Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Dallas Cowboys: Unknown Quantities

Bullet Points! Ricky Foley, Leo Ends and Other Seahawks Miscellanea

Sprint

Sponsored Post: This post is presented by Sprint. Bringing you the first wireless 4G network from a national carrier. Only on the Now Network.

(No one ever gets that's a Talking Heads reference. Try to find a city / Try to find a city to live in)

Marketing will be happy to know I use the phrase "game-changing" somewhere in this post.

  • I was given a promotional copy of Win Forever. After reading it for about a half an hour, which is time enough to rip down a significant portion of the book, I realized that reviewing Win Forever would constitute a conflict of interests. I am not sure I would say buying Win Forever or 1100 Things Seahawks Fans Should Know & Do Before They Diee is an either/or proposition, but it nevertheless makes Carroll and I something like competitors. So sorry Portfolio. And best of luck. You really didn't want to read my review anyway.

Star-divide

  • The third edition of On the Fringe with Rickey Foley is on NFL.com. It's a pretty pat story about a distant Old Man and the son that struggles to impress him. Finally, he does. A lot of people out there might be able to relate to this. I do not. So maybe I am a little heartless about the matter.
  • Foley is 29 and trying to break into the NFL. I think that is the truly interesting story surrounding Foley. In 2008, Cam Wake had 23 sacks in the CFL. In 2009, he had 5.5 for the Dolphins. Using that conversion, which I shouldn't because it's stupid, Foley should have about three sacks this season. Though the process is stupid, I wouldn't be surprised if the output is accurate. Situational pass rusher with a little pop and quickness, three sacks would be a worthy contribution.
  • Foley will probably fulfill his dream of playing in the NFL. Seattle is desperate for pass rushers, and it can't be too choosey about who it keeps. If you are curious, the best pass rusher on the entire team is David Hawthorne. If Seattle wants to do something radical but potentially game-changing, see if Hawthorne has any chance to stick at Leo. Foley, Wake and Chris Clemons are all former linebackers. Hawthorne has youth and talent on all of them.
  • Part of the problem with Seattle's not-3-4 3-4 is that the 3-4 is popular in the NFL right now. Seattle is competing for in-demand talent. When the Seahawks traded Darryl Tapp, they must have thought that sometime between that move and now, they would have acquired a better Leo. Brandon Graham was never linked to Seattle that I know of, but the Eagles traded up to 13 to draft him directly ahead of the Seahawks. In retrospect, maybe Seattle was targeting Graham. Though I think most of us are satisfied with Earl Thomas, a defense can survive a scrub playing safety. Pass rush, and especially pass rush in a Monte Kiffin-derived system, is fundamental. I find myself more and more concerned about this matter each passing day.
  • Missing out on the draft's best defensive end led Seattle to drafting an excellent safety prospect. I am not nearly as high on Thomas as some, but if he can transfer his ball-hawking ability to the NFL, Seattle has added a starter with Pro Bowl potential. That's good. Not that Seattle needed a starter before it cut Deon Grant, but so be it. Pete Carroll must somehow hope that despite a shot in the dark pass rush, the secondary will contribute coverage sacks. Will it? I am not sanguine. A coverage sack results from a quarterback having no where to throw and eventually suffering the sack because he waits too long. The problem with this is somewhat obvious. The NFL, from Peyton Manning down to JaMarcus Russell, averages a 60.9% completion percentage. Clearly, passing is favored and completing a pass probable. That doesn't bode well for the notion that a team can blanket every receiver. Further, included in that total are throw-aways, and any quarterback worth his salt will throw the ball away long before he suffers a coverage sack. Anecdotally, this seems pretty obvious. A true coverage sack almost never happens. Sacks occur because of pass rush. Beside, if the play really breaks down, just throw at whoever Kelly Jennings is covering. What's the worst that can happen?
  • Long story short, I think Seattle will allow a lot of passing yards. If the formula works, Seattle will counter that weakness with a strong run defense and a rapacious secondary. The linebackers will neutralize the underneath passing game and the safeties will keep big plays in check. The Seahawks will attempt a bend but don't break defense, and this time next year, have hopefully reloaded at pass rusher.
  • It is not a bad idea given the schedule. Brian Burke recently calculated that the value of an interception is 60 yards. That is significant to say the least.
  • Poll
    If Seattle had the chance, I would rather they have selected at 14:
    Brandon Graham
    125 votes
    Earl Thomas
    681 votes

    806 votes | Poll has closed

    Comment 71 comments  |  0 recs  | 

    Do you like this story?

