Seahawks Insider

Hawks talked contract with WR Jackson

Post by Eric Williams on Aug. 20, 2010 at 3:17 pm with 69 Comments »
August 20, 2010 5:43 pm

Jason Cole of Yahoo Sports is reporting that the Seattle Seahawks have been granted permission by the San Diego Chargers to enter into preliminary contract talks with San Diego restricted free agent receiver Vincent Jackson.

The team confirmed that they did indeed receive permission to talk to Jackson’s representation recently and have had conversations, but it appears nothing is imminent in terms of the two sides reaching a deal.

This appears to be Seahawks general manager John Schneider following through with his stated plan of turning over every rock and going down every road to find players that can help this team.

Also, there’s no word yet on what type of compensation the Seahawks would have to provide to the Chargers in return for Jackson’s services. But bringing Jackson into the fold would give Seattle the big, explosive receiver they were looking for when they went after Brandon Marshall in free agency.

According to the report, no significant progress has occurred to this point. However, San Diego is committed to trading Jackson, who is believed to be seeking a long-term contract worth more than $9 million per season, because the team expects that he will not report at all this season.

The Broncos received a pair of second-round picks as compensation when they dealt Marshall to Miami.

If the Seahawks do bring Jackson in, you have to wonder about the status of veteran receivers T.J. Houshmandzadeh and Deion Branch.

Houshmandzadeh, who missed three days of practice to deal with a personal issue, is guaranteed $7 million this season. While Branch’s $5.47 million is only guaranteed if he’s on the 53-man roster to begin the regular season.

Both receivers provide similar skill sets as precise route runners with good hands who can work the middle of the field in the slot.


Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune has more on the Jackson talks.

According to Acee, a stalemate was reached because Jackson’s agents are asking for $30 million guaranteed on a five-year, $50 million contract.

Jackson reportedly wants a contract that will pay him more than the four-year deal with $24 million guaranteed that Marshall got from the Miami Dolphins in March.

Jackson certainly looks the part. At 6-foot-5, 230 pounds the 27-year-old would be the down-the-field threat Seattle is looking for. Jackson has topped 1,000 yards receiving the last, two season and scored 16 touchdowns over that period.

Jackson also has to serve a three-game suspension to start the season for violating the league’s policy on substance abuse.

Player movement
Leave a comment Comments → 69
  1. ruminator1 says:

    wonder if a trade is in the works. kinda sounds like someone is thinking that way. housh? branch?

  2. ruminator1 says:

    duh. master of ther obvious. sorry. but now i do wonder about the housh rumors.

  3. freedom_X says:

    Considering what Seattle gave up to SD to get Whitehurst – what would Jackson cost them? 3 1st round picks and a 15 million/year contract? :(

  4. 3-game suspension aside, I’d take Jackson over Housh and Branch ANY day.

  5. Houshmandzadeh, who missed three days of practice to deal with a personal issue, is guaranteed $7 million this season. While Branch’s $5.47 million is only guaranteed if he’s on the 53-man roster to begin the regular season.

    I think I see the answer to the question “Who goes if the Hawks sign Jackson?” in the excerpt above. Housh is who he is and his $7 mil is guaranteed, and Branch has to be on the 53-man to get his dough.

    Both probably have trade potential, but if it comes down to keeping one and setting the other free, give me Housh at a full season vs Branch and ……?

    And with Jackson on board? WOW!!! What a group of receivers!!

  6. Don’t get me wrong, I’d be jacked to get a WR like Jackson… but it sure would have been nice to get him in for the start of training camp so he and the QBs could have developed some chemistry.

    I wonder the asking price? I’d be all for giving up a 2nd rounder next year for him, but I don’t know about giving up a 1st rounder (as those picks can always be traded down to get extra picks… not that it always happens, but it allows for more options). I guess good things (Jackson) cost a good price though. It’ll be interesting to monitor this situation.

