O Line

[justafan]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

This is a GREAT rundown of the problems that has been smothering Pete & ALL his Coaches, ^^ and NOT JUST in yesterdays game either. :irishdrinkers: to you Tamerlane.

Great post. Great points.

 

[John63]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

the olien has never anke dhigher than 20th in pass blocking in the PC era that is th epoint, they have showed not real willingness to fix it. Every Fa, or Pick was done with them ssaying he is a good run blocker. That is the point of all this and has been for 8+ years.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Why pay Russ top dollar should be your question. :?: .

Because without Russell we're a 5-7 win team. He's literally the ONLY thing keeping this mediocre roster competing week in and week out.

That's why.

I think you're pretty close to the overall truth. Bottom line is Russ is getting older and less elusive. In order for him to continue to make a large difference in wins they are going to have to improve on the numbers Seymour posted. Whether Pete is willing or not..... Trading for Duane Brown was a step in the right direction.

 

[xray]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

Can we have a word limit on posts in here ? or is it established at 50,000 words already ?

 

[A-Dog]

One snap out of 50 plus. Never-the-less, that's going to be a moment of acknowledgement for Jamarco Jones on tell the truth Tuesday or Wednesday on what ever day that review is scheduled.

They just said on tv Wilson was hit, hurried or sacked on 12 of his first 15 drop backs. We were ranked 24th in pass blocking going into today. Fyi our 2nd best behind 20th.

What does any of that have to do with a response to a specific tweet or the team's upcoming truth-the-truth session.

You seem to be implying that this play was an outlier, and not representative of Jones' or the Line's overall performance.

If that's not what you're trying to convey then what is your point?

Jones had an abysmal game even if you subtract this play. This calls in to question a few things:

1) Why did we play Jones over Fant at LT? Should we play Fant at LT next game?

2) Could we have schemed better to prevent Jones from getting isolated against the NFL sack leader who ended up with FOUR SACKS in the game?

3) Does Jones have a future at T or is he limited to playing inside? His pre-draft measurables were extremely poor for an outside pass protector (or for an OL to be honest).

 

[Subzero717]

BREAKING NEWS- A bad Oline has bad back ups.

 

[chris98251]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

Can we have a word limit on posts in here ? or is it established at 50,000 words already ?

Need to take your Adderall meds for more focus obviously, thought it was a great post,

 

[John63]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

Ahh we did not abandon the run till we had to. As to rest some good, some bad, so misguided but at least a well thought out post.

 

[HawkerD]

Wow. Backups or not this position group has sucked or been barely mediocre for years.

k

Sometimes I don't think you guys watch any other football. All backups suck, that's why they're backups............especially O-linemen. They have limited skillsets, they're undersized, they're old, they're rookies, on and on. Again, that's why they're not starters.

Very few teams can sustain serious O-line injuries and still have the offense function successfully.

Yeah but even when the starting 5 are in, they still mostly suck.

 

[IndyHawk]

It helps to know what my post was responding too as a matter of courtesy ......... :roll:

One snap out of 50+ game snaps was my response to the tweeted snap >>>>>>

It would also be nice to understand my point. :roll:

1 snap out of 50 that JUST so happens to very well represent the last 8 years of what Wilson deals with more than any other franchise QB.

That 1 in 50 is the NORM here for 8 years. :177692:

Your posts are so confused. I'll decline to attempt to make any sense out of it.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :snack:

 

[IndyHawk]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

Can we have a word limit on posts in here ? or is it established at 50,000 words already ?

Need to take your Adderall meds for more focus obviously, thought it was a great post,

The bold part made sense to me.
Actually the whole thing is pretty good..Long but good.

 

[Scorpion05]

The point by some here, about how backup lineman are always bad make little sense. If Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers gets hammered like that, even by a backup..they’d be scolded. Front offices who care about their Quarterbacks, go out of their way to protect them. Even with backups.

This isn’t hard, I have zero idea why acknowledging these facts and putting ego aside is so hard amongst Hawks fans. Our O-line is bad, has been bad for years, and that’s unacceptable for most 1st class organizations with a franchise QB. Focusing on the injuries on the O-line, as if this O-line hasn’t been statistically bad for years is intellectually dishonest. Every QB in the league cause SOME sacks, most QBs in the league aren’t asked to face as much consistent pressure as Russ does. This isn’t a reaction to an O-line that was good or great before, and is suddenly struggling with injuries. This is a long, consistent pattern of poor O-line play.

