Seahawks Insider

Morning links: 2 more sign futures contracts

Post by Eric Williams on Jan. 6, 2012 at 11:44 am with 53 Comments »
January 6, 2012 11:44 am

The Seattle Seahawks announced that they have signed two more players to futures contracts as they firm up the 80-man roster for 2012, receiver Charly Martin and defensive tackle Adrian Taylor.

Martin, 27, is 6-foot-1 and 212 pounds, played at West Texas A&M and was with Jacksonville’s practice squad last season. Taylor, at 6-foot-3, 311 pounds, played for the University of Oklahoma and tore his Achilles and missed the final four games of his senior season.

Here’s a pretty good feature on Martin.

And you can watch Martin running routes about five minutes into the video below.

Clare Farnsworth of hands out postseason honors. Marshawn Lynch is his MVP.

Mark Whicker of the Orange County Register senses Carroll’s on the verge of a breakthrough entering his third season in Seattle.

Rob Reischel of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel breaks down the tough decision the Packers will have to make once the season is over on whether or not to franchise backup quarterback Matt Flynn or tight end Jermichael Finley.

Kerry J. Bryne of Sports Illustrated takes a statistical look at the year of the passer.

No Seahawks made this year’s NFL All-Pro team. San Francisco led all teams with five players selected.

Morning links
Leave a comment Comments → 53
  1. No way the Packers franchise Flynn because he would make about $4 million more than Rodgers next year. Besides, they have other FAs they could use the tag on.

  2. yellaman says:

    Call Packers bluff on franchise tag. The just want compensation for him and there is no way the keep him with the franchise tag

  3. Dukeshire says:

    Agreed. No way they let Finley see the light of free agency. Bluffing a franchise tag on Flynn is about the only way left they have to get any compensation for him, outside a comp pick for the 2013 draft.

  4. HawkfaninMT says:

    I could be wrong but there really isn’t a bluff to be called. Either they Tag him, or they don’t. The trade deadline has passed and the league year doesn’t begin until March. At that time he is either tagged or a free agent. He can’t be traded before that time.

  5. Helenahawk says:

    Why would they trade him now? He might be needed in the Super Bowl. Finley gets the franchise tag, no bluff at all.

  6. chuck_easton says:

    He can’t be traded after March either. He’ll be a free agent. They either sign him and then trade him, sign him and keep him, or let him walk. No other option available.

  7. I don’t think Peyton Manning will end up a Seahawk, but that’s not the point from this article:

    My favorite part from this article is from this guy in the comments section:

    “Build on what you have with Jackson, let him go through the off season workouts, no need to pick up other teams crap.” Apparently this idiot doesn’t know we already have crap from another team (Minnesota).

    I don’t think there’s any question that Finley will get the franchise tag. The only way I don’t see this happening is if Rogers gets hurt and Flynn leads them to a Super Bowl win (then they could really get something significant via trade) or if Rogers suffers a major injury where he won’t be ready for the start of ’12 and Flynn plays well in relief (whether they win it all or not).

  8. Dukeshire says:

    I wasn’t even considering they can’t trade him until the new league year begins. Good call.

  9. *franchise and then trade* too risky now (2 regular season starts), but not too risky if he were the starting QB of a Super Bowl winner. Teams would bite.

  10. raymaines says:

    The Packers don’t have to Franchise Flynn to keep him. They just have to out bid the other half dozen teams that want him.

    Getting 7-8 million a year to sit on the bench in GB sounds pretty good to me, but that only shows why I’m a retired bus driver and he’s a pro athlete. Well, that and my height, weight, skill set, motivation, age, testosterone level, ego, ……

    If they franchised Flynn they would have (according to Clayton) 52 million tied up in the QB position and no tight end. I’m thinking maybe not.

    Have you guys seen the Andrew Luck post game interview with The Onion?,26962/

  11. chrisj122 says:

    If Green Bay were to Franchise Flynn only to trade him, that would technically be breaking NFL F.A. rules. From my understanding you can only franchise a player if you have an intent to resign him. Just another reason why he won’t get the franchise tag.

