG-Brian Clarke, strong, quick & very mean and his favorite block is the cut-block, Cable will love this kid. Probable late round or UDFA pick with very high potential in the Seahawks system. A true "sleeper".
    http://nfldraftdiamonds.com/diamond-in- ... loomsburg/
    <--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--> GO SEAHAWKS <--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--><-->
    User avatar
    CamanoIslandJQ
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 931
    Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:11 am
    Location: Camano Island, WA


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:36 pm
  • Thunderhawk wrote:several members of .NET were hoping we'd draft OL last year only to be dismissed by those who thought our OL was fine. Clearly it is not fine


    Our line is more than fine when our starting left tackle, center and right tackle aren't missing half the season.

    Seattle needs better depth, but I don't believe that was ever disputed.

    Spending a first rounder on such a limited mid-round prospect like Cyril Richardson isn't the answer. And Greg Robinson is a top ten talent.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8153
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:57 pm
  • Moving Okung is crazy, Bailey will be a good back up at LT once he gets more time in. And Sweezy is going to be a monster in the near future. Have you seen how low to the ground he gets in his stance? It's amazing! There is no way any dlineman is going to get under his pads. That's the cool thing about Okung too, he gets very low in his stance.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8896
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:54 pm
  • I just want to see them address the lack of quality depth with something other than a bargain-bin free agent or late round developmental project.
    Image
    You are absolutely entitled to state your opinion whenever you wish, and I am absolutely entitled to point out the stupidity of that opinion with the same frequency.
    User avatar
    SeatownJay
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 6872
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:38 pm
    Location: Hagerstown, MD


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:27 pm
  • Mtjhoyas wrote:We will be picking in the late 1st round, which means any OL we will be looking at is most likely a 2nd round value. We would be potentially passing on superior talent at WR, DT. This is when picks like James Carpenter happen. You force a pick based on need rather than playing the board.


    We could look at the last 5 years drafts (interior v. tackles) -- examining late first to mid second round interior linemen to dispel that myth:

    2009

    #28 Eric Wood 5 year quality starter
    #49 Max Unger 5 year quality starter **
    #51 Andy Levitre 5 year quality starter

    vs. Tackles

    #23 Michael Oher 5 year starter
    #39 Eben Britton 1 year substandard starter
    #54 Phil Loadholt 5 year average starter
    #58 Sebastian Vollmer 3 year quality starter
    #60 William Beatty 3 year average starter

    2010

    #45 Zane Beadles 4 year quality starter *

    Just missing cut:

    #17 Mike Iupati **
    #18 Maurkice Pouncey ***

    v.

    #23 Bryan Bulaga 3 year average starter
    #33 Rodger Saffold 3 year average starter
    #61 Vlad Ducasse 1 year substandard starter
    #64 Charles Brown 1 year substandard starter

    2011

    #23 Danny Watkins 1 year substandard starter
    #48 Stefen Wisniewski 3 year quality starter
    #55 Rodney Hudson 1 year average starter


    Just missing cut:

    #15 Mike Pouncey 3 year quality starter *

    v.

    #22 Anthony Castonzo 3 year average starter
    #25 James Carpenter 1 year substandard starter (2 years platooned at G)
    #29 Gabe Carimi 2 year substandard starter
    #32 Derek Sherrod 0 year substandard starter
    #46 Orlando Franklin 3 year quality starter
    #49 Ben Ijalana 0 year substandard starter
    #63 Marcus Gilbert 2 year average starter

    missing cut:

    #17 Nate Solder 3 year quality starter


    2012

    #40 Amini Silatolu 2 year quality starter
    #44 Jeff Allen 2 year average starter
    #55 Peter Konz 2 year substandard starter
    #60 Kelechi Osemele 2 year quality starter

    v.

    #23 Riley Reiff 1 year average starter
    #37 Mitchell Schwartz 2 year quality starter
    #41 Cordy Glenn 2 year average starter
    #42 Jonathan Martin 2 year substandard starter
    #56 Mike Adams 1 year substandard starter


    The draft in 2013 is still too early to judge, but it's probably the best of the ones I've listed. The conventional wisdom was, that the OL was overdrafted. But after one season, it looks to not have been the case at all. There are probably pro bowl interior lineman going into round 3 in the near future.

    Similarly, that 2011 draft class of OL was horrible. It's such an outlier to the classes before and after it. I would instantly discount any generalities formed or supported by the failures of this class as it is very very clearly an abnormally bad class to start with.

    The results of interior linemen in the #20 through 64 range is actually quite good in recent history. Much better than the expected results from OTs taken in the same range. Even eyeballing drafts older than 2009, the returns on G/C prospects in that range is actually very very good. Of course I would concede that a good G has it's limits in terms of impact on the team. But a good OG is certainly more valuable than a below average to maybe even average OT.

