Seahawks Insider

Friday practice report: Hawks ready for Cowboys

Post by Eric Williams on Oct. 30, 2009 at 1:15 pm with 76 Comments »
October 30, 2009 1:15 pm

The Seahawks worked out for about an hour and a half this morning in preparation for the team’s game against Dallas inside the team’s practice facility in Renton.

The team announced that linebacker Lofa Tatupu has been officially placed on the injured reserve after having surgery to replace a torn pectoral muscle, ending his season.

“I knew for a couple days it was coming, so I was prepared for it,” Mora said. “It’s unfortunate, but you’ve got to just keep marching on.”

Cornerback Marcus Trufant has been placed on the active roster, filling Tatupu’s spot.

Here’s the injury report.

For Seattle, C.J. Wallace (hamstring) is out. Sean Locklear (ankle) did not practice, and is listed as doubtful.

Matt Hasselbeck (ribs), Robs Sims (ankle) and Patrick Kerney (groin) all practiced and all are probable for Sunday.

For Dallas, CB Allen Rossum (hamstring) is out.

NT Jay Ratliff (knee) was a limited participant in practice and is questionable.

And RB Marion Barber (thumb), S Gerald Sensabaugh (thumb) and LB DeMarcus Ware were full participants in practice and are probable.

Mora said the plan for Trufant is still to play in the team’s nickel package in passing situations, and Josh Wilson will get the start at cornerback.

“We have a plan in mind, but it could change as we go,” Mora said about Trufant’s situation. “The one thing we don’t want to do is come out the game saying we wish would have played Tru more. So we’re very conscious of that.”

Mora went on to say that Trufant had a good week of practice and feels good.

As far as the offensive line, the starters are Damion McIntosh at left tackle, Rob Sims at left guard, Chris Spencer at center, Max Unger at right guard and Ray Willis at right tackle.

Mora said that Steve Vallos will be the backup for the interior positions, but he did not give a backup for the tackle spots, saying that he had confidence both tackle would make it through the game OK, including the team’s fourth starting tackle this season in McIntosh.

“We’ll deal with it if it comes up,” Mora said about the backup plan for tackle. “I mean we have a plan, but we’re not going to have to use that plan. We’re going to have five guys in there, and it’s going to be consistent, it’s going to be great.”

Categories:
Notes from practice
Leave a comment Comments → 76
  1. BobbyAyala says:

    Dude, why is Sean Locklear still out? Didn’t he and Josh Wilson suffer the same injury during the same week?

    Way to earn that paycheck, baby. Keep up the good work.

  2. I agree with bobby. totally whack.

  3. Locklear and Wilson both had “high ankle sprains”, but I think the similarity ends there. Wilson is a small lightweight guy who healed fast, but Locklear outweighs Wilson by more than 100 pounds. Note that Walter Jones at 320+ lbs was slow coming back from a lower-body injury also.

    McIntosh should be able to do a decent job this week, especially since Sims is back and practiced all week next to him. McIntosh could be a strong run blocker for us.

    Regardless, its on our defense to step up and slam the cowboys hard for us to have a chance in this game.

  4. Dukeshire says:

    Thank you Stevo, sometimes the myopia here is mind numbing.

  5. Norseman says:

    every passing situation from 2nd down on, Curry should be rushing the passer. dropping him into coverage isn’t the best use of his abilities, and i swear to god, if i see it again on 3rd and passing, i’m gonna slap gus bradley.

  6. bird_spit says:

    Hawthorne will rock.

  7. hawkdawg says:

    MaCintosh’s inside won’t be the problem. His problem will be his outside, where Ware lurks, and Sims won’t be able to help him there. Maybe they’ll keep Carlson in a lot, again…

  8. Agreed, hawkdawg, and I hate seeing Carlson kept in to block. It takes a big component away from offense. Its up to McIntosh and our RBs to show they can handle the pass rushers wihtout keeping Carlson in to block. Here’s hoping.

  9. So the Seahawks are missing starters at only 2 positions:

    LT – its a mystery how this will go
    MLB – I think Hawthorne is going to be a great player and in some cases better than the now too big Tatupu

    This is probably one of the healthier teams in the league at this point. There should be no excuses now.

    That being said, I go into this game just hoping they keep it within 20. Too many blowouts in the NFL nowadays and I dont want this to be one of them. I think this team lacks talent on the offensive side, but the defense could be great if they don’t spend the whole game rushing 4..

