Arizona Cardinals 27 - Seattle Seahawks 3
It's you write the recap. I'll piece together your thoughts and repost a real recap.
I didn't see the game, so here's my little rant sponsored by Red Zone.
![]() |
Red Zone represents an outdated model. In fifty years we will look back to it as the last gasp of a dying industry. A gimmick station brought to life by an aggressive marketing campaign and an even more aggressive lobbying effort.
It's simple really: I would have paid ten dollars to watch this game. Ten dollars to watch -- for one day, three hours -- the team I live and die with - play football. I might be in the minority. Maybe most people would only pay five, or maybe ten bucks a month.
I am writing this during the moments my illegal stream stalls. I have no desire to watch this game on an illegal stream. I respect a company's right to ownership of information. I am not an anarchist, but prohibition doesn't work.
The outdated model designed by the NFL, enforced by the FCC and profited off of by companies like Comcast equal a prohibition on information. A prohibition on communication. A prohibition on my right to follow my team.
It is a right. Information is protected under the First Amendment. Perhaps I should buy the Sunday Ticket Package. Let's walk through that process.
Google it. Go through NFL page. Well, I don't really want 50+ channels, but that's the cheapest option, ok. No premium channels, just Sunday Ticket. I need a receiver. Well that sucks. I'll get just one I guess. Don't want a credit check since this is just for laughs.
Looks like $529.94 for the first month and then $29.99 for the first year. So all I need to watch this game is to pay $859.83. I am ignorant of legal precedent in this matter, but I would guess charging exorbitant sums is a form of restriction. Honest, shame be damned, I literally cannot afford that. My finances and my geography leave me had no legal means to watch today's game.
I will personally pay the Seahawks organization $9.99 a month to watch their games on Seahawks.com. No middle man. No outmoded bully to jack the prices with packages and services and unnecessary equipment. Just me, my money to my passion, sitting at my laptop, watching the team I love.
0 recs |
186 comments
|
Comments
But you get a $5 discount!
Making your first month’s bill only $524.94! They’re practically giving it away!
by Hmph on Oct 18, 2009 4:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Steve Vallos and Kelly Jennings need to be taken behind the woodshed and put down, Old Yeller-style.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 4:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lets add Terrill and, hell, the rest of the O-line
Oh and Carlson’s helmet because it got in the way of the ball hitting him in the face.
Karma police, arrest this man.
by wyte_lightning on Oct 18, 2009 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, Vallos did not have a good game..
But the main reason for the pressure was because Arizona’s secondary did not allow Seattle’s receivers to get open when Matt needed to get rid of the ball.
Today, we saw what rarely happens in a game — a team’s secondary controlled the game.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Oct 18, 2009 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm in agreement that the Cardinals secondary played a very good game but...
….that doesn’t explain why their pass rush was 3 or 4 man rushing and getting multiple defenders to Hasselbeck in under 3 seconds.
The lack of running game was perfectly understandable, but I found the dearth of pass protection indefensible. It was bad even for backups.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 8:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's fairly basic...
Seattle is employing a 2-and-a-half-string OL in a relatively new zone blocking scheme.
Last weeks game was against one of the (arguably) worst pass rush front 7’s in the NFL, and so the flaws were somewhat masked.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Cardinals pass rush was similarly bad to Jacksonville's
entering this game.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 9:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...Kids will be Kids ???
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Correction
Arizona was middle of the pack, whereas Jacksonville was terrible.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One again... it is making our draft strategy clear in my mind.
OL, DL, and QB are no-brainers here.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The game was bad.
Our offense was never on the field it seemed, The O-line was bad and Vallos starting of Wrotto was stupid.
The defense was alright, not great, but capable of winning the game with a halfway decent offense. Curry played well and I thought the D-line played well overall. I guess the secondary could of played better, but Fitz, Bolden and Warner are tough, especially with the offense going 3 and out.
Special teams were bad. The fake punt was cool, but the rest was awful. Poor kick and punt returns and what the hell was that kick-off in the 1st quarter?
by MFAN on Oct 18, 2009 4:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I know the situation sucks and everything...
But Sunday Ticket is soooo worth it.
by michaelfox99 on Oct 18, 2009 4:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I would only consider Sunday Ticket
if you had an option to sell it back for a prorated refund if your team is having a bad season. Otherwise, you’re just paying extra to be disappointed.
by Hmph on Oct 18, 2009 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
Esp. if you pass a partial credit-check (I didn’t, which means a refundable 400.00 deposit – yes, up front). The offer I got and ran with was first 5 months free for the ‘premiere package’. I can change to a lower-tier package anytime, and will after my first 5 months are up. Pay for Sunday Ticket in 5 installments (about 350.00 total) and you’ve got your ST paid off by the time your regular bill returns at the rate of about 70.00/month. That first 5 mos. pretty much pays for Sunday Ticket.