    As always, no two drafts are the same. But if you look at a decent sample size of drafts, it's pretty easy to see that you can get quality in the late first through second rounds in the vast majority of drafts. And in particular, you can get excellent quality in the 10-20 overall range if the prospect warrants that kind of consideration. The results of interior linemen taken in that range is very nearly bust free.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 733
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:39 pm
  • I've seen nothing to make me think that Okung and Breno don't have our tackle positions locked down. Unger has struggled this year, yeah, though his competition has been brutal. Guard is where I would look, because our constant shuffling at those positions isn't inspiring anyone's confidence.

    I'd like to think that Percy Harvin's presence (and/or that of another deep speed/soft-zone-agile WR) will lessen up some of the pressure on the OL, as would Pete's insistence on the deep ball. I say that because all through December teams were just stacking the line to dare Wilson to throw, thus increasing the load on our guards. But since Pete seems determined to look for the big play, and since Wilson needs reliable throwing lanes to work behind the line, I'd agree that we could use guards of better caliber. Don't fight for the board for them, though.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11468
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:06 pm
  • In fairness...if I'm drafting an non-LT in the 1st round, being an average quality starter is worthless IMO. I'm looking for a potential difference maker in R1, not an average starting caliber Right Guard.

    I get the yearning for an elite OL, but it's nigh impossible to do without wasting resources. If we pass on Odell Beckham, Ra'Shede Hageman, etc for a Guard, I will lose my mind. Again, nothing threatening on the perimeter makes it easy for opposing Ds to tee off on our OL. Make an opponent fear getting burned deep/outside, and I guarantee people will view this OL as very good.

    We are putting up a ton of points with a very average WR corps. Uptick that to a good-great WR corps, and this offense will blow up.
    Mtjhoyas
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 316
    Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 2:03 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Thu Jan 02, 2014 6:36 pm
  • Thunderhawk wrote: Any players you guys like that might be there when we select 32nd overall? Auburn's Greg Robinson would be perfect but he will probably go earlier if he declares. Cyril Richardson would make an ideal RG but probably lacks the versatility that the coaches want. Who else?


    It looks like your topic struck a nerve with the 12th Man, congrats!

    I think the majority of us agree that picking the best player available with a slight edge to position of need is the best strategy. If the BPA in the 1st round is a QB or RB then take the next best player available at a different position or trade down a couple of spots if the opportunity is there. If the BPA is a OG then I'm all for drafting that player, because we don't have a LG that our coaching staff believes in. Our (RG) Sweezy has elite mobility for a guard and I like that he plays to the whistle, but I have see him get blown up a number of times by DT's which I don't know if he has the sand in his pants to ever correct.

    A player that has been mentioned on here before, and I have warmed up to, is LSU (LT/LG) La'el Collins. Collins has a lot of experience at LG and this past year was starting at LT. So you may want to look at some of his game tape as a 1st round offensive line prospect for the Seahawks. I believe right now he is considered a late-1st to 2nd round prospect. IMO you could start him day 1 at RG and if Okung were to get injured then plug Collins at LT until Okung returns.

    Mississippi State (OG) Gabe Jackson is another guy I really like. Once he gets his hands on a d-lineman in pass protection "its over", he can eliminate his man in pass pro. But he is not very good when asked to pull, not the quickest guy in that aspect. Right now he is considered a 2nd-3rd round prospect.
    cover-2
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 542
    Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:47 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 2:12 pm
  • Addressing the arguments against drafting OL in R1:

    Deep threat: Deep routes take time to develop. Will RW have time? I get the argument that a vertical threat would force defenses to play it straight and not stack the box, but isn't that what we were supposed to get in Harvin? Also, Russell's ability to extend plays should enable any of the receivers to take the top off the defense, that is provided Russ can stay upright. If we get competent lineman that can maintain their blocks and give Wilson time he has been able to find Baldwin / Tate / Kearse deep. I am not opposed to drafting a big bodied deep threat in R1 but it isn't as urgent as OL, IMO.

    BPA: When has this team gone BPA in Round 1 under Schneider? Not only have they consistently taken need they have reached for need.

    The notion that the NFL has caught up to Seattle's offense is legitimate. Let's look at the last quarter of the season:

    49ers: 262 total yards. 2 sacks allowed
    Giants: 327 total yards. 4 sacks allowed
    Cards: 211 total yards. 4 sacks allowed
    Rams: 269 total yards. 4 sacks allowed

    Four conference games, three divisional games. Two at home, two on the road. All ugly for the offense. Between Eli and Carson our defense forced 9 INTERCEPTIONS and scored only 23 vs NY and 10 vs AZ. 9 picks - 33 total points. Horrible.

