Aaron Curry Agrees to New Deal, Final Two Years Dropped
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 2:12 PM PDT
in Seahawks News & Rumors
Email
PrintFor a while it was unclear if the new CBA's rule against renegotiation drafted players until after their third year was applied to existing contracts, but now it seems it was not: Aaron Curry has agreed to a new deal with the Seahawks per Pro Football Talk, which takes the final two years off his contract. According to Brian McIntyre, he was set to make $8-9 million in 2011 and 2012, with nearly $11 million guaranteed. If the PFT report is accurate, he'll still make those numbers but $5 million in guarantees has been dropped, from 2012.
This means the Seahawks can freely cut bait before the 2012 season, which in turn means this season is Curry's absolute make and break season. Like earlier renegotiations (Hill, Locklear), the FO does not seem to be very happy with the talent-to-payment ratio for a lot of Ruskell's guys. If Curry produces adequately he could be extended on a more reasonable contract. He could also walk as a free agent in 2013.
This comes shortly after the Seahawks signed David Vobora, who will provide depth at Sam. That is unlikely to be related though, our linebacking talent is still not on a level where Curry's job is under pressure. It's still a bit unclear if he'll play Sam (in which case he'll be backed up by Vobora or McCoy) or Will (in which case he'll be backed up by Malcolm Smith). Vai Taua was released to make room for Vobora.
145 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Our still-favorable cap space situation just got even more favorable over the next few seasons.
The money he was due was ridiculous.
Now if they could just cut bait on Jennings, and all of Ruskell’s mistakes will have been properly taken care of.
I like Curry, I really do – and I hope he turns the corner this year. But man, has he been frustrating to watch. Good luck, Aaron – this is your last shot.
Always up for some Twitter action @nandron. I only talk NW sports, though.
by Nick Andron on Aug 22, 2011 2:17 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Trufant has very little guaranteed from 2012 onwards too
He’s likely gone after this season. Between the two of em they make over $15 million in 2012.
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Our CB situation is worrisome.
We don’t have anyone that’s even close to a #1 corner back. I’m a bit peeved that John and Pete didn’t go hard after Jonathan Joseph.
Always up for some Twitter action @nandron. I only talk NW sports, though.
Not nearly as peeved as I am
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions
After the report came out about how much money we still had
I was very peeved as well. Talent, need, and money available all matched up. This would have been a near perfect off-season.
Yep.
Seems to me like the FO is hard on diamonds in the rough at the CB spot.
Very risky – cornerbacks are probably second only to d-linemen in terms of importance on a defense.
And we don’t have any elite cornerbacks. Or even any elite prospects.
Always up for some Twitter action @nandron. I only talk NW sports, though.
I don't agree at all
In this defense it seems to me that safeties are a premium to corners. It doesn’t make sense to me to spend big dollars on CB’s when that money could be spent elsewhere to greater effect. The question is when and where will this money be spent (if at all).
I think PC and JS have done a pretty good job in terms of evaluating talent that fits the system and I trust they’ll spend our cap room when it makes sense and not before. Also it will be interesting to see if any big names that might fit our plan will be released when final cuts are made.
by bobbyj0708 on Aug 22, 2011 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Valid point there
I am still waiting to see the final ideal PC defensive scheme with all his pieces in place. What I think his plan is will make ET even more valuable in the near future….
Respect goes a long way....
I was peeved too!
Peevishness all around
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 22, 2011 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions
I was 99% sure that they would go after an early-round CB in the draft
And now here I am, 99% wrong. It’s a vital position that seems to be a bit undermanned, and may continue to be if the FO goes after a 1st-round QB next year.
Unless Sherman/Browner/Thurmond turn into studs
Then we bow down. Once you get past the top 2 CB’s (maybe even top 1), it really comes down to role players that fit what you’re trying to do. You’re right though, a top-flight CB that can cover a #1 is very important and tough to address. I wanted Joseph too.
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 22, 2011 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions
But if he was only 99% sure,
then doesn’t that mean he was 1% right?
