Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

Where will the churn hit? Wide Receiver edition

This off season the QB position will be scrutinized under a microscope. With free agency, draft, and possible trades there is a lot of speculation as to if or how Tarvaris will be replaced.

Going forward no matter what choice the front office makes one thing is certain, they need weapons. Our offense is predicated on hard tough yards in the run game, and explosive plays in the passing game.

The Seahawks certainly havecleaned house in an attempt to increased their weapons over the last two years. Gone are Deion Branch, Nate Burleson, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Mike Haas, Ruvel Martin, and Brandon Stokley. One thing these players do not have in common is they do not create big plays on their own. Most would be considered in the possession receiver role, those that are good enough to be considered at all.

Those types of receivers are perfect for west coast type offenses. The type of offense where timing is everything and precise breaks nickle and dime you to death. Where you often will see 4 and 5 wide receiver sets on first, second and third down consecutively. That's the Mike Holmgren version of the 'Hawks offense.

In Pete Carroll's version the 'Hawks want to smash you in the mouth, draw your safeties into the box, and then strike like lightning with a big play down the sidelines. This is probably why Carroll has major wood for tall receivers who are fast, but he is smart enough to know he will take a play-maker in any size or shape he can get when the opportunity to grab one.

Wide receivers are widely considered to be one of the two hardest positions to learn, right after QB. Wide receiver is such a hard position to learn that most receivers are not considered to really contribute until their third year in the league. Some of this is reasoned by how dependent teams have become in 4 or 5 receivers sets. Many teams keep 5 or 6 receivers on their roster every year and also keep somewhere from 2-4 on the practice squad. Seattle is no different.

Pete preaches always compete, always get better. That means if we have an opportunity to go out and grab a wide receiver in the draft or grab another undrafted free agent, we will. Generally speaking the higher the draft pick the sooner they con contribute. The Seahawks don't think that way, they expect every one to compete right away.

That doesn't mean they are opposed to projects and we have a few of those. That being said its important to know how they will fit into our roster.





Star-divide

Our one and only play maker is Sidney Rice, he is an athletic 6' 4” 202 pound target. He is young at 25 years old but already has 5 years experience. He is quick for his size running a 4.49 40 yard dash. His major issue so far has been injuries. This year he played through a torn labrum issue for 9 games. He had 32 receptions, for 484 yards and 2 touchdowns. Not exactly stellar numbers but if he had played all season those numbers would be closer to 56 catches for 860 yards and 4 Tds. One can only speculate if playing injury free would have improved those numbers even more, though it wouldn't be a huge leap of logic to think it would.

Our one true slot receiver in Doug Baldwin. His crisp and consistent routes are the type that Qbs dream of in a reliable target. Baldwin is one of the slower Seahawks receivers running 4.42, on the field he has game speed. He clearly showed that game speed against the 49ers in our first game. He is clearly more dominant than most nickle backs and consistently wins 1 on 1 battles to pick up the first down. Standing at 5-10, 189 pounds Doug took some major hits and showed his toughness and determination. Being only 23 and already proving he is durable, Doug is a building block of the Seahawks for years to come, no matter who the QB is.

Because of how our offense focuses on the deep ball, speed is paramount, and the Seahawks have gotten extremely fast with four different receivers posting sub 4.40 40-yard dash times. Deon Butler is the fastest of the bunch, assuming he hasn't lost a step since his broken leg. Fair warning if you havent seen this, its particularly gruesome.

.

If he is back to top speed we need more of these

Video Click => Serious play making ability

Just before his leg break Deon was “Getting it,” if he retains his speed and continues to have good routes he can be a core WR for the future.

Ricardo Lockette is another speedster running a 4.26 40-yard dash and plays every bit of it in pads. He does it with a big 6-2 200 pound frame, and soft hands. Because of his speed and height he can play opposite Rice and become a serious constant threat. He showed some flash, but he is raw. If Ricardo can develop an all around game he could become the play maker that Carroll wants.

Video Click => Splitting defenders for a great sideline catch Video Click => Lockette showing soft hands

Golden Tate is the next fastest speedster clocking in with a 4.34 40 time. He is often likened to a running back and as seen in the highlight below, he can break tackles. He also has tremendous vertical, and a shifty running style that eludes tackles. Going into his third year, we could see Tate break into play-maker role. Tate has already shown enough to land him on the roster for next year and may fight for a starting position.

Video Click => Tate will not go down

Isaiah Williams is the last speedster. He sat on the practice squad and never made it to the roster. This means the Hawks can not protect him from other teams signing him. He also runs a 4.34 but like Lockette carries that speed on a 6-2 200 pound frame. This will be his 4th year though, and I believe his practice squad eligibility is up meaning he has to make the roster this year or he could get churned.

Preseason highlight

Video Click => Presseason Game

Another Developmental WR is Kris Durham, who when active and on the field made contributions. Durham is a 6-6 220 WR, with a 4.42 speed. He has a lot of physical tools to make him successful in the NFL, and since he was playing as a developmental player the coaches will give him a shot at the practice squad if not the active roster.

Obomanu is in his 6th year as a pro and has decent speed. He is a good special teams contributor but hasn't been this year. After signing a 4 year 8 million dollar deal in the off season Obomanu was not a great contributor this year, often dropping very catchable passes. Obo Still has a lot in his tanks, but his slight improvement in production but not close to expectations after signing a new contract could mean he is on the bubble. His numbers were comparable with Rice's but in 7 more injury games. With at least five receivers committed to the roster and one to practice squad, there just may not be room for Obo. The good news is none of his contract looks to be guaranteed and bonuses already paid.

Video Click => Obomanu still has gas in the tank

BMW with a 3 million contract could be a casualty to the churn. It could be argued that BMW needs a specific type of QB to make him successful, and with Hasselbeck he was our leading receiver, even if his numbers were average. Mike can be a big target on third downs and can pick up the firsts. There is a slew of cheaper, more effective receivers that can do that though, and most of them can work with any QB. On top of that Carroll has stated a desire for explosive “Touchdown Makers” Williams just cant get open down field with out the aid of a timing route. His contract also is not guarenteed. It should also be noted that Williams was considered not only a leader in the locker room, but also invaluable for coaching up his teammates and could stay on the squad for just this reason alone.

Video Click => Rice to Williams

If you had the opportunity to read Davis' series about the green bay model and roster churning, you know we can expect to see at least a 13 player turn over. And since anywhere from 6-10 of the possible 61 players has to come from the WR spot, that is anywhere from 10%-16% (1.3 to 2.08 players )the correlation should stand to the churn. One could even make the argument that more should come from the receivers since weapons are a big focal point of green bay.

If the Seahawks don't do anything to improve the WR corps I still think just with its youth that it will improve even more. The hawks could also add two more to the practice squad and not have to let anyone go. So a churn here is not guaranteed.

With the Green Bay model though, regression is almost a sure fire way to find yourself on the chopping block. Age, lack of progression, and inflexible skill sets surely play a part as well. It may be tough but a few fan favorites might end up on the chopping block.

Comment 139 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Good stuff.

Your Kris Durham link actually goes to a play from AZ Cardinal WR Max Hall.

So, no predictions on who we keep?

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 8, 2012 9:44 PM PST reply actions  

As for predictions,

I think we will keep 8-9 WR on the team, 6 on roster, and 2-3 on practice squad.
It really looks like BMW and Obo are the two most “churnable” players, though I cant say Obomanu was terrible, but he had a lot of opportunities this year and didnt make much of them. BMW had a major regression, for what ever reason.
I would venture to guess both Williams will be gone.

by Oliudyen on Jan 8, 2012 11:16 PM PST up reply actions  

It's doable to predict who our "keep" priorities are

Rice, Tate, Baldwin are locks.

Lockette might have to go back to the practice squad but isn’t leaving, neither is Durham.

BMW and Obomanu are question marks, but I have a hard time seeing them leave. Obomanu has too much value between receiving and special teams play. BMW will be fine with more time with T-Jax or another QB.