  10. Dukeshire says:

    The biggest problem I had with Knapp keeping Carlson in to block against the Cards is that they would motion him away from Williams way too many times. I still don’t get that. Towards the end of the game they would just line him up in the backfield, as you may remember. He is such a vital part of their offense, as Stevo points out, I won’t mind if he’s in just long enough to just chip Ware and still get into the seam quickly.

  11. I know I am a big homer, but I am a little bit excited that we may be able to generate a rushing attack on Sunday. McIntosh next to Sims on the O line are two big strong bad dudes. This is not Williams and Vallos we’re talkin about here. I want to see them mow people down and run the football.

  12. Owens should be the TE-L blocker to slow down Ware. Hopefully, Carlson can get some receptions this week as Willis blocks Spears.

  13. “Agreed, hawkdawg, and I hate seeing Carlson kept in to block. It takes a big component away from offense. Its up to McIntosh and our RBs to show they can handle the pass rushers wihtout keeping Carlson in to block. Here’s hoping. ”

    Maybe we have to keep two RB’s in more often on passing downs, leaving one of them to double up on Ware if he’s getting by McIntosh, and the other for blitz pick-up – or does that not make sense?

  14. princeaden says:

    Ive read where Griffith is an excellent run blocker. Is he equally as good in pass protection? I remember Mack Strong and John L. absolutely blowing up LB’s as they were trying to blitz. It may be a dumb question, but can he stay in the backfield to help and let Carlson out on a route?

  15. “This is probably one of the healthier teams in the league at this point. There should be no excuses now”

    Where do you get that sentiment from? We’re still on our 4th string LT, back-up RT, our pro-bowl MLB is out, and our QB is playing w/broken ribs.

    And all of the above I would agree are the kind of things that happen to any team, with the exception of the LT position, which as we all know, is a key one.

  16. Dukeshire says:

    That’s interesting about running the ball against them. The ‘Boys rank in the bottom 10 in the league in passing yards and passing touchdowns allowed. Perhaps the passing game will open up running lanes but I think their success will come from throwing first. In the end I couldn’t care less which brings a victory. My biggest concern comes on defensive scheme. Romo lives and dies on mid / deep passing attack and that has been where the ‘Hawks have been most vulnerable. They’ve been playing that soft zone with the corners playing off the receivers a lot and Romo will eat that area of the field alive if they aren’t able to keep pressure on him. I’m not talking about jail break blitzes but I am saying that the front four needs to apply constant pressure with stunts and blitzes from Curry and or Hill or Wilson when he’s in the slot or even bring Babs. Mixing up looks isn’t enough if they don’t bring an extra pass rusher to knock the hell out of Romo. You don’t always have to get the sack for a pass rush to be successful. He cannot be allowed to get comfortable back there.

  17. Dukeshire says:

    princeaden – Not dumb. Smart. He’s a better blocker (especially in the run) than Schmitt at this point. Now that he’s healthier, his role should get back to what it was to start the season.

  18. Willis is a better RT than Lock. Just me.

  19. norseman – Zzzzz…

  20. “my biggest concern comes on defensive scheme. Romo lives and dies on mid / deep passing attack and that has been where the ‘Hawks have been most vulnerable”

    Agreed – i remember our last game against them, and Romo looked like he was having a passing practice, he had SO much time all game, and they easily picked us apart. I feel like with Curry, and with Jackson/Tapp playing better, along with Kerney, we’ve got more pass rush than we used to – that will be key tomorrow. And tackle Miles Austin — several of the huge gains I’ve seen him have on the highlights look like they could’ve been stopped short if people had been better on the tackling. I looked him up – he’s listed at 6′ 3″ 215, I didn’t realize he was that big.

  21. BobbyAyala says:

    I’d love to see Lock get mad at anything other than a girlfriend after a night out, suck it up and get the heck on the football field. High ankle sprain my butt, Locklear is the second most important player on the team and his attitude is that of long reliever.

  22. Sorry, BobbyAyala, I didn’t realize you were such close friends with Locklear that you know his attitude and what he’s thinking.