It was just intense, and it was ball, and it was juice. The juice level in that room was high, and it was awesome.
by mister bunny on Aug 22, 2011 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Id think so
He was 99% wrong and 1% right.
by PhoneHomeET29 on Aug 22, 2011 11:07 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
This is a pretty pointless sub-thread but in something with a binary outcome (they do or do not go after a CD)
you can either be 100% wrong or 100% right.
By this logic if you are 0% sure you are 100% right.
I can’t support this.
If you're not sure if there's a quarterback controversy, there is one.
There's 32 other teams in the league, who says he even wanted to play here?
Just because we have cap space and great facilities doesn’t mean we can get whoever we want to come here. Maybe Joseph likes country music, or warm weather, or gun racks. Maybe he has a connection to the staff or he likes the scheme better, maybe he didn’t pay any attention and let his agent pick like Sidney Rice. There are far too many factors involved to be mad at the FO for not making it happen, especially when there was only a couple days to land him and 500 FAs on the move.
by Fumanchuchu on Aug 22, 2011 7:37 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Theres only 31 other teams.
As far as I know, there’s only 32 teams in the NFL. Unless you want to count USC Haha.
by PhoneHomeET29 on Aug 22, 2011 11:08 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Agreed, this is great news
Let curry actually earn some money through his play in the NFL. Time to show the world you can actually hack it in the league
by Dialectic on Aug 22, 2011 2:19 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Jennings again?
Some people do not think Jennings is brought up much here in a negative way…..
Hopefully a rejuvenated Leroy Hill and an improved DL will only help Curry show up more on game day. Just play the game and try not to over pursue please!
Respect goes a long way....
Alright Curry.
Time to pit or get off the shot.
If you're not sure if there's a quarterback controversy, there is one.
by shams on Aug 22, 2011 2:20 PM PDT reply actions 4 recs
I'm thinking it puts us in a lot better position to trade him.
As it was, we were upside down on him. Now, at least in 2012, he’ll be a lot closer to market value, so we can maybe get some draft value back out of him. I’d rather see that than just let him walk or cut him.
JC is the Anti-Ruskell
I wonder how easy it is to walk up to a man that big and tell him you want him to make less money?
Maybe he just calls his agent.
by Harvey Manfrengenson on Aug 22, 2011 2:27 PM PDT reply actions
"Hey, kiddo!
That helmet stunt you pulled back there – stupid. We’re fining you $7mil, in effect next year" -Rudy
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 22, 2011 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
And no more of that "We don't negotiate during the season" bullshit
by lemonverbena on Aug 22, 2011 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I thought Ruskell
was actually well respected how he configured contracts not to hurt the team in the future like Burleson and others. He made it easy to get rid of guys who did not perform up to expectations.
This is a positive mood and indicates to me that Curry realizes he needs to step up. Thank goodness the rookie salary cap makes sense now.
Respect goes a long way....
by Mangolover on Aug 22, 2011 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
IIRC, We kept the same cap guy from the Ruskell regime.
Izdik – I guess he’s the silent part of the triumverate in Renton. I don’t know where he fits in the whole “Queen/PM” metaphor, but ultimately, I think after Carroll/Schnieder target the player, he’s the one that actually negotiates the deals and manages the cap.
Hard to know exactly how good a cap guy is – but IMO he seems to do a good job. Like you said, even when reported salary figures seem extreme, the team has been able to rework deals has hasn’t been trapped under a lot of dead weight.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
This is something I've never even heard of
Would make a helluva Field Gulls feature article, by the way…(HINT) (HINT)
by jhmg16 on Aug 22, 2011 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe, he can settle down & just play ball now.
Instead of thinking he has to go 100 mph all the time to justify the big $. Maybe.
by Richard fg7 on Aug 22, 2011 2:39 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Maybe, you never know
A lot of perspective on Curry is skewed by his draft position/pay, and the expectation that LBs always hit the ground running as young players. They usually do, but not always. Curry has physical skills beyond belief, can he put it all together? I dunno. All this changes is it gives us an easier out if he doesn’t
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions
New Back Two Carries and you are GONE
Wow, these fourth/fifth string running backs get in for a few carries and are gone the next week. Same thing happened with Reynolds, wonder what that does for “Tommy Gunz”.