I will always root for the Seahawks. But when we get a new owner, I would like Russ to not re-sign, and move to a team that creates the identity of the team around him. Have a running game, sure. But give him pass blocking O-linemen and maybe Julio, Fitz, Michael Thomas type number 1 receiver. This team has refused, even after Beast left, to TRULY build the team around Russ and it makes zero sense. And it’s tiring to hear fans, who claim they’re “FAIR” to Russell find a way to completely talk around our QB dealing with a bottom 5 O-line. Let’s just stick to being a running team with a cheap QB and a great defense. It doesn’t make sense for Russell to stay on a team where people don’t think it’s an outrage to not only have a poor O-line, but zero O-line depth.

John ........ I don't believe you can see beyond Russell Wilson. For you, the rest of the team is but a cast of extras.

And that's ok. It's your choice.

The people who are anti-Russ are worse. In fact, it’s a shame Russ isn’t as universally embraced by the fan base as Lynch is.

Either way, why not allow yourself to be led by the facts? You responded to the thread saying “1 snap out of 50.” Someone responded to you not with their opinion, but an actual fact about what Russ is facing. As a Hawks fan, that should outrage you.

 

[getnasty]

The point by some here, about how backup lineman are always bad make little sense. If Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers gets hammered like that, even by a backup..they’d be scolded. Front offices who care about their Quarterbacks, go out of their way to protect them. Even with backups.

This isn’t hard, I have zero idea why acknowledging these facts and putting ego aside is so hard amongst Hawks fans. Our O-line is bad, has been bad for years, and that’s unacceptable for most 1st class organizations with a franchise QB. Focusing on the injuries on the O-line, as if this O-line hasn’t been statistically bad for years is intellectually dishonest. Every QB in the league cause SOME sacks, most QBs in the league aren’t asked to face as much consistent pressure as Russ does. This isn’t a reaction to an O-line that was good or great before, and is suddenly struggling with injuries. This is a long, consistent pattern of poor O-line play.

I will always root for the Seahawks. But when we get a new owner, I would like Russ to not re-sign, and move to a team that creates the identity of the team around him. Have a running game, sure. But give him pass blocking O-linemen and maybe Julio, Fitz, Michael Thomas type number 1 receiver. This team has refused, even after Beast left, to TRULY build the team around Russ and it makes zero sense. And it’s tiring to hear fans, who claim they’re “FAIR” to Russell find a way to completely talk around our QB dealing with a bottom 5 O-line. Let’s just stick to being a running team with a cheap QB and a great defense. It doesn’t make sense for Russell to stay on a team where people don’t think it’s an outrage to not only have a poor O-line, but zero O-line depth.

John ........ I don't believe you can see beyond Russell Wilson. For you, the rest of the team is but a cast of extras.

And that's ok. It's your choice.

The people who are anti-Russ are worse. In fact, it’s a shame Russ isn’t as universally embraced by the fan base as Lynch is.

Either way, why not allow yourself to be led by the facts? You responded to the thread saying “1 snap out of 50.” Someone responded to you not with their opinion, but an actual fact about what Russ is facing. As a Hawks fan, that should outrage you.

The number of anti Russell fans is about 2. People are critical of him because he's the most important peice to the puzzle and when he messes up it's he should be called out. Just like with any sucsess we ever have he'll get the credit.

People want an average OL? Top 5 in run blocking and bottom 5 in pass blocking = Average

The teams that are better then us right now are not better because they have a better OL, they are better because they play defense.

 

[xray]

47 sacks and counting says volumes . I know it's more involved than that ; SOME of those sacks are on Wilson but most are on the OL ; which Carroll and co. have proudly assembled and brag about . Go figure

 

[getnasty]

47 sacks and counting says volumes . I know it's more involved than that ; SOME of those sacks are on Wilson but most are on the OL ; which Carroll and co. have proudly assembled and brag about . Go figure

Can you show us where Pete has bragged about that?

 

[Northwest Seahawk]

Not asking for an elite oline. Read again.

Average would be awesome!

What you're really asking for is a new head coach that implements a more dynamic and balanced playcalling scheme.

Because it'd be insane to spend the time and cap resources into developing a better pass blocking O-line on such a run heavy offensive team.

Wrong!!

Use facts and don't just shoot from the hip. :roll:

We pass 53.4% of the time this season. The niners run more than we do yet they pass protect far better (#9 in pass blocking)

I agree 100 percent we will not do jack in the playoffs with this turd of an 0-line. It has to get better if were ever going to win again in the playoffs. Just making the playoffs is not enough i'd rather take a step back for 2 years and come out the other side with a chance at the NFC Championship game than continue to lose the first playoff game. We haven't won a divisional playoff game since 2014 and we haven't won the wildcard game since 2016 at Detroit that was back when we still had a defense and an average descent O-line. If this O-line had stayed healthy and we had Britt and Brown maybe things would have been different. We need better depth, O-line and LB has to be a priority this next draft.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

Ahh we did not abandon the run till we had to. As to rest some good, some bad, so misguided but at least a well thought out post.

