Field Gulls Podcast: The Definitive Matt Hasselbeck (LOUD)
by John Morgan on Jan 2, 2010 7:22 PM PST
Email
PrintI discuss the significance of this weekend, both obvious and less obvious, the future of Matt Hasselbeck and take my turn at fantasy GM.
102 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Themesong was 5 times louder than your voice.
The Themesong volume was normal, its just voice was just THAT quiet. Sounds like you need to physically check your microphone. I use a non-headset microphone. Some of them have volume dials or buttons right on them, so much sure you check for that. Also, you want your mic to be no more than 2-3 feet from your face when you talk, and obviously, if its pointing not directly at your mouth that makes a big difference too.
I've been using a table top microphone for 4 years now
I get a lot of complaints of being quiet even though in person I get opposite complaints. Pretty much there are a lot of things that can make a table top mic fuck up, and the most common problem usually exists on the mic itself physically (a volume knob not being turned all the way up, etc).
Unsolicited advice can be rude, like when you insult someone's intelligence by assuming they couldn't find a volume knob.
This is the raw cut. I’ve since amplified it through audacity, but it takes 40 minutes to upload to SBN and twice now I’ve waited for it only to be booted.
Most headsets and microphones dont come with volume control on the actual item
believe it or not, its one of the most common hangups
Wasn't trying to be a dick, just trying to help
I used to have to deal with this specific problem daily with other people on ventrilo for a world of warcraft guild, The volume knobs can sometimes be hidden and not obvious at all for most people. Especially since most don’t have them. Its just one of those things its smart to check for just in case.
Trying to help is not dickish.
Giving advice when it is not requested and explicitly not asked of you, is.
Seattle doesn't need to invest heavily in the line?
You’re a madman, Morgan. Mad, I say!
Boy I’d love to see Spencer retained. Hopefully the new GM can work something out if the lack of a CBA keeps him as an RFA.
Ok, you've convinced me a 3-4 transition is viable.
Mostly because you’ve convinced me that we have the talent to make it work already.
I’m assuming you meant trading up so that we had two top 10 picks? Because a great talent should still be available for our first pick, since we’ll be ~7 or so, and I think we even have the possibility of moving into the top 5. It is interesting how the value of top 10 picks will probably be at an all time low because teams simply won’t want to pay the contracts. A team might look very favorably towards trading their 1st rounder this year for a 1st rounder next year (though there would of course have to be additional compensation, just probably not as much as usual).
That's been my holdup as well in regards to the 3-4.
Sounds like we’ve got the talent. I hope the new GM and coaching staff takes a good, hard look at going to that scheme.
I seem to disagree with you a lot. Ignoring or disregarding what a run game gives you.
This seems foolish to me because look at Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco. Those teams had dominating running games and that protected the young QBs and simplified the games as their running games stalled they look human now
Running game helps but for someone like Peyton Manning or Dan Marino. Even Tom Brady. Hasselbeck was an average QB who put up good numbers in a pass first offense, but put up superbowl numbers after the running game became the focus. Do you need pass protection over run blocking? Oh no doubt but to say the run is out dated is to miss it’s huge asset, particularly when you can do it well.
One thing I think you covered that is unique though is the return game. Bob Casullo(sp) did the best job with our special teams in recent years and despite not using a homerun man in Josh Scobey we always seemed to have 2 or 3 drives start around the 40 of our own field.
I can't find a good link at the moment
because I don’t read Brian Burke’s stuff nearly enough and don’t know his site well enough. But JM is referring to work Brian Burke has done that has pretty convincingly pointed out that good passing offenses win regular season games, and are far more effective towards winning regular season games then rushing games. Same with passing defense being more important than rush defense, for the obvious reasons. I believe it also shows running game and rush defenses to be more important for post season games.
It's not just Burke
Pass game over run game is the supported by metrics across the board, including lowly old yardage.
Yea, but I remember him (I thought it was him)
doing a detailed study of it, and showing his findings. And it was pretty stark the difference between the run games effect on winning and the pass games effect on winning (i’m including rush defense with run game and pass defense with pass game for simplicity, because they strongly correlated with their flip side on the offense). I just couldn’t find it to show him.