  7. Where there’s smoke there’s fire, and there is smoke coming Housh’s direction. It is interesting to watch TJ’s body language in practice, he gets annoyed if the QB is not throwing to him often enough. I think Coach Carroll likes his production, but doesn’t like his antics.

    Housh and a third round pick next year for Vincent Jackson.

  8. snydro22 says:

    It would take an unprecedented career year from Branch to come close to equaling the consistency and production of an average year from Vincent Jackson.

    I wonder if they would take our 2nd Rounder plus Branch in a desperate attempt to rid themselves of Jackson. Probably not, but at this point, they don’t have a ton of leverage with no replacement + no Jackson..

  9. “I wonder the asking price? I’d be all for giving up a 2nd rounder next year for him, but I don’t know about giving up a 1st rounder (as those picks can always be traded down to get extra picks… ”

    Feels like, at this point, with the Chargers complete inability to get him signed and into camp – that their leverage isn’t strong enough to get as much for him. Seahawks know the situation in SD, and know that they can go into the season with the group they’ve got. Would love to trade Housh or Branch, and some pick for him – we’ll see.

  10. snydro22 says:


    They already have our 3rd..

  11. We can’t trade a 3rd for Jackson; we don’t have one next year.

  12. ruminator1 says:

    another interesting rumor out of san diego regarding marcus mcneill, with lots of suggestions about what it would cost the seahawks:

  13. Exe_Aye_Aye says:

    If San Diego does not want to pay 9 mill per year to Jackson, there is no way they will take on Housh’s 7 mil per year.

    I like the effort, and if we could get a deal, would like a trade, but the bottom line is that we are to far away from contending to make a deal like this.

    The Hawks need to see how their guys develop this year, before making that big push to the next level.

  14. nevermind – snydro beat me to it.

  15. Dukeshire says:

    I wonder if Hill actors into a trade scenario? A couple months ago I don’t know that I would have been in favor of this. But I’ve grown to trust Carroll / Schneider and if they are willing to bring him aboard, then I’m more comfortable with it.

  16. freedom_X says:

    Jackson won’t be had for a 2nd rounder and trash. AJ Smith has already tasted what Seattle is willing to pay for a career backup who has never thrown a regular season pass in 4 years, and I really doubt he cuts Seattle a break here. Especially because Smith is one of those GM’s that loves to gloat about his trades – he won’t lose face by taking less, he’ll want lots more.

    In a “value” trade, I think it would take a 2nd (2011) and 3rd (2012) + a 5th (2011.) This is actual market value.

    With the Whitehurst trade setting the market for SD and Seattle, I would expect a 2nd in 2011 and a 2nd in 2012, or a 1st in 2011 and a 3rd in 2012, to be the minimum price.

    I don’t think SD wants any of Seattle’s existing receivers. They have no value in a SD-Seattle trade.

  17. Exe_Aye_Aye says:


    I am not sure you are correct about “market value”. Santonio Holmes was traded for a 5th rounder (also facing 3 game suspension) and is 2 years younger, with comparable stats in the last two years, though Jackson has more TDs.

  18. Dukeshire says:

    Seattle is not in the position it was when they were looking at Brandon Marshall. Golden Tate and M. Williams have helped improve their receiver corp to the point they aren’t desperate. That and the fact Schneider loves to build through the draft leads me to believe they won’t leverage future drafts by giving all those high profile picks away. Investigating this cannot hurt.

  19. Exe_Aye_Aye says:

    Agreed Duke,

    As far as the Whitehurst trade, I think the Cardinals were hot after him and drove up the price. What I do not know is if they played the Hawks, or if they truly wanted Mr. Clipboard.

  20. chuck_easton says:

    While everyone and their brother hopes any trade would include Branch I’m going to go forward and put 2 +2 together and get 12.

    Sando is not one to make idle comments. He has an talent for hearing the right things from the right people and he doesn’t go out and spread idle rumor and gossip. If he is hinting that Housh may not be a fit in Seattle then he has heard this from someone.