Does it mean we are going to carry 4 backs?
That would mean someone is getting their feelings hurt at the other skill spots.
Win Forever: Live, Work and Play Like a Champion
I don't think Gunz is PS eligibile
Yet I can’t see us carrying 4 RBs and a FB. Cutting Forsett?
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Sure haven't seen much from him yet.
I thought before the season that he might be the best back on the team.
by Spin Forever on Aug 22, 2011 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Forsett is not the problem
Not even Barry Sanders could do much with poor blocking. Hopefully, our OL will show steady improvement this season.
Respect goes a long way....
Whoa whoa whoa
You ever seen Barry Sanders?
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 22, 2011 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh yes I have seen Barry Sanders
I so loved watching him turn a 3 yard loss into a 2 yard gain over and over and over. He was one of a kind and just imagine if he had better OLs, and/or a QB who had better targets…. Herman Moore was good but…
Respect goes a long way....
Those Lions teams were so bad, retirement was preferable
by lemonverbena on Aug 22, 2011 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Thats terrible!
But maybe has some truth to it. The Lions are almost like the NFL version of the LA Clippers huh?
Respect goes a long way....
I hear this all the time, how bad the Lions' OL was.
So I guess the 10 combined Pro Bowls & couple All-Pro seasons out of Kevin Glover & Lomas Brown don’t mean anything. Typically Herman Moore is mentioned, in some kind of obligatory way but without actual acknowledgement that the man was a 3-time All-Pro during his peak.
Barry Sanders happened to be one of the best RBs of his generation and also one of the best of all-time, despite being a total boom & bust scat back. That should not require the ridiculous level of apologies that come up universally as Barry’s name comes up. I don’t get it.
The Lions had 5 playoff appearances in Sanders’ career, and, tellingly, a 6th the year he retired. It’s a gross inaccuracy to characterize the 1990s Lions as a pitiful impediment to one man’s great career from becoming otherworldly-great. They were an up & down, mediocre team that had some strengths and some weaknesses.
Barry was both for them. A phenomenal physical talent to behold, he also substantially hurt his team many times a game with the negative runs. It should tell you how great he was that DVOA, which punishes backs for negative runs, still often had Barry amongst the best in the game. He was a great back.
But Barry made it more difficult for his team to win. His team did not make it substantially more difficult for him to make successful runs. There were problems on the offensive line, but the mythology has been blown way, way, way out of proportion. They had nothing on the 2010 Seattle Seahawks.
I mean, they took Barry out on 3rd downs. 3rd down running situations! For a long time I hesitated to call the man great because of that fact. I see now he was great in spite of it. But it’s distasteful to me to see so many fans blame the team for the man’s shortcomings.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Aug 22, 2011 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Fair point
Barry’s gripe was more with the Detroit FO.
by lemonverbena on Aug 22, 2011 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions
i agree
The team had some talent. The line could have been fantastic but with Sanders’ style of play an off-tackle run turns into a sweep then an end around. That has to be frustrating and beautiful to see at the same time for those guys. And the fans of course.
He had a short career considering guys like Emmitt Smith (sp?) stayed longer than he should have in order to get records, I don’t blame him for wanting to. Sanders had 1,000+ every year and had probably 3-5 more in the tank.
by SGT Lenny on Aug 22, 2011 5:24 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Interesting post.
One question, when you write:
But Barry made it more difficult for his team to win.
Do you mean that he made it more difficult for his team to win than he had to? Or do you mean that they would have won more with some other, less notable, league average type back in there? Or do you mean something else entirely?
If you're not sure if there's a quarterback controversy, there is one.
I just mean his dancing around frequently lost yardage
putting them in undesirable situations like 2nd & 11 or 3rd & 8. I do think he made more of a positive impact than negative impact. I think the Lions wouldn’t have been as good with an average back. A lesser back who’s still good, but more consistent back could have helped more, I think.