    Comments

    Display:

    There's a research article in Football Outsiders Almanac 2010 about pass rush scouting,

    it’s kind of a lukewarm thumbs up on Graham. Better than I was expecting. Anyway, the end prospects were just underwhelming this year. Don’t want to be stuck with an underwhelming prospect from this year because we needed more rush, and an underwhelming safety from next year cuz we’ll come to need a safety.

    We filled what holes we could, leaving end unfilled, but got good prospects, and I’d much rather have it that way.

    by jacobstevens on Jul 13, 2010 4:46 PM PDT reply actions  

    ^This

    Hopefully, next year, this is rectified, assuming that the holes Seattle has tried to fill out has panned out..

    That said, before, during, and after this upcoming season, I’m going to be in full, all-out, “search for the quarterback of the future,” mode.

    Golden!

    by Carl Shinyama on Jul 13, 2010 7:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

    This is a very astute observation.

    This was, by most indications, a weak class for pass-rushers. Particularly 4-3 DEs. I agree that taking a once in awhile prospect in Thomas who has a chance to be truly great, was the better move. The best defenses usually include a player like Thomas. The passing league that the NFL has become makes a player like Thomas that much more valuable.

    I do like Graham, but who knows if he’s going to be Orakpo, Trent Cole, or one of many underwhelming but highly touted pass-rushers in recent drafts? The class of 2007 was particularly bad. Morgan this year definitely didn’t do it for me. Graham looks to be a situational pass-rusher for Philly, along with Tapp, Victor Abiamiri, Juqua Parker, and others. It will be interesting to follow his career and revisit this one.

    Red Bryant: surprise us!

    by Misfit74 on Jul 13, 2010 8:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

    If we had Kept Grant, and drafted Graham, would we be better?

    Good questions raised, and we can all watch how Graham and Tapp perform in Philly. That will be interesting.

    But I cannot help thinking that John described exactly what Tim Ruskell would have done: Ruskell would have overpaid for a very good but aging safety, and he would have reached in the first round for a talented but underperforming DE.

    The way Schneider and Carroll went in a very different direction than Ruskell would have gone is reason enough for me to give them a season or two grace period to see how it works out.

    "Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank

    by Stevo's on Jul 14, 2010 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

    If this statement had a sound...

    “But I cannot help thinking that John described exactly what Tim Ruskell would have done: Ruskell would have overpaid for a very good but aging safety, and he would have reached in the first round for a talented but underperforming DE.”

    It would be the sound of a hammer hitting a nail on the head.

    I guess I’ll have to follow Derrick Morgan, too. I think if Ruskell were in charge, Morgan very likely would have been the pick.

    Red Bryant: surprise us!

    by Misfit74 on Jul 14, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

    QB, though?

    Not that any of this matters, it’s all just speculation, but would he have continued to pass on QBs? Clausen isn’t the type of prospect so distinguished from a risky Sanchez that the payoff on waiting on QB would demonstrably have been worth it on draft night, but I still have enough confidence in him as a GM to think he’d have rested on his Tapp/Jackson laurels for at least the first round.

    by jacobstevens on Jul 14, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

    Though I'm obviously down for, you know, winning now,

    next year’s class of defensive linemen is keeping my optimism afloat. If we’re able to play semi-successful football with our ragtag collection of defensive linemen, I’ll be pleased. If we can’t and we fail, at least the talent will be there for the drafting.

    by PRIDEin253 on Jul 13, 2010 6:12 PM PDT reply actions  

    Need another option

    Neither. I still think Clausen was the right pick.

    by ColumbiaRob on Jul 13, 2010 7:22 PM PDT reply actions  

    I wanted him when he was there at #14.

    But the fact that he fell so far and the numerous scouting reports since (especially by John Morgan) makes me think that the Seahawks made the right choice.

    Golden!

    by Carl Shinyama on Jul 13, 2010 7:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

    He was a risk, as all QBs are

    There were however plenty of scouting reports that had him highly rated. I can’t argue against the Okung pick, as it’s a cornerstone position. Failing to draft a top rated QB prospect, when we have a clear need, I’ll never understand.

    by ColumbiaRob on Jul 13, 2010 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

    Need vs. Talent.