  23. This is the first game of the season where I really haven’t analyzed match-ups. I simply have no faith in the line to allow the rest of the team to have a chance to win. And I’m to the point where I don’t get mad at the bad plays. All I can expect is a comical attempt to try and block the likes of Ware. The only thing that gets me through is knowing guys like Daryn Colledge and Jahri Evans are scheduled to become FAs and players like Mike Johnson and Jon Asamoah will be available in the draft. As long as there’s hope, there’s something to look forward to because Sundays isn’t something that’s overly fun anymore. Oh, sure, I’ll be watching all 60 minutes and rooting for the team, but I’m not so emotionally invested in the W/L because it’s tough expecting a win when you know a unit will destroy a team. I have no idea how Matt Hasselbeck can get through his days knowing he’s going to get pummled. I guess making millions helps things, but the games have to be demoralizing when you’re getting killed again. Stranger things have happened and this unit could turn it around to allow the line to be a respectable unit… but if I were a betting man, I wouldn’t put too much money on it happening. I’d give anything to be wrong. I hate giving up on a season when the next one is so far away. Can it be that McIntosh will be a significant upgrade at LT and be a good run blocker? And he’ll combine with Sims to form a good run blocking side? And Spencer/Unger will improve as they work together? And Willis/Unger too? And then we slowly build a little confidence to the point the unit gets good and then we’re kool-aid bound (geeze-I hope so!!!). I just don’t want to get my hopes up too much again because the crash really sucks. Oh well… we’re Seahawk fans… we’re pretty used to things that you don’t want to get used to…

  24. Not that I know Locklear, but after the girlfriend choking incident… I didn’t think there was any way Ruskell would resign him. Afterall, Ruskell didn’t draft him either. I assume, the girlfriend incident aside, he must have been a pretty good dude for TR to resign him. If he was a character cancer, I doubt he’d have attempted to resign Lock.

  25. Hasselbeck can have time in the pocket and the offense may still not be able to move the ball. I look at the Seahawks WRs and RBs as a bunch of number 2 guys on most teams in terms of skill level and that seems to be Ruskell’s MO in building the offense.

    The running game stinks because the RBs stink. Instead of picking up the rejects of other teams, Ruskell could actually have drafted a decent RB instead of all the defensive picks.

  26. While I agree that our RBs aren’t good (I do like Forsett as a 2nd option though) I disagree about the tandem of TJ/Burleson. Granted, neither is a true #1, but both are better than a lot of #2 WRs in the league and that at least averages out to above average. I think our starting WRs are the least of our worries on offense. And I don’t think we’d have a good running game if we had a great runner. The line is simply that bad. Adrian Peterson certainly would improve our running game, but I still don’t think our running game would be great if he were on our team. And if our line could give Matt ample time to throw, our WRs would have time to get open (like they do on most good teams). Peyton Manning and Reggie Wayne would be a shell of themselves this season if they had our line “blocking” for them.

  27. While most can agree that AP is a great runner, lets not forget that he has the luxary of running behind Bryant McKinnie and Steve Hutchinson. Both of whom are a 1,000 times better than any lineman we have. They have a better LT, LG, C, and RG than we have (although I’d take Unger in ’10 than what the Vikes have this year). The only position we have along the OL that’s better than what AP has is Willis at RT.

  28. Dukeshire says:

    I think you’re overvaluing Willis just a bit. He’s yet to develop into an adequate pass blocker. He’s shown a vulnerability to pure speed or quick, agile DEs. Whether it’s his knee that slows his lateral mobility or technique, I’m not quite sure. But in any case, he’s still rather one dimensional, but I still think he’s got more upside than he has show.

  29. Here’s our (potential) starting LT next season with our own #1 pick. My favorite part is where they talk about him being a perfect fit for the zone blocking scheme.
    Bryan Bulaga, T, Iowa
    From the website: http://www.fftoolbox.com/nfl_draft/profile_display.cfm?Prospect_ID=2088

    And here’s our (potential) starting LG next season with our Denver #1 pick.
    http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=78247&draftyear=2010&genpos=OG

    And our (potential) starting RG next season with our own 2nd rounder:
    Jon Asamoah, OG, Illinois
    http://www.nfldraftbible.com/Players/List/2010-Big-Board/Jon-Asamoah.html

    Bang… boom… we have a LT, LG, C, RG that will be together for over 10 years. Talk about continuity all you want… well draft a crew of rookies and prove that you’re willing to let them play together for that long of a time period.

    Just 1 option (without FA dollars on OL).

  30. Seahawks2620 says:

    I actually feel as if our line is going to do pretty damn good. This line seems a hell of a lot better then the line that played against Arizona. I think that Mcintosh will do fine. It’s going to be fine

  31. The line wasn’t bad for pass blocking until the Arizona game when they played with Kyle Williams. The line played well with Frye at LT (again pass blocking), except for when Wallace created his own pressure and made a 3 man rush look like 10 guys coming in at once.

