Seattle Seahawks: Don't Be the Bucs part One. Re-Sign Marshawn Lynch and Add His Clone
I think we are all feeling pretty damn happy with our team right now, aren't we? As long as nobody mentions Tarvaris Jackson, I think the fanbase feels good about what this team did this year and how much better this 7-9 season was than last years identical record. And for good reason:
- Brandon Browner, Kam Chancellor, Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas (in no particular order)
- Red Bryant, Chris Clemons, Brandon Mebane (in alphabetical order, by last name)
- Pete Carroll, Tom Cable, John Schneider (oldest to youngest)
- A high draft pick
- A strong finish, though it could have been stronger
- My addition to Field Gulls
- Winning seven games while having key players on IR
That last part is pretty important. By seasons end, the IR listed key players: John Carlson, James Carpenter, John Moffitt, Russell Okung, Sidney Rice, Walter Thurmond, Marcus Trufant, and Mike Williams. Don't make the mistake of reading that as an excuse to losing nine games.
Instead, read it as this: The Seahawks placed three-fifths of their starting offensive line, their top two wide receivers (we thought that's what BMW would be at least and he was a starter) and two key cornerbacks on IR and didn't get their asses handed to them, while being able to get a good, long look at their depth. Seattle found out that they had depth without having to get embarrassed on the field.
Seattle was able to find out which offensive lineman they should retain for depth. They found out what Richard Sherman could do. They might have seen enough of Ricardo Lockette to keep him around, even if it's only on the practice squad next year. They saw some light with Golden Tate.
If this is a team that's going to be young, affordable, and effective, then Seattle needed to find out how good their scouting department was doing after the first two or three rounds of the draft. Did you see how many awesome players that the Packers snag after the first couple of rounds?
I better stop there before I start biting on the Packers articles. I am not going to talk about that. Anymore. Starting... NOW!
I want to talk about the opposite of that, because we do feel good as a fanbase, but how good should we feel? It's not that I want to be the party pooper but I am going to take a dump on something: the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
I'm really, really sorry Tampa fans. It's nothing personal against you. But I do NOT want to see what happened to Tampa Bay this year happen to the Hawks. I know that a lot of Seattle fans probably feel like that's not possible and that they have faith that the organization would not let that happen (and I would agree!) but to just completely ignore the possibility seems shortsighted to me.
If we want to sit back and feel all warm and fuzzy inside, I'm all for that. I'll light the candles and you run the bath water. But there are still steps that need to be taken to avoid a Tampa Bay-like tumble and the most important ones will be the personnel moves that do or do not happen. What lessons can be learned from the Bucs total collapse in 2011?
Let's try to learn from it, because every mistake made in this league is an opportunity to learn, even if you aren't the team that makes it.
Why Tampa Bay and what does that have to do with Seattle?
The 2010 Bucs went 10-6 and were one of the youngest teams in the league. (Maybe the youngest? They were the youngest this season, I believe.) They went from 3-13 in the first year of Raheem Morris to that 10-6 record and just barely fell short of the playoffs. How good were they?
Well, that's the thing. They could be happy with their record. They could be happy with Josh Freeman. But Tampa did not really dominate in the way you'd expect a 10-6 team to dominate in anything. The Bucs finished 19th in total offense, 17th in total defense, and their biggest strength was their +9 turnover differential. They waited until week 17 to beat a team with a winning record, the Saints. The Saints sucked so much that they lost to the Seahawks the next week!
New Orleans did not really suck, but the second-best team that they beat all year might have been the Rams and they beat them by a single point at home.
Tampa Bay was 10-6, and they didn't really have a bad loss, but those good feelings that they might have had about being young, being under a second-year head coach and improving, all seem somewhat tarnished in retrospect. Nobody could have expected that Josh Freeman would go from throwing 25 touchdowns and 6 interceptions to throwing 16 TD/22 INT, but their collapse and subsequent ten-game losing streak to end the year were more than just the by-product of a promising young QB gone wrong.
I think one of the most underrated aspects of the losing streak was the loss of running back Earnest Graham.
He may not be as important as he once was, and he hasn't rushed for over 100 yards in a season since 2008, but LeGarrette Blount needed Graham and the Bucs had no answers when he went down. Graham was playing his best football since 2007 (or maybe ever, even in a reduced role) this year and rushed for 206 yards on 37 carries (5.6 yards per rush) plus 26 catches for 163 yards.