    Drafting for need is a dicey proposition. Drafting for talent, is a lesser evil. The Seahawks had a need at saftey and at quarterback. However, the elite talent available at safety at #14 was greater than at quarterback at #14.

    Golden!

    by Carl Shinyama on Jul 13, 2010 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

    I'm posting the correct link below, as your article links it as a source

    http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/07/10/1555634/practice-makes-perfect-for-qb.html

    Interesting read, thanks for the find. Sounds like Cantwell is quite the reclamation project however, so I’m not sure how much stock to put into this. His release sounds Tebowesque.

    by ColumbiaRob on Jul 13, 2010 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

    Humble Cannon Arm QB vs Arogant Questionable Arm QB

    I’d root for him any day of the week. He is the kinda QB that the team/fan will really get behind, if he wins. Thats the big if.

    by stufr on Jul 14, 2010 4:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

    I like Brandon Graham a lot, and it's probably telling that Philly took him.

    While it’s questionable to assume other teams know better, Philly knows how to build a defense. They stack their roster with talented terrors at end and rotate through fresh and vicious bodies. Coverage is so much easier when the quarterback thinks, even knows to a certainty, that he will be a chalk outline should he not fling that ball. Graham is an animal but lives in that land between linebacker and every down lineman. Hey hey that smells like a Leo.

    by abender20 on Jul 13, 2010 7:24 PM PDT reply actions  

    I just bought your book!

    Just waiting for it to come out.

    Kudos to you Mr. Morgan. I write scripts (try to) and animation/film related stuff (though not professionally yet, still trying)…so I know how daunting it can be….tip my hat to ya…

    now lets see if it’s actually good or not… ;)

    I Bleed Blue and Green

    by DSAhawker on Jul 13, 2010 9:40 PM PDT reply actions  

    My irrational side loves Graham.

    My practical side supports drafting Earl Thomas.

    by John Morgan on Jul 13, 2010 9:42 PM PDT reply actions  

    If Seattle had the chance,

    I would rather the Hawks had drafted Suh.

    Seems like we should be debating whether they should have traded up for Graham, not traded Tapp, or some other option that was available.

    I guess that means I’d rather the Hawks had lost MORE games last year.

    by trippsixxes on Jul 13, 2010 10:07 PM PDT reply actions  

    Or the Broncos

    but I think all things considered the Bronco situation went swimmingly.

    by John Morgan on Jul 13, 2010 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

    How about McD winning more games than Da Bears?

    Universally considered a terrible decision to give up the Chicago pick was actually a pretty damn good move. Now what he did with the pick is another story.

    by trippsixxes on Jul 13, 2010 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

    Hindsight.

    I still wouldn’t have given up two 1st round draft picks for Cutler if I were the Bears.

    Golden!

    by Carl Shinyama on Jul 13, 2010 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

    I think it'll work out in the long run

    Cutler can be damn good, especially if Martz can knock some sense into him, which I’m expecting. If he gets it, he’ll be more than worth it.

    I think it’s safer than spending a 1st on an unknown college question mark….trying to develop him….wasting years waiting for him to come around…only to watch him fail…spend another 1st on a new unknown college question mark…rinse and repeat

    This league lives and dies by QB’s (for the most part)…and they had shit for QB, much like a lot of the teams out there who went the conventional route. I’m all for taking a big change like that on a near-proven guy like Cutler

    I Bleed Blue and Green

    by DSAhawker on Jul 13, 2010 11:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

    Hindsight?

    If, by hindsight, you mean that looking back it paid off… ok, but then in that regard all analysis is hindsight.

    But it seems like a negative connotation meant to imply it was blind luck and there was no way he should have won any games, let alone more than the Bears.

    Its easy to credit McD for his failures. Why not credit him for one of his few successes? Namely the only thing an NFL coach is paid to do: Win.

    I can’t stand him as much as the next guy, but you’ve got to give him credit for putting his money where all coaches mouth’s are and standing behind his team with his choice of which pick to keep.

    It was a calculated risk that paid off that I’n not sure you or I would have had the cajones to take.

    by trippsixxes on Jul 14, 2010 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

    That was my ultimate dream.

    I would have been perfectly fine with the Seahawks trading both of their 1st round picks for Suh.

    Golden!

    by Carl Shinyama on Jul 13, 2010 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

    I voted for Thomas.