My Comcast bill was easily more than what I pay now. I had no premium channels on my old Comcast package, only NFL Network (4.99/month).
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Oct 18, 2009 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Get a wealthy grandfather who loves a team that plays a different schedule.
It’s been working great for me. Every sunday I drive over, kick it with gramps, share a brew, and watch each other’s teams. I recommend it.
WHAT FUCKING BRONCOS BAR ARE WE BRINGING DOWN BITCHES!?!
by DJ C-Raig on Oct 18, 2009 4:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
One is dead
the other I barely know.
by John Morgan on Oct 18, 2009 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My irrational rant of the week
Kelly Jennings just assured himself that he’s never going to play a role in helping the Seahawks win. Ever. He cannot cover anything. I know it’s Arizona, but he gets beat on every post, slant, curl, and sideline route imaginable.
No more Bruce DeHaven, who is the worst special teams coach in football. Jon Ryan outkicks his coverage over and over again and we can’t stop big returns nor can we break a big return. Ryan might as well play QB full-time.
The entire offensive line was an embarrassment. Steve Vallos shouldn’t be allowed to get on the field. He’s watching and admiring the docile Cardinals "pass-rushers" freely get around him and crush Hasselbeck.
EVERYTHING ABOUT THIS GAME SUCKED!!!!!!!
After such a high last week this was rock bottom. I am still looking at the Jags game as an emotional high and something to look forward to.
Otherwise it’s time to blow up the offensive side of the ball (except WR). Draft a QB and have Hasselbeck take him under his wing. Draft CJ Spiller so I don’t have to see Edgerrin James get 2 yard gains every time.
Draft Eric Berry with your inevitable top 10 pick.
Absolutely bullcrap effort. At least Aaron Curry gives me hope.
And at least we aren’t the Eagles (today) or the Redskins.
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 4:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
They aren't a real football team
Even Washington could beat them 2-0.
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What would you do
If Golden Boy skeeted 54 points on your team and then blanked your ass? Just a horrible day to be a Tits fan. That’s capital T; I’m always a tits fan.
by DJ C-Raig on Oct 18, 2009 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I'm with you!
DeHaven is a bum. Why did we let Pete Rodriguez go. I loved the guy. Jennings didn’t have a good game but he didn’t have a bad one either. Zona has good WR’s and they made good plays on the ball. Overall I thought the D (after that horrible 1st drive) played well. The offense and Special teams gave them short fields on every score except the first drive, not the D’s fault. Curry looked awesome and so did Hawthorne. The D created 2 turnovers and kept them in the game. The Offense just sucked. Knapp has to go. I know our offensive line sucks but I felt like he paniced to early and abandoned the run. Seattle did nothing to exploit the Arizona blitz all game.
I thought early on it would’ve been nice to see some roll outs and more screen WR screen passes to offset the blitz. I also think the throw to Butler was the right one but we needed to do that more. I feel Matt does not give his WR’s a chance to make plays on the ball with one on one coverage (even when there covered) to. Kurt Warner let’s his WR make plays on the ball even when there was good coverage. We needed to stretch the field some more. I mentioned in a earlier post that Arizona sits on our short routes and that we would have to attack them down the field to back them up. We only did it once and gave up on it.
I guess what frustrated me is that every time Arizona blitzed they showed blitz and we never adjusted with our play calls. Whether it was audibles or in our initial playcalls. I thought Gus Bradley called the 1st drive to conservatively but after the 2nd TD reallized we needed to bring the heat. Probably should’ve done that from the jump. I thought he would’ve seen the John Marshall tapes and stayed away from that Zone crap. All and all though the D played well to me. I give them a B-. I felt though that we were outmatched and that’s what hurts. WR is still a problem for us. Offense F-!
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really, you have got to start being more concise with your comments.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Screw it
Jennings had a bad game. YOU CANNOT CONTINUOUSLY MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES OVER AND OVER AGAIN!!!!! I don’t care which receiver you’re covering, Kelly is a footballing mental midget.
Why does Knapp have to go? His playcalling has been good for the most part and when we tried running the ball we weren’t doing squat.
WR is not a problem for us. How can you suffice that when Hass was on his ass all the time?
Blache go watch the game again. We were getting best on 4 man rushes so I don’t get your comment. Our o-line was garbage against everything.
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you think Branch and company were winning at the line of scrimmage
Yes our O-line sucked. That goes without saying. Jennings is NOT A STARTER. He’s only out there because Trufant is out. He would be our 4th CB if we weren’t hurt! Give the kid a break. He’s matched up against the best 3WR trio in the League. And I watched the game. Our 4 man rush was so so. When we brought an extra player to the line to blitz with our front 4 is when we got consistant pressure on Warner.
Arizona doesn’t respect our WR. They pushed them around all game. I felt like they didn’t win there battles at the line of scrimmage.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jennings was a high draft pick
and will always be subject to the criticism that he’s not living up to expectations.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your right about that.