    So we can’t blame the line for the team’s offensive inadequacies prior to the Arizona game.

    Drew Bledsoe with the Patriots was another QB who made his line look terrible. His slow release and decision making caused him to take far more sacks than he should have. But everyone blamed his line. Tom Brady came in, played behind the same line and was rarely sacked.

  32. I have been so guilty of drinking the team kool aid but I’m done. I’m seeing the OL for what it really is. Go ahead and analyze each player and how good they are with respect to every other player in the NFL at their specific position.

    We are what we are at LT. Even if Lock is healthy and not getting hurt… he’s simply an average to perhaps below average LT.
    Sims has elevated his game to being an average LG (who gets injured too much).
    Spencer has not elevated his game to being an average to above average Center (who is injury prone). He’s not as bad as he used to be, but he’s still not good.
    Unger is not in the upper half of RGs THIS year. He WILL be in the upper half of Centers next year though. There is hope. If he remains at RG next year, I still don’t see him above average at that position. His skill set is better suited as a C.
    Willis is an average RT. Very good run blocker, below average in pass protection.

    With that being said, we have 2 average players, and the rest is below average. I don’t understand how there can be so much optimism for this unit. I want to be good and hope we can be… but I look at the hand we’ve been dealt and don’t see how we can be good.

  33. ryanryan says:

    I’m sorry if I restate a past post, I didn’t have time to read them all…we have got to run right at Ware and see if McIntosh’s strength (run blocking) will be able to beat Ware in the run game, his (McIntosh) range isn’t great anymore but I hope he can still maul. Maybe I’m crazy to hope.

  34. BobbyAyala says:

    Not speaking to Lock’s character, speaking to his pain threshold. Anyone remember that Detroit opener in ’06 when Walt wrecked his ankle, came off the field, Ashworth got destroyed on the next play and Matt went down. Walt came right back onto the field the next play and refused to come back out. Or how about Thanksgiving last year when he played on his tore up knee.

    Holmgren said it all the time, “The guys have to know the difference between hurt and injured.”

    That’s all I’m saying about Locklear. He’s making LT money to sit on the bench and nurse and ankle sprain while his QB with a cracked rib is getting clobbered.

  35. BobbyAyala says:

    Bobby, do you really see Ruskell drafting a franchise LT after the cash they threw at Locklear? Obviously, that was the signing that was to answer Walt’s departure. I can see them adding tackle depth, but I don’t think there’s any way they don’t consider Lock the future at the position.

  36. BobbyAyala says:

    “The running game stinks because the RBs stink.”

    They really don’t. All of these guys are the anti-Alexander, they find a hole and run North and South. Julius is a good, quality running back. They’re playing behind a mediocre college-level line. You can’t blame the RB’s, you just can’t.

  37. Dukeshire says:

    Bobby – Where is all this coming from? Where are you reading “so much optimism”? For the better part of two years this has been a relative patchwork unit. Leading into this past draft, addressing the line was all we seemed to talk about for months, yourself included. How can you of all people, be so surprised? Now, the good news is that the interior is healthy, for the time being, for the first time since week one, I believe. Will they stay that way so they can gel and grow together? Odds are decidedly against that. I guess when the reality of a situation finally sinks in the natural reaction is to jerk in the extreme opposite direction. Come back to the center, bub.

    BobbyA – I’m not Bobby but my opinion is that I do not see Ruskell drafting a franchise LT. That’s because Ruskell won’t around for the 2010 draft. I cannot see him being resigned to a new contract. I understand he has just put his coach in place but signing him to a 1 or 2 year contract puts a deadline on their return to serious contention, for all intents and purposes. That’s not an ideal situation. Conversely, I really don’t see him being signed to a 5 + year deal either for a series of mismanagement decisions regarding this roster, overall. I think unless there is a significant turn around with this team this year (that means playoffs) he is gone.