    I’ll bet we see a Housh for Jackson swap before we see a Branch (plus a lower round pick) for Jackson deal.

  21. freedom_X says:

    I was looking at the Marshall trade (2010 and 2011 2nds) and the Boldin trade (2010 3rd and 4th rounders.)

    Jackson is not as accomplished as Marshall, but he’s not as great a risk, either, and is potential is just as great if not greater. So my reasoning revolves around Jackson being a bit less costly in “real” terms, but Seattle having to pay the premium because AJ Smith skinned Seattle in the Whitehurst trade and is going to hold Seattle to that standard.

    On those terms, 2x 2nd rounders is actually cheap (IMHO, on the Whitehurst trade scale, Seattle would have to pay a 1st and 2nd round 2011 pick to get Jackson at least.) AJ Smith would really have to be desperate to let Seattle get away with less, and I don’t believe San Diego is that desperate.

  22. freedom_X says:

    I tell you what, if San Diego loves Houshmanzadeh and they can move him, in part to get Jackson, it would be a great way to recoup the price of the Whitehurst trade (can you tell I though Seattle overpaid for Whitehurst? :) )

  23. Dukeshire says:

    I tend to agree Chuck. For what it’s worth, if I too were to bet on it, I’d say it will be Housh not Branch, for good or ill.

  24. ruminator1 says:

    jackson, mcneill–hard to believe both of these could go down. housh, contract notwithstanding, has short term value and i think a deal including him and draft picks might work or maybe an arrangement along the lines suggested by freedom_x if no player comes from seattle.
    mcneil, though he had a neck injury, is a top tier performer (and supposedly healed though i don’t know how they know that), and i cannot see that seattle has enough to offer

  25. Exe_Aye_Aye says:

    I’d say neither. The problem between Jackson and the Chargers is that he wants 9 million per year.

    Housh makes 7 million per year, and is slower and older.


    Neither wide recievers will be traded to SD.

    However what about trading x amount of picks and the trading Housh to the Vikings? They wanted him bad last year, and with Harvin and his migraines, may be in the market (plus a bit desperate to make a push to the SB).

    Just a thought.

  26. seatowntp says:

    I say we trade Whitehurst and Housh for Vincent Jackson and our 3rd round draft choice. If SD doesn’t go for that, I’d say we pressure them with the fact that they raked us over the coals for Whitehurst, so they should give us Jackson for a discount!!!

  27. seatowntp says:

    Oh yeah! Yes, I am drinking.

  28. I’d rather stick with what we got than take a risk on VJ, give up draft picks, and pay him a ton of money.

    Unless Deion Branch is part of the trade, that is.

  29. snydro22 says:

    There is a 99% chance that nothing happens. But it’s still fun to speculate.

  30. maddog12 says:

    I’d like to now how long Seahawks have been talking to VJ’s agents. That would help us know what the chances are of VJ coming here. My thinking is the longer the time the greater the chance of an impasse. Plus we don’t know if VJ is interested in Seattle.

    Likely the price is too high… a ton of dough and draft picks. TJ to Minni has some possibilities. I think his mouth is too big for the new regime.

  31. freedom_X says:

    San Diego Tribune source (via Sando) says SD is asking for a single 2nd rounder.

    Clayton says that Seattle did the exploratory contract conversations with Jackson over a week ago, but never followed up with trade compensation talks with San Diego.

    Jackson is said to want more money than Marshall. I’d guess that, as much as anything, is why Seattle has put the matter on the back burner.

  32. I’d be fine with getting him for a 2nd round pick. Wanting to be paid more than Marshall is a joke. I wouldn’t pursue it anymore either.

  33. We continue to undersell and diss Branch… if healthy, the guys’ the real deal…
    I’m with Chuck & Duke, I believe its’ Housh involved and I feel he’s expendable adding the Jackson skills and the Tate, Butler, Williams and Obu developement…….. Clearly another step better….

