Holmgren Says Bumpus Still Punt Returner; Taylor on Thin Ice

by SSreporters on Sep 23, 2008 12:39 PM PDT

I was reading the sports section of the Everett Herald today because I couldn't find a newspaper, and coach Holmgren said Michael Muffapunt is still the punt returner:

"He's really a good punt catcher, and he misjudged it," Holmgren said. "(The Rams') Donnie Jones got off a beautiful punt, and Michael, like an outfielder, misjudged the ball. It doesn't happen very often, and I don't think it will happen with Michael very often."

He's a good punt returner, and I'm glad it looks like he'll be on the team for now. Now, Holmgren mentioned this on Courtney Taylor:

"[his] role has changed for us."

Branch and Engram are expected to be back unless they collide with each other going after a poor pass from Brian Russell and they suffer concussions.

It would be Branch, Engram, Bumpus, Taylor, McMuffin, Colbert, and Robinson. Obviously one of them has to go. McMuffin had a better game last week and had some nice footwork on that catch down the sidelines that set up the Duckett TD in the first half. No point in cutting Colbert, Bumpus looks like he is safe for now, and Robinson hasn't played yet. In all likelihood Taylor is the odd man out with Jordan Kent in the practice squad, and hopefully Coutu also goes now that Mare is hitting touchbacks and is proving himself an adequate replacement for that other kicker.

The Herald also plagiarized reported that Mo Morris and Seneca Wallace would be active for the Giants game so this bye, this win, and the health couldn't have come at a better time.

Who do you think goes? And do you think we could see some possible trades instead of cuts?

0 recs | Comment 28 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

This weekend, Jimmimoose and I came up with a good nickname for Bumpus.

In honor of Scruffy’s recent Greg the Bunny videos in the Video Previews, we started calling Bumpus, “The Wumpus”.

by Phildopip on Sep 23, 2008 1:14 PM PDT 1 recs

I am for Rape

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

by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 23, 2008 1:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

Why would anybody have to be cut?

It’s not like there’s a 15-day disabled list that the injured guys are coming off of; they’re already on the 53-man roster. Are you assuming they will want to re-sign a defensive player or two?

by busplunger on Sep 23, 2008 1:49 PM PDT 0 recs

True

We don’t have to cut anyone but I do not think we will keep 7 healthy receivers, and certainly not 7 on the active list. My guess though is that they will not play Engram or Branch very much or at all for a few more weeks. Or perhaps they will let Engram play but not Branch. Branch is still only 29 and we have a lot of money committed to him so it makes sense to try to keep him healthy and not rush him back from a rather serious surgery. Engram on the other hand is already on his last legs and has little future money coming his way so you may as well throw him in. Considering how Carlson and McMuffin have played, plus with Robinson potentially available you can stomach keeping out Branch a few more weeks. We knew mid-season was ideal for him so I think this is expected.

I hope we don’t cut Taylor.

by michaelfox99 on Sep 24, 2008 8:20 AM PDT up 0 recs

I kinda agree

I can see reason to err on the side of caution. Perhaps only playing Branch 2nd half if we’re down, or earlier as needed, but I have a feeling that the Giants game will be a defensive struggle and not a offensive battle. If we blitz effectively and Grant plays like he did against the Rams and everyone else is consistent I think we’ll be okay, I just hot Hass can hold up because I see some hits in his future.

2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.

by Chickadee on Sep 24, 2008 9:52 AM PDT up 0 recs

I just hot Hass?

I meant hope, I don’t even have a good reason for the misspell. Freudian slip? Well bald is a handsome look. Wait. What the fuck am I saying.

2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.

by Chickadee on Sep 24, 2008 9:54 AM PDT up 0 recs

we all fall victim to the hass syndrome once in awhile, its ok

by vanrijn on Sep 25, 2008 8:23 AM PDT up 0 recs

For the last time

We are not cutting Coutu. It has been said repeatedly by Coach. He is the future at PK and they are treating him as such by letting him ride the pine.

Remaining cautiously optimistic...

by Badical Turbo Radness on Sep 23, 2008 2:06 PM PDT 0 recs

ya

i’m past the “why the hell do we have two kickers thing” because in all reality, it just allows an extra contributer to be activated every sunday as coutu takes up one inactive spot…..

by Woodinville_12thMan on Sep 23, 2008 2:22 PM PDT up 0 recs

No it doesn't.

Think about what you just wrote. It doesn’t make sense. Seattle will have 45 active spots Coutu or not, but Coutu prevents an inactive spot from being used for depth and talent.

by John Morgan on Sep 23, 2008 3:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

QFT.

Josh Who?

by SSreporters on Sep 23, 2008 3:35 PM PDT up 0 recs

but

in the eyes of the whole organization, they see coutu as talent and depth should mare get hurt again or falter. they obviously think really highly of him but don’t want to rest huge kicks on the shoulders of a rookie in holmgren’s final year. they think that he is the long term solution at the position, and in my eyes that’s good enough to warrant a spot. the depth and talent that you speak of is still occupied by that spot (coutu) plus is stashed on the practice squad (ie. adams, who would most likely be the player there). sure babin and forsett were cut, but that wasn’t necessarily coutu’s fault, it was the injured receivers. see what i’m getting at? or am i just dumb?

by Woodinville_12thMan on Sep 23, 2008 6:58 PM PDT up 0 recs

ahhh

i just re-read my other post. scratch it and insert my previous one.

by Woodinville_12thMan on Sep 23, 2008 6:58 PM PDT up 0 recs

The organization thinks Coutu is something special and deserves a roster spot.