  38. nightwulf says:

    Bobby,
    I’ve said before, and I still think that Lock is an above average RT, he is NOT a LT (and I’m hoping the team has figured that out), Sims is a good back up LG, Spence is a good back up C Unger ought to be starting there. Willis is a good back up RT, and Lock ought to be starting there…so:

    LT LG C RG RT
    (nobody) (nobody) (unger) (nobody) (Locklear)
    (nobody) (sims) (Spencer) (nobody) (willis)

    Is what our depth chart is, if we want a decent line…We can’t fix this mess with JUST FA, or JUST the draft…for that matter, we most likely can’t fix it in just one year…I still like the idea of throwing big money at Evans, that will give us a VERY solid right side..(who says we can’t run to the right, instead of the left) Pick up a pair of LT’s in the draft, and draft or FA a lg, and we may have something worth building on…until then, were looking at high draft picks…

  39. Dukeshire says:

    “You can’t blame the RB’s, you just can’t.” Indeed, how can JJ and Forsett really be measured running behind this unit and all the different combinations they have had to run out there?

  40. Duke – Scroll up 7 AND 8 posts above this one. That’s the “optimism” I was referring to. And, yes, we have all been screaming our heads off for a long time about our OL. I think I’ve finally snapped. I can’t take it anymore.

  41. Now it’s 9 AND 10 posts above this one.

  42. BobbyAyala says:

    Duke, I’m with you. I just hope Mr. Allen sees it the same way. It’s interesting that Ruskell hasn’t been re-upped, and I think it says something.

  43. Dukeshire says:

    Oh, I see that. Well, I wouldn’t call that optimism exactly. That was more stupidity, than anything. (No offense to anyone.)

  44. nightwulf – I disagree. I think we can fix the OL in simply one off-season. And in all honestly, I think our current entire team, minus the OL, is good (granted there are some FAs at the end of the season).

    We’re going to probably cut Kerney and Branch. A Walt retirement (if he can’t play) will save another large chunk of change. And the cap is going up again next year.

    I think we can sign both Colledge and Evans. Colledge is a well above average at LG (and young) and Evans (even younger) is the best RG in the NFL. Unger moves to Center. And our own #1 pick is used on Bryan Bulaga. That leaves Lock at RT and Willis to replace him in week 4 because he got hang nail and had to miss a month.

    Done.

    Signed.

    Sealed.

    Delivered.

    Dominant OL once again (and happy days here again). Where there’s a will, there’s a way. This leaves us with the Denver #1 and our own #2 to take anyone on offense or defense to make this team better. There is no excuse not to fix this mess in 1 off-season.

  45. Dukeshire says:

    I’m not terribly surprised he hasn’t been signed or read too much into it simply because he (and his staff I presume) are / is proponents of letting players contracts run all the way out before resigning them. It stands to reason he would follow his own lead, so to speak.

  46. Dukeshire says:

    Regardless of who this team brings in, no matter how talented they are, remember, it will take time for them to learn to work as a single unit and play cohesively.

  47. Teams with average or worse offensive lines have won nearly all of the Super Bowls the past 10 years. The only exception I can think of was the 2007 Giants.

  48. I agree. But my point is that I want talented guys to work together instead of a bunch of clows that Ruskell seems to favor. And all of them are young enough so there’s no reason they can’t grow old together.
    Our youngest player would be 22, the oldest 28.
    LT Bulaga
    LG Colledge
    C Unger
    RG Evans
    RT Willis
    There’s no reason that the LT/LG/C/RG couldn’t play 6-8 years together.

  49. BobbyA: With all the difficulties this year on the offensive line, BobbyK’s thoughts on the draft really look pretty plausable… Think of our receiver situation last year… horrible.. similiar to this yr’s offensive line.. look what happened… a free agent and our 3rd draft pick, making us really strong there…
    I’d be totally surprised if we don’t “overkill” the offensive line in the next draft…
    There will be no false expectation of Walt coming back… If he does, it will just be a plus… Remember, when Rusk took over, we had no LB’s… our LB position now is VERY competitive, despite even the injuries there… BobbyK’s direction looks pretty much the history of how Rusk goes after things…

  50. When/If Locklear ever gets back, I think the line you see is the line Ruskell intends to go with in the future:

    LT – Locklear
    LG – Sims
    C – Spencer (or Unger?)
    RG – Unger (or Locklear?)
    RT – Willis

    And I think these guys are actually good enough to win with, but we won’t be able to tell on Sunday with Locklear missing against Ware.

  51. Super Bowl 43 – Steelers didn’t have a good OL.

    Super Bowl 42 – You’re right, the Giants had a good one.

    Super Bowl 41 – Jeff Saturday probably should have been MVP of that game. He is/was a stud Pro Bowl Center. Manning was flanked by two solid guards (at least above average) and Glenn was one of the better LTs in the NFL (played in the ’05 Pro Bowl). This line was definitely an asset.