    When I saw that the Eagles had traded ahead of the Seahawks, I was pretty sad because I thought for sure it was to take Thomas. Given Carroll’s track record when it comes to coaching safeties (Joey Browner, Ronnie Lott when people thought he was done, Merton Hanks, Tim McDonald, Lawyer Milloy, Troy Polamalu) I just feel much better about any Safety he’s excited about over any other position. It’s kind of like Holmgren selecting a QB, it’s not like he’s not ever going to get it wrong, but you still like his chances.

    I don’t think I ever even heard of Graham being considered by the Hawks either. I had figured that if we were going to draft a DE, it was going to be Derrick Morgan. I’m sure for some people Brandon Graham probably sounds more appealing because it was the Eagles that drafted him, sort of like how a few people commented how they couldn’t help but have second thoughts about cutting Mike Teel once New England claimed him (although he’s already been cut since). If it had been a team like the Falcons, Texans, or Bengals, there is probably less reason to second guess.

    by Mind of no mind on Jul 13, 2010 11:42 PM PDT reply actions  

    Brandon Graham, without a doubt.

    To me he’s far more likely to reach his potential than Thomas in a far more important position. But I’ve never understood all of the Thomas love.

    by Nate Dogg on Jul 13, 2010 11:48 PM PDT reply actions  

    Is his potential as a pass rusher above average?

    The FOA article noted his short shuttle time and vertical leap suggest he may not have great pass rush agility/re-direction speed or great explosiveness out of his legs, but rather is otherwise generally athletic (straightline speed).

    Another team noted for finding pass rushers, the Colts, took Jerry Hughes, a nobody, who scored highly in those measurements. I doubt we miss out on much with Graham.

    by jacobstevens on Jul 14, 2010 2:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

    I would echo most of what you have to say on this.

    Except for one part, when you use “generally athletic” to mean straightline speed. It seems like that’s the biggest component that would not be part of general athleticism, which seems to me more like a description of an athlete’s balance, agility, even jumping ability. But there have been so many guys in this league with sprinters speed, but who lack the ability to change direction, or jump, or have timing, or stay on their feet. Those people I believe you would say they are generally athletic, but you would acknowledge that they still are fast as hell. Maybe it’s a distinction that’s more in my head than it is real.

    I read that article too, and it is quite the interesting idea. You certainly put a compelling argument out there for not believing Graham is necessarily going to be a great player.

    by cashless on Jul 14, 2010 3:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

    I suppose you're right. Didn't know exactly how

    to describe a guy with pass rush talent but lacking, relatively speaking, in those two areas. And thought I oughtta toss in an example of athleticism that can still be exemplary without being strong in those two talents.

    by jacobstevens on Jul 14, 2010 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

    I'm very suspicious of it. Very.

    Only bring it up to raise a question, which I think is still valid.

    by jacobstevens on Jul 14, 2010 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

    Yeah, the little blurb I read only included the cases that backed them up.

    And it’s hard to get that info to go out and verify it myself. It’s something I’ll keep an eye on, the logic behind it makes sense, but it’s not much more than an interesting tidbit at this point.

    by Nate Dogg on Jul 14, 2010 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

    Yeah. What bothers me most about them, is they find an interesting pattern and extrapolate it out to be a distinguishing thing to look for, build a method around looking for it, and then brand it with a name.

    If I were a scout, I bet I’d read that and say, yep, those are what we look for, and leave it at that.

    Since I’m not a scout, though, I think it arms me as an amateur innernet scout with one more thing to consider, that I know how to consider. Trunk strength, important for a lineman. Now I can see that a squat can demonstrate trunk strength, while a vertical can demonstrate explosiveness. Might have been intuitive to others but it hadn’t occurred to me.

    I guess I ought to give them credit that they stress it’s mostly useful in identifying red flags in prospects who may not succeed. But really, that’s what the whole combine is about. Finding red flags and paring down who not to draft is really the driving part of scouting.

    by jacobstevens on Jul 14, 2010 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

    Yeah.

    It’s probably a pretty crucial part of the athletic side of pass rushing, but I think that the skill side of pass rushing shouldn’t be overlooked. Nick Reed isn’t an NFL player because of his 3 cone drill. From everything I’ve seen of and heard about Graham, he’s a very skilled pass rusher. So a luke warm thunbs up on the athletic side combined with his skills as a pass rusher should make him a very good pro.

    by Nate Dogg on Jul 14, 2010 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

    Just curious

    Why do you think he is more likely to reach his potential?

    by stufr on Jul 14, 2010 3:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

    I'm not sure how to explain it.