Football Outsiders characterizes Sanders as “the best boom & bust back ever, with bigger booms and fewer busts.” I don’t think fewer busts is correct, but he had more and bigger booms, for sure. He was still a great back and I’d definitely have taken him over most backs, if I had the chance, on my team.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Aug 23, 2011 7:42 AM PDT up reply actions
I wore a #20 Lions jersey to the Pro Bowl the year he was voted to the HOF
Then rooted like hell for Shaun-A while mocking 9ers fans.
by lemonverbena on Aug 22, 2011 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Even Ray Roberts Looked Good There
He looked damn good sometimes with Barry making somethin outta nuthin.
Win Forever: Live, Work and Play Like a Champion
Clayton is not Eligible
He’s been on the Browns/Patriots/49ers squad.
Dude also spent almost as much time in college as Josh Portis, it seems.
Win Forever: Live, Work and Play Like a Champion
Ive been wondering about Forsett as well
Clayton is getting a lot of pre-season carries, and it feels like they’re giving him a legit try-out at making the team. I can’t imagine that they’d carry 4 RBs and a FB, so maybe Justin’s spot isn’t secure…?
I think carrying 4 RBs is likely
Lots of teams carry 5 total (3RB, 2FB). Since M-Rob will likely be the only FB needed, that gives room for 4 RBs. The big reason I see behind it is the emphasis on a pound-the-rock running game. You need a big, strong, work-horse back – and if Lynch needs a breather, he’s the only RB with that skill-set on the roster. Forsett & Washington are change-of-pace/3rd down guys … you don’t really want them carrying the load an extended period of time. Clayton looks like the type of back that could step in Lynch’s roll if needed.
If they do carry only 3, then hate to say it, but I could see Washington and Forsett in competition for one scat-back spot to compliment the hammer of Lynch & Clayton. Unless they feel secure leaving Clayton “on the street”, and he’d be available as a FA during the season, if needed.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
Realistically, there's only about 3 spots open for all those cool UDFAs we're looking at...
…including Portis, Baldwin, Lockett, Pinkard, Konz, a whole pile of CBS, and at least one of our bad-ass TEs. Do we want to spend one of those spots on a fourth HB?
Depends
If you want to run the ball 60% of the time and that 4th RB will see the field more then your 5th CB or 3rd or 4th TE, then yes. There’s going to be some tough decisions made at cut-downs.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
I don't see why they would need to carry more than the 4 they have on game day
TEs can back up at FB and 3 deep is plenty to get through a game. Seems like there’s no shortage of unemployed HBs if you need to add one real quick from the PS or street.
I've been wondering the same thing.
Clayton has 2 more games, he could still earn his way off the team, but he looks like he could make a very difficult (but I suppose good to have) problem for them.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Aug 22, 2011 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not seeing it
I think the same group that ended the season is solidified. Force is a great team guy, they’re not moving him.
by lemonverbena on Aug 22, 2011 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I was really hoping they'd give Taua a shot
but he has PS eligibility whilst Tommy Gunz doesn’t. Stil…
I wanted to see more of Taua as well
That’s why I’m wondering if Clayton has a legit shot at making the team. Guys around him that are PS-eligible keep getting cut, yet he’s still there.
They've been giving him a lot of snaps.
Honestly, while I haven’t been hugely impressed, it’s not like he’s played poorly. I just found Taua to be a little more interesting. Maybe just because of the name?
From all the interviews and footage, etc. I've seen of Aaron,
I get the strong impression he’s just not very bright. Maybe that’s his main issue, defensive schemes in college are much less complex and don’t require a lot of thought, so he shined with pure physical ability. Trying to play linebacker well in the NFL requires a strong understanding of reads, formations, I just wonder if it’s beyond him to process information at a high level. I’m just speculating, who knows.
1. Charlie Whitehurst 2. ??? 3. Profit!!!
I had that same impression of Aaron.
Always up for some Twitter action @nandron. I only talk NW sports, though.
Yeah, agreed.
Especially by reading Twitter. I just don’t think he’s all that intelligent. Which seems odd for Ruskell.
I hope that is not true but...
Could be true. I have been a Curry supporter and realize it takes time but he has been missing the “special” that special players just make plays. I hope he feels comfortable and steps up but for the first time I have to admit it might not happen. I am going to support him completely this year but he needs to show more. Bring it Aaron!
Respect goes a long way....
