The 2011 Seahawks: Think This is a Rebuild Yet?
A lot of people say that there are no true 'rebuilds' in the NFL anymore and that may be partially true. Teams build towards the future while trying to compete now and this means you see a team with many key veterans with a few young players sprinkled in here and there to develop. By and large though, you don't see many teams sell off all their major veteran players and start from scratch. This inventory liquidation style of management is pretty rare in this era of the NFL, but what the Seahawks are doing is probably as close to a complete rebuild as you're going to see anymore.
I've mentioned it before but I'll say it again (and John Boyle confirmed it on Twitter yesterday too) -- there are now 16 (17 now that Jennings re-signed) players on the Seahawks roster of 89 that were here before John Schneider and Pete Carroll took control of the team. Many of the team's starting players from just over one year ago are now gone -- most notably Matt Hasselbeck and Lofa Tatupu but also Chris Spencer, Sean Locklear, Julius Jones, Nate Burleson, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Rob Sims, Ray Willis, Lawrence Jackson, Josh Wilson, and Deon Grant, and I'm sure I'm missing others. Jordan Babineaux looks unlikely to be back.
Furthermore -- John Carlson is a trade candidate in his contract year. Marcus Trufant is a contract-restructuring candidate. Deon Butler will probably start the season on the PUP list and could even be cut. This number, 16, could get smaller in the coming days and weeks.
So what does it mean for Seahawks fans? Well, let's not sugarcoat it. You're looking at a roster with the average age of 24.5 (tip of the cap to Davis Hsu). That number will go up after the final cuts (skewed because of UDFA rookies) but the point is that you're going to see a lot of very young and inexperienced players on the field. The Hawks are going to take some bumps along the way this year and there are going to be some games that aren't pretty. But, frankly, that's what you'd expect with a team that's rebuilding. If you don't think this is a rebuild then that's fine, but if that's so I don't really know what you would classify a rebuild when you're talking about 85% turnover in a year.
I look at it like this -- because the Hawks are in a weak division they're going to have the chance to contend for the NFC West again. However, they're not going to be elite by any stretch of the imagination. They'll have a chance to gel and possibly surprise some people. The Hawks won some games no one expected them to last year and I'm confident that will happen again in 2011. But, they'll probably lose some games they're expected to win. It's anyone's guess as to how many wins they get and I'm not even going to try and guess, but I'm not going to be holding my breath for a return to the playoffs.
That doesn't mean I don't think they're going to get better. I think by the end of the year you're going to see a team that is much improved from last season and showing a lot of potential (where that leaves them in the standings, I don't know). They have some holes on their roster but there are a lot of young, exciting players to watch. I think schemes implemented last year are going to start to catch on and have some success. I think players are going to start to get on the same page. When you have a glut of leadership the new Matt Hasselbecks and Lofa Tatupus are going to emerge.
I think you're going to start to see John Schneider and Pete Carroll's personnel vision become more apparent. You're going to start to figure out what the hell this 4-3 under is capable of. You're going to see why they have brought in about forty different defensive backs in the past season. You're going to see why they have drafted three offensive linemen out of their top five Draft picks in the last two years. You're going to get a better idea of what kind of offense Pete really wants to run.
I've tried to say it here before and I'll continue to say it going forward -- a rebuild doesn't happen in one year. Last year's team is not what Pete and John have in mind. They inherited a terrible roster, cut some fat (Housh, for example), brought in some good young players in the draft, but still didn't have anything that resembled the team they were trying to build. So they brought in some band-aids. Chester Pitts, Ben Hamilton, and Brandon Stokley come to mind. They retained some guys that they needed to fill a starting lineup -- Craig Terrill, Chris Spencer, Jordan Babineaux, even Lawyer Milloy. These players are all now gone and the Hawks are committed to the "their guys."
It's now year two though, and we're going to get a chance to see what Pete and John's guys are capable of. We're going to start to get an impression of how they choose their personnel. I'm not going to make judgements, because I know it takes probably closer to four or five years to completely reload, but you're not going to see many band-aids on the 2011 roster. Except maybe at quarterback. But that's a can of worms I'm not going to open right now.
