Advertising

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby calabcoug on Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:19 pm

HawkBowler wrote:
TheProfessional wrote: I disagree with the college O-Linemen learning power and schemes..etc. It's the stance and footwork that Cable says they are lacking. Most of those guys have been in a spread offense and two point stance High School thru College.


There's the Cable hubris at work. None of the colleges train their OL correctly so we might as well take guys who haven't even played the position and start from scratch. Only Cable knows best.

The Hawks have success stories up and down the roster, from rounds 1 through to 6. Contrary to popular opinion on this board, the OL has not been given less valuable picks..... they just miss on them. What happened with Moffit and Poole and a half dozen other guys that Cable praised as having tremendous potential only to see them leave the team without even reaching the field?

The problem is either drafting, developing or both. None of us know exactly who's responsible for those failures, but we do know that Cable's in-charge of the unit and second in command as far as coaches on the team. If he were really a guru, we would have had a steady stream of replacement OL players to take over for lackluster guys like Carp, Sweezy and Breno. The Hawks let those guys go in part because of money, but also because they thought they had their replacements either already on the team or through the draft. That was an error in judgement and Cable is at the center of that judgement process.


Good grief- you have zero verification for any of this spit ball take. Cable has zero say so on money and who stays and goes...that is the GM and Pete. Gimme my guys and I will work them up isn't hubris...it is his skill set. He hasn't been given the horses... you name one actual flop pick for the OL in 5 seasons...the only high draft pick who didn't work out...and a Terry Poole a 4th round pick. Come on...4th rounders don't even make a lot of teams, much less become starters. you conveniently ignore the rags to riches guys he did build up-- Sweezy being one of them. All these OL guys you yourself maligned continually HB, got nice free agent deals elsewhere...it wasn't cuz they sucked. Your narrative is unfounded and tired...Cable has not been given studs to mold. That simply isn't the case. He has had constant turnover and his OL is the lowest paid in the league by a mile.
 
Posts: 7106
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:58 am
Location: Calabasas, CA

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby Soggyblogger on Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:07 pm

HawkBowler wrote:
TheProfessional wrote: I disagree with the college O-Linemen learning power and schemes..etc. It's the stance and footwork that Cable says they are lacking. Most of those guys have been in a spread offense and two point stance High School thru College.


There's the Cable hubris at work. None of the colleges train their OL correctly so we might as well take guys who haven't even played the position and start from scratch. Only Cable knows best.

The Hawks have success stories up and down the roster, from rounds 1 through to 6. Contrary to popular opinion on this board, the OL has not been given less valuable picks..... they just miss on them. What happened with Moffit and Poole and a half dozen other guys that Cable praised as having tremendous potential only to see them leave the team without even reaching the field?

The problem is either drafting, developing or both. None of us know exactly who's responsible for those failures, but we do know that Cable's in-charge of the unit and second in command as far as coaches on the team. If he were really a guru, we would have had a steady stream of replacement OL players to take over for lackluster guys like Carp, Sweezy and Breno. The Hawks let those guys go in part because of money, but also because they thought they had their replacements either already on the team or through the draft. That was an error in judgement and Cable is at the center of that judgement process.


I'd remind you that Carpenter was paid well by the Jets and at one time was thought to be their best OL. Sweezy was a "find" that completely destroys much of what your narrative above is about. Namely, that the Hawks have "hits" in the draft all up and down the roster EXCEPT for the OL. Sweezy was drafted late (sixth or seventh round I believe) and STARTED his entire career for the Hawks, then was awarded a very very nice contract. That's a "hit" by my definition, and so was Carpenter ultimately.

Now, another factor in the evaluation of what Cable has had to work with is that we traded away our pro bowl center for a pro bowl TE. Granted, he was hurt a lot, but he was very important to this OL, and losing him was a very big blow to the talent on the OL and getting the most out of that talent. The center makes the calls, and when Unger left that part of the Hawks game suffered the most. Didn't both Bailey and the other B guy get taken from Cable through waivers and free agency? We let our supposedly "best" lineman go for peanuts, too. Okung was the highest drafted OL on the team for the last, what?, 8 years? Gone from the talent pool. And speaking of Poole, yea, we missed so far on Poole, I always wondered who's guy Poole was. His stats never screamed "athletic" like the others. What was he? A fourth rounder? We've missed on fourth rounders over and over and over. In lots of positions. You win some and you lose some.

But the fact remains that the Hawks have re-signed Avril (twice), Bennett (twice), and Mebane once though he is gone now, but those are all linemen for the defense. Who have the Hawks re-signed? We not only didn't re-sign Unger, we traded him in on a TE that didn't know how to block. And Avril and Bennett both came in as veterans with strong resume's. None of the veterans brought in for the OL have had strong resume's. I know we gave up a draft pick (which could have been used for an OL) for Graham as well as Unger, but that doesn't change anything regarding what Cable has had to work with.
 
Posts: 2002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:06 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby HawkBowler on Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:06 pm

calabcoug wrote:Good grief- you have zero verification for any of this spit ball take. Cable has zero say so on money and who stays and goes...that is the GM and Pete.


That's not what Schneider said.... "We don't make a move on the OL without including Cable."
 
Posts: 7221
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 7:46 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby Don Gorgon on Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:08 pm

he said they wouldn't draft a lineman Cable didn't like, you have twisted that into Cable calling the shots of who they draft.
 
Posts: 38544
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 4:59 am
Location: balm yard

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby HawkBowler on Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:29 pm

Soggyblogger wrote: None of the veterans brought in for the OL have had strong resume's. I know we gave up a draft pick (which could have been used for an OL) for Graham as well as Unger, but that doesn't change anything regarding what Cable has had to work with.


The Hawks have drafted 11 OL players since Cable arrived.(Keep in mind that our cornerstone OL guys in Okung and Unger were already on the team when Cable was hired). How many have turned into solid starters? I won't ask how many have turned into pro bowlers because none of them have.

Now look at the rest of the team. Did the Hawks devote more picks to other areas of the team? Did they use higher quality picks on other areas of the team that they didn't use on the OL? The answers are no and no.

Also, we don't know how involved Cable was concerning not resigning guys like Sweezy and Carpenter. Rather than just assuming that Cable had no say, what if it was him that convinced Pete and John that the team would be fine without them? What if it was Cable that told them the line would be fine without Unger?

We don't know any of those things, and yet there's people on the board that think Cable is only a lowly OL coach with absolutely no say in personnel. How do they know? Especially when the GM says they don't make a move on the OL without him. He's at the combine. He's in the war room. It's Cable after the draft that always gives the reasons why they chose such and such OL player.

One area that we can say that Cable is 100% responsible for is OL development. There's been 11 draft picks during his tenure, several FA and UDFA have come in. Where's the fruit?

My point is simple; had the Hawks done a better job of both drafting and developing OL players, they would have had players ready to take over for the guys that left . The Hawks must have thought they already had the replacements or they wouldn't have let all those guys go.

Not everything that's wrong with the OL is Cable's fault, but to say he bears no responsibility negates his important role with the team. Not only as a position coach but also second in command behind Pete.
 
Posts: 7221
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 7:46 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby HawkBowler on Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:36 pm

Don Gorgon wrote:he said they wouldn't draft a lineman Cable didn't like, you have twisted that into Cable calling the shots of who they draft.


Nope... look it up.
 
Posts: 7221
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 7:46 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby Don Gorgon on Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:53 pm

okay I will...

here

Schneider was asked if it’s possible the Seahawks could start a rookie draft choice at center in 2015.

"With [offensive line] Tom Cable and his staff, I think it’s viable," Schneider said. "You have to remember, both sides of the ball here have very good teaching staffs."

Schneider was asked how much input Cable has into the offensive linemen the team might draft.

"We’re not going to draft a guy [Cable] doesn’t like," Schneider said. "He doesn’t have the final say, but we would never draft somebody he doesn’t think could play. You are totally spinning your wheels there."


It would be dumb to draft a lineman your line coach doesn't think can play...
 
Posts: 38544
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 4:59 am
Location: balm yard

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby HawkBowler on Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:18 pm

Don Gorgon wrote:It would be dumb to draft a lineman your line coach doesn't think can play...


Right, even dumber to bring on former tight ends, basketball players and converted DTs that the OL coach doesn't think can play.

Do you really think Pete and John are the ones that make those decisions?

BTW... that reporter who asked Schneider the question was making the same assertions that you and others are making... that Cable is not involved in personnel decisions. To which JS replied, "I don't know where you're going there... totally spinning your wheels."
 
Posts: 7221
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 7:46 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby Don Gorgon on Wed Jan 11, 2017 4:22 pm

you claimed I was wrong, so I found the exact quote for you just as I stated it, not gonna keep going around in these circles, I doubt many football teams draft players their position coaches don't think can play. And I have already pointed out to you how Fant was not a player that Cable brought in. He was brought in by the scouting department. Its dumb to keep going over this stuff, Cable coaches he is not out finding talent. That is left to the GM and his staff. Cable is busy with his coaching.
 
Posts: 38544
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 4:59 am
Location: balm yard

Re: Cable up for the 49ers HC gig

Postby HawkBowler on Wed Jan 11, 2017 6:10 pm

Don Gorgon wrote: I have already pointed out to you how Fant was not a player that Cable brought in. He was brought in by the scouting department. Its dumb to keep going over this stuff, Cable coaches he is not out finding talent. That is left to the GM and his staff. Cable is busy with his coaching.


And you know this how? Go ahead and knock my speculation, but don't think you're not doing the same thing. The question is which speculation is most plausible.

Are you saying that Cable wasn't the decision maker as to whether Fant was signed?

So the scouting department brought him in, what does that prove? We're talking about who makes the decisions for the OL. Your speculation that Cable is not involved in who the team drafts or signs for the OL is untenable.
 
Posts: 7221
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 7:46 am
Location: Seattle, WA

PreviousNext

Return to Seahawks

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Don Gorgon and 2 guests

Advertising