He was a 1st round pick but that is sitll an indictment on Ruskell for drafting him that high then Jennnings bad play (even though I still think he didn’t play that bad today, he has sucked on others). Breaston made a great play on the Ball in the endzone. Gotta give these WR’s who catch over 1000 yds rec some credit to.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. He gets no breaks. He does the same stupid mistakes
And is getting beat on straight routes with just about every receiver he has faced. ONE INT in 4 seasons? That one being a total duck by Favre? Never looking for the ball consistently until year 4? Still getting best in year 4?
He is a bust.
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not saying he's not a bust but
who drafted him in the 1st round. That being said, talking only about todays game the times he was beat he was there and the Cards WR made great plays on the ball. You have to give those guys credit to. Talk about being beat look at Babs 1 on 1 against Fitz. He straight burnt his ass. Babs was no where near the ball. When Jennings was beat the front 4 did not get pressure and the WR made great catches. I DONT THINK JENNINGS IS STARTER WORTHY but I thought he did okay considering his competition today.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
my thoughts
This game is an indictment of Ruskell’s approach to building an offense. If it all starts with the line he might be one of the worst in the league at it. I know we can analyze these players to find both negatives and positives but I have to think we can do better then Steve Vallos and Kyle Williams. Perhaps drafting an offensive linemen sometime in the first 3 rounds in the last 4 years might have been a splendid idea instead of thinking that Jones wasn’t approaching 40 and that we could get away with the guards we had. Solari can’t polish turds.
I really have nothing to say about Hasselbeck, if you give the guy less then 3 seconds in the pocket does it really matter? Knapp didn’t help matters much, his play calling was erratic and strange.
All things consider I thought the defense played OK. Take away Patrick Kerney’s sack in the red zone and he looked like shit, constantly being blocked completely out of the play.
Special teams should be tied to the bumper and dragged home like in National Lampoons Vacation. When asked about it Dehaven can just take the silent approach.
by Hancock.Brett on Oct 18, 2009 4:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agree
Ruskell’s aversion to spending high draft picks on the offensive line has been exposed as a serious mistake.
We have to fix the line before we even think about adding more “skill” players.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
It’s not going to be fixed in one draft unfortunately BUT all of our skill players are on loan types anyway.
by Hancock.Brett on Oct 18, 2009 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thing is
… we don’t only need better starters on our line, we need better depth too.
So it’s gonna take more than one or two draft picks.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We had depth, then half of the O-Line group got injured.
Were you bitching at Ruskell when we had that catastrophic injury run with WRs last season?
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't think the OL was very good even before all the injuries
There were a lot of question marks going into training camp. Locklear at LT, Spencer at C, whoever at LG…
So it isn’t the same as the WR’s last year.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The line coming into this season wasn't going to be otherworldly good, but it would be decent.
If Locklear, Spencer, Sims, and to a lesser extent Frye remained healthy, we’re not having this conversation.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's your point? That we can stand pat with the offensive linemen currently on the roster?
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My point is that when you lose as many players out of a certain position as we have
no team is going to look good at that position.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We entered the season crappy, thin and inexperienced at OL
Its not totally unlike the WR situation in 2008. Both 2008 Branch and 2009 Jones entered those seasons with knee injuries and uncertain recovery times that figured to extend well into the season. Engram injured himself in the preseason, this year Spencer was injured in the preseason. In 2008, by the end of week 2 we were reduced to street free agent WR. In 2009, by the end of week 2, we were reduced to street free agent OTs.
A lot of injury situations like those are based on luck. Its not simply luck, but luck factors. However, the WR situation was susceptible even before the season, with a bad combination of aging players, injured players that wouldn’t recover in time, and young, inexperienced, unproven players.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 9:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I did..
but that being said I think we had depth at O-line, it’s just that the starters we have other then Jones and Locklear are not dominant. And Locklear isn’t really dominant either. Can’t blame Ruskell for LT but our O-Line has been a problem ever since Hutch left. He has tried to address it but just unsuccessfully. I do think we may be looking at his last year in office though.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just stop. Please.
Fire him why?
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 5:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
do you think Rusk has addressed our O-line issues successfully?
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Personally I think we'd be fine but a rash of injuries occured that no GM could have forseen.
At worst, you can fault him for not releasing Walt and replacing him with someone else during training camp.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Understood.
but it’s been 2 seasons where we have been faced with a rash of injuries at one position. Both offensive. I feel at LB and D-line he has made sure for us to have great depth even if we lose 2 of them but the same hasn’t been done at O-line or WR (last year). I don’t think he should’ve released Walt though.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't predict rashes of injuries like that.
It’s bad luck, plain and simple. If you’re going to fire Ruskell for that, you’re essentially firing him for having some sort of bad luck aura around him.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 5:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not firing him for that.
