Ruskell Talks about the Future of Seattle's Offensive Tackles

by srainier on Apr 18, 2009 4:30 PM PDT

"That was a plan when we paid Sean and said that that was in the back of our heads in terms of when Walter's done, Sean would move over," Ruskell said. [...] "So that's still the plan. That's still the plan that when Walter is done, Sean moves over there and that's the reason we signed him to a long-term deal and it's the reason we signed Ray Willis."

Everything said in the week before the draft has to be taken with a grain of salt, but I think it's fair to say this is what Ruskell is actually thinking. I'm no John Morgan, but I liked what I saw from Willis early in the 2008 season, and Locklear seems capable enough at LT. So this rules out Monroe at #4.

This draft really can't come soon enough....

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Careful about saying things like "rules out"

The plan can be changed next Saturday when they take Monroe at 4 because he’s the best value.

by diehard82 on Apr 18, 2009 4:57 PM PDT reply actions

Could just be smoke as well.

I’m not sure I trust anything a GM says to a member of the media. Too many ‘this coach is our coach’ BAM! fired. And ’we’re not trading this guy’ BAM! traded.

by LantermanC on Apr 18, 2009 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions

I think the word you're looking for is "BOOM!"

you know, in honor of the recently retired one.

by shams on Apr 19, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions

"when Walter's done, Sean would move over"

Let it be known to the world that John Morgan called it months ago!

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 18, 2009 7:23 PM PDT reply actions

John knew, unlike a lot of us, that Locklear had contract provisions regarding the LT spot.

I had no idea.

But wow, can you imagine if Lock and Willis worked out at LT and RT? That’s a couple of holes fixed PDQ, leaving us with the (not so) simple task of working out the inside of the line.

One wonders what the FO is thinking regarding tackle in this draft. If they’re so high on Lock and Willis at tackle, why draft a tackle at all, except for depth? In that case, wouldn’t it be a major surprise to see a tackle taken in the first three or four rounds at all? More likely we’d see guard and center picked.

by djafrot on Apr 18, 2009 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions

Well, yeah, the general consensus is that our interior line needs more early help.

But about the tackle situation: It could easily fizzle out, too. Locklear has looked at least serviceable at LT. But what if he gets worse? What if Willis never improves handling the speed-rush and gets continuously beat by Leonard Little-esque DEs? What if either gets injured? We don’t even have Pork Chop anymore, and I really don’t think Wahle is up to the challenge anymore.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 18, 2009 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions

Why would Lock spontaneously get worse?

I’d think he’d improve with experience.

Dunno about Willis, really, not having paid enough attention to him when he was on the field.

by djafrot on Apr 19, 2009 11:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Maybe he's just teasing us at left tackle and can't handle the tougher DEs on that side for a whole season?

John wasn’t kidding about Willis having trouble handling speed rushers.

"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."

by Fearless Frog on Apr 20, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions

I think Ruskell might be right..

it seems rare lately but I think Ruskell may have this one right…I know his philosophy on lineman is that he doesn’t think there 1st round worthy. I do think we have been spoiled by Walter Jones though and may have to address this next year. Not this year but Next year.

by Mr. Blache III on Apr 19, 2009 1:13 AM PDT reply actions

Am I the only one who feels Willis fits best at RG?

I just shudder at the thought of our pass rush protection with Locklear at LT and Willis at RT

by PattyB on Apr 19, 2009 9:58 PM PDT reply actions

I like him at RG as well.

He’s a serviceable backup RT in my opinion, but as a RG, I see him being more of a mauler, making it easier for our running backs.

by LantermanC on Apr 19, 2009 10:57 PM PDT up reply actions

Do you know

If Ray Willis is helped by the zone blocking system?

"We want the ball and were gonna score"

by Seahawks124 on Apr 20, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions

Is it just me, or is the draft kinda like playing Rock/Paper/Scissors?

You’re always thinking something like:

“He thinks I’m going to go rock, so he’ll do paper. So I’ll do scissors, but he’ll know I’ll do scissors, because he thinks I’m going rock therefore I’ll be going scissors. But since he’s thinking that, he’ll go rock, so I’ll go paper. But if I go paper, there’s huge change …”

And so on.

by Nick Andron on Apr 20, 2009 9:36 AM PDT reply actions