Seattle is dead last in OL spending

[Ozzy]

That picture is incredible.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

This is a little scary


WHY SEATTLE’S OFFENSIVE LINE IS NOW AN UNAVOIDABLE PROBLEM
https://www.profootballfocus.com/why-se ... e-problem/

edit: How do you make that text be a link?

 

[mikeak]

You guys are missing the point - this means that we are getting tremendous value from the O-line.

Someone posted just the other day how our O-line is ranked 27th out of 32 teams

That means we are paying the least but are getting better production than 5 other teams. That is the definition of value.......

:sarcasm_off:

and in regards to mediocre O-lines winning in the past. That is not what we are discussing. We are discussing an abysmal O-line. One that fans has been complaining about for years it is almost like the FO said - we will show those complaining fans how wrong they are lets spend EVEN LESS!!!.......

So what was the last abysmal O-line that won? If you don't think it matters watch the first quarter of the Carolina playoff game last year and get back to me. We got DESTROYED

 

[sdog1981]

This stat also vindicates Cable; he isn't given sufficient resources to work with. This team has zero respect for continuity on the OL. Who is the anchor? There isn't one. If I had to pick I'd say Britt, and that's a joke.

You need to review your Seahawks history. Cable has been given a player from every round of the draft and 3 times he got to pick the first player of that draft. Cable is the anit-coach every player he deals with gets worse. In fact, Cable is so bad the Seahawks should keep him on the staff as a scout. He would then give the hawks a list of players he likes, just so when he tells them he like a particular player the Seahawks would then know that player is a smoldering pile of garbage.

 

[CodeWarrior]

This stat also vindicates Cable; he isn't given sufficient resources to work with. This team has zero respect for continuity on the OL. Who is the anchor? There isn't one. If I had to pick I'd say Britt, and that's a joke.

You need to review your Seahawks history. Cable has been given a player from every round of the draft and 3 times he got to pick the first player of that draft. Cable is the anit-coach every player he deals with gets worse. In fact, Cable is so bad the Seahawks should keep him on the staff as a scout. He would then give the hawks a list of players he likes, just so when he tells them he like a particular player the Seahawks would then know that player is a smoldering pile of garbage.

Yeah, the players are "so bad" that they got substantial second contracts from other teams. Contracts Seattle couldn't afford. Think it might be you that should review Seahawk history.

 

[mrt144]

This stat also vindicates Cable; he isn't given sufficient resources to work with. This team has zero respect for continuity on the OL. Who is the anchor? There isn't one. If I had to pick I'd say Britt, and that's a joke.

You need to review your Seahawks history. Cable has been given a player from every round of the draft and 3 times he got to pick the first player of that draft. Cable is the anit-coach every player he deals with gets worse. In fact, Cable is so bad the Seahawks should keep him on the staff as a scout. He would then give the hawks a list of players he likes, just so when he tells them he like a particular player the Seahawks would then know that player is a smoldering pile of garbage.

I dont think Breno, Carp and Okung are too broken up about the damage done by Cable. They used Seattle as a great launchpad to become professional grade OL for other teams.

 

[CodeWarrior]

This stat also vindicates Cable; he isn't given sufficient resources to work with. This team has zero respect for continuity on the OL. Who is the anchor? There isn't one. If I had to pick I'd say Britt, and that's a joke.

You need to review your Seahawks history. Cable has been given a player from every round of the draft and 3 times he got to pick the first player of that draft. Cable is the anit-coach every player he deals with gets worse. In fact, Cable is so bad the Seahawks should keep him on the staff as a scout. He would then give the hawks a list of players he likes, just so when he tells them he like a particular player the Seahawks would then know that player is a smoldering pile of garbage.

I dont think Breno, Carp and Okung are too broken up about the damage done by Cable. They used Seattle as a great launchpad to become professional grade OL for other teams.

Also Sweezy.

 

[mrt144]

This stat also vindicates Cable; he isn't given sufficient resources to work with. This team has zero respect for continuity on the OL. Who is the anchor? There isn't one. If I had to pick I'd say Britt, and that's a joke.