  34. I wonder how many big free angency signings and trades it will take the Seattle Seahawks tolearn that it’s not a good idea with WR’s???? Burelson, Branch, Housh….all overpaid underperformers.

    Besides, does anyone think WR was even in the top 4 weaknesses on this team? If you’re going to trade for a high priced player, why not O-Line or D-Line which actually are weaknesses???

    Never, never, never pay big money for a WR or RB.

  35. DisplacedSeahawkFan says:

    I hope we don’t trade away our first round pick on anyone. We need a quarterback. I know it’s a long shot but depending on how our season goes Jake Locker may be available when we pick during the first round. It would probably sting more then the Steve Hutch fiasco if we give up our first round pick and Jake Locker, or a really good DE, is available but we can’t get him because we traded away our first rounder. I really like Whitehurst but is he a franchise quarterback? If it was up to me, I wouldn’t gamble away a first round pick this early hoping he is.

  36. tylakewalker says:

    Well said maltz88. I think Seattle is fine at receiver. I want to see the younger receivers get some minutes/experience anyway.

    I agree that the O-Line and D-Line are bigger weaknesses.

  37. snydro22 says:

    He’s good.

  38. maddog12 says:

    Thanks for the info freedom x.

  39. snydro22 says:


    Based on what? A game here or there between injuries? Certainly not based on any statistics.. Also, durability is a real, tangible thing.. When grading a player, it certainly is it’s own category which can’t be ignored.. Beyond that, inconsistency is another huge concern with Branch. He simply disappears for stretches at a time.

    I like him as a person, and think he is a good team guy, but I question his real value for this franchise, and would be nervous to guarantee that contract once again..

  40. Southendzone says:

    Giving a 1st round pick would for VJ would be a TERRIBLE move. The Hawks aren’t going to get better in 1 season, we need 2-3 years of smart drafting. This is NOT the season to go for broke.

    At least when we overpaid for deion branch, and gave a stupid contract to Shawn Alexander we could say that we’re going all out to try and win the superbowl. That’s not the situation here, and I would say even giving up a 2nd round pick for him is a questionable move.

  41. Jackson is good (as snydro said). And I agree that I’d rather get a big time OL/DL over a WR. However, Jackson is availalbe. Who is the pass rushing stud or the dominant offensive lineman who is available? There are none.

    However, Jackson is a better of a deep threat than Marshall, but he is not a better overall WR. Therefore, him wanting more than Marshall is a crock. If he comes off of him unrealistic demand of being paid more than Marshall, I am definitely interested in getting him for a 2nd rounder.

    More fuel for the conspiracy mongers: Housh is a California guy and I could see him wanting to be there.

  42. snydro22 says:

    Never pay for a WR?

    Sorry, but I take issue with that. I think if you look at the difference-making WR’s in the league, most of them are very well compensated. Guys like Randy Moss, Marques Colston, Steve Smith, Brandon Marshall etc. can simply change the game.

    So, you could say, “Never pay big money for the wrong WR,” but to say WR’s aren’t worth paying for is a bit naive.

    Of course, the right QB and the right system will always be a huge factor.. And both of those things should probably be in place before you make the investment.. See: Randy Moss, Oakland Raiders..

    RB’s, now you might be able to make a case against them..

  43. I question the people who say SD got the better of the Weirdbeard deal. We trade a 2nd rounder this past year (who we should have used for Golden Tate) and a 3rd rounder next year for Golden Tate (used with the SD 2nd rounder we received to move down) and a QB we’re all quite happy about; at least with respect to what we saw of him in the first game (and many want to dump Matt for already). I’m fine with that deal. I don’t care about “at the time” crap. I care about who got the better end of that deal at the time, I care about who gets the better end of the deal in the long run (granted, there’s no way of knowing a guy like Tate would fall that far down in the 2nd round).