Hasselbeck put up better numbers in 07
When we publicly abandoned the run game.
by Big E-Z on Jan 2, 2010 11:26 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Oh I just remembered something I thought of while listening.
It continues to amaze me what GMZ has done. For our football analysis, or at least mine. There’s no reason the basic way he operates would not work in the NFL. We don’t have the stats baseball does, scouting is more important. But football knowledge, game planning, and roster management are decades behind what the rules allow. Zduriencik, the Seahawks need a clone of you. Someone to distance himself from the team, to identify cheap commodities and use them to gain a better team. The closer analogy was perfect. There are tons of people like Peerman, who are fast and could be effective in the return game. It’s a cheap position to fill, with clear benefits. Why would we stick with Rankin, who clearly has no future? Get a guy who can take it home a couple times a year. A guy who can get us to the 40 periodically, setting up easy points. It would cost almost no resources.
It’s not that its a position that would make us a contender. Its that we could sink almost no resources into it, and get a large upgrade. Because the position is undervalued (like defense currently is in baseball. For now).
Does he cover Short yardage in this at all? What about specific down efficiency like 1st down and 3rd down?
This seems oddly limited scope if I’m to believe this is some hidden Metric that the young kids see and the old guard is far too stupid to use.
by Joshua Kasparek on Jan 2, 2010 10:21 PM PST reply actions
I look at this in more of a big-picture sort of way.
If we’re talking about the importance of passing versus rushing in a macro sense, passing has a stronger correlation to offensive success and victory than rushing does. Therefore, you should do what you can to maximize your team’s passing success.
I look at it in terms of Quarterback likely bust rate.
I’m a believer in you can plug any QB into a good rushing attack that has a decent arm and quick decision making then you are at finding a QB that can shoulder the entire burden himself, such as Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. Maybe even Drew Brees.
QBs are such a good luck position. that drafting an athelete that can hit an 88-yard run from the line a scrimmage off a few good blocks and plugging in a Chad Pennington or David Gerrard who can put it in the air a few smart times is infinitely preferable to Rick Mierer and John Fries at QB. I feel like that’s where this franchise is headed.
by Joshua Kasparek on Jan 2, 2010 10:59 PM PST up reply actions
Improving passing success isn't limited to just the QB.
Putting emphasis on pass protection when looking at line talent, using the tight ends in more receiving situations, and finding backs with receiving ability plays a big hand in improving the overall pass game.
You're right, I forgot to consider Jerramy Stevens one year wonder in terms of Hasselbeck's best season
In my opinion saying Matt Hasselbeck’s best season was 2007 yes the yards, but he also had fumbles and a good deal of picks. It was interesting to me that the bulk of his passing days were under 250 yards, but I remember his 68 percent completion rate.
Maybe that was thanks to Jerramy Stevens controlling so much of the middle.
Even when Shaun executed like a west coast back in 2003 when Matt Had Itula Mili in the mix at TE he wasn’t nearly as good as 2005. That isn’t to say TEs are totally one position fix all, but any elite passing offense needs this threat above most to win big time mismatches. Maybe you’ve sold me here.
by Joshua Kasparek on Jan 2, 2010 11:25 PM PST up reply actions
Though apparently, the bears have taken this to mean
You only need Tightends in an offense.
by Joshua Kasparek on Jan 2, 2010 11:27 PM PST up reply actions
I'm glad you hit up on the whole Bennett/Walker thing again and expressed it more succinctly than I managed to.
Losing those two players the way we did (especially Walker) is an absolutely damning indication of how badly this team is being run right now. Sweet zombie Jesus there was no excuse not to IR Burleson or Curry in order to retain Walker. Zero. Zip. Nada.
And hell, let’s say that right now the coaching staff isn’t sold on Walker and doesn’t see him in their long-term plans. It still doesn’t make any sense to let him go at this point! Why the hell not hang on to him until preseason cuts to see if he can make any strides? Holding on to him at least to that point in time costs this team absolutely nothing.
