Seahawks rebuilding effort

by crnchber on Nov 25, 2009 3:58 PM PST

I just wanted to post a couple thoughts about the Seahawks mess because I think that a lot of people seem to be misunderstanding the situation we're in. (Or maybe I am, who knows.)

I believe it was the right before the 2008 season when we realized that our core players were getting old and we either were going to blow up the team or tough it out and add some players and try to keep the window open for a year or two more. IIRC, it was a conscious decision to add players and hope that Hasselbeck and Jones would stay healthy long enough to get it done again.

What happened is that the gamble didn't pay out. We all quickly forgot about the rebuilding part and thought we had a contender regardless. Well obviously we were hit by injuries over and over again, not just to the older players but to everyone.

When we stuck our necks out trying to extend that window we knew that this was the downside. Because we weren't going to add a replacement LT or QB. We had two pro-bowlers and we were going to try to run with them. If they get hurt, well we would of been rebuilding anyway.

I think the only real damage done here is that the fan's expectations would be too high. If it worked we would have expected it. If it failed, the drop in enthusiasm would be (is) brutal.

The good part is the team isn't in that bad of shape, no matter how much some of you want to imagine that. We have a lot of young talent, and really if we just use our drafts choices wisely (And Ruskell is a good drafter, don't pretend otherwise) we will finally get that LT and QB (and maybe a DT) to go along with our other young guys and have a real shot in the near future. Which would be a pretty short rebuilding timeframe if it works.

I'm not saying that everything went according to plan or worked out just right. I'm saying that there is a plan. Also I'm saying that Ruskell isn't going anywhere. (We'll see about Mora)

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 2 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

2010 Draft

When was the last time Seattle used a first round pick on Offense? Seattle will be picking 8-10 and with Denver’s 22-25 pick. Take a look on You Tube and check out CJ Spiller for Heisman videos 1&2, that will convince you who should be the first pick.

1a) CJ Spiller. 4.3 /40. There is only 1 of him, better take now.
1b) best LT available
2) best QB available.
4) best S available
5) LaGarret Blount 6’2 stud with power and speed. Take no guf , with Hutchinson attitude. 1st rd talent with little risk and money this late in the draft. The Thunder to Spiller’s lightning.

by blazerbill on Nov 27, 2009 5:48 PM PST reply actions

Wow, I love the Spiller pick, but...

as good as he is, I think 8-10 is too high. I think we could trade down and still get him at 15-20, or get lucky and have him drop to us at 22-25. Whatever pick we use, I’ll love having him making plays for us. My only other complaints are that with a draft that seems stocked with D-line talent, you don’t have us taking any, and Blount with Spiller would mean giving up on Jones. Forsett is great value. I’d rather see Spiller used sparingly as a RB, in concert with Jones and Forsett, but also with multiple touches receiving and returning, say 15-20 touches per game, but less than half that rushing from the RB position. Butler is not the answer in the return game. Spiller would be a huge upgrade.

I’d rather see us trade down for a 3rd rounder and take Spiller at about 15, then
1a) RB CJ Spiller from Clemson
1b) DE Brandon Graham from Michigan
2) S Nate Allen from S. Florida
3) DT Tyson Alualu from Cal
4) S Myron Rolle from Fl. State
5) OT Zane Beadles from UT, projected to play OG
6) Another developmental QB to compete with Teel
7) Nick Reed Jr.

by diehard82 on Nov 28, 2009 10:58 AM PST up reply actions

why does everyone think we need a DE

we need to be able to sure up the middle. We don’t have a stud run stuffer.

"What is it about good sex that makes me have to crap?"

by durteehawk on Nov 28, 2009 11:27 AM PST up reply actions

Me!

Bane!

by thebyron on Nov 29, 2009 7:58 AM PST up reply actions

Because we defend the run well

and we have very disappointing pass rush. And a standout DE is more valuable than a standout DT.

by jacobstevens on Nov 30, 2009 12:52 PM PST up reply actions

Everybody will want Spiller

He is projected to go to SF to compliment Gore, or to SanDiego, He wont last long. I like trading down, but its a gamble that Spiller wont be there.

We need LT help more than DE I think.

I would like to see more from Moore. He looked good in preseason, he is faster than Forsett, and maybe he is as good as Spiller. Seahawks should use him to see if we need to draft Spiller.

by blazerbill on Nov 28, 2009 11:55 AM PST up reply actions

Moore is straight-line speed, nothing else.

There is a reason he wasn’t drafted in the early rounds, and he is a LONG way from being at the level of Spiller. I’m not even saying we should draft Spiller, I’m just saying comparing Moore to Spiller is ridiculous, and there is NO WAY “he is as good as Spiller.”

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 28, 2009 5:51 PM PST up reply actions

seriously if Ruskell is here draft time and he chooses another defensive player first round I am done.

"What is it about good sex that makes me have to crap?"

by durteehawk on Nov 28, 2009 11:27 AM PST reply actions

Damn, I meant DE

"What is it about good sex that makes me have to crap?"

by durteehawk on Nov 28, 2009 11:28 AM PST up reply actions

I completely agree with this article.

Trying to win now, then extend the window, I believe was the right call. Actually kind of an easy call to make, but the right call, and it dictated a lot of what we did on the micro-level. Needing to transition to post-Holmgren, while also trying to keep the window open, is probably a tall order to really substantially make a successful splash in, especially in one year, so they might have done a better job than it looks.

Recognizing that the time had come to fortify the foundations of the next model, and not try one more time to extend/resuscitate the Hasselbeck-Jones window, this year, probably would have been a better decision, but the bottom line results would have been about the same, or worse, anyway. And, if he didn’t like Monroe or Sanchez, or Crabtree, felt like they were too risky, then who’s to say this wasn’t already recognized but the best player for the team still happened to be defensive and ultimately supplementary. And I expect to some extent there was desire/pressure to have a decent season for Mora’s first year, to stave off pressure against him & Mora.

I also am loathe to want a DE in the first round, with either pick. I recognize it as a big need. Well, pass rush is a big need. DE is the answer to that, but I dunno. Maybe we have the guys. Maybe playing with the lead a bit more would help. The offense is a bigger need. But we’ll see, when we’re slotted and who’s available, maybe DE will frustratingly be the right pick to make.

by jacobstevens on Nov 30, 2009 1:03 PM PST reply actions