Seahawks Insider

Ex-Hawks DB Lucas in Seattle’s crosshairs

Post by Eric Williams on March 31, 2009 at 2:51 pm with 76 Comments »
March 31, 2009 2:51 pm

Cornerback Ken Lucas, recently released by the Carolina Panthers, reportedly visited the Seattle Seahawks before taking a trip to Chicago on Monday, according to a report by the Chicago Tribune. Team sources confirmed Lucas’ visit to Seattle.


When Lucas was released by the Panthers earlier this month I said that he would be a good fit in Seattle because at 6-0, 205 pounds he’s a big, physical corner who would fit in nicely with Seattle’s change to more of a cover-2 scheme.


Lucas was drafted by Seattle in 2001 and got his start with the Seahawks before leaving in free agency to Carolina in 2005.



Lucas presumably also has a good relationship with current Seattle defensive backs coach Tim Lewis, who served as the defensive backs coach in Carolina when Lucas was there.


Signing Lucas also would fit the team’s current strategy of filling needs through free agency so when the draft comes in April, the Seahawks can take the best player available.

Categories:
NFL free agency
Leave a comment Comments → 76
  1. kurtisballard says:

    if they can get him without keeping them from signing draft picks then i’m all for it. wouldn’t want him locked up for more than two years though.

  2. Anyone an espn insider subscriber? They’ve got a headline implying that the Hawks are interested in Buffalo’s all-pro LT Jason Peters — http://tinyurl.com/ckp8tw — he certainly wouldn’t come cheap, but would be a big signing . . .

  3. chuck_easton says:

    pdway,

    You read that wrong. That portion of insider each rumor is a different color. The one on Seattle states that they are looking for an impact player with their #4. No news there.

    There is another separate article above it that says Peters and the Bills are far apart and the Bills might trade him rather than have him hold out (he has 2 years left on his contract).

  4. GuardDogg says:

    I wouldn’t mind seeing Lucas back with the Seahawks, but he doesn’t dramatically improve the secondary.

  5. ah, got it – oh well. thanks.

  6. I think he improves our secondary drastically. He is a great Tampa 2 corner, he is extremely physical, he had Steve Smith swinging on him at camp for being on him like a wet blanket. He can shut big receivers down…until they get past him but then that wr would be our safety’s responsibility in the new cover 2. Bring WIlson in to play slot and have Tru and Lucas. Draft Curry and have him cover the TE and we have a hell of a secondary.

  7. I wouldn’t even mind a long term deal for Lucas. He seems the perfect kind of guy who can switch to safety if he loses another step. This would shore up another area of the team and keeps the Hawks from having any GLARING needs. Now that’s not to say the team couldn’t use some upgrades. Is the team ready to hang it’s hat on Red Bryant (Cole was always a backup signing, and Redding has been tabbed for DE). Jones, Duckett, Forsett? Sims and Spencer? Will Herring and DD Lewis replacing Peterson?

    Eric – could you give us a run down of who is either in the final year of their contract or in the final year of their realistic contract due to back-ended money in their deal? I think that will give us a much clearer idea of who the Hawks may want to bring in to groom (leverage).

  8. williambryan says:

    I think Lucas would want to have a gaurantee that he would start and I’m not so sure that would happen. if you bring in Lucas it would get pretty crowded back there, I’m all for that but it just doesn’t happen.

  9. Dukeshire says:

    “At the right price” is going to be the mantra, here. I do like the idea of him playing opposite Tru, though. When is Ruskell going to address the safety issue? Whether they sign Lucas or not, it’s the weakest link on the D now.

  10. Dukeshire says:

    williambryan – You make a good point. I don’t know about guarantees to start, but even still, someone would have to go. It’s hard to imagine them giving up on Jennings totally, quite yet. I’m a bit skeptical it will happen as well, but if it did, I think that would spell the end of Hobbs’ development, as a Seahawk.

  11. I certainly don’t see where this would hurt (if he’s a CB or FS). If he has the skills to move to FS, all the better. A FS who can actually cover would be fun to have too.

  12. Dukeshire, I would be surprised to see Ruskell sign another FA safety, wouldn’t you? After spendng big $ on Grant and Russel, I would assume he will go after a safety in the draft for less money.