For instance. We lose Tats and Hill…most teams would be in turmoil for that. But his depth with the Heater and Herring have played out great. I would call losing those two starters a rash of injuries. I just don’t think on the offensive side of the ball he is as prepared for injuries like that the way he is on offense. That’s all.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
let me clarify
Meant to say:
I just don’t think on the offensive side of the ball he is as prepared for injuries like that the way he is on defense. That’s all.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't feel the same way.
I think criticism is fair to the extent that we wrapped up the 2008 offseason with two wideouts already injured and known to miss a chunk of games, and this season with Walt coming off surgery.
I think the GM is obligated to identify and mitigate injury risk. I think Ruskell does. The 2008 WRs were mitigated, yb volume, with a small investment in resources.
The tackle situation now, not really mitigated. At one point Willis had been lowballed and received offers from other teams while we had Locklear and an unanswered question in Walt’s knee. He definitely demonstrated faith in Walter Jones.
There used to be a bit of negativity in how he dealt with injured players, seeming ruthless in disposing of them. I wonder if he reacted to that by showing more patience.
I think Ruskell is fantastic and I want to keep him around. I think his abilities to scout offensive players or buld the offense are fairly questioned, but I think macro-circumstantial strategy has been the reason for it, and ultimately I think it was the right call. Spencer and Sims are good. Unger will be good. Willis is apparently a capable starter. Carlson is good, and Branch would have been good. I didn’t like that trade from the beginning, but I eventually saw what Branch would have been capable of. I want this man picking our next QB & RB next year.
by jacobstevens on Oct 19, 2009 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Fire him why?"
Because someone needs to be held accountable?
I don’t agree that it’s time to fire Ruskell — I’m willing to give him and Mora another two years or so — but I can understand why some fans feel that way.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 9:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fire him why?
Because what he has inherited he hasn’t improved upon. If he built this team I think he should get more of a leash but he didn’t. He’s added some good pieces but has lost some to. Our record reflects that since he’s been GM. I don’t want to hear the rash of injuries argument to. Also, the market has great coaches available at the moment that have won SB’s. Holmgren (again), Shanahan, Gruden, and Billick….Shottenheimer are sitten out there to (even though he hasn’t won a SB). I think this is the time to take advantage of the market. I think Rusk is okay but not sensationsal. Give me Holmgren at GM and Chuckie at Coach and we will be right back atop our pirch!
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 10:50 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Holmgren had his shot as a GM under Paul Allen.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And he did well!
He built the nucleus that became our dynasty and identity for those winning seasons. You can’t disagree with that. He deserves another shot considering his sucess.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Holmgren brought in some good talent.
Hasselbeck, Hutch, Bernard and Shaun, but I think he had a lot of problem adding depth and other key components. He had a lot of trouble on defense.
I appreciate what Holmgren did for this team, but he wasn’t a very good GM, and I highly doubt he gets another chance at it in Seattle.
by MFAN on Oct 18, 2009 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
On that, Brian, you and I are agreed
I think the people who are asking for Holmgren as GM are just showing yet another aspect of the typical Seattle homerism. Unable to think outside the box of things we’ve already seen up here in the Pacific Northwest.
When they’re not doing that, they’re lusting after some has-been the MSM has been telling them about for years…
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
has been...
Well let’s get Tom Flores back then…..Holmgren is far from a has been and is still a quality mind in the NFL. What was our team like before him? And then after. He’s the reason our expectations have been raised for this franchise.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
The one remarkable thing about Holmgren the GM
was that he wasn’t Trader Bob Whitsitt. He hit on some good players in Alexander, Hutch, Bernard, and Hasselbeck, but he had more than his share of whiffs and reaches.
The core nucleus of those 2004-2006 teams weren’t a direct result of Holmgren and Holmgren alone, but a composite of the work done by Holmgren, Ferguson, Mueller, and Ruskell.
I appreciate the good things Holmgren did for this franchise and the attitude he put in place, but that still doesn’t change the fact he wasn’t that great of a GM.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huge HR's.
That was the foundation of our offense and you forgot D-Jack to. Don’t forget that Holmgren had the dual duties of Coach and GM. Just like at coach when he was able to focus on that task this team elevated. Just give him the task of GM and he will do the same with the confidence of Gruden who can run his offense. He deserves the shot!
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 11:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Let's not forgot that it took several years for Holmgren's plan to come to fruition
I think we should give Ruskell at least as long.
… and I don’t think we should count most of the time when Holmgren was still here, pulling the team in another direction.
by Mr Fish on Oct 19, 2009 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't this Ruskells 5th season?
