Excellent word. It made me think about Final Fantasy for 10 minutes or so.

and they’re generally true. Nick is assessing our team right now, which may not have been the topic you specifically were talking about, but he’s making some very good points, and he’s spot on.

Brady is a good QB because he’s a fantastic decision maker, he has a strong arm and he’s very accurate. He will be a good QB on any team behind any O-line. Aaron Rodgers will, as well. Hell, Rodgers is putting up pro-bowl numbers behind a line that has allowed the most sacks in the league. He’s already been sacked 10 more times than he has all of last year.

Sacks, sometimes, are actually the fault of the QB. But Rodgers, historically, doesn’t seem to be a sack prone QB and thus I don’t believe he’s the reason, it’s his lack of protection.

Of course o-lines are important. There’s no arguing that. I simply think that the majority of fans over-value the offensive line and are far to quick to point the finger once the offense starts to struggle.

Or could it be an acute awareness of his team’s QB, and his QB’s limitations?!?

on 3rd and 2, and the types of situations where a downfield shot was quite unexpected.

They failed. Every. Time.

The majority of the time the pass was just off. Either underthrown, WAY overthrown or defensed. Hass just don’t got. He never really was much of a deep threat QB. Why would be one going on 35?

In regards to Knapp, I tend to agree with Whiskey, below. I believe Knapp slowly changed the playbook after he recognized that our offense is incapable of the ‘down field shot’ or the ‘big play’ (haven’t seen an end-around in a few games now, and the SeneCat is rare and conservative). He’s playing to our team’s relative strengths (short pass game), strengths that sadly aren’t very effective unless they’re executed perfectly and very consistently.

the guy has been doing it a long time. Produces between teams. Doesn’t have fossilized ideas like Holmgren. He’s really constricted in what he can do with his offense.

I don’t think the o-line is overrated (this is what sparked the debate between him and I) per se, I just feel that too many fans are over-reliant on the o-line and tend to point fingers quite quickly at the line if the offense falters.

Bout that opinion of yours, though…. : )

Do you realize, for RB your maxim is a complete reciprocal of John Madden’s? He said many times, a great back can make a line great, but not the other way around.

Now, hearing Madden over a long period of time, it’s clear he still recognizes bad blocking can hold any RB back. But I think his point is a little more focused, in context, about great backs, that they transcend the circumstances and just play great. Probably the most pertinent example is Emmitt Smith. I can’t think of a back who has had so much credit taken away for having a great line. As though he was on par with Chris Warren but was set apart by his line. The guy was a great back.

Now, the idea that RB is fungible has risen in recent years, but I think that’s quite overstated. The position demands a lot of talent. It isn’t as demanding of exquisite skill as several other positions, but it’s still one of the more important positions. And can skill can still make a difference. There is a modest glut of capable backs, and that’s why it feels so interchangeable. There are a lot of guys that can do the job, it’s true. But it’s probably the closest part of football to basketball. Like a point guard. People think receiver is, but there’s a lot more skill involved, that can make or break you. In b-ball, transcendent talent alone can be a game-breaker, can set you apart. RBs touch the ball more than anyone but QB, so the impact that a transcendent talent can make is more maximized there than anywhere but QB.

A team, especially a talented team elsewhere, can do just fine with a back that’s anything above replacement level. But the impact in resources invested there rather than, say, thinned out to bolster depth elsewhere, can be much greater, so this throwaway mentallity of the RB position is really neglecting the impact it can make.

It’s as though people look at Michael Jordan and say, yeah, great point guard. But expensive, and hard to find. I can find a lot of decent point guards all over the place, so I’ll get them to do a decent job and spend the rest of my money on getting easier to find good players at the other positions around him, to build a very good team. Sure, that works, too, but don’t ignore the difference that a Michael Jordan can make. You have an opportunity to get a guy like that, a transcendent player at RB, there’s little excuse to ignore it.

I’m kinda surprised that we were bottom five in pass pro in ’07 when Matt was tearing the league a new one through the air.

and, not to be prickish, I am pretty sure you made up your statistics and correlations.

During precisely that same period, the Seahawks ranked bottom 5 every year in pass protection.

For most teams, 90% of their run yards can be accounted for by adjusted line yards: the OL itself is the running game. There is also a very strong correlation between pass protection and potent passing offense, and injuries. The franchise QB is undoubtedly the most valuable part of a football team. Keeping that piece safe and productive is of massive importance.

