Seattle Seahawks Sign Cornerback Travis Fisher

by John Morgan on Aug 2, 2009 2:34 PM PDT

Travis Fisher is a medium sized corner that had a promising start to his career eaten up by seasonal injuries. Mike Sando is reporting that Drew Rosenhaus has announced via Twitter that Seattle has signed Fisher. This is a pretty good value pick. Mostly likely he doesn't stick. The purpose of this signing is to fill out Seattle's training camp depth at corner. Marcus Trufant is currently on the PUP list, but there's little indication he's seriously injured. Should Fisher stick, he could battle Kevin Hobbs and Kelly Jennings for the dimeback position. He lacks Jennings athleticism, but he's a better zone defender than either. He is Seattle's fourth best zone defender now that Jordan Babineaux is committed to safety. So, nothing to get too excited about. Once upon a time Fisher was a pretty good athlete, but it's anyone's guess how much of that's been lost to a rash of knee and groin injuries. But Fisher has a chance to make the opening day roster and should he, Fisher could surprise.

The remaining question is who is cut when Aaron Curry signs? I would guess a wide receiver.

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Can't say I would welcome any receiver getting cut

…especially Hass. Famously great hands but check out the play at 1:32:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEMihZtSjmU

by shams on Aug 2, 2009 4:06 PM PDT reply actions

I like Hass and am pulling for him,

but it still seems so odd to me when I see him on the list of Biletnikoff winners, it just looks so out of place with the likes of guys like Moss and Fitzgerald.

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

by Fearless Frog on Aug 2, 2009 6:21 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah, I guess.

Although I thought Rogers was actually looking great in the NFL too until he started getting injured all the time.

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

by Fearless Frog on Aug 2, 2009 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions

Is there a division

That signs released players , makes trades, and deals players within the division more than the NFC West?

Decent depth signing and I remember him having a few good moments with the Rams.

The remaining question is who is cut when Aaron Curry signs?

Brian Russell.

"And Joe for Matt Hughes, dislike may not be a strong enough adjective!" - Mike Goldberg

by SSreporters on Aug 2, 2009 5:50 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs

Ahem.

rec’d

Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Jevon Snead, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, CB Ras-I Dowling 6'2, 200, RB Jonathan Dwyer

by Misfit74 on Aug 2, 2009 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions

Amen brother!

by rex92 on Aug 4, 2009 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions

I've never been a huge Ruskell fan (not a hater either)

but if LoJack continues to struggle, then the fact that him and Jennings are 4th on their depth charts has to be one of the bigger disappointments of the season so far (all three days of it). Of course if Red Bryant is decent then I still think our defense is pretty solid, which is, in and of itself, a testament to Ruskell’s ability to assemble a team with late draft picks and underappreciated undervalued veterans.

by LantermanC on Aug 3, 2009 9:17 AM PDT reply actions

Does LoJack backing up Redding on the "natural" strong side imply progress?

Or is 4th on the depth chart still insinuate that A FREAKIN’ FIRST ROUND PICK IS STILL 4TH ON THE DEPTH CHART?!?grit?!?

by Airborne Hawk Guy on Aug 3, 2009 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions

The latter,

I meant that even though 2 first rounders are already probably busts, we still have Tapp as our 3rd DE and Wilson as our 3rd CB, so we’re in ok shape.

by LantermanC on Aug 3, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions

i think its way early to call LoJack a bust

DEs take a big step forward their second year, and we’d have to compare him to the caliber of guys picked around him. not sure that teams are seeing many results out of the D-Linemen selected around him (Kentwan Balmer (one pick later), Phillip Merling (three picks later)).

He’s not what we hoped he would be, but I think he’s a long way from a bust.

by cro-mag! on Aug 3, 2009 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions

Yeah, compare his stats to Kerney's at that point in his career.

They’re pretty much identical.

by djafrot on Aug 3, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions

But I thought Kerney didn't start nearly as many games as Jackson did,

and still racked up nearly the same stats.

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

by Fearless Frog on Aug 3, 2009 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions

Maybe not starts

But Kerney was 3rd in the rotation and had a lot of playing time. His 2nd year, he started all 16 games, and basically repeated his rookie stats. he didn’t take off until his 3rd year.

I agree with cro-mag, way to early to call Jackson a bust, and there’s still time. That 1st round tag just amps expectations up so much, even though it was a late 1st. If Jackson went just 5-6 picks later and was a 2nd rounder, IMO people wouldn’t be nearly as worried about his slow start.

by jteckmann on Aug 3, 2009 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions

Both Jackson & Balmer sound like they've picked up where they've left off

Jackson getting pushed around by Willis and an unnamed rookie offensive lineman. Balmer getting pushed around, asking for more, then getting pushed around some more by Chilo Rachal.

Doesn’t mean he’s a bust, you’re right. But as time progresses, and he doesn’t, not only does the likelihood for him to bust or work out slowly shift to the bust side of the scale, it also means as the odds slowly stack against him working out, figuring it out within the next few years, there would be some tangible quality that we could point to that is well enough above average to account for and make up for the noted deficiencies. As for Jackson, the one positive that stands out is his trunk strength.

He probably would make a much better 3-4 end, a single gap player who’s #1 job is helping open up lanes for the real stars, and #2 job is containment on their single gap.

by jacobstevens on Aug 3, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions

I see your point, and this isn't to refute it

but while on the subject, don’t you find it to be a slight positive that he has two of his three most recent 1st round picks 4th on the depth chart? Ultimately I still think it was Ruskell’s move that put Jackson as opening day starter when he didn’t earn it in the least, and that hurt us and him. But I love that there’s at least a limit to his ego, that keeps us all from choking on his pride by keeping those guys as starters because they’re his guys.

by jacobstevens on Aug 3, 2009 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions