Post-Draft Thread
by John Morgan on Apr 24, 2010 2:19 PM PDT
Email
Print
First, thanks. This was a good draft, and everyone contributed to three days of good threads. Probably a connection there. Still, I know people fall in love with prospects and can be frustrated when their guy is passed over. We didn't have any eruptions and very little bickering. Awesome. Thank you.
Use this thread for post-draft commentary and links.
682 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
There are some very good players that went undrafted...
Blount and Tony Washington come immediately to mind.
Do we expect Seattle to pick up some o-linemen?
I hope so.
The lack of extra linemen is perhaps the most disappointing thing about this draft, but really, I do not think anyone can complain!
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm betting Gibbs is out there right now picking up scraps.
There was a USC guard out there that sounded pretty good. Can’t remember his name.
Wouldn't surprise me at all.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions
It's a matter of preference
but Byers seemed to be getting more play around here, so that’s who I figured he was talking about.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions
ahh the Alex Parsons project
sounds like it has potential
I wish Cops was on...
by Generzal Zod on Apr 25, 2010 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Being the team that drafted a guy who had consensual sex with his sister
Doesn’t sound too enticing.
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
I'll reserve judgment until I've seen his sister
by Jason_D on Apr 24, 2010 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
This is pretty damn funny.
More so because I just googled “Tony Washington signed” to see if I could find out if anyone had signed him yet. But when I was typing it in and got to “Tony Washington si” and google was trying to auto complete my search, the third suggestion was “Tony Washington sister picture”. I guess you’re not the first person to think this!
by Mind of no mind on Apr 25, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Good to know I'm not the only voyeur.
But then again, I googled “Tony Washington sister picture” quite a few times.
Don't know why this made me laugh. But since it did you get a rec.
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
How about just rec it?
The “rec’d” comments are really tiresome.
by lemonverbena on Apr 24, 2010 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions
It wasn't just a "rec'd" comment
It made him laugh for no reason. That’s something.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Disagree.
He gave a reason he Rec’d it – This is the way you’re supposed to do it.
by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 24, 2010 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
I'm going to Rec this because I also support this statement.
Just kidding. I will not Rec this.
Well, whom else do you propose he has incestuous sex with?
Sheesh… haters!
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Apr 24, 2010 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Let me be the first to say...
…I’m absolutely fucking psyched.
We filled our biggest needs (Okung, Thomas), brought some flash (Tate, Washington), some beef (White) and a whole lot of potential and depth (all those defensive guys).
I think they are hoping that Chancellor starts pretty quickly with Thomas back behind him making sure everything’s OK.
This goes beyond filling needs...
OTs Bulaga or Davis would have filled a need. We got the best.
Trent Williams may be more athletic, and COULD become as good as Okung, but we got the real deal. Perhaps TW’s upside is a bit higher, but they are taking a big chance that he’ll progress. He plays to the level of his competition and gets beat by average DLs.
I think the Redskins blew it.
I am still concerned about our pass rush. Very concerned.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - Morgan
This was too downer of a statement.
I couldn’t be happier with our draft. Honestly.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - Morgan
Nah, the sense of it is clear and the sentiment is dead on
We didn’t do much to fix our pass rush, so it’ll be an area of concern going into the season.
by Thomas Beekers on Apr 24, 2010 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I could be
because I’m still concerned about our DL in general, and I wish we’d managed to add more talent in that area; if Anthony McCoy had been an equivalently-talented DE or DT, I’d be happier. But he wasn’t, and that player wasn’t there, and so be it. I do wish I knew more about Vickerson.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions
One interesting project DT
is Oghobaase from Duke; I wouldn’t have drafted him either, but he should be worth a flier/
http://www.mockingthedraft.com/2010/3/30/1396370/vince-oghobaase-nfl-draft-scouting
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Please God yes.
I saw him play in person four or five times this year, and he was (the only one) ferocious against the run. It’s hard to get a good read on him because he was constantly doubled as a result of no one else on our defense being worth a damn, but he definitely has talent. And from everyone I’ve heard, he’s kind of a nerd, so hopefully that means he’s got a high football IQ. I’m not sure how useful that is to a DT though.
by SeaTownBlueDevil on Apr 24, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree with you on both accounts.
This was a great draft. But it’s best to remember that we’re talking about a team that went 9-23 over the last two years with a bunch of aging players. I wasn’t really expecting it all to be fixed in one draft. I had our major needs coming into the draft as being LT, WR, RB, DE, QB, S and I think we filled 2/3 of those needs with high caliber players. Overall I’m very impressed with our new FO.
by Mind of no mind on Apr 24, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions
I think our pass rush will improve with a change of scheme, and better coaching
The Seahawks may have concluded that drafting an elite pass rush would be too expensive, or impossible.
And if that isn't the case
At least we have a significantly improved secondary to prevent getting utterly murdered by opposing QBs.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - Morgan
This is something that really excites me.
It’s not just Thomas. That new corner is 5’11", 200 lbs… if he can play outside that lets us move Wilson to nickel where he is positively dangerous. If Chancellor can come in, too, that’s a lot of intimidation. Thomas covers the back end, and Chancellor makes a mess out of people over the middle.
Eeeeeeexactly.
I’m praying Chancellor is good!!!!
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - Morgan
Haha, yeah, read out this potential secondary in a high British accent
Trufant
Thurmond
Thomas
Chancellor
Draw out "Thuuuur-mond"
Like Thurston Howell III from “Gilligan’s Island”.
inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Chancellor is like Mays but can make a tackle, his coverage skills is where he will be exposed.
He and Jennings on the same side of the field will be a huge problem. I think he switched from linebacker early in his college career. He can make some big hits, watch footage of the Chick -Fila Bowl. He is ferocious though and if he brings that with him to practice he will be a solid member of our team.
I have a bunch of VTech grads in my family so I see a lot of their games.
I wish Cops was on...
by Generzal Zod on Apr 26, 2010 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions
Not from LB, from where you woulnd't expect.
Was recruited as a CB, and played CB and FS.
Huh - but he can really hit
at least there are some ball skills then
I wish Cops was on...
by Generzal Zod on Apr 26, 2010 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, this is no Michael Boulware experiment
He may have a LB build, but he’s never played the position. He was also a QB in high school. SS looks like a natural spot for him.
by B.B.Finnegan on Apr 26, 2010 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions
The secondary should improve our pass rush
Isn’t that the reasoning why Tapp got to QB so much, but didn’t get many sacks last year. With a new scheme and a new secondary, we should be better.
I went into this draft feeling that Seattle would have to pull off a hell of a draft
to make me feel like the regime isn’t screwed. They did. There are a few minor quibbles I have with the draft, but they are minor. Overall, Q/PM did a great job.
Now with more lemon bars!
After this draft, do we put the "P/QM" moniker on hold?
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - Morgan
idk
what that stands for – help?
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
I think the thought was
that Schneider would be nothing more than a figurehead = Queen.
Although this doesn't seem to be the case
so maybe we need a new nickname?
And we're starting to get somewhere =P
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - Morgan
Pete Carroll is to John Schneider as the Primer Minister of England is to the Queen.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Wait
There’s a Primer Minister?? Is he even better than the Prime Minister?
by Matt Erickson on Apr 24, 2010 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions
A good draft doesn't change the influence Carroll has on the organization
But there is little evidence at the moment that Schneider is just his coffee boy.
I rather like the Q/PM moniker actually.
Even if it is found to be untrue, we can use it in an ironic way!
Fans are typically idiots.
by The Typical Idiot Fan on Apr 24, 2010 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, and although it's not his role, I love automatically picturing Pete in a tiara
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions
More interesting
to picture PC and Schneider launching off into “Bohemian Rhapsody” . . .
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions
.. Do you picture Pete in tiara often?
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Yep
Just like I always picture Jim Mora in one of these
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Please do.
Speaking of tiresome…
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
What the french, toast?
by Wayward Llama on Apr 24, 2010 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions
What we need...
…is a off-season summary.
Who was added. Who left, cause I can’t keep it straight. For example, we kept adding this one-off d-linemen in trades.
Draft?! Draft?!
Don’t talk about the draft!
by SeahawksFanInNY on Apr 24, 2010 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions
My only criticism is the Thomas pick
I’m not down on him, and I do think he was good value at his draft spot. We had a chance at our choice of DE’s, which is a far higher value pick.
Still an epic draft though, I can’t get over how lucky we were to land Okung.
That was my favorite of the draft.
The Okung was technically the best, and most important, but I liked the Thomas pick the most, followed by the trade for Washington.
Agreed.
It spoke the highest of Carroll/Thomas. Okung was a no brainer. But I was afraid they’d pass up on Thomas for someone else.
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - Morgan
He appears to be a great player
so I’m not going to belabor it too much. We just had a glaring need at DE in my opinion. If they do implement the elephant, this criticism might be misguided.
I think the issue is relative value.
If there had been an elite pass-rushing DE, and the second safety simply good, it would have been easy to take the DE. But I think the situation was reversed, and picked accordingly.
True
same thing probably applied with the QBs.
Precisely what I felt that the case was.
Value. The Seahawks valued Thomas more than any of the other picks at 14. They were going to trade back if he wasn’t available.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Our biggest need was in the secondary
Instead of drafting someone like Mays who is one-dimensional, they got a player in Thomas that can also line up as a corner. They almost filled two needs with one pick.
I heard a Stat
I was listening to Philly Sorts radio on Friday, and they brought up a stat about 1st round DE’s that over 70% don’t live up to the hype. They listed 3-4 guys the eagles have picked over the past couple years that were firsat round busts.
Conversly they said Safeties taken that high play (are in the league) for much longer. The guy hosting the Show wanted them to pick Thomas…He had been talking about them taking Thomas all week. Said he was so excited when they traded up to 13, then disappointed when they chose Graham over Thomas.
Can't help but think
That with our coice of DEs, PC/Schneider looked at it and went “well, none of those are very good”.
It wasn’t the strongest DE class.
by Thomas Beekers on Apr 24, 2010 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions
I hope we sign Kyle Bosworth OLB UCLA
Tell me it wouldn’t be see to see another Bosworth playing LB for the hawks.