Pretty much everything you stated here is unfounded or factually inaccurate. In fact, since 2006, Seattle has never ranked bottom five in pass protection.

he discussion is not how important an offensive line as a whole is, but how much in resources should be dedicated to it and how much separates a first round guard, center or tackle and a later round guard, center or tackle.

Absolutely! Importance is unquestioned. How much goes into it (investment wise) is the key. You DONT need to break the bank to get O-line results. Scheme is nearly as important as personnel.

It’s about production and value, less about the round in which they were taken.

The Falcons started a right side of Tyson Clabo and Harvey Dahl, two undrafted free agents in their second year, and a center that was a 7th round pick. Despite that their running back ran for 1700 yards and their rookie quarterback was 7th in DVOA. To be fair they have invested a first and a second round pick on the left side of their line and Weiner is a solid vet, but the team jumped from 24th to 5th in adj sack rate and the only additions were in the backfield.

The Giants offensive line in 07 was hugely successful, to the point of FO talking about the unit deservice MVP votes, but has seen a huge drop with the decline of Brandon Jacobs and the loss of Derrick Ward. They’ve dropped from 3rd in run blocking in 2007 and 4th in 2008 to 12th in 2009 without any player changes.

Or watch the movement of Favre to see how much a QB can impact his pass protection. In 07 Green Bay ranked first in adjusted sack rate, in 08 they ranked 14th with Rodgers. In 08 the Jets ranked 19th in adj. sack rate, in 09 so far they rank 25th with Sanchez. Minnesotta ranked 28th in adj. sack rate with Frerotte and Jackson in 08, they rank 11th with Favre in 09. As Favre has moved and improved the QB play the offensive lines have also improved.

Here’s something to be excited about:

Ignore Gore’s two long runs in our first matchup (which are outliers anyway; we were banged up defensively and miss our best DT), and the Hawks run defense is ranked 4th/5th in the league (based on yards allowed per game).

And if you can’t pressure the QB, you need to LOAD your backfield with elite talent. And even sometimes that isn’t enough.

They’re simple requests for proper punctuation and grammar. That’s all =)

And you’ll be well received.

You don’t need to be a journalist to learn that basic functions of the English language need to be shown in a presentation of an argument or question to an audience.

going to Word (or whatever you use) then cutting and pasting it in. That way you have a solid spell check running through your work before posting, and it adds to the quality of your words, hence strengthens your words.

Your words are your voice. The stronger and more clear they are, the more they will resonate with the masses.

This place can be tough for new posters, but its pretty much a situation where you will have to adapt to the communities values- the community is not going to bend to you. If you’re ok with that, then welcome!

But just be advised, you will need thick skin here if you go against the flow (as you can see already). Things can get heated here and some things are touchy subjects.

The content of your fanpost was a little thin but that’s fine- I think short, minimalist fanposts are the best for stimulating discussion. I think all they wanted was for you to get the names right and make sure the post would pass a 9th grade writing level. It only takes a little bit of effort to do so, and if you take the time to create a fanpost, its worth that extra 10% effort to make it correct.

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2009/11/16/1160431/field-gulls-mod-enforced-rules-and

Part of joining a community is understanding that community’s norms. We ain’t so bad….

and I do not think anyone is attempting to be rude or dismissive, but part of being new is learning the community. The community is not going to bend its standards around you and so you must uphold the standards of the community. Some members have attempted polite correction. If that is not something you can tolerate, than I do not think you’ll enjoy Field Gulls.

For me it wasn’t a grammatical issue. It was my choice to use the word “stout”. I referred to the Seahawks use of undersized, penetrating linemen (Darby), as a contrast from what the focus appears to now be (“stout” linemen like Cole and Redding).

In the dictionary there are several definitions for the word “stout”. Obviously, I was using the first definition listed (thick and heavy); however, the 4th and 5th definitions (according to the online source I referenced, had “stout” meaning forceful, sturdy with staying power). Apparently, many took umbrage with Colin Cole being called sturdy, and forceful, and let me have it. I remember feeling very put off by the whole experience and actually logged off for nearly 2 months.

In retrospect, their comments weren’t all that harsh, but to a “new guy” they do come across as high-browed grammar snobs. I assure you that it will pass. You’ll come to appreciate the difference between a site like this, from the free-for-all’s that exist at places like FOX Sports. Coming from someone who DID take it personally…. don’t take it personally.

If nobody has done it yet… I want to welcome you here.

Grammar and punctuation aside, this has been a thought provoking Fan post that has attracted plenty of good debate. Stick around… take a few minutes to check the formatting next time (to ward off the grammar gargoyles), and enjoy one of the most in depth Seahawks analysis sites in the world. Hope to see you back.