The most important thing about what Graham did, beyond just blocking and being one of the most liked players and leaders on the team, was provide a different look than Blount for defenses; which included being able to catch the ball out of the backfield.
Blount went undrafted in 2010, signed with the Titans, then was waived in September and picked up by the Bucs. By week seven, this undrafted free agent (character issues need not be discussed, as they weren't the only reason he went undrafted) had his first 100-yard game.
By the end of the year, Blount had rushed for 1,007 yards and 5 yards per carry, the majority of which came in only 11 games.
This led the Bucs to believe that they were satisfied enough with Blount to part ways with Cadillac Williams and they didn't really do much to replace him. Tampa Bay drafted Allen Bradford, who we know is now a Seahawk, and went with the duo of Blount and Graham, backed up by Kregg Lumpkin.
The problem was that LeGarrette Blount became useless to Tampa Bay when they were losing. His deficiencies as a pass-blocker and pass-catcher meant that he would not even see snaps in a game when Tampa Bay found themselves down in a big enough hole. This is where Graham would step in, but when Graham went on IR, the Bucs flopped here. (Sorry.)
Subsequently, they were forced to go with Blount and Lumpkin, and then later a guy named Mossis Madu. MOSSIS MADU! Fun to say, but no fun to play. (I'm so, so sorry.)
What happened was that Blount struggled to duplicate his rookie success and ran for 781 yards on 184 carries for 4.2 yards per carry. The average per carry is fine, but Blount is such a limited running back that it's almost a waste and you can see how he was the Yin to Graham's Yang.
Lumpkin was limited in almost the opposite way, so at that point the defense knows whether or not you are going to pass it or throw it based on which running back is in the game. Blount caught 15 passes this year (compared to 5 last year) while Lumpkin caught 41 passes compared to 31 carries.
What does this mean for Seattle?
I don't think I have to explain why Seattle should re-sign Marshawn Lynch or why we all want them to. If he can continue to do what he did this past season for another four years, Seattle is going to be successful on offense. There's no question that we all knew that he needed to be a part of the plan.
The other part that I think is important is finding a back that is similar to Lynch.
Unlike Blount, Lynch is an every-down back. Though his 28 catches in 2011 won't blow you away, he put together a package of "everything you could ask for" from a running back this past season and unlike Blount, he doesn't need an Earnest Graham. More importantly, it's what Seattle needs, which is an "In Case of Emergency" plan.
Justin Forsett seems unlikely to return, so it's unlikely that I'll need to talk about him.
Leon Washington is one of our favorite players, but he's not an answer for a Lynch emergency. He has carried the ball 450 times in his career, compared to Lynch having 285 carries just last season. He's the perfect #3 running back and #1 kick returner.
What Seattle needs to do is find a player that can carry the ball 5-10 times when Lynch is healthy and 15-20 times in case something happens. I don't know who that player is or if they'll get him in free agency or the draft, but Seattle has to avoid being in a position where they can't run the ball.
Even in a pass-happy league like this, teams need to either have the threat that they can run it or they need Aaron Rodgers. The Hawks will most likely not have a top 5 QB next season, but they can score points if they can run the ball well, and it's a lot easier to find a good running back than it is to find a great quarterback.
Lynch is a critical step one, but I think finding his back-up and potential replacement is a key step two. There are a lot of great running backs that go after the first two rounds of the draft and I think grabbing one in the third or fourth round would be a wise move.
The draft will all come down to who is available and who falls where on your big board, but I won't be mad bro if the Hawks take a running back in round three. It would be just one step to avoid taking a Tampa-sized step backwards in 2012.
(edit: Apparently that list of our secondary is also in alphabetical order. My brain is on fire son!)
128 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"Brandon Browner, Kam Chancellor, Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas (in no particular order)"
Actually, they are also in alphabetical order by last name.
Eternally looking forward to someone making a Seahawks song based off of Lil' Jon's "Shots" song named "Hawks!"
by Bobby Cink on Jan 5, 2012 12:31 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
Lynch wasn't really an every down back.
He came off the field a lot on third downs and in two minute situations. He was usually replaced by Forsett. I think Force is gone but I’d guess they replace him with a better version of himself, someone who gives them the same thing in the passing game but can take the running load when needed, not a necessarily a Lynch clone.
by Nate Dogg on Jan 5, 2012 12:36 PM PST via Android app reply actions
You are right and make a fair point. I was pointing out the discrepancy in carries, but he's not an "every down back" in that sense.
