Carroll on Seahawks' offensive line: 'We're in good shape"

[StoneCold]

With a healthy Rawls we will be fine. Just look at the line he ran behind last year and was tearing it up.

 

[nanomoz]

Two or three really good ZBS fits are coming via the draft. At that point, yes, I'll feel good about a competitive group that might be able to develop some cohesion.

 

[DavidSeven]

You can't expect him to say anything different, and this is also no different than the rhetoric last year about "plans" and loving certain guys who they later cut.

This year is all about Tom Cable to me. He's created this situation because he's quit on all his developmental talent and refused to pound the table for his decent starters. Every other unit on this team gets better (including Bevell's groups), but the OL has gotten worse every year since 2012. And now, the one technique that gives Cable an edge is being phased out of the league.

If this reboot works and we end up saving gobs of money, then I tip my cap to him. He knows a lot more than I do. But I think it's fair and reasonable to be skeptical.

 

[Hawks46]

Last year, we were depending on DL converts and 3 guys new to their positions at this time of the year.

At least we have some veterans. We're in better shape than we were last year at this time, and could actually get better.

Also, we have no real excuse for not going after OL in the draft this year. When you HAVE to do it, sometimes it gets done better.

 

[jammerhawk]

While it is true the Seahawks have ZERO Pro Bowl OLinemen on the team and the talking heads figure they'll suck as a result, the proof won't be known until the season begins.

Frankly there is an awful lot of handwringing going on here around the OLine which has not been all that wonderful at pass protection since this regime began here. Generally the Hawks have a solid (r)unblocking OLine
and are somewhat suspect at pass blocking. Of course that is likely a designed situation and while the team would prefer the pass protection to be better they are unprepared to sacrifice any ability to run block to have that happen. Seattle has proven their plan to be successful and the team has been among the league's best each year at running. The pass protection seemingly could significantly improve to protect RW, but that will happen slowly.

Just because the team has an absence of "name" players on their OLine doesn't mean they aren't effective at doing what they want to do. this picture is far from being clear and Pete knows what he wants to do and if he believes the team is in good shape, they probably are.

Let's face it, the team truly wasn't prepared to "pay" either Okung or Sweezy and felt they could get a close equivalency a lot cheaper. Most of us looking at the two key subtractions from last year's starting group either were in tacit agreement that Okung wasn't worth a big contract and neither was Sweezy. Generally signing 'name' FAs is a mistake and the team isn't in a position capwise to do at any rate. Ultimately there is a plan in place here and it isn't completely clear to us yet but it is to the FO and they have been right a lot more than they have been wrong.

We all need to wait or the season to begin before fretting. I'm willing to bet we will be happily surprised.

 

[McGruff]

Generally the Hawks have a solid unblocking OLine .

Sorry, jam . . . But I had to highlight this freudian slip.

 

[Fade]

You can't expect him to say anything different, and this is also no different than the rhetoric last year about "plans" and loving certain guys who they later cut.

This year is all about Tom Cable to me. He's created this situation because he's quit on all his developmental talent and refused to pound the table for his decent starters. Every other unit on this team gets better (including Bevell's groups), but the OL has gotten worse every year since 2012. And now, the one technique that gives Cable an edge is being phased out of the league.

If this reboot works and we end up saving gobs of money, then I tip my cap to him. He knows a lot more than I do. But I think it's fair and reasonable to be skeptical.

Cut blocks are still allowed bruh.

 

[DJrmb]

If any of you get a chance, take a listen to this interview with Sowell. He definitely won me over a bit and it sounds like Pete and his staff did a lot of due diligence before signing Sowell.

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=10004373&p=1013&n=Danny, Dave and Moore

A couple of things I really liked from the interview is that he wanted to come here because he wants to start and he's determined to win the starting job. Doesn't sound like Gilliam will be handed anything with this guys drive and desire to be the starting LT.

Also they ask him why he wore his helmet once while driving to a game. He said it was during the shootings they were having in Arizona on a highway and that he thought if he got shot in the arm or the shoulder he could still play in the game. I like that he cared about playing that much that that was his first thought! :th2thumbs:

 

[DavidSeven]

You can't expect him to say anything different, and this is also no different than the rhetoric last year about "plans" and loving certain guys who they later cut.

This year is all about Tom Cable to me. He's created this situation because he's quit on all his developmental talent and refused to pound the table for his decent starters. Every other unit on this team gets better (including Bevell's groups), but the OL has gotten worse every year since 2012. And now, the one technique that gives Cable an edge is being phased out of the league.

If this reboot works and we end up saving gobs of money, then I tip my cap to him. He knows a lot more than I do. But I think it's fair and reasonable to be skeptical.

Cut blocks are still allowed bruh.

We rely on chops too, "bruh." Check the tape.

Or don't. Seahawks game film was used to pass the rule.

 

[McGruff]

You can't expect him to say anything different, and this is also no different than the rhetoric last year about "plans" and loving certain guys who they later cut.

This year is all about Tom Cable to me. He's created this situation because he's quit on all his developmental talent and refused to pound the table for his decent starters. Every other unit on this team gets better (including Bevell's groups), but the OL has gotten worse every year since 2012. And now, the one technique that gives Cable an edge is being phased out of the league.

If this reboot works and we end up saving gobs of money, then I tip my cap to him. He knows a lot more than I do. But I think it's fair and reasonable to be skeptical.

Cut blocks are still allowed bruh.

We rely on chops too, "bruh." Check the tape.

Or don't. Seahawks game film was used to pass the rule.

Every team chops and cuts.

 

[DavidSeven]

Every team chops and cuts.