  44. snydro22 says:

    BobbyK, you don’t have to look any further than the SD Chargers for a big time OL who may be available shortly – Marcus McNeill..

    Schefter reported they are nowhere close to getting McNeill into camp, even after a face-to-face meeting with AJ Smith..

    However, with our investment in Okung, we should probably looking more at stud guards and maybe a replacement for Locklear on the right side. Not that either player couldn’t play well on the right side, but pride and a whole lot of dollars are at stake..

  45. Yeah, I thought of McNeil, but, as you say, he’s not on the market yet (that we know of) and he’s a LT and that’s the one position on our line that we don’t necessarily want/need (I’d say Unger is solid but is his future at RG or C?).

    I think the Pats are in more of a pissing match with Mankins at LG and with the line being so important with respect to continuity, I think we have what we have on the OL and nothing will change there until the off-season.

  46. snydro22 says:

    Mankins would be ideal. And when I say ideal, I mean the absolute rock of a guard we are looking for. Dominant and durable. A little nasty but technically sound.

    If we had a chance to get Logan Mankins, I would say jump at it. He will be steady for us all through the rebuilding process and into the glory years. New England is out of their mind for not giving that man what he wants..

  47. snydro, you’re making my point for me.

    Neither Steve Smth nor Marques Colston have been traded for or FA aquisitions. They were both drafted and developed by their current teams.

    Moss worked in New England, but they gave a 4th rounder for him!

    Brandon Marshall was a big signing for Miami, and it cost them two 2nd round picks! There is no evidence that it will work for them yet.

    When was the last time a team paid a high price through either free agency or trade for a WR that had a BIG impact?

    While on the other hand think of the impact WR’s over the last few years and look how they got there:

    Fitzgerald, Andre Johnson, Miles Austin, Colston, Steve Smith, Reggie Wayne, DeShaun Jackson, Roddy White, Greg Jennings…..all drafted by their current teams.

    Wes Welker is about the only somewhat pricey WR that has made an impact over the last few years, and it cost that Patriots a 2nd & 7th round pick.

    My point is you can pay your own WR’s big money if they work in your system and team, but don’t pay a FA or trade a lot for a WR. It doesn’t work.

  48. Snydro… Can’t disagree the playing time is crap, but Branch sure can play when on the field… last sat’ game as a great example…. look at the tapes… He gets open….

    If we end up with him, Jackson and Carlson…. despite the naysayer’s here, Hass will have a ball!

  49. maltz…. I’m down here in FL right now and the scuttle-B is not too good on Brandon…. Apparently there’s already a significant attitude prob on field and in clubhouse….
    Miami trying to muffle things

  50. IBGoofy,
    That’s exactly what I’ve heard too. Something about him getting frustrated and booting a ball. I’d be surprised if it works.

    Our local history here should seal the deal on the WR theory. Who would have ever thought Joey Galloway would be a flop anywhere after the way he played in Seattle? Two 1st round picks Dallas gave up for him, and he couldn’t play anywhere close to the level he did here.

  51. snydro22 says:


    Over time, there have been plenty of examples. Even this year, guys like Santonio Holmes and Anquan Boldin could be difference makers.. And even Terrell Owens has been a difference maker outside of San Francisco. It’s not worth it to start listing them all over the past 30 years, but believe me there are definite examples.

    That said, I was specifically arguing your last sentence, maybe unfairly.. At some point, you have to pay to keep the WR’s you develop..

  52. ruminator1 says:

    i cited previously a rumor from san diego about mcneill. someone at least thinks it a good idea for seattle (but not for okungs spot, for loc.’s).

    as for branch, if no injury between now and sept, i would guess he will be a hawk. he has had a very good camp.

    on jackson, the incentive for SD is that he isn’t going to play for them this year.