Another point of emphasis Seattle will need to look for in finding a backup running back. Thanks Nate.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 12:40 PM PST up reply actions
Not to pile on, but I think that's pretty significant.
What we need is a smaller, shiftier, back that can block and catch. Leon’s not it, I believe, because his pass-blocking is sub-par.
Someone should do a post looking at these kinds of backs in the draft, or free agency.
I think I pretty much gave way to all the points Nate made as being accurate.
It’s MY opinion that we need a big back that can handle the workload if necessary, but that’s just my opinion and I welcome all others.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 1:24 PM PST up reply actions
Hey, let's compromise.
Lynch, a big back, and a third down back.
WIN
How about TJ Duckett for "big back"?
(NB: this is only a joke, not a dig at Ruskell.)
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
I'm of the opposite opinion as this
I think we do need another big back like Lynch. If Lynch goes down, we don’t have another running back that can pick up the hard yards in goal-line, short yardage situations, and we saw both Forsett and Washington get stuffed hard in these situations at times this season.
Being able to catch the ball is not synonymous with being small, and like Kenny, I just don’t think we need another scat back. I’d like to have someone like Jason Snelling for third-down, backup duties. My opinion, anyway.
What happened in the game where we didn't have Marshawn Lynch?
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
This may or may not be a rhetorical question...
But Washington started and rushed well. 7 times. For 39 yards. Forsett rushed 8 times for 23 yards. I went back and looked at the game book, the Hawks didn’t run the ball in third or fourth and short once. It was like Jeremy Bates was calling plays.
Anyway, it’s those types of situations that I think a powerback is more important. If you want to utilize speed backs more, play Leon Washington more.
Every question I make is rhetorical.
Or is it?
The Browns were among the worst run defenses in the NFL and even though Charlie Whitehurst was starting, I think that’s where having an every down back helps. You put Michael Bush in there (just throwing a name out there that we’ve already discussed) and Seattle is significantly more successful. Is the point that you and I already agree on.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 1:49 PM PST up reply actions
Lynch Could Be
A third down back if he wanted to. He does have an excellent pair of hands and his pass blocking is also ferocious. A look back to his earlier career at Cal, he even lined up at WR in some packages.
In 2008, (his pro bowl year) He had 47 receptions. So I wouldn’t put it past him to be able to do it if asked.
Live work and breathe like an optimist.
We started Whitehurst,
and lost on a bullshit special teams penalty.
Do we win with Lynch? Maybe. Or maybe they still stack the box vs. CW and still win.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
We scored 3 points and what Leon Washington did is utterly meaningless in this argument.
As I said above: One of the worst Run D’s in the league.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 2:47 PM PST up reply actions
Sure, but our O line couldn't block for shit yet either.
We started out 2-6 and didn’t really run on anybody even with Lynch.
It clicked around mid season. Guys started making blocks, and Lynch started picking the right holes.
So asking what happened in Cleveland isn’t really fair question. Because it’s the same shit that happened in 6 of our first 8 games. We lost.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Lynch didn't just "start picking the right holes"
He started off slow? Yes. The teams he played: San Francisco, Pittsburgh, and Atlanta. Those are three of your top run defenses in the league.
Not one of the top run defenses in the league? Cleveland. So if Seattle goes into that game, even with Whitehurst, you couldn’t expect fewer than 15 carries from Lynch and I would have expected him to do better than Washington/Forsett because we can agree that he is better than Washington/Forsett, can we not?
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 3:08 PM PST up reply actions
Actually I think that he might have started picking the right holes.
I’ll back Hazbro up on this by referencing the interview with Cable that has become common on the site over the last couple of days. That was my interpretation of it at least. The whole “A to B” thing he was talking about was Lynch’s picking of holes… in my opinion… I think…
Eternally looking forward to someone making a Seahawks song based off of Lil' Jon's "Shots" song named "Hawks!"
Fair enough and now I'm remembering back to.. oh... YESTERDAY.. when we talked about this.
My brain no work so good.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
You live in LA, so you don't get local sports radio here.
It’s all Cable, Lynch, and Carroll have talked about in regards to the run game. When they committed to it, when it clicked, and yes, Lynch hitting the right holes.
And, early in the season the AFC North was ranked 1-4 in the league on defense.
