Why Michael Bennett is a star & OL issues slightly overblown

[pehawk]

I agree with Rang: with Cable you don't need to invest high anymore (assuming Okung is healthy). He's the best in the game.

And, Carp gets a bum rap here because its easy.

 

[RichNhansom]

As much as I love Peyton Manning, some of you guys are giving him more credit than is deserved as far as the O-line goes. I am trying to find it right now, but one of the major stats websites made a list earlier this week of how much time before each O-line's pocket begins collapsing, and Peyton's was #1 in the league. His line is performing incredibly well for him.

If your a D coordinator how do you game plan against Manning vs Wilson? Your not going to do what Houston did and blitz on every play against Denver because you know it wouldn't work and would leave you vulnerable but against any QB that holds the ball a long time and moves around significantly in and out of the pocket it becomes more tempting.

You might also consider the mentality of the D-lineman. If your getting to the QB in 3 seconds but the ball is consistently gone and you now have to change direction and run down field to be in on the play it will have a wearing affect on your approach. Flip that around and if you are having success getting to the QB and hurrying passes, chasing him out of the pocket or getting sacks while he still has the ball, you might find some motivation to not only keep trying but to try even harder.

I don't put this all on Wilson though, I think Bevell really needs to stress play calling to create early passing opportunities. I think the smart play early in games will be to take the easy high percentage plays that routinely get the ball out early and doesn't feed the D-lineman's belief he is having success. It would also go a long way in figuring out opposing defenses game plans early while still moving the ball and it would open things up much better later in the game as defenses have adjusted to a shorter game plan.

We did see more of a short quit passing game the second half in Houston in the second half and while we didnt become dynamic we did start moving the ball better and kept their defense on the field to tire them out.

The short game does hurt the running game a little because it will draw opponents into the box but IMO in the long run of the game, the season and the health and quality of our O-line, it would be very beneficial overall.

Health of the O-line is also tied to this. If they are not only protecting twice as long but are also protecting against defenders that are constantly giving their all, it will have a negative affect on both health and success.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Carp gets a bum rap because people like Kearly and Danny Kelly, who know what the ---- they're talking about because they've played football themselves, look at him with an educated eye and see a limited player.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

I agree with Rang: with Cable you don't need to invest high anymore (assuming Okung is healthy). He's the best in the game.

And, Carp gets a bum rap here because its easy.

I agree on Carp. Not so much about Cable.

It would be fair to expect him to build an O-line full of lesser-talented draft picks if he was working in an offense with a quick, passing game like the Broncos run, but that's not the style of the Hawks. This team demands more from its linemen than almost all other teams out there, in terms of having to run-block and pass-protect longer to take advantage of the deep routes by the receivers. IMO, more talented players (thus higher drafted) are needed to make this philosophy on offense work.

 

[Scottemojo]

The only thing about the O-line that is overblown is the notion that it can be fixed. It can be healed, with some time, but not fixed. I just don't agree with thinking it can perform at this depleted level and not end up in our QB being injured.

 

[Largent80]

Well hey, lets not call that in. Anyone that has been around football long enough knows the importance of o-line continuity. You can't get it when there is a constant rotation.

We are going to have to find a way to overcome it. And, with out T.E. situation the way it is, we aren't looking good there folks.

 

[pehawk]

Carp gets a bum rap because people like Kearly and Danny Kelly, who know what the ---- they're talking about because they've played football themselves, look at him with an educated eye and see a limited player.

Based on what I've read the past two years from kearly, when Carp has played, its been fair with a mix of positives and negatives. Am I missing something, or were you shoehorning a statement to fit an argument?

Mostly everyone on this forum played football. I don't get your point....?

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Carp gets a bum rap because people like Kearly and Danny Kelly, who know what the ---- they're talking about because they've played football themselves, look at him with an educated eye and see a limited player.

Based on what I've read the past two years from kearly, when Carp has played, its been fair with a mix of positives and negatives.

Which is another way of saying "limited", like I did.

Sweezy and McQuistan, on the other hand, just aren't cutting the mustard. Breno and Unger have their up-and-down moments as well. I don't mind up-and-down linemen, but when mixed in with one-dimensional projects like Sweezy and Carpenter, it spells trouble. Okung is the only real stalwart on this line, and while I refuse to use the phrase "injury-prone", he does get a lot of bad luck in that department.