Deon Butler is, in my estimation, close to a lock to be cut.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 9, 2012 10:08 AM PST up reply actions  

That's a pretty reasonable analysis.

I’ll be sad if Lockette gets yanked out from under our noses but it’s completely possible he’s not yet worth a roster spot.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 9, 2012 10:54 AM PST up reply actions  

Lockette won't last on the practice squad. Too many teams need "that guy" who can just fly past the deep safety

Figure 6 WRs on the roster at game days…
Baldwin, Rice locks
Lockette and Durham are here for potential, and it looks like PC gives his players 2 years to develop as a minimum.
Tate showed flashes this year, but still inconsistent.
Obo is great on special teams, better overall WR than Tate at this point, but Tate probably has more upside and Obo does not seem to have developed significantly now that he has been getting so many more looks.
BMW looks like he might be at most a locker room influence. If he gets a spot, I think we have 3 TEs instead of 4.
Butler is a wild card… this FO has the least invested in him of all the WRs, but his upside is a faster Baldwin, and I think the FO still wants to see what can come of that potential.

I think this team has a clear idea of the upside of Obo and BMW, and the ceiling is the lowest by far for those two players. Given the youth movement, I think either of them are more likely cut than any of the other players, although if Butler goes it also won’t be a big surprise.

As far as TEs, Miller is a lock. Morrah had flashes 2 years ago, but was kind of lost to my eye this season. McCoy can’t catch, and as impressive a physical specimen as he is, I just don’t think he is a very consistently good blocker. JC could come cheap, and is a better receiver than anyone cept Miller, and he may turn out to be a better receiver than Miller if he gets his rhythm back. I see JC back on a 2 year 1.5 million contract, and keeping one of McCoy, Morrah, or a late round draft/UDFA

Smashmouth is the new sexy!

by pqlqi on Jan 9, 2012 11:20 AM PST up reply actions  

I am going to break down TEs later in the off season but a tid bit here

Morrah has been known as a fast TE who has drop issues, but he really stepped up and made some nice blocks this year, though i havent broken down his blocking to see if he is consistent or just flashing.

He gets open, but needs better hands.

He is very replaceable. TE could be the place the hawks look for a play maker the most. I know a lot of people disagree but i believe with how often they use 2 TE sets, and how Morrah and McCoy had 19 catches combined, and a few drops. that explosive TE would get atleast 30 catch opportunities. Make us more versatile. Its also what the FO said they wanted when they were going to have Miller/Carlson on the team at the same time. An explosive rookie would also be cheap. Could open things up to get miller involved as well, and we KNOW miller can handle the rock.

by Oliudyen on Jan 9, 2012 11:46 AM PST up reply actions  

I thought the same about Butler before he came back

but he came back and made very nice cuts, and looked to still have very nice speed.
He, i believe was active for 4 games, and had very limited playing time in the first two. So in about 2 and a half games being the #5 WR, he made 6 catches for 3 first downs, and a 10.2 Y/R. Not exactly thrilling, but considering the nature of his injury, one could say its very good progress.

BMW legitimately had four times as many games with a plethora more opportunities and only had 18 catches for 13 first downs. Butlers production, being 5th WR for 16 games would have been around 24 catches, 12 first downs.

Another point that hasnt been talked about much is BMW’s broken ankle. Though it generally only takes about 6 weeks to fully heal, a broken ankle often results in deformation of the ankle and or permenent pain. BMW may never regain his flexibility due to a deformation. Not putting the cart before the horse, its not unreasonable to think he may start out on the PUP.

As for obomanu, In years past i would 100% agree that his special teams contributions are critical. This year how every, it atleast with our reveiwing all the game tape, seems like he dissappeared. Vabora, Farwell, Maxwell all shined on ST, but i noticed a definate lack of Obomanu. He only had 3 tackles this year. that is a three year decline in ST tackles from 12, to 7, to 3. Tackles are not diffinitive, but I cant remember him downing a lot of punts either.

Lockette will most likely not be put on the practice squad though, he proved he can come in and make plays right away. The only way seattle would risk him on the practice squad again would be if they brought in a big name free agent.

Last but not least, looking through the Pete Carroll glasses, Neither Obo or M.Williams are play makers they are not explosive, though obo is a fair bit more than BMW.

I believe they will all be invited to camp, if BWM isnt still injured, I. WIlliams included, but i dont thinkn either Williams will make the final cut, and there is a good possibility that Obo is gone too.

by Oliudyen on Jan 9, 2012 11:35 AM PST up reply actions  

I wonder how much of Obo not playing ST

had to do with him being our most reliable and experienced receiver over the course of the year, and not wanting to put him in ST situations with increased risk of injury.

Smashmouth is the new sexy!

by pqlqi on Jan 9, 2012 12:20 PM PST up reply actions  

BMW is doomed as long as T-Jack is here.

I don’t agree that BMW will “be fine” with more time with T-jack. jackson has sown throught his NFL career a major unwillingness to throw balls up for grabs or “throw open” a receiver. After six years, i don’t see that chaning much. Unfortunately, that’s BMW’s game….he doesn’t get separation, he beats smaller DB over the top and by using his huge body as a a shield. T-Jack won’t throw to him because of it.

by Emperor_MA on Jan 9, 2012 4:14 PM PST up reply actions  

I know, bro, I did an entire story on it

But an entire offseason together will help. Rice doesn’t have that much more separation than BMW, yet Tarvaris is fine with him.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 9, 2012 4:35 PM PST up reply actions  

Wow, I must really know little about football.

Sure looks to me like Rice can beat press coverage really quick. I’ve been thinking of him as separating better just about than anyone we’ve had in a good while.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 9, 2012 6:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Rice is slightly faster than BWM in 40 times

but in pads Rice runs nearly the same speed, BWM doesnt.

Other than that I really can only speculate why rice is so much better at getting open and BWM is so much worse.

Another point again is not who the QB is, because rice gets open no maqtter who the QB is, is that BWM limits the types of QBs that can throw to him, I dont believe anyone else on the roster has this type of limitation.

Pqlqi Makes a solid point about the known ceiling of Obo and BWM. Statistically Baldwin is already better than both, and Tate is equal to Obo and better than BMW, though Baldwin and Tate both have much higher upsides.
Statistically last year Butler had more receptions in 2 less games, Obo was the 3rd WR and saw significantly more plays than Butler.

Butller and Tate are very similar, though Tate is thicker and definately seems shiftier. Both had/have the same issue with routes. Though Butler has an extra year in the league, the broken leg took that year away. If he can prove he can run routes in OTAs, and prove he still has the speed he could enjoy a break out year, same with Tate.

I really just dont think Obo, or BWM will have that kind of possibility.I also expect atleast 1-2 UDFA WR to be signed to the roster this year, in a very WR rich draft.

by Oliudyen on Jan 9, 2012 7:16 PM PST up reply actions  

what 40 time are you using though, combine?

because BMW is 3 years older and spent 2 years out of the league losing top end speed. Rice also looks like he accelerates faster, both from a stand still and out of cuts.

BMW looks like he doing the parachute drill when he tries to accelerate.

Smashmouth is the new sexy!

by pqlqi on Jan 10, 2012 4:03 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't think he has nearly the separation of Baldwin or Obomanu

But his reach creates a much wider window to throw into.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 10, 2012 8:50 AM PST up reply actions  

Agree 100%

The problem with those 3 is that Rice is injury prone as mentioned and the other 2 are more slot type receivers. We need another option for our #2 and there isn’t one on this roster (BMW should be cut). If PC holds true to form in his like/want of big WRs I see us likely moving to the draft to get one… I wouldn’t be shocked to see us draft one with our first round pick… Michael Floyd – Notre Dame. Standing at 6’3", played with Golden Tate in Tate’s senior year, but there is risk with his off the field issues… DUI in the spring. If he’s cleaned up his act, he’s a better option than Alshon Jeffrey.