I saw this brought up on the commentary yesterday (Thomas mentioned it, I believe) and on Twitter (@joeyoly brought it up) a little bit as well, but this roster-rebuild is a little bit reminiscent of what the Buccaneers did in 2009 (and they're one of the exceptions to the "no such thing as a true rebuild" rule). Jon Gruden and the BucsGM were fired, the franchise hired a new coach and GM, cleaned house, --dropping Jeff Garcia, Micheal Spurlock, Derrick Brooks, Warrick Dunn, Joey Galloway, Ike Hilliard, and a few other key veterans-- and went with a younger and inexperienced team. They chose to develop these guys, build for the future, and went 3-13. They now, two years later, have one of the most talented and exciting young teams and a franchise QB. Obviously that's a pretty big piece of the puzzle, but otherwise the Seahawks are on a good track.
Hopefully we won't see 3-13. But don't kid yourselves, this is a total, house-cleaning, rebuild. And I'm pretty stoked about it.
Follow @FieldGulls on Twitter | Like Field Gulls on Facebook
111 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good topic and perspective.
This team could be noticeably improved and finish with a worse record.
Head of catering.
With our schedule it's pretty likely.
But it is also scary to think this team has a legitimate chance to go 6-0 in the division.
Armchair Linebacker
And the Cardinals.
Kolb would have shredded our 2010 defense. Remains to be seen whether we’ve upgraded enough, but all this youth and inexperience worries me.
http://17power.blogspot.com
I only agree if you say that Kolb and the Eagles would have shredded our defense
Kolb is now Kolb and Fitz with a poor offense around them. I don’t think that they will have an easy time shredding us.
Brandon Stokley doesn't belong in the same sentence with Ben Hamilton.
Good article, though.
http://17power.blogspot.com
haha - that's very fair. I did feel bad about that a little. But, they didn't bring him back either.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
FIELDGULLS
I can only handle a 3-13 season
if that brings us Andrew Luck next year.
"Borrow money from a pessimist - they don't expect it back"
With all this talk about it already
I don’t want Luck anymore. It’s the stigma of a shit team that “tried” to get him because somehow he’s the magic cure to whatever severely damaged team’s management pushed them down to #1 pick. Let someone else have him and struggle through the pains of the Panthers, Rams, and Dolphins of the last few years. We have a light at the end of the tunnel, and a 3-13 would move us back to Holmgren’s last year, somewhere we don’t want to return to.
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 1, 2011 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Nobody WANTS to go 3-13
but let’s be honest. As much as you ALWAYS play to win, and as much as I loved the BEEFQUAKE (ahhhh, so so soothing), Seattle would have been better off with six wins and higher draft picks.
It’s not like a window would have closed had we missed those playoffs. The NFC West is gonna still be weak this year. We would have had a better shot to fix our QB problem going forward, and probably the same likelihood of squeaking into the playoffs at 7 wins this season.
As for a light at the end of the tunnel, I don’t know what that is. TJax was a quality signing, but until we take care of our QB situation long-term we’ll be in the same fundamental position every year. We can make the playoffs in a weak division, but not be a serious contender.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Does this have to still be brought up?
We won 7. It happened. Can we move on?
"Hey, guess what? Nobody cares who would win in a crazy fantasy fist-fight between Anne Frank and Lizzie Borden." The Monarch
by crushedoptimist on Aug 1, 2011 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I stopped reading.
Because I would not trade Beastquake for a higher draft pick. No one in the Seahawks organization would.
"It was a dream come true to be the quarterback in Seattle; Bigger and better than anything I could have dreamed of." -Matthew Hasselbeck
by Cheddar28 on Aug 1, 2011 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 7 recs
I agree...
But dcrocket17 had it right with:
(ahhhh, so so soothing)
Umm… yeah, what he said. I don’t get screaming and jumping excited about it any more, but I do get this very, very contented smile that hangs in for some time after I rewatch it :)
I am completely with you
I want to get the QBOTF, but I don’t care how we do it or exactly which player it is. I don’t know if it will be or should be Luck and I am tired of people rooting against us winning when we haven’t even started the season. I am not questioning fanhood, so don’t shoot that at me, but if you say you want us to get Luck, you are hoping for 1 or 2 wins. I’m just tired of it because it isn’t helpful to the discussion of the upcoming year, or really where we are at in a rebuild.
Exactly; we could go 3-13 but a few other teams could be even worse and we miss out on one of the really good QBs.
The “Luck Sweepstakes” isn’t something to be won, but something you trip and fall into. It’s very possible that the ends won’t justify the means.
I hate all this Luck crap, too
Every year, people are talking about the next QB savior to tank for. Last year at this time a bunch of people wanted to tank for #1 pick Locker. In years before fans of other teams wanted to tank it for saviors such as Chad Henne, Vince Young, JaMarcus Russell, Matt Leinart and Brady Quinn. There’s no guarantee that anyone is going to be worth a damn in the future, and I will accept never root for sucking just for chance to get a better hyped unproven.
by central_scrutinizer on Aug 1, 2011 8:37 PM PDT up reply actions
You're right, but that doesn't mean all quarterback prospects are equal.