I was trying to maintain my temper in my writeup (which I hope I did), but losing Walker to the 49ers in the way we did might be the most infuriating personnel move I’ve seen all season. This bothers me more than dumping Duckett for James and hanging on to Terrill over Atkins. Again, it’s not so much that we’ve lost Walker but the move being a pretty horrifying glimpse into how the team is being run.
We actually started on TalkShoe
Beyond the recording sound quality issues (which you obviously don’t use), we found it to be pretty unreliable and difficult — especially if we wanted to upload our own mixed episode. It would take hours before showing up.
No such problems at podbean. It’s free, as long as you don’t upload too much per month and don’t suck up too much bandwidth. But even if you do (which we do) their basic package is only $4.95 a month with like 100 GB of storage space a month and tons of bandwidth.
Very satisfied with it.
I agreed with almost everything so far (about halfway)
I most strongly agreed regarding Hasselbeck and his future. I also agree about the pass setting up the run but not vice-versa, and that tailoring the team to run the ball and stop the run at the expense of the pass is maddening.
I agree that there is some talent on the OL. Agree about keeping Spencer. The interior is a Spencer extension and Iupati (maybe the best OL in the draft when ignoring positional value) draft pick away from being elite, but where does that leave Unger?
I’m worried about Unger. He doesn’t look well suited for guard, (just not strong enough), and he’s inferior at C than Spencer. He’s looked pathetic in pass protection at times, particularly the “punch” he delivers, which is probably about as much of a body blow as mine was in high school. I know he’s a rookie, but I’m worried about him. Saying that he’s on a Chris Gray path- medium/low upside a long time from now- puts me in saddened agreement. That kind of outlook is not enough to send Spencer packing nor enough to pass on an elite prospect (especially if that prospect is a guard).
Other than Unger, the two weakest links on the OL are the tackles. Not only that, but depth is lacking too. Lock’s contract makes him a good target for release. And I hate to say it, but I don’t even know if Lock is an average pass protector anymore. Willis is a below average RT who has really struggled at times. He’s not garbage, but a good ZBS OL would probably not start him, at least not very often. So unfortunately, this puts Seattle very much in a buyers position at tackle this offseason, which sucks because this is a pretty horrible year for tackles. The position is overvalued to begin with, combined with a poor class, means its a really bad time to be a buyer. Free agency is pretty barren as well, especially considering all the newly minted RFA’s. I’m a big believer in not drafting by position, but by the player. And so far, only Charles Brown has modestly impressed me in the footage I’ve seen, and he’s 285 pounds at the moment.
Regarding Cirron Black, its funny that you mentioned him. Kyle Rota and Rob Stanton at Seahawks draft blog, who are very bright talent evaluators, are not fans of his. Here’s Rota’s write up: Cirron Black: Cajun for “stay away.”
Very interesting thoughts on Deon Butler
Very pointed. WR is typically a position that takes a long time to reach NFL speed and we haven’t seen much of Butler this year. That’s why I find it fascinating you would be willing to ship him out after only 15 games. I’m not disagreeing- Butler wasn’t my choice either- just find it very interesting since normally you are very patient with young players.
Absolutely phenomenal.
Superb job, Mr. Morgan.
One thing I think you didn’t mention in the podcast (or perhaps you did while I attempting to un-blow my mind) was Patrick Kerney. I assume from future posts that you don’t see him as a part of the future of the franchise. Is his contract also built so that it would give us a significant amount of room to move should we cut him following this season?
Thank you very much for so eloquently stating the Hasselbeck situation. I will attempt to spread the knowledge while I’m tailgating tomorrow morning.
GO HAWKS!
Chad Brown for the Ring of Honor!
by Big Seahawk Loser on Jan 2, 2010 11:03 PM PST reply actions
I know it didn't make sense to cut Kerney this season because of how his contract was structured.
I’m not sure how that would work next season (contract structure as well as all of the CBA shenanigans), but it wouldn’t surprise me to see him gone before the end of preseason.
WR
Outstanding analysis. I don’t agree with all of it (most, but not all), but It’s insightful and entertaining.