If you are looking in later rounds here are a few PC type WRs that could be targets.
Dwight Jones – North Carolina 6’4" 215lbs – late 1st early 2nd rnd
Marvin McNutt – Iowa 6’4" – 2nd rnd (love this kid’s game)
Nick Toon – Wisconsin 6’3" – 3rd round (underrated, Wisconsin is running team, but this kid as intangables… excellent blocker as WR, great route running, good speed and hands) good #2 WR option.
If looking for sleepers in even later rounds… I like:
Risard Matthews – Nevada – 6’2" – 5th/6th round – Was Colin Kaepernack’s main WR, there was questions with Matthews when Kaepernack went to NFL and had to work with a new QB, but responded with 91 catches for 1364 with 8TDs. Reason he’s not ranked higher is Nevada doesn’t get a lot of competition in their conference, untested, but seems to have good skill set.
Lance Lewis – East Carolina – 6’3" 200lbs – 5th/6th round missed last 4 games due to injury. Good hands but needs work to be NFL ready… If keeping BMW for another year, he could be groomed as #2, needs to put on 10-15lbs for NFL

by tarryhawk on Jan 10, 2012 9:11 AM PST up reply actions  

I would be very surprised to see us draft a WR high

And would absolutely hate it.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 10, 2012 12:24 PM PST up reply actions  

I wouldn't at all be surprised if we do, if it is a physical specimen with a huge ceiling.

I would love to have the bloodlines of Toon joining us if he fell to the third. I don’t think he’ll last that long though. But given our draft position and needs/possible upgrades, I think WR is a very probable place to see us look early.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 10, 2012 1:10 PM PST up reply actions  

If Seattle were so inclined to make a big splash, there are quite a few interesting free agent targets.

Not making any wild speculations here or assertions that they should do this, but if they wanted to release BMW and sign Dwayne Bowe, a much better physical receiver, there’s options available. And it certainly wouldn’t hurt the team, even if it’s not addressing the teams most pressing issues.

follow @casetines

by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 10, 2012 1:31 PM PST up reply actions  

There are a lot of options

From everything i hear though Bowe is a premodona, along the lines of TO, Chad what every his last name is this week, and TJ houshmandzadeh.

Dont think he is a good fit but there are a LOT of good FA this year for WR. Plus a WR rich draft.

by Oliudyen on Jan 10, 2012 1:59 PM PST up reply actions  

Okay, Bowe is a freakish beast.

He’s not so much a primadonna, he’s more or less somewhat lazy. However, the last couple years he’s somewhat rededicated himself to being a professional, working in the off season, that sort of thing.

Housh never had his athletic ability, Ocho never had his pure size.

Interesting thought though Kenneth, on signing another high end FA WR. I’m not against the idea at all, if we have the space to address other needs. It seems a safer proposition than drafting one I think…

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 10, 2012 6:02 PM PST up reply actions  

If Dwight Jones is sitting there at 11 or 12,

I say fuck it. Draft a WR.

The only QB I’m interested in that will available to us is Osweiler. So if by some way we could draft Jones, Polk, and the OZ 1-2-3 I’d go nuts.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 10, 2012 6:13 PM PST up reply actions  

Did you take a look at the Chandler Harnish highlights Rob Staton put up?

The guy looks good, I gotta say.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 10, 2012 7:02 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Too High

If Jones is indeed ‘their guy’ you have to trade back, he’s the 4th WR prospect in the draft pre-combine/pro day. Blackmon, Jeffery and Floyd are currently ranked ahead of him. WR is deep in this draft. I wouldn’t mind trading back to get another 2nd round pick.

by tarryhawk on Jan 11, 2012 7:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Wait until the combine/senior bowl.

He’ll move up. He’s a beast.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 9:45 AM PST up reply actions  

Jones is probably the best receiver in this class.

Jeffery isn’t looking like he’ll even be a first rounder.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 9:53 AM PST up reply actions  

That would be such a ridiculous waste of draft capital

In rounds 1 or 2.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 10, 2012 7:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Why?

I can see not being excited about a WR in the first round, even though I’d disagree with you. But in the second round too? That seems extreme.

Seattle isn’t that well off at receiver. They have a very good but injury prone number one in Rice, two number twos that haven’t played with any kind of consistency in BMW and Obo, a legit slot receiver in Baldwin, and a second round pick in his second year that doesn’t scout out particularly well and hasn’t produced in Tate. Do guys like Lockette and Durham keep you from taking a guy like Dwight Jones, who looks like a prototypical number one receiver, or Kendall Wright, who comps to guys like Mike Wallace and DeSean Jackson?

Also, it’s a pretty weak draft. Are Andre Branch, Melvin Ingram, or Zach Brown that much better of an investment of draft capital?

by Nate Dogg on Jan 10, 2012 11:13 PM PST up reply actions   2 recs

Problem is....

with our main need (besides QB) being DE and a lack of potential pass rushing DEs in this draft class, you have to take one early in round 1 or 2 (and they may be gone by 2nd round).
If we take a WR in round 2 Chris Polk will not be a Seahawk who could very well be there when we pick in 2nd round, which leaves 3rd round WR. There are some interesting names that could be there but are risking some very good ones…

If we can trade back and get another 2nd round pick, I like the potential haul of players:
1st round – Vinny Curry, Melvin Ingram, Nick Perry are 3 DEs that would likely be available from pick 20+ (Perry likely late late 1st or 2nd round guy).
2nd round: Chris Polk RB
2nd round: Marvin McNutt WR or Nick Toon WR would be my picks
3rd round: Emmanual Acho OLB – Texas or Nigel Bradham OLB – Florida State.

by tarryhawk on Jan 11, 2012 8:03 AM PST up reply actions  

If we don't trade back...

I like:
1st round – Whitney Mercelius DE – Illinois
2nd round – Chris Polk – RB – Washington
3rd round – Emmanual Acho or Nigel Bradham (both OLB)
4th round – Austin Davis – QB – Southern Miss. (Could be there in 4th)
5th round – Risard Matthews – WR – Nevada
6th round – Art Forst – G – Rutgers
7th round – Jeremiah Hatch – C – Kansas

Based on just having our 7 rounds… I know we lost a pick as part of the Lynch deal, but thought we picked up that same round for Jennings.

by tarryhawk on Jan 11, 2012 8:43 AM PST up reply actions  

Every team has holes.

It’s unavoidable. But not every team has game changers. Arizona won 8 games with Skelton at QB, because they have Fitz. The Lions passed for 5K yards and made the playoffs, because they have Megatron.

A legit beastly #1 receiver can solve half of our QB problem. That would make us a playoff team as is without improving the D.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 9:42 AM PST up reply actions   3 recs

Seattle's situation is a little more complicated than just needing a DE though.

They’re likely bringing back Red, so they have their starters at defensive end. They need a pass rush specialist to rotate, that’s not necessarily something they have to spend a first round pick on or even should spend a first round pick on. So I’d definitely agree that Seattle has a bigger need at DE, but that might not mean they need to invest more there.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 9:57 AM PST up reply actions  

You NEVER draft by main need in a stretch.

You do that and you end up needs unfilled and a lack of top end talent across the roster because you passed on top end talent to fill needs.

Better to take difference makers regardless of position. BPA all the way.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 1:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Hey, hey, LBJ--

BPA! All the way!

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 11, 2012 3:51 PM PST up reply actions  

I also am not sold our greatest need is a DE who can pass rush.

I would not be surprised if we add another unique Red-type player mid-draft, upgrade our OLB talent and go with more and more 3-4 variations without actually committing to either a traditional 4-3, a 3-4, or exclusively the “Elephant” format currently executed.

Those LB’s could be found anywhere in the draft, from high end options in the 1st to sleepers in the later rounds.

But to reach for a DE who can pass rush is a huge risk, as DE pass rushers rarely develop effectively for several years. If you absolutely must have one, sign one like Cliff Avril, who has gone from 5 to 5.5 to 8.5 to 11 sacks. Because if you draft one, you’re looking forward to a couple of 5 sack seasons while he develops, just like the now 25/26 year old Avril.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 2:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, I disagree with you on Tate, who looks like a fine, legit prospect

But no wonder I once again will get disagreement for that in the off-season. Guess he’ll have to prove yourself again to you people next season.