  12. Audible says:

    The Luck interview bit is funny as hell. Could you imagine if he actually said that in a real interview. LOL

  13. Soggybuc says:

    Love the onion, I would bet Flynn has little interest in re-signing with Green Bay. he’s done enough time on the bench, he wants to Start!

    I’m eager to see what Adrian Taylor has when camps resume. could be another solid add that others missed due to injury concerns. he certainly has the size that Carroll likes.

  14. Green Bay can franchise him. He would counter by signing the 1 year contract (immediately, I would think). Green Bay would own his rights, but be able to trade him to the highest bidder (as the Jets tried with John Abraham, unless the ruling of trading franchised players has been rewritten under the new CBA).

    *Teams wouldn’t be as eager to trade for Flynn (mid-March; after new league year, as chuck said) if it was like the old rookie salary scale where unproven players got huge paydays (Curry, Aaron). That’s part of the reason we never saw much trading into the top 5. I know Flynn is going to get a nice chunk of change if he reaches free agency (which I think he will), but teams are going to be more reluctant to pay that salary (or more) AND trade draft pick compensation.

    *Also, think of the LeRoy Hill situation. He and his agent thought they had the upper hand in negotiations b/c they had the 1 year guarantee (part of the reason they did not sign the franchise tender) and thought their long-term contract deserved to be more. They didn’t actually agree to a “long-term” deal until the tag was removed. Well, in the Flynn scenario above, he will already have this 1 year HUGE guarantee so he’ll expect the longer terms of the deal to be higher.

    It’s one thing to pay someone a lot of money, it’s another thing to pay someone a lot of money AND give up a high draft pick or two.

    I want Flynn as badly as anyone, but I’d be reluctant to do it if it means we have to trade our #1 to make it happen. I’d almost rather keep the pick and pay Tannenhill a much cheaper salary to be our QB of the future.

    I do hate the continued Kolb analogies though. For every Kolb there is a Mark Brunell. For every AJ Feely there is a Matt Hasselbeck. For every crappy QB that was traded for there is a Matt Schaub. For every Peyton Manning there is a Ryan Leaf. For every Matt Ryan there is a Tim Couch. For every David Carr there is a Carson Palmer. You get the idea.

    This would be an analogy just as dumb: Hey, guys, if you get a QB whose name starts with an “M” that means you’re going to do well (Mark Brunell, Matt Hasselbeck, Matt Schaub). That must mean that “Matt” Flynn is guaranteed to be good. Derrr.

  15. Does Pete Carroll know that the 2008 Draft day trade turned out to be incredibly one-sided in favor of the Packers? The Vikings got John David Booty(yeah, Pete’s QB) and the Packers got Breno Giacomini(OL) & Matt Flynn(QB). JD is now out of football, Breno now a Seahawk and… Matt “6 TDs” Flynn. Carroll/Schneider/Bevell should be joking about this trade.

  16. Seahawks2620 says:

    I know I have suggested Chris Ivory as a nice physical compliment to Marshawn Lynch, as of recently. How would you all feel about LaMichael James as a mid round pick. He is projected to go in round 3 or 4, and although he is not a big or physical back in any way, shape, or form he would be a phenomenal change of pace back. Tons of speed and could be a Darren Sproles type of play maker. Just a thought, don’t know how popular it would be to the Seattle fan base as a whole, but it could do a lot for this offense if he pans out as a Sproles type of player. Just look at the Saints. Haha

  17. I think we have our Sproles type of player in Leon Washington. I think this offense needs/wants two banger guys, to go with its change of pace (Leon).

    I’d love to have Ivory back-up Lynch.

    If we have to divide money, I’d rather have Flynn/J-Stew/Ivory over a T-Jack/Lynch/someone situation if the money is going to cost about the same in either situation. Actually, that decision wouldn’t even be close for me. No way in hell I want the ball in the hands of T-Jack with a play-off game on the line and he needs to lead a game winning drive without much time remaining, which is simply what happens late in the season against other good teams.

  18. Seahawks2620 says:

    I can agree with that, however we NEED to get Leon involved more often if he is going to be nearly as productive as Sproles is for the Saints. Right now, outside of special teams, he contributes next to nothing. I don’t fault him for that, seeing as how they almost never run anything that compliments his skill set.