It sounds like you’re hoping that we move away from Branch and Burleson, but are not high on Butler. That leaves only one decent WR option in Housh. To me – in a pass-first system, you need a far far better group of WRs than that. Am I missing something?
If he falls to us, I'm all about Dez Bryant.
by Joshua Kasparek on Jan 2, 2010 11:33 PM PST reply actions
WR might be a bigger problem than right now
Housh may want out, and Burleson or Branch might be gone.
by aerozeppelin on Jan 3, 2010 10:03 AM PST up reply actions
It depends
Would you rather reach for a position of need or take best player available?
by aerozeppelin on Jan 3, 2010 11:12 AM PST up reply actions
Foolish?
From my perspective there needs to be a damn good reason to take a safety over a player like Dez Bryant. A damn good reason. And “impact of position” or “need” don’t combine to even make one.
Some constructive criticism for you John.
You seem to want to cover a variety of subjects at once in these, this was probably the most interesting one of these yet, but a bit unorganized in terms of subject because you sounded like you wanted hit specific subjects which is good, but you didn’t appear to know how much you wanted to cover each part. I have a pair of friends that do podcasts and they use a 30 minute rule 3 topic approach to them. Having a timer of some kind might help you hit things a bit more firmly and allow you to feel more confident in your completed product and also not get caught wondering where the last hour and a half went..
Keep up the work John.
by Joshua Kasparek on Jan 2, 2010 11:51 PM PST reply actions
You talked a little bit about the draft.
I heard you talk about Suh, McCoy, and Berry. You make a good case for trading up. But failing that, specifically, which players besides those 3 are on your radar with the #7 overall? Or with Denver’s (currently 19th)? What would an ideal (but at least somewhat realistic) John Morgan “stay put” draft look like in round 1?
On coaching- if Jim Mora is fired and the entire staff dismissed, what kind of coach type would you prefer to bring in? One with an offense background or one with a defense background?
I’m pretty sure I’m not one of the 99% you referred to at the end, but I still appreciate your perspective on the Seahawks and I usually take away something from visiting this site every day. Thanks.
I'd love to see some 3-4 happening
but, isn’t it very unlikely to happen with the current regime as both Mora and Bradley ran 4-3 for their entire NFL careers?
I was just thinking about the offensive coordinator position a couple days ago
And I completely agree with you. I would really like to see a more pass oriented OC in Seattle.
75% of people account for 3/4 of the worlds population.
by Pessimistic Optimist on Jan 3, 2010 6:20 AM PST reply actions
Also to add on to that
At the end you mentioned Field Gulls helped you tolerate the 2009 season. Well, I just wanted to thank you for helping us tolerate the Seahawks and giving us hope that better things will come. I know I speak for all of us when I say I am truly grateful for your intelligent analysis of the Seahawks.
Heres to 2010! Hopefully better things will come. Actually, they will come. I know they will. And yes, we do have a Brandon Mebane obsession here, but that can be attributed to the fact that Brandon Mebane is a fucking boss.
75% of people account for 3/4 of the worlds population.
by Pessimistic Optimist on Jan 3, 2010 6:31 AM PST up reply actions
I think a more pass oriented OC would be a painful way to rebuild
To go more pass oriented would mean getting an elite QB a quality OL and our current or better recieving corps. We aren’t getting an elite QB for quite a few years. You just can’t get past that. If we build up the OL and get a solid run game then we have the chance to let a QB develop into an elite QB. With what we currently have even Payton Manning would suck.
I completely believe that the quickest way to rebuild is through the OL and the running game. The passing game will follow.
I am talking about the big picture here.
A good running game is optimum for a rookie quarterback because it simplifies the offense. I entirely agree with you about that. But just because someone is a pass-oriented offensive coordinator does not mean your run game is not good(Look at Sean Payton in New Orleans). Maybe not now, or next year, but I would like the Seahawks to eventually become an elite passing team.
75% of people account for 3/4 of the worlds population.
by Pessimistic Optimist on Jan 3, 2010 7:57 AM PST up reply actions
I agree, but I think its just too far down the line
An elite passing team is built off of a solid OL and running game. We don’t have either. If we had minesota’s OL and RBs Beck would look as good if not better than Favre does right now. I truly believe that. RBs are a lot easier to replace, but OLs are difficult and take a long time to build into elite units. That should be our focus in FA and the draft.