I don’t care about Lockette or Durham.

I don’t think our wide receiver group is incredibly well-off, but we’re pretty heavily invested in it already, in cash and draft picks. We’re not far enough in our rebuild where we can afford to make luxury picks, which a #2 WR tends to be, or move on from investments like Rice or Tate as fast as you’re suggesting. It’s easy to get starry-eyed about more flashy picks, but you have to figure if our depth at wide receiver doesn’t diminish the need for a “true” #2 (it does), and if our other needs don’t significantly outweigh another WR addition (they do).

I’m not a fan of the DeSean Jackson mold of WR.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 9:20 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't want to say it is burning draft capital, note

But I think it would hurt our rebuild significantly if we can’t utilize our draft picks to address some of our more glaring needs, because this is a very uneven team right now.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 9:26 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm curious what you see in Tate.

Most scout types aren’t wild about him, and I can see why. He’s not particularly explosive with his cuts, he’s not a disciplined route runner, he’s average-ish catching the ball and he doesn’t have great size. He’s talented running with the ball, you can see that he’s a natural running back, but he doesn’t do enough as a receiver to consistently get himself enough space to use that ability. And from a production standpoint, he hasn’t done anything. I think someone said he didn’t drop a pass this year, but when nearly everything they throw to you is a swing route or 3-5 yard curl that isn’t too impressive. And it shows in his YPC, his 10.9 YPC this year is almost identical to the 10.8 he put up last season.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 9:40 AM PST up reply actions  

He doesn't scout well because he doesn't fit any prototype

People keep mentally trying to jam him into the slot receiver role because it’s the best they can think of, but he’s not a great hands catcher, and doesn’t catch the ball well in traffic, so oh no, he’s a bust. He doesn’t have the size of a number one or the quick cuts of an underneath receiver. Oh no, it’ll never work! Players who don’t fit these predescribed NFL requirements are often just dismissed by “scout types”, because they’re not the most mentally flexible people in the world.

See, that’s what I dig about Schneider and PC. They don’t work with the prototypes, they work around them. Tate is just another example of that. But because he came into the league as a “raw but high-upside” prospect, and doesn’t immediately produce as you would expect from a raw receiver, people are giving up on him.

The only thing that even worries me slightly about Tate is his lack of speed out of cuts, and his lack of crispness cutting. I think that’ll always be a concern. But he is improving as a route runner and as a hands catcher to a great degree. Tate is fast, powerful, agile and has great coordination and balance. Bevell has no real clue how to use him which is yet another thing that grinds me the wrong way about Bevell, but the truth is, Tate still scouts to me as he did when he came out of college. He hasn’t disappointed or surprised, and I have no reason to doubt he’ll do well as the Steve Smith/Percy Harvin mold receiver. Once we get a coordinator who has a clue.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 10:12 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

So even though he doesn't do anything particularly well, you have no doubt he'll do as well as Steve Smith/Percy Harvin?

I get thinking outside the box and it’d be great if they could find a role for some of his unique abilities, but even if they do there’s still the chance he’s like a lot of players and just doesn’t work out. I’m not advocating giving up on him by any stretch, but to expect much more out of him than 3rd or 4th on the depth chart seems exceedingly optimistic.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 10:28 AM PST up reply actions  

I think he's playing for a starting job this off-season

It’s an important year for him. Looks like you’ve given up on him (amusing, considering you were defending him last time around when people were complaining about him, prior to the Raiders preseason game). Me, I’m just more patient than that. Is there a chance he just doesn’t work out? No kidding, you mean just like every other unproven player in the history of the league?

No idea where you’re getting “doesn’t do anything particularly well” from. It’s certainly not something I wrote.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 10:31 AM PST up reply actions  

The entire first paragraph is a list of things he does not do well.

You pretty much said exactly what I did but patted yourself on the back for being innovative. I still see a receiver that is more flash than substance. Tate is talented running with the ball, but he’s a fairly mediocre receiver and that limits his ability to take advantage of those talents.

As far as what I said before the season, there have been a few games since then. We have more information now. I havne’t given up on Tate, but after two seasons I’m not seeing anything that makes me think he’d be a quality starter on a playoff team.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 10:45 AM PST up reply actions  

No, it's a list of requirements for prototypes that Tate does not fit

Prototypical requirements define players if that’s what you should be looking at. It just isn’t for Tate. Instead of being all glum about it, go back and see him try to be a hands catcher early last season, and compare it to his skill now. Look at his routes now, and compare it to then. Tate didn’t come in as a finished product. He was BAD at learnable skillsets coming in, but he already showed in college he is a hard and quick study, and is still showing that now. A little slower than we could have hoped? For sure, I would’ve enjoyed if he’d already broken out. But that doesn’t mean that he won’t when showing good progress.

If he shows more year-over-year progress as a hands catcher, he can then utilize his outstanding agility and body control. If he shows more year-over-year progress as a route runner, his speed can be used on longer plays. And if we get a competent OC, he may actually be utilized more from the start. No, he’s not there yet, that’s why he’s not a sure thing, but he entered raw, and he is showing growth that you would like to see, particularly considering the situation with no off-season and a change at quarterback/OC.

What do the playoffs have to do with anything?

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 10:56 AM PST up reply actions  

So, again, he doesn't do anything particularly well.

He might learn to do some things better, but that’s a pretty big question mark.

As for the playoffs, I just meant that I don’t see him as a quality starter on a good or contending team. He’s not a consistent enough contributor for a quality team to rely on him.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 11:03 AM PST up reply actions  

I think this argument is an indictment of WR experience

more than depth. Certainly the position is not remotely close to settled, although I think we have a pretty good #1 in Rice and slot in Baldwin. So for the #3 and 4, we get to pick between Obo, BMW, Tate, Butler, Durham, and Lockette. This is a rebuilding team, and I think we get to see a lot more of the latter 4 next year, and it doesn’t make much sense to cling to BMW or Obomanu. I agree with Beekers that at this point, much has been invested at the WR position, and the FO probably would prefer to figure out what it has among all that potential before spending a top 10 pick at the position.

Smashmouth is the new sexy!

by pqlqi on Jan 11, 2012 11:16 AM PST up reply actions  

He does do things well

He has good speed, he has good body control, he has good agility and great strength. He is getting to be decent at hands, routes and concentration. Yes, the former are mostly physical skills, the latter mental, which is exactly what we drafted Tate for: a physical specimen with upside if he gets things sorted out.

“Doesn’t do anything particularly well” is just being needlessly dismissive.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 11:24 AM PST up reply actions  

things he does well

1, create separation
2. gets down field fast
3. increadable vertical as shown in his TD catch in the back of the endzone
4. Increadable body control
5. Lack of fear
6. has already come miles from where he started, in a game of inches.
7. Is fast, agile, and already showing he should be replacing Obo.

by Oliudyen on Jan 11, 2012 11:39 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't think he creates great separation

But I do think he did in college, and is simply still adjusting to the NFL in this field, just like his route running has to become a lot better.

I think 6. is an important point in this discussion. People who doubt Tate should really go and dig up some 2010 footage to put next to some of his later games this year. The difference is significant.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 11:49 AM PST up reply actions  

Really, that is the only difference you see?

I’m just going to have to agree to disagree. I’m not even sure where that comes from.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 11:58 AM PST up reply actions  

It comes from his inability to line up at times last season.

You’re pointing to progress that still leaves him far from the goal. He hasn’t exactly cleared the highest hurdles to get to the spot he’s at now.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 12:01 PM PST up reply actions  

Also, I really have to highlight because I can't help but feel it is being missed (this one is for you too, Nate)

Context is everything. I saw significant improvement on Tate’s concentration and ability as a hand catcher, and much crisper play on his routes and overall play. When I say significant, I mean significant in context: the context being that he has a different OC, and that he is definitely one of those players that suffers markedly under the shortened off-season.