Luck is mentioned, at this point, as one of those very rare prospects. Things may change closer to draft day, but at this point he’s more highly regarded than any QB to come out in a while that I can think of.
Don't marry yourself to the idea of Luck.
There are two other quarterbacks that are likely worth drafting in the top 10 next year, if not top 5.
I’ll be keeping a very close eye on quarterbacks this year. I’m not even sure Luck will be the first quarterback chosen.
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 1, 2011 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Good stuff
I think winning the NFC West and a playoff game basically gave Carrol more time to rebuild. We could have a bad year this year and a mediocre one the next but because of last year he will get a pass on this season for sure.
The team is very much setup for a learning year this season which is fine because in 2012 and especially 2013 we could be a very strong team. Assuming we get a franchise QB I’m not just talking NFC West contenders but Superbowl contenders.
This all assumes we will be better than the Rams though, and that team could also be very scary starting this year. Bradford basically gives them an edge on us unfortunetly.
by The Great Googly on Aug 1, 2011 12:43 PM PDT reply actions
Good God, I would cry myself to sleep for a month if we traded JC.
The beatings will continue until morale improves!
Oh - cool. Could have part to do with Lofa's restructuring.
You guys have probably already talked about this so I won’t derail the thread.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
FIELDGULLS
Im fine with it
I like JC but I dont think he fits what PC is trying to do with the offense all that well. TE is also one of those positions you can find starting talent with in the late rounds or even UDFA.
by The Great Googly on Aug 1, 2011 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, hyperbole not withstanding, if John Carlson is gone before the season starts I'll be bummed.
The beatings will continue until morale improves!
If we were playing with 10 players on the field, yeah.
But if you’re seeing Zach Miller in his place, I think you’d be excited.
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 1, 2011 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions
What sets Zach Miller apart from John Carlson?
Honest question. Similar sized guys, similar production so far.
Is Miller a better blocker?
Similar?
Carlson started off well but has been trending down, and has a lower yard-per-catch. Miller’s more of a playmaker and also a better blocker, though Carlson’s grown in the role.
The difference isn’t big enough where I think this FA move would be a particularly good one, but it’s there
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 1, 2011 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes... similar.
I think it’s a little early to say that Carlson is trending down. I got the impression that a good deal of his lack of production last year was b/c of being kept in as blocker and being used as fullback.
I recognize that Zach Miller had a much better year statistically in 2010, but I don’t see him as being on a whole other level from Carlson as a receiver. I’ve seen Miller play a number of times dating back to college, and he’s a guy I’ve always liked, but I’ve thought that he and Carlson are pretty similar as receivers, but I never really paid attention to Miller as a blocker.
It wasn't only the blocking
Carlson had a low catch-rate (catches per target) before his blocking duties increased. Some have blamed that on the QB but I’m not sure its really been addressed.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Aug 1, 2011 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I remember John Morgan going into it a bit midseason
But it would be interesting to see a similar analysis for the entire season.
The way I see it, Hasselbeck has been "trending down" Carlson.
Remember the first pass Matt threw last year? Technically a pass to JC, but in reality he threw the ball RIGHT AT Clements; I’ve seen more shit balls thrown to Carlson last season than all the other receivers on this team combined.
Hasselbeck and Carlson never developed good chemistry, and John probably deserves his fair share of the blame, but I would like to see what he can do with a different QB (although trading Carlson for a pick and signing Zach Miller sounds good, too).
Miller and JC in 2 TE sets, anyone?
Anyone else remember when all the TEs went out in Chicago and we got our asses handed to us?
Add Morrah for 3 TE sets, with BMFMW and The Rice Rocket on the wings, and you might have positive yards if the sexy new line can keep the janitor (QB du jour) upright.
by bleedshawkblue on Aug 1, 2011 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think we're keeping 4 TEs on the roster again this season.
Especially since JC, Miller and Morrah all have similar skill sets.
I think we will
Tom Cable likes heavy sets right?
Apparently Pete Carroll doesn’t like how Charlie Whitehurst holds a clipboard
Ah, he keeps his shit balls for Carlson?
The Roy Williams Defense. Well played.
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 1, 2011 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm just saying there was a lack of chemistry between the two.
Carlson could very well be like Roy Williams and have bad chemistry with EVERYONE, for all I know…I also got the feeling Hasselbeck threw passes “under duress” more often to Carlson than other receivers (because tight ends are usually closer to the LoS than receivers).