Also, later in the season after it had “clicked” they ran against the Niners and their top 3 defense quite well.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
So, are you arguing that Lynch would not have made a difference in a 6-3 loss or that Seattle would not have benefited from having a running back that could run well in place of Lynch as a 15-20 carry back?
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
No.
This is what I said about that: “Do we win with Lynch? Maybe. Or maybe they still stack the box vs. CW and still win.”
My point is that the Browns game isn’t a good indicator. Heck, we were still running the no huddle at that time IIRC.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Hey, when you jump into the middle of a disagreement that I'm having with somebody else I get confused as to who says what now.
I think I’m pretty straightforward with my “Nobody knows what would happen if you changed one thing” philosophy.
My only philosophy is that I’m sad we didn’t have a real backup running back, only change-of-pace backs, so we had to change the whole strategy. Dallas had a real backup running back and got better when Felix Jones went down.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 3:39 PM PST up reply actions
This is why we need Polk.
He’s shifty and fast but can also run your ass over.
Second round please.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
watching youtube videos....
…. and…. done.
Yep, good with it.
I don't see us spending our second round pick on Polk.
I have a sneaking suspicion that pick (and our first rounder) are going to be spent on the DL and LB positions.
If Polk slide to us in the 3rd, then I say grab him faster than I’m grabbing just about any size L 34/35 Geoffrey Beene fitted dress shirts on sale for 10$ each…
Eternally looking forward to someone making a Seahawks song based off of Lil' Jon's "Shots" song named "Hawks!"
Let's not put it past the FO to trade down and who knows what they may pick up in return. If they don't fall in love with anyone available at 11 or in the top 20... maybe they can get another 2nd rounder.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 2:49 PM PST up reply actions
Very true. At this point, I almost expect them to trade down to pick up a second rounder this year
Or potentially a first rounder next year.
If T. Richardson is still on the board when we are picking, I think someone will be more than happy to give us picks to get him.
Eternally looking forward to someone making a Seahawks song based off of Lil' Jon's "Shots" song named "Hawks!"
It's very unlikely that the Seahawks would use a high draft pick on a running back AND re-sign Lynch.
One or the other, folks.
I say both.
We need a change of pace back, and why not prolong Lynch’s career by cutting his workload just a bit. Protect the investment.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Two words: Resource Allocation.
It’s a fool’s errand to put too much money/draft picks into the RB position; if we sign Lynch to a 4-year contract, why draft his replacement now, to (mostly) sit on the bench until his rookie contract expires?
There are PLENTY of ways to get a decent backup WITHOUT using a Top 100 pick.
And for the record, I advocate for getting a running back of a certain style and I wouldn't be mad if that player was drafted in the third round an UDFA.
Just as long as he has the right tools.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 3:41 PM PST up reply actions
Then call me a fool.
Because PC is clearly committed to the run, and Polk seems to be a rare talent like Lynch.
Who says Polk will sit anyways? Line em’ both up back there. Polk can catch like crazy.
To me this draft is completely uninspiring in relation to the needs we have and our draft position. LB in round one? No thanks. Maybe receiver if Dwight Jones falls to 11. I don’t see any pass rushers worth pick 11.
So trade up or trade back and get two seconds unless a playmaker falls to us. But Polk is a playmaker. You can never have too many.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
For a player like Polk, a 3rd rounder is more than worth it.
Whether or not we re-sign Lynch.
Eternally looking forward to someone making a Seahawks song based off of Lil' Jon's "Shots" song named "Hawks!"
RBs don't win superbowls
and this team has needs more important than RB
Drafting BPA is often how one wins superbowls.
Eternally looking forward to someone making a Seahawks song based off of Lil' Jon's "Shots" song named "Hawks!"
Well, you're right about the synonymous thing.
He doesn’t HAVE to be small. But we definitely need a pass-blocking guy of some kind, and that’s not Lynch or Washington, at least, I don’t think so. And said person needs to catch, too.
Leon is a bit of a liability in this case, maybe.
Hey, remember that one time we were talking about Marshawn Lynch's backup?
Well, here’s something that is maybe conversation worthy – the Hawks just signed Tyrell Sutton, who, as FG writer Chris put it:
“… is like a bizarre hybrid of Justin Forsett (5’8”) and Marshawn Lynch (230 lbs). He has surprisingly good hands out of the backfield, and is a perfect zone running back — one cut and go, all the way."