This is very important! Adjustment on expectations for Tate’s second year need to be tuned down due to working with a shortened off-season, a quarterback that doesn’t necessarily know how to use him, and an OC who clearly does not.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 12:01 PM PST up reply actions  

How would you like to see Tate used?

I don’t know a ton about how Smith and Harvin are used and how that differs from what Seattle does with Tate.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 12:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Good question.

When I think of Harvin, all I think of is drag routes.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 11, 2012 1:48 PM PST up reply actions  

Also, I did not say "he'll do as well as Steve Smith/Percy Harvin"

Your entire subject line had nothing to do with my post. Please read more carefully and refrain from twisting my words, because I have long since grown tired of “that type of” internet conversation.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 10:39 AM PST up reply actions  

It means

He’ll enjoy as level of success (or in other words “do well”) when utilized as the type of receiver he is (the SS/PH mold).

You turned that into he’ll equal the level of play (“do as well”) of those two receivers.

“Do well as a type” and “do as well as these types” are completely different statements.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 10:45 AM PST up reply actions  

Randall Cobb

It is unique. Unique like Red Bryant. Unique like Richard Sherman.

We’re swinging for the long balls. Some of them will be misses. Will Tate be one? Maybe. Is Tate already one? Haha, no.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 10:51 AM PST up reply actions  

So, looping this back to the original conversation.

How would Seattle drafting a receiver at 11 be a ridiculous waste of draft capital? They have one starting receiver and he can’t stay healthy. After that you have a backup/special teamer in Obo, a huge question mark in BMW, an old school slot receiver in Baldwin and a lotto ticket in Tate. It’s not the most pressing need on the team but it’s a unit that needs help and this is a draft that’s maybe strongest at WR.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 10:58 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm not that sold on this draft WRwise

Especially if someone reaches for Blackmon, who does not profile as a top-10 receiver to me. See, scout people! Looking at those “requirements”.

Anyway, I think I addendumed this question on well. I don’t think it’ll be a worthless pick, but we are not at that stage of the rebuild when we can make these kinds of pick. We have some fairly serious money and draft capital invested in the wide receiving group, and by drafting players high you are essentially going to negate some of that invested value because you will not give them the shot, as they’re going to sink behind a #1 guy.

So it’s a combination of things. On the one hand, we have significantly more dire needs. On the other, we’re not in a great position in our rebuild to go BPA. On a third arm growing out of my shoulder, you are destroying capital by superseding investments before they really get a shot to prove themselves, as we’re following a lockout year with a new and incompetent OC/QB combination.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 11:30 AM PST up reply actions  

I'll agree Blackmon is over rated.

But Jones is a game changer. If he’s available to us I’d say we’d have to take him as BPA. He’ll probably be gone by then though.

But I don’t see “serious money and draft capital invested in the wide receiving group”. Rice is our only high dollar receiver, and he was a free agent-so no draft capital. BMW was a FA reclamation project-so he was cheap and no draft capital. Tate was a second round pick and is not high dollar. Obo-late round pick and low dollar. Durham-4th round pick and low dollar. Baldwin-UDFA and low dollar. Butler-3rd round pick from previous regime and probably the odd man out. Lockette- UDFA.

Our receiving corp is decent and “good enough” for now, but our investment has been one big FA contract and second and fourth round picks. And to date, the picks seem to be the least valuable of the bunch.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 11:40 AM PST up reply actions  

You probably view the draft differently than I think PC/Schneider do

A 2nd and 4th is a very serious investment, to them. Maybe they’ve seen enough of Tate to give up and move on, and don’t take Durham that seriously, but does that really fit their style? It’s possible, I’m not going to deny it, I would hope they don’t over-obsess on their guys and if Tate’s shown enough to be a failure, by all means move on.

I don’t know how they work money-wise, it’s harder to peg, but between Rice’s contract and BMW/Obomanu’s extension, I think this might be our highest-paid positional group. Draft picks are cheaper now, but add even more money to that and it’s really getting skewed.

Pick and money wise, what positional group comes close? O-line…and nothing. Do you think an OL pick is very likely with our 11th? Would you consider it a sensible investment?

I mean, don’t get me wrong, you’re dead on in that we have a problem at 11. It isn’t likely to line up well with our needs at QB or DL. So we trade up? Eh, not sure. So we trade down? Yeah, knowing Schneider/PC, that really seems a lot more likely than them picking a WR at that point.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 11:48 AM PST up reply actions  

If we value picks by that point scale,

we’ve got more invested in the Safety position than the receivers.

I’m not big on drafting a receiver in the first, but I think Jones is a special talent and the opportunity would be too much to pass up-like when ET fell into our laps.

The thing that worries me about this draft is that picking at 11 or 12 and looking at the board and going “meh”……well, most of the rest of the league will be doing the same. So trading back might not be worth it unless there’s a player sitting their that another franchise is absolutely in love with.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 11:58 AM PST up reply actions  

Like Jones?

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 12:01 PM PST up reply actions  

Sure, like Jones.

But big play guys like him are usually gone. I’m thinking more like a team with a specific need at say guard or LB is around-say DeCastro and a team feels like they have to have him.

If Jones makes it past the Browns and the Jaguars I’d be amazed. I see ten teams in front of us that need receivers. Two of them will get QB’s, and one or two will get tackles. So that’s six or seven teams who’ll look long and hard at Jones and Blackmon. They might both be gone.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 12:10 PM PST up reply actions  

It doesn't have to be black and white, Tate isn't a failure or a success.

Maybe he’s shown the coaching staff that he can contribute as a role player but is unlikely to be able to hold down the starting job. Maybe they like him as the Az-Hakir to whoever their Holt and Bruce are. Or maybe a guy like Baldwin has just taken his spot, and he isn’t a failure but he’s probably going to lose that competition.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 11:59 AM PST up reply actions  

It definitely isn't black and white, and we definitely do not know closely what they are thinking

Total brofist, bro. This conversation is going places!

not snarky

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 12:02 PM PST up reply actions  

Oh, and in regards to how JS values picks,

I think everything past the 3rd round seems like a swing for the fences more or less.

WT3, Legree, Durham, Konz, etc.

They don’t seem to be looking for role players (with a few exceptions like Pep), but high upside/risk players.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 12:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Both BMW and Obos contracts are non-gaurenteed

Obo being trimmed saves 2 million and 2.3 million for the next two years.
Williams 3.25 million, and 3.65 million in the next two years. We do have a lot of cap space and with the rules i think “saved cap space” gives a credit the next year. I believe we were about 20 million under the cap. that should mean we have about 40 million to spend. Front load a WR contract for a great FA and we can afford to pay big market money.

Those I would consider to be worthy would be worth big money

Grizzled Veterans:
These are older, established and probably shouldnt get more than 2-3 year contracts due to age.
Reggie wayne: 33
Wes Welker: 30, only made 2.15 million last year (half of what BMW made)
Brandon LLoyd: 30

Veterans: They have experience, shown what they are capable of and are young enough to do it for another 5+ years

Vincent Jackson: 28 yo, 6’5, 230, runs 4.4 40YDD, has shown he can be the man.
Dwayne Bowe: 27 yo, 6-2, 225 4.5 40YDD
Marques Colston: 28 yo, 6-5, 225, 4.5 40YDD

Young but proven: has 8+ years left in the league if production stays high. Could be with team through 2 contracts.
Stevie Johnson: 25 yo, 6-2, 200, 4.45 40YDD
Mike Wallace: 25 yo, 6-1, 200. 4.2 40YYD RESTRICTED FREE AGENT

Non- big money under radar forces:
Robert Meachem, 6-3, 200, 4.3 40YDD

Intentionally left off list for behavior issues:
DeSean Jackson

We could still get one of these guys and have plenty of cap space for Brees/Avril/Mario Williams. plus save the first round for another need like LB

by Oliudyen on Jan 11, 2012 12:58 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't see any of those players coming to Seattle.

That’s fantasy man.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 1:09 PM PST up reply actions  

Sure,

Reggie Wayne: do not want. Can’t see PC wanting him either.