Too far down the line for what?
The Seahawks will not be contending for a superbowl for years. It is time to start building the offensive line into an elite unit. As John stated, we have some pieces in place, but we need top OL talent.
I have to disagree about the Hasselbeck/Favre bit. Hasselbeck has a below average arm right now. Sure, he would do better. But to say he would do better than Favre is just idiotic. Favre is and will always be a better quarterback than Matt Hasselbeck.
75% of people account for 3/4 of the worlds population.
by Pessimistic Optimist on Jan 3, 2010 8:11 AM PST up reply actions
I meant the elite passing offense is too far down the line
We have to build the line now. As far as Favre vs Beck, look at Favre last year in NY. He was hurt and on his ass and looked it. Put him behind a great line with the best running back in the NFL and he suddenly is a pro bowler. Give Matt the off season to heal up and put him in the same scenario and people would think it was Matt of four years ago again.
I just don't see why we can't build the offense with a plan to become a good passing team.
Maybe Elite is asking too much. I am just talking top 10.
And for the record, the Jets had a good offensive line. And they also had a good running game last year. They were the 9th best in the league last year (NFL.com). Link is too long.
75% of people account for 3/4 of the worlds population.
by Pessimistic Optimist on Jan 3, 2010 8:28 AM PST up reply actions
I'll say it again and get yelled at, we need to trade down
The quality at the #7 pick is not comenserate with what we would pay for it. Trade it for a mid first round pick and a third this year and next. There just aren’t elite players worth the money at #7. There are some good players. There are guys with upside, but with how much you pay in the top ten, you need a player who will play imediately and have an impact. That isn’t there.
Thing is... with the available talent at #7 and the needs of the teams at #14 to #17...
Only the Steelers seem like the most logical trading partner. If Eric Berry is available at #7, there exists the possibility that they might trade up for him.
However, historically in this past decade, the Steelers are big movers in the draft. They tend to stay put and make do with what they’re dealt with, so I don’t know how willing they’d be to trade up to get Eric Berry and give up their 2nd round pick. If this is the case, I can see them waiting to with either Earl Thomas or Taylor Mays, though with their superb scouting personnel, I think they’d set their hearts on Earl Thomas.
Then, for all of the other talent available, I have a hard time seeing how teams like San Francisco, who have 2 first round picks, Miami, and Atlanta would want to trade up to the #7 spot.
However, I’m all for trading down if Suh, McCoy, or Bradford aren’t available. I think you’ll find a lot of Fieldgullians here very open and accepting of the idea of trading down, especially considering that the Seahawks don’t have a 3rd round pick this year.
Top 10 talent that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, and Sam Bradford.
Mid-first to 2nd round talent that I covet:
Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, and Earl Thomas.
4th round and beyond:
Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Jan 3, 2010 9:54 AM PST up reply actions
I would guess that the Polomolu injury exposed a weekness
But he should be back and they might be reaching
Ryan Clark and Tyrone Carter are not only 30+, they're both free agents.
They’re going to need someone to play with Polamalu. Not to mention, I think safety is their biggest need. Why not try and draft the top talent if he’s available?
Top 10 talent that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, and Sam Bradford.
Mid-first to 2nd round talent that I covet:
Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, and Earl Thomas.
4th round and beyond:
Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Jan 3, 2010 10:41 AM PST up reply actions
Plus, the press is making him sound like he is "elite" talent
Not sure if he is, but they are selling him that way
I agree with Suh, but he won't be there
I don’t buy Bradford yet. Bradford is a injury prone spread QB.
McCoy has been underwelming at best this year.
Neither makes me confident enough to pay #7 money
"Injury prone"
Hardly. He had the one injury his entire college career, which he re-aggravated while playing in a game that he shouldn’t have been playing in the first place. He was rushed back out because the Sooners didn’t want to give up their title hopes, nor did Bradford want to hurt his stock. Well, it was a gamble that they lost.