Major holes filled: safety, LT
Major upgrades (makeover): RB
Upgrades (adding competition): TE, CB, DE, DT, QB
Posting from the Raleigh World Beer Fest
Go Seahawks. Long live Field Gulls. Fuck yeah.
“…Alex Smith picked off by Earl Thomas!”
All The Way, AIRBORNE!!!
by Airborne Hawk Guy on Apr 24, 2010 2:33 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Ooh, I love beer fests
The Portland Beerfest is one of my favorite times of the year.
I've just realized that the Jets used the Seahawks pick to take a guy named John Conners
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
+1 internets foe you
All The Way, AIRBORNE!!!
by Airborne Hawk Guy on Apr 24, 2010 2:52 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
The only major opportunity that didn't happen...
…was to land one of the top DTs. Not sure when this could have happened, but other than that, I think they blasted it out of the park.
They essentially added a QB (Whitehurst), 2 RBs (White, Washington) without costing a pick, as they all involved in moving up or down and adding picks.
They added two has-been and maybe yet-to-be WRs in Williams/Williams.
They got the best LT in the draft (number 1 need) and arguably the best safety (Thomas) plus a deal on the Mays look-a-like but much cheaper SS in Chanceller.
They stole Golden Tate at 60, and McCoy in the 6th(?)
They got great value out of every pick, and entirely made over the team. Next year might be a lot more fun than many of us once thought.
I think Tate was my favorite pick
the guy is just a playmaker. Something we sorely need.
We play the teams that drafted them.
I’d bet we play maybe one of them =P
"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - Morgan
Bradfor for sure.
I am not certain Clausen or Tebow will see the field.
Matt Moore looked pretty good at the end of last year.
True.
I’d say odds that Clausen starts for Carolina at some point this season are pretty high. He’s ready to play, and John Fox really needs to prove that he was the right pick.
As for Tebow, yeah, obviously he won’t start. But you know Mcguffin or whatever his name is really wants to get the kid on the field somehow. As a wildcat QB, maybe. “TeCat”.
Bradford… well, he’s toast.
I think this was the best QB pick of the draft
Clausen going to Carolina. He might start right away, given the competition.
Perfect situation.
Great running game, established offensive line, good defense. Low-pressure surroundings.
Just woke up
Did we get Leon Washington for a handful of magic beans? Whuh?
Seahawks Fans Cannot Be Cured
by TheLaird on Apr 24, 2010 2:39 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
After watching Clausen slide
I’m completely over not getting him. There has to be some medical issue, or serious character issue for that many teams to pass on him. He simply looked too good on the field for that many teams to pass on him otherwise.
Or QB wasn't a pressing need for most teams.
And it might be more of an indication of how deep this draft truly was.
If I have a son, I'm naming him Golden
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
He better be badass
because that just lends itself to bullying.
If his name is Golden, he won't have to be.
He’s Golden, therefore, he is.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, his name would litterally mean, "Golden New Mountain"
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Make his middle name "silverback"
and even Nick Reed would respect him.
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
Hahahaha.
That’s an idea!
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 8:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Shinyama
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I absolutely loved this draft
I remember watching the second round and when it was at pick number 52 I was thinking to myself “I want Golden Tate”, and with every pick I was relieved he wasn’t chosen. Then up came the Seahawks and they picked him and I was filled with joy! Yes! Awesome draft.
by Pessimistic Optimist on Apr 24, 2010 2:41 PM PDT reply actions
Loved the draft....
Anyone know how soon teams can sign the undrafted players?
Like almost immediately.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Dorin Dickerson
I can’t believe he lasted till the 7th round. I wish we would have picked him.
Seahawks Fans Cannot Be Cured
The secondary could be intriguing
Does Wilson become the nickel CB with Chancellor starting, or does Babs become the nickel with two rookie safeties
We have a new CB too.
A big one. This is the way I see it within a year or two:
CB Trufant
CB Thurmond
FS Thomas
SS Chancellor
5 Wilson
10 Babs, or Jennings
Though Trufant is nearing the end of his prime, and is expensive.
I must say. After this draft, and everything that went with it. I'm am not drinking the Koolaid.
I am fucking injecting that shit STRAIGHT into my jugular. These past 3 days are a dream come true. Wowowowowowowowowowowowow.
by twocolorcrayon on Apr 24, 2010 2:51 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Amen, Brother.
On Wednesday, it was Playoffs?! Now it’s Playoffs…
OOOOOH!!!!! That was NASTY!!!!!!!!
Nice drafting by the Seahawks
Clearly Carroll wants your team to go to a wide open passing attack with the WRs you’re adding. Do you think he’ll be bringing in any UDFA QBs or is it going to be Hasselbeck and Whitehurst next year?
I was right, you were wrong.
We past up on Clausen and McCoy
So even if we bring in an UDFA QB, it won’t be to realistically compete, just a future/3rd QB
Pretty sure it'll be Hasselhurst
with some Teel backup.
Can't believe how good the niners defense is looking
After picking up mays and…name escapes me…but that new nose tackle you got. Sounds really complete now.
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
Picked up Navarro Bowman in the 3rd
but he’s going to be playing ST and backup ILB until Spikes leaves.
Ricky Jean-Francois is backing up Franklin now.
I was right, you were wrong.
An undrafted FA will be brought in to compete with Teel
I was hoping for Zac Robinson in the 7th, but oh well, they’re all-in on the Whitehurst project for now.
by lemonverbena on Apr 24, 2010 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions
I was hoping for Snead or Robinson.
But I think Teel may be better then both.
by Scruffy Lefty on Apr 24, 2010 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Priority Free Agent I'd like
Danario Alexander, Missouri WR — troubling history of knee injuries, but phenomenal run-after-catch. Great hands. Super tough.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
oh, and this
http://www.rockmnation.com/2010/4/24/1441409/hey-nfl#comments
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Who ended up drafting
that OT that fucked his sister?
It sounds so gross when you put it like that!
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions
you put it a way
that doesn’t sound gross?
by Snuffleupagus on Apr 24, 2010 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Sure, we got Leon Washington, but that allowed the Jets to draft John Conner
The the apocalyptic near-future, who will save us from the machines?
by Anticitizen_One on Apr 24, 2010 3:13 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I am so tired of the Nick Reed jokes
so your “obviously” made me LOL in my pants.
I'm frightened that your penis has the ability to laugh.
Unless “LOL” stands for “Lots of Leaking”.
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
by SSreporters on Apr 24, 2010 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Why doesn't Carrol like Forsett?
Don’t get it. I think Forsett could be very, very good.
I was right, you were wrong.
Interesting.
We must have a Caroll mind-reader here. Nothing in print declares such a thing.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Sam Bradford, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, RB Jonathan Dwyer. Top-10 [5 for 7].
the fact that Forsett doesn't get playing time and that you've added
two new RBs through FA doesn’t indicate to you that he’s not happy with Forsett?
I was right, you were wrong.
When has Pete had the opportunity to give Justin playing time?
For all we know, Pete could have gotten Leon and LenDale to be depth behind Forsett.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 25, 2010 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Does the fact that the 49ers drafted Dixon...
Mean they aren’t happy with Gore? Forsett can’t carry the ball every down, it isn’t going to happen. The team needed to improve on goal-line and short yardage (White) and on returns and reception-back yardage (Washington.) Forsett could still get a lot of playing time, but we don’t have any idea who will take most of the carries. According to Carroll, it’s all about competition, so whoever shows the best ability to carry the ball will probably get the most reps. Hopefully…
Drafting a guy in the 6th round
is quite different than bringing in two high profile free agents.
I was right, you were wrong.
They weren't free agents.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Being high profile does not translate into player value.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 25, 2010 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions
He's happy with Hasselbeck
but brought in Whitehurst.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 25, 2010 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions
You draft guys in the 4th and 5th round for depth
or sign them as UFAs. You don’t get high-profile players for depth. They’re brought in to compete for a starting job.
It would be like us going out to sign Brent Celek for “depth” at TE
I was right, you were wrong.
They traded a 5th for Washington and traded down ~8 spots in the 4th and 6th rounds for LenDale.
Carroll has tended to use two or three backs in a rotation at USC and the three guys he has now all complement each other pretty well with LenDale having the extra benefit of familiarity. Also, as good as Forsett is he tends to wear down over the course of a game, getting some quality backs to soak up some extra carries was a great move.
But remember, we only gave up the equivalent of a 5th rounder for both of them.
I think it just means that he’s not happy going into camp with just Forsett, Jones and Rankin. Personally, I think Jones is the one who should be the most concerned.
by Mind of no mind on Apr 26, 2010 12:38 AM PDT up reply actions
agreed - he won't make it through camp
Washington and White have shown they can play in this league. Jones has been mediocre but with ZBS if he listens to Gibbs he could be a stud. He doesn’t seem to have a fumble problem so who knows.
I wish Cops was on...
by Generzal Zod on Apr 26, 2010 12:40 AM PDT up reply actions
I haven't seen it either.
I was hoping if the smileyman had a source, he’d toss it up.
I figured we got these veterans (Washington and White) to increase competition and give us options. I’d suspect at least three of these guys stick, so Forsett still has a shot. I’m inclined to see Jones as the odd-man out, but Jones probably looks great in a pair of shorts, so there’s that.
At the Combine Carroll said he wanted a more physical presence at running back
To me that indicates he’s not happy with the current RBs on your roster.
I was right, you were wrong.
It indicates that he wants a more physical presence at running back.
So, if he brought in more guys, then it indicates that they feels these guys are physical. We were not very good on running the football, and Forsett was a 7th rounder. I’m not saying he’s awful, I’m saying he’s okay, and adding more running backs to compete doesn’t mean he doesn’t like Forsett, it means he thinks we need players who are more physical. I’d say White and Washington are more physical than Forsett and Jones. But I haven’t seen anything yet that specifically indicates that Carroll is getting rid of Forsett or will give him less playing time than last year.
This says as much about Jones as it does about Forsett.
I don’t know many people who would classify Forsett as “physical.” Sure, he exists and occupies space, which is the definition of having physicality, but he’s not “physical.”
If he said he wanted more pass rushing at DT, that wouldn't mean he's unhappy with Mebane.
