Seahawks o-line not bad, relatively speaking

[Attyla the Hawk]

I'd call our line inconsistently bad.

Of course it's also inconsistently good.

Honestly considering the number of starts our current OL came into the season with:

LT: 0
LG: 1
C: 32
RG: 0
RT: 12

This really shouldn't be all that surprising. To be perfectly honest, I'm really bullish on this OL. I consider it a pretty big win to be basically average when you account for injuries to Rawls and Wilson over that same time and the almost total lack of experience.

Sowell to me is a placeholder. RT will be addressed. All other positions look like we have talent that can get considerably better with expected improvement in health and NFL experience. Just the health factor alone could put this OL as is in the top 12.

Now imagine them behind a line like Dallas or Oakland's.

Sure, but to afford (additional 15m to position group) that we'd have to pare 2m from CBs, 7m from Safeties and 6m from DL

So to get there, we'd drop:

Chancellor for McCray,
Bennett for Clark
Lane for Thorpe.

That'd barely give us the 15m needed to add to our existing cap spend to match Dallas'.

For the Raiders it's worse:

Drop Wilson for a rookie QB (14m)
Doug Baldwin for Richardson (6m)
Rubin and Clark for rookies (4m)
Chancellor for McCray (5m)

That'd give us the extra 30m needed to pay for the Raiders OL.

So if I compare apples to apples and imagine all of that -- I say ukeface:

 

[mikeak]

What the chart doesn't show, is that through the first few games, our O-Line was raw & inexperienced as hell,.

2 weeks ago we failed to score a TD, RW was under constant pressure from a mediocre D-Line

 

[McGruff]

What the chart doesn't show, is that through the first few games, our O-Line was raw & inexperienced as hell,.

2 weeks ago we failed to score a TD, RW was under constant pressure from a mediocre D-Line

2 weeks ago we inserted a raw rookie center into the lineup, along with a new RT who had never played RT before . . .

 

[mikeak]

What the chart doesn't show, is that through the first few games, our O-Line was raw & inexperienced as hell,.

2 weeks ago we failed to score a TD, RW was under constant pressure from a mediocre D-Line

2 weeks ago we inserted a raw rookie center into the lineup, along with a new RT who had never played RT before . . .

Yes because those guys that should be backups are starting. We have absolutely no depth as we are playing an inexperienced O-line

Having starters is not all that matters. Being able to overcome a few injuries at all positions except maybe the QB position is key in this league

I agree with most everyone that the O-line is playing better than I expected and continuous to improve but it needs additional improvement and depth. Maybe if we draft the same next year as this year for the O-line we will have enough depth to be truly serviceable throughout a season.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I'd call our line inconsistently bad.

Of course it's also inconsistently good.:

We just said the same thing.

Guess it depends on your definition of "good." My definition includes consistency, arguably THE most important factor in evaluating any job performance, sports related or not.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

FG: Grading Fant
http://www.fieldgulls.com/2016/12/8/138 ... -breakdown

 

[scutterhawk]

2 weeks ago we failed to score a TD, RW was under constant pressure from a mediocre D-Line

That same "Mediocre D-Line" had beaten the Chiefs the week before eh?
Seahawks O-Line was forced to insert a raw Rookie at a KEY position...Russell Wilson requires a little more consistency from his line of protection, and he was getting nothing of the sort.
Pete has mentioned before, that a lot of people have a misnomer about the level of talent in the Pro's. Where there truly is a drop off is when you pit Vets against raw & inexperienced rookies.....Little to none play time, stomps the hell out of gaining any consistency, and all your weakness get exposed pretty quick....The Buc's Defense exploited the hell out of Hunt.

 

[brimsalabim]

I agree these numbers don't tell the whole story because, as others have said, Rawls and Russ are good enough to escape tackles when protection breaks down. And thank goodness for it.

Now imagine them behind a line like Dallas or Oakland's.

And because of the salary cap, we'd be playing 11 UDFAs on defense.

Being an NFL GM is hard work in this CAP era. When is Rawls off of his rookie deal?