    Super Bowl 40 – This line, led by Alan Faneca, was definitely well above average. This line had 2 players play in the Pro Bowl (and in the season before, the Steelers had 3 players from their OL play in the Pro Bowl).

    Super Bowl 39 – If I remember correctly, this line was solid. It may not have been great, but it wasn’t merely “average.”

    Super Bowl 38 – See above comment regarding Patriots and SB 39.

    Super Bowl 37 – That Bucs OL sucked and I had no clue how they pulled it together and played that well down the stretch. No inclination they would pull it together they way they did. They weren’t that good. They weren’t very good early in the season, nor the season before or after. But I do remember how great they were down the stretch. Very confusing. I would give anything to type this about our OL at this point next year.

    Super Bowl 36 – Same old Patriots above average OL (did have a Pro Bowler in this season).

    Super Bowl 35 – Odgen is/was one of the top 3-5 OL in the history of the league and he was in his prime. The rest of the line wasn’t a liablity.

    Super Bowl 34 – Pace is/was one of the top 3-5 OL like Odgen. And the rest of the line was good.

    Super Bowl 33 – Broncos had 3 of their OL make the Pro Bowl. This doesn’t sound average to me.

    The pattern is that teams who win the SB usually have a good OL. I would go so far as to say that more teams have won the Super Bowl with a crappy QB than teams that have won the SB with a crappy OL. So, pabuwal, I have to wholeheartedly disagree about the last 10-11 Super Bowl winners not having very good offensive lines.

    And even if we could get an average OL… that’s fine… but I am a firm believer in having that one offensive lineman who needs to be great… that one guy, surrounded by average players… who you know you can run behind on 3rd and 1 and you’re going to make it. The closest thing we have is Ray Willis. That’s not bad, but it’s certainly a far fetch from having Hutch to run behind. Walt was a better overall player, but Hutch was better on 3rd and 1. Together they were unstoppable in ’05.

  52. Pab… remember that we have 2 Number 1′s next year… That alone will provide a unique position for bartering (up, down,etc)… I just can’t believe we’d throw away the opportunity to solidify the OL after this season…… The Hawks need to sell tickets ongoing, if they miss this unique opportunity, Rusk will be gone in a heartbeat… I’m sure he knows that..

  53. BobbyAyala says:

    “BobbyK’s thoughts on the draft really look pretty plausable” I agree, but I’d be a lot happier with Bobby in Renton than the circus clown that’s currently there.

    I’m thinking we’ll pick up a corner, a linebacker, a safety and three mediocre OL at the end of the draft come April.

  54. nightwulf says:

    Bobby, the line CAN be fixed in one year, but that depends on a lot of things going our way: Evans being willing to sign here, ditto College (or however his name’s spelled), drafting low enough that we can get our stud OT, and still, with all that, we’ll only have one decent back up T (willis)…Suppose Barry’s available, but our first choice at Tackle is gone…do we go with BPA, or need? Suppose that Jake Locker declares, and we get Barry with our first pick, and Locker’s still there when we have our second, do we pass on him? Would a draft of Berry, Locker and a second round LT (assuming we get what we want out of FA, despite other teams desires) work for you?

  55. wulf – don’t get soft on me:) YOU, more than anyone on this blog, including myself, were psycho about adding to the OL last off season. I remember the posts. And nothing has changed, except ANOTHER wasted season thanks to our OL sucking donkey crap.

  56. bigmike04 says:

    I do have one thought will the seahawks bring in free agents for LB dept?

  57. nightwulf says:

    LOL, Bobby, not getting soft, just looking at reality…if Evans IS the best available G, it’s a fairly safe bet that we WON’T be the only team bidding for his services…We could end up with another Deilman fiasco on our hands…Do I blame Ruskell for that one? Not at all, he offered more than SD did, the guy just wanted to stay with his team. We CAN get it done in a year, but lots of things have to go our way…Would I pass up on Berry AND Locker to do it in one? Ask me that ten times, and I’ll have ten different answers…(I DO think that Locker will go back for his senior year, though) If we can only get one good guard in FA, would I pass on Berry to get two tackles and a G in the draft? I would definitely consider it. If we can’t get ANY of the good FA linemen? You bet, linemen with our first four picks…

  58. Dukeshire says:

    BobbyK – When you make a general statement about the o-line like “they sucked” what are you basing it on? The fact that they played well enough to propel an offense to the Super Bowl? That it didn’t have 3 prow bowlers? And if so, how then are teams winning Super Bowls with lines that “suck”? Let me answer that; they aren’t. And if the argument can be made that they are, isn’t that an inditement of the Seahawks coaches and front office? Why then in god’s name are you willing to give Ruskell another contract? Can we please move on from this for a bit. There is a game this weekend you know.