Wes Welker: not leaving Brady and a contender.

Lloyd: also do not want. Not a real upgrade and older.

Jackson: over rated head case, have no idea where he’ll end up but we already passed on him based on trade cost. He’s unlikely.

Bowe: a big fat giant maybe.
Colston: not leaving Brees and a opp for a ring.

All those guys are also older than what PC/JS are looking for.

Young’ns:

Stevie Johnson: has just about played himself off his team just like DeSean.

Wallace: not leaving the Steelers.

The rest: Brees? C’mon man. Avril would be sweet, but he’s in a sweet spot and he knows it. And Williams? Injury prone. But hey, why not?

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 2:48 PM PST up reply actions  

I was talkign about the WR

Counting Brees/avril/williams its 12.

I get your point about the older recievers, its one reason I seperated them into age categories.

Jackson- Trade value and free agency value, in my opinion are pretty far apart as a form of logic. Saying wouldnt sign brees to a large contract cause he would have been worth 3 firsts doestn make any more sense.

Welker/Colston- Sometimes the lure of a big pay day outweights getting paid pennies (euphemism) on a good team.

Johnson: Think its compeltely different than DeSean. Johnson doesnt grumble about not getting paid. Yeah he was benched for a bone head ideas for TD celebrations. He is young and brash, and exceptional talent, not unlike Browner (Suplex anyone?)

Wallace probably will be matched by Steelers.

If you are an NFL GM, do you let Brees even sniff free agency? Why are the Saints?

Avril is in a nice situation except the lions are hard pressed to pay yet another D-line man lots of money.

Williams injury prone- less so than Okung would you let Okung slip away? problem there is the Texans cant franchise him or it will be over 20 million on their cap for the first year.

If we dont sign a single free agent I would really be happy because the draft can still be used to fill those holes.

But there are soem really exciting free agents out there available, and we have cap space, unlike many years in the past where we had space but no quality FAs, or no space and lots of talent.

by Oliudyen on Jan 11, 2012 3:13 PM PST up reply actions  

"Sometimes the lure of a big pay day outweighs getting paid pennies on a good team."

So we overpay for a guy who wont be as good for us as he is where he’s at? I don’t understand the benefit.

Colston is solid, as is Welker, but both benefit from an elite QB and a system that maximizes opportunity for both them and their teammates. And that’s the great fear with #2 or non 1A WR’s signing somewhere else. There’s always the fear they will be more Alvin Harper TB than Alvin Harper Dallas when they go.

Hate to see us pay a premium to find out…

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 3:28 PM PST up reply actions  

more like

Welker only makes 2 million argueably top 3 receivers.

Paying him 6 million to do the same isnt over paying.

Consider Steve Hutchinson he was paid 3.5 million, he signed a new contract at 7 mill a year, was he over paid?

Out of that list, Colston may be the only “Alvin Harper” on the list, the rest are legitimate 1As, most maybe even better than Rice.

by Oliudyen on Jan 11, 2012 3:53 PM PST up reply actions  

You can't compare OL to receivers in FA

The question is how good will the receiver be when he doesn’t have an elite QB throwing to him anymore.

Deion Branch comes to mind.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 4:29 PM PST up reply actions  

Not really

Deion Branch we had to trade for, then sign to 6.5 mill a year. He had 2 decent seasons, one of 800 and one of just under 1k. Yardage wise. he was also a hold out because he played well in the Superbowl.

Welker has had 1k plus yards 4 out of the last 5 years, going over 110 catches over those 4 seasons.

Johnson, Bowe, Wallace, Jackson, Wayne all had consecutive 1000 yard seasons. Dont have major injury issues.

All would be a legitimate #1 WR here.

by Oliudyen on Jan 11, 2012 4:49 PM PST up reply actions  

It's funny, the Packers always provide the best comps

We try to compare Earl Thomas to Troy Polamalu (that’s stupid, he’s nothing like him) or Ed Reed (ehhhh, maybe one day), while really he’s a Nick Collins. Tate? Is he Smith, Harvin or is he Randall Cobb? I like how you can pattern the teams similarly, they know how to beat the odds and go against the prototype to get the best team together.

Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 10:29 AM PST up reply actions  

I prefer Tate ~= Harvin, but if you say ~= Cobb, then does

Durham ~= Jordy Nelson?
Lockette ~= Gregg Jennings?

Smashmouth is the new sexy!

by pqlqi on Jan 11, 2012 11:19 AM PST up reply actions  

Lockette = God

Didn’t you get the memo?

Heresy grows from idleness.
Why get Matt Flynn?
"Also, for what it’s worth, if we get Flynn, New England and Detroit are on the schedule!" - SSreporters

by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 11, 2012 12:53 PM PST up reply actions  

Lockette definately has a future

At this point in time, aside from go routes though deep crossing routes. He has a LOT to learn still. If he gets on the phone and gets reps in with Jackson in the off season, i wouldnt be surprised to see him fighting for the second spot.

On the other hand if he doesnt show a lot of progress, he might sit 6th in depth.

by Oliudyen on Jan 11, 2012 1:03 PM PST up reply actions  

I disagree on the #2 WR argument, when the #2 is really another number 1.

This is still, despite our pretending otherwise while we try to win on the ground, a passing league. If you can get an elite talent, you get it position irrelevant. But it’s still a position which could be an upgrade. It isn’t like a WR2 isn’t a starting position. This is a theoretically a guy who could come in and immediately contribute and make our offense better.

Outside an elite QB, I’m not sure there’s a position on the offense other than WR2 in which you can say a higher talent/ceiling player could give us an immediate upgrade.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 2:16 PM PST up reply actions  

But, I meant to add, I completely agree with you on the DeSean Jackson style WR.

Don’t want ‘em don’t need ’em.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 2:17 PM PST up reply actions  

Is that based on anything other than his attitude?

Because he’s a really good football player, I can’t imagine why you’d take that stance on DeSean Jackson the player.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 2:23 PM PST up reply actions  

His attitude is huge.

But I also prefer bigger stronger if not as quick WR’s to Jackson’s type, are less needy of full health to be effective. I think they make better easier targets for a QB, and since we don’t have quality QB play we can make up for it with that.

Now I would be more in favor of a Mike Wallace type, as there are at least 2 inches and 20 lbs more on his frame, while still being first and foremost a “speed” receiver, he’s at least normal sized and not a little sprite.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 2:30 PM PST up reply actions  

Preferring one type of receiver over another is different than "Don’t want ‘em don’t need ’em."

Mike Wallace and DeSean Jackson are very similar receivers in terms or style or type. Wallace doesn’t really use his extra height or weight in any real meaningful way. Wright will probably fall somewhere between the two in size.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 2:36 PM PST up reply actions  

No, there is a difference. 2+ inches and 20+ pounds is a difference.

There’s less there for the QB to get to. Unless you can prove to me that they have the exact same arm span/fingers-hand size/reach.

And also, a 6’ 200lb guy is more likely able to take contact and not break. DeSean Jackson is so tiny he has zero margin for error in that regard.

So little speed receivers? Don’t want ‘em, don’t need ‘em. And even if I do, I’ve got Deon Butler who is cheap already knows the system and might be a reasonable “poor man’s version” of DeSean, only as a model citizen instead of a headcase.

But again, “Don’t want ‘em don’t need em” because I am perfectly happy with Golden, Baldwin and 2-4 much larger guys, and the Seahawks seem to lean that way as well.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 3:55 PM PST up reply actions  

They probably have very different arm span and hand size.

That wasn’t my point. Mike Wallace isn’t using his size like Larry Fitzgerald does, he’s not trying to leverage it the same way another receiver might. So even though he has a pretty significant size advantage on DeSean Jackson, it doesn’t really mean a lot in how he plays the game.

I think dismissing guys because they’re little speed receivers is a pretty narrow minded way to build a roster. DeSean Jackson, Percy Harvin and Steve Smith are good players that type of player could certainly contribute a ton to Seattle.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 4:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Okay, let's try this another way.