    Interesting to imagine Lucas back on the team at CB. He would take over the starting spot opposite Tru for sure. The dude can cover and hit and he isn’t done yet, with 16 games and 60 tackles the last two years in a row. Sign him.

  13. mindnbrad says:

    Why did the Panthers let him go? Any red flags there in terms of performance? Age?

  14. Dukeshire says:

    I do expect they’ll take a safety. Chung, Hamlin or later Clemons. But back there you have Russel (Rob Sims on D, that’s for Bobby) and a aging Grant who’s coming off a season where he played with a bad knee, most of the year. So I would be surprised, in that Ruskell isn’t likely to sign another FA safety. I’m not necessarily suggesting that, but it simply must be upgraded. I do acknowledge that there are some positions of need here, that will not be addressed in earnest until next year. Running back is one (sorry Moreno lovers, he’s great but don’t pin your hopes on it) and safety is perhaps another.

  15. Dukeshire says:

    mindnbrad – Generally reported as a salary cap issue. There are a ton of reports out there, this is just one quick link.

    sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/03/11/panthers.release.lucas.ap/index.html

  16. nightwulf says:

    Most likely for cap reasons..thiswould most likely be the year that the backloaded part of his contract kisks in…He’s still good. Not great, but good and physical. An upgrade from Jennings, I think. (although I would like to see how Jennings does when playing WITHOUT broken ribs…) I’d love to see Kenny come back for a couple years, for a reasonable price.

  17. bigmike04 says:

    I’m back about time the blogs got fix, so I can comment lucas would be good CB for us and that iand just like if hawks did sign him.

  18. freedom_X says:

    Another ESPN Insider rumor was that Seattle was bringing in a big-time running back (presumably a draftee) in for workouts. Wells? Moreno?

    According to the combine times, Wells did not run much faster than Moreno. Wells was the tallest and biggest RB though, and had a broad jump nearly 1 foot longer than Moreno. (Best of the combine.) Wells didn’t run any of the shuttles though so no comparison there. Moreno had a bit better vertical (35.5″ vs. 33.5″)

    Fastest 40 – Cedric Peerman, 5’9″, 216, 4.34, 40″ vertical, but shuttle times were about the same as Moreno.

    From a pure athletic standpoint (no idea if the guy can actually play) here’s a tackle prospect: Lydon Murtha, Nebraska, 6’7″, 306, 4.82 40 yd dash, 4.34 20 yd dash, 7.06 cone drills, 35″ vertical (all bests for tackles), and 9’2″ broad jump (1″ behind the leader Xavier Fulton.) If the guy were mean, sounds like a potential D-line prospect…

  19. Dukeshire says:

    Wells is coming in.

  20. I definitely see us taking a Safety in the first 3-4 rounds. I agree about the Chung (2nd round) or Hamlin (3rd round) comment. Both seem like Ruskell picks.

    I definitely see us taking at least one offensive lineman in the first 4 rounds (Ruskell is pretty proud of his 4th round “success” stories in Willis, Sims, and Wrotto — judging by his post season press conference). Although I will give him credit for Willis being a damn good 4th round pick. So it’s possible (to my dismay) that he may not go OL until 4th and/or 5th round, even though many of us have been complaining for OL help early and often in the draft.

    That means we have 2 positions that will get addressed for the rest of the team in the first 4 rounds. Personally, I am fine with 2 of the top 4 picks being OL, but I’m going to be a realist as I put myself into Ruskell’s shoes as to what I think he’ll do.

    I don’t see Ruskell taking a TE, FB, DT, or MLB in the first 4 rounds.

    That means (IMO) we’re going to take 1-2 of the following: QB, RB, WR, DE, or OLB (CB odds being longer, especially if we sign Lucas) with the remaining picks (remember, IMO, we already took 1 OL and 1 S).

    Personally, I’d like
    1. RB,
    2. C,
    3. S,
    4. G/T — mainly if those guys were BPA. I don’t want to pass on a great prospect in favor of an okay prospect just b/c we’re trying to fill a need.

    It’s nice to have a 5th round pick again, especially when it’s the first pick in the round.

  21. SeahawkFan12 says:

    Just curious, has Lucas had any major injuries in his career?

  22. Nothing serious. That’s another positive. We don’t need anymore Kerney, Branch, Spencer, type of injury prone players.