  59. The ’06 through this years line have all “sucked.” The run blocking has been sub par in each of those seasons and I think you’ll have to agree. In each year, I have had no confidence in our unit on 3rd and 1. With the exception of the ’07 team, who did well in pass protection, all of the other offensive line play from all the other years with respect to pass protection has been below average. In conclusion, when you can’t run block very well and can’t pass protect very well, that’s what I consider bad.

    And please don’t ask me why I think Ruskell should get a 1 year extention. I have no basis for this and it’s embarassing to admit. I have no defense. My only stipulation in his 1 year deal would be that he can be shot if he doesn’t fix the OL.

  60. nighthawk2 says:

    Locker sucks. Almost as much as this current o-line we have. I can tell you what happens if MacIntosh or Willis get hurt, Unger will be playing tackle and Vallos will be in at guard in his place.

    If Ruskell is still the GM when we draft next April it doesn’t matter about two 1st round picks, he’ll blow them. That guy cannot judge o-line talent and I still think he looks down on offensive linemen and that guards are a dime a dozen. Since his contract expires at the end of the season, and this team is going to picking about where we did last year, I’m hoping there is a good chance they tell him to hit the highway and will bring in a good GM this time who will weed out the deadwood Ruskell drafted/signed and get this team back on track. It’s going to take more than one off season though.

  61. BobbyK: “My only stipulation…..”

    ~~~~~ LOL!!!!! ~~~~~

  62. There are quite a few quality players scheduled to become FAs this upcoming off-season. Yes, some will get franchised, but many won’t.

    We are going to have cap dollars to play with (and reasons stated before). And with three high picks, we have a chance to get a few impact players.

    I think it can/should get fixed in one off-season. There’s no reason we can’t be a Super Bowl frontrunner in ’10.

    If the Jahri Evans at RG situation becomes another Kris Dielman, it’s not the end of the world. And if Daryn Colledge stays in Green Bay to play LG, it’s not the end of the world. There are plenty of other options. Marcus McNeil is a good, young LT and is going to be a FA. I suspect he’ll be franchised though. There seems to be three good guards who will be available in the draft. I’m certain they will be there when we make our Denver pick and our second rounder. And between Okung/Bulaga, one of them most certainly will be there when we pick with our own first rounder.

    And if we do get “burned” by the FA OL, we can use FA dollars on the other positions so we don’t have so many needs besides the OL. Aaron Kampman would look great at LDE. There also seem like 4 guys who play FS who will be available.

  63. hawkdawg says:

    Locker does not suck. He’s not ready for the pros, but he does not suck. His tools are outstanding, and if he declares I can just about guarantee that some team is going to draft him in the first round on his potential. If Josh Freeman gets drafted in the first round, Locker doesn’t? Preposterous.

    But I don’t think he’ll declare.

  64. Right now I’m watching the Indiana at Iowa game. Iowa has an offensive LT (#79 Bryan Bulaga) I really like. Quick feet, good balance. Might be avaliable in the second round.

  65. Seahawks fans became really spoiled by Walt and Hutch.

    I’m not sure if any NFL team ever had two HOFers playing side-by side through their prime years, maybe a few, maybe none. That’s what the Seahawks had and we need to accept it was a rare, rare event that is nearly impossible for any GM to plan or repeat. All the best GMs draft guys year after year they hope might be another Walt or Hutch, but it rarely happens. Face it, there is a lot of luck involved.

    Our offensive line will be very good again. Healing the players we have, developing the players we have, and adding a couple new good players can produce a top notch offensive line.

    In the years we had Walt and Hutch, did you notice that Other Teams won the Super Bowl every year? Why? They had offensive lines that were inferior to ours, but they were better teams top-to-bottom. Our defense is not superior top-to-bottom to the one we had in 2005. Improve a few positions (including but not only offensive line) a couple more steps and we will be back on top.

    As the injuries heal and this starts to happen, I think Ruskell’s overall plan is going to start looking pretty smart.

