Seahawks Insider

Hawks make Jones signing official, cut WR Hass

Post by Eric Williams on Aug. 23, 2010 at 2:12 pm with 20 Comments »
August 23, 2010 2:13 pm

The Seattle Seahawks officially announced the signing of former San Francisco receiver Brandon Jones this afternoon.

In order to make room for Jones, the team released wide receiver Mike Hass for the second time this month.

Jones spent last season in San Francisco following four seasons with the Tennessee Titans after being selected in the third-round (96th overall) of the 2005 NFL Draft.

Jones has played in 59 games with 27 starts, recording 113 receptions for 1,398 yards and nine touchdowns. He had a career-high 41 catches in 2008 and career-high four touchdowns in 2006.

Player movement
Leave a comment Comments → 20
  1. I’m sure Hass saw the writing on the wall (especially since he’d already been released lately).

  2. Dukeshire says:

    Yeah, he’s been signed, cut and re-signed about as often as anyone I can remember.

  3. bird_spit says:

    41 rec in 2008 and 4 tds in 2006… That puts him about as productive (potentially) as the more expensive Deion Branch. Not that he has a chance of making the team, but says something about Branch in comparison. When are they going to get rid of that over paid sissy of a WR? What do you think Singletary would do with DB?

  4. Here is a link to wide receiver rankings from 2005, Jones was the 18th rated wide receiver according to Rob Rang’s site. He ran a 4.42 in the forty. Ironically, the second ranked wide receiver in that draft was our own Mike Williams.

  5. ryanryan says:

    and 14th is vincent jackson

  6. freedom_X says:

    Did he get a signing bonus or guaranteed money? That will give an idea of Jones’ short term future as a Seahawk. I’m assuming no guaranteed money – it’s a kick-the-tires situation.

  7. Dukeshire says:

    With his injury history, there hadn’t better be.

  8. I wonder if this means that it’s more or less likely that Vincent Jackson becomes a Seahawk?

  9. bayareahawkfan says:

    I had the same question, Bobby. I was hoping it might add leverage for us in lowering their asking price. But unfortunately I think it means the opposite.

    Just heard Clayton on 710 with Groz stating in no uncertain terms that VJ trade with us is dead, and that is actually why we moved to sign Jones for the minimum.

    Makes sense.

  10. I feel sorry for Mike Hass, who was a very good receiver in college but never seems to have gotten on the field in the pro’s.

    If I were him, the next time the Seahawks call, I’d let the answering machine take it — and then hit the ‘delete’ button. Enough is enough.

  11. Maybe we should go after the OT that San Diego can’t sign.

  12. Dukeshire says:

    The Chargers placed Jackson on the roster exempt list Friday, the same day Seattle was given permission to talk to him so they had to be aware of it. He’s already missing the first 3 games for violating to league’s substance abuse policy anyway, so there is no net loss there. And if they haven’t been able to work something out before the end of the preseason, it’s unlikely anything would ever get done, so the 6 games is irrelevant. I don’t think it has a bearing either way.

  13. freedom_X says:

    But if there are no other messages on the answering machine – I’d say Hass will answer. A guy in his position has to keep plugging away – for example, I was surprised to hear Dane Looker had an 8 year career – I knew Looker was more than a 1 year wonder, but 8 years was more than I thought.

    Offensive tackle is much more important than WR, and unless McNeil goes Haynesworth on the Chargers, he’ll never be moved.

  14. I would obviously rather have McNeil than Jackson. That has never been the issue. I always assumed there’s no way they let a stud left tackle leave. McNeil is upset with the Chargers, but not as much in the way of public complaining than Jackson. And the Chargers have said they would be willing to deal Jackson; no so with McNeil.

    On one hand, I respect Smith in SD. He drives a hard bargain. At the same time, it’s cost his team in terms of talent by playing as hard of ball as he does. I remember a few years ago he got a corncob up his ass with respect to Gates and he was suspended for the opener. The Chargers lost a close one and a guy like Gates could have easily been the difference between an opening win and loss. He hasn’t learned. I’m not saying to give in to the player at all costs, but at the same time there is a pattern with him that is costing his team. If you draft a guy and he’s a stud; I think you’d want to keep your guy around for the long run and by their second contract, if they are still young and performing at a high level, do what you can do to keep them. I would probably keep playing the hardball with Jackson, but I’d get McNeil in camp about a month ago. Who cares if he’s going to be one of the top paid LTs? He’s one of the best. And you know damn well that in a year or two lesser players than him are going to get more than what he is getting now. That’s the way it works (unless, Smith is that stupid OR they believe the economy is going to lower prices OR they are set on a lock-out OR the conspiracy theories can keep going). Maybe there’s more to it than I know (usually is) but on the surface, I think Smith is an arrogant douche (especially with the Gates thing).

  15. All reports I have ever seen about Smith is that he is a complete and total a$$. Office personell even hate him!!

    On a separate note. Watching Arizona play Tenn. right now. the cards do not look all that good right now at all. They started the game with 3 straight 3 and outs. Defense has been good at times and clueless at times.

    Anderson actually looked better than Leinart and I think they both played with and against 1’s but I could be wrong.

  16. Dukeshire says:

    Yeah, Arizona did not good. Anderson was able to move the chains a bit but overall not their best effort. V Young looked much better in the pocket than he has in a long time, preseason or no.

  17. chuck_easton says:

    We can’t go after the LT (McNeil) that San Diego can’t sign. He is a restricted free agent. RFAs can only sign an offer sheet with another team up until April 15. After that they can only sign with their own team. San Diego can give permission to other teams to try and work out a contract with an unsigned RFA and then accept a trade. This is what they did with Jackson and Seattle. San Diego has not granted any team permission to talk to McNeil so he’s their property alone.

  18. I am well aware of everything you said.

  19. chuck_easton says:


    I knew you were aware of this, my comment was directed at Jibo who thought we should go after McNeil.

    Can’t get what you can’t have. But if SD did make him available I’d agree with you, better money spent to try to get him than to go after Jackson and his crazy demand for 5 years $50 million with $30 million guaranteed.

    Only problem is, and I don’t see how having too many good OL is a problem, if/when Okung comes back full strength we now have two starting calibre NFL LT’s. Which one gets moved to RT?

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