clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Seattle Seahawks: Field Gulls Mailbag with Coples, Osweiler, and How The Seahawks Find Their Precious

New, comments

Good Afternoont.

I have never seen a Tyler Perry movie but I once saw that on a bus stop bench, so I guess I sort of have seen a Tyler Perry movie.

Anyways, I asked you guys to send in your questions for the upcoming Field Gulls YouTube Channel that I will be running and you've sent me quite a few. To the point where I'd never be able to cover them all in a time-sensitive matter so I've taken it upon myself to answer some of them in the written word. This is good because when you officially see my face on video, you'll know that less is far, far more.

Here are a few things to remember:

  1. Subscribe to the SBN YouTube Channel. When we officially launch the SBNFieldGulls YouTube Channel (in the next day or two) then subscribe to that too!
  2. Follow FieldGulls on Twitter @FieldGulls and me on Twitter @Casetines and I probably should have changed my twitter handle to something more understandable at some point but I didn't so get over it and yeah I'm regretting it so maybe I'll have them change it.
  3. Send in MORE questions to SBNFieldGulls (@) GMAIL (dot) COM because we can never have enough.
  4. Though misunderstood, Kimmy Gibbler taught us that even if adults treat you like shit, never stop being who you are.
Let's get to some questions. Thanks for sending them in.

From Brian:

Since it seems very possible quinton coples falls to us at the 12th, do you (along with the handful of ppl on youtube) think that the 'big' personalities on this team (lynch, bryant, assuming they're resigned), along with carroll & his crew could fire him up and motivate him to live up to his potential?


Thanks for the question Brian! First of all, don't ever listen to what people on YouTube say. The people that comment on YouTube are people that were abandoned by their parents as babies not because their parents were bad people, but because they recognized that they had given birth to a terrible human being. They were often left in dumpsters but then the dumpsters threw the babies out because they didn't want to be associated with a future terrible YouTube commentor and have it ruin the reputation of dumpsters.

As far as Coples goes...

A short primer on Quinton Coples for those who aren't familiar:

6'6, 285 lbs, UNC DE that might be the best DE in the class. Few people question his athleticism, but everybody has a question about his work ethic and attitude. He had 59 tackles, 15.5 tackles for a loss and 10 sacks in 2010 when he had to move to DT to fill in for suspended player Marvin Austin but had struggles during his senior season and on game film it was commented that he wasn't hustling and that he looked slow or that he didn't care.

In response to these questions, Coples had this to say:

"I can see where it can look like that on film, but overall I felt like I did the right job and did the right thing sacrificing for my team and that was important to me at the time," Coples said. "I think I have long strides and things of that nature so it may come fast to me in the game and film will slow it down a little bit. People have their own opinions and some people don't even think it was a problem."

I honestly read that and don't know if he's even answered the question. It sounds like he's saying, "It ain't my fault, you just don't know how to watch video. Some people don't even agree with those people." But he doesn't actually say he agrees with the people that didn't see it as a problem. Some people love communism, too.

"He's one of the most gifted guys here,'' analyst Bucky Brooks said. "But his production as a senior was subpar.

"Then he got to the Senior Bowl, and he absolutely dominated. So scouts have questions about his motor, the consistency. Teams want to dig into what makes him tick. ... But he is super talented.

"If he puts it together, he can be a perennial Pro Bowl player.''

People really want to compare Coples to Julius Peppers, but I think many of those people are making "really athletic DE from UNC" stretches that I wouldn't dare make to one of the top five defensive ends of the last decade. He seems like a mid-to-late first round pick in my estimation, though I can see why he's probably going to go earlier than that. He's got the athletic ability to be an effective pass rusher in the right system, something that Seattle desperately needs, but when you're flashing signs at me that a player won't hustle for 60 minutes a game, 16 games a year when he doesn't feel like it, those players rarely win Super Bowls as a main asset on a team.

I think at 12, Seattle can find a player that has both athletic ability and a glowing work ethic and reputation. There's no need to take a chance that early. As to whether or not I think that the veterans on the team can motivate a young player to reach his full potential, sure I think that's possible. I don't think that Pete Carroll is the type of guy that takes shit from any player and he's used to being a leader of men and he thrives on giving young people a sense of direction and drive. That's one of my favorite things about Carroll. Even when he was the coach at USC (and I HATE USC), I respected the hell out of him when I saw reports on what he does off of the field in helping troubled youths.

However, Coples (or whoever the Hawks draft) won't be a troubled youth. He'll be a new millionaire and he'll be the hot shot rookie on this team. Even if the team could provide him motivation to reach his full potential, should we be using those resources in that way? Wouldn't it be nice if we could just draft a player that didn't need that kind of coaching so we could focus on learning the playbook, the schemes, and getting ready for NFL game speed?

I can see using a mid-to-late round pick on a guy that's got ethic questions, but in the first round I don't think we can afford to swing and miss. I'd prefer to have a sure-fire double than a "strikeout or homer" kind of prospect. We're talking about baseball right? That's why I'm using baseball metaphors.

Next question!

From AJ:

Should the Seahawks jump for a top rated QB even if there not sure he's the guy. Or should we start drafting 2nd/3rd picks until we either hit on one of those picks, all the while biding time to sell the farm for a top tier star in the making.


I've seen Ryan Tannehill really start to jump up the mock drafts based on the needs of certain teams like the Redskins and Seahawks. Most people by now assume that the Browns will trade up and draft Robert Griffin III which would leave those QB-desperate teams without many options. The mockers think that one of them will have to reach on Tannehill or face another year of Rex Grossman or Tarvaris Jackson.