  23. totally unrelated… denver owner pat bowlen has decided to trade cutler.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4031893

  24. hawkcrazy says:

    Hey BK…don’t you think we need some WR help? Branch and Housh are the only ones to finish the year out last year.

    What are your thoughts on Kenny Britt, Hakeem Nicks and Robiskie?

  25. hawkcrazy – Yes. I think we need a good, young WR prospect. But I don’t think Ruskell agrees. I wouldn’t mind taking a WR in the 5th or someting along those lines. I know that’s not an elite or glamor spot, but at least it’s something. Besides, IMO, I firmly believe we need 2 of our top 4 picks need to be OL (even though I only think Ruskell will use 1 of the top 4 picks to address the OL).

    With my mancrush on Moreno, the belief that we need OL help at 2 of the positons along our line, and the obvious need we have for a S… that takes up the first 4 picks. I’d like to take more guys on the first day of the draft, but we’re handcuffed (like most teams) in only getting 1 pick per round.

  26. this would be a good signing!

  27. williambryan says:

    I don’t think a rookie WR is a need persay. With all our current players healthy we are pretty good. Remember before any of the injuries hit last year we were all talking about how much of a strength thw WR corps was. What has changed? we still have all the same guys that we started with last year (swap Engram with TJ) and a healthy Branch and most likely healthy Burleson. I would be okay with Crabtree because of his upside but again it is not a need. With so many of our “holes” being “filled” in FA I think whatever direction we go will be alright, with the exception of Stafford. At this point if we draft Stafford at #4 That would be a big dissapointment on many fronts, but I hope Ruskell sticks to his history of avoiding first round QB’s who are more often than not, busts.

  28. nighthawk2 says:

    Anything is an upgrade over Kelly Jennings.

  29. Dukeshire says:

    I would put WR in that same category as running back. Certainly on the ’10 agenda.

    Nighthawk – I haven’t seen a one sentence post from you in weeks. lol.

  30. Dukeshire says:

    Check this out, about Redding’s re-worked contract.

    myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcwest/0-8-525/Redding-s-new-deal-reveals-Seahawks–thinking.html

    I have to go to bed, but I can’t wait to read the comments about this, when I get to work.

  31. Seattle usually keeps four DEs and right now they have Kerney, Jackson, Tapp, Redding and Atkins. Well, they also have Miller but he is just camp fodder. But I don’t think they will use a first day pick on another one.

    They need an OLB even after Hill re-signs. They need a safety.

    On offense they need O line and backups at FB and WR. If I remember right before Obo and Payne got hurt Taylor had moved ahead of both of them on the depth chart. Considering how Taylor bombed, I don’t have much confidence in Payne or Obo. Branch, Housh and Burleson make it for sure. I also think Mike Hass has a good shot and two WR draft picks.

  32. I would love to see Ken Lucus back with the Hawks. Does anyone remember his last year here? He was a flat out stud. He also plays with “tude”.

  33. bigmike04 says:

    Redding’s new deal reveals Seahawks’ thinking

    March 31, 2009 10:58 PM

    Posted by ESPN.com’s Mike Sando

    Thanks to Brian McIntyre of Mac’s Football Blog for passing along a link to his item on Cory Redding’s restructured contract.

    I put a call into the Seahawks on this one earlier in the day after a source told me Redding’s new deal carried a $2 million salary for 2009. The new terms puzzled me.

    Redding, acquired with a fifth-round pick from the Lions for linebacker Julian Peterson, was scheduled to earn $3.3 million in base salary with a $250,000 workout bonus in 2009. That deal ran through the 2013 season.

    We knew the Seahawks planned to rework the contract. I figured they would trim base salaries and possibly shorten the deal. I never figured they would make Redding eligible for unrestricted free agency after only one season in Seattle. By doing so, they’re giving Redding additional incentive for playing his best while blowing up the inflated final seasons of his deal.

    The new contract would seem to value Redding as part of the defensive line rotation, but not necessarily as a cornerstone of the line. In effect, Redding sacrificed $1.55 million in 2009 compensation, plus whatever future salaries he might have earned, for the right to become an unrestricted free agent after one year.

