An Open Letter to Aaron Curry

by John Morgan on Dec 9, 2009 8:50 PM PST Comment 44 comments

You've fallen under the media's wheel. There are a mix of reasons: You were the fourth overall pick selected by a since resigned general manager, you play at an unfashionable position, you're kind of sloppy, you talk a lot of shit, you're proud, others in your class are outclassing you, you've been repeatedly fined by the league, and, most of all, because you are the latest face of the Seattle Seahawks and the Seattle Seahawks suck.

I don't know what to make of you. I didn't want Seattle to select a linebacker with the fourth overall pick. It made sense for Seattle to select you at four, the next six picks were expensive gambles red-flagged for health or behavior or inexperience. It still didn't sit right. Maybe it fell like a cheat.

Seattle had its elite linebackers in 2008. Their impact earned Seattle the pick they selected you with. Anyone who watches tape can see that a linebacker does not have the integral impact on every play that a wide receiver, quarterback or an offensive or defensive lineman does.

And yet, I know what I hate and I don't hate you. You're awesome. Like what the words means. Awesome. You're a hitter and I know that must mean something. Lawyer Milloy saved Seattle's season by browning Michael Crabtree's underpants. You run blitzed Steven Jackson and flanked him so hard he flew into the air. The frame, speed and coordination you possess almost defies positional classification. You weigh less but are broader, longer and more powerful than Darryl Tapp. Tapp. Seattle's best defensive end. You're faster than Forsett. If Seattle switched schemes and freed you to blitz between the tackles, you could be a punishing force at rush linebacker. You are quite simply the most special talent Seattle has drafted since Seattle drafted Hutch, and I want you to achieve Greatness in the Blue.

So: This weekend you face Brian Cushing. Cushing is adored. Cushing was selected after you. He makes noodles to your megabucks. No, you will never actually face Cushing on the football field, but his specter will be all over you like Russell on hustle.

Kick his ass. I am running a full Aaron Curry breakdown next week and I want to write about you ho slappin Chris Brown and wearing Matt Schaub like a meat suit.

Show us everything you have.

Field Gulls

1 recs | Comment 44 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I so want

For Curry to be a beast, and I really think he will. Ever since I met him at SeaTac (yeah, I was that guy in the NFL video) I’ve been hoping for great things. I think you definitely see it in games, the promise that lies within Curry.

He’s responsible for my first every jersey purchase, I hope he’ll be an important piece of a dominant Hawks defense for years to come.

by ungoreatstefan on Dec 9, 2009 10:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I hope he does too.

I wasn’t happy with the pick either but I’m a Seahawk fan and I want him to prove why he was the 1st selected LB in a LB deep draft (another reason why not to draft a LB 1st in such a LB deep draft but that goes without saying) .

To your point about Cushing, he was the LB I coveted in the draft. I hate watching him fly all over the field thinking we could’ve or maybe should’ve traded back to select him if we were going to draft a LB. That being said, I want Curry to prove me wrong. Prove to me that we shouldn’t have drafted Crabtree, Harvin, Wells or Cushing in the 1st Rd instead of you.(I would’ve traded back in the 1st Rd for the last 3 I mentioned though).

Let’s go Curry and crush the Texans. I agree with you John, I think we should blitz him more. Maybe the Seahawks aren’t using his talents properly. His speed and frame make him a perfect blitz Linebacker.

by Mr. Blache III on Dec 9, 2009 10:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

What makes you think Ruskell didn't try to trade down?

Pretty sure that’s what all the “Seahawks interested in Sanchez” pre-draft hype was all about.

by B.B.Finnegan on Dec 10, 2009 9:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe he did...He never said either way.

But the #4 pick was the prime to trade down from if Ruskell wanted to. The teams interested in Sanchez wanted that 4th spot. I would figure the Redskins were eyeing #4 especially if they got wind the Jets would move up to #5. I’m pretty sure the Jets were interested in our #4 spot just as much as they were in the #5 spot. Either way I think there were some deals there for the taking but I think Ruskell rather have Curry then trade back. Just my personal opinion based on how things turned out on draft day.

by Mr. Blache III on Dec 10, 2009 10:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Ruskell wasn't given enough in return to trade down...

so he took the “safest pick in the draft” and said it was the guy we wanted all along. But I do believe he badly wanted to trade down…

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

by whiskey chainsaw on Dec 10, 2009 12:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

17th and 52nd pick

That’s what Cleveland got in return for trading out of the 5th spot to the Jets. So I would only imagine that Ruskell was offered the same deal by the Jets that Cleveland got.

Cleveland got the Jets 17th pick in the 1st Rd and the Jets 52nd pick in the 2nd Rd. I would’ve made that deal. Especially considering we traded our 2nd Rd pick to Denver for their 1st Rd Pick for next year.

Or maybe after trading back with with the Jets (for the same deal they gave Cleveland) we could’ve packaged the 17th and 52nd (or even our original 2nd Rd Pick) to move up a couple of spots, maybe the 12th Spot with Denver. ..Then we would’ve still had a 2nd Rd pick in this years draft and gotten a extra 1st Rd pick in next years….who knows, but we would’ve had more options by trading back instead of using our 4th pick on a LB in a LB deep draft.

by Mr. Blache III on Dec 10, 2009 1:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This is pure and meaningless speculation.

by John Morgan on Dec 10, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

So do you think the Jets just offerered that deal to Cleveland knowing the Redskins were interested in Sanchez too?

by Mr. Blache III on Dec 10, 2009 4:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe the offer was never on the table to us...

And even if it was, maybe it was farther back than Ruskell wanted to move— which is entirely fair, and the compensation for moving back was less than he was willing to accept— which is entirely fair.