Most of us wanted a power component to add to Forsett. The investment in Leon Washington and Lendale White is either a complete rape if by high-profile you mean highly productive, or indicative of their current place in the league, which was each back being squeezed out of their current teams.
Carroll has said he wants competition at every position, and lived up to it. Just because he found a way to cheaply add talent that you might think is good, doesn’t mean he’s completely invested in White and Washington. Had he traded something more substantial for either one I’d tend to agree with you. But he added them with barely more effort than it would have taken to ask Blount to come in, investment was small.
Forsett will get his chance just like the rest. If the Denver system was any indication, maybe the Seahawks can have great success from one or two HBs, trade them, and let others on the roster succeed after that.
part of ZBS is that the RB hits the hole as it forms, that they run in the spot where the hole will open
that leads me to believe that LenDale may be the most confident in that system since he is a power runner. Force and Washington are fast and shifty so outside plays are what they will do. White could hit the hole and power through it even if it never forms and getting a few yards.
I wish Cops was on...
by Generzal Zod on Apr 26, 2010 12:37 AM PDT up reply actions
I think Forsett is confident because he ran in that system in college and last year ran a version of it.
Washington might have to adjust to it, but Lendale should be somewhat familiar with it as well.
Great draft on paper.
Now can anyone speed up time so we can see the actual product?
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
Apparently he's slimmed down to 220.
He get’s fit for his time off. He’ll be back to 250 for game day.
Here's hoping Carroll can keep him in check.
I always liked White… he moves piles, and scores touchdowns.
White can be our short yardage back.
Washington for the speed, and Forsett for everything else.
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
I cant wait for Forsett to get 60% of the carries this year
If he doesn’t it will be a tragedy.
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
He'll be busy playing special teams.
and taking 40% of the carries.
2/3 of the world is covered by water. The rest is covered by Marcus Trufant.
Washington will also do a lot of kick returns too
that may cut down on carries.
I wish Cops was on...
by Generzal Zod on Apr 26, 2010 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions
So with Konz
is there a chance that due to his lack of position/position flexibility they try to mold him into a Stanley Havili kind of role?
Probably a pipe dream at this point.
[DELETED ZOMG NO POLITICS]
Or will he be like Ducket?
when Holmgren didn’t know what to do with him
by SeahawkSammy on Apr 24, 2010 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Duckett never had the season White did two years ago
TJ was always more about what he might be, not what he was. Lendale will run hard through the tackles.
I feel so much better about our
Secondary,O-line and Receivers.The D -line could use some help but there’s always next years draft.I think we’re heading in the right direction.
Watching Mora on the NFL Network was like
pulling teeth every time he talked about the Seahawks.
Very sore subject for him.
A Ruston Webster/Jim Mora draft in 2010 would've been disastrous.
Kicker at #6, Pouncey at #14 as center, etc.
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
Doesn't Webster still have the same job he did under Ruskell?
If so, he’s played a big part of putting this draft board together.
I totally agree with what you’re saying, though – a Webster/Mora draft would’ve meant sticking with the status quo, and I doubt they have a draft this exciting without the decision to blow it up and start re-building from scratch.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
I disagree.
HE was the one that brought the seahawks up as his team that made the best moves. I think he was incredibly complimentary.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions
I just read on rotoworld that he pulled out at the last moment and changed to the Titans.
by Mind of no mind on Apr 25, 2010 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Yep.
hahaha
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
What the french, toast?
by Wayward Llama on Apr 25, 2010 6:45 PM PDT up reply actions
They now have Seattle with
Seahawks
Rob Rose, DT, Ohio State
Quintin Hancock, WR, Tennessee
Stafon Johnson to the Titans
[DELETED ZOMG NO POLITICS]
Here's our list
Seahawks
Rob Rose, DT, Ohio State
Quintin Hancock, WR, Tennessee
Michael Bennett, DE, Texas A&M
Tony Fein, LB, Mississippi
Devin Moore, RB, Wyoming
Dave Philistin, LB, Maryland
Andre Ramsey, T, Ball State
Tyler Roehl, RB, North Dakota State
by SeahawkSammy on Apr 24, 2010 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Something's wrong with that list...
I think its mixing up last year and this year.
Its back to just Rose and Hancock now
I was just as stoked when I saw that name again too.
But I thought he was signed by someone after we cut him. That list is old.
BENNETT IS BACK!
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
Nah this is wrong. Devin Moore?
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
Rose looks interesting
4.74 40 at 290 pounds, described as a gifted pass rusher, needs to grow up.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions
I think I've found the object of my unhealthy obsession
I love toolsy underachievers, I always feel like we’ll be the ones that change their careers.
Rose - below is excerpted from the link above. Isn't that fast for a 290lb d-lineman?
Rose, a 290-pound defensive lineman, reported times of 4.76 or 4.79 seconds in the 40-yard dash.
Yes
hence my comment (though my typo made him even a bit faster). Rose was actually recruited as a DE — he’s gained 40+ pounds over his OSU career, without really slowing down much.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions
That's last year's.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions
This draft, at least initially,
has given me about 15 more reasons to be excited about this football team. Buy or sell on Q/PM? At this point, I’m buying.
Kinda feel like the Q/PM moniker should be retired
At least while they’re looking like they’re succeeding.
I don't think Q/PM was ever meant to be derogatory.
It was just a way to describe the power relationship between Carroll and Schneider. Plus, Q/PM is way easier to write than Carroll/Schneider
by Kevaru on Apr 24, 2010 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Except, why are "Super" and "Alpha" caps, but not the rest of it?
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Super is a proper noun?!?
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 5:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, it sure looks like Schneider is the PM when it comes to the draft.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions
So can we interpret the Hawks NOT taking a late round QB
indicates they like Teel at least enough to keep him another year?
He WAS supposed to be a 2-3 year development project after all. I’m glad to see he might get that chance. I wasnt super excited about any of the QBs in this draft, especially the ones up for grabs late.
Maybe. Teel may have shown enough to only compete against an UDFA instead of spending a low pick on a QB.
I was banging the drum for Zac Robinson, but I can see where they wouldn’t want to waste draft resources on the position when there are so many needs.
by lemonverbena on Apr 24, 2010 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Queen/Prime Minister
Implying that Schneider is the Queen and PC is the Prime Minister, making all the decisions.
Queen and Prime Minister
Means that Schneider is just a figure head and Pete is making all the decisions.
[DELETED ZOMG NO POLITICS]
I'm disappointed the Hawks didn't sign Brandon James from Florida.
That solves the kick returner positions immediately and effectively. Kid is electric.
It's not really an issue unless you also choose to carry two kickers and guys like Mike Hass and Logan Payne.
Payne has no real practical value to the team and can be fairly easily replaced by someone off of the practice squad. A good kick returner has value and guys with that sort of athleticism can be integrated into the offense as screen backs and as parts of gadgets.
Leon and Golden fix that already.
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
They need it. Their special teams is just terrible.
The Seahawks have traded my signature to the Detroit Lions for a 6th round draft pick.
Jameson Konz - the next Marques Colston?
I do seem to recall the same phrase was used regarding Colston ‘nondescript college career’
I can just see Whitehurst to Konz, beating the now too short Polamalu, no jersey names even visible.
You can, if your name is Antonio Gates.
Just not in football.
Anyways, Kent St. is in my college’s conference, seen the guy play several times, he’s pretty good.
Mora talking about the Seahawks.
Sounds like he is having a tough time saying they had a good draft.
I disagree. I think he's been incredibly gracious.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree.
I think this is actually good for him. If the Seahawks had a more questionable draft, it might have come accross as sour grapes for Mora to criticise the team, but since it was such a home run, he doesn’t have to choose his words so carefully.
by Mind of no mind on Apr 24, 2010 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions
I could give two shits about anything he did or didn't say.
It’s over. It’s the past. On with it.
/prays
I assume that's based at the thread in general and not me specifically?
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions
No, not you or anybody personally.
Sorry if it came off that way. I mean Mora’s words mean nothing to me. I don’t care about the Mora-parade.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Sam Bradford, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, RB Jonathan Dwyer. [0 for 7].
It's okay to root for the Blazers, since Paul Allen owns the team, and they voted against the Sonics move
But the NBA can go fuck themselves.
What are the "Blazers?"
I know not this “NBA” thing that keeps coming into the conversation…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions
It was the old pro basketball league that folded. Remember?
A few people have seen its ghost, though. Not that many, but a few.
Clay Bennett should be including in the fucking themselves conversation.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions
included*
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Who?
Don’t seem to recognize that name.
I had a dream today that the young Sonics were kicking the Lakers up and down the court. Now that I’m awake I have this fuzzy realization that the Lakers looked bad today, but I’m not sure why.
Sometimes I feel dirty watching basketball, like today.
Anybody know if Ciron Black signed with a team?
Heard something about the Steelers but no confirmation.
Could we sign Jarrett Brown real quick?
Somebody please make this happen, kthx.
Seahawks Fans Cannot Be Cured
Yeah... Blount and Dixon for a 6th round pick.
And no matter what anybody says about his coverage skills, Mays at #49 is the definition of buy-low.
I concur.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Jason Campbell to the Raiders?!
Did I miss this?
by Anticitizen_One on Apr 24, 2010 4:29 PM PDT reply actions
the first Hawks game I went to.......
in the dome was vs. the raiders.
I’ll never forget the fan sign: “I paid my last dime to see the raiders get slimed”
Both Campbells
Since the Raiders drafted Bruce in the 4th round. After all the shit-talking about how awful Al Davis is on so many mock drafts, it’s nice to seem the team draft competently (not that I ever want the Raiders to do well). Too many snot-nosed brats out there making easy jokes against The Undead Owner; it got old real fast.
You can watch Earl Thomas in the national championship game replay right now
ESPN U – 621
Just watched him tackle Ingram.
Nothing will ever top Mack Strong.
Greatest name for a FB ever…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 10:04 PM PDT up reply actions
No, Mack gets it.
HOWEVER, Boss and Champ get the best brother tandem names hand down…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 25, 2010 12:21 AM PDT up reply actions
SF picked up at least 3-4 starters in this draft.
Bowman + Singletary is not good for Hawks fans.
I’m not gonna pick them over New Orleans or Green Bay though.