Trending down?
I’m not sure that I agree with that. But first, how so?
He had one down year in receptions, so I’m not sure that is a trend because for there to be a trend, a general tendency has to be implied, and in this case, he had two years with almost identical production, followed by one down year, so that doesn’t suggest much of a downward trend (or tendency), now does it?
Let’s also remember that last year’s O-line was pretty banged up for most of the year, what with 11 different starting combinations, so with that sort of instability, Carlson was asked to block a lot.
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 1, 2011 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions
And not just block, he was also asked to play a completely different position.
I get that he hasn’t turned in a huge season like people wanted him to, and any excuses regarding quarterback play would go double for Miller, but I’m really surprised people have soured on him so much. Outside of a case of the dropsies earlier in the season he seems like the same guy people loved in 2008.
Carlson was with Holmgren in 2008.
Holmgren loves guys like Carlson and tailored his offense to exploit him. Objectively, though, in a league where skyscraper tight ends put up gaudy numbers, Carlson’s precise route-running ability, while nice, seems a bit quaint by comparison. And he’s a mediocre blocker.
Still a fan, but if the Miller deal falls through I still think we look to upgrade the position soon. A serious weapon at this position is a huge boon for a guy like T-Jack.
I think I know enough of hate/ To say that for destruction Rice/ Is also great/ And would suffice.
Skyscraper tight ends?
Carlson is as tall as Gonzalez and an inch taller than Gates.
Miller is an upgrade but I still think Carlson is one of the better tight ends in the league, I don’t know why the team would prioritize making a change there anytime soon.
And To Further That Point
They ran Nearly IDENTICAL 40 times, actually Carlson tested out faster, running a 4.78 to Miller’s 4.83.
My question is, why does Miller look so much faster?
Win Forever: Live, Work and Play Like a Champion
Was more thinking Finley/Shiancoe
But I take your point.
I think I know enough of hate/ To say that for destruction Rice/ Is also great/ And would suffice.
Honestly, it's more because I'm a homer.
And it would be sweet to see one fan favorite from the previous era to keep up with PC and JS. From what I hear though, Miller is a talented guy.
The beatings will continue until morale improves!
Ryan, Obo, Forsett, Tru(for now), Heater, Red, Mebane.
I too would rather keep Carlson, Morrah, McCoy and have the resources to be spent on Miller go towards a DT, LB, or CB(but I think they have all been snatched up by now).
It's about being a much better fit.
Carlson’s lack of speed could be made up for as long as Hasselbeck was running it, but the deep-threat QB of Carroll’s preference will need faster guys. We’re also in the market for better TE blocking. Throw in Miller’s history under Tom Cable and it seems like a pretty obvious move to me.
http://17power.blogspot.com
I'll concede Miller being a better
to those who pay more/better attention to those things.
But is Miller really significantly faster than Carlson? He’s never struck me as a fast TE.
Buc's comparison is a good one. I was thinking of 88/89 Cowboys...
In short, I mumbled at Mora’s firing, that I wanted to have a hot coaching commodity come in and clean house. I was thinking about Jimmy when he went to Dallas. I was a Canes fan from S. Florida, and happened to live in Dallas the year of the 1st SB trip. I recall his moves, the unpopular cuts and trades, the pain of youth coming in etc. I wanted this for my hawks.
Enter PC/JS. That’s what’s going on here, save some of the cuts were a year in the making. It is unfortunate (however telling) that we were unable to make any big trades for picks. Not one player on this roster last year, was capable of garnering a 1st or second round pick from another team. Sad and so much needed for our rebuild.
If PC/JS did not bring them in, there is no one on this roster worth a high round trade. I am glad we moved where we could and gotten some draft stock from lesser players, who don’t fit scheme.
This will be a great season, even if the record sucks.
Dallas under Jimmy is exactly what came to mind for me too
I bet many of you are too young to remember the shockwaves that came with Tom Landry’s dismissal and Jimmy Johnson’s hiring. I’ll never forget Buddy Ryan’s infamous, “There no East Carolinas in the NFL.” The 1-15 season. It was ugly.
But they did it the right way.
And it’s worth noting, the defense gelled fairly quickly. I think leadership is often way overstated on D. A young team will get duped sometimes, but you put big, fast, athletic players on the field and they’ll just run themselves into plenty of plays just on talent. Offense is more dependent on experience, touch, and feel for the game.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Johnson also brought fresh perspective and strategy
He broke a few molds on schemes, player picks, talent evaluation etc. Probably before him, no one had done that since Bill Walsh. I am hesitant to put Bill and Pete in the same context here, as Bill is close to football sainthood and people would likely miss the principal of the point over garnering Pete w/ such high praise.