    If Redding enjoys a bounce-back season in 2009, the Seahawks could conceivably emerge from this trade with the Lions’ 2009 fifth-round choice and one season from Redding. That’s not bad if the Seahawks planned to release Peterson anyway.

    If nothing else, we now know how much the Seahawks valued Peterson and how much they value Redding — not as much as one might have thought.

  34. bigmike04 says:

    thought atkin isnt a lock for the DE as, he might have to beat out someone else for his spot, which I hope happen as he useless.

  35. pales dream sequence Stafford is available at #4 Denver trades us Cutler and #12 pick we then swap cutler to Jacksonville for the #8 choice With #8 we take Oher with #12 Moreno

  36. hawkcrazy says:

    That is a dream Pales…what would you do with Hasselbeck?

  37. hawkcrazy says:

    Never mind…hippy moment.

  38. freedom_X says:

    Denver will not trade Cutler AND the #12 pick for the #4. Seattle would need to add more to the pot, like Leroy Hill (though he is a bit small for a 3-4 linebacker), or their #2. Denver could probably trade Cutler for the #1 overall pick straight up.

  39. I have a feeling Denver will be asking for a lot more than one first-round choice..

    Really interesting about Redding’s contract. Not sure how I feel about that.. Seems hasty..

  40. Dukeshire says:

    A one year deal for Redding? They must have real concerns about his knee.

    Seattle’s not trading for Cutler.

  41. Dukeshire says:

    I haven’t thought this all the way through. but if Redding is only a one year stop gap, does that bring Orakpo into the draft picture? Of course he not an interior lineman, but with Redding and Kerney potentially playing only the ’09 season, that would leave end rather shallow, looking forward, considering he is expected to rotate there. Tapp (this is the final year of his rookie deal) Jackson, and Atkins. Or is this an opportunity to take advantage of what is most likely an uncapped 2010? I don’t think that’s it. I do not feel good about this.

  42. Dukeshire says:

    Sen’Derrick Marks or Evander Hood? Okay, time to slow down.

  43. HawkFromDay1 says:

    JP’s trade value was at an all-time low. He didn’t have a great year, and he’s going to make stupid money next year. Who wants that? Getting a rental DT + a 5 is fine by me.

    The likelihood of taking Orakpo keeps increasing in my mind, especially now that he is considered a legit OLB. Looks like a JP clone to me. Lofa will line Orakpo up, and turn him loose into a gap. Curry is a little too much of a Tampa-2 mike, EXACTLY like Lofa.

  44. I think the Redding contract is further proof that Ruskell will not take Stafford with the #4 pick.

    The Redding contract is about playing for ’09. You don’t draft for the future when the future is now (for good or ill).

    Redding has a 1 year deal. Players seem to play their best in the final year of their contract. Ruskell is about winning now. Ruskell is also in the last year of his contract. Coming off a 4-12 season, he must feel he also needs to win NOW.

    With Kerney as good as gone for ’10, Redding on a 1 year deal, and Tapp in the final year of his rookie contract — yes, Dukeshire, I agree there is something to the Orakpo thing. I’ve been predicting him at #4 for a long time, but wanting Moreno/Oher. Afterall, Orakpo is the poster child for a Ruskell pick. He meets every requirement.

    If the Hawks don’t win in ’09 — Ruskell probably won’t be around to see Stafford develop in the future. If the Hawks win the Super Bowl this upcoming season, then he will have some serious job security and will be able to go out and draft a QB in the first few rounds and he will be able to wait around for him to develop without having to worried about getting fired right away.

    Lastly, Cutler is a baby. You don’t want a moron like that as the leader of your team.

  45. The last time Redding was in a contract year — he just so happened to have the best year of his career. If he does come through like that again — we always have the ability to franchise him for ’10 and make him play on another 1 year deal again. Of course, Hill is also playing on a 1 year deal so you have to pick and choose sometimes.

  46. Should read: “without having to worry about getting fired right away.” (not to worried)

  47. piperfeltcher says:

    I agree with you on this one Bobby a little extra motivation might be what Redding needs. Been a great offseason I can not wait for the draft.