Saints got lucky too many games
like the skins game or even the championship vs minny. SF and Minny have skill weapons and a knock your fuckin head off OL and D’s
I totally respect with the Saints did last year
But I wonder what happens if Brees gets hurt, or becomes much less effective? There is a lot of talent on that team, but like the Colts so much of their production revolves around the QB. This will be Drew’s 5th year in New Orleans….makes me wonder if they can keep it all up.
And the guys they picked up are physical
San Francisco is looking to hit people in the mouth this year. Teams won’t look forward to taking on this team. I know I’m not looking forward to Week 1, even though I like how this team is starting to shape up.
Green Bay seems to have our number
(flashes of the 90s there with Favre). New Orleans I think we can play close, but the problem with them is they can put up points in a hurry.
We open up at home against the Saints and that’ll be fun.
I was right, you were wrong.
You think the NFC West is going to produce two playoff teams?
Well I’ll be
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Saints used up all their magic
Vikings would have won by 3 TDs w/o 5 turn overs. they can’t match up with smash mouth teams. especially when those teams can score 30 pts. a game.
Jesus. I know this is way off topic, but my god I forgot how funny Mars Attacks is- thank you Encore.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 5:00 PM PDT reply actions
Well played!
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions
We got Byers from USC
The DT from Duke went to the Dolphins.
Rose from OSU would probably be a better fit alongside Bane anyway
and I’m not sure he’s that much more of a risk than Oghobaase. Granger looks like a better DT prospect than either if he can stay healthy.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions
UDFA's updated
From Here
Seahawks
Rob Rose, DT, Ohio State
Quintin Hancock, WR, Tennessee
Josh Pinkard, DB, USC
DeMarcus Granger, DT, Oklahoma
Jeff Byer, OG, USC
There are holes in these Trojans (games), so months from now
You might be surprised what you got or nothing will have happened and you will discard them.
So far I am completely wrong on the Seahawks getting a low-round or UDFA quarterback
by lemonverbena on Apr 24, 2010 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions
If Zac Robinson turns into something I will be less than amused
Actually that’s not true, he’s a good guy and I wish him the best at NE.
by lemonverbena on Apr 24, 2010 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh and this might be early and not directing at any previous jokes, but can we put a ban on all Lendale White fat Jokes?
Unless he does something that truly calls for the joke to be made, or if he comes into camp at 300 pounds…in which case it wouldn’t be a joke anymore!
He's been LenWhale for several years for me...
Not sure if I’ll be able to lose the nickname or not. Might depend on how he weighs in at the start of Training Camp.
God, I hope to get there again this year. It was a blast watching play-action fullback fake passes to the blocking tight end.
/prays
It's a term of endearment at this point
No need to make a big deal about it. As long as it doesn’t get over-done, let’s let people say what they want to say.
FatDale isn't very funny at all.
I sometimes have trouble not saying LenWhale though, it’s kind of ingrained in my mind.
I wanted to ask which players are on your roster to play DE and do you play a 3-4 or a 4-3 under Carrol?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLTLNIzGiLY
"We're going to get the players we have targeted," Baalke said. "I promise you that."
It sounds like they're going to be using a 3-4 style package with Curry lined up as an elephant linebacker
So, 3-4 personnel that behaves like a 4-3.
Hybrid 4-3 with one DE playing stand up.
Right now we’ve got Aaron Curry starting at the stand-up DE and Lawrence Jackson playing the traditional. Drafted one of each today as well.
Curry was in a regular LB role in minicamp
the first team D-line was Cholston-Mebane-Cole-LoJack.
Who the hell is Cholston?
Did we drunk-dial the Jets and get taken?
by trippsixxes on Apr 24, 2010 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
That would be sick if Clemmons actually wins a starting gig
but I think that spot’s Curry’s to lose.
Oh that scares the hell out of me because Seattle's DT's are way too small to run any kind of 3-4
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 5:47 PM PDT up reply actions
From what I understand of it.,
they will still line up in a tradition 4-3 but one of the DEs will be standing up. It shouldn’t change anything about our DTs.
by seattle_since_81 on Apr 24, 2010 7:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Our DT size will make a difference
Because we are using line backers to play that other DE position not traditional DE that’s weight that our LB is giving up and conversely this is why DT’s in a 3-4 need to be HUGE. Because they are going to be double teamed and pushed around. They have to hold their ground. Our DT are not built for for a 3-4 Hell Mebane could almost play end.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions
Who did you want?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLTLNIzGiLY
"We're going to get the players we have targeted," Baalke said. "I promise you that."
Looks like we signed Reggie Carter, OLB, UCLA
according to nepatriotsdraft.com (not on the Danny O’Neil list)
Seahawks Fans Cannot Be Cured
Sando's list includes him as well.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Check the sidebar
DJ C-Raig posted it as a fanpost. Or, here: http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/17573/seahawks-sign-15-undrafted-free-agents
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions
What do you think is the likelihood of us going out to get Osi and Fat Albert?
Here’s hoping…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 5:43 PM PDT reply actions
27 roster additions -- that'll keep Morgan busy, for a while :)
Seahawks Fans Cannot Be Cured
by TheLaird on Apr 24, 2010 5:53 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Seacocks passed on Taylor Mays! Big MISTAKE!!!
Boohaahahahahahahahaha! Crown the 9ers! I’m out!
"Bar None!" - William Floyd
Well, the party ain't complete without a troll
and the uglier and stupider, the better . . .
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 5:56 PM PDT up reply actions
First we didn't pass on him we got a better guy than him
And we got Golden Tate the guy who caused Mays to fall to the second round…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Well he got a response tree made up of at least 10 posts
so he can chock it up as a successful troll
Not really
because the response tree went OT on his troll pretty quickly.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 6:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Got douche?
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions
It must be fun to live in a world where the results of the draft are black and white
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I didn't see any other colors out there....
by Matt Erickson on Apr 24, 2010 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Well
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Leroy Hill isn't opposed to gettin Chinese
by trippsixxes on Apr 24, 2010 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
why am I not surprised no one picked this one up.
rec’d for the sly mary jane reference.
by Seahawks4life on Apr 25, 2010 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I admit I snickered earlier...
just didn’t rec.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 25, 2010 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Chung is one-eight Chinese or something
He’s a Jamaican through and through.
by Thomas Beekers on Apr 25, 2010 3:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Ward is asian and black
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLTLNIzGiLY
"We're going to get the players we have targeted," Baalke said. "I promise you that."
almost every team in the league passed on him....twice.
including the niners.
good job dumpster diving
Passed on Mays and got Thomas.
Yep, we’re doomed.
It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
What the french, toast?
by Wayward Llama on Apr 24, 2010 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions
so 2 tryout WR, 2 drafted WR, and we signed a UFA WR
doesn’t sound good for Obomanu. I’m intrigued by Housh-Reggie Williams-Tate package
I think it will be
Housh Tate and Butler personally because of this group Butler is the only one with the height and speed to stretch the field.
We will keep both of the Williams’ for packages where run spread 4 and have Housh and Reggie run deep to open up the middle for under patterns bubble screen and crossing patterns.
We will Likely do the same thing with 2 TE sets.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Tate will make plays downfield.
I guarantee it. This kid is tough as nails… his lower body strength will enable him to outmuscle corners for jump balls, a la Steve Smith.
I think he Tate will get down field
I’m just saying packages will feature different patterns
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Haha, that's not what you said, but whatever.
We’ll have to see what Bates brings to the table. I’m eagerly awaiting John’s analysis of his work in Denver.
This is exactly what I said
But there is a difference between stretching the Defense and getting down field… Stretching means all you do is Run down field and if you think that is all they will use Tate for then you need to go back and watch his film.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I think the point is
that, at least as per Morgan, Tate’s strength is likely going to be YAC on shorter patterns, not deep routes.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I just don't see it.
I know he’s not big, but he has impressive body control from the highlights I’ve seen. He does a great job at achieving a last-minute seperation from the defender, either by way of a perfectly-timed hop or a gentle bump, both of which I attribute to great lower-body strength.
That’s not to say he won’t excel at short-range YAC plays!
He's not gonna be a DeSean Jackson type WR
he’ll have some highlight dragon catches, but his strength will be short and screen catches with lots of yards after the catch. Think Hines Ward if we didn’t hate him
That's not DeSean Jackson's game, either
He’s just goddamned fast, not muscly.
Teams will intially come up to press Tate to keep him from getting quick releases into short patterns like slants, and he’ll beat them with his strength and release deep. Eventually this will balance out with those defenses backing off, but that’ll just make the underneath stuff easier.
This is what made Steve Smith so dangerous… you HAD to double him because he’d kill you at any spot on the field.
Of course, this is just my own observation based on watching Youtube stuff. Not anything scientific like John’s analysis. But I’m calling it now…
I really like Butler
but he’s 5’10 and I don’t think Schneider wants the outside receivers under 6 ft. Hope he sticks around cause he’d make a great 4th receiver/gunner. When I made that post I already completely forgot we still had Branch on the team.
Branch will get traded
I think he will go to the Skins, or the Giants
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 6:29 PM PDT up reply actions
The Pats, I hope.
They seem to love acquiring older vets at WR, and Branch even said he’d like to go back there. Plus, the Pats always seem to have a million extra draft picks.
The Differense
Is the pats can’t help us with our pass rush
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions
not sure how we got to pass rush from here.
but it doesn’t matter since player for player trades are nearly unheard of.
I think we trade Branch and a 4th
For either Osi or Haynesworth and it won’t be a straight player for player.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I'd do that.
In a second. Doubt that would be enough for either, though.
Maybe if JPP makes Osi irrelevant, but DE depth is pretty important.
Buttler is really good
He had a great Summer last year and I imagine people will start getting him the ball now that our QB won’t get sacked every 3rd play.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 6:30 PM PDT up reply actions
I wish I could believe that Hasselbeck is not getting sacked every third play
I do, but until I see something more substantial, I don’t believe this O-line will be all that good this year.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions
I think we can agree
that it will be better than last year so Sacked every 4th or 5th means 1 or 2 more plays to try and get the ball down the field.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions
We can't know that.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Why can't we know that?
We have a LT playing LT and a RT playing RT and a G playing G and not a mix and match of 3 teams practice squad players. This line isn’t perfect but it is better of that you can be sure.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:57 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree with Carl.
