No?  Well what if I told you he had one of the more recent discussions with Pete Carroll, and there just might be some tidbits in there?

Still no?  OK, then.  Let me just drop a few Carroll quotes of interest and spare you the Kelley treatment (gross revisionisms like "Hasselbeck ...[being] the face of the organization practically since the day he arrived in 2001"):

"We need depth. We need competitive situations at all spots," he said. "I don't feel like it's like that now. We're very thin in the secondary. Very thin up front defensively. Very thin in the offensive line.

"There just aren't a lot of quality competitive situations where guys are really battling and fighting and pushing for playing time. That's not right. We need every position to be competitive. If we don't have competition at every position, then we're not right yet."

Lesser substantial, but perhaps more meaningful when combined with the above, is

"That's just a mind-set that we've had for years," he said. "We're starting brand new and everybody's a rookie, in a sense. As we go on, when we bring guys in, they go right to the front, right away. We're going to force them in. Tell them, 'Show us how you fit. How far can you take it? How much savvy do you have?'

"It's something we did at SC for years. Freshmen were brought in to start. Guys we draft will be brought in to start. The thought is, 'The opportunity is yours. Can you do it?' And if the veteran guys can hold them off? Awesome. Every guy who comes into the program from now on is going to be in that same situation."

I wonder if part of the Chris Clemons/Robert Henderson stockpiling is due to an underlying, philosophically-driven belief in positional competition across the board.  Speculating that, my next thought was, what is the Carroll valuation of competition vs. talent when the objectives may be mutually opposed or when limited time and resources for the pursuit of either forces you to choose?  But I don't think I can extrapolate a lessened valuation of talent compared to other teams, just because of a stated valuing of competition. 

But I do think the acquisitions we've made shows this isn't just lip service to competition.  I don't know how much of a driving factor it is or isn't, but it seems certain it's a part of the equation.