For some reason, JJ isn’t put in the same class as Bill, however he is a fantastic coach and broke the status quo in the same way, while ultimately producing a team of hall of famers and multiple super bowls and dominance.
I do see Pete as being much closer to Bill in personality and coaching style. I can only hope the results are proven.
I'd LOVE to land Trent Richardson. :)
by Carl Shinyama on Aug 1, 2011 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
He is from the next town over to where I live now
It was beyond a big deal when he was choosing colleges
Okay, so our strategy is to emulate Jimmy Johnson.
So 1-15 next year and then the team gets the Vikings to trade their draft for the next 3 years for Marshawn Lynch. CHECK.
Well, Lynch is a free agent after this season.
Another advantage Jimmy had 20+ years ago: no (real) free agency back then.
Spot on, Danny
I’ve been pounding this drum for a long time: Pete and John are rebuilding this team for the long-haul and it won’t get done in one offseason.
Last year, we trimmed a lot of fat, put in young talent at key positions and filled in the gaps (and the roster was mostly “gap”) with older, cheaper vets. Even if we wanted to sign premier FAs, the last of a CBA would have made it very difficult to restock. As a result, the team was older, less talented and less competitive, but we had cap room and roster room for this offseason.
This year, with a relatively bare roster and tons of cap room, we’ve been able to restock with more top-shelf FAs in key positions and should be more competitive. We’re still not done, though. We’re building around the QB position, but we don’t have the 2012 QB on the roster. Our QB situation is on hold (TJ and CW are placeholders) and the CB position is still looking like a mess.
Next year, I see us picking up a QBotF and maybe drafting some more defensive players.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Aug 1, 2011 12:59 PM PDT reply actions
Thanks.
I feel like I’ve been beating this drum for a while now (maybe too long).
Pete and John came in which a plan for a team that they though could be competitive in the NFL. Most of the personnel didn’t fit the scheme and weren’t transcendent talents, so they shipped them or cut them, depending on their value. They got young at key positions, looked for talent on the margins and then filled in with veteran spackle. While the roster got older (and many confused this for a “win now” mentality), most of the vets were just space-fillers that could help install the schemes for the future. Now that we’ve been able to have our first FA period, we can finally re-stock the team at most positions. All that’s left is the QB, which can’t be filled easily. It looks like we’ve decided just to punt on that and worry about it next year. Can’t build Rome in a day.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Aug 1, 2011 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions
I wish more people would put 2012 QB/QBotF in their analysis
instead of “Andrew Luck”. We don’t want Luck and the mess that signifies at this point. Thank you for not.
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 1, 2011 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions
You have to suck really hard to get the #1 pick (whoever that is)
I think our QB-less roster will take us to at least 5-6 wins, which would put us out of the running. I’d hope that the FO would trade up for a QBotF next year, but I don’t think anyone’s going to trade out of the #1 spot. I think the “best case scenario” will end up with us getting the #2 or #3 QB in the draft.
I don’t know that Luck will be that #1 QB next year but he’s got a better chance than most. I think it all depends on his OL play next season and whether he can stay healthy.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Aug 1, 2011 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Also consider this
Carolina is as likely as any NFL team to end up with the top pick in 2012. So, even if Seattle wins 5 or 6 games they’ll potentially be in the running for Luck—either in trade or take their chances scouts falling in love with the new guy.
Remember, Jack Locker was a bona fide top 3 pick. Then he went back to school.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Either that...
or our record will continue to be artificially high due to our division strength. I don’t know how any rebuild project doesn’t include a “Win now” part to some degree. I get the “win later” piece (and agree), but the draft is such a crap shoot (See: Aaron Curry vs. Russel Okung)… I think people put WAAAY too much stock into the draft and our position within it. Losing may force talent to Seattle via the draft, but Winning can be an equally effective strategy in attracting it. I don’t buy the ‘suck for luck’ mentality. I’d rather we try to win and deal with the outcome; otherwise your team’s calibration is artificial and likely wrong.
How's that working out for you... being clever? - Tyler Durden
by YoSoyMacho on Aug 1, 2011 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Think our new free agents watched that playoff game at qwest vs the Saints?
I’d bet they did.
12thMan. Recruiting talent.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
by hazbro24 on Aug 1, 2011 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Our roster could get us to 5-6 wins, but our stadium could get us to 7-8 wins.