    Yes, we were playing some of the best defenses in the league. But these are the defenses we will see 6 times per year. We have to be better. Why were we bad? Look at the sacks. Russ has to improve on getting the ball out faster but he is getting heat half a second after the ball is snapped. He has looked a little shell shocked lately. His pocket awareness has suffered down the stretch. He is running into the pressure now instead of escaping it. We have to give him more time and we need better lineman to do it.

    This is an urgent need. Our LT has missed a quarter of his professional games. Our center has missed a ton. Our guards are brutal and out RT is merely average. To roll in the NFC West we have to win at the LOS and we can't do that without seriously upgrading OL.

    I'm kinda surprised I even have to make these arguments...
    "It was so loud Derrick Coleman heard it."
    User avatar
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 502
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:44 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 2:19 pm
  • Thunderhawk wrote:The notion that the NFL has caught up to Seattle's offense is legitimate. Let's look at the last quarter of the season:

    49ers: 262 total yards. 2 sacks allowed
    Giants: 327 total yards. 4 sacks allowed
    Cards: 211 total yards. 4 sacks allowed
    Rams: 269 total yards. 4 sacks allowed

    Four conference games, three divisional games. Two at home, two on the road. All ugly for the offense. Between Eli and Carson our defense forced 9 INTERCEPTIONS and scored only 23 vs NY and 10 vs AZ. 9 picks - 33 total points. Horrible.

    Yes, we were playing some of the best defenses in the league. But these are the defenses we will see 6 times per year. We have to be better. Why were we bad? Look at the sacks. Russ has to improve on getting the ball out faster but he is getting heat half a second after the ball is snapped. He has looked a little shell shocked lately. His pocket awareness has suffered down the stretch. He is running into the pressure now instead of escaping it. We have to give him more time and we need better lineman to do it.


    My problem with this line of thinking is that in the two games immediately prior to this stretch (vs MIN and vs NO), Wilson had terrific protection and looked all kinds of relaxed in the pocket. NO has a pass rush, and Minnesota at least had Jared Allen. What really changed was the game plan; Pete sent half the playbook on vacation and had Wilson looking for deep shots all the time. It also seemed to be the time in which defenses just went "screw it" and started making heavy commitments against the run, basically daring Wilson to carry the game. So I feel there were other explanations for the offensive line.

    Do I think we couldn't improve at guard? Nah. But I'm tired of all the first-round resources to the OL. I don't care what anyone says; it's not the most important area in football.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11468
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:04 pm
  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    Thunderhawk wrote:The notion that the NFL has caught up to Seattle's offense is legitimate. Let's look at the last quarter of the season:

    49ers: 262 total yards. 2 sacks allowed
    Giants: 327 total yards. 4 sacks allowed
    Cards: 211 total yards. 4 sacks allowed
    Rams: 269 total yards. 4 sacks allowed

    Four conference games, three divisional games. Two at home, two on the road. All ugly for the offense. Between Eli and Carson our defense forced 9 INTERCEPTIONS and scored only 23 vs NY and 10 vs AZ. 9 picks - 33 total points. Horrible.

    Yes, we were playing some of the best defenses in the league. But these are the defenses we will see 6 times per year. We have to be better. Why were we bad? Look at the sacks. Russ has to improve on getting the ball out faster but he is getting heat half a second after the ball is snapped. He has looked a little shell shocked lately. His pocket awareness has suffered down the stretch. He is running into the pressure now instead of escaping it. We have to give him more time and we need better lineman to do it.


    My problem with this line of thinking is that in the two games immediately prior to this stretch (vs MIN and vs NO), Wilson had terrific protection and looked all kinds of relaxed in the pocket. NO has a pass rush, and Minnesota at least had Jared Allen. What really changed was the game plan; Pete sent half the playbook on vacation and had Wilson looking for deep shots all the time. It also seemed to be the time in which defenses just went "screw it" and started making heavy commitments against the run, basically daring Wilson to carry the game. So I feel there were other explanations for the offensive line.

    Do I think we couldn't improve at guard? Nah. But I'm tired of all the first-round resources to the OL. I don't care what anyone says; it's not the most important area in football.


    So other the QB what is the most important area if O line and D line are not, I am a beleiver in it starts in the trenches. So many teams have had great QB's out of college and no line and they go no where, teams like the Cahrgers with Fouts had a great offense but a d line that looked like swiss cheese and while made runs could not close things out.

    I will say this, the Z blocking scheme does not focus on pass protection, it's dedicated to running and having a back that can read and make one move and go.

    I think it's a lot of our scheme and not completly on the line itself.
    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: 11540
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:11 pm
  • chris98251 wrote:So other the QB what is the most important area if O line and D line are not, I am a beleiver in it starts in the trenches. So many teams have had great QB's out of college and no line and they go no where, teams like the Cahrgers with Fouts had a great offense but a d line that looked like swiss cheese and while made runs could not close things out.