DeSean Jackson is a punk and I wouldn’t rely on him.

On top of that, the list of WR’s his size who have had continued long term success in the league is….. how long? (that’s for you to prove, not me. I think he’s too small and I can’t think of a lot of WR’s over the past decade or so that have had prolonged success while being well under 5’10" and well under 185lbs.)

Percy Harvin and Steve Smith are both considerably thicker and able to handle contact a lot more. And Harvin, one of your “success stories” really hasn’t been all that successful and has migraine issues that make me question relying on him as a primary guy. Even so, BMI wise, they’re both considerably bigger than is Jackson.

I wouldn’t dismiss a player on size alone, but size and character? Yes.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 9:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Terrell Owens, Randy Moss and Chad Ochocinco were punks too.

I don’t really care if you prefer big receivers or little receivers, but you’re dismissing an entire group of players because one of them has an attitude problem. That’s silly.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 9:44 PM PST up reply actions  

You're really misrepresenting what he's saying, even after he's rephrased himself a number of times

Whiskey:

I wouldn’t dismiss a player on size alone, but size and character? Yes.

Nate Dogg:

you’re dismissing an entire group of players because one of them has an attitude problem.

He was pretty explicit that it’s not the size alone that gives him pause about Jackson- it’s the combination of his attitude problems and his size.

And if:

I don’t really care if you prefer big receivers or little receivers
is the case, well then you might as well not even have the conversation, because you’re just going to dismiss his opinion with your opinion regardless.

The artist formerly known as mattlock.

Twitter! -- Facebook!

by Matt Erickson on Jan 12, 2012 2:35 AM PST up reply actions  

My point was never about Jackson specifically, but players like Jackson.
you’re dismissing an entire group of players because one of them has an attitude problem.

Again, if you go back to how this started I was saying that Kendall Wright compares to players like Jackson or Wallace. Jackson’s attitude should have any bearing on how Seattle evaluates Wright or the wide receiver position.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 12, 2012 11:38 AM PST up reply actions  

But all your other players that are "similar to Jackson" are all considerably larger.

He’s just really really tiny. Wallace is much bigger, so is even Percy Harvin, who is smaller than Steve Smith, who is only 5’10" but is built like a tank.

I like more BMI (body mass index) in my football players, and Jackson is the very rare exception that performs well despite his size. But that doesn’t mean I trust the construct.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 12, 2012 3:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Receivers are the divas of the NFL.

You watch. In 3 years Baldwin is gonna punk out too if we don’t pay him.

But DeSean has extra diva, with a side a me me me.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 12, 2012 8:13 AM PST up reply actions  

DeSean would be a punk in any circumstance. Love the supersize comment you gave on him.

Baldwin already exhibits less punkiness. Why would he suddenly develop into a punk down the road? I just don’t see it.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 12, 2012 3:47 PM PST up reply actions  

Because he's the team's leading receiver

playing on a UDFA contract. So he’s basically the cheapest guy on the team and producing the most. If that goes on for three years he’s gonna get a complex.

And it’s not his fault he wasn’t drafted. He’s got skills, and he’s not making what he’s worth because scouts and talent evaluators weren’t good at their jobs. He was undrafted and has chip on his shoulder because of it, and he plays with a chip on his shoulder.

So the second his contract is able to be renegotiated he’s going to expect to be paid. Like the next day. And if he doesn’t get paid he’ll play out the last year of his deal with the intention of not getting hurt and waiting to leave.

But, this front office has shown every inclination towards rewarding their guys who perform. And I have every expectation that they’ll do that with Baldwin.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 12, 2012 4:52 PM PST up reply actions  

They're not mutually exclusive.

It’s not like TO didn’t work hard.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 12, 2012 5:15 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Agreed.

I said “unlikely”. If you have a squishier word to recommend I’ll use that instead.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 12, 2012 5:17 PM PST up reply actions  

But also, T.O.'s fanciness has been evident from the beginning, I believe.

Does not Baldwin exude a Springsteen-esque, blue collar sensibility?

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 12, 2012 5:18 PM PST up reply actions  

He was pretty mild mannered in college.

Overcame a lot of obstacles to make it to the NFL and felt like hot shit once he’d done it. I don’t really have any reason to think that’s likely to happen with Baldwin, but Hazbro definitely laid out a good scenario for how it could happen.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 12, 2012 5:24 PM PST up reply actions  

Every one of these guys has the same attitude.

Pay me.

TO’s is Pay me + hey Cletus watch this.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 12, 2012 5:45 PM PST up reply actions  

He's a really good athlete that could be a great football player if he cared more about the team than himself.

There’s a difference. I love watching Jackson play, but he’s inconsistent and disappears in too many games.

follow @casetines

by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 11, 2012 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

The inconsistency of a "big play speed guy" is another reason I don't like them.

I didn’t put it in words, but that’s exactly one of my gripes with them. More likely to disappear more often, or appear to be that way.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 3:56 PM PST up reply actions  

He's 6' 198.

That’s 2 inches and 20 lbs, a considerable amount of size in the NFL.

For example, 2 inches and 20 lbs are going to cost Kellen Moore several million dollars.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 9:14 PM PST up reply actions  

Again, it's not so much about size as it is style. Maclin and Jackson play the game somewhat similarly.

Regardless, this whole discussion is ridiculous. I was talking about Kendall Wright, who compares to guys like Jackson and Wallace. He’s not the same size as Jackson, he’s about 10 pounds heavier and maybe an inch taller. Dislike DeSean Jackson all you want, it’s not really relevant to the point I was making.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 9:53 PM PST up reply actions  

So why have a smaller guy do that when a bigger guy (like Maclin or Lockette) can do it just as easily and almost as fast?

Look, I’m not going to lie. I’m 6’4" and in adulthood anywhere between 205-230 lbs. I LOVE our corners and Cam because they look like me out there, and I’m not a fan of the little guy, particularly a little guy whose a punk.

I think in sports, bigger is almost always better. And in this day and age there are big AND fast guys. I’d rather have them then little and fast, all things being equal.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 9:19 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Sure, I don't disagree at all.

But I was talking about a type of receiver and I got the impression from Whiskey that he was dismissive of that type of player because of one players attitude.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 4:08 PM PST up reply actions  

I think Jackson's gotten a raw deal.

He’s been promised a new deal, has played at an elite level well above his contract and it didn’t become a huge issue until the Eagles went out and spent half their cap on big name free agents.

A lot of guys in that locker room are looking at each other and saying: “hey, where’s our money?”

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 4:36 PM PST up reply actions  

Nothing wrong with being concerned about the business, but it's not like Jackson's attitude on the field is any better.

He’s twice… TWICE.. given up touchdowns during his career (college and pros) because he was showboating. Terrell Owens, Chad Ochocinco.. guys like this are the most talented receivers in the game during their time and yet.. where are the wins? I just prefer team-first players. I know Randy Moss had success on the Patriots, but even then.. the best WR in the NFL went to one Super Bowl and it had to come in a place where he knew team always comes first.

follow @casetines

by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 11, 2012 4:41 PM PST up reply actions  

I actually wouldn't disagree with the fact that he's gotten a raw deal.

But with his antics, he’s never going to get the money he could if he wasn’t a total douche. Who wants to guarantee him money.

And all those other guys are just BIGGER than DeSean. He’s tiny man. I don’t trust putting a bunch of money trust and expectation into a man that small in the NFL.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 9:23 PM PST up reply actions  

Interestingly...

Based on the model Pete and John are using, as Davis has outlined, that sort of issue will never come up in the Seahawks’ locker room. :)

The artist formerly known as mattlock.

Twitter! -- Facebook!

by Matt Erickson on Jan 12, 2012 2:38 AM PST up reply actions  

I was thinking the same thing.

And it isn’t the first time it’s come up in Philly, and could be one of the many small though legitimate contributing factors in them having consistently solid teams that never make the next step.

That is pure conjecture of course, but, I can’t see it absolutely NOT mattering.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 12, 2012 3:49 PM PST up reply actions  

It may be conjecture

but reasonable to assume, since chemstry is the one factor you cant completely define but has such a huge impact.