  66. I meant to say: “Our defense is NOW superior top-to-bottom to the one we had in 2005.”

  67. and the only way to judge the team Ruskell built is comparing it to the team we had in 2004.

  68. The Raiders come to mind with Upshaw and Shell on their left side.

    Super Bowl winners are good top-to-bottom or else they wouldn’t have made it that far. They are usually good at all positions.

    We all have different philosophies on how we would build a winner. Mine is franchise QB and good OL. From there, I’d mix and match with trying to be good all over but realizing it can’t always happen. I just don’t think you can skimp.

    No matter how hard we try, we’ll never have a left side better than Walt/Hutch, but that doesn’t mean we can’t get good players. And we certainly can improve from the right side of what we had in ’05. And the natives are going to come out in full force with their hatchets on this one, but Robbie wasn’t a “real” Pro Bowler all by himself in ’05. He was an above average C who played on a team who had a runner with great stats and road the coattails of Walt/Hutch and Shaun’s numbers to the Pro Bowl. He was a fine player and I’m glad he was on our side (the continuity was huge b/w our linemen) but if he would have played the exact same way that year for a 5-11 team, there’s no way he would have sniffed the Pro Bowl. Kind of like Tez in the 90s. That guy was the best for a period of time but he never got talked about like he would have if: A. He played in New York or: B. The Seahawks would have won. And I’m used to people taking what I say and using it in a way that I didn’t mean, so I’ll wait for the “I can’t believe you think Robbie sucked” comments and know there’s no way in hell I thought he was a bad player.

    I’ve been watching the Iowa game to see Bryan Bulaga and he looked fine (so did their RT). I’d love to have him at LT in ’10. I only saw it on commercials of the Nebraska game though so it’s not like I watched his every snap.

  69. Dukeshire says:

    “Super Bowl winners are good top-to-bottom or else they wouldn’t have made it that far. They are usually good at all positions.” That is in direct conflict with your Super Bowl champions o-line break down above. And speaks to my points earlier in reference to that list.

  70. nightwulf says:

    Bobby, I don’t think we need much in the way of “building”…The D is pretty much there, (we’ll always be a piece or two away from perfection) The Receiving corps is there, the QB is there, the backfield is an unknown…the only place where we need a lot of work is the O line…

  71. I really hate the zone blocking system. I would rather the Hawks bring in bigger, drive blocking O linemen and have them take tighter splits.

    OT Trent Williams, Kyle Calloway, Bryan Bulaga

    OG kMike Lupati, Jon Asamoah, Mitch Petrus

    center JD Walton, Ted Larsen

  72. princeaden says:

    I’m hoping with all this talk about the o-line, the line we are going with tomorrow comes with some attitude. Maybe DMac brings some Nasty and it will rub off on Sims and Spencer and co. (for the record, Willis already has plenty of Nasty) and we can suprise some people. If they can knock the Cowboys off the ball a little and have a little running room, it will open the seams for the receivers and Matt and the offense could enjoy some success. Of course, the Defense will need to play with some serious enthusiasm. A couple TO’s and a bounce or two our way and this could be a turning point. We’re as healthy as we’ll probably be all year(Locklear not withstanding) so there’s no better time than now to start turning this around. Kool-Aid………… Anyone???????????

  73. One writer writes that most SB winners the last 10 years didn’t have very good OLs. My analogy was to dispute that you DO need a good OL. But most SB winners are USUALLY pretty good all around.

    USUALLY

    Not sure what part is isn’t understood? Every team in the history of mankind has had strengths/weaknesses… but the champions normally have more strengths than weaknesses and the weaknesses usually don’t suck that bad (but some do). And, no, I’m not going to define “suck.”

    All I know is that I’d rather have a good OL than a good group of LBs, DBs, WRs, etc. I’m not going to do the reseach to dispute, in the last 10 years, who had good units of this or that of the teams who have won SBs.

    Ahh, f-it… lets just get slaughtered tomorrow and draft some DBs and LBs next April. That would be fun.

  74. I wonder what’s going to happen today? We’re going to “upset” the Cowboys? We’re going to get slaughtered? At least we don’t have to wait too much longer to find out.

  75. Dukeshire says:

    What’s not clear was the point you were trying to make. Arguing that you need to be strong on the line (either offense or defense) is a bit like arguing the sun will rise in the east. No s**t.

  76. Usually I do not read post on blogs, but I would like to say that this write-up very forced me to try and do so! Your writing style has been surprised me. Thanks, quite nice article.

*
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