    Here's the problem, even if someone concedes the argument about the importance of the OL, it does not necessarily mean that expending a lot of draft capital on OL is the smartest route. The four best teams this season so far are Seattle, Denver, Carolina, San Francisco. Below are the draft rounds of their starting OL:

    SEA 1 3 2 7 5
    DEN UD 2 4 3 2
    CAR 1 3 2 5 UD
    SFO 1 1 5 UD 1

    So you can go the 49ers route and expend a ton of money and draft picks and create a very good line, or you can go the Carolina/Seattle/Denver(CLady out via injury) route, prioritize LT, draft and sign FA's well in later rounds.

    I'd prefer Seattle continues to upgrade when possible, but not to throw draft picks at OL just for the sake of it. Both Alvin Bailey and Michael Bowie have shown flashes to indicate either or both of them could be above average NFL linemen and they cost the Hawks a grand total of one 7th round pick.

    If a day one starter falls at guard or tackle falls to 32 in the next draft, then absolutely, I'm all for drafting him, but I don't think that's likely, and I'd prefer they go another direction.
    drrew
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 498
    Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:50 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:37 pm
  • drrew wrote:I'd prefer Seattle continues to upgrade when possible, but not to throw draft picks at OL just for the sake of it. Both Alvin Bailey and Michael Bowie have shown flashes to indicate either or both of them could be above average NFL linemen and they cost the Hawks a grand total of one 7th round pick.

    If a day one starter falls at guard or tackle falls to 32 in the next draft, then absolutely, I'm all for drafting him, but I don't think that's likely, and I'd prefer they go another direction.


    Agreed. I don't want them to go OL be damned route. If you're talking need, which is really relative in this case -- we're probably talking OL, WR and DL. Not in any particular order either.

    This draft, at least as it look at the end of round 1, it looks really good for either OL or WR. I do think Hageman will be one of the guys we race to the podium for if he falls. Not simply due to talent but also due to the limited pool at that position.

    Otherwise, we should be in a position to get an upgrade at OL or WR. What leads me to think it's OL, is because McQuistan and Giacomini are very likely to be UFA losses. We will know that well before the draft. Right now it's speculation but seeing the list of players we would like to resign -- that 7m per year we're paying those 2 OL players is going to be needed for players we currently have that are producing at a high level and are worth their second contracts.

    If they are gone, then not only do we have 2 players at the OL we need to add (probably via draft for cap reasons), but we'd be relying on 2 players who are really unknown -- although guys we like and have shown flashes. And if we factor in expected attrition for the 2014 season, whomever we draft is probably going to play a significant amount of games.

    Beyond simply seeing what we are now -- if we project who we will have come draft day I expect OL will be our biggest need by a wide margin. Personally, if it comes down to committing dollars to resign our DL UFAs versus our OL UFAs, it's a no brainer. I want McDaniel and Bennett and McDonald more than McQuistan and Giacomini. Replacing the latter two losses with our backups and/or draft picks while using that 7m to resign all three DTs (easily manageable) is a much rosier scenario for me. I've seen nothing from Hill or Williams to suggest they can provide similar production on the DL.

    It doesn't mean we have to take a round 1 OL prospect. But it probably means we have to take one before our 4th round pick. I do expect we'll take a WR/OL in R1/R2. Not necessarily in any order. It's doubtful a run on both positions will develop before we pick in R1.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 733
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:41 pm
  • Thunderhawk wrote:Yes, we were playing some of the best defenses in the league. But these are the defenses we will see 6 times per year. We have to be better. Why were we bad? Look at the sacks. Russ has to improve on getting the ball out faster but he is getting heat half a second after the ball is snapped. He has looked a little shell shocked lately. His pocket awareness has suffered down the stretch. He is running into the pressure now instead of escaping it. We have to give him more time and we need better lineman to do it.

    This is an urgent need. Our LT has missed a quarter of his professional games. Our center has missed a ton. Our guards are brutal and out RT is merely average. To roll in the NFC West we have to win at the LOS and we can't do that without seriously upgrading OL.

    I'm kinda surprised I even have to make these arguments...



    I'm kinda surprised you can't see the answer staring right at you. The left tackle, center and right tackle missed a large chunk of the season through injury.

    If they'd played all 16 games, Seattle would've fielded an extremely competent offensive line this season including two Pro Bowlers at the two key positions (LT, C).

    The depth could be better, but nobody is disputing that. You don't need to draft for depth in round one.

    And if you think our guards are brutal, I'd recommend watching the other guards in the NFL. Sweezy has had an extremely efficient season and is developing nicely. James Carpenter showed gradual improvement and IMO deserves to enter next season the starter (with Bowie and Bailey fighting him for the spot).