I think Curry's one of those guys
that think the wonderlic is being able to touch your nose with your tongue.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
by hazbro24 on Aug 22, 2011 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Hey-Oh!
In that case I’m a first round pick… ladies.
I've got ridiculous upside.
Twitter: @JacsonBevens
by Jacson Bevens on Aug 22, 2011 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Stop licking your nose!
Who knows where that thing’s been
by Buster! on Aug 22, 2011 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
p-u
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Aug 22, 2011 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions
He was at the charity 206 basketball game in July
He was in one of those halftime games where you shoot from specific circles on the floor and get 1/2/3/4 points based on what spot you’re shooting from.
He spent the entire game shooting from random spots on the floor that would give him team zero points even if he made them. I’m not sure he understood the directions. He’s gigantic in person though
Ah
I knew I had heard that before.
One Terrill down, one Jennings to go...
Follow the llama tail
by Wayward Llama on Aug 23, 2011 1:29 AM PDT up reply actions
A damn fool is what Curry is.
A stupid human being.
Yeah you look smart right now
With all that evidence and deep thought that you put into this
by stufr on Aug 23, 2011 5:44 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Why dont cut him?
He is a bust. Cut him instead.
Are you serious?
We have to at least try to trade him to the Raiders first.
One Terrill down, one Jennings to go...
Follow the llama tail
by Wayward Llama on Aug 22, 2011 3:55 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Yes, let's do that because he's underperformed.
We have so much cap room yet we should put an untested rookie or a guy just cut in there to start.
by Stay Off the Flowers on Aug 22, 2011 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Depends
He might believe he has a better chance at success elsewhere (and he might be right), he might’ve been put in front of a “take the deal or get cut” situation. Who knows. Locklear and Hill took their cuts too. Our FO is good at it
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Locklear and Hill would have been cut.
I find it hard to believe they would have been willing to cut Curry.
Yip
But honestly, we’ll never know.
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Sounds like they didn't talk him out of any money, just the 2012 guarantee.
Still a tough sell I would imagine. Is he really bad enough that they would cut him and eat 11 million? It would take some kind of poker face.
They done called that bluff with a few guys already
by lemonverbena on Aug 22, 2011 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions
He probably thinks
that he’s been doing well enough to earn a big payday and that more years will only reducing his chances of getting one.
A bigger payday than he's getting with us?
No. No he doesn’t think that.
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Good question
I saw someone mention this on the TNT forums, and it’s speculative, but makes sense to me:
Shortening his contract, accelerating his bonus, and making his ’12 salary non-guaranteed not only makes it easy for the ’Hawks to cut him after the season, it also makes it a lot easier to trade him THIS season (not the big bonus cap hit for the other team)
With the team moving fast to sign Voobra, KJ Wright projecting as a good SAM, and now re-working Curry’s deal at this point in camp …. maybe it means a deal is in the works?
I follow Curry on twitter, and while you hate to make judgments on a guy just off that, he strikes me as a guy who’s never really adapted to Seattle. Maybe he agreed to this to facilitate a trade to an East Coast or Southern team closer to home & his family?
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
He was dropped long ago
On his head.
by broadbill birdwatcher on Aug 22, 2011 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions
So....
Seattles signs a olb then restructures Currys contract? I dont know… I think they are connected. Could we see a trade? Didn’t Green Bay just lose a olb to a broken shoulder? Bungles need help at lb. Maybe it’s nothing but I’m very happy to see his contract reduced… What’s settles cap #? I think that puts us something like 21 million under..
by Redzone59 on Aug 22, 2011 4:58 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
GB is a 3-4 team. I don't think he would fit there.
Not sure about the Bengals though. Pretty sure they are a 4-3 so that is a possibility.
Earl Thomas + Mark Legree = Earl Gree. A new flavor of safety coming to you on Sunday's this Fall. They're gonna wake you up!
To the Bungles for a bunch of picks that end up being at the top of every round?
To the Packers for Flynn and some of their talented young DBs?
To the Ravens for their starting Defensive 11 plus Oher?
