OL Woes

[RiverDog]

A pretty good article documenting the struggles we've had with our "drastically" improved offensive line:

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... very-well/

[obiken]

buy cheap you get cheap.

[HumanCockroach]

Yep, especially the part about three excellent games leading up to last week, that was spot on. Drastic improvement by ANY stretch of the imagination.....

As for the concern... Waaaaahhhh.

[HumanCockroach]

buy cheap you get cheap.

Overpay for mediocre, get the Browns or Niners to root for.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Nothing like an individual thread to drag the dead horse back into the street for another round of beating. We get it; you are upset about the o-line. I'm at the point where I'd like to see the whole ship go down so you can be proved right. I don't think you or I really want that, but I don't get the constant hand-wringing. So, for my dead horse, you can't pay everybody. A top defense and a true franchise quarterback do not come cheap, and, as HC has said, a smart and efficient front office doesn't overpay for talent. There's more than one way to build a team, and, while the best way is arguable, Schneider's way has been pretty damn good.

[NorthHawk]

This is Gilliam's last year of his contract, so I wonder if they are trying Sowell at RT so they don't have to pay for Gilliam.
To be fair, he hasn't played particularly well this year, but it does fit a pattern.

There's a difference between overpaying for the OL and underpaying. According to Spotrac, we are only paying 4.17% of our Cap space on the entire OL. The average is about 15%.
That's last in the league and less than half of the next cheapest team spending on that group.

[Agent 86]

If it's not obvious by now that this regime targeted a group when they first got here, the offensive line, that they would purposely go cheap in order to spread the money around to other groups they deemed more important, then the poor dead horse will continually be beaten.

And how can it be argued? Look at the last 4.5 years of Seahawks football.

It's a philosophy I have to believe, so I don't think you are going to see any offensive lineman get a fat 2nd contract in Seattle, unless they prove they deserve one, which is tough to do in your first 4 years. Only the special ones will get it, and they haven't drafted that special one yet. They are hard to come by, even if you have a top 10 pick.

So yeah, you will get games like last weekend, where the line is questioned.

But when was the last time the D line/LB's were questioned for giving up multiple 100 yard rushing games like in years past. Is there anything worse than a team running down your throat game after game? Have some of us now been numbed by the fact very few teams in the last 4.5 years have rushed for over a 100 yards against the Hawks and just take it for granted now?

When was the last time we had a QB like RW3?

When was the last time we had a secondary like this (granted it has shown cracks of late trying to fill that other CB spot)?

A great D, a franchise QB, and a good running game. It has been a recipe for success. The running game is in transition with Beast gone, and it will be a huge key down the stretch here. Hopefully Rawls can stay healthy, but question marks there.

But the O-line will be the lowest paid group on this team, probably in the league, for the next while. I don't see them changing their philosophy on this one, unless they hit on a couple picks that deserve that fat 2nd contract. When that happens, the defense will then suffer, and the complaining about whatever group gets the hit will start.

[RiverDog]

Nothing like an individual thread to drag the dead horse back into the street for another round of beating. We get it; you are upset about the o-line. I'm at the point where I'd like to see the whole ship go down so you can be proved right. I don't think you or I really want that, but I don't get the constant hand-wringing. So, for my dead horse, you can't pay everybody. A top defense and a true franchise quarterback do not come cheap, and, as HC has said, a smart and efficient front office doesn't overpay for talent. There's more than one way to build a team, and, while the best way is arguable, Schneider's way has been pretty damn good.

Not a matter of my being proved right. It's a matter of what's keeping this team from being great, like our two SB teams of the recent past, and this is without argument the single biggest issue that's holding this team back. It's such an issue that it's the first topic the beat reporters want to talk with Coach Carroll about, more so than the injuries, more so than our upcoming opponent.

As far as my bias about beating up on the OL by starting a thread about it so I could "kick a dead horse" (the horse is still very much alive), I would direct you to the "Russell's stinker" thread where I called out Russell's poor play and demanded that we give him his fair share of the blame for our team performance last Sunday that caused us to backslide off our recent improved offensive performances of the previous 3 games.

The only thing I'll plead guilty to is my rubbing HC's nose into his "drastically improved" statement. It's so seldom that he's off on something that I have to take the opportunity to give him a good natured ribbing for it.

[HumanCockroach]

In order to "rub my nose in it" you would have to be right, you aren't, so really all you have accomplished is reaffirming your bias about the line. Get back to me when they play more than a single poor game in a row, sandwiched by good ones.