No matter how good he was in college, you can’t count on a rookie LT to be good. If he’s above-average, that’s great. If he’s average, you take it.
With two new players on the line, there is no way to know how well they’ll mesh right away.
Thank you for saving me the time to respond. You said what I was gonna say in a shorter fashion.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions
If he's even average, he's better than what we had at LT last year.
I don’t have ANY QUESTION that this line is already better than last year’s. Outside of Okung, Hamilton is a seasoned vet at LG who will make Okung and Spencer better, Spencer is now healthy and has another year under his belt, Unger is no longer a rookie, and Locklear is back to his old spot at RT. Meanwhile, Willis can still play RT in a pinch.
Shit, all I have to say is “no Vallos” and instantly this line is better.
Agreed and then you must add the fact
That we had practice squad players from the Giants and Cards Starting for us. Oh yes this line is better…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions
You are taking a very presumptive tack. We cannot know without any evidence at the very least.
Sean Locklear was average at LT last year. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that his play and production was above average Of course, it helped that Sims was next to him, but we cannot take due credit away from Locklear, who was only called for holding 2x, false start 3x, and allowed only 1 sack. Problem was, he was hurt for almost half the season — this hurt the line rather dramatically.
And if we accept — which I’m not assuming that you are — that Locklear was at least average at LT, then it logically follows that the O-line cannot automatically be presumed as being improved without any evidence or proof that supports this with the addition of Okung.
Hamilton was brought in for veteran support and to play on the line in a mentor role due to the fact that he is very experienced in the ZBS, but we don’t know that he actually makes the line better, or those around him better. But we shall see.
Then there’s Okung’s learning curve. There WILL be some growing pains on his part. Even Clady has had his shares of struggles during his first year, though his overall body of work was impressive.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions
This was a bad offensive line last year.
It wasn’t as bad as a lot of people made it out to be but it was certainly below average. Sims was steady, Spencer was at times good and thats the extent of positive things you can say about that group. Willis was miscast in their system, Unger was bad and Locklear’s performance, and from all accounts effort, was lackluster.
There will probably be a learning curve for Okung,
but at the same time, if you feel that Locklear was average at LT, then if Okung can be at least average in his rookie year, we should be greatly improved simply because we’ll have good depth at the LT position. But I also agree that we can’t just assume Okung won’t struggle. As far as I know all of the 1st round tackles from last year other than Oher struggled. And I think Oher was allowed to start at RT before being moved to LT.
by Mind of no mind on Apr 25, 2010 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Definitely a learning curve for Okung.
But he’ll play anyway, according to Gibbs, who has already written him in as left tackle. So, he says we’ll go through those growing pains as a team. I think this means we might struggle this year a bit, and I’m hoping next year they’ve seasoned Okung enough that he’ll be the best he was meant to be.
Tackle is one of those spots where high-drafted rookies often do well immediately
And Okung looks by all accounts to be pretty much ready out of the gate.
I don’t know where SMPG is getting this idea that Locklear was “average” at LT from. I thought he was downright awful. He was much better at RT.
Because you are comparing him to Walter.
Locklear wasn’t bad. Of course he was better at RT, there are very few offensive tackles that you couldn’t say that about.
Good point.
People hated Sims for not being Hutch, it makes sense that Locklear is downgraded by many for not being Jones.
by Mind of no mind on Apr 25, 2010 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Key point right there.
Locklear was an ‘average’ LT. He’s an ‘above-average’ if not outright ‘good’ RT. He’s superior to any other RT on our roster last year (and currently). Simply plugging him in at RT upgrades our line. Putting Lock at RT and getting an ‘average’ season from Okung greatly upgrades the line. Plus, Lock can help Unger’s play on the right side and Unger has another year of experience. I’d venture to say that Hamilton is equally serviceable to Sims given the scheme.
Plus, Spencer won’t have a giant club of a cast on his hand. Not sure if that’s a good or bad thing, actually.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Sam Bradford, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, RB Jonathan Dwyer. Top-10 [5 for 7].
He was thrown under the bus last year
the years before that the whole unit didn’t play well and we had wash outs as our running backs.
I wish Cops was on...
by Generzal Zod on Apr 26, 2010 12:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Misfit74
All good points…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 8:09 PM PDT up reply actions
This is my guess for the WR's, circa September 2010
Roster:
Housh
Tate
Butler
R. Williams
M. Williams
pratice squad:
Zorn/Zane/whateverthehellhairykid’snameis
I do believe Obu will be cut and Branch traded or cut.
The question is… who will play gunner on this team?
I don't really know anything.
But I have a hard time seeing both Williams making it. Regardless, we’ve got a much better core than we had last year.
I bet that Branch will still be on the team in September
I don’t think teams would trade for him considering his salary and he is still productive enough to keep on the roster. I think the only way Branch gets cut is if he doesn’t compete in training camp or if Butler proves to be as capable as Branch.
Why is everyone assuming both Williams' will make the roster?
inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
It's not an "assumption", just a prediction based on what else we have.
Who else is going to fit those spots? Obu? Morey? We need to carry at least five WR’s, probably even six considering Bates’ predelicition for multiple-WR sets. That said, Carlson will probably split out some too.
No offense djafrot
It’s just that your post happened to be the latest one I saw that pencilled in both. I would guess the odds that both of these longshots make the roster are very low, no?
inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Who says they're longshots?
After TJ, Tate, and maybe Branch, they’re probably the likeliest ones to stick. This is a new regime — they have no connection to Butler, or Branch, or any of the other holdovers.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I tend to agree...
One of those guys will make it. There isn’t a receiver on this team that could have held a USC jock.
Butler is too valuable to cast off
He had a couple of clutch moments last season, he’s still young with a lot of potential, worst case scenario of keeping him around would be a strong 4th WR option who’s a really good gunner. My guess will be that the top 4 slots will be Housh, R. Williams, Tate and Butler.
was he the gunner all year?
The only memory I have of him as a gunner was that awesome downing the ball at the 1 play against the 9ers. He was never a returner though and it was a stupid move to just put him there for the first time and expect that he could actually do something with it.
Ben Obomanu was the primary gunner if I remember correctly.
Butler’s role on special teams was pretty much limited to returning punts and kicks, and he was pretty bad at it.
Yeah, no problem.
You’d think the odds would be long, considering neither of them has made a roster on other teams. But I really don’t see anyone else on the roster that would take those spots other than Obu. Morey? We’ll see. I really don’t know how much he brings as an actual WR, and he’s not much for the future.
I’d guess Reggie has a better chance than Mike, if for no other reason than his profile is more “normal” while Mike’s is more of a big, slow TE type.
Huh?
“Neither of them has made a roster” — what? Reggie Williams has 79 career games, 189 career receptions for 2322 yards; even Mike has 30 career games and 44 career receptions for 539 yards. Granted, both have been disappointments to date, but let’s not overstate things here.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Even so, Reggie's lack of roster spot last year was not performance based...
I’m with Ancient Mariner here.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I was attempting to add some perspective on what I thought he was saying.
But without my hyperbolic absolutism blocking glasses, and while on the internet, I sometimes forget that I should smile and nod.
So let's just assume he makes the roster and then relapses and gets suspended again
that way we’re covered for good or for awesome.
Pardon the sarcasm but I hope he works out.
I wish Cops was on...
by Generzal Zod on Apr 26, 2010 12:45 AM PDT up reply actions
Given the TEs on the roster
it seems highly likely we’ll carry three, which could well keep us to five wides.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Jameson Konz?
If he does make it to the practice squad, maybe Tate or Butler.
And LB background.
I just envision him being a pro bowl special teamer at some point, without anything to go off of but intrigue.
I don't mean to take up space or waste anyone's time, but I feel compelled to do so
RE: the amount of WRs we will keep. Consider that, once the final roster is set, the team will probably end up with:
3 Quarterbacks
5 Running Backs
3 (or 4) Tight Ends
9 (or 10) Offensive Linemen
5 (or 6) Defensive Tackles
4 Defensive Ends
6 Linebackers
9 (or 10) Defensive Back
Plus 1 Kicker, Punter and Long snapper…..that leaves room for 6 receivers. Maybe 7, if he have one less linebacker or d-back.
But there is no way this team ends up with only 5 receivers. Not in the modern NFL, even if Carroll runs a 2TE set on every player (which he won’t).As tempting as it might be right now, I’m sure it’s much MUCH too early to start speculating about who makes it to the 53-man roster.
I currently rank the receivers as TJ/Tate/Butler/Branch/Martin/Obu/Morey/M-Will/R-Will/Konz/rest of UFAs
That’s over 10 guys right there.
I ranked both Williams lower than Obumanu and Morey because they were signed at the minimum after a tryout. It’s up to them to knock off the guys ahead of them.
I think safeties need to have a certain understanding of the game
and I don’t think an athlete turned football player a year ago would have that certain understanding
Dude's played Linebacker his entire life until 13 games ago.
I think he could figure out Safety.
He’s pick number two hundred and somethin… he better start making up positions he could play.
Actually, I think he played WR in high school
and was converted to LB in college. Seems to me I remember reading that, anyway.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 8:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Hmmm... converted WR from TE from LB from WR...
Maybe the guy just doesn’t know how to play football.
I’ll be surprised if he makes the roster.
More likely, his coaches just weren't sure how to make the best use of him
We see these kinds of stories all the time; some of them make it, some don’t. WR’s probably the best bet for him, though. You’re probably right that he won’t make the active roster this season — I’d bet they’ll try to practice-squad him — but given a year or two, maybe he’ll turn into something.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh, I really doubt he makes the roster.
As John (I think) said, he’s a project, and probably going to the practice squad.
Who the heck knows?
Obviously anything physically reasonable is possible — he won’t be playing DT, OL, or probably QB — but all we know at this point is they plan to start him off at WR. From that point, he’ll develop or he won’t, and they’ll do what they do accordingly.
by The Ancient Mariner on Apr 24, 2010 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions
We don't need safeties
all of the sudden.
But I can see them turning him into a gunner or some other kind of special-teams ace.
The draft is pretty fun with two 1st-round picks
Having only 1 next season is gonna be pretty boring.