To the Patriots for Brady, Welker and Haynesworth? Plus a couple of first round picks?
by bleedshawkblue on Aug 22, 2011 5:49 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Yes. Yes and Yes
Or just some cold beers
by Redzone59 on Aug 22, 2011 6:24 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Vobora time, go Hawks, go Vandals
College athletics are corrupt and I suspect wrestling may be scripted
Curry is a waste
Thankfully we won’t see him after this season. Why in the world we took him in the first place is beyond me. I wish they would dump him sooner. He is and will always be a bust.
Disagree..
Curry is not a waste. He does play good but seems lost at times. Im not sure why everyone is down on Curry. We should be directing our comments at Timmay and Jimmay for reaching. Curry being picked at #4 and getting paid has much more to do with the Seahawks old front office.
by Redzone59 on Aug 22, 2011 6:38 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
He was the consensus can't-miss player of that draft
It’s not like Ruskell was insane, he just bought into the conventional wisdom.
by lemonverbena on Aug 22, 2011 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Do you want your GM getting his drafting advice from Mel?
by Harvey Manfrengenson on Aug 23, 2011 5:16 AM PDT up reply actions
And since we're playing "I told you so"
I wanted us to trade down and take Josh Freeman in that draft. But I wasn’t howling about the Curry pick at the time; literally everyone said he was a sure thing.
by lemonverbena on Aug 23, 2011 8:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Yep.
I don’t remember much of a peep of serious dismay, though a lot of us were (and still are) looking for a quarterback.
It was more grim realization
I understood the logic behind the pick, but I really wanted a QB. In retrospect I’m glad we didn’t because R wouldn’t have taken a risk on J. Freeman and would have reached badly.
I wanted Sanchez, Crabtree or Monroe more, in that order.
But I was happy. Sanchez has worked out well enough for New York but I don’t know how well he would without that line, that run game & that defense. The biggest reason I wanted Curry 4th most was because I thought it was a lesser-impact position and was deep enough in the 2nd round. Then the LBs got all picked up quicker than I thought.
But being right this one time 079910doesn’t mean I can’t recognize the rationale of the pick at the time and that it wasn’t an awful move.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Aug 23, 2011 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Do you really think that is what happened
Do you think Curry wouldn’t have been taken a few picks after us had we skipped him? He looked like a great prospects, even if at an unimportant position, it’s weird to try and deny this in hindsight.
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 23, 2011 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions
we must keep curry
he will develop. it’s not easy to find talent like him. patience people
by genax on Aug 22, 2011 6:58 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I agree with this sentiment
Though he’ll have to show something this year
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 22, 2011 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions
He has seemingly unlimited physical talent.
I personally think he’s just not that smart. Majorly biting on play-action and misdirections time, and time, and time again. His physical tools are useless if he is always out of position.
One Terrill down, one Jennings to go...
Follow the llama tail
by Wayward Llama on Aug 22, 2011 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions
That talent doesn't matter without the instincts
I’m starting to believe Curry simply doesn’t have them, and I don’t know if they can be taught at this level.
IIRC, Curry wasn’t ever a star recruit or even very experienced coming out of HS – I thought he was a late-bloomer who grew into a physical freak at some point in college, and then had his best season when Wake simply set him loose to make plays. I don’t think it has anything to do with intelligence, I just think it’s that he doesn’t have that lifetime of experience playing the game that builds “football intelligence”
Ever since his rookie year, I’ve felt that they just need to use him as a dedicated pass-rusher, LEO, whatever, just put him on the edge and set him loose with minimal responsibilities. IMO, the complexities of playing SAM are just too much …. he reminds me of Aundray Bruce from a long time ago – another complete physical freak who simply had no idea how to play LB.
"I'm tired of chasing after my dreams. I'll just find out where they're going, and catch up later." - Hedberg
by jteckmann on Aug 22, 2011 7:50 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Looks to me like they are assuming Curry won't improve much.
If they thought he was going to raise his play to the level we all assumed he’d achieve, there’s no way they’d shorten his contract.
Yeah... this seems logical, unfortunately.
If they had much faith there’s no way they do this.
Proactive-like-Nonstop
FIELDGULLS
by Danny Kelly on Aug 22, 2011 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Is he just in the wrong scheme?
Would Curry be more effective as a 3-4 outside linebacker?