And maybe it would be a little harder to move up to the 12th spot. And maybe, and maybe, and maybe…

And maybe…

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

by whiskey chainsaw on Dec 10, 2009 4:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Now you're asking John for pure and meaningless speculation.

by BrianL on Dec 10, 2009 5:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Timing

Seattle took Curry quickly, leaving a lot of time left before the 5th selection. That indicated to me that their best case draft scenario had come to fruition for them. With how fast they made the selection, at best they got a quick show of hands before taking him.

Recall, that the team intentionally pulled some misdirection regarding Curry by cancelling his individual workout and essentially not uttering his name even before the combine.

Reading the lines, Curry was their guy long before he blew up at the combine. If anything, the combine sealed the deal.

by Attylathehawk on Dec 11, 2009 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Curry

Being that I know live in Spokane WA and no longer live in Louisiana I am always going to be a Saints fan first and a Seahawks fan second, but the way the team went out and got Aaron Curry in the draft made me very happy for their future on D.

Curry is a man-child and he was the best pick in the draft period! He reminds me of Patrick Willis.

Geaux Saints and Seahawks!!!!

by Saintsfan4life on Dec 9, 2009 11:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

A man-child?

It's Great to be a Florida Gator!

"I never met a llama I didn't like." - TJ Duckett

All I want for Christmas is Joe Haden, Eric Berry, and Nandamukong Suh in Seahawks blue.

by Wayward Llama on Dec 10, 2009 2:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Geaux Saints!

I liked Curry, safest pick and hard to go wrong. I never thought he’d be flashy, rather, he’ll have a long ramp up to greatness.

by Strictnine on Dec 10, 2009 7:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Signed me

Please go beast Schaub and remind people why they are afraid of the D Hawks. Then quote “300” at them, because you do that alot.

by DJ C-Raig on Dec 10, 2009 1:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Ready your breakfasts and eat hardy -

For tonight we dine in hell!

by Captain Poopy on Dec 10, 2009 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Loved the pick best player available at the time.

3/4 would suite him better we need to switch next year. Look at the Packers. We had and have the personal to do so. Patience is a virtue.

"Superhero like even"

by censor1979 on Dec 10, 2009 5:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Maybe we can sprinkle in some of the 3/4 D this year. We have the players on our roster. now.

I thought Bradley’s WCD was suppose implement lots of moving parts. I would love to see us on occassion go 3/4. It’s kind of like a boxer that goes southpaw in the middle of the fight. Our down lineman could be Cole, Jackson, Redding ( or Mebane with Redding out) with Tapp, Hawthorne, Hill, and Curry behind them. At this point of the season it wouldn’t hurt to experiment. We could blitz out of that formation because Tapp and Curry off the edges have great speed but also Heater and Hill are very good blitzers too. That allows us to bring blitzes from either player at any given time. Lots of confusion for offenses facing that alignment.

by Mr. Blache III on Dec 10, 2009 7:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm pretty sure we do.

by thebyron on Dec 10, 2009 9:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This made me laugh this morning

Thank you.

CougCenter

by Jeff Nusser on Dec 10, 2009 6:41 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I see you snuck in a Simpsons reference there...

Burns (to Marge regarding the Burns portrait she painted): “I know what I hate, and I don’t hate this…”

I will smash your face into a jelly.

by Phildopip on Dec 10, 2009 7:27 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Good catch.

by thebyron on Dec 10, 2009 9:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Speaking of Crabtree browning his pants...

Anyone have the .gif yet? I daresay I NEED it.

by Bildo on Dec 10, 2009 8:03 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Pro Football Focuse has Cushing ranked first, and Curry last for OLB's in the 4-3

http://profootballfocus.com/olb

I don’t know what to make of that site, however, since looking through Seahawk players I see O’Mare ranked 17th on kickoffs even though he’s in the top five on every kickoff category. http://profootballfocus.com/k

Also, Justin Forsett made a field goal for some reason?? I know we’ve really been missing the two kicker play this year but still…

by B.B.Finnegan on Dec 10, 2009 9:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Curry

Feast on Schaub and Brown. Go Sea D-Hawks!!!

by GTsmookie on Dec 10, 2009 10:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Seems to me that Curry is best suited to 3-4 OLB to maximize his potential

That’s not to say he can’t be a great 4-3 OLB, but for the money he’s paid by virtue of his high draft pick, he should be producing 4-3 DE sack numbers.

That said, I think we should either be looking at playing predominently 3-4, or trade Curry (to someone who can maximize his value in their scheme) for a top 10 pick in this draft.

What teams picking in the top 10, could use a stud 3-4 OLB and might be willing to do such a trade, excluding other NFC West teams of course? Answer: Cleveland and KC, although in neither case is it probably their biggest need. Last year KC passed on Curry in favor of Tyson Jackson at 3. If they have pick 4, 5 or 6 this year, would they give that up for Curry? With Seattle taking Curry at 4, the Browns promptly traded out of the 5 spot so the Jets could take Sanchez. Had Seattle not taken Curry, would the Browns have taken him or still done the Jets deal? Right now, I think the Browns are going to be picking in the top 3. If that happens, I doubt they’d do a straight up trade for Curry. Still, if we throw in another player they can use, maybe they’d to the deal to save $ with Curry costing less than the #1-3 picks this year. In any case, the benefit for Seattle trading away Curry is getting another elite player at a position of greater value in our scheme, such as Suh, McCoy or Morgan. Under this scenario (trade with either KC or Cleveland for Curry) Seattle could wind up with Suh or McCoy, followed by Morgan and then Brown all in the 1st round. DT, DE and OT could be extremely valuable building blocks for the team going forward and all carry greater value than OLB, particularly given the solid roster without Curry. I’m not sure management could be that creative, but I’d do that deal.

by diehard82 on Dec 10, 2009 10:25 AM PST reply actions 0 recs