    And when you consider both players had to deal with McQuistan and a 7th round rookie at tackle for so long, it makes their performance even more remarkable.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8153
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:10 pm
  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    Thunderhawk wrote:Yes, we were playing some of the best defenses in the league. But these are the defenses we will see 6 times per year. We have to be better. Why were we bad? Look at the sacks. Russ has to improve on getting the ball out faster but he is getting heat half a second after the ball is snapped. He has looked a little shell shocked lately. His pocket awareness has suffered down the stretch. He is running into the pressure now instead of escaping it. We have to give him more time and we need better lineman to do it.

    This is an urgent need. Our LT has missed a quarter of his professional games. Our center has missed a ton. Our guards are brutal and out RT is merely average. To roll in the NFC West we have to win at the LOS and we can't do that without seriously upgrading OL.

    I'm kinda surprised I even have to make these arguments...



    I'm kinda surprised you can't see the answer staring right at you. The left tackle, center and right tackle missed a large chunk of the season through injury.

    If they'd played all 16 games, Seattle would've fielded an extremely competent offensive line this season including two Pro Bowlers at the two key positions (LT, C).

    The depth could be better, but nobody is disputing that. You don't need to draft for depth in round one.

    And if you think our guards are brutal, I'd recommend watching the other guards in the NFL. Sweezy has had an extremely efficient season and is developing nicely. James Carpenter showed gradual improvement and IMO deserves to enter next season the starter (with Bowie and Bailey fighting him for the spot).

    And when you consider both players had to deal with McQuistan and a 7th round rookie at tackle for so long, it makes their performance even more remarkable.


    While a healthy Oline would obviously be better, you have to consider the fact that Okung has only played 45 games in 4 years and Unger has only played 61 games in 5 years. That's not a good track record for either one and makes it tough to count on both of them to start a full season.
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 824
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:50 pm
  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:James Carpenter showed gradual improvement and IMO deserves to enter next season the starter.


    I couldn't disagree more. Carpenter is barely the starter as it is, he is average at best. Saying Carpenter should go into the season as the starter is off the table, unless you mean deserving to start the 1st pre-season game which I would be fine with. Carp isn't even a full time player as it is, he is usually rotated with McQuistan at LG. I would give Carpenter the pre-season to compete, but for me he is on the roster bubble during the pre-season.
    cover-2
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 542
    Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:47 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Fri Jan 03, 2014 7:12 pm
  • 13-3.

    Also, give Carpenter and Sweezy more time to evaluate their potential.

    Carpenter actually being able to workout and condition in the off-season sans an injury from now.

    And Sweezy is in his first full year of starting.

    Geezus.
    TURN DOWN FOR WHAT? -The 12th Man
    Pandion Haliaetus
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2074
    Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:07 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 12:03 am
  • Seattle will prioritize upgrade. That probably means OL early. But only if the right guy is there.

    Also, what if they have a future HoF type grade on ASJ or a non-short WR like Sammy Watkins? (Both are studs, IMO).

    This is a very good year to draft weapons, and IMO Seattle needs one more weapon at WR/TE. I don't know WHO it will be, but with so many good playmakers in this draft there is a decent chance you might have a Percy Harvin or Dez Bryant type "bad boy" who slips into the 20s. I'd very much like Seattle to be all over that if such a scenario were to occur, moving up if necessary. Our OL needs to be better, but our weapons haven't scared anyone this year.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11394
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 12:07 am
  • cover-2 wrote:
    theENGLISHseahawk wrote:James Carpenter showed gradual improvement and IMO deserves to enter next season the starter.


    I couldn't disagree more. Carpenter is barely the starter as it is, he is average at best. Saying Carpenter should go into the season as the starter is off the table, unless you mean deserving to start the 1st pre-season game which I would be fine with. Carp isn't even a full time player as it is, he is usually rotated with McQuistan at LG. I would give Carpenter the pre-season to compete, but for me he is on the roster bubble during the pre-season.


    I wouldn't read too much into the rotating. Seattle rotated at guard the year before too when we had one of the very best run blocking lines in football. Also, I'm not defending Carp but I think "average in 2013" is fair for him, especially given his lack of experience prior to this season. IMO, our biggest problems on OL this year were at center and tackle, and that was almost entirely because of injury issues, which will likely be temporary.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11394
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:16 am
  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    Thunderhawk wrote:Yes, we were playing some of the best defenses in the league. But these are the defenses we will see 6 times per year. We have to be better. Why were we bad? Look at the sacks. Russ has to improve on getting the ball out faster but he is getting heat half a second after the ball is snapped. He has looked a little shell shocked lately. His pocket awareness has suffered down the stretch. He is running into the pressure now instead of escaping it. We have to give him more time and we need better lineman to do it.