Century Link Field is still Qwest Field, if you catch my drift. Just like last season, we could easily go 4-2 in the division, and don’t forget our tough schedule does include the Browns and Bengals….you never know…..
by J.L. White on Aug 1, 2011 3:10 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's really only semantics at this point
I like what Danny’s saying and you add a couple of key point Hummongous.
I just don’t think JCPC subscribe to the labels.
Well, except win forever but that’s kind of amibiguous. I bet they just see the roster churn as getting better more capable players on the field. And part of that is getting younger and healthier players.
They had no choice but to vett the roster and bad contracts. And now they have no choice but to fill it up with new, hopefully not bad, contracts.
If they had traded for Kolb or Palmer I doubt anyone would be saying rebuild though. I guess the line between “rebuild” and" go for it" comes down to one’s opinion of TJax and or CW.
by vertigoman on Aug 1, 2011 1:36 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, the LBs could be an issue down the line
Hawthorne isn’t locked up for long, Curry’s still learning (and very expensive) and there’s no clear long-term starter at the WLB. The best thing you could say about the group is that we don’t have a lot of money tied-up in the position.
Clemons isn’t very young, Red’s almost a FA and has been injured a bunch and Mebane looks like the only long-term guy in the middle.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Aug 1, 2011 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I guess thats my point
We are one elite CB away from being set in the backfield. The front 7 need a lot more help than that.
I think that's true for the most part.
LBs should be easy to find but it might take some work to keep the DL stocked. In theory, the LEO position should be easier to staff than the traditional 4-3 DE or 3-4 rush OLB, but I think Brandon Graham may have been in our sights at 1.14 last year before the Eagles swooped in and nabbed him. The rest of the DL is made up of DT-types and we’ve had a hard time finding injury replacements when the starters went down.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Aug 1, 2011 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions
All of a sudden we have fungible LBs...
…and it’s no longer our most heavily-invested position. Polar opposite of Ruskell’s philosophy. And the Panters’, too. ;)
Sidney Rice: Superstar.
by Misfit74 on Aug 1, 2011 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, remember when we had the best LB corps in the division (maybe the league)?
Then we just had the most expensive LB corps? This is a pretty big sea-change.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Aug 1, 2011 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I will say it seems like rebuilding the LBs is quicker than most postitions
The drop off between average and good is much lower.
Not so much "fungible" as young and fast.
Different FOs and different coaches (kinda) came in, so a different philosophy on how to use our LBs came to shape.
Holmgren Era started very similarly.
I think this reminds me of the begining of the Holmgren Era for the Hawks. Won the division in his first year then they went backwards. He got rid of a bunch of people after that first year, including the starting QB.
Disagree
This feels like the Erickson era to me. We’re building our lines and flushing players through all the other positions. The only players who stuck from last year’s new talent were our first two picks and Clemons. That’s a long, slow way to build a team and it involved years of losing. I’m not sure there’s any other way.
Beyond that, we’re not giving players who could stick a good chance at doing so. Carlson had to help the line last year and Lynch will suffer this year because we don’t have a credible passing threat in short yardage.
I am a pessimist, which I pretty much equate with realist. I do know that if you want to win at poker, though, you draw as few cards as possible. Rolling the dice more times means losing more often and I think we’re doing a lot of dice rolling.
by EthelGemerman on Aug 1, 2011 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions
"The only players who stuck from last year’s new talent were our first two picks and Clemons"
Leon Washington
Raheem Brock looks to be back
Golden Tate (3rd pick)
Marshawn Lynch
Whitehurst is still around
Walter Thurmond pushing for a starting spot.
Polumbus
BMW
That’s off the top of my head. Pretty much everyone outside of camp bodies they brought in is still here. Lendale got dumped, that was about it.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
These players technically stuck because they are here this year
Which one is a genuine, no question, starter? I forgot Williams. Pretty big omission. So really, if you can count on one offensive and one defensive player beyond the first round pick in the draft to stick, you’re looking at several years to rebuild. Detroit and St Louis are it. That’s what we’re looking forward to but we’re at the very beginning. I think that’s fine but that is what it is.
by EthelGemerman on Aug 1, 2011 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Kam Chancellor
your new starting SS.
If the FO keeps finding starters all throughout the draft, this will be quick.