First of all, if anyone actually has listened to John Schneider talk, you know that they aren't going to draft Tannehill or anyone else in the first round if they don't think he's the guy. We won't panic. In my opinion, this is the only right answer that there is. You can't waste developmental time or a draft pick or money on a player that you don't believe will pan out. It's okay to have some doubt, because doubt comes with every player. There's doubt around Andrew Luck and RG3. But when you start to weigh the balance of the doubt against the possibility of being great, you'll find your answer.

"If it happens, it happens," Schneider said when asked if Seattle will finally draft a quarterback this year. "You can put yourself in a tough position if you go all-in with a guy you feel pressured to take. You can set your organization back."

It sounds like Seattle is high on two quarterbacks in particular: Brock Osweiler of Arizona State and Kirk Cousins of Michigan State. They were one of five teams to meet with Osweiler and he could be a steal in the 2nd round and he said the most important thing to Seahawks fans that he could have said: "I'm not Dan McGwire."

Of course, he could also be very bad and that's why he could possibly be had in the second round.

If you take a QB in the 2nd round and he succeeds, then you've just hit pay dirt. No matter how you get a franchise QB it's pay dirt, but it's even better if you only used a second round pick to do so. If you draft a QB in the second and he turns into Brian Brohm, then at least it was "only" a second rounder. Though they can be valuable, it was worth the risk. It would not be worth the risk necessarily if you draft a guard in the second round and he failed, because he was probably a very highly-rated guard, but at QB you take that chance.

I feel confident in Tarvaris Jackson's ability to lead this team for one more season and just one more season. He'll have over a year in the system with these players around him when the 2012 season rolls around and I think he's done enough to prove that he's a viable stopgap. That's what makes drafting a guy like Osweiler viable, because Osweiler is going to need time to adjust to the NFL and get better. There won't be as much pressure to use him in year one as compared to a player you draft at 12, though I think Tannehill would very much benefit from a year on the clipboard as well. (Unless you're very special, I think almost all rookie QBs should sit for a year.)

Meanwhile, if Seattle doesn't take a QB in the first two rounds, I don't see a problem with taking a flier on Russell Wilson or Kellen Moore at the tail end of the draft. I do not believe that those guys are going to become NFL quarterbacks that can play at a high level, but in the 6th or 7th round, I don't see a problem with it either. Remember that Seattle cut it's 5th round pick Mark LeGree before last season and so not every player drafted is going to be on the team. At least with a QB, you're taking an understandable risk.

Last question!

From Corax

I believe that ultimately, either Samwise or Gollum should get credit for destroying the One Ring. Samwise because his 'heart wasn't strong enough' but it obviously was, and Gollum because he so nobly sacrificed himself in the name of all that is good and ordered. What do you think?


This is the most important question of the bag, obviously.

First of all, team effort. It took 17 hours of movie footage (I only own extended editions of course) or something to get from the Shire to Mount Doom and you've got to give credit to all of them. Frodo is nothing without Samwise and Samwise is nothing without Frodo. It's a Fellowship and without the whole TEAM, the destroying of the Ring is not possible. Sure, you can give more credit to one than to another, but just because Pippin isn't as important as Aragorn, they're all links on the chain. Take one away, and the mission is for naught. (Forget the major plot hole that would have saved them the entire trip.)

The concept of Lord of the Rings is not unlike the building of a football team:

One Ring to rule them all,

One Ring to find them,

One Ring to bring them all

and in the darkness bind them.

All 53 men on the team, all of the coaches, all of the executives are in charge of bringing a team from the Shire to Mount Doom, except they don't have The Ring to begin with. They must complete the journey in order to get the Precious and if one of them fails, it may all fall apart.

One Ring to rule them all.

Us, the 12th man, they're doing it so that Sauron (the Steelers or Patriots or 49ers or any other evil empire) doesn't destroy the hearts of the 12th man. Pete Carroll is our Gandalf. Russell Okung, our Legolas. Earl Thomas, our Aragorn.

One Ring to find them.

They have to work together to save the hearts of man... Tom Cable, our Gimli.

One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

It's in this desire to find our Precious that we may lose sight of the goal. But make no mistake that whether you're a Frodo (the QB we have not yet found) or a Merry (Charlie Whitehurst), when you're on this team, you're on this team. This isn't about your own desires for the Precious, this is about doing the right thing for the hearts of the 12th men. Never lose sight of that goal. The Ring isn't about you. It's about Us. It's not about the individual, it's about the team.

When we find our Frodo Baggins, we may finally complete this journey, but with or without him, we still need our Samwises, our Merry's, our Boromir's to complete their duties and stay focused on the heart of the matter. Otherwise, we shall not pass.

I hope that answers your question.

Also, a lot of people hate on the relationship between Samwise and Frodo and think it's very effeminate. Nah, that's just bro's being bro's. If you're comfortable in your manhood, then you can be sensitive with your bro's and tell them how much you love them. You can look them deeply in the eyes and say "I'll never leave your side, because that's why bro's are for."

"Frodo" is just another way of saying "Brodo." Never let your Brodo's down, don't be afraid to tell them that you love them. That's how a man really acts.

Now, Frodo and Gandalf... there was definitely something going on there.

Hey, follow me on Twitter and check out my website. See you on YouTube soon.