 

[pehawk]

And again, go get Hoyer and watch the pass protection appear "better". Get a tall, quick release guy.

There's still not enough advanced OL statistics to compensate for Wilson's height, avoidance to turnovers and Pete's preference for the big plays. Oh, and the offense being built with rushing the ball, physically, over all else. The style of play makes an average pass-pro line appear dreadful.

 

[Zowert]

Manning holds the ball for a nano second and it's why they're feeling the loss of Clady much less than we're feeling the loss of Okung.

This is the best explanation so far of O-line talk. Eventually, Denver will have to face a good defense and when they do (regardless of Mannings study and what he has seen) that defense is going to fluster him. I have seen him throw a lot of game ending picks in critical games.

I've seen a lot of downplaying of the opposition of the Broncos. Let's remember they did start off with Baltimore, a very good team. Sure they are 2-2, but 1 of those losses came against the Broncos, and they also mauled the very team we had so much trouble with last week, the Texans --beating them 30 to 9. The Ravens do have a legit defense, and they showed it against the Broncos in the first half. But in the 2nd half, Peyton ran right over them with a bulldozer that's their offense.

Peyton won't be flustered. He is a superbowl winner. Let's remember what his team is without him --they year he was injured, his Colts team won 1 game i believe. The years prior they were yearly entrants into the playoffs, including a superbowl win. No man can do it alone. I think a lot of the losses from his teams was due to his teams and not him. This year they have a legit team, and the Seahawks must be strong in every department to beat them.

Yeah, the defending Superbowl Champion Baltimore Ravens mauled the Houston Texans at home in Baltimore. The Seahawks would have done the same to the Texans if they were to have played in Seattle. Also, the Ravens lost both of their road games this year. One at Denver and the other at Buffalo. They also barely beat the Browns at home. Sorry, but the Ravens are not a very solid team this year. Huge downfall for that team.

 

[Largent80]

At this point. If the current version of the line can at least run block, I am OK. Because Mr. Wilson will find a way to work his magic.

Lets friggin just run it down their throats. Sweezy seems ok at that.

 

[pehawk]

Carp was drafted to be a road-grating guard. A project one, at that. Unfortunately he's been too injured to achieve/fulfill that. But, he will, IMO.

So yeah, I'll respectfully disagree with anyone who says otherwise.

 

[DavidSeven]

At this point. If the current version of the line can at least run block, I am OK. Because Mr. Wilson will find a way to work his magic.

Lets friggin just run it down their throats. Sweezy seems ok at that.

I look back at our rush numbers from the middle of last season, and they look just as good, if not better, than they were after Sweezy was given the vast majority of the snaps at the very end. Is whatever mystical contribution he's making to our run game really worth the night/day degradation we've seen in pass protection? I don't know; I said Cable was getting too cute when he initially made the switch, and nothing that's happened since then has really convinced me otherwise.

 

[pehawk]

Pete's preference has always been; physically impose your will with the run, then go deep with play-action. That's a really simple way to look at it, but that's what it is when you remove the seeds and stems. So, what does it take to do that? A physical line which can impose its will, then catch them off-guard and throw over the top.

Unless you have a top 10 pick, you have to choose what type of linemen you want. Guess which types Seattle chooses? Also, deep balls off play action takes what...time. You're asking guys known for run blocking to give time. So you need a little advantage thrown in to help them...which is the play-action and fatigue from power running (play calling too).

This line looked good in pass pro once Bevell got his groove last year.

 

[kearly]

It's pretty easy to see what's going on. The dropoff from Okung to McQuistan is monumental when facing any kind of legit pass rusher. Bowie is a rookie, Sweezy isn't a rookie, but he's similar to one. JeanPierre isn't a rookie, but he's similar to one. IIRC, Carp has less than a full season of experience at guard.

Further, Pete is a coach who likes to force his opponents to do things. He puts Red Bryant at DE in the hopes that it will force his opponent to quit the run. He builds a line full of run blocking maulers in the hopes it will cause pass rushers to think twice before selling out, and it effects blitz calls too. But so far, that run blocking has been undermined by highly ineffective lead blocking, both by Coleman and others. Then you add in the injuries, and it's a minor miracle that Seattle's rush offense is still among the league's best. But it's still worse than it should be, and that's allowing teams to attack our passing game more than they previously could.