  53. yellaman says:

    Whether its housh or Branch I don’t care if you can get jacjson at the right price- make the deal. I look at this as an upgrade in the talent department. also, housh and branch to me are the same player- both do really well in the middle of the field. We don’t need that he got Carlson for the middle of the field. We need a big, fast & fierce WR to play the outside WR position. Jackson is that kind of player. Now I don’t agree he should get 30 mil garaunteed and 50 mil $$$ contract so if the price is right I say get the deal done.

  54. Dukeshire says:

    The more I think about this the less chance I think there is anything happens, presuming the Chargers are adamant about a second round pick. Schneider likes to build through the draft, so it’s difficult for me to believe he would enter next years draft without a 2nd & 3rd. Especially for a player that doesn’t really improve their chances of making the playoffs until more pressing needs are addressed.

    His contract is another concern, although I think that is not nearly the stumbling block the draft pick is. I would have no problem paying a high price for a receiver of Jackson’s ability presuming the rest of the team is in a position to be competitive. That is the difference between the Raiders signing Moss and the Patriots. The Raiders brought him in as a player to build around and the Pats added him to an already near complete unit. The results speak for themselves. And almost no player is as dependent on the play of their teammates around them as receiver is. On a bad team, a great WR can be easily neutralized or at worst have their contributions minimized by a DC. But on well rounded teams, a great receiver brings an added dimension that gives DC’s fits and opens up the entire field to offensive coordinators. Not quite sure the Seahawks are in a position to get all that Jackson can bring, to make the compensation worth it at this point.

  55. snydro22 says:

    Duke, see my comments at 5:30 pm and then 7:25 pm ;)

  56. I think the VJ story is just been re-hashed from earlier this year because they just put him on “ROSTER EXEMPT” status , San Diego (AJ Smith) is NEVER Gonna let a player win.

    OT : I have a gut feeling the Seahawks will pick up 5 or 6 new players after all the teams make their final cuts to 53 players. I have no idea who, but there are going to be some surprise cuts on other teams…any thoughts on that?
    And Housh is NOT gonna be on our opening day 53, being gone for 3 days in camp and reports that he was kinda going through the motions…does not bode well.


  57. Dukeshire says:

    That’s the reason I used the Moss analogy. That and the subsequent posts. (I suppose I could have reference that.)

    And I agree with you (obviously) that it is unlikely to happen. I wasn’t sure what to make of it all yesterday, but after thinking about it it just seems like a real stretch.

  58. I, on the other hand, think there’s a good chance we could deal for Jackson if he will accept a bit less than Brandon Marshall.

    Mr. Happy reallly wanted BM but he went to the Dolphins for a pair of 2nd rounders. This is just a hunch, with no factual evidence on my side, but I think we probably offered a pair of 2nd rounders as well (although we’ll probably never know). However, the Broncos went with the Dolphins offer because Miami picked higher in the 2nd round this past year than we did (we had the Chargers 2nd rounder at that time).

    Jackson may not be Marshall, but he’s close (and a better deep threat). So, if you’re willing to offer two 2nd rounders for BM, I think there’s a real chance to offer a single 2nd rounder for Jackson.

    All purely speculation but it’s something to think about.

  59. If we do trade a 2nd rounder for Jackson and enter next years draft without a 2 and 3 (and 6), I think it’s all but certain that we won’t use our first rounder next season — we’ll trade down to recoup a pick or two. I still think we’re going to get a 4th rounder from the NFL because of Burleson signing such a big contract so that offsets a bit of the blow of not having a 3rd rounder. Again, purely factless speculation.

  60. Dukeshire says:

    “Again, purely factless speculation” Lol, careful Bobby. That just the kind of thing that will land you a job at ESPN.