How much more time should we give him. I think Ruskell has done some good things here. Not all bad. I’m not saying that he’s been a horrible GM by any stretch. But if we suffer another season like last season do you think we should give him another chance? Especially with the talent at coaching that’s sitting out there right now. I think bringing Holmgren back makes sense. But I do respect your opinion on this.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 19, 2009 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have to give him credit for Hasselbeck as well.
by LantermanC on Oct 19, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In fact it's right here:
He hit on some good players in Alexander, Hutch, Bernard, and Hasselbeck
by BrianL on Oct 19, 2009 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Ruskell’s aversion to spending high draft picks on the offensive line has been exposed"
Ruskell has spent as many first and second round picks on offensive linemen as the Patriots have in the same period of time.
by Santolina chamaecyparissus on Oct 18, 2009 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Patriots are also in decline
… albeit not as rapid a decline as the Seahawks.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They didn't spend many high picks on O-linemen
when they were building their dynasty, either. The Colts haven’t spent a first on an o-lineman since 1997.
by Santolina chamaecyparissus on Oct 18, 2009 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that settles the argument quite nicely.
That said, you find talent where you find it.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Oct 18, 2009 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, all it does it shift the focus to the evaluation of o-line talent
If you build your o-line with late round picks, you’d better be as good at finding talent as the Pats and Colts have been.
Arguably, Ruskell (or the people working for him and for whom he’s responsible) has not been that good.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to see what the Pats or Colts would do if they had as many injured lineman in six weeks as we have.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Brian.... In all fairness
Don’t you think risk assessment should have been a bigger part of the equation?
Jones (even to the most myopic in our crowd) is on his last leg, Spencer is made of balsa wood, and Locklear, in recent memory, hasn’t been able to stay healthy on a consistent basis. It seemed to me at the time (and was the reason I BANGED OL’s drum hard during the draft), that if there are any doubts at all about a team’s OL or DL’s they should take priority.
Colts and Pats? I believe they would have addresses these risks.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Spencer was remarkably healthy up to last season.
Jones was a player that could have perhaps been handled differently. Locklear was fairly consistent up until last season as well.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You bring up a great point here....
Where do you think the handling of Jones could have been different?
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 8:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps Ruskell could have cut him and replaced him with another player, but it would have been a hard sell.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Without question "A hard sell"
I haven’t read thoroughly enough, this blog, to know whether or not there was any sentiment here regrading this topic….
How did John see Walt’s position this year?
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When Walt went in for surgery
John felt that was pretty much the last we were ever going to see of him. He’d come back for one more year, probably get injured, and retire at the end of the year. That’s looking very probable right now.
by Fear on Oct 19, 2009 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Locklear missed 5-6 games in 2 out of 3 years before this season.
Depth was also an issue at Tackle even before the first injury. Pretty much only the best case scenario (Jones comes back quickly, injuries are modest or non-existent) did the tackle depth situation seem passable. I thought back in the draft that drafting a tackle, even in the mid rounds, was a slam dunk for this very reason. I was kind of surprised they didn’t. Granted, 1 extra rookie tackle would not have prevented this catastrophe, but it would have been better than none.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Those were my exact thoughts as well...
I like to think of it in terms of risk assessment. What is the best, worst, and most likely scenario to happen.
In nearly every “mock” draft I took a stab at….. I went some combination of DL, OL, DB, OL. Not claiming I am clairvoyant by any means, but something was screaming NEED to me, and it was more than likely the recent memory of OL not finishing healthy.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Locklear's worst season came in 2006 when he missed five games
with a combination of knee and ankle problems. His next worst came last season when he missed four games, but missing those games after it was clear that the team was way out of contention.
He played 16 games in 2004 (first season in the NFL), played and started 16 games in 2005 and 2007.
Not ironman, but not out of the ordinary for an NFL tackle.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 9:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jones has spoiled us for along time....
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
a (space) long..... Iverson you moron.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
by iverson2169 on Oct 18, 2009 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its funny how you said the same thing I did
Its still 5+ starts (or 4+ games if you prefer) in 3 of the last 4 years.
That his injury came at the end of the 2008 season does not downplay its significance.
Locklear was pretty healthy out of the gate, but since being promoted to starter, he has missed significant time in 3 of his 5 starting seasons. The more injuries a player suffers, the more likely they are to be injured again later. That he was once healthy is old, outdated information. In light of the past 4 years, the odds of him starting or suiting for 16 games in 2010 are not very good, and that’s concerning for a guy that plays the most important spot on the line. It also unfortunately raises the issue of his salary and if its justified.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Context matters.
Sean Locklear could have possibly played out 2008 but sat because the season was in effect over.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think he could have played with a dislocated toe
I say this from experience. I played the position in high School and College and had toe problems. Just a turf toe was tough. I can’t imagine a dislocated one especially when run blocking.
Locklear also had a knee injury that year and was briefly benched in favor of Ray Willis.
by kearly on Oct 19, 2009 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We do have a first and second round pick playing on the O-line
What can we do when Walter Jones is hurt and Sean Locklear. We had to respect Walt and let him try and come back. But at this point, Walt should retire or we should cut him. We need to make moves next year without thinking at all about Walt.