  19. I think this is a matter of system:

    On the Saints, Leon would see a lot more snaps simply b/c the Saints have Drew Brees and some talent on its OL, backfield, and receivers. They gain a lot more yards and have a lot more snaps b/c they can sustain drives more consistently. If you will, there are more pieces of the pie to go around.

    When you have a rushing offense like the Seahawks (which is fine with me) and a QB that isn’t great, you don’t have as many chances to see the ball (or snaps).

    There are more ways to win a game and I’m fine with our approach, but I don’t think we can expect our offensive players to put us the same numbers as a team that really moves the ball well, led by a great QB. Sproles wouldn’t have had nearly the numbers he had in New Orleans if he were a Seahawk this past season and Leon would definitely have been more involved in the Saints offense, as opposed to what he did in Seattle this past year.

  20. I wonder how much the agent of Lynch will bring up that his client is more valuable than Zach Miller and yet the Hawks gave Miller 5 years and $34 million? Half of that is/was guaranteed ($17 million).

    DeAngelo Williams signed a 5 year deal for $43 million ($21 million guaranteed).

    If you’re Lynch, why would you take Zach Miller money when you know you’re more important (and better)?

    I don’t see a settlement anytime soon.

  21. freedom_X says:

    Matt Cassell was franchised for the purpose of getting trade value by New England. Same scenario as Flynn (though Cassell might have had more value because he played well for almost a whole season for the Patriots.)

    The key to signing Lynch will be neither side burning bridges. If Lynch can get better-than-Zach Miller money on the open market, then Seattle should pay him that money.

    But the reasoning is that no one will pay Lynch that money. I just can’t think of any team out there that’s going to try to sign a veteran RB to a blockbuster contract.

    If Seattle doesn’t insult Lynch and lets him go to the open market, then Lynch can find his market value. If Seattle’s right, and Lynch doesn’t let his ego get in the way, he can take Seattle’s market offer.

    But I don’t believe Seattle should bid against itself, if there’s no other team willing to pay more $$$$ than Miller got.

  22. I think part of the reason Williams got that big of a deal last year was because Fox went to Denver and (supposedly) wanted him. And they wanted to help their rookie QB out by having a good rushing attack (Williams AND J-Stew). However, I don’t see why the Seahawks should be punished b/c the Panthers overpaid for Williams (although the Hawks will probably be penalized to Lynch and his agent for all the money thrown at Miller when Lynch is obviously more important than him).

  23. Dukeshire says:

    Honestly, as a RB, I don’t think Washington can touch what Sproles does. Leon is a more than capable 3rd down / “change of pace” back, and a brilliant returner. Nearly Sproles exact opposite,from where I sit. But he’s not someone that ought to be getting more than 4-5 touches a game. At least not in this system that is clearly bent on running between the tackles.

  24. Dukeshire says:

    First of all, why would a RB’s agent try and determine his clients worth based on what a TE got? He wouldn’t. But more importantly, it will take at least Miller’s numbers to keep Lynch. $34 million over 5 years with 17 guaranteed? How cheap do you people think a 1200 yard rusher, and clearly the teams best offensive player, will come? Especially if he’s viewed as a building block…?

  25. GeorgiaHawk says:

    How about 20 million over 3 years with 10 million guaranteed and keep his buddy Forsett for at least one more year?

  26. guiltybystander says:

    Three things:

    1. If the Seahawks bring back Lynch, which one shows up this year? The one who gave the ten terrific games during his salary run, or the one who dogged it in both Buffalo and Seattle before he decided to “run for the money” when his contract was in Expire Mode? There’s a reason the Bills let him go.

    2. I wouldn’t be so quick to let John Carlson get out of Seattle without a serious bid. True, he hasn’t been a world beater since his rookie year (poor 2010, IR in 2011), but Zach Miller wasn’t exactly a bargain at TE either.

    3. If I’m the Packers and my choice for franchising a player comes to either a top-quality TE or a backup for arguably the best QB in the NFL, that one’s a no-brainer. Bye-bye, Matt.