  61. I’ll hold out for the National Enquirer. That’s become a bit more credible than ESPN lately. lol

  62. ruminator1 says:

    i think this is more possible than some seem to. jackson is not going to play for SD, the 2 teams and the player and the hawks have been talking. if the issue is the level of compensation, maybe some combination of draft choice, money and player from hawks could swing it. giving up say a 2nd round pick and getting rid of a contract/problem for a top level receiver would be worth it IMO. given how high SD is projected this season vs the hawks, maybe a swap of draft positions or level of draft choice can be mixed in. the difference between the earlier rumors and this one is that seattle has been given permission to talk to the player/players agent. and they have done so.

    i would guess that the mcneill option is less possible. for one thing he and SD management have only recently talked. not sure if they are at an impasse, but the SD position seems to be that they are not going to give in to holdouts demanding a pay raise. intriguing possibilities regardless.

  63. snydro22 says:

    Bobby, we got a 6th for LoJack.

    Right now we hold picks in the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th rounds.

    Surely we will get a compensatory pick or two – of our three significant FA signings, one retired before training camp, one is a 33 year old guard, and the other is on the PUP list lol.. None were guaranteed much money nor will they be significant difference makers on paper.. I wouldn’t be surprised if we received an additional 4th and a 6th as compensation..

  64. snydro22 says:

    Also, an additional pick in the 6th/7th for Seneca Wallace.

  65. Do you think that hawks would give a player with the deal?Do we have someone they would want?Branch,Jones?

  66. Dukeshire says:

    I’m surprised we haven’t heard from Nighthawk about L Jackson being jettisoned. If for no other reason, he won’t have to read “LoJack” anymore. (He absolutely hated that nickname, as I recall. lol)

    I’m curious about something; doesn’t V Jackson have to report to the Chargers by week 10 to accrue the year necessary to become an URFA? I’m sure this is a simple answer but I’m at a loss.

  67. Yeah. I know we added the LoJack/Seneca picks. I should have been more clear. I repeat myself enough so I should have done it again:)

    nighthawk absolutely hated that name (LoJack). lol

    If Housh goes in a Jackson deal, I think that would be addition by subtraction. On one hand, I love his competitiveness and fire. On the other hand, I see a glorified possession WR who can’t make many big plays due to the lack of speed. I’m certainly not saying he sucks (he doesn’t), but he’s certainly not a playmaker in the mold of Jackson. I’m not saying that a 10 yard reception on 3rd and 9 isn’t important, because Housh can do it very well, but Jackson can get us a 25 yard gain. Also, as weird as it may sound, Jackson WILL HELP the OFFENSIVE LINE. Jackson will command attention (making life even easier for Carlson; who we already believe will have a great year) and even Branch. Branch sucks if he’s a go-to guy. He can’t beat a double team if his life depended on it. But Branch (the two weeks of the year he isn’t hurt) in single coverage is good. But teams won’t be able to stack the box as much with a guy like Jackson and that certainly will help our OL and running game. Also, I loved the Joe Jurevicius run blocking in ’05. Jackson is a beast in the run game, too. Lastly, some people click in life and some don’t — Matt and Housh have not clicked.

  68. A lot of the plays you see VJ make are deep balls thrown accurately into a tight window, placed by Philip Rivers where only VJ can get to it.

    The problem is that that type of offense is the kind in which a guy like VJ can be productive, but Hasselbeck can’t make those throws like Rivers can. His big play ability (17yd/rec or whatever) is negated if the QB throwing to him can’t get it deep and accurate. So I just don’t think it’d be worth acquiring him unless there is another guy in place. Whitehurst, maybe… but if we’re looking for a franchise QB, we’re not going to be able to get him while giving up draft picks for VJ, which makes his acquisition moot.

  69. Weirdbeard is going to be Jackson’s QB for a majority of his career in Seattle.

    I’m not saying Matt is as washed up as some people think… but great WR play can/does certainly make QBs look better too.

    Joe Montana was great no matter what; but for part of his career he looked even better because of Jerry Rice. I would say that Joe Montana in his prime would have looked very average if he were a Seahawk in ’08 and his top 192 WRs were all out (nevermind a bad line overall).

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