  48. Stay away from Cutler, and definately don’t draft Stafford. The QB’s in this draft aren’t anything special, thats why he is projected to be such a high pick. Wait till a later round or next year to pick up the future QB. Hopefully not, but with who we got right now at RB’s, will probably be drafting pretty high next year as well. I hope the Hawks focus on OL in the first couple of rounds and pick up a quality RB as well. S is also a concern, but a think the running game is more important part of the puzzle first, especially if we are going to be a run first time of team. JJ, Docket, and Forsett, opposing teams aren’t going to have to do much game planning to stop them.

  49. Dukeshire says:

    Two things about Redding: 1) He has suffered a significant knee injury since then, and has not yet played on it yet. 2) You’re not going to get him to sign a series of one year deals in order to “keep him motivated”. Franchise is a possibility but so is the fact he will have a huge year and they’ll be in a position to sign him to a massive deal or let him walk. Remember, Hill and Tapp need to be locked up, and it won’t come cheap. There is no guarantee that a new CBA won’t be reached by 2010. It’s unlikely, but not a given. It may turn out to be a very shrewd move on Ruskell’s part. Which is good, because his next will be his first.

  50. Palerydr says:

    Everybody read my post again I said TRADE CUTLER not keep him I only want the guy for his trade value. He is a prima donna not in the TR mold at all. If we had to package picks to do that then do it. As long as we come up with more picks in 2nd 3rd round I would be happy.

    TR is in year 5 it’s win now or else and with this roster in a perceived weak div. He has a weak OL holes at DB/S and LB needs another speed back, WR depth, and SP teams depth

    Sign Lucas to a deal if you can but don’t think he will come cheap or give a home town discount. #4 pick = OL/Orakpo as they will be most likely the highest rated players on TR’s board. If Stafford is available look for them to entertain trade offers.

  51. You can sign him to a series of 1 year contracts because we already have him signed to a 1 year deal and franchising him again would constitute another 1 year deal (if his play in ’09 warrants it — good point about the knee though) so it seems we could easily do it. Again, players tend to try just a little bit harder in their last year of contracts.

    I have never seen the Tapp you have seen. I don’t think he’s anything more than an average player and I wouldn’t be interested in giving him a “massive” deal unless he has a monster year this upcoming season (which I’d like to happen, but don’t expect). I’d rather him walk than overpay on another long term deal.

    That last part is funny about Ruskell.

  52. There seems to be a lot of conjecture about our draft / FA signing strategy based on
    the fact that Ruskell is in the last year of his contract and may be on the cutting block.
    That may be faulty reasoning and this is why:

    1. I think Paul Allen is very deliberate in his decision making, so he’s not going to
    make impulsive decisions like Al Davis.

    2. Last year was an anomoly with Holmy leaving and the injury situation, so I think
    TR gets a pass from PA.

    3. This year there is an entirely new coaching staff, so Paul Allen may have high
    hopes, but he’s too reasonable to expect another Superbowl in ’09, so if the hawks improve but fall short of the playoffs, Ruskell is still here next year. And, there is almost no way, outside of injuries that the Hawks aren’t back on track this year.

    4. The Hutch fiasco is his glaring mistake, but again, it’s business and Hutch was
    pulling some really underhanded BS with the poison pill signing. I doubt PA would hold
    Ruskell completely to blame for not anticipating the shady tactics that Hutch chose to
    use in order to get a big payday.

    5. Alexander’s contract was a bust, but we cut our losses and moved on…His contract
    year happened to be our Superbowl and his MVP season…and he nearly had two rusing titles, so offering a big contract was a given. How do you explain to fans that you let your
    NFL MVP leave in FA because you were lowballing him.

    6. Some of the other busts were later round guys like Sims who no reasonable
    person would expect to replace Hutch.

    7. Spencer is incredibly athletic but often injured and apparently dumb as a box of
    rocks.

    8. Branch isn’t a bust as a player…IF he stays healthy plays to his potential for the next few years
    we’ll forget about the LATE first round draft pick we traded for him.

    9. Look at all of the great picks they’ve made…and particularly in the 2nd and later. Look at the Free Agent signings…Jerevicius, TJ, JP, etc. How many Division Titles have we had
    the past five years….

    10. Look at this offseason…We’re really doing a terrific job of filling holes with our
    FA signings, and there may be more to come.