 

[brimsalabim]

2 weeks ago we failed to score a TD, RW was under constant pressure from a mediocre D-Line

That same "Mediocre D-Line" had beaten the Chiefs the week before eh?
Seahawks O-Line was forced to insert a raw Rookie at a KEY position...Russell Wilson requires a little more consistency from his line of protection, and he was getting nothing of the sort.
Pete has mentioned before, that a lot of people have a misnomer about the level of talent in the Pro's. Where there truly is a drop off is when you pit Vets against raw & inexperienced rookies.....Little to none play time, stomps the hell out of gaining any consistency, and all your weakness get exposed pretty quick....The Buc's Defense exploited the hell out of Hunt.

Pete said this? Wow I find it worrisome that he would make this statement while planning to start 4 inexperienced guys on our oline after an entire off season? I know Pete is physically fit for his age but has he been checked for dementia?

 

[WindCityHawk]

Lol, not sure why some people are trying to lecture me about the salary cap after I posted an image of Homer fantasizing. I get that money is not infinite.

And thank goodness for it, I hate what no cap has done to baseball.

 

[mikeak]

That same "Mediocre D-Line" had beaten the Chiefs the week before eh?
.

Tampa's d-line didn't beat the Chiefs - their team did.

In the Chiefs game Tampa had: 0 Sacks, 3 TFL, 3 QB hits

http://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=400874649

Against Seattle the same D-Line had: 6 sacks, 8.5TFL, 12!!!!!! QB hits

http://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=400874665

On the season their defensive line has not gotten pressure on the QB. There were other stats mentioned during the game that supported this. They beat KC despite not getting pressure and they beat Seattle thanks to the pressure they got

As I already stated above - I judge the O-line including at least 1-2 backups. You can't look at any starting roster in the NFL and expect it to look the same at the end of the year. Injuries are part of the game and you need to have appropriate backup and even though there is a drop-off it shouldn't be catastrophic

 

[Hawkpower]

I find it interesting how some hawk fans are so dead set on punctuating the narrative about a terrible o-line.

Data rarely lies....and it certainly doesnt lie to the tune of 14th when they should be LAST!!!!!!

The line has been average this year in comparison the rest of the league. Good at times. Bad at times.

We forget that other teams gnash their teeth about their o-lines too, we aren't alone.

Try accepting the numbers for what they are, and at least feel comfortable that despite it all, there are lines out there that arent performing as well as ours.

 

[brimsalabim]

trust your eyes... The creator of the table linked above came to an incorrect conclusion based on the data supplied. WE have witnessed the actual line play and it is historically bad.

 

[cymatica]

trust your eyes... The creator of the table linked above came to an incorrect conclusion based on the data supplied. WE have witnessed the actual line play and it is historically bad.

The line is bad, no question. The point of the thread was in relative terms, they are not. Considering they spend way less than the rest of the league, and playing 3 rookies, and one was a basketball player, they are actually decent and theoretically can only get better, while saving money. Also considering the gauntlet of good d-lines they have faced, not bad. They do alright against mediocre to bad d-lines. The downside is the depth, which showed up in the tampa game. Looked like the tackles also were not getting wide enough splits, especially fant, probably learned from that mistake though

 

[Jeremy517]

I find it interesting how some hawk fans are so dead set on punctuating the narrative about a terrible o-line.

Data rarely lies....and it certainly doesnt lie to the tune of 14th when they should be LAST!!!!!!

The line has been average this year in comparison the rest of the league. Good at times. Bad at times.

Picture this:
QB A throws the ball on average after 2.5 seconds and has been hit 50 times and sacked 20 times.
QB B throws the ball on average after 5.0 seconds and has been hit 50 times and sacked 20 times.

QB A and QB B have the same number of attempts.

The chart will consider the lines as being equal, but they obviously are not. Data can be misleading, and interpretation of data can be awful.

 

[scutterhawk]

2 weeks ago we failed to score a TD, RW was under constant pressure from a mediocre D-Line

That same "Mediocre D-Line" had beaten the Chiefs the week before eh?
Seahawks O-Line was forced to insert a raw Rookie at a KEY position...Russell Wilson requires a little more consistency from his line of protection, and he was getting nothing of the sort.
Pete has mentioned before, that a lot of people have a misnomer about the level of talent in the Pro's. Where there truly is a drop off is when you pit Vets against raw & inexperienced rookies.....Little to none play time, stomps the hell out of gaining any consistency, and all your weakness get exposed pretty quick....The Buc's Defense exploited the hell out of Hunt.