    Graham has been as productive on worse teams over a longer span at a position where production stabilizes pretty quickly. He’s no George Selvie. I think if a defensive end can produce at that level for 3 years he’s probably really good (provided he has the athletic ability, and I think Graham does).

    Thomas on the other hand played on a great defense where it’s questionable where he ranks among his other team mates (you could make the argument he’s the best defender, you could make the argument he’s the third or fourth best defender) at a position where flukey production is common. Earl Thomas had nine picks, and thats terrific, but Brian Russell had nine picks for the Vikings one season. He also played against pass happy Big 12 teams that were frequently down big to Texas, giving him plenty of opportunities to pick off passes.

    Thats not to say that Thomas won’t be good, you can’t knock him for doing what he’s supposed to and he scouted out really well. I just have some concerns about what he’ll ultimately become. I think Graham has a far better shot at becoming Joey Porter than Thomas does at becoming Ed Reed.

    by Nate Dogg on Jul 14, 2010 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

    You are right.

    But at the same time, mentioning the 3 years for a defensive end, that’s sort of Ruskullian of you. If Thomas is a stud at safety, but still has things to work on, we got him that much younger. It is harder to evaluate, but also gives us more years of big improvements while he’s a Seahawk.

    I have the same concerns, and then I watch some of him and can’t help but be excited. Like Golden Tate, he’s undersized, yet the ball is in his hands if it’s in the air. He had a ridiculous number of pass breakups. Where Taylor Mays would look like he could only hit a reciever and nothing else, Thomas looked like he could go for the knockdown, the pick, or hit the reciever with equal effectiveness and timing. He just seems to judge what play needs to be made really well, and had enough athleticism to get there all the time.

    Now in the pros, maybe that athleticism isn’t elite enough and he’ll be exposed as an undersized gambler. That’s something I worry about, but then I go watch some, and I think we’ll be very happy to have him in 3 years, and maybe even this year.

    by cashless on Jul 15, 2010 1:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

    Interesting analysis...most of which I agree with and see the same types of things.

    I think it cannot be understated that our new FS is gifted enough to cover WRs as a corner would. His versatility will add plenty of wrinkles to our defensive schemes and weekly game-plans. I’m very excited.

    Red Bryant: surprise us!

    by Misfit74 on Jul 15, 2010 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

    Since you bring up Brian Burke, I have something I was wondering.

    You brought up the “updated” draft chart based more on production that showed a curve that was a lot less steep than the ESPN model that has been around forever. I never bookmarked that, and I thought it was Burke, but when I search for what I think will find it on his site, I get some discussions on draft value, but never find that chart. Do you have a link to it saved still?

    by cashless on Jul 14, 2010 3:43 AM PDT reply actions  

    "If you are curious, the best pass rusher on the entire team is David Hawthorne."

    Most interesting sentence in the piece, I thought. I’d like to hear you expound on that one a bit, John.

    Hawhorne was an exciting player in 2009, but not without flaws. He deserves more ink – er, pixels.

    "Football players are temperamental. That's 90 percent temper and 10 percent mental." - Doug Plank

    by Stevo's on Jul 14, 2010 9:13 AM PDT reply actions  

    I thought it was

    “there’s good points, some bad points/find a city/find myself a city to live in…” Anyways, it’s good to see that, between this and “Eric Berry is a Place Where Nothing Ever Happens,” we’re getting liberal doses of David Byrne weirdness.

    Speaking as a non-Seahawks fan (but a budding sympathizer, based on the quality of this blog) and someone with a pretty rough idea of the team’s specific weaknesses, you should be angry about missing out on Graham. He put up 20 tackles for losses in 2008 and 25 last season, which, weak competition or not, ain’t no joke. Moreover, he had his best games against the best (relatively speaking) competition, putting up at least two TFLs against Iowa, Penn St., Ohio St., Michigan St., and Wisconsin both seasons.

    In terms of size, style, and technique, he’s strikingly similar to Trent Cole. He could improve his repertoire of moves, but he almost never sacrifices run responsibilities for a successful pass rush. I’ve got no idea if that discipline, combined with his relatively small size, translates into the versatility required to play linebacker even part time (to say nothing of dropping into coverage), but I’m extremely high on him as an every-down 4-3 defensive end.