Anyway, just thought it was appropriate for the discussion at hand.
That was a long time ago Shooter.
You’ll have to bring us up to speed.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
If you're looking for that.....
I think LaMichael James from Oregon would be a good one. He’s a lot like Darren Sproles.
He's 5 pounds heavier but 3 inches taller than Sproles.
Sproles: 5’ 6" 190, James: 5’9" 195.
Sproles is a bit more power packed and durable than James. James seems more of a finesse runner. I’d rather have Polk who clocks in at 5’11" 222 and has a bit of nasty streak.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
I like Polk too but,
He’s rated #56 on the CBS rankings and we would have to take him in round 2 probably. James is rated # 95 and might be available in the 4th which could be a good value.
Dang I would be down to pick up LaMichael in the 4th.
Eternally looking forward to someone making a Seahawks song based off of Lil' Jon's "Shots" song named "Hawks!"
I'm sure after the combine Polk will be rated the #3 back,
and have shot up the board. If we were to trade back later into the second we might be able to still get him but I doubt it. He might be gone by our pick in the second anyways.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Particularly now that Montee Ball is staying.
Why on earth would a running back return to school?
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
Because it's hard to understand the value of youth till it's gone.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
by hazbro24 on Jan 5, 2012 5:40 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I really, really don't understand what happened to Forsett, because he should be ideal for this role.
He’s a pretty good pass blocker and receiver, and his small frame makes him dangerous when running on passing downs. Or, at least it used to.
A year and a half ago every statistical sign pointed to Forsett being a better runner than Lynch. This has completely flip-flopped. I watch Forsett run the same stretch play as Lynch and he seems to slam into the back of some lineman every time. Someone who’s smarter than me must have an answer to this… has Force simply not picked up this blocking scheme? Or has he lost a step getting to the hole?
John Morgan mentioned it
Ruskell’s late bloomer picks appear to peak after about 3 years and then suck after that.
Read my tweets or whatever - @SSReporters
I'm not sure I understand how this works.
I’m assuming that Ruskell picks, by this argument, are already polished and ready to go. But, um, wouldn’t they still be as good in their fourth year as they were in their third? How would they get worse?
Stats don't always tell the story......
Useful, yes. But must be applied in context to mean anything.
I think Michael Bush would be great at the right price
But I don’t see him coming here at the right price. Maybe he really liked Cable
I would like Michael Bush as a backup but yes, I assume that somebody is going to offer him a chance to start.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, and with that in mind, maybe Bush will actually be interested in not being a main-back for somebody?
I don’t know, just spit-balling, but it could help him have a longer career rather than having two years as a starter and then falling off. He was always an injury concern. I would see him working nicely in tandem with Lynch as he did with McFadden.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 12:53 PM PST up reply actions
Counterpoint taken.
And agree with the possibility. I wouldn’t mind Bush at all, think he’s pretty ideally suited for the role we’d be looking for.
I tried to think of somebody currently in the NFL who is similar to Lynch,
and I came up with nothing. So, I don’t know where we would get this player. If anything, I expect to acquire a more bruising big back than Lynch.
by Harvey Manfrengenson on Jan 5, 2012 12:46 PM PST reply actions
coughCHRIS IVORYcough!
I don’t know why i was coughing. But I think Chris Ivory would be someone worth looking in to. The Saints are so ridiculously stacked. Draft day move to switch spots with the Saints or something minor like that, Mr Schneider?
This would be great
Saints already have Ingram and Thomas. Ivory is a beast. I am also not apposed to making a move for Richardson in the draft.. maybe not the most glaring need but he does have something special I believe, a good combination of size and speed. Heck pair both Richardson and Lynch.
Good stuff Kenneth.
Chris Ivory late day 3 trade intrigues me. We need a pass blocking power back with solid hands and good acceleration (in a perfect world). Not to say Ivory is all of that, but I like him. I’d take some Polk as part of a three headed monster if we didn’t “reach.”
by Charlie Todaro on Jan 5, 2012 2:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Based on the Tyrell Sutton is a mix of Forsett/Lynch comment above...
I’d say I’m at least a little intrigued.
by Charlie Todaro on Jan 5, 2012 3:27 PM PST up reply actions
Definitely Ivory, but if not him, Marion Barber.
He’s getting old and is injury-prone, but I still think he’s more than serviceable in a reduced role.
I can't really think of anybody as bruising and badass than Lynch. I don't know.