As i see not many Seahawks have that “Me first attitude” TJ tried and got shipped out real fast. the PNW is a blue collar type place. So are most of it’s players, or atleast they are smart enough not to air it to the media.

by Oliudyen on Jan 12, 2012 9:49 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't disagree with the sentiments..

However, I would point out that WE see ourselves as workmanlike and blue collar.

The rest of the country sees us as coffee drinking techie environmentalist liberals.

Doesn’t mean they’re right, but there is definitely not a majority of the rest of the country that see us as “blue collar.”

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 13, 2012 9:00 AM PST via Android app up reply actions  

He is a huge, huge health risk.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 11, 2012 5:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Jackson is?

He’s missed 4 games in 4 seasons. I wasn’t aware of him having injury issues.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 5:27 PM PST up reply actions  

Is that all?

I thought he was always banged up, and one concussion away from the couch.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 11, 2012 5:49 PM PST up reply actions  

That would be news to me.

I’m not sure who you’re thinking of, but I don’t think I’ve heard anything like that about Jackson.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 11, 2012 5:53 PM PST up reply actions  

But, if he gets hurt, banged up, and loses a step...

what’s left?

I want a bigger guy to shield against that a little.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 9:24 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes, that's exactly who I was thinking of.

David Terrell is a peach.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 12, 2012 3:50 PM PST up reply actions  

Id say that though playmaker is increadably important

the FO would have to see talent and POLISH to pull the trigger on an early round pick up, because we have lots of “developmental” players who have raw if not elite physical skills.

If they see some raw talent late I think they pull the trigger either way, mostly because not only do we need the 13 player turn over and WR looks to get probably two of those, but also because staggering weapon contracts is pretty important too.

by Oliudyen on Jan 11, 2012 12:05 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree completely.

With a great offseason and training camp from Butler being the one thing that could save him.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 10, 2012 1:06 PM PST up reply actions  

The "Draft capital" debate... I'm too confused to jump into the middle of that but I find something interesting, and going back to John Schneider - How much would he follow Ted Thompson?

I only bring this up to do a little research, because I think how the Packers have drafted wide receivers is VERY interesting.

2005 – In Thompson’s first year as GM, Javon Walker, GB’s #1 WR, misses the season with injury. Donald Driver performs well, is 30 years old. They have very little after that – Robert Ferguson is well past being a disappointment and Antonio Chatman is interesting, somewhat.

2006 – Green Bay trades Walker (who was in a holdout the previous year) to the Broncos for a 2nd round pick. Packers draft Greg Jennings in the 2nd and Cory Rodgers in the 4th. Rodgers doesn’t make the roster. Driver is still very good, Jennings flashes potential. Ruvell Martin catches some passes. But the Pack can feel good about Driver/Jennings as a 1/2 and some depth with Martin.

2007 – Packers draft James Jones in the 3rd and David Clowney in the 5th. They retain Koren Robinson and Martin for depth. Jennings catches 12 TDs. Driver has over 1000 yards again. James Jones has 676 yards as a rookie.

2008 – After going 13-3, with Driver/Jennings/Jones at the core, and Martin for depth, the team still drafts Jordy Nelson with their first pick of the draft, 36th overall. They take Brett Swain in the 7th. However, after losing 7 games by 4 points or less, the team slumps to 6-10.

2009 – Driver/Jennings/Jones/Nelson make up the core. Packer don’t draft a WR.

2010 – Jennings is fully the #1 WR, Driver starts to show his age, James Jones and Jordy Nelson give them great depth. At this point, they’re steadily using only 4 WRs and Finley. Win Super Bowl.

2011 – Despite knowing that they still have Jennings/Driver/Nelson/Jones for the third straight year, the Packers draft Randall Cobb in the 2nd round. It’s a luxury they can afford, perhaps getting ready to move on with a Jennings/Nelson/Cobb core of wide receivers plus maybe they draft another one this year. Who knows?

You can see a definite change in philosophy in the way the Packers get their WRs but they seem to value being very talented at the position, using a bevy of 2nd round picks over the course of a few years, and potentially starting to churn “out with the old, in with the new” now with Cobb.

It’s interesting. Not sure how that would apply to the current Seahawks, but I’m not sure that we are any more or less talented now than the Packers were in 2005 at the WR position with Driver and the rest… I like our players in principal, but i reality, Doug Baldwin led this team in receiving, and it wasn’t typical “leading receiver” numbers. Everything changes if Sidney Rice plays 15 or 16 games.

follow @casetines

by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 11, 2012 4:14 PM PST reply actions   3 recs

Contextually

It makes sense to surround elite QBs with Elite WRs.
If they dont have an Elite QB, do they still draft that way? Tough to say, maybe they do, maybe they dont.
Notice anything about the Oline as well?

by Oliudyen on Jan 11, 2012 4:28 PM PST up reply actions  

They didn't have an elite Qb during this period.

They had a declining Favre and an unproven Rodgers, and still kept drafting receivers.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 4:31 PM PST up reply actions  

I'd call our investment of a 2 and 4th round pick plus one FA pretty meager.

And the second round pick was a swing for the fences-I don’t consider drafting high risk/high upside players as an investment. They’re a gamble.

70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by hazbro24 on Jan 11, 2012 4:33 PM PST up reply actions  

Nice research, King Arthur.

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 11, 2012 5:11 PM PST up reply actions  

Rec'd.

Very interesting.

"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 9:26 PM PST up reply actions  

Pick up a playmaker in FA.

(cue rosterbation music)
This FO has already shown intrest in Vincent Jackson. Why not sign him to a deal similar to what Rice was given. Churn BMW and Obo to free some cash. This would give us Rice, Jackson, Baldwin, Tate, The Rocket, and Butler/Durham for our wr corps. Lining up the tandem of Rice and Jackson would be bananas. Not to mention, this would free up space for Beef Mo/Baldwin/Tate to do their respective things. This would give the ’Hawks very formidable weapons all over the field without touching our coveted draft capital. Now about our QB situation…

...and if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump it's ass when it hopped.

by Side Effects on Jan 11, 2012 11:36 PM PST reply actions  

We need to figure out what the rosterbation soundtrack should be.

boom chicka bown bown

"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."

by shams on Jan 12, 2012 2:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SEA!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avatar_small
The OT Thread---12thrs, Assemble!
Small
Just How Much Do Close Games Matter Anyway?
Small
Help Me Understand How Irvin Will be Used
Turbin_game_uni_small
Hand Size and Quarterbacks
Einstein_www-txt2pic-com_small
On Pete Carroll and Previous QB Competitions

Recent FanPosts

Horsey_small
Results from the 2012 Armchair GM Championship
Tasb_logo_small
Consider it Spun: The 5 Worst Moves of Carroll and Schneider Era in Seattle
Small
Plaxico Burress: viable option, or over the hill?
Small
Portland Seahawks Fans: Where You Be?
Small
Should Seattle Go After Kellen Winslow?
Small
Football where the head is sacred

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managing Editor/Lead Writer

Screen_shot_2012-05-04_at_10 Danny Kelly

Staff Writers/Editors

Screen_shot_2011-01-05_at_9 Scruffy Lefty

Small BrianL

Avatar_small Benne

Olympiabeer_small Tyler Jorgensen

Madhatter_small Thomas Beekers

Profilepic_small DJ C-Raig

897267_o_small Kenneth Arthur

Sbn_pic_small Jacson Bevens

Photo__1__small Charlie Todaro

Staff Writers

Small Joshua Kasparek

Photo_small Matt Erickson

Davis_small Davis Hsu

Profile2_small Rob Staton

208114_505637750968_23709013_30160241_9483_n_small Scott Enyeart

Elephant_pink_clothes_small Chris Sully

Seattle_seahawk_white_1600_reasonably_small_small Derek Stephens

Ace_small Ben Harbaugh

Bu_fb_2_small Daniel Hill

Rob_small Rob Davies