You need to review your Seahawks history. Cable has been given a player from every round of the draft and 3 times he got to pick the first player of that draft. Cable is the anit-coach every player he deals with gets worse. In fact, Cable is so bad the Seahawks should keep him on the staff as a scout. He would then give the hawks a list of players he likes, just so when he tells them he like a particular player the Seahawks would then know that player is a smoldering pile of garbage.

I dont think Breno, Carp and Okung are too broken up about the damage done by Cable. They used Seattle as a great launchpad to become professional grade OL for other teams.

Also Sweezy.

Is he back for the Bucs yet? I broke a promise to follow the Bucs this year since I'm representing them in a Blood Bowl league modeled after the NFL. too many fires at home

 

[tmobilchawker79]

I was listening to AM950 the other day and Dave Wyman called BS on the whole "we don't pay our OLine, or invest in our OLine"

His point...We were last in QB spending Russ' first couple years in the league and we were getting great results.

I think the spending is not the issue, it's the performance. We have guys capable of blocking. Let's give them a game or two to get on the same page. From what I hear, a lot of our struggles have been missed assignments and miscommunication.

 

[LeftHandSmoke]

I was listening to AM950 the other day and Dave Wyman called BS on the whole "we don't pay our OLine, or invest in our OLine"

His point...We were last in QB spending Russ' first couple years in the league and we were getting great results.

I think the spending is not the issue, it's the performance. We have guys capable of blocking. Let's give them a game or two to get on the same page. From what I hear, a lot of our struggles have been missed assignments and miscommunication.

The bold is my probably-naive hope, the idea that they will continue to progress. Physically they are a little on the big side, good for blowing D-lines off the ball in the run game so that should come through with time together, and hopefully pass-pro will soon be at least as good as last year.

Cable has spoken with confidence about this group, I tend to go with that.

 

[mrt144]

I was listening to AM950 the other day and Dave Wyman called BS on the whole "we don't pay our OLine, or invest in our OLine"

His point...We were last in QB spending Russ' first couple years in the league and we were getting great results.

I think the spending is not the issue, it's the performance. We have guys capable of blocking. Let's give them a game or two to get on the same page. From what I hear, a lot of our struggles have been missed assignments and miscommunication.

Man, if only there was a coach dedicated to helping players on O Line not be such screw ups.

Oh, there is.

Hmmmm.

 

[CodeWarrior]

I was listening to AM950 the other day and Dave Wyman called BS on the whole "we don't pay our OLine, or invest in our OLine"

His point...We were last in QB spending Russ' first couple years in the league and we were getting great results.

I think the spending is not the issue, it's the performance. We have guys capable of blocking. Let's give them a game or two to get on the same page. From what I hear, a lot of our struggles have been missed assignments and miscommunication.

I don't see the validity of that comparison at all. Russell was a draft pick, an unknown commodity if you will. The only reason Seattle was able to spend so little on Russell is because he was cost controlled in accordance with the new CBA. He is also a single player, not the five individuals on the OL.

Our OL strategy on the other hand is doling out contracts to cheap vets that couldn't hack it elsewhere, or drafting quality players that we retain until they leave in FA. Continuity be damned. As for personnel, Sowell and Webb are known commodities. Asking them to reinvent themselves at this point in their careers is foolish.

Look at the teams that consistently field quality OLs... NE, Pit, Cincinnati... they pay their players and always have anchors on the line, be it Solder/Vollmer, DeCastro/Pouncey, or Whitworth/Zeitler. We let our equivalents walk away and its killing us.

 

[vin.couve12]

Ironically, I think this OL is way ahead of last year's OL, both in run blocking and is pass blocking. RW has more than 1.5 seconds to pass this year and while Rawls is seeing a lot of the same run blocking that Lynch saw last year, Michael seems to be dealing with it well, albeit just being more explosive than any defender.

At some point we'll likely see a lot of the same huge running lanes that Rawls was getting last year and pass protection communication will also start to jell as well as RW getting sharper and more precise with his decision making.

 

[DavidSeven]

This stat also vindicates Cable; he isn't given sufficient resources to work with.

Isn't this also Cable's fault, though?