  27. Dukeshire says:

    I have never seen Lynch dog it even once, here is Seattle. And his off-field issues led to his reduced playing time and departure from Buffalo, more than his effort, from what I can tell. Hard to be productive when you don’t ge tthe ball. However, there is always a concern that once a RB “gets paid” his production will fall. Happens all the time for one reason or another. But I don’t get the feeling that Lynch is a dog it person. I find it hard to belied someone who relishes contact the way he seems to, is capable of pulling an Alexander, so-to-speak.

  28. Usually, players at like positions are the ones who complain about so-and-so getting X amount of money in comparison to them. Kind of like Boldin complaining about how much more Fitz was getting or Briggs wanting Urlacher money.

    However, there are cases where a client says that so-and-so isn’t as important to his team and yet they got X amount of money so I should be taken care of better, too. I know for a fact that the Adrian Peterson camp wasn’t happy that Chad Greenway was getting taken care of when AP hadn’t yet, so I’m not sure why the Lynch camp wouldn’t bring up how they took care of Zach Miller who isn’t as important to the team than their client unless this agent takes the high road (and I’ve never heard of too many of them who do).

    I would think the Lynch camp would want more than the Frank Gore extention that was signed about 4 months ago which was 3 years, $21 million, $13.5 million of which was guaranteed. Lynch will actually be a “free” agent and is younger so I would assume he’ll get a 4-5 year deal in Seattle (assuming he signs the long-term deal).

    Either way, I really don’t care about Lynch unless we get a real QB. I really don’t care about anything until we get a real QB.

  29. Dukeshire says:

    Wasn’t that after Minn franchised Greenway? I could be mistaken, of course. And it’s true an agent will use whatever tools necessary to get the most money. But in reality, as you note, it’s going to come down to how Lynch stacks up against like RBs.

    I want a new QB if for no other reason than that means Bobby comes to Seattle.

  30. Yeah. They had him franchised but then agreed to an extension towards the end of training camp. I think the AP contract got done the next week or something, just prior to the season began. In the end, they made everyone happy. They spent all that money and still suck! lol

  31. Would anyone here get mad if David DeCastro was our 1st round pick? He seems safer than any of these pass rushers. I don’t want to reach for a pass rusher and for him to turn into a bust when we could have taken more of a “sure” thing.

    Another reason NOT to want DeCastro is thinking that Carpenter will make a better LG than RT. Drafting DeCastro would mean being forced to keep Carp at RT (which I don’t think is his best position).

    I think Gallery was only guaranteed money through this year and he’s set to make a bunch of change for not being overly good for next season. I would think money could be saved by not having Gallery and using it for something else (Flynn, Lynch, etc.). I don’t know any of the cap ramifications though.

    I remember when we drafted Hutch, I was thinking that we lost a good player (Pete Kendall) and replaced him with a guy for a 1st round pick so I questioned how we got better (bobbyk = derrr). This could be another situation where we lost a guy (Gallery) but got better (DeCastro).

    The more I look and try to project who will be there, the more it looks to me like DeCastro will be the best (and safest) player available. Let me be clear, I do NOT want a guard to end up as the BPA, I really hope it’s an OLB/DE type of guy who his dynamic at getting pressure off the edge. One nice thing about this staff is that I think they can grab a guy who may not be a perfect fit for every system and tweak some things to put them in better position to be successful (like they did with Big Red and Clem).

    All bets are off if we don’t have a QB by draft day though. Then it’ll be time to ignore BPA and do what needs to get done to get a QB and if that’s Tannenhill, so be it. We can’t keep waiting until next year to get that position figured out.

    At the same time, it sucks always talking about how we need more to get more pressure on the opposing QB, too. Except for Kerney’s first year in Seattle, I can remember all of us complaining about our lack of consistent pressure on opposing QBs as well (year after year for a long time).