Misguided only for people like you, Ben Baldwin, etc.
More like post of the year.

 

[John63]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

Ahh we did not abandon the run till we had to. As to rest some good, some bad, so misguided but at least a well thought out post.

Misguided only for people like you, Ben Baldwin, etc.
More like post of the year.

LOL sure whatever you say :lol:

 

[Largent80]

Is LOL your response to everything?...If so...LOL @You.

 

[Jville]

Let's have some perspective here. The offensive line for much of yesterday's game was down to 3 backups and 2 starters. Think about that. For those not named backup Jamarco Jones, facing the #1 sacker in the entire NFL, the offensive line was responsible for all of 1 hit and 4 hurries yesterday according to PFF! Russell Wilson was credited with 2 sacks and 1 hurry. The average "time to sack" for Wilson was 4.22 seconds.

The offensive line and the team as a whole were simply decimated by injuries. The line had improved throughout the year -- as I posted in another thread from week 9-15 they had the #8 pass blocking efficiency. They weathered the storm incredibly well losing their starting center, top pass blocking tight ends, and substituting guards from time to time (even against Aaron Donald). But losing their leader and best lineman, by far, on top of everything else was just too much.

Some who cling to their preconceived notions don't want to hear facts. It's easier to man-rage against Pete, Schotty, the OL, or whoever is next in line. With team health on life support, I guess it's the perfect time for bitter cynics to crawl out of the woodwork with agendas. Down to one deep roster running back, we saw what it means to put the team entirely on the back of Russell Wilson and to live the Seahawks Twitter "analytics" dream. "Running backs don't matter". "Passing is more efficient - do a lot more, can't say how much, but do it a LOT more". "Russell Wilson is the best evar, just put the ball in his hands and the magic will happen - trust our statistics over any football common sense you think you know". The result yesterday: 31 passing attemps, 20 rushing. 1/12 third down conversions. Utter offensive deadlock. Cardinals get 35 mins time of possession and 70 plays on offense.

The problem with the pass obssessed, Russell-Wilson-does-no-wrong, "Pete just holds him back" group is that they never, ever allow themselves to be disproven with facts or evidence. They have an unfalsifiable logic. When the team gets to 11-3 running the gauntlet of injuries and the most difficult schedule in the league, doing so with a balanced offense ranked #2 and #7 in pass/run DVOA, the reply from yahoos like Ben Baldwin is to suddenly move the goalposts of success to a brand new HYPER-ADVANCED super-metric called "Point Differential!" Think about this: the first rule of so-called "advanced" football statistics 101, which these guys will lecture you about at length normally, is to account for opponent strength! Like for example Football Outsider's DVOA measures. But no, all of the sudden, Ben Baldwin, faced with too much Seahawks success for his liking, becomes a die-hard convert to Point Differential, which takes no account of strengths of schedule. This conversion was of course necessary for him to hold on to his precious agendas. "Seahawks games are too close, should have passed more, pretenders lol".

However, as soon as the Seahawks abandon the run, by choice (e.g. first two games last year) or by necessity (e.g. yesterday, most of 2017), and it doesn't turn out so well, the reply from the same peanut gallery is of course to deflect and blame anything but their own stupid ideas: head coach too old, the offensive line, offensive play calls (before anyone has even seen film of WR routes). Nevermind that most of these basement "statisticians" can't distinguish one WR route from another, don't acknowledge how often Wilson checks in to run plays, and so on. It's farcical really.

I'm not blaming Wilson, by the way. He's a real warrior and did his best yesterday with a depleted and decapitated roster forced into a perilous one-dimensionality that was never going to work at the best of times. But this team will be (and should be) designed for a balace of run, pass, and defense and has had to do so on a -$35m cap budget, which is a challenge. Those who want the Green Bay Packers model of league high QB salary + league high OL salaries (but still one injury away from the precipice), leaving next to nothing for the rest of the team, you might as well settle in for the long run because that won't be happening on the Seahawks. Thankfully.

NFL rosters are by necessity top heavy and the Seahawks by some measures are literally missing most of their high impact players: by PFF scores 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on offense and 4 out of the top 6 graded starters on defense. I don't know why it's so hard to appreciate how devastating this is.

Enjoyed your post. I'm looking forward to the privileged of seeing and reading your thoughts more often.

Thanks for posting :2thumbs: The forum needs quality posts.