Seeing as his pass rush skills are incredibly limited I'd say no.
The thing people forget about Curry is that he was drafted in large part because of his coverage ability. He looks almost more like a defensive end than linebacker but he rarely rushed the passer in college and has been slow to develop any moves or ability since he was drafted.
I'd like to hear answers to this question.
Would our defense be any less effective or productive with out him?
I answer: No, we would not drop off without him. He does not make our defense better and is easily replaced. He’s a sunk cost and is not bringing value at this time. He has a replacable skillset. Take any draft stock or player trade that will upgrade the team for him at this time.
Sarcasm aside
Of course we want to develop young players. In his case, I think he is as developed as he gets. Waiting too long for potential, can further sink costs. Of course, I’m not knowledgable enough to know if he is limited by the non-physical skills needed; simply my observation from afar.
Agreed.
Oddly enough, Curry seemed to have a much larger impact the first few games he played (e.g. coming down the line like a freight train and trucking Steven Jackson) than he has recently. He may be playing much more “assignment correct,” but sure doesn’t seem to be any kind of impact player. Even when he is beating his blocker, he is often not wrapping up and finishing a play. Not to mention him repeatedly biting hard on play action and crashing into the middle of the pile, while losing outside contain. Very very frustrating.
I like Curry
But he just wasn’t worthy of the 4th overall pick. I’m not sold that he will ever be an elite LB (he’s 3rd best on the team right now), and anything less than a pro bowler is a bust when you are taken 4th. If he was taken later on in the draft then his story would be different. He just doesnt seem to be developing his game and I see him over pursue quite a bit. For comparison, here are the other LB’s taken in the 1st and 2nd round of the 09 draft (and notice how many came from USC). See any on the list that you’d rather have than Curry? I do
1 round 15th pick Houston Texans Brian Cushing LB USC
1 round 26th pick Green Bay Packers Clay Matthews LB USC
2 round 3th pick 5 St. Louis Rams James Laurinaitis LB Ohio State
2 round 38th pick Cincinnati Bengals Rey Maualuga LB USC
2 round 45th pick New York Giants Clint Sintim LB Virginia
Don't forget Tom Brady in the 6th round!
Man, this hindsight thing is fun.
by Kyle Rancourt on Aug 22, 2011 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think you can say it was a bad pick because of the results.
You have to think about the process. He was a can’t miss pick, and we grabbed him. I don’t remember at the time anyone being upset about the pick.
Time to address the elephant in the room:
Does this mean that FearlessFrog is unbanned?
by frithsblessing on Aug 22, 2011 11:43 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
He still hasn't changed his sig from "Aaron Curry was a bust the moment he took the field".
He will literally never get over it.
If you're not sure if there's a quarterback controversy, there is one.
And at this point,
it’s looking like he’ll be correct.
One Terrill down, one Jennings to go...
Follow the llama tail
by Wayward Llama on Aug 23, 2011 1:30 AM PDT up reply actions
That's like correctly calling red on the roulette wheel.
The shit doesn’t go on one’s tombstone.
If you're not sure if there's a quarterback controversy, there is one.
My tomb stone will read:
Seahawks will be so awesome next year!
by goatweed on Aug 23, 2011 6:49 AM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
That was never the issue
His obsessiveness was and is.
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 23, 2011 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions
I seem to remember Curry and his agent not wanting a six year deal in the first place
I think that held up the contract negotiations after he was drafted. Ruskell wanted a six year deal and I think Ruskell gave up more guaranteed money to get it.
Dropping it to four years shows more his current value, though he’s still overpaid.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Seattle traded him, if they find a good deal.
Now that you mention it, yeah, he was pushing for five
Hard to get a good deal on Curry I think
Formerly Known As Vasilii
by Thomas Beekers on Aug 23, 2011 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Imagine if we'd hired Singletary to coach the linebackers.
Wonder if he could’ve helped progress Curry.
Eddie Izzard ran 43 marathons in 51 days with 5 weeks of training. What's stopping you?
According to Pete (via everybody on twitter)
this restructuring happened “months ago”.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Aug 23, 2011 6:10 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
Related FanShots on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