Alex Smith was out for the season from the hit that he took from Rocky Bernard the other year. That’s exactly what the Sooners should have done with Bradford; sit him and let him heal, and maybe let him play near the end of the season.
Gerald McCoy has been underwhelming? How so? I only ever saw a player who was consistently in the backfield from game to game.
And yes, I agree that Suh won’t be there. But being the optimist, I choose to remember that Michael Oher, who was supposed to go #1 last year, fell all the way down to the 20’s.
Top 10 talent that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, and Sam Bradford.
Mid-first to 2nd round talent that I covet:
Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, and Earl Thomas.
4th round and beyond:
Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Jan 3, 2010 10:47 AM PST up reply actions
Sorry wrong McCoy
I thought that you were talking about the Colt version
Gerald won’t be around either.
I think Bradford might go to Washington, but he still might be around. I know he is probably the best answer in the draft, but I still am not happy with him.
Just out of curiosity..
What is it that you’re not happy with Bradford about?
Colt McCoy is probably not going in the 1st round. I’ve been reading a shit ton of draft sites, and no one, I mean, NO ONE has him going in the first. It’s actually even hard to find him in the 2nd round on some sites too.
Top 10 talent that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, and Sam Bradford.
Mid-first to 2nd round talent that I covet:
Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, and Earl Thomas.
4th round and beyond:
Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Jan 3, 2010 11:22 AM PST up reply actions
I just don't know if he is the answer
With the amount of money we hand the #7 guy he better be the answer. Thats the main problem I have with anyone in the top 10, you are going to pay them as if they are a big time starter. Bradford would probably not be worth that until season 3. Not that he isn’t good, its just that he will be on a crappy team with a line made of mesh.
It's understandable, but they'd be able to afford him.
Top 10 talent that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, and Sam Bradford.
Mid-first to 2nd round talent that I covet:
Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, and Earl Thomas.
4th round and beyond:
Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Jan 3, 2010 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
Yes we can
But we have so many piece to build, I hate to tie so much up when he might not pan out. I would much rather trade for one of the backups who has proven themselves elsewhere.
I don't think the Seahawks have that many pieces that they need. Just some elite talent at a few positions of higher value
Top 10 talent that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, and Sam Bradford.
Mid-first to 2nd round talent that I covet:
Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, and Earl Thomas.
4th round and beyond:
Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Jan 3, 2010 11:59 AM PST up reply actions
That same problem exists even if we didn't draft a QB.
It’s why some people were so pissed off about drafting Curry last year. I don’t think people thought he’d suck, just that it was too much money. High draft picks get paid, and we’ve just gotta deal with that….for another year, at least.
I would love to give the Steelers our #7
For D. Dixen and a couple of thirds or a second and a third.
As long as a 2nd rounder is involved, I'd be quite happy with moving to somewhere around #16.
Mike Iupati and Earl Thomas should be available.
Top 10 talent that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, and Sam Bradford.
Mid-first to 2nd round talent that I covet:
Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, and Earl Thomas.
4th round and beyond:
Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Jan 3, 2010 11:20 AM PST up reply actions
Honestly, I can live without Dixon on the Seahawks' roster.
Top 10 talent that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, and Sam Bradford.
Mid-first to 2nd round talent that I covet:
Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, and Earl Thomas.
4th round and beyond:
Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Jan 3, 2010 11:46 AM PST up reply actions
Great job John
I agree with 95% of your vision. I especially like the fact that you are able to find correctly find value in certain current seahawks.
Love it John, thank you much.
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.
Finally got around to listen to it.
And I have already recently been won over by the 3-4 transition idea for this team because of what we already have. I just wanted to add, that I hadn’t thought of what Red Bryant’s role would be. And thinking of him as a 3-4 end, all I can say is, holy shit.
Great podcast John
But didn’t you mean Robert Mathis and not Rashean Mathis when mentioning Tapp/Cole? Rashean Mathis is a safety.
FIRE JIM MORA NOW!
Isn't Rashean Mathis a corner?
75% of people account for 3/4 of the worlds population.
by Pessimistic Optimist on Jan 4, 2010 11:00 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
