Seahawks Shake Up Practice Squad, Re-Sign Forsett

by John Morgan on Oct 9, 2008 2:12 PM PDT

Seattle has re-signed Justin Forsett and added former Montana State quarterback Travis Lulay. To make room, Seattle cut running back Matt Lawrence and wide receiver Trenton Shelton. Just great news. Good to have you back little big-man. I would advise Seattle move Bumpus back to the practice squad and get Forsett back at punt returner, but the team will likely wait until Deion Branch can return to do so.

0 recs | Comment 29 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

They've also resigned Courtney Taylor to the PS.

by redwolf75 on Oct 9, 2008 2:22 PM PDT 0 recs

Yep.

Happened yesterday.

Somehow that slipped through the cracks.

by BrianL on Oct 9, 2008 2:27 PM PDT up 0 recs

It almost sounds as if Lulay is just injury insurance right now.

What are the chances we cut him in a few weeks?

by BrianL on Oct 9, 2008 2:28 PM PDT 0 recs

He's bounced around the organization, so I'd say pretty high.

Too bad there’s no more NFL Europa.

by John Morgan on Oct 9, 2008 2:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

Lulay is pretty terrible

You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.

by Scruffy Lefty on Oct 9, 2008 2:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

But the big question is this:

Does Lulay mean we’re going to have to wait even longer for Scrappy White Guy Brian Russell to take snaps at quarterback?

by BrianL on Oct 9, 2008 2:36 PM PDT up 0 recs

He's pretty savvy and gritty and cerebral.

He’s already quarterbacking our defense; it’s a waste of scrap to keep him from quarterbacking our offense. We should be getting Russell reps at every position. I bet he could tell Jon Ryan to kick the ball farther and Deion Branch to stop getting injured. We already know how he coached up Seattle’s secondary to excellence, can we waste those talents having him play only one position?

by John Morgan on Oct 9, 2008 2:43 PM PDT up 0 recs

If we had a team consisting 53 Brian Russells

we’d never lose. Such grit and veteranocity!

by BrianL on Oct 9, 2008 2:58 PM PDT up 0 recs

Teams would forfeit out of respect.

by John Morgan on Oct 9, 2008 3:13 PM PDT up 0 recs

Feel the love

Russell’s worked up to the full Willie F. Bloomquist treatment. Is he now Brian F. Russell?

by robbbbbb on Oct 9, 2008 3:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

Not until people start photoshopping him on top of ponies.

by BrianL on Oct 9, 2008 3:23 PM PDT up 0 recs

Why don't we just cut McMuffin when Branch is back?

You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.

by Scruffy Lefty on Oct 9, 2008 2:33 PM PDT 0 recs

See when I suggested that McMuffin would be expendable when Branch and Engram returned

people thought I was crazy but holy crap those routes have been ugly.

by BrianL on Oct 9, 2008 2:35 PM PDT up 0 recs

Last week he showed why he hasn't stuck in the NFL

You may gain some yards on the ground, but eventually Lofa will end up biting you in the ass.

by Scruffy Lefty on Oct 9, 2008 3:11 PM PDT up 0 recs

Luckily it sounds like Koren isn't being held back this week.

If we’re lucky we’ll get to see him take some snaps Sunday.

by BrianL on Oct 9, 2008 3:18 PM PDT up 0 recs

Is he going to return kicks?

Frankly, if we’re going to get anything out of him I think it’ll be on KR.

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Oct 10, 2008 5:09 AM PDT up 0 recs

Hooray!

Welcome back, Forsett.

by Benne on Oct 9, 2008 2:33 PM PDT 0 recs

Joy

Just pure joy!

by Nate Dogg on Oct 9, 2008 4:28 PM PDT 0 recs

Lulay is terrible,

if you wanted topped out big sky quarterbacks why not sign Eric Meyer

by armedpp on Oct 9, 2008 7:33 PM PDT 0 recs

IMO, Bumpus has been fine at PR.

Aside from that brain fart vs. St. Louis, of course. But, with so many guys on the roster that can also double as returners, I don’t see Holmgren using a roster spot for a return specialist this year. Forsett would just wind up being inactive if he was on the 53 – just like he was in Week 1. Even when Branch is healthy, I’d think that Bumpus as PR and spare WR adds more value to the roster than Forsett as a 6th RB.

Ideally, if K-Rob could then take over KR duties from Wilson, that’d be awesome.

by jteckmann on Oct 9, 2008 8:04 PM PDT 0 recs

one wonders if they're going to put him on the practice squad AGAIN

because who’s he going to replace on the roster?

by djafrot on Oct 10, 2008 1:34 AM PDT up 0 recs

The thing with Forsett...

for me is that this is a wise roster move just on merit alone. I don’t expect much in the way of contribution from Forsett this year. But still, the move that makes sense here—get a promising young player for next to nothing whom you really shouldn’t have let go in the first place. The ability to basically admit and correct for a previous mistake restores a little lost faith in the front office. In a division where every team has major flaws, whether you’re 1-3 or 3-1 doing things the right way has a way of being meaningful sooner or later.