Maybe this guy, and he probably also has the capability for flying nutgrabs into the endzone.

Dunno if they make jerseys that big
Also, that spandex is totally about to rip
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 5, 2012 5:31 PM PST up reply actions
If they dont resign Lynch there going to be shooting themselves in the foot, especially if a rival like Arizona or St. Louis snags him up. I think San Fran is unlikely to buy an expensive back like Lynch but god, can you imagine Gore and Lynch tearin it up on the same team? Alex Smith wouldnt have to throw one pass all year.
I think SF is more than happy with Gore and Hunter.
I don’t think Arizona would spend big money on Lynch when they have Beanie and maybe a healthy Ryan Williams.
I don’t think St. Louis is going to be spending big money on any free agents, especially a running back. I mean, of course they’ll spend money, but they’re so far from competing.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
If I'm the Rams, I trade Steven Jackson before he gets hurt again.
But the Rams are too cheap to sign a guy like Lynch; more likely they just draft Jackson’s replacement. It didn’t seem like St. Louis gained all that much from having a healthy Jackson this season, anyway.
Not sure they could trade him.
Owed almost $20 million for his age 29 and age 30 years with over 2,000 carries (plus catches) in his career.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 3:36 PM PST up reply actions
If SJax ever wants to see the playoffs during his (useful) career, he better be willing to renegotiate.
If not, then he and the Rams are stuck together for the next 24 months.
Well, I don't know what the Rams would be thinking right now but only a small piece of that is guaranteed.
I couldn’t foresee a scenario in which they compete next season so they could either take the $9 mill cap hit and play with Jackson, or save themselves the money and let him go. But I don’t see a team trading for that cap hit.
I do wonder how the cap minimum would affect such a decision though where St. Louis has to keep Jackson because they have to stay above the minimum.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 3:43 PM PST up reply actions
Seattle can't win without a quality running game
Because it’s highly unlikely the passing game will improve in 2012 unless Jackson improves or the rookie QB comes in and becomes a success right away.
Re-sign Lynch.
Also Gore is going to be 29 by next season and he suffered a serious hip injury. I think he’ll decline fairly quickly.
Read my tweets or whatever - @SSReporters
RBs
I loved this piece. I was thinking the same but more for 2nd round and Chris Polk but wont be there in the 3rd or later. Polk will be an option if we can’t resign Lynch, but who else would be there in 3rd or later that might be any good? I like Tauren Poole – Tennessee and Vick Ballard – Mississippi State, but do they fit what we’d be looking to accomplish? They should be available in 3rd and beyond
War Daddy!
I would love to see Polk in a Hawks uniform! But I trust the front office not to reach in order to get him. RB is one of those positions where you can find value in the middle and lower rounds.
Benno
I think running back is indeed a priority.
QB, RB, LB and DL are our needs, I would say. Then again, I am fairly ignorant when it comes to evaluating and choosing depth. I like Chris Ivory, and obviously Chris Polk ( Husky fan here). I hope they make a good, cheap decision at running back.
by Neonjerseysplease on Jan 5, 2012 2:20 PM PST reply actions
I feel ya about Ivory.
He’s a “straight between the tackles let me eat some clock at the expense of your health” sorta back. But he’s under contract through 2013, and I think the Saints like what he offers (especially after Ingram down). So he might have a higher asking price than the FO wants to pay.
As for Polk, I wonder how he would fare as a Seahawk insert smashmouth football dream sequence montage I just wonder where he’ll fall as a draft prospect and if the FO can afford him.
A fistful of brass. My sigs are always behind the times.
I'm a one man rec'n crew
I'm not worried about...
Seattle turning into the Bucs. We can leave that to the 49ers.
by Redzone59 on Jan 5, 2012 2:25 PM PST via mobile reply actions 8 recs
Dead heat on what i'm happiest about...
Our awesome secondary or Kenneth’s addition to Field Gulls. i really like both.
italics make it special
Seems to me it's the other backfield position that needs ....
I know, i’m beating a dead horse. I thought I saw it move.
Like the situation in LOTR?
“He was twitching because he’s got my axe EMBEDDED IN HIS NERVOUS SYSTEM! "
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 5, 2012 5:33 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Did they really use the phrase "nervous system" in LOTR dialogue??
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
That's why they called him J.R.R. "Anachronistic Bastard" Tolkein
Or so I’ve been told.