    11. We also have TEN draft picks this year…if we hit .333 on those picks, we’re going to be looking pretty damn good.

    12. So, if TR values his job, he’s going to be thinking long term success with this draft,
    because it’s the perfect time to rebuild given we have just cleaned house and overhauled
    the coaching staff.

    If we struggle next year, I think PA will attribute the struggles to coaching and roster changes rather than use TR as a scapegoat.

    And, PA is an extremely smart and shrewd businessman, so don’t believe for a minute
    that he’s not going to notice TR making short sighted draft choices to make himself
    look good in the short term, at the expense of the team’s long term success. Actually,
    I think that’s more dangerous to Ruskell’s longevity as a Seahawk than having
    another lackluster year.

  53. Dukeshire says:

    Franchising him will cost a hell of a lot more that 2.5 mil. So that’s not quite the same thing as a series of 1 year deals. In any case, I do expect Tapp’s continued development to produce a big year. This does not appear to be long term thinking on Ruskell’s part.

  54. Oh, really? I didn’t know franchising him would cost anything. I thought he’d take a pay cut to get franchised. :)

  55. Audible – I couldn’t disagree more with most of your assessments, but I don’t have the time to write why.

    For example, #4. A poison pill happened just a few years ealier b/w the Jets/Redskins with respect to Morton. It had happened. Anyone who was “shocked” by this is an idiot who doesn’t follow the NFL. Last I looked, Ruskell was in the NFL when it happened so he had no right to be “shocked” when it happened AGAIN.

    Must go back to work…

  56. HawkFromDay1 says:

    Rob Rang (the only one I trust in such matters) has Orakpo going to the Chiefs at #3 in his mock from 3/31.

    That’s the highest I have ever seen him.

  57. Dukeshire says:

    You seemed to imply that franchising him would be as easy as 2.5. Which I know, you know isn’t the case. Counting on that does not seem reasonible to me.

  58. BobbyK- if you remember correctly – the reason they were shocked was that the NFL had supposedly closed that loop hole because of the Jets deal.

    There were national guys who were saying that the contract would be thrown out by the NFL because of that.

    It is also interesting that it hasn’t happened since that Season. Did they finally close that option?

  59. Dukeshire says:

    “Audible – I couldn’t disagree more with most of your assessments, but I don’t have the time to write why.” I’m thinking the exact same thing.

  60. the3mitchells says:

    Now Denver are prepared to listen to offers for Cutler, what about Matt and our 4th for Cutler and and their 1st round pick?

    Seems its a win win for us, proven young replacement for Matt and we still get a decent 1st rounder.

  61. BobbyK, Dukeshire,

    I knew you guys would both disagree, and you may be right in your assessment.
    I admit that I can’t even come close to either one of you with my
    football or Seahawks knowledge, but it seems that I’m a little more objective than
    either one of you when it comes to Ruskell, Hutch, SA, Moreno, Rob Sims, etc…

    I really don’t think Ruskell is going to short change our future to save his job because
    I don’t believe his job is in jeopardy unless there is a total collapse this year. He’s had
    plenty of success, sprinkled with a few mistakes but I think overall he’s been doing
    a pretty damn good job. We’ll see what happens with the draft, but we’re positioned
    pretty well already.

  62. This will sound extremely stupid (what else is new from me, right?) but I bet Denver would (almost) rather have the #13 pick and a decent contract for that person over paying $60 million over 6 years for the #4 pick. Before some of you flip out and go psycho — I said almost. Common sense dictates that you want a higher pick, but when you combine that with the stupid salary structure of the top 5 draft picks, it makes you not want to have that pick unless there is a guaranteed franchise player available (like Tim Couch, Charles Rogers, Akili Smith, or Ryan Leaf).

  63. Audible – We are positioned well at this moment. I agree. Ruskell has done a decent job this off-season up to this point. For this, I am thankful. I’m looking forward to the draft.

  64. I know this will draw the wrath of many who don’t like hearing things over and over and over and over again, but I don’t see why anyone should be “objective” about Rob Sims. What’s there to be objective about? I realize there are definitely different degrees of worthlessness, but a spade is a spade too.

  65. Fredline says:

    FYI, latest from Rotoworld:

    Free agent CB Ken Lucas says the Bears did not make him a contract offer during his Tuesday visit with the team.