    This is an urgent need. Our LT has missed a quarter of his professional games. Our center has missed a ton. Our guards are brutal and out RT is merely average. To roll in the NFC West we have to win at the LOS and we can't do that without seriously upgrading OL.

    I'm kinda surprised I even have to make these arguments...



    I'm kinda surprised you can't see the answer staring right at you. The left tackle, center and right tackle missed a large chunk of the season through injury.

    If they'd played all 16 games, Seattle would've fielded an extremely competent offensive line this season including two Pro Bowlers at the two key positions (LT, C).

    The depth could be better, but nobody is disputing that. You don't need to draft for depth in round one.

    And if you think our guards are brutal, I'd recommend watching the other guards in the NFL. Sweezy has had an extremely efficient season and is developing nicely. James Carpenter showed gradual improvement and IMO deserves to enter next season the starter (with Bowie and Bailey fighting him for the spot).

    And when you consider both players had to deal with McQuistan and a 7th round rookie at tackle for so long, it makes their performance even more remarkable.

    I'm with this.. :13:
    User avatar
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 795
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:42 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 6:44 am
  • EverydayImRusselin wrote:While a healthy Oline would obviously be better, you have to consider the fact that Okung has only played 45 games in 4 years and Unger has only played 61 games in 5 years. That's not a good track record for either one and makes it tough to count on both of them to start a full season.


    Let's also take into account that Unger didn't become an immediate starter. Chris Spencer was the center in PC's first year and Unger took over in 2011 when Tom Cable arrived. So his lack of games is somewhat down to a coaching decision.

    As for Okung, I'm not sure what to recommend. A left tackle takes a very specific skill set and you usually have to be picking in the top ten to get a good one. We're clearly not going to replace Okung. Again, the team needs better depth. We need someone who can do a better job than McQuistan if Okung gets hurt again. But you don't go after that guy in round one.

    And if our line remains healthy, we have a good one.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8153
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 8:23 am
  • Our line has been healthy the past 6 weeks, right? It looked like the weakest aspect of this team in most of those games. That is why it needs upgrading, even when healthy we rarely won the battle at the LOS in the ground game and our pass blocking was very inconsistent.

    You can't force the board, but if a PC/JS approved OL is available in the late first, I think we have to consider it. Carpenter and Giacomini are hardly irreplaceable. Everyone except Sweezy has an injury history.

    Also, Rob, Unger was a day one starter. At guard.
    Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.
    Snohomie
    * NET Draft Guru *
     
    Posts: 3593
    Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm
    Location: Bellingham, WA


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:20 am
  • Snohomie wrote:Our line has been healthy the past 6 weeks, right? It looked like the weakest aspect of this team in most of those games. That is why it needs upgrading, even when healthy we rarely won the battle at the LOS in the ground game and our pass blocking was very inconsistent.

    You can't force the board, but if a PC/JS approved OL is available in the late first, I think we have to consider it. Carpenter and Giacomini are hardly irreplaceable. Everyone except Sweezy has an injury history.

    Also, Rob, Unger was a day one starter. At guard.


    In my couchchair GM opinion, if there is a solid tackle at our pick we should grab him. If not maybe try and trade back a few spots, recoup some picks and grab a solid G like Gabe Jackson and then take whatever big WR is left in rd 2.

    I checked and it looks like a big chunk of Unger's missed games are from 2010 when he was IR'd after 1 game. I still think depth is going to be a big concern. I don't see us resigning both Mcquistan and Breno. Out of the 2, I prefer Breno but if he wants too much money he'll be gone. Let's not forget LJP is also a FA. I'd like to resign him too, but he may have shown too much to be cheap enough. That is going to exacerbate the Oline need though.
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 824
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:33 am
  • Again...do you want a 2nd round talent at OL or a potentially game changing talent at WR or TE? That's what is going to be available at our 1st round pick.
    Mtjhoyas
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 316
    Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 2:03 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:58 am
  • Mtjhoyas wrote:Again...do you want a 2nd round talent at OL or a potentially game changing talent at WR or TE? That's what is going to be available at our 1st round pick.


    Or do you want to try and upgrade the offensive line and grab a big WR in the 2nd, or grab a big WR in the 1st and hope the Oline holds up? There is an extraordinary amount of good WR in this draft. I've seen mock's with WR like Coleman falling into the 3rd. I wouldn't mind even waiting to try and grab someone like Cody Hoffman by trading back from our 2nd rd pick.

    Here are the OL under contract for 2014 according to overthecap.com

    Okung
    Unger
    Carpenter
    Sweezy
    Bowie
    Bailey
    Hauptmann

    I see a starting line of Okung Carpenter Unger Sweezy Bowie

    Does that seem like enough depth to risk waiting for an OL later in the draft?
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 824
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:58 pm
  • Couple thoughts, of course just my opinion...