Hurts to say it. I love Big Walt. But for the future of this team, we cannot afford to be unstable at LT.
by ASeahawkfan on Oct 18, 2009 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Lofa out for the year?
They just announced this on the post-game show.
The body blows just keep coming.
That’s it. I’m done hoping for the team to recover this year.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 4:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sarcasm aside,
this just means status quo. He has played poorly for a good deal of this year and last because of nagging injuries. This just means we’ll be watching a backup who is approximately as good as a gimpy Tatupu.
by Santolina chamaecyparissus on Oct 18, 2009 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Worst news we could have had today. Much worse than simply losing a game.
"Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank
by Stevo's on Oct 18, 2009 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The good thing here
Is we have so much depth at LB that Hawthorne and Herring, who both played well, can replace him to some extent.
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I give it four hours before people start saying that Lofa is an injury-prone bust.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Should've drafted Sanchez to play MLB
When is Frog out of the box?
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
with the 5th pick in the 2010 NFL Draft....
The Seattle Seahawks select…..
by Hancock.Brett on Oct 18, 2009 4:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That sounds rather generous.
I’m expecting a 5-11 record, which will probably equate to a 9th or 10th pick. This team isn’t bad enough to lose enough games to get the 5th pick unless they just totally quit on the season.
by Hmph on Oct 18, 2009 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All depends on the O-line
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
by Nick Andron on Oct 19, 2009 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
pull a ditka?
trade our entire draft to move up and grab an offensive tackle?
by Hancock.Brett on Oct 18, 2009 4:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
No.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Oct 18, 2009 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we were "one player away" that would make sense
But we have lots more than one hole to fill.
Can there be any doubt that our “window” has finally closed? It’s time to look at each player on the current roster and ask whether we expect them to still be a contributor two or three years from now. Then make some ruthless cuts this offseason.
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hm.
It’s time to look at each player on the current roster and ask whether we expect them to still be a contributor two or three years from now.
You might be right, but at this point, I’m not ready to give up on the season.
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Oct 18, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am giving up on winning the division.
Or even getting a WC.
I want to see brilliant stuff from Curry, Reed, Butler, etc.
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We can still win the division
2-4 really sucks but in our division that means we still have a shot. We are a FG kicker away from being 3-3 without our starting QB for 2 1/2 games. I really think it starts with Knapp. If he can play call better when Sims and Locklear get back after the bye we have a shot. Again I keep saying this but I think Forsett deserves a shot on 1st and 2nd down. Considering we are not a run dominant team we need a guy on the field who can give us good running and pass catching capabilities. Forsett gives us that. I think we can be 4-4 after our Detroit game. We still have San Fran at home. 9-7 will probably win our division.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I can tear that argument apart
We’re 1-2 in the division with 1 of those at home and those 2 losses are against the teams ahead of us.
You’re blaming Mare for the Bears game. Insane.
You think we can beat Dallas in Dallas?! You’re a blinding optimist.
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not like Dallas has been beating teams down.
There just as much of an enigma as us. That being said I think we can finish 3-3 in our division. We can beat St. Louis on the Road and beat San Fran at home. I’ll give Zona the victory at home. We still have a shot! Also, we’ll be healthier after the break. When we get Tru back it changes everything in our secondary. Mare wasn’t the only reason we lost against the Bears but he could’ve helped us. And again, we played the Bears with our back up QB!
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Having Trufant back is not going to change everything.
The guy hasn’t played all YEAR, and is an average corner at best anyway. Try to be realistic.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
Next year's notable Ex-Seahawks:
Walter Jones, Patrick Kerney, Seneca Wallace, Jordan Babineaux, Kelly Jennings
by Wayward Llama on Oct 19, 2009 1:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
average corner?
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 19, 2009 6:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
He’s incredibly overrated by Seahawk fans. I like the dude, but no one is scared of him. He’s no Nnamdi, for Pete’s sake.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
Next year's notable Ex-Seahawks:
Walter Jones, Patrick Kerney, Seneca Wallace, Jordan Babineaux, Kelly Jennings
by Wayward Llama on Oct 19, 2009 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trufant an average corner at beast?
Come on here, this is the man who last year shut down Randy Moss on an island.
by redwolf75 on Oct 19, 2009 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's always played Moss pretty well
Steps up for that one. He’s better than average. Often his abilities are overstated by Hawkfans, though.
by jacobstevens on Oct 19, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with Blanche.
Dallas is pretty terrible. We’ll have locklear, trufant, kerney and maybe sims back.
If we can play with the intensity we had during the Jaguars game, I think we could pull off an upset.