    Meanwhile, I’ve agreed with pretty much all of John’s analysis on Thomas. A potentially spectacular coverage safety, but poor tackler/run defender. He also garnered his interceptions playing centerfield for a defense that led the nation in TFLs last year, so who knows what he’ll do on a team with such a limited pass rush? Though I’m a safety enthusiast, I still think defensive end is the most important position on the defense, and with even a little attention drawn away from him (by Aaron Curry, I suppose, in this scenario), Graham would have produced. I don’t know enough about the scheme Carroll’s going to bring to the table (4-3 under principles like at USC?) or about the state of your secondary as-is to comment on the selection of Thomas. What I do know is that Graham is a safer bet (and more complete player) at a more important position, which also happens to be a position of dire need for the Seahawks.

    by Walter FTW on Jul 14, 2010 10:29 AM PDT reply actions  

    Heater

      One of your best articles or summations in awhile, John. I fully agree with Heater being possibly one of the best players to blitz. Look what he did last season (guess you did) and that was with a poor team and little coaching. He has a non-stop motor and gets after the QB without being told. I doubt if he had much coaching last year at all, (if he had, he probably wouldn’t have done so well.
       From a Heater fan. Wonder how much better he is than Hill? I am putting my money on Heater starting and doing better than last season.
      Think what he will do as the Leo and better coaching with real assignments.

    by BUSTINHEADS on Jul 14, 2010 3:33 PM PDT reply actions  

    Pass Rush

    Does Mebane improve more in the 4-3 under and get more pressures than Reed/Clemons/Foley?

    by 008klm on Jul 14, 2010 4:05 PM PDT reply actions  

    I'm going to comment on the miscellanea

    by adding one. @PeteCarroll asked his followers for some questions. Some football questions. I asked, anticipating that teams will run at Leo until we make them stop, how is he going to prepare for that? But all he answered were the softball lobs, like what kind of season will the Huskies have, and how’s Leon Washington’s rehab coming along.

    He asked for football questions, man.

    by jacobstevens on Jul 14, 2010 5:01 PM PDT reply actions  

    Lots of Ifs and maybes for our pass rush

    but I still am glad we took Thomas over any of the DEs available in April’s draft. None of them really wowed me. Not Graham, not Morgan, not any of them. I don’t buy into the mind set of we needed a pass rush more than a DB (which I think was the case, though it was close our coverage was just as bad as our rush last year) therefor we must draft a DE any DE early. if its a week class you do what we did, take Thomas in the end he’ll prove to be the better player than any of the DEs we could have had. IMHO

    Besides, and I am positive PC and Co.are aware of this, 2011 is looking to be a freaking stellar year for pass rushers, especially if a few of the Jr’s. that are expected to come out, do so. So while I agree our pass rush is looking suspect again for 2010, in the grand scheme of things looking beyond what is needed for just this coming season. taking a top DB prospect in Earl Thomas when we had the opportunity to land him will prove to be the right pick in the long run.

    Beer, its not just for breakfast anymore.

    by Dougula on Jul 15, 2010 12:51 PM PDT reply actions  

    Comments For This Post Are Closed


    User Tools

    SEA!

    FanPosts

    Community blog posts and discussion.

    Recommended FanPosts

    Avatar_small
    The Official Field Gulls OT Thread - In Which We Gush About Our Favorite TV Shows
    Hatersgonnahate_small
    A short note on what worked for the 49ers, but isn't really a "model"
    Halloween_mobster_small
    Come on in!

    Recent FanPosts

    + New FanPost All FanPosts >


    Managing Editor/Lead Writer

    284430_601240951600_44900771_32958650_2317286_n_small Danny Kelly

    Staff Writers/Editors

    Screen_shot_2011-01-05_at_9 Scruffy Lefty

    Small BrianL

    Avatar_small Benne

    Olympiabeer_small Tyler Jorgensen

    Hatersgonnahate_small Thomas Beekers

    Profilepic_small DJ C-Raig

    897267_o_small Kenneth Arthur

    Halloween_mobster_small Jacson Bevens

    Photo__1__small Charlie Todaro

    Staff Writers

    Small Joshua Kasparek

    Mail Matt Erickson

    Davis_small Davis Hsu

    Profile2_small Rob Staton

    208114_505637750968_23709013_30160241_9483_n_small Scott Enyeart

    Elephant_pink_clothes_small Chris Sully

    Seattle_seahawk_white_1600_reasonably_small_small Derek Stephens

    Osprey1_small Ben Harbaugh

    Bu_fb_2_small Daniel Hill