    A. Nobody that should be available to us in late R1 represents anything but maybe a marginal upgrade to the current OL IMO.

    B. Outside of the big Dogs at WR, we should be able to pick from a very dynamic group, and get our specific guy (ie body type, skill set, etc). OBJ, Jarvis Landry, Jordan Matthews, Davante Adams, etc.

    C. If we wait til late R2, I don't think we will be looking at a dynamic WR. A pretty good one? Sure. But now you are talking about marginally upgrading the OL and WR corps with our top 2 picks. I think this is a really poor way to improve your team.

    D. A 1st round pick needs to be a potential difference maker. If it is a LG, that guy better be playing at a pro bowl level and soon. And this idea doesnt just apply to OL IMO, but extends to Safety, LBer, RB, TE. The current history of late R1 OL has been pretty meh. I think getting an average starting quality non-LT OL in R1 is just antiher reason to seek another upgrade in another year or 2. It's an endless cycle of trying to upgrade, when reality shows the quality of OL play is dwindling across the league. The better athletes are being put at DE and DT.

    E. And my big point; I think a dynamic threat on the perimeter with a healthy Harvin will make life so much easier for our QB and OL. If a defense has to account for 2 dynamic receiving threats, they can ill afford to just stack the box.

    Good dialogue here...my biggest concern is that the yearning for an Elite OL is a pipe dream and would require drastic negligence (both draft picks and cap $) to achieve. Upgrade the downfield and perimeter threats, and I think you see the OL get a boost. Additionally, I think we can find a good raw athlete on the OL in the middle rounds and try to strike gold. Billy Turner is an intriguing option in R2.

    EDIT/ADDITON: I'm not an advocate of spending premium draft capital on OL depth. For a clear upgrade to the OL? Of course. DL, WR, i am more than willing to because those types, despite health of others in front of them, without a doubt will see the field.

    EverydayImRusselin wrote:
    Mtjhoyas wrote:Again...do you want a 2nd round talent at OL or a potentially game changing talent at WR or TE? That's what is going to be available at our 1st round pick.


    Or do you want to try and upgrade the offensive line and grab a big WR in the 2nd, or grab a big WR in the 1st and hope the Oline holds up? There is an extraordinary amount of good WR in this draft. I've seen mock's with WR like Coleman falling into the 3rd. I wouldn't mind even waiting to try and grab someone like Cody Hoffman by trading back from our 2nd rd pick.

    Here are the OL under contract for 2014 according to overthecap.com

    Okung
    Unger
    Carpenter
    Sweezy
    Bowie
    Bailey
    Hauptmann

    I see a starting line of Okung Carpenter Unger Sweezy Bowie

    Does that seem like enough depth to risk waiting for an OL later in the draft?
    Mtjhoyas
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 316
    Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 2:03 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:03 pm
  • Snohomie wrote:Also, Rob, Unger was a day one starter. At guard.


    Only started one game in 2010 -- unless I'm mistaken wasn't he simply benched?
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8153
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:44 pm
  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    Snohomie wrote:Also, Rob, Unger was a day one starter. At guard.


    Only started one game in 2010 -- unless I'm mistaken wasn't he simply benched?


    I checked and he was IR'd with a toe injury.
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 824
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 5:50 pm
  • I'd like to see more than just depth added. I don't care if they don't pick o-line in the 1st. But I would like a little more emphasis than 7th rounders and udfa projects. I would imagine that a larger ratio of quality o-linemen throughout the league were had between rounds 2 - 4.

    At this point, I would like to see them put an emphasis on upgrading pass protection and better recieving options for Wilson. I don't really care how they get it done specifically. But I do care about the quality.
    User avatar
    Shane Falco
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 844
    Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:09 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 7:24 pm
  • EverydayImRusselin wrote:
    theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    Snohomie wrote:Also, Rob, Unger was a day one starter. At guard.


    Only started one game in 2010 -- unless I'm mistaken wasn't he simply benched?


    I checked and he was IR'd with a toe injury.


    Which week?
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8153
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 8:28 pm
  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    EverydayImRusselin wrote:
    theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    Snohomie wrote:Also, Rob, Unger was a day one starter. At guard.


    Only started one game in 2010 -- unless I'm mistaken wasn't he simply benched?


    I checked and he was IR'd with a toe injury.


    Which week?



    http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawks/2012897163_unger15.html

    Early September so I assume week 2.
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 824
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:02 pm
  • Snohomie wrote:Our line has been healthy the past 6 weeks, right? It looked like the weakest aspect of this team in most of those games. That is why it needs upgrading, even when healthy we rarely won the battle at the LOS in the ground game and our pass blocking was very inconsistent.


