Yes, but Kelly Jennings is hovering dangerously close to bust status already. He looked promising in limited playing time in 06, was masked by a fantastic pass-rush and a heavily overachieving secondary in 07, and has looked disgustingly bad ever since then.

But here’s the major reason why I’m not ready to abandon Ruskell: His emphasis on character.

I think this is pretty overrated. Ruskell’s character emphasis doesn’t really bother me but I certainly don’t think he’s ever going to build a contending team because they’re all nice people.

I’m probably in the minority of the people who would like to see Ruskell canned the moment this 7-9 season ends. But I do realize he’s probably in a good relationship with Mora and the coaching staff and his contract will likely be extended, and if/when the team continues to struggle in the next several seasons, he’ll get dumped when the coaching staff and front office goes ka-boom.

While it seems to be very popular, I think its short-sighted and simplistic to evaluate a GM’s performance by looking at the draft only. Its also troublesome to compare the 1st-round picks taken in the top of the draft to picks in the bottom of the round.

In order to avoid going into the draft with gaping holes, Timmah tries to address any outstanding weaknesses in the FA market. Typically, he signs underrated veterans that will contribute but won’t dazzle. Then, in the draft, he’s able to stick to his draft board and sign the BPA.

Ruskell’s taken a largely conservative approach to building the team that doesn’t produce as many home runs but also doesn’t produce as many strikeouts.

I can’t fathom what the purpose of that was because most know that size does not necessarily equal stoutness vs. the run, and nothing about Cole’s performance has proved that wrong so far. It looks like another Brian Russell move.

If this thread is an indication, I’d guess its 90% the other direction. But seriously, even on less intellectual/more reactionary sites that discuss this, I’d say its at best 50/50.

Whether or not you want Ruskell back isn’t completely about his performance. Its partly political. For example, I lean slightly in favor of not extending Ruskell despite his good traits because I’ve long felt his values are out of sync with my own. Of what I consider the “core” pieces of a good football team (in order of importance)- QB, OL, DL, and Secondary, Ruskell has shown an interest in fortifying the latter two but has been fairly uncommitted to the first two. Parts of the team I think should not be emphasized- namely LB and RB, have been two areas where Ruskell has splurged, particularly at LB ($128 million in contracts for starting 3, while Hawthorne and Herring ride the bench). At RB, he had the Shaun deal, and then gave two decent contracts to Jones/Duckett when Shaun bombed out.

To me, building a team is first about building an offense that can score with anyone and control the game. You do that with a (healthy) franchise QB and an OL that wins at the line of scrimmage every snap and keeps that QB healthy while paving the way for some anonymous 3rd round future star RB.

His hesitancy to replace Hasselbeck even though its obvious Hasselbeck does not have much time left, seems to indicate a fear. Ruskell was part of a front office that picked Matt Schaub, but he also picked Dilfer, Greene, and traded for Frye. To be fair- maybe Ruskell simply hasn’t seen anything he’s loved (Sanchez, etc). But when you consider that the last time he committed more than a 3rd round pick to a QB was for Trent Dilfer, it makes him seem gun-shy.

Regarding OL. Ruskell’s had some shitty luck. You simply can’t hold him accountable for the injuries the last two years. But even before that, it was a failing line. Look up the FO stats for OL since 2006. You’ll see Seattle in the bottom 5 pretty much every year since in both metrics (ASR & ALY). Injuries sabotaged the OL- but they also helped cover up the fact that it was at best mediocre and likely less. I don’t think Ruskell is a complete retard with the OL- I think he knows how to evaluate the talent. I just wish he had invested a bit more and aimed higher than “serviceable.” Because I consider the OL to be a vital component to a competitive team, its an area where a front office should strive for excellence- the same way that you wouldn’t want to settle for a serviceable QB if you had serious aspirations for a championship.

Ruskell has pissed me off a few times (I won’t get into that), so that probably creates some bias: I’d be a little happy about seeing him leave. But he’s definitely a smart guy and if he re-prioritizes a bit, I could easily see myself becoming a future supporter of his. So while I’m leaning against him, it wouldn’t ruin my life if he was extended. He’s got some issues, but he’s not a bad GM.

I still have complete faith in him.

I would cry purple tears of happiness if the Seahawks managed to pull Locker out of the draft next year.

One thing I was thinking about is that the Hawks seemingly could draft only OT and QBs the whole draft and really still be fine. There are some positions of want, but we have youth and depth at most spots now. Right?

One cannot criticize a former GM for leaving the cupboard bear when in fact the cupboard was not. Nor is the cupboard bare today.

- The issue is not “is there talent on the Seattle team directly attributed to Ruskell”.
- The issue is not “Ruskell added value to teams that went to the playoffs 4 straight years”
- The issue is not “he is a class guy and has good things for the Seattle organization”

The issue is the direction, vision, leadership, decision, focus, prioritization, and approach to them:
Direction: Tampa 2 defense with hybrid West Coast offense
Vision: To become Tampa Bay West
Leadership: Allowed Holmgren to hang on, causing conflict in leadership and player/scheme development
Decision: To hire a coach within when it was not necessary and more qualified candidates existed
Focus: The myopic development of defense with a total disregard for top quality talent on offense
Prioritization: To take defense at the expense of offense in drafts where offensive talent equaled or trumped defensive talent
Approach: Injured, aged, expensive FA at the expense of the development of younger players with potential

Pick a path and follow it Mr. Ruskell. The criticism you are reciving is justly earned. Your team, for all the talent on paper is getting blown out. Your hand picked defense and leadership is failing. In the real world, this gets people fired.

 I think he was great, he was scapegoated after one bad game (that is my recollection) and our new punter is way worse than Plack.

Bring Plack Back! (He’s a FA too)

at punting percentages. The only thing he was good for was a big boot. No accuracy and a fat ass. John Ryan is just fine.

Things can change quickly. (0:21)