So, to be clear
We gave up a 3rd round pick and took a worse 2nd rounder for Charlie while the Raiders got Jason Campbell for a 4th round pick.
Charlie Whitehurst must be one hell of a guy.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 10:17 PM PDT reply actions
Remember, it's a 4th in 2012 too...
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by Tyler Jorgensen on Apr 24, 2010 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions
that's not the point
with the 40th pick if we wanted to we could have moved back into First round and gotten better talent than Tate. I like Tate but getting tate doesn’t make the bad choice on Whitehurst any better.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions
We might have picked Tate at 40 anyway.
I’m not sure we would have gotten significantly better value in the first round, when this is The Deepest Draft in NFL History, and the second rounders were really 1st rounders. We can’t count them as 2nd rounders. Their really, like, 1st rounders, and the first rounders must be 0 rounders or something.
Determining the value of the pick is nearly impossible. With Alualu going at 10 and Clausen lasting until late 2nd round, I think we know that some players went before they probably should have and others went later. Tate was worth the 40th pick as much as the 60th pick. I’m not saying we WOULD have taken Tate there, only that nobody would have batted an eye at it.
The deal for Whitehurst isn’t really something we can evaluate unless we know that he’s unlikely to work out for the team. I don’t believe anybody here, including John, has the background knowledge, ability to evaluate talent, business acumen and NFL connections to determine that Whitehurst was not worth what he was traded for. I’m not saying he was worth it, I’m not saying he’s not worth it. I’m saying we can’t really say either way without guessing, so saying we know anything with any amount of certainty is a little ridiculous.
I agree that the pick-up of Tate himself does not determine the value of the trade in any way.
I understand that people have issues with his choices
But can we agree that Dez Bryant has more raw Talent then Tate?
If so (not that I would have recommended it. it’s simply an example) then with the 40th pick we instead of Dallas could have moved into the 24th spot and selected Bryant. We gave up a second second round Value for Charlie Whitehurst that means we could have gotten Tate (for everyone who loves him) and Lamarr Houston or Sergio Kindle.
That is bad math in my opinion…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions
24th pick and what to get that pick?
Is there any player in this draft worth TWO picks? I thought you said the players were so good in this draft that nobody should trade multiple picks for a single one? Am I remembering incorrectly? So trading into the first round is a bad idea, versus that logic. Having two second rounders would have been nice, but we gave up 20 spots in this draft and a 3rd next year, in a lesser draft, which is worth fewer points. However, again, I’m not really into the point system. I prefer figuring out which players you might miss out on before the trade. But they still couldn’t have figured out that Clausen would fall so late, or that Tate would be available at 60, or even that Bryant would be available at 24. It’s tough to figure it all out, and I think for a first year GM, it wasn’t all that bad.
Bryant versus Tate is tough. Tate, for me, is an easier player to deal with because I haven’t heard that he’s late to meetings, and I haven’t heard that people who know him said you’d want to have somebody make sure he wakes up in the morning because he might not make it. He also showed up late to a game. I’d rather have Tate at 40 or 60 than Bryant at 24. But, again, just an opinion. I think with Tate, we’ve got upside, talent and character together. I do agree that Bryant has more “raw talent” than Tate. I also think Bruce Campbell has more “raw talent” than Russell Okung, but wouldn’t take him in the first round.
I will say this: it sounds to me like we took the deal for Whitehurst too quickly, and I would have liked to see us give up less for him or find someone else with equal ability. I know he’s not the only QB in the NFL who has the size, speed and arm they wanted, and may have been able to find one for less. I think they could have done better on the deal, I just am not as worried about what we missed, and think he might work out. I think it was an OK deal, but it definitely favored the Chargers.
I was using it as an example if traded up
My point is Charlie Whitehurst isn’t worth 2 picks either and we gave up 2 picks to get him a 3rd round next year and the value from 40 to 60 which is 200 points that is equivalent to pick 78 Brandon Lafell WR, LSU. And Colt McCoy didn’t go until 85.
But you are right it is a crap shoot and you just never know who is going to fall and who won’t. I just hope that as our FO gets better acquainted to the process that they will allow the system to come to them. Not to be afraid to pull the trigger because what they did today for White definitely and possibly Washington also. Was a complete fleecing of the Titan and Jets.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Too many factors involved to guess how it would've been without Whitehurst
Panther’s tried moving up to the top of the second for him but didn’t offer enough, had we been involved it could’ve started a bit of a bidding war. Probably would’ve tried to go for Campbell but been out bidded by the Raiders, Schneider and Carroll showed they were really disciplined with their lower picks. It’s possible we would’ve came out today having only Hasselbeck, Teel and another developmental QB. Whitehurst hasn’t proven much but at least he’s proven he can stick around in an NFL roster
True
But he hasn’t thrown a single pass in the NFL yes he may have done some pre-season work as a 3rd man on the depth chart but that is mostly college level skill also.
I agree that we know more about Whitehurst than these college kids, but some of these college kids even the developmental kind have at a better value a higher upside than Whitehurst. Why is it that since he was drafted he couldn’t move passed Billy Volek? If San Diego thought he was the cheddar don’t you think he would have moved up? This isn’t Hass who was the heir apparent behind Favre. This guy was a 3rd stringer…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 12:08 AM PDT up reply actions
You are letting the value chart distract you from common sense.
They did not trade 2 picks for Whitehurst.
The only pick they lost was a future 3rd rounder in what will likely be one of the shallower drafts in history.
Yes, they would probably have taken Clausen over Whitehurst, but do we know they would have taken Clausen over Whitehurst AND Tate? Maybe they would have… But is there another player at 40 that they would take over CW + Tate? Probably not.
There was no way to increase the number of 2nd round picks the Hawks owned by not trading for Whitehurst. They did not lose the opportunity to select 1 player in the round. They postponed it. Selecting Tate validates the hypothesis that the player available at 60 was equal to the player selected at 40.
The Seahawks might have overspent on Whitehurst in comparison to Oakland’s payment for Campbell, but supply and demand determine price and the parameters of both had changed between the two deals.
The Seahawks surrendered zero picks in a deep draft class for a quarterback they wanted on their team immediately, while KEEPING a 2nd round pick.
Compare that to the Chargers. They gave up a player, and two ACTUAL picks in the top 40 in the very same deep class and have exactly one player to show for it.
Your own logic, if followed correctly, should lead you to approve of the trade.
by trippsixxes on Apr 25, 2010 12:04 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
No....
Nope… They did use 2 picks a 3rd next year and a 3rd in value this year 200 points. That rates the 78th pick in this years draft…They could have kept that draft pick and traded back getting picks instead of Whitehurst and that value would have given Seattle Seattle the 60 and the chargers 3rd round pick 79. Do you know how many projected starters came off the board after the 79th pick? Just guessing but many… Especially in this deep class. As I said before Colt didn’t come off the Board till 85. We get a QB who Holmgren likes so you know he can’t be all that bad. We still get Tate at 60 and we keep next years 3rd rounder that we can trade for a 2012 draft pick 2nd rounder if you think 2011 it too shallow.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 12:19 AM PDT up reply actions
No way to tell if they could have traded 40 for 60 for more picks.
That is not anything but a what-if. Plus, now you are saying that they shouldn’t have done the deal because Colt McCoy plus Golden Tate plus a 3rd rounder a year from now is better than Charlie Whitehurst plus Golden Tate.
Once again, the difference between the two is JUST THE ONE PICK a year from now.
And Colt McCoy? Keep him… I’ll roll the dice on CW. But that’s the point… you can argue whether CW deserved to be in the same sentence as McCoy/Tebow/Clausen, but you can’t argue that he cost the Hawks 2 picks.
by trippsixxes on Apr 25, 2010 12:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Now Ryan Matthews?
He did cost the Chargers 2 picks. They lost the pick on him AS WELL as their opportunity to draft someone in the second round.
by trippsixxes on Apr 25, 2010 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Yes I can
Or did we just move back in the 2nd round out of the kindness of our hearts?
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 12:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Moving back holds value
that value is worth a 3rd round pick
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 12:36 AM PDT up reply actions
And yet, you can't magically turn that "value" into a pick.
Think of how many second rounders St. Louis could have made appear if they had traded the first pick in the draft! Man, they could have drafted six or seven 2nd rounders if they had traded that pick!
True, true. The point chart says this is possible. And in this draft, I think 7 picks in the 2nd round would have done a lot more good for St. Louis than having the #1 pick. They could have drafted Clausen, Tate, Saffold, Troup, Benn, Worilds and Gerhart! Obviously, this is ridiculous, and on a greater scale than you’re talking about, but uses the same chart to suggest that such a thing is possible. These are just points, they’re not players or picks, and cannot always become picks. This chart, in some ways, exists in a vacuum, and it is hard to judge picks based on a chart in a vacuum. Unless you’ve got seven monkeys on typewriters and a cat in a box.
BUT, nobody knows how the draft will play out, so you don’t know what players will be available and when. See Clausen or Dwyer. Also, nobody has these picks to offer, so it won’t be done. AND, if we look at the trade value chart, the teams that traded in this draft did not get equal value for their trades, because of perceived value of players and picks.
I also don’t think that a pick this year equals a pick of a higher round next year. That would make our third rounder next year like trading a 2nd rounder this year. I don’t get that. If we draft a guy this year who plays for 10 years versus a guy next year who plays for 10 years, we still got a player for ten years, just a different ten. It’s the good teams that don’t use this sort of trade logic on their side (NE, Bal, Ind) and they come out on top. It’s not all about this year, so we have to think about other years.
My problem is with the method being used to compute picks and players that we can’t know specifics about unless we enter an alternate “What-If” Universe. Unless that’s where you’re typing from, and I have to ask…is Deon Sanders the Commish there?
It only holds that value if that value can be realized.
The value is subjective and completely dependent on external events that can not be guaranteed. If the Hawks fail to trade #40 for #60 how much value does it hold? If they like Tate at #40 it holds absolutely zero value. It would most definitely not be another pick in that instance.
Whether they made a good trade or not the fact remains that they SURRENDERED only ONE pick, and postponed another.