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 Jan 5, 2012 6:47 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Well....
The Dwarves had plenty of contact with the Caliquendi (Elves who’d been to Valinor) and the Vala freely shared a great deal of knowledge with said Elves.
More significantly, the Dwarves were the only race of Middle Earth created by a Vala (’though Ilúvatar had to give them spirits of their own). Aulë the smith fashioned them because he longed for someone to share his knowledge with. Thus they could easily have medical knowledge that might seem anachronistic in the pre-Renaissance times of the real world. Also keep in mind that Dwarves lived hundreds of years, so knowledge once acquired would be much less likely to disappear as it does in human societies.
And, of course, the Greek research Galen described the nervous system— making a distinction between motor and sensory nerves— in De motu musculorum. He died in 217 A.D., centuries before the middle ages.
hahahaha your last line just ate me alive.
I pissed off everyone in the computer lab, I do believe.
by Matt Erickson on Jan 6, 2012 2:17 PM PST up reply actions
An entire discussion that includes draft talk...
…and nothing about the largest hole in the team, QB?
Just finished watching PC’s post-season presser, and he emphasized the need to improve the pass-rush, danced around all the Jackson questions (although committed to a true competition next year – does that mean Portis has a chance to step up?), and dynamic players who can score – that might lead to drafting a RB, a WR (although he mentioned Lockette as being one of those guys, and Durham on the mend and playing well, and Rice, Butler, Tate, BMW, Baldwin – I don’t see how you fit a top WR on this roster) .
So my question: no possibility of drafting someone like Tannehill at 11/12?
About the 2011 Seahawks: "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, tis that I may not weep." Byron
My friend,
Just addressing one issue in my article. Hence, part one. Beyond that, wowzers, we are talking about the QB situation in just about every other article and fanpost. There’s a LOT of stuff coming up in the off-season and I imagine too much of it will cover the QB position but we will definitely be gabbing about it like a group of coffee talk single ladies to death.
In response to your comment though (because I’m not dismissing it) for one, I’d say BMW could be gone. I’d say that the guaranteed returns are Rice and Baldwin. The most likely return beyond that is Tate. Then they’ll work from there. Yeah, they need someone to replace BMW if they release him (because he was not that good this year anyway) which means they need a #2 WR if they don’t think Golden can fill that role. Or even if they do, then they’d want Golden/Baldwin/Rice/Someone to all be a regular part of the offense. And then look at what you’ve got there: an injury prone #1, a second-year undrafted FA, a third-year player that has had his struggles, and a “someone” whether that be BMW, Butler, Durham, Lockette. This team, in my opinion, does need to address the WR position. Remember when we were “stacked at LB”? Yeah, that was like a year ago and now it’s a position of need.
A possibility of drafting Tannehill? Well, in January, there are a lot of possibilities. Tannehill could see his stock rise to that position, or fall to the 2nd round. I’d say anything is possible, but from what I’ve gathered, that would be a reach, but I felt that Christian Ponder was a reach and I thought he played okay.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 7:24 PM PST up reply actions
I just thought it interesting the many comments that seemed to dismiss the possibility out of hand...
…and the main article (very nicely done, BTW) addressed the strengths of the team and where it might go next (and where for it NOT to go).
Anyway, fans tend to develop favorites, and I have discerned any kind of concensus over who might be selected in the first round, or even where the discussion-battle lines might be drawn.
I agree – no reaches. Will Flynn be this year’s Kolb? I can’t see TC/JS giving up a king’s ransom to move up, and there is no clear 3rd QB graded that high.
What I find interesting about Tannehill, and what may intrigue PC/JS is his size, arm-strength and athleticism (he was one of the better WR as a fresh/soph).
QB and pass-rush: 2 top priorities, but that doesn’t necessary translate into top draft choices. But I really don’t believe PC/JS would/should go another year with TJax. Next year should be a major improvement over this year, and getting to the opposing QB and having one of their own that plays at a higher level will do that.
Also (and those who study this can correct this impression I got watching the games) the main difference for BMW this year and last is the difference between how Hasselbeck played and TJax. Not that one was better/worse than the other, only that Hass was far more willing to throw the ball to BMW, whereas TJax less so. I don’t think BMW was any more open last year – gaining seperation is not his forte.
PC can’t wait for Barkely (I don’t believe). The absolutely best possibility is to see Josh Portis step up and beat out TJax for the starting position. If Seattle could spend it’s precious draft capital on other positions than QB, that would be great.