    Max Unger has been playing hurt (shoulder, other injuries) since week one. He hasn't been remotely close to his usual self. Okung has been battling some injuries too (toe, mostly). Carolina might be the only game Okung has been 100%.

    Since coming back from injury, Breno has actually played very well by his standards, and IMO he's playing his way into consideration for a second contract.

    Unger's injury related decline this season has been a huge negative for Seattle's interior run blocking. On the positive side, Seattle's pass protection the last few weeks of the season was actually pretty good. If they benched Unger for Jeanpierre right now I think you'd notice a positive difference. Unger has been pretty bad.

    I think any line is going to look bad when it's dinged as much as ours has been. I've always been a guy that beats the drum for investing in the OL and if it makes sense here I'm all for it. I just hope that doesn't mean passing on the next Jimmy Graham or Dez Bryant to get the next Bryan Bulaga. Seattle needs more than just OL help on offense.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11394
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:33 pm
  • English, is injury history factored into your evaluations of draft prospects on SDB? If so, why do you seem to ignore injury history as it applies to the pros? You routinely defend the line talent as adequate *when healthy* but they are routinely unhealthy. That's the point. Continuity matters and therefore durability matters. However, I think the line is inadequate even at full strength, as I explained in the OP.

    Also, I agree with cover2. My NFL Game Rewind account has Carpenter on speed dial. The effort is seldom there and when it is there the talent isn't. Injuries? Conditioning? Whatever the excuse he is not a starting player on a championship team and I personally wouldn't accept him as a backup.

    I've read every post in this thread. Some interesting takes but I'm still fixated on fixing OL first.
    "It was so loud Derrick Coleman heard it."
    User avatar
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 502
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:44 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sun Jan 05, 2014 12:03 am
  • kearly wrote:I just hope that doesn't mean passing on the next Jimmy Graham or Dez Bryant to get the next Bryan Bulaga. Seattle needs more than just OL help on offense.


    Totally agreed. This is a year we need to add future quality. 2013's draft was a pretty big whiff as it stands right now. We need 2014 to have a lot of 'the next' kind of guys. Players that allow us to let some of our higher priced/second contract guys move on.

    Need notwithstanding, we need to add players that will reload. We should be in a position to draft pretty much any position group.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 733
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sun Jan 05, 2014 10:09 am
  • Kearly - good points (although everyone in the NFL is hurt by midseason, and I don't even think our OL injury issues stand out among the NFL).

    But, then it goes back to the fact that our depth was so abysmal and dangerous to Wilson's health that we had to bring back our starters when they are too hurt to play well. I think my view is best summarized as this: we need one more starting caliber player on the OL, and we need a backup LT who can do a decent job, given Okung's history. IMO, OL and big target are the 2 most pressing needs at the moment.

    I agree, we can't force the board (admittedly, I say that every draft). I just think we need to be as ready to take a OL as a WR or TE.
    Last edited by Snohomie on Sun Jan 05, 2014 12:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.
    Snohomie
    * NET Draft Guru *
     
    Posts: 3593
    Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:06 pm
    Location: Bellingham, WA


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sun Jan 05, 2014 12:02 pm
  • Thunderhawk wrote:English, is injury history factored into your evaluations of draft prospects on SDB? If so, why do you seem to ignore injury history as it applies to the pros?


    No, I don't ignore it.

    But I also put everything into context. Seattle has talent on the offensive line. This year they've been bitten badly with the injury bug, something we avoided last year. It's not much different to Denver losing Ryan Clady for the year. They too wont be drafting a left tackle in 2014.

    If you seriously expect us to go out and replace Okung and Unger -- two pro-bowlers -- it's not going to happen.

    Again, better depth is required. But you don't draft depth in round one.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8153
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sun Jan 05, 2014 1:04 pm
  • I think we resign Breno to a similar deal that he has now ~3-4m/yr. If that happens I think our starting Oline looks like Okung Bailey Unger Sweezy Breno. If we can't upgrade that then sure let's wait. But if we can I say let's do it.
    User avatar
    EverydayImRusselin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 824
    Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:38 am


Re: Seahawks must prioritize O-line?
Sun Jan 05, 2014 3:09 pm
  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:If you seriously expect us to go out and replace Okung and Unger -- two pro-bowlers -- it's not going to happen.

    Again, better depth is required. But you don't draft depth in round one.

    I am hoping for a high quality starting LG out of the draft or even free agency. However, it's dangerous to continually ignore the chronic durability issues that plague our line. So, yes, I would like the FO to prioritize tackle as well. It would be irresponsible for them not to.
    "It was so loud Derrick Coleman heard it."
    User avatar
    Thunderhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 502
    Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:44 pm




It is currently Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:29 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE NCAA FOOTBALL & PRO DRAFT FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online