    As great as our DBs are on paper, they aren’t going to be able to cover for as long as our pass “rush” requires them to though. And when we started to get hot, lets not forget that we got hot against teams, for the most part, that had crappy/horrible/embarassing QB play. I like Sam Bradford, but he was dead when we played him twice. Caleb Hanie is a joke, Sexy-Rexy sucks, VY was starting for Phi and looking terrible when he had to replace Vick so we got lucky there in who we faced, Alex Smith is Alex Smith and John Skelton. That’s a pretty terrible group of QBs that we faced when we went on that winning streak. We’re not going to get all of those losers like that consistently either so it’s even more imperative that we can generate more pressure than we did this year which makes me want to go against everything I’ve just asked you all about with respect to DeCastro and ask about getting a pass rusher at all costs (assuming QB has been addressed).

    What do you guys think? Pass rusher before a BPA like a LG (DeCastro) or stick with BPA? As long as QB is taken care of, I’m not sure what my answer is so I want to hear from all of you.

  32. SandpointHawk says:

    BobbyK this all depends how free agency shakes out. QB, DT, DE, HB, LG or pray maybe even a Von Miller clone… too many ifs at this point. Trust in JS and PC to lead us to the promised land. I am…..What a glass half full fool I can be at times….

  33. Dukeshire says:

    Well, you know me, I’ve never been a best player available guy. Always draft for need is my philosophy. The worse a team is and earlier they pick, the easier it is to defend BPA, simply because they likely have holes everywhere. But even then relying on BPA is a directionless strategy. You have to pick the best player according to your particular needs and franchise philosophy, as I see it.

  34. Kelly Jennings just made a play against A. Johnson in the end zone late in the 1st half. lol

  35. I wonder if Carson Palmer is having fun watching the Bengals-Texans game?

  36. Dukeshire says:

    I don’t know whether to feel sorry for Palmer or feel like he got exactly what he deserved.

  37. I think “best player available” is total b.s. Always has been. Its right up there with “we got the guy we really wanted at that position in the draft”. They all say that.

    Teams with more needs to fill can draft for need at many different positions, but Every team drafts for need.

    (The only exception I can think of is the Chargers drafting Manning when they already had Brees. They did that to trade Manning to the NYG for a bunch of picks and then draft Rivers so they could avoid over-paying Brees… the Chargers filled a lot of needs with those moves.)

  38. guiltybystander – Which Lynch shows up?

    It won’t be the 21-year old Lynch who showed up in Buffalo to play in the snow with the most poorly-coached and demoralized team in the NFL.

    Lynch has come a long way since then, and he has great coaches and teammates who love him. There is risk is signing any athlete to big money, but I can’t see much risk in signing Lynch.

  39. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I wouldn’t be upset at all if we were to pick David DeCastro in the first round. He is the best pulling Guard I have ever seen coming out of College, imo.
    Then they could keep Decastro at his natural position,( right guard), and move Carpenter over to left guard. The side he was used to playing on in College.
    Moffit could fight it out with Carpenter or be a possible solid backup.

    Anyways, we certainly need help along the defensive front, however like BobbyK says, reaching for one may not be the best way to go.

  40. Andy Dalton just made a good football play. The stat sheet will show he threw an INT, but he could either throw it up for grabs downfield (on a 4th down) so there was a chance to pick-up the 1st down or he could have taken a sack or thrown it away. By getting picked, he saved his team over 20 yards of field position, but, more importantly, he gave his team a chance even if it wasn’t high percentage.

    Actually, Stevos, I don’t remember the Brees/Rivers situation that way at all. I remember Brees hadn’t established himself fully yet and Smith wanted Rivers to be the guy. It just happened that the year Rivers was drafted, that’s when Brees came out and looked like a good/great QB as the starter, finally. By then, they had two guys moving forward and had to make a decision.

    I wonder if we would consider trading for Yates if other things don’t work out? He’s a rookie, looks okay, but most importantly, has gotten some starts and looks like he’s going to get a play-off win.

  41. That’s true Bobby, the Chargers didn’t think Brees was their guy, and so they didn’t want to overpay Brees in his free agent year. In their opinion, QB was a ‘need’, and through their deals, they filled several needs without ever signing the guy that everyone else said was “BPA”. I remember thinking their front office were geniuses after that year, but its amazing how they’ve fallen.