Chirp and tripsixxes
This isn’t a what if, this is a literal view of what actually happened…
Did we trade a 3rd rounder next year? Yes
Did we trade back in the 2nd round of this year? Yes
Does that trade back have value? Yes
What is it’s value? a third round pick…
If you don’t count the value of us dropping back then everyone should drop back in every round. Because it doesn’t have any value. If you have the first over all pick in the draft well that must be worth the same as the 32 second pick because there is no value between the 2.
All I’m saying is we gave up 2 picks might not be 2 people though it could be if you traded back. But it is definitely worth 2 picks. .
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 1:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos
The trade back holds value. Your mistake is taking an outdated value chart and then presenting it the value as equivalent to a pick based on that value chart. Do you not see how it simply doesn’t work that way?
by Thomas Beekers on Apr 25, 2010 4:00 AM PDT up reply actions
The value argument doesn't hold up.
It’s not a straight-across comparison, as Chirp points out with his example of the Rams trading back for 7 2nd-rounders. Did we give up value of our 2nd-round pick? Yes. But we didn’t give up the pick itself.
There is always value when you drop back
Otherwise you do it for free… I don’t know too many teams that would recommend dropping back for no value.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 26, 2010 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions
This being declared as the deepest draft can't be justified though.
We don’t know that this is the deepest draft because that information is based on projections of greatly varying accuracy, so we shouldn’t assume that it is any different from average for now, including the relative values of its picks.
But we have seen Charlie play in the NFL, which isn’t concrete by any means, but it’s a whole lot more meaningful than the information we have on collegiate players. Meaningful data that creates a more meaningful projection allows us to confidently analyze his deal.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Actually Chirp was quoting me
I said this was the Deepest Draft in history… And I have alot of sources form which to base that opinion including having gone through this process (The Draft) a few times myself. And having watched closely the talent in this draft like Dwyer drop from late 1st to late 6th. Cambell from late 2nd to mid 4th and there are alot of poeple we could list here Blount not getting drafted at all for example.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Projections on an individual basis are relatively accurate
But imperfections become magnified when you’re talking about the draft as a whole and, in my opinion, to the point where its overall value projection has no real weight.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 24, 2010 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Fair enough
As a wise man once told me never argue with a drunk…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I was agreeing with you
and threw in the joke, it’s ok…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm afraid many seem to have written of Whitehurst
Simply because the trade for him kind of sucked (and make no mistake, it was not a smart trade, tender-to-trade-wise).
It’s a shame, but it doesn’t change much. He’ll prove the nay-sayers wrong or right. Who knows?
by Thomas Beekers on Apr 25, 2010 4:02 AM PDT up reply actions
That's just nit picking
Tate is a unique talent that they had specifically targeted, and probably would’ve passed on the other receivers. If we traded up, we probably would’ve gave away the picks we used to get White and Washington. Even if you hate our current set up of Hasselbeck/Whitehurst, you gotta admit it’s a miracle we somehow snagged the guys they’re surrounded on offense by now. We are in a damn fine position for next year.
by G-Mo on Apr 24, 2010 10:59 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree for the most part
I love the talent that Matt finally gets to work with… I TOTALLY thought it was a great draft, but I’m not sold on our position next year. I still believe that at best we end up 2nd in the west. At worst we end up 3rd.
And for the record my problem isn’t with the draft it is what happened before the draft.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Looking back I'm not as angry about Tapp and Sims anymore
It’s clear they’re going in a totally different direction. They both got reasonable Tenders and got no interest. If we kept Tapp for the next season he might’ve just looked terrible or rode the bench, then everyone would’ve just waited for a release if they were interested. Everyone knows the Gibbs prototype and could recognize Sims doesn’t match it, at least we got something.
But we didn't replace him
So why would he ride the bench?
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm pretty sure we did
Clemmons, Foley, Davis and probably Reed. Looks like they got something specific they’re looking for in that right end that Tapp just doesn’t have
Well they certainly got alot of people who look the same
but I’m not entirely sure that we replaced Tapp in any way shape or form.
Wilson is the one I am most interested in. BIG HUGE kid is he going to play end? He would be an end in a 3-4…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
My theory is he's moving inside
He’s heavier then all the RE’s they’ve been looking at. A little bit heavier then LoJack so it’s possible it’s just LE depth. But I saw somewhere he’s kind of slow for an end which doesn’t match their profile
I could see him play DT also
the write up I saw on him was though he doesn’t get much push nobody pushes him around either. His best assets is as a run stuffer.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:52 PM PDT up reply actions
That's interesting.
I’m really curious about that. I’d like to see a good DT prospect out of this draft class. It’s just another thing we will need to address next year if we don’t find one now.
yeah, they probably pulled the trigger on that too soon
Hind sight is 20/20. They needed insurance at the QB position and didn’t like the draft class so they had to find someone they liked for relatively cheap. There was no way of them knowing Philly would trade their QB to the Redskins or that Clausen would fall to the Panthers and potentially put Moore on the trading block. Had these freak accidents not happened, teams would’ve had us over the Barrel trying to rip us off for a decent back up.
Unless they see that he is ready to be a starting QB
And he has talent that is not being realized. They proved in the draft that they are not morons. They actually showed some moxy and depth of thinking. The QB situation will show if they are a special FO.
You know....
I’ve been riding the FO’s ass all offseason, but dammit, they won me over this weekend. Helluva draft, and I’ve always loved Leon Washington.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
Agreed
One hellava a draft… And we all new that the new GM was good at the draft and FA but not as good at trades. This was the scouting report on him coming out of the Packers. And well he showed that this off season hopefully he’ll get better at trades by next year. He needs to stop taking first offers.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions
I may be off
but I think we maybe understanding each other… you must be very scared. lol
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions
lol
Well as long as we got to a point where we weren’t arguing… Nothing wrong with a difference of opinion.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Unless that difference of opinion results in death.
Which, in this situation, is not the case. Whew!
Come on everyone, more fighting.
This is boring.
FATALITY!
Finish him!
I think you just want to get rid of both of us. I think in a death match, you wouldn’t be that lucky. You’d still be stuck with one of us, and without the other to balance out, the one left will be impossible to deal with.
Hmm, good call.
Keep you guys fighting each other!
Chirp, Sean called your mother a whore.
Sean, Chirp claimed that your grasp on the realities of professional football was more tenuous than Brian Russell’s grasp on Chris Johnson.
Damn it! Chirp That's it !
To the DEATH! Because of your insult of my Football knowledge is far worse than what I supposedly said about your mama…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Wait a second, you saw my Mom?
How’d she look? Last I heard, she’d had some sort of stroke-thing and the left half of her face doesn’t move and she needs to put drops in her eye in order to make sure she doesn’t lose it. Also, she’s fat (thyroid) and worthless (hasn’t worked since Taco Bell when she was 16) and quite possibly homeless. I haven’t seen her in years! She probably has a peg leg by now, knowing her…is she still in the Bay area?
But I love her.
Hopefully she fleeced you worse than we got fleeced on Whitehurst, because she could use the money. Did you pay good value? Did you use the Oldest Profession in the World Value Chart to make sure it was fair? Because whoring has value.
Also, nobody’s grasp of professional football is more tenuous than Brian Russell, so that was obviously false! Good day.
OMG
This was like a movie:
First I was sad, I felt bad for your mom, I almost cried…
Then I was happy because I’m not the only one who knows about the oldest profession in the world value chart. And now that you mention it Seahawk’s still got took for more. I’m thinking Drew Brees being released outright and signing with Tampa Bay.
Then I was laughing at the ending it was a heart warming tale of a man named Russell who loved to hug the air.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I doubt you can find a single person on this Earth that thinks that JS made bad trades today.
OOOOOH!!!!! That was NASTY!!!!!!!!
The trades he made today were apart of the draft system everyone knows that there is veteran talent to be had at the 4th and 5th round...
I am talking about straight trades not within the draft system taking the first offer on Tapp was a horrible choice when we could have gotten 3rd round value instead of 4th.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:14 PM PDT up reply actions
The trades made today were not part of some draft system.
They were made today based on skill.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 24, 2010 11:16 PM PDT up reply actions
The players skill?
or the FO?
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 24, 2010 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
The FO
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions
You are right
The FO had the skill to know that there would be Veteran Talent to be had in the 4th and 5th rounds BECAUSE IT HAPPENS EVERY YEAR… Kudos to them for knowing how the draft works. This is my point is that this behavior is a part of the draft system. Where the Whitehurst, Sims and Tapp trades though they effected the draft they are not apart of the draft system because you can’t get a feel for a particular draft to know who is available who is falling till you are actually in the draft. This part of the FO’s skills still needs work, IMHO.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions
But if this is the Deepest Draft in NFL History...
(Last time I’ll trot that out, honestly…) then aren’t this year’s 4th and 5th rounders better than next year’s or last year’s? Doesn’t that give them more value, a value we can’t really use the chart for, because these players are so amazing they TRANSCEND the chart? These guys are the stuff of legends. They will get twinkled in no time, mark my words!
lol oh lord...
:0) That’s all I got…
But then again… That only furthers my point perhaps we should have pulled the trigger on that 5th round drew brees trade. we clearly sold ourselves short.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Please see my above post
with regard to Hyperbole…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions
How can you possibly say this
Tapp was a horrible choice when we could have gotten 3rd round value instead of 4th.
Just because you list something at a price doesn’t mean that you will get that value. Maybe Tapp was only worth a 4th rounder to the rest of the NFL?
The fact that the Iggles just traded two Tapp-likes in the draft
Kind of shows even they don’t think of him that highly
by Thomas Beekers on Apr 25, 2010 5:11 AM PDT up reply actions
How did we know this
And we all new that the new GM was good at the draft and FA but not as good at trades
I didn’t know how they would draft until we got there and I wasn’t done with them in FA yet, since the offseason wasn’t done yet.
We shall ride his majestic mane to the Super Bowl.
Hasselbeck has nothing on him.
Is that the light at the end of the tunnel, or the headlights of an oncoming train?
I think this guy makes the ST squad
did you see his 46 inch vert? crazy and he isn’t slow either I think they find away to use him.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Wait a second, wait a second...
we all know White Men Can’t Jump! How did this happen? Did we have another Sampson on our hands, and he gave it all up for a hair cut!?
The 46 vert and other pro day numbers came AFTER the haircut.
He didn’t cut all of it either.