Pete said this? Wow I find it worrisome that he would make this statement while planning to start 4 inexperienced guys on our oline after an entire off season? I know Pete is physically fit for his age but has he been checked for dementia?

You're intentionally misinterpreting. :roll:
Pete said that there isn't a sharp drop off in talent in the Pros..........I SAID, We are starting what we have AT OUR DISPOSAL, which happens to be INEXPERIENCED Rookies, and with the lack of reps, playing against VETS..... they are obviously going to be at a big DISADVANTAGE.....Instead of giving a snide reply, tell us, what your Fix the problem answer is.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Interesting that the article drools over the Dallas OL when it looks like the Raiders line may be even better.

The Carolina game definitely gave a big boost to our run numbers. They would have looked like crap the week prior.

Raiders are paying for it - $36,972,041, league high. Vikings are paying the 3rd highest at $32,477,398 and they suck.

Vikings are taking a 11 million hit from Kalil being out and injured. Boon is making 6.7 mil as an FA they acquired and they also got Andre Smith who has been injured making 3.4 mil against the cap.

And from the OP the Vikings rush game is bad because of OL injuries, Bridgewater not being there to run around and move more than Bradford, AP being out, Mckinnon being out here and there. Asiata has almost 100 carries.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Those numbers are misleading. The big yards Rawls put up last week came from cutting back against the grain and running away from our blocking. When he actually tried the whole he got a concussion.

And the flip side to that coin is that Michael wasn't assignment correct and couldn't read the blocking he had. Look at the tape; he had good blocking at times and didn't always read it right.

So our OL was blocking for a guy that wasn't the greatest fit for our system and didn't maximize what was given him. That drags their grade down.

Just like QB hits; Wilson has caused a few of those by holding onto the ball too long and that's not a fault of the OL. They have their share of hits allowed but QBs can mitigate a lot of that as well. We have a good QB and a good RB. All we need a league average OL and I think we'll have that by season's end.

I honestly think this is one of many reasons they cut him. He just didnt seem to get it for the mental side of things. That and falling over all the time

 

[Jville]

^^^^ Also worth noting Cowboy fans can look forward to fretting over a 2017 price tag of over $44 million for their line. ....... snicker ........ snicker.

What Tom Cable and company have done in 2016 is out and out Ballsy! There is nothing conservative with this crew.

He has broken precedent by adding 4 rookies in the same year and played all of them. 2016 is a foundation year. I've enjoyed each and every game of this unprecedented and instructive journey. I hope many of you have also enjoyed the progress this offensive line has made.

These are the best of times! :2thumbs:

 

[mikeak]

I find it interesting how some hawk fans are so dead set on punctuating the narrative about a terrible o-line.

Data rarely lies....and it certainly doesnt lie to the tune of 14th when they should be LAST!!!!!!

The line has been average this year in comparison the rest of the league. Good at times. Bad at times.

We forget that other teams gnash their teeth about their o-lines too, we aren't alone.

Try accepting the numbers for what they are, and at least feel comfortable that despite it all, there are lines out there that arent performing as well as ours.

Lies, Damn lies and statistics

So me pointing out data that shows how poorly we performed against an average defensive line is equal to me being "dead set on punctuating the narrative"

You ignoring my data as a counterpoint is apparently completely different......

When we have faced edge rushers that are decent or a team really decides to go after us like Tampa Bay then we have FAILED. We are one of two teams that failed to produce a TD in three games. I simply pointed out that this was not just the beginning of the season but continuous since we besides lacking experience from our starters also lacks it on the bench

So quite a few of us were adamant about this problem PRIOR to the season. We were told to shut up and see how the team would perform

Now during the season and we point out that it is still not very good and that a few games are raising our average then we are told to shut up because there is nothing that can be done about it now and because 1-2 starters being out in a game is apparently justification enough to perform horribly

I watched the Panthers game last year enough so that I know what happens when we face pass rushers combined with a poor gameplan....