If the talent on OL isn't there, then he should be pounding the table to retain his guys or sign new ones. Instead, he has sold the team a bill of goods on guys like Michael Bowie, Lemuel Jeanpierre, and Garry Gilliam as replacements for Breno, Unger and Okung. None of these guys could even make it out of camp without being cut or demoted, despite Cable's reassurances. If Cable had instead sounded the alarm on these guys early on, then I guarantee we aren't making the same personnel decisions. His hubris regarding coaching marginal talents is part of the problem.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

If Ifedi is a starter, then we're getting more value because he's still on his rookie contract, just like we did when Sherman and Wilson were on their rookie deals. If Ifedi gets good, we're getting even that much more value. Remember how much money we had for the rest of the team when Wilson was playing at a pro bowl level, but barely touching the cap? People need to lay off the o-line until Ifedi comes backs and they are playing their right positions like they did through TC--and looked great.

 

[MORGULON]

We all know the line stinks.

So the question for the people who want more cap space dedicated to it is simple..............what players do you cut to open cap space. Bennett? Kam? Shouldn't have given Doug more money? Graham?

To be fair to this conversation, there's a difference between spending FA money on the line and using draft picks for the line. Of which we've done, a LOT. Just hasn't worked out in most cases. But attention IS being given to the line, just in picks not FA's.

Get rid of Jimmy Graham and you can have an offensive line.

 

[CodeWarrior]

Isn't this also Cable's fault, though?

If the talent on OL isn't there, then he should be pounding the table to retain his guys or sign new ones. Instead, he has sold the team a bill of goods on guys like Michael Bowie, Lemuel Jeanpierre, and Garry Gilliam as replacements for Breno, Unger and Okung. None of these guys could even make it out of camp without being cut or demoted, despite Cable's reassurances. If Cable had instead sounded the alarm on these guys early on, then I guarantee we aren't making the same personnel decisions. His hubris regarding coaching marginal talents is part of the problem.

In terms of salary cap percentage Seattle is spending nearly 5x as much on the secondary as the team spends on offensive line.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/positional/

That level of disparity requires spending mandates that are coming from none other than PC/JS. I believe Cable is given a shoestring budget and told to make do. The validity of that approach is in question, especially when that meager OL is protecting your franchise QB.

 

[Fade]

Outside of LT the O-Line will be fine guys, only LT needs to be replaced ASAP.

Long Term Starters
Glow under contract 3 years.
Britt 2 years
Ifedi 4 years w/ 5yr team option.

Long Term Backups / Potential Starters w/Development
Rees Odihambo 4 years
Joey Hunt 4 years
George Fant 4 years

They need a LT long term. Other than that the core of this O-Line will be around for a while. Gilliam is fine as a stop gap. Sowell is not. They thought he could be, they miscalculated. I will be surprised if Seattle doesn't make a move there during the bye, maybe earlier. I GUARANTEE Bradley Sowell will not be starting at LT come week 6.

 

[DavidSeven]

In terms of salary cap percentage Seattle is spending nearly 5x as much on the secondary as the team spends on offensive line.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/positional/

That level of disparity requires spending mandates that are coming from none other than PC/JS. I believe Cable is given a shoestring budget and told to make do. The validity of that approach is in question, especially when that meager OL is protecting your franchise QB.

As an outsider looking in, my sense is that Cable is not a lap dog in this organization. He is the Assistant Head Coach and he has sway, especially over OL personnel. Carp, Moffitt, Sweezy and Britt were his picks, not PCJS picks. If he tells Schneider that Garry Gilliam has no shot of ever being a starting LT in the NFL, you think Schneider lets Okung walk or doesn't build some other contingent plan besides Bradley Sowell? I don't. His evaluations have been suspect (in both draft and current roster), and that has led the team to make several questionable gambles regarding their roster. PC and JS are not OL experts; they are absolutely going to defer to their OL coach in deciding what they can get away with from a cap perspective.

 

[vin.couve12]

@ Fade

Gilliam lost his job at LT because he was out for 3 weeks of TC. Can't win a job if you're not on the field. I'm not so sure he doesn't end up back there at some point. He's better at pass blocking quicker ends than larger, more powerful ones anyway. He tends to lunge at the bigger guys.