Though sadly I’m in the boat that our season is probably over. Unless tragedy strikes both the 49ers and Cardinals, the chances of us catching up and overcoming are pretty small considering our situation.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
by Nick Andron on Oct 19, 2009 8:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It does not work for every position
That is stupid.
October 11th, 2009: The day Justin Forsett became loved by Seahawks fans forever.
by SSreporters on Oct 18, 2009 4:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, with Lofa out for the year
It would seem to me that getting LeRoy back after the bye -
We would probably move Curry to MLB and Play Hill/Herry/Hawthorn as the OLB’s.
It sucks but I don’t see that as being the end of the world for the Seahawks.
by fender on Oct 18, 2009 4:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why? It's the key position in the 4-3
And Curry is smart enough and the most athletic LB on the field now.
I’m really asking why not :) I have the utmost respect for your opinion.
by fender on Oct 18, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Simple
Hawthorne has played well at MLB and Seattle should not stunt Curry’s development at OLB.
by John Morgan on Oct 18, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is there a LB on the practice squad?
Are we down to just one MLB?
by Mr Fish on Oct 18, 2009 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Further
It’s not the key position in any form of modern 4-3.
by John Morgan on Oct 18, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hell No!
Curry perfect at OLB especially now that he’s coming off the edge and putting good pressure on QB’s. Plus the Heater is doing great at MLB. Keep it how it is. Hill will be back soon and that will help a little with the loss of Tatupu. That being said LB isn’t a problem for us.
by Mr. Blache III on Oct 18, 2009 5:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tatupu "out for the year"
If I had a credible source, I’d start a fanpost, but I heard this just now at Seahawks.net in passing. If anyone can confirm, please do.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 4:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
jim mora in his press conference
via q13 postgame
by Will Kier on Oct 18, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ooops just saw the comment above.
Wow, that sucks.
by kearly on Oct 18, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This Bills/Jets game is probably the least entertaining "OT thriller" ever.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 4:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
well, let's see..
looking at the future the Seahawks need a brand new OL mix of starters and competent depth, a franchise QB, members of the secondary who aren’t TWO FEET TALL, a replacement for Patrick Kerney on DE, yes….nail that and in two years we’ll be ready for a first round playoff loss.
by Will Kier on Oct 18, 2009 4:47 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
And a dominant DT
Sam Bradford, future Seattle Seahawk.
by Carl Shinyama on Oct 18, 2009 5:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Worst fake FG ever.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 4:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I wonder if trading Tatupu is something Seattle
would entertain next year. He has become a MASH unit himself.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Oct 18, 2009 4:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well I should have set my target at fifteen minutes.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do not follow
If the MLB is not a critical piece of a 4-3, and you have a high paid player who has not played in a 16 game season in 3 years, and still has value, and can be replaced without much pain, and you are rebuilding; why not?
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Oct 18, 2009 4:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And a great MLB, including pass-defender and run-stopper.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Oct 18, 2009 4:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder if he will be starting in three years.
but I agree with your position. Well stated.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Oct 18, 2009 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You think he's going to be finished at or before age 29?
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would be surprised if he is still starting at age 29
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Oct 18, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barring a career ending injury or death he'll be starting at age 29.
by MFAN on Oct 18, 2009 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Players get injured
even great players often miss significant time. I hope this inspires Tatupu to slim down and rediscover the player he was. Tatupu can not be classified as injury prone. A torn pec is a fluke injury. See: Rob Sims, Patrick Kerney.
by John Morgan on Oct 18, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bullshit.
Check your facts. Tatupu missed one game last season. He played in 16 games his first three seasons.
by John Morgan on Oct 18, 2009 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also in 2007 the game he "missed" was the game we sat our starters versus the Falcons.
by redwolf75 on Oct 18, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow, I hit a nerve, and did not intend to
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Oct 18, 2009 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This Jets-Bills game is a lesson in futility.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Oct 18, 2009 4:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
*offensive futility, I mean
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Oct 18, 2009 4:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm calling it. This game is ending in a tie.
Of course if the refs had any mercy, they would just call this right now.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 4:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
There's the Ryan Fitzpatrick we know and love.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 4:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Enberg just said Jones has a big hole.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer, Sam Bradford*.
by Misfit74 on Oct 18, 2009 4:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 4:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Neither team deserves to win this game.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 4:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So if we're going off of results-based analysis theater
taking Curry at 4 over everyone else available looks pretty damn good.
by BrianL on Oct 18, 2009 5:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Malcolm Jenkins has two forced fumbles
and I bet I could cook up a stat to credit him for some other stuff.
by John Morgan on Oct 18, 2009 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can you please just uphold this call so the Bills can kick a FG and end this abortion of a game?
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 5:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Finally, it's over.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
by Benne on Oct 18, 2009 5:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So, hopefully this ends the Rex Ryan love affair.
by MFAN on Oct 18, 2009 5:12 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
LMAO Rex Ryan is a fat joke
Thank you Al Davis for Michael Crabtree!!!!!
by Athletic on Oct 18, 2009 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm fairly relaxed after today
This game puts us in a sure rebuilding phase.
