Six Hawks on the PUP

[RiverDog]

We have 6 players that will miss the start of training camp on the physically unable to perform list. Most are not a surprise:

Shortly before the start of their first training camp practice of the new season, the Seattle Seahawks placed six players on the physically unable to perform list, including veteran safety Jamal Adams and linebacker Jordyn Brooks.

Along with Adams and Brooks, tight end Noah Fant, defensive tackles Bryan Mone and Austin Faoliu, and cornerback Tariq Woolen will not participate in Seattle's first camp session. Per NFL rules, all six players can be activated at any time, but once they return to practice, they cannot be placed back on the PUP list.

https://www.si.com/nfl/seahawks/news/se ... ining-camp

Anyone have an idea as to what the league wide average number of players that start out on the PUP list is?

[NorthHawk]

Can that really be a measuring stick for comparison?
Each year some team or teams get hammered by the injury bug and others seemingly avoid major personnel losses.
It seems it's just the luck of the draw.

For us, we should have expected 4 starters from last year (Adams, Brooks, Mone, and Woolen) to be out because they've either had serious injuries or in Woolen's case got hurt around the OTA time frame.
I never heard that Fant was hurt last year, though and wonder if it happened during OTA's.

[RiverDog]

Can that really be a measuring stick for comparison?
Each year some team or teams get hammered by the injury bug and others seemingly avoid major personnel losses.
It seems it's just the luck of the draw.

For us, we should have expected 4 starters from last year (Adams, Brooks, Mone, and Woolen) to be out because they've either had serious injuries or in Woolen's case got hurt around the OTA time frame.
I never heard that Fant was hurt last year, though and wonder if it happened during OTA's.

I don't know if it's a yardstick or not. I was just trying to get an idea if our PUP situation is any better or worse than the rest of the league.

[NorthHawk]

The PUP lists are often very conservative because a player can't go back on it once they are declared fit to play, and that may skew the value of any comparisons.
So teams often bite the bullet and make sure a player is fully ready to practice before releasing them from the list.

[RiverDog]

The PUP lists are often very conservative because a player can't go back on it once they are declared fit to play, and that may skew the value of any comparisons.
So teams often bite the bullet and make sure a player is fully ready to practice before releasing them from the list.

Yea, I hear ya. So then let me put it another way: With 5 starters on the PUP list, including 4 on defense, an area of the team that we can least afford injuries, are we at a disadvantage? In other words, if you were a bookie, would this information cause you to adjust our handicap?

[NorthHawk]

I think the biggest concern would be Brooks and if that means a downgrade at LB even with the additions.
Mone might be a concern because of the position he plays. Adams is perceived to be valuable, but some of us think the Defense played better without him, so who knows?
But we really don't know the extent of the concerns with some of the others. Is Fant on the PuP list because he's out of shape or did he pull/hurt something in OTAs? I suspect the latter, but in the past some teams have put players on the PUP list because of conditioning issues.

[RiverDog]

I think the biggest concern would be Brooks and if that means a downgrade at LB even with the additions.
Mone might be a concern because of the position he plays. Adams is perceived to be valuable, but some of us think the Defense played better without him, so who knows?
But we really don't know the extent of the concerns with some of the others. Is Fant on the PuP list because he's out of shape or did he pull/hurt something in OTAs? I suspect the latter, but in the past some teams have put players on the PUP list because of conditioning issues.

I agree, particularly as it applies to your comment about Adams. It could be just a coincidence, but don't think that there's any question that our defense was better when Adams was out. Plus, they just brought in a free agent safety, Julian Love, so it would seem that they might be anticipating that Adams might not even be on the roster.

I'm not all that concerned about Fant as we have a pretty good stable of tight ends with Dissly and Parkinson. Besides, with the log jam at WR, we might be seeing more 11 personnel than 12.

Brooks and Mone are the two biggest concerns IMO, as we don't have the depth at those two positions like we do at safety and TE.