The organization is almost certainly wrong. As Mare proves, talented kickers are easy to acquire. I’ve yet to see Mare do something that implies he shouldn’t be Seattle’s kicker next season and for the foreseeable future.

by John Morgan on Sep 23, 2008 7:14 PM PDT up 0 recs

A perfect example of this is trading for bullpen help.

Not necessary.

XBOX live gamertag: BANE509...I would die tonight for my beliefs.

by Christian on Sep 23, 2008 8:01 PM PDT up 0 recs

This is beyond trading for bullpen help.

This is like trading for a prospect who you think might one day contribute as a pinch runner.

by Matthew on Sep 24, 2008 1:42 PM PDT up 0 recs

I think I was pretty vocal about letting Brown go

but even I’m starting to agree with this.

Either way, there is no excuse for two kickers on a team. If Coutu is special and deserves a roster spot than he should be kicking and Mare should be cut. If Mare is good enough now to start and the team is comfortable with him, and it certainly looks like they are, then ditto to what John said.

I’ll never understand why they’re so afraid to cut Coutu and risk losing him but were so nonchalant with Forsett and Kent.

by Nate Dogg on Sep 23, 2008 8:14 PM PDT up 0 recs

i guess

that i’m just giving the organization a chance and letting this one play out, they’ve made some damn good roster moves especially in the draft since ruskell has jumped aboard, this may end up being another. we didn’t know that mare was going to kick well, he’s been hurt and seen his percentage plunge in recent years. now coutu is more expendable, but i still want to see what the buzz on him is about. he could end up being good.

by Woodinville_12thMan on Sep 23, 2008 10:10 PM PDT up 0 recs

and on forsett:

who’s to say change of pace/special teams backs aren’t a dime a dozen if that’s what forsett ends up being?

by Woodinville_12thMan on Sep 23, 2008 10:10 PM PDT up 0 recs

Think about it.

Best case scenario is that Coutu becomes the starting kicker next year and is a good or even great kicker. That still wouldn’t vindicate what the organization is doing because we could get a good kicker from free agency at any time (as we did with Mare). Plus we have Mare on contract for next year also and for pretty little $.

Even if Mare got hurt we could get another kicker from FA. It isn’t that tough.

Try turning your TV on this Saturday and tune it to a Division I-A college football game. Both teams will have starting kickers that can do pretty much everything the NFL kickers can do. Now consider the top 10 kickers in college football. Not even all of these guys will make it to the NFL despite being completely adequate. This is because kickers are pretty cheap commodities that have VERY long careers, so most teams very rarely draft or sign a kicker other than to bring to camp or the PS to help out at practice.

Kicker is the ultimate in NON premium positions. Keeping Coutu on the roster at the expense of Forsett or Babin is indefensible. Unless Coutu can play quarterback or spin yarn into gold or something he should be cut.

by michaelfox99 on Sep 24, 2008 8:08 AM PDT up 0 recs

This organization is notorious for being hesitant to start rookies

Perhaps the coaches are aware that our special teams line is playing poorly and don’t want to risk Coutu to injury until we know we can protect correctly?

Way I see it I think Coutu is just there to keep Mare honest – not that I condone it, but I’m not the one payed money to make the big decisions. Either way I’d rather have two kickers and successful kicks than one and not being able to count on your kicker. Mare need only prove himself and I think we’ll see Coutu booted. Maybe a couple of clutch kicks or game winners and then I think we’ll have no choice but to move Coutu elsewhere.

2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.

by Chickadee on Sep 24, 2008 9:59 AM PDT up 0 recs

That's among the wildest stretches for explanation I've read in a long time.

We’re protecting our kicker from injury by not playing him? Our kicker? By not playing him?

Everyone would benefit from abandoning this thinking that because Tim Ruskell does it it’s dignified. Tim Ruskell is a good GM. He makes mistakes, especially on special teams. Keeping Coutu on a team that badly needs special teams help is a mistake. That spot could be used on someone to protect the punter and kicker, or a real gunner, players that can be acquired near-freely and would help Seattle win this year. Keeping Coutu is arguing that Coutu is more valuable than Mare, the player Seattle could fill Coutu’s roster spot with and any kicker Seattle could get in free agency.

by John Morgan on Sep 24, 2008 10:14 AM PDT up 0 recs

Josh Who?

by SSreporters on Sep 24, 2008 12:50 PM PDT up 0 recs

Way I see it I think Coutu is just there to keep Mare honest – not that I condone it

and

Either way I’d rather have two kickers and successful kicks than one and not being able to count on your kicker. Mare need only prove himself and I think we’ll see Coutu booted.

I don’t think, as per your response, that you read these sections

2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.

by Chickadee on Sep 24, 2008 9:51 PM PDT up 0 recs