Not saying they don't.

But we recruit for it. Are nortorious for it. Are being blamed for the new rule by coaches and players alike. Our game tape was used as the shining example of what won't be allowed anymore.

Just being real. This is a Seahawks rule.

 

[Jville]

Every team chops and cuts.

Not saying they don't.

But we recruit for it. Are nortorious for it. Are being blamed for the new rule by coaches and players alike. Our game tape was used as the shining example of what won't be allowed anymore.

Just being real. This is a Seahawks rule.

I think those smears just complement so much other hatred floating around out there. It's NFL politics at work filling dead air.

Nothing more.

 

[Jville]

If any of you get a chance, take a listen to this interview with Sowell. He definitely won me over a bit and it sounds like Pete and his staff did a lot of due diligence before signing Sowell.

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_player_sports/?a=10004373&p=1013&n=Danny, Dave and Moore

A couple of things I really liked from the interview is that he wanted to come here because he wants to start and he's determined to win the starting job. Doesn't sound like Gilliam will be handed anything with this guys drive and desire to be the starting LT.

Also they ask him why he wore his helmet once while driving to a game. He said it was during the shootings they were having in Arizona on a highway and that he thought if he got shot in the arm or the shoulder he could still play in the game. I like that he cared about playing that much that that was his first thought! :th2thumbs:

Nice interview. Sounds like a workman. We'll see soon enough. Good candidate for future interviews going into training camp. Thanks for posting link.

 

[McGruff]

Every team chops and cuts.

Not saying they don't.

But we recruit for it. Are nortorious for it. Are being blamed for the new rule by coaches and players alike. Our game tape was used as the shining example of what won't be allowed anymore.

Just being real. This is a Seahawks rule.

Maybe the NFL liked the color of our uniforms?

 

[DJrmb]

Every team chops and cuts.

Not saying they don't.

But we recruit for it. Are nortorious for it. Are being blamed for the new rule by coaches and players alike. Our game tape was used as the shining example of what won't be allowed anymore.

Just being real. This is a Seahawks rule.

They may have used Seahawks tape as an example but they could have used just about any team in the NFL if they wanted.

It's also worth noting that Pete Carroll said they were for this rule change and they voted for it. If it was going to be so damning to our team why would he be so for the rule change? They also publicly stated they are against the 2 unsportsmanlike conduct penalty change (and voted against it). So you can't say they were just being politically correct...

This rule change and its effect on the Seahawks is being overblown by the media just like when they changed the rule to emphasize DPI and defensive holding. Everyone was calling that the "Seahawks rule change" too and we ended up being the least penalized team for that...

That change didn't effect us, and neither will this.

 

[NJlargent]

I dislike the justifying of our OL by saying that every OL outside of Oakland and Dallas is not good. Completely irrelevant

 

[DavidSeven]

It's also worth noting that Pete Carroll said they were for this rule change and they voted for it. If it was going to be so damning to our team why would he be so for the rule change? They also publicly stated they are against the 2 unsportsmanlike conduct penalty change (and voted against it). So you can't say they were just being politically correct...

And Jeff Fisher voted in favor of strengthening the unsportmanlike conduct rule and spoke glowingly of the auto-ejection component. Jeff Fisher.

Sometimes you go against your short-term self-interest to gain long-term political goodwill. With the light shining on Seattle for the chop block rule and the inevitability of the rule's passing, I could imagine there was little to gain from John and Pete's perspective to vote against it or critique the rule change publicly. A vote against the auto-ejection rule isn't as controversial -- first, the spotlight isn't on Seattle; second, it's only temporarily approved and has many vocal critics.

 

[DJrmb]

It's also worth noting that Pete Carroll said they were for this rule change and they voted for it. If it was going to be so damning to our team why would he be so for the rule change? They also publicly stated they are against the 2 unsportsmanlike conduct penalty change (and voted against it). So you can't say they were just being politically correct...

And Jeff Fisher voted in favor of strengthening the unsportmanlike conduct rule and spoke glowingly of the auto-ejection component. Jeff Fisher.

Sometimes you go against your short-term self-interest to gain long-term political goodwill. With the light shining on Seattle for the chop block rule and the inevitability of the rule's passing, I could imagine there was little to gain from John and Pete's perspective to vote against it or critique the rule change publicly. A vote against the auto-ejection rule isn't as controversial -- first, the spotlight isn't on Seattle; second, it's only temporarily approved and has many vocal critics.

Maybe that's Fisher, but that's not really Pete Carroll. Pete typically stands on what he believes to the bloody end. If that was the case then why did they fight against the re-emphasis on illegal contact and DPI in 2014? It was clear then that everyone else didn't like the way the LOB defended and that the rule would be passed but Carroll still fought against it. Even after it passed he contacted the league about "fixing it" during the preseason due to the absurd amount of penalties being called because of the emphasis.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

We're in good shape in the sense that our QB is the most elusive in the league anyway, and his OC has finally figured out a passing scheme that doesn't rely on five seconds of solid protection every down.

I dunno. I think Pete had to find a place on the team to suffer because of financial priorities, and he picked the OL.

I agree. Although I don't think we chose to skimp on OL as much as it was chosen for us based on extenuating circumstances, like a league-wide shortage of good OL, teams paying very well for our FA OL, us having so many fantastic players to re-sign at other positions, etc.

 

[Scottemojo]

Sowell is a guy I have high hopes for. Seattle exploiting the desire to be a LT, and his feeling that he didn't have a real shot at LT in AZ because of the paycheck in front of him with Veldheer comes through in the interview loud and clear.

I don't expect us to go LT in the first unless the value is very, very plain.