I have no reason to believe the Portis could be the next Seahawk QB – just saying that in a perfect world, if he could be good, that would make a huge difference on the coming draft and FA.
About the 2011 Seahawks: "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, tis that I may not weep." Byron
Two more quick things:
The only position PC said would be tough to draft was the offensive line – didn’t rule it out, but indicated unlikely.
And what about that Price kid? What, 7 TDs in the Fiesta Bowl, right? And a sophmore?
Just thinking about who might join Barkely and Jones in next year’s QB class.
About the 2011 Seahawks: "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, tis that I may not weep." Byron
Wish Price were bigger, but there is no doubt he's a playmaker.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
Yeah, he looked small.
I don’t watch much college ball, so don’t really know how to judge, but Price looked the better QB in that game, in every way.
I understand the Husky defense took away some of RGIII’s downfield options, but even so. Impressive showing.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
I watched a lot more this year than last year but BMW did not look very good out there to me.
I don’t think it can all be blamed on the difference of Hass and T-Jack. They could easily upgrade the #2 receiver and though I appreciate what BMW did last season, I wouldn’t be mad about it if they replaced him.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 5, 2012 8:08 PM PST up reply actions
Feel same.
I think we look to him or Obomanu if we want to upgrade there. I like the BMW story and the potential but he is too injury prone. In a more developed offense, where he and the QB have a rapport, I could see him flashing 2010 numbers again.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
You can't swing a cat around here without hitting a QBOTF thread.
/This post does not constitute an endorsement of cat-swinging.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
Yeah, I just need to catch up. Been off-line for awhile.
About the 2011 Seahawks: "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, tis that I may not weep." Byron
I hate repeating what has already been said/discussed. Semi-rude.
About the 2011 Seahawks: "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, tis that I may not weep." Byron
Nonsense, you're fine. :)
It’s the 2012 tubes, nobody can really stay on top of things. :)
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
So is there any kind of consensus?
About the 2011 Seahawks: "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, tis that I may not weep." Byron
Yes
Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin are going elsewhere, and we’re going to end up with somebody weird. But they will be awesome, because of PC/JS.
Really? Huh.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 6, 2012 10:17 AM PST up reply actions
I know I'm going to be made fun of for asking this, and I deserve it
But, is that real?
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
Theres a youtube video of it that is made just completely hilarious by some dude yelling "FLUFFY" in a horrified voice.
In short, who knows.
by the other side on Jan 6, 2012 4:01 PM PST up reply actions
I don't know, that's something my stupid cat would do.
Just the other day he was playing with the shoelaces of a big boot, and it got caught in its claw, and he went running off like a shot, that big-ass boot clumping him the ass the whole way!
I just about pissed myself, laughing so hard.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
No.
It’s from a Nokia commercial. But the professional origin does explain the high degree of realism (such as the warping of the fan blades in response to the cat’s weight), so it’s not a bad question.
11/12 in the 2nd?
Tannehill’s not a 1st-round player and you don’t make a QB better by reaching.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 5, 2012 9:34 PM PST up reply actions
I definitely think SEA will be in the market for one back, maybe even two
Fortunately, it’s a good year for backs in the mid-to-late rounds. If we are talking 3rd round and later, here are some names to get familiar with (no particular order).
xx Doug Martin, Boise State (5’8, 210) — Love that guy as an all-around, any-way-you-wanna-swing-it back. He can play in the passing game. He can carry the mail. He may force himself up into the 2nd round conversation once he gets to workouts.
xx LaMichael James (5’9, 195) — Love that guy for entirely different reasons. He seems tailor-made for the better-version-of-Justin-Forsett role.
xx Bernard Pierce (6’0, 218) — I don’t know much about him. He put up big numbers for Temple.
xx Robert Turbin (5’9, 216) — Physically, Turbin is a beast. He’s a power runner who also caught almost 70 balls in his career.
xx Vick Ballard (5’11, 220) — Ballard is another big back who played on mostly awful MS State offenses. He’s a powerful runner who also seemed to catch a couple balls most every game.
xx Terrance Ganaway (5’11, 240) — He got a lot of yards at Baylor because defenses spread thin across the field couldn’t maintain gap discipline. Still, he’s worth a look late.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by 

