    The Chicago Tribune calls the Bears’ interest in Lucas “lukewarm.” Seattle is the other team pursuing Lucas and appears to have the upper hand.

  66. Dukeshire says:

    I will agree that I do not believe Ruskell would intentionally short change their future.

    And Bobby, we are not objective. LOL!

  67. anybody have dvd’s of the Hawks from the 80′s?

  68. Just me – No, they didn’t close the loophole and the Steelers used the transition tag last year on their LT. No one bit and the player re-signed with the Steelers. Supposedly the NFL owners privately discussed the entire Minny vs Seattle issue but the loop hole cannot be changed until the next CBA is written.

    NFLPA loves the language so they aren’t going to just give up that bargaining chip without something in return.

  69. I actually have a vhs tape from some game in the late 80s agains the Chargers.

    I don’t think Ruskell would “intentionally short change” the future. I don’t think that at all. I just think he would pass on a QB to take a guy who can contribute more immediately. Sure, it may not be in the best interest of the long term for the franchise, but drafting someone like an impact RB or DE instead of a QB for the future isn’t exactly saying “to heck with the future” either.

    That’s cool about Lucas. I hope he signs.

  70. I really don’t want to read up, on all the stuff you wrote but i really like Lucas, he was one of the first players i became a fan of (i’m 17, fan since 2003, i live in Denmark, if you wanted to know) I hope he signs we could use some qual’ depth at CB, even though i love Wilson, he don’t have the ideal height, and Jennings is a disapointment

  71. I think if the Hawks sould pick up Lucas, if they can come up with a reasonable 2-3 yr contract, don’t over pay him like they did with Grant, Russel, and TJ. PIcking up a playmaker at running back would be in the hawks best favor for the future. Even with a shorter lifespan, they can be productive for at least 7-8yrs, if not longer. Skipping Stafford doesn’t mean that the team is looking to succed now whether it hurts the it in the future or not. Stafford I think will be a produtive QB, but not the type that you want to build a team around. Pick up OL’s to protect Hass and he will be the best option for success the next 2-3 yrs. Wait till next year to pick up a QB. McCoy, Bradford, Tebow, etc will be there next year, and whoever imerges with them. The feild will be deeper, so the options will be better. Try to get the next Walt.

  72. Maybe if we wait long enough we can get Jake Locker!!! KIDDING!!!

  73. Dukeshire says:

    mocarob – No DVD, I still have a bunch on VHS though. Haven’t transferred them.

  74. I think I’m objective to a certain degree. If Ruskell does something good — I’ll give him credit and be happy (the ’05 draft was very good, even if Spencer has been a bust and Greene was even worse… Lofa, Hill, and Willis are 3 very good players). If he can get 3 very good players with our top 5 picks this year, I’ll be very happy.

    If he does something stupid, I’ll call him on it. I don’t think we should blindly support or oppose someone just for the sake of it (especially when he doesn’t have the track record of Super Bowl victories to give him a little extra leeway). As much as I’ve criticized him in the past, he and I are on the same side — we both want the Seahawks to win Super Bowl XLIV.

  75. nighthawk2 says:

    “Rob Rang (the only one I trust in such matters) has Orakpo going to the Chiefs at #3 in his mock from 3/31.

    That’s the highest I have ever seen him.”

    Why would you trust him? This guy should have to take a drug test before he does a mock draft. They’re as weird as McFool’s mocks.

  76. tp10super10 says:

    HawkFromDay1, “Curry is a little too much of a Tampa-2 mike, EXACTLY like Lofa.”

    Not sure about that one. Curry is 6’3 256 and runs a 4.56 40 and plays a different position. Curry might be able to switch to a MLB in a 3-4 but you would not be able to take advantage of his coverage skills and playmaking ability against the pass like he could in our cover 2 as an OLB. Curry would, however, look fantastic lined up next to Lofa using his range and explosiveness.

    As for BobbyK and Dukeshire…I enjoy your opinions. All you are doing by sharing them is showing that you care and are passionate. Have I have read a post from you guys, Nighthawk, etc. and wanted to put a hole through my monitor? Of course. But you at least put some insight and new ideas into the mix. I don’t feel the disdain for Ruskell as some and we will probably differ on alot of thing, but I hate thinking that I am too negative on here, Even during a disagreement I hope to at least share something as I go.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0