  42. Draft an OG, eh Georgia? Hmph. Always enjoy your comments, bud, but I don’t want to see us draft more O linemen this year. I feel like our O line is the deepest unit on the team. Good young starters and backups competing for their jobs. Last year, they passed up Dalton to draft Carpenter. This year, they cannot pass up another QB to draft another O linemen. It seemed like the right thing to do at the time in 2011, and may prove itself out in the future… but we’ve been there and done that.

    After building the O line successfully, the team has two big needs to reach the level of the elite teams: an elite QB and an elite pass rusher. Plus, they need to figure out who their SE will be.

    Quinton Coples from NC could likely succeed as starting 3-tech as well as rush from LDE on 3rd downs. He could be a huge upgrade to our D line if he can add a little ballast and bring his college game to the NFL.

    Courtney Upshaw from Bama could probably fill the edge-rusher role on 3rd down. To be worthy of pick #12, he would need to be a game-changing pass rusher. If he is then he’s worth any pick, IMO.

    If its not a guy who can fill those pass rushing needs, then it needs to be a QB.

    I don’t care whether its Tannehill, Weeden, Wilson, Foles, Cousins… if Carroll, Schneider, Bevell, and Smith agree he’s “their guy”, then go get him.

    I don’t think there is any such thing as a “reach” when you are drafting a QB who you believe is “the guy”. Draft your QB a round higher than predicted by the sportswriters, so what, just get him. If they can trade down to get more picks and draft the guy they truly want, great. If not, then its not a reach to draft your future starting QB at 12. Remember, Jake Locker was drafted at 8, and few months before he was picked, some sportswriters were calling him a 2nd or 3rd rounder.

    In the big scheme of managing a team over time, trading down, adding picks, and finding gems in lower rounds is a great strategy, and Schneider is an expert at this. But in finding the right QB to be your starter, all that matters is that you get your guy.

  43. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Will Cortez get in this year? I think he has a good chance.

    And no way do I want Coples. He may not even be the best defensive player on his team this year. Imo. Alot of hype for him to be the next Julius Peppers.

  44. Ha, I’m not endorsing Coples, or Upshaw, or Tannehill, Weeden, Wilson, Foles, Cousins or anybody else I mentioned. I’ll leave that to the pro scouts who work for NFL teams, have signed NDAs, and are sworn to secrecy… and we won’t know what they think until April 26. Until then, there’s always mock drafts, rumors, and b.s. lol.

  45. jarred767 says:

    Watching Brees and Stafford tonight makes me want a QB so bad right now!!

  46. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Ivory is one tough back!

  47. hawkfan777 says:

    I would guess the 49ers are going to get killed next week. I just dont believe Smith can keep up with Brees.

  48. Nobody is going to outscore the Saints this offseason, unless its the Packers.

    The AFC playoff games seem a bit pointless. They’re playing for the right to get creamed in the SB.

  49. “Nobody is going to outscore the Saints this offseason, unless its the Packers.”

    Should be the highlight game of the year.

    “he AFC playoff games seem a bit pointless. They’re playing for the right to get creamed in the SB.”

    You don’t think N.E. can hang in that game? They can score too.

    I tend to agree in general though, I think you go into a Saints game right now knowing you need 40+ points to win it. They are rolling.

  50. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I wonder how much all these fines and rule changes on hits have affected the scoring increases, or if it’s just great qbs being great?
    Probably a combination of the two.
    I doubt that there would be these kind of passing records and scoring records in Easley’s, Lott’s, White’s, Kennedy’s, and Taylor’s era!
    The Bear’s, Giant’s, Cowboy’s and 49er’s of the 80s wouldn’t let this happen, but I guess since the NFL is fast becoming the Noncontact Football League we will probably see many more passing records be broken in the near future.

    All the more reason to pursue a qb like Flynn, or what Flynn could be just to keep up.

  51. GeorgiaHawk says:

    The Panhandle’s ” Little train that could”.

  52. ljarllrajl says:

    “Would anyone here get mad if David DeCastro was our 1st round pick? He seems safer than any of these pass rushers.”

    We had 5 years of ‘safe’ picks with Tim Ruskell. That’s not how you put together a great roster.

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