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Oct 10, 2008 5:18 AM PDT 1 recs

What's the long-term projection for Justin Forsett?

With Maurice Morris, 28, in the final year of his contract, Forsett could possibly replace him as the Seahawks’ third-down running back during most long-yardage pass plays next season.

Who, by the way, represents Forsett’s potential upside in everyone’s mind? Off the top of my head, I’ve got to go with Kevin Faulk; however, y’all probably have your own comparison for Forsett.

by AK1984 on Oct 10, 2008 9:31 AM PDT up 0 recs

Long-term projection = Eric Metcalf

God, I loved watching Metcalf play.

by marc w on Oct 10, 2008 9:59 AM PDT up 0 recs

What about Dave Meggett?

Unlike Justin Forsett, Eric Metcalf was an elusive burner on offense and special teams. Moreover, Metcalf spent a heavy amount of his career — especially during his tenure with the Atlanta Falcons — lined up in the slot receiver position rather than at tailback.

Meggett, however, was a diminutive third-down tailback — as well as a prolific return specialist — who could both run hard upfield and catch passes out of the backfield in long-yardage situations. Rather than Metcalf, Meggett seems like the most apt comparison for Forsett.

In any event, though, Metcalf was pretty awesome to use on Tecmo Super Bowl for Sega Genesis.

by AK1984 on Oct 10, 2008 10:32 AM PDT up 0 recs

I considered Meggett

I’m still thinking of Metcalf more in his Browns tenure, when he was used out of the backfield instead of in the slot, though he caught a lot of passes in that role.

Also, Meggett’s usage was so tilted towards returns and receptions. That’s fine if you’re comparing him to how Forsett might be used now but I think Forsett could get a lot more carries long-term. Metcalf got over 100 carries and 600 yards twice with the Browns (along with over 50 receptions a bunch of times). Meggett got 50 receptions only twice, and never broke 100 carries.

I guess Meggett is fine if you see Forsett purely as a return specialist and occasional change-of-pace. If Forsett sticks in the league, however, I think he’ll see some use in the backfield.

by marc w on Oct 10, 2008 3:29 PM PDT up 0 recs

My comparison is Ray Rice.

Forsett isn’t the waterbug/burner that Sproles is, and he’s not quite the bowling ball that Jones-Drew is. I think that Forsett is more of a well-rounded RB, then the scat-back/ST guy label that gets put on him because of his size. He doesn’t have the top-end speed to be a big-play guy, but his low-center of gravity makes him an effective inside runner, and harder to bring down. He’ll blast through creases other RBs won’t fit through to get into the 2nd level.

IMO, he projects as a solid piece in an RBBC system. I could easily see him replacing Mo in ’09.

by jteckmann on Oct 10, 2008 10:03 AM PDT up 0 recs

That makes sense

I what you said regarding Forsett comparing well to Rice is valid, as well as him being a candidate for our RB2 next season, replacing Mo.

I have to say that although I like Forsett, the team selecting a young RB next year that does have the full compliment of skills to be a long-term producer would be great. Mainly, someone with the gears to break it anytime coupled with the ability to break tackles, too. How good would a RB selected in the first few rounds look on our team if we had done that this year? Not to take anything away from Julius, because he’s done very well, IMO, and hopefully continues to have a good/great season. Guys like F.Jones, Chris Johnson (CJ4.24) and even Slaton or Forte making nice strides and adding explosive elements to their squads that our team lacks, at least to a certain degree. I think we have too many ‘average’ or ‘good’ players, but lack explosive ‘play-maker’ types. Where is the electricity on offense? Guys like Burleson and Branch are fine players, but they still fall short of players who ‘scare a defense’ to borrow a cliche’. We need more play-makers. Forsett could be one, but I don’t know if he’s the dynamite we surely lack.

by Misfit74 on Oct 10, 2008 12:13 PM PDT up 0 recs

Agree on the play-makers

But I’m a big fan of RBBC – and with Jones, Duckett and now possibly Forsett in the fold for the next couple seasons, I think we have a dang good one. If Mora keeps Solari around, and is as committed to the run as he was in Atlanta, I think we’re looking good.

IMO, we need that play-maker at WR more than anywhere else. I’m not expecting Bobby back next year, and as much as I like Branch I just don’t think he can be counted on. Burleson’s a fine #2, but anyone coming off an ACL rehab shouldn’t be relied on till they prove they’re back.

If Kent could put it all together, or we stumble into a top-ranked WR next draft …. that could do wonders for this team.

by jteckmann on Oct 10, 2008 5:07 PM PDT up 0 recs