Seriously, thanks a lot everyone.
As strange as it sounds, being on FG during the draft made me feel like I was watching it with a huge group of friends. Awesome.
by PRIDEin253 on Apr 25, 2010 10:59 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Rec'd for agreement
As someone who’d have a hard time convincing many people to watch “weird American sports” (though I’ve converted a few), let alone the draft, this is a great place to share the thrills with.
by Thomas Beekers on Apr 25, 2010 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions
You should be here on game day.
It’s a party.
I'm pretty active year-round,
but have worked on game days for the past year and a half. Solution? Forgo $120+ each Sunday this Fall to relax and watch my revamped Seahawks. Yessir.
A+ Draft Grade
My mock had Seattle taking Spiller and Clausen in the first
Carrol did better by taking Okung and Thomas
Tate in the second filled another need area with talent
The capper was trading for Leon and Lendale to fix the RB issues
Best draft of 2010
He’s always open. He catches a lot of balls. He’s un-guardable, no matter how old he is
Agreed A+
Now that I have done some research the capper may be getting Kevin Vickerson for trade value on a 6th round swap. That’s a steal also, because the guy isn’t as bad as I thought he was.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Why do people assume that it was Carroll who did the actual picking?
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions
Because that's how the structure was presented to us when Carroll was hired
It seems odd to now that the draft was good suddenly put it all on Schneider’s shoulders.
Obviously they both had a hand to it. If the structure is as presented, then final say was Carroll’s.
by Thomas Beekers on Apr 25, 2010 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions
People should stop acting like this draft happened in spite of Carroll
Carroll took part in the hiring process that got Schneider here, and both seem to get along very well and work together. Carroll had a big role in this draft.
I am not acting, nor saying, that the draft happened in spite of Carroll.
Saying Carroll had a big role in this draft is being presumptive.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions
The way I understand it is this:
Schneider and the staff prepare and orchestrate the draft and all that goes with it. Carroll and Schneider as well as the rest of the staff involved collaborated on the draft plan, team plan, etc. Carroll has to sign off on every personnel decision. He has the power of veto and approval.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Sam Bradford, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, RB Jonathan Dwyer. Top-10 [5 for 7].
Hush. Play along.
Schneider is the GM. He’s also the real head coach, relaying up-to-the-second instructions to Carroll via an audio/visual uplink device that is easily concealed in Pete’s dimples.
Carroll is our security decoy. He’s there to protect Schneider, to draw the attention of extravagant trade offers from Al Davis & the Glazers, ninja assassins from Jerry Jones, and nanobot spies from Bill Belichick.
We have a role to play in this façade. Remember the mantra: It’s all Carroll, all the time.
What are you talking about!?
It IS all Carroll all the time! You’re crazy! Ha ha. Ha. Nobody listen to this guy over here, he’s just messing around. Carroll’s the mastermind! Don’t worry about the man behind the curtain.
Once again...
Why does it matter who picked the picks? Are we suddenly shocked if a guy who drafted in a similar manner as he did in Green Bay, drafted our draft? Are we shocked that Pete Carroll a man who drafted Arron Glen to the NY Jets in ‘94 a guy who had 41 career interceptions would select a similar guy for Seattle? He started with a DB in New England also though with less spectacular results in Chris Canty. However, the point still remains, that perhaps the style of draft was Schneider’s while the individuals who were selected were all Carroll. Would it diminish either of them to both be involved? I think we are trying too much to figure out the special ingredient that we are missing the full flavor of this cuisine. As for me this draft left a mighty good taste in my mouth.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 6:18 PM PDT reply actions
It matters because the decisions the front office made during the draft are indicative of future decisions and therefore the future of the franchise.
The only reason anyone would be shocked is because this draft was incredible and you simply don’t expect that.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 25, 2010 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions
The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.
As I said earlier this knowledge of who drafted whom is only important if we break up the pair. As I doubt that, this dynamic duo will be changing anytime soon then you can bet on similar behavior in the future. Ok? Does that allow you a modicum of respite? Trust me when I tell you someone knows who does the work and if it is only one of the two someone will leave. The only question is whom?
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 6:49 PM PDT up reply actions
What
Trying to figure out which one of the two is responsible for any given draft pick is a slippery task. And why would it matter? One of them isn’t going to “leave” because the other is “doing the work.”
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 25, 2010 6:56 PM PDT up reply actions
My point exactly
So why bother trying to figure it out? The draft worked… Didn’t it? Why look a gift horse in the mouth?
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions
No one is complaining, they're just talking.
People here tend to what to know as much about the Hawks as possible and the front office power structure is fairly interesting.
I got the distinct impression
That some people on this board thought that Carroll was too incompetent to pull off a draft like this and/or Schneider was too new. I’m saying that this draft was actually right in the wheel house of both of these men. So it doesn’t really matter who picked…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 7:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Here is a quote
“Saying Carroll had a big role in this draft is being presumptive.”
Carl Shinyama
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions
The secret ingredient to the secret ingredient draft...
there is on secret ingredient.
It certainly isn't complimentary
I don’t care how you read it… lol
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions
It just says that Carroll may not have played a big role...
Which I’m not sure I can agree with but we’ll let Carl decide what he meant.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions
It does not say that.
It says that it’s presumptive to say that Carroll played a big role in this draft.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 9:34 PM PDT up reply actions
And what's the difference?
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions
There is a considerable difference.
Simply because I do not say it.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Those are not the words that were there.
by DrunkAmerican on Apr 25, 2010 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions
He could be the most competent talent evaluator in the world
And still not have a big role in the draft.
Delegation or deference to another individual is just as likely. Just because someone can do something doesn’t mean they are doing it.
Our abilities need not define our actions.
That, in no way, shape or form, implies Carroll was or is incompetent.
Let’s look at the word “presumptive,” shall we? It means to assume something without proof or evidence. There is very little to no evidence, or proof that Carroll did, indeed, play a big role in this draft.
Also, that was my response G-Mo, who made the statement that people should stop acting as if the success of the draft happened despite Carroll, and that Carroll played a big role in the draft, which, in the absence of any real evidence or proof, he and everybody else here cannot really know.
I merely remarked on the person’s observation, which was speculative.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions
But is it not just as speculative to assume that he didn't play a big role?
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I've already provided evidence that it was more Schneider's draft than Carroll's.
The point was that his statement was presumptive, mine wasn’t, even if it may or may not be speculative.
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions
OH MY GOD I LOVE THIS DRAFT
PETER CARROLL COME HER AND LET ME FONDLE YOUR BOSSOM
by Robert on Apr 25, 2010 6:27 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Glad to hear it, Robert.
Great draft, for the most part.
Early prospect watch: RB C.J. Spiller, QB Sam Bradford, OT Ciron Black, DT Gerald McCoy, S Eric Berry, DT Ndamukong Suh, RB Jonathan Dwyer. Top-10 [5 for 7].
I was wondering where Robert had disappeared to.
Good to know he has a new crush, maybe Carlson and Felix will get a breather.
Now with more lemon bars!
Like most others, I loved this draft.
And yet, I will reserve judgment until they play a down. Yes, yes, its a pessimistic POV, but I remembered that I loved last year’s draft as well, and look at how that turn out. But this gives me some hope for the upcoming season.
I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus
I got to agree with Nate Dogg
Last years Draft panned out fairly well… Curry needs to develop Unger is the best run blocker we have but he’ll get better with some continuity playing Guard instead of going back and forth at center. And Earl Thomas was a steal.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 25, 2010 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I think this draft is going to define Carroll's and Schneider's careers. I think it was wildly successful.
But… But! I am still taking a wait-and-see approach. Let’s see how this all pans out first. :)
Talents that I covet:
Ndamukong Suh, Gerald McCoy, Sam Bradford, Mike Iupati, Golden Tate, Earl Thomas, and Freddie Barnes
by Carl Shinyama on Apr 25, 2010 9:39 PM PDT up reply actions
I was not happy with Carroll and Schneider.
I said I needed to see a great draft to have a chance of changing my opinion. They had a great draft, so now I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt. Like you, I’m not in love with Carroll or Schneider yet. But they’ve earned some time to show what they can do. I’m eager to see the product they put on the field.
Now with more lemon bars!
Jaguars draft...
I have to say, the most impressive pick for me was that they got Kirk Morrison for so cheap. They needed an improvement at the position, and I’d be surprised if he doesn’t start this year.
I still don't understand why they took Tyson
I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus
One small disappointment
was watching the Golden Tate interview on ESPN. He was boring and seemed ill at ease on camera. If your name is “Golden Tate,” you’re supposed to be a colorful personality. Especially if you catch footballs for a living. I wanted to see him dishing out memorable quotes, and preferably dressed like Deion Sanders in 1989.
by Suburban Shocker on Apr 26, 2010 1:09 PM PDT reply actions
"Colorful personality"?
Are you telling Golden Tate to dance? I know you ain’t telling the Tate to Dance…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 26, 2010 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions
About Earl Thomas.
McShay and Schlereth on NFL Live both seemed to think he’ll be a better corner long-term than a safety. What do you guys think?
I don't think so
I think he will play alot of man in trip man stack in three wide sets. But I don’t think he’ll be a corner I think his ball hawking will be wasted if you don’t let him free range in center field during running downs. 1st and long 2nd and 5 3rd and short, where teams can run but may pass out of a running set.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 26, 2010 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions
I found this article interesting.
In which Carroll says he wished he had addressed the pass-rush. It’s nice to know that he knows we didn’t really fix it. It doesn’t fix it, but makes me feel better about it.
I read that too...
Great article I think he may feel we traded Tapp too early before we knew what Patrick was planning to do. If we still had Patrick I think everyone would look more favorably on the Tapp trade. As it was it was still pretty good, lord knows we couldn’t stop the run last year, and E.J. Wilson will certainly help with that.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Apr 27, 2010 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- The Shutdown Corner Podcast: Greg Cosell on the NFC South Draft
- BREAKING: Tim Tebow did not become a great quarterback today
- Jerry Jones says Cowboys championship window is closing; Tony Romo disagrees
- Lawrence Taylor was told his Super Bowl ring was bought by Charlie Sheen
- Chad Ochocinco gets robbed, mourns loss of Starbucks gold card