They came in with a three year plan. I see it happening.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Last Year
Earl Thomas
Chris Clemons
Russell Okung
Marshawn Lynch
Mike Williams
This Year
Walter Thurmond
Kam Chancellor
Sidney Rice
James Carpenter
John Moffit
Thats 10 starters (on offense and defense) out of a possible 22, in which most appear to have a long term future with the club, if not the immediate future. Not to menotion revamping the special teams (Leon Washington, et al) and improving the depth.
Mike Robinson belongs on the Last Year list.
And Tate will be in 4-WR sets at the least.
"It was a dream come true to be the quarterback in Seattle; Bigger and better than anything I could have dreamed of." -Matthew Hasselbeck
I ommited Robinson
Just because I feel like he’s not going to be around forever, but I guess he’s only 28 and pretty good so I should have. Plus we inherited starters from the previous era that appear to have a long term future here like:
Carlson
Trufant
Curry
Hawthorne
Mebane
Thats another 5, with Robinson being 6. 11 players brought in, 16 of a total 22 filled for the most part. Some could stand to be upgraded sure, but for now we have 16 serviceable players, while averaging a little over 5 starters per offseason, that would give us another year to almost completely overhaul and have a full roster. Maybe 2 to fill in other players that get injured, regress, and any other unforeseen circumstances.
Wait...you roll dice in Poker?
I’ve been playing it sooo wrong…
by Buster! on Aug 1, 2011 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
A team that won...
five games for two consecutive teams somehow doesn’t need a character change? Entitled players don’t belong on the Seahawks anymore. Lofa’s exit has less to do about his leadership qualities as it does entitlement. Lofa’s contract wasn’t overly hefty. It was quite manageable by most means. It was Lofa’s look at of long-term team focus that got him cut. Take a little off to add more. Osi was the looming elephant-in-the-room in the quest for this restructuring. He’s been linked to the Hawks since there was talk of him getting out of New York. Are we interested?
We have to be. If one of the game’s elite performing ends comes out and says that he’d like to be a part of the Seahawks, how do you not find a way to make that happen? I’d take Osi over Lofa every day. Lofa just missed the point. And, the Hawks are talking about another huge target in TE Miller. Anyone still questioning whether or not this FO is serious about winning?
This team was old and bad before Pete and John took over. Declining underwhelming roster with bloated contracts. I don’t care what anyone has to say. No one thought we had a chance at a division title last year and we came through. The front office gets it. Pete built a champion at USC. John was part of building a champion in Green Bay. Why doesn’t anyone get it? Pete and John aren’t laying down this year in any way. They’ve improved the roster at just about every position. QB is questionable, but they gambled and hopefully they won. The entire team is improved from when they took over. I’m tired of people not being excited about this team.
Trust in your team and its’ players this year, Seahawk fans. You won’t be disappointed.
I get the message! Do you?
Soooo how do you know Osi was the elephant-in-the-room?
"It was a dream come true to be the quarterback in Seattle; Bigger and better than anything I could have dreamed of." -Matthew Hasselbeck
I would consider
St. Louis, Detroit, Tampa Bay as examples of “true rebuilds”. All of which should have fairly decent chances at making the playoffs.
Detroits been rebuilding
since Barry Sanders.
Looks like they’ve finally made it.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
simply stockpiling receivers and ignoring your other needs isn't really considered a rebuild
by BrooklynPreacher on Aug 1, 2011 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions
That's not when the rebuild started
The rebuild started after they got rid of that assclown millen
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 1, 2011 3:00 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Stockpiling receivers?
Did you watch the Lions at all last year? If Stafford stays healthy they are going to be a top 10 offense. Oh, does Suh ring a bell?
by m_b on Aug 1, 2011 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Until Megatron came along
Detroit had wasted the better part of a decade worth of high first round picks on wideouts who were mostly busts, most of which are no longer in the league. Its only the last few years since they canned Millen that they’ve made draft choices that worked out. Damn near 50 years worth of high draft choices is only now paying off for them.
by CMoney87 on Aug 1, 2011 6:14 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
With Tampa Bay as the lucky exception.
They had a winning season the year after the big churn. They could be the team that falls back down like Miami did a few years ago. The slow build is the way to go. Detroit still needs pieces in the secondary and on the offensive line. They could use more receivers. We’ll see you St. Louis is this year. I think they’ve almost finished the defense. Rebuilding takes years for most teams. You’ve got to have patient owners and fans to get it done right. That’s why you’ve got to love the Detroit fans. They stick with their team no matter what.
by EthelGemerman on Aug 1, 2011 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Let's remember that the 2008-2009 Seahawks weren't NEARLY as bad as the Rams and Lions were.