We have alot of positive young assets we want to keep. We have a few older assets we may be able to move for draft picks to contending teams like Kerney and Branch. We now much make a decision on Walt. We have two draft picks heading into next year.
The defense looks like a young and improving unit with a smarter defensive coordinator calling the plays. Last year Marshall Zona put up an unreal amount of yards on us. This year with the offense playing worse than last year, the defense still didn’t give up 300 yards passing and kept everything on front of them like they are supposed to do. They are swarm tackling to cut down on YAC. And all around playing better and sounder defense.
Now let’s hope we don’t end up like the Rams failing to rebuild our O-line. Ruskell better not fail to take the best O-line guys he can get ahold of as well as make moves in FA to get at least one quality O-line guy. Ruskell’s been rebuilding units for a while now. The number one unit he has failed to rebuild is the O-line. Get it done Ruskell, that is if you’re still here.
by ASeahawkfan on Oct 18, 2009 6:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why don't you just go to a sportsbar John?
That’s what I do, then you get all the games for free. Well, you have to pay for food but that’s a given no matter what you do. I’d say it costs me $10 extra per week to go to a sports bar rather than stay at home and in return I get to see all the games, get a great atmosphere with lost of fans cheering for different teams, and some decent food too. It’s well worth it in my opinion.
As for the whole freedom of information thing, is that any different than having to pay for a newspaper or a magazine? (Serious question)
by Brendan Scolari on Oct 18, 2009 9:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Seriously, how long will SBN keep letting the anti-red zone rants go on?
by Surf Hawk on Oct 18, 2009 10:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
All redzone wants is publicity.
And John is giving them that.
by redwolf75 on Oct 18, 2009 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I see Kyle Williams or Steve Vallos on the field again
I’m gonna throw my TV out the window.
by DetectiveM on Oct 19, 2009 12:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
NFL streaming access
The options for streaming video through the NFL’s site are here and fairly reasonable
by flyinmonky on Oct 19, 2009 8:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm an Idiot
Sorry, those are just the audio.
by flyinmonky on Oct 19, 2009 8:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And in further proof that the television industry is going to screw you at every turn possible
Comcast is about to buy up NBC. Say goodbye to Hulu.
by BrianL on Oct 19, 2009 8:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
my thoughts
Its more obvious than ever that this team is in a pseudo-rebuilding mode. The offense is in need of rebuilding, and is learning a new scheme on the fly with lots of moving parts. This is no way to learn a new offense.
Tip your hats to the Cardinals for exploiting this. Their defense was dominant today.
You look at the great teams in the NFL, the great units, and they came together and grew together. Staying healthy is a piece of success, but not required. Although injuries can be reasonable and unreasonable.
This offensive line needs to mesh. Who is the offensive line though? Unger and Willis? Perhaps by season end there will be some offensive consistency. That is why I now look forward to. Probably this team wins 6 games this year. Maybe 7. Before we look to the QB of the future we need to get an offensive line of the present.
by Section 128 on Oct 19, 2009 8:58 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
In regards to rebuilding
I don’t feel there is much “rebuilding” that needs to take place. I’m not sure why, but everyone seems bent on drafting LT. What happened to Locklear? Sure, he’s no Walter Jones, but he’s a serviceable, average tackle. Spencer is average/good, Unger should develop to be good, Sims is good … our should be above average when healthy and gelled.
I feel we need to address Safety, Running Back and CB within the draft. Eric Berry, CJ Spiller and some 2nd/3rd round athletic, TALL corner would be a great start.
I honestly would rather not draft a QB. Unless we got lucky with a Matt Ryan type (immediate impact as rookie), half our our receivers will likely be in wheel chairs by the time he’s ready.
Just my thoughts.
The demise of the Broncos in '09 is our future. Pray hard.
by Nick Andron on Oct 19, 2009 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So draft more receivers
I want QB, RB. Not to give up on the season. If we had won the Bears game that we should have won, at 3-3, having won outside the division, I would be feeling pretty good. I always contended this was the toughest part of our schedule, even though we’ve now got more road games than home, including a stretch of three, as many 1pm EST games as 4pm games, facing the Vikes and Pack, and so on, I always felt this would be the toughest part.
So the odds are stacked against us. That’s OK. What else do I have to do, between now and January? Go team.
But rebuilding…we’re in transition, and have been for a year. So QB & RB, 1st round, is what I want. They’re just the most important positions, they’re game breaking positions, they’re so difficult to find anywhere else. Simplification, I know. Yes, S, CB, tackle, and WR after that. They can be free agents, draftees, cogs or key components, we’ll see when we get closer.
by jacobstevens on Oct 19, 2009 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 

