Green Bay has a very similar pass offense to Seattle. Poor pass protection, plenty of empty backfield stuff, lots of developing routes, lots of emphasis on YAC and chunk plays, and a wily QB who loves holding the football. The recipe has produced a ton of sacks and also a ton of offense. However, when Green Bay faced Seattle in 2012, they were sacked 8 times in the first half, and leading a drive was basically impossible the way they had that offense set up. So what do they do? They come out in the second half with an extreme dink and dunk offense. Every pass play unloads the ball in a couple seconds, usually for short yardage. It wasn't an awesome offensive display, but it was a big improvement. Green Bay dominated the second half of that game, mostly with defense, but with just enough offense.

What ticks me off isn't personnel, it's how Seattle refuses to adjust to a glaring problem. They are trying to drive down the highway at 60 mph with two flat tires. If they can't pull off the road and get things fixed, then they should at least adopt a different strategy. Stop forcing Wilson to hold the ball longer than his backup, inexperienced, piecemeal line can handle, start giving Wilson the green light to run more, especially when the receivers go deep vs. man coverage (we did see this vs. Texans, to Wilson's credit). Right now we have a pass protection situation that only Peyton Manning could make look good. Instead of attempting to emulate a Manning type game plan in the short term to compensate, Seattle continues to put their protection in unwinnable situations. That, plus the refusal to address the empty backfield / delayed blitz issue is maddening. Also, Derrick Coleman was a bad idea, but he's just a small part of the equation at this point.

Also, what do they know about Bailey that we don't? Has he stunk in practices since the preseason? Or is Seattle just in that much of a slump regarding the evaluation of talent on their own roster (Person, Lotulelei, Howard, Bradford, Mike Rob, Coleman, etc)?

 

[kearly]

You can't go wrong drafting high O-line every year. (Say, somewhere in the first two rounds, occasionally the third.)

You simply can't. Worst case scenario, you get so loaded with talent at O-line over time that you can afford to trade away a guy who's about to get a lot of money and get more draft capital, and your QB takes very little damage each season, PLUS gets to perform under optimal circumstances. It's HARD to get a great O-line together and keep it healthy/functional.

I'm completely serious. I'd love to see us draft an O-lineman somewhere in the first couple rounds of the draft every single year.

I would agree, but it really depends WHO you're talking about with those picks. Everyone wants good OL, and last year guys with late first round grades went high in the first and guys with 2nd round grades went in the top 20.

 

[pehawk]

So, kearly's saying a lot of it is playcall related too.

So, does Montana say I KNOW what the ---- I'm talking about too? I'm (bi) curious.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

And again, go get Hoyer and watch the pass protection appear "better". Get a tall, quick release guy.

There's still not enough advanced OL statistics to compensate for Wilson's height, avoidance to turnovers and Pete's preference for the big plays. Oh, and the offense being built with rushing the ball, physically, over all else. The style of play makes an average pass-pro line appear dreadful.

This is the very same drum I've been beating for months. It's just that there are other things the offense could be doing to offset the protection problems, and they're NOT doing them. If they aren't going to build in more blitz-beater routes, slants, screens, heavy tight-end route packages, and other pressure-beating devices, they'd better either beef up the pass pro talent on the line itself or pray that Wilson can keep scrambling. It's been sustainable so far, but it only takes one sack.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

In response to Roland... the worst case scenario of drafting o-line early every year is other areas of your team will eventually suffer. Seattle is on the brink of having to replace multiple key veterans all over the roster for cost purposes. It's the only way to keep and pay your elite players.

 

[Scottemojo]

Pete's preference has always been; physically impose your will with the run, then go deep with play-action. That's a really simple way to look at it, but that's what it is when you remove the seeds and stems. So, what does it take to do that? A physical line which can impose its will, then catch them off-guard and throw over the top.

Unless you have a top 10 pick, you have to choose what type of linemen you want. Guess which types Seattle chooses? Also, deep balls off play action takes what...time. You're asking guys known for run blocking to give time. So you need a little advantage thrown in to help them...which is the play-action and fatigue from power running (play calling too).

This line looked good in pass pro once Bevell got his groove last year.

Well, the purpose of play action is to also freeze the line and linebackers for a moment, so theoretically play action gives average pass blockers an extra tick.

Houston's OLBs weren't playing that game, though. After Bevell called a couple of read options, they slowed their roll, though.