Those franchises were ran into the ground for 5+ seasons; they had no choice but to do a total rebuild with their current FOs. Most teams retain some kind of foundation that prevents them from going into long rebuilds like those two teams; even if the Seahawks finish with less than 7 wins this season, we are already “moving up.”
Great article, Danny. I'm totally stoked, too.
I’ve been so weary of a mostly inept team for so, so many years, I barely even flinched when I learned that Hass signed elsewhere and Tatupu was cut.
This team is FINALLY turning the page on the Superbowl team. So many people have clutched to that roster and that memory, and it’s being ripped away like a band-aid on a healed wound.
I’m excited to see a new chapter emerge led by Pete Carroll and John Schneider.
Always up for some Twitter action @nandron. I only talk NW sports, though.
This isn't so much a rebuild
as it is a complete demolition and building something completely new on the same property.
‘But we love that building! It’s been part of the neighborhood for years, everyone visits there!’
Yes, but it’s not up to code, the foundation’s a bit weak, and it’s unsafe to do just surface patching.
‘You just want to tear it down and replace it with some fancy expensive monstrosity!’
We don’t want to tear anything down. If these buildings could stand up forever under their own power, I’d be all for it. But the fact is that they’re getting worn down from too much use. We’re not going to put up the Vince Young Tower in the middle of Belltown. Too gaudy and pretentious. Every architectural facet of this project will be suited to Seattle’s taste and character.
‘But our old building lasted for years! How do we know this one won’t just tip over and have to be replaced all over again?"
Other cities have put up expensive landmarks on shaky ground, that’s true. But not here. Here, we’re focusing on the basics, with sturdy ground, a solid foundation, and proper framework that’ll stand up to heavy use. And with proper diligence and oversight, we can make timely repairs when we need to without affecting the main structure.
We understand that the old building was a fun place to hang out in. But it was unsafe. And with the shoddy patchwork repairs it was only a matter of time before the whole thing came crashing down, and we wouldn’t want that resentment to color your memories of such a fine place. So yes, we are replacing your old building, but in a lot of ways it’ll be the same. Only stronger. Longer lasting. Better. Made to last so that you and everyone that comes after you can enjoy it for years to come.
Carroll & Sons Construction Co. – Est. 2010
by Clendy on Aug 1, 2011 2:43 PM PDT reply actions 9 recs
Good Post
The idea is that Carroll And Schneider have an eye for talent, and it’s not nearly veteran oriented unless they work.
I consider those two some of the best talent evaluation teams out there, and just because they aren’t seen with reverence as say GB or TB (yet), there won’t be a time where we see “oh character issues” He’s never going to be here. Those days are gone like the Dodo.
Win Forever: Live, Work and Play Like a Champion
Excellent post, Danny. Keep up the good work!
Eddie Izzard ran 43 marathons in 51 days with 5 weeks of training. What's stopping you?
Four little words:
Nine and twenty-three. (Hawks record the two years preceding the new regime.)
Total rebuild? Yep, and Schneider and Carroll had to know coming in — and have Paul Allen’s 100% agreement — that a total rebuild is what the team needed, and what they planned to do.
Do I expect them to win the Super Bowl? Nope, but I expect lots of great moments, a few unexpected wins and an unexpected loss or two and if lightning strikes, they’re at least starting to look like a team that could play all the way to the final game.
They’ve erased Holmgren’s geriatric approach and Ruskell’s itty-bitty high-motor guy fixation on the DL, and well down the path of remaking the Hawks into a consistent win.
Can’t wait for the season!
by Diehard Hawks Fan on Aug 1, 2011 6:08 PM PDT reply actions
I think there's gonna be a lot of growing pains this season.
We are definitely rebuilding, and while I think the division is winnable, I think that it’s also gotten stronger. I do think that in another year or two, the NFC West is going to be an extremely tough division, and I look forward to that.
I’m tired of hearing the winner of the West as being written off for being from “a weak division”, and when the Seahawks win it going forward I’ll be excited to hear the respect they get. But they’re not there yet.
I don’t think they’ll qualify for the Luck sweepstakes, but I do think there’ll be a few good QBs in the draft next year, and that they will be in prime position to get one of them, hopefully without selling the farm to do so. The schedule is brutal and the QBs are untested at best.
But, looking at it long term, these are the growing pains that we’ll see that lead to an awesome team in the future. Pete and John are doing it right, and it may take another year or two for them to assemble the pieces, but I’m willing to bet we’re looking at a prolonged return to prominence, and developing some super strong rivalries in the division.

by 































