Seahawks Insider

Morning links: RB Sutton added to roster

Post by Eric Williams on Jan. 11, 2012 at 8:41 am with 65 Comments »
January 11, 2012 8:42 am

The Seattle Seahawks announced another addition to the team’s 80-man roster, signing running back Tyrell Sutton to a future contract.

Seahawks general manager John Schneider is familiar with Sutton; he was in Green Bay when the Packers signed the running back out of Northwestern as an undrafted rookie free agent in 2009.

Sutton was released during final cuts, and signed with Carolina, where he remained until being released at the beginning of the 2011 season.

Sutton played in 16 games for the Panthers, starting one game at fullback. He finished with 25 carries for 139 yards, averaging 5.6 yards per carry.

At 5-8 and 211 pounds, Sutton is described as a tough runner who has excellent hands as a pass catcher out of the backfield.

Brady Anderson of ESPN 710 Seattle writes via a conversations with Kevin Calabro and Jim Moore that former NFL quarterback Rich Gannon doubts that Tarvaris Jackson will improve from where he’s at now.

Clare Farnsworth of takes a closer look at the up-and-down performance of Seattle’s special teams unit this season.

Len Pasquarelli of the Sports Xchange says Wisconsin quarterback Russell Wilson and Oklahoma State quarterback Brandon Weeden will benefit from Matt Barkley and Landry Jones staying in school another year.

Andrew Perloff of Sports Illustrated has Seattle selecting Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill in his latest mock draft.

Robert Griffin III reportedly has informed Baylor of his plans to turn pro.

Peter Schrager of Fox Sports evaluates Alabama edge rusher Courtney Upshaw and Baylor quarterback Robert Griffin III in the video below.

<a href='' target='_new' title='Schrager: NFL Draft prospects' >Video: Schrager: NFL Draft prospects</a>

Leave a comment Comments → 65
  1. Apologies to those who are mock draft haters ;) but I think Perloff’s mock looks realistic. Rams trade down from pick 2, and Cleve or Wash trade up to take RG, Seattle stands pat and gets Tannehill. I like it. A lot will happen in the next three months, but as of now I’d be all for this.

  2. jarred767 says:

    Looks like he has some skills, but the fact that he’s been in the NFL for two years means it’s unlikely that he could turn into a potential starter. However, he could’ve gotten lost in Carolinas crowded backfield.

    It is interesting that they used him as a fullback because his highlights look like he’s definitely got more skills out on the edges and in space. Maybe another diamond in the rough, at a minimum though it’s obvious these guys never stop looking for talent.

  3. Dukeshire says:

    Well, what I think this signifies is that Forsett is gone. He may or may not make the 53 man, but considering they have little tied up in Forse and this would seem to be a lateral move, if on paper, I don’t see him returning. (To say nothing about the fact they may / should get bigger back there behind Lynch.)

    Stevo – At least the Seahawk’s season is over. Mocks are at least tolerable now. But when mocks are being released in Sept, Oct and Nov… give me a break.

  4. Seattle will not take a QB in the first round.It will be a DE,and a QB in rd 3 or 4.

  5. HawkfaninMT says:

    Speaking of DE… Not sure who posted that Whitney marcilus is not entering the draft, but they are wrong according to The site will not let me copy and paste, but they report that he is entering the draft, and I would love to see him on the hawks in round 2. Led the nation in sacks, is underrated somehow, and seems to fit the mold of the Leo position. I will defer to those with more knowledge on Caroll’s Defensive scheme on this, but from my novice perspective he looks like a great fit.

    On Sutton, he seems more like Michael Robinson than Forsett to me. Although Forsett is redundant in either case due to Washington’s presence. Just another body to add to the backfield without much future implications IMO

  6. Whatever happened to Tommy Gun?

  7. RDPoulsbo says:

    I don’t mind mocks, but 1/4 of the draft positions are still left to be determined. Until the combine, mocks are really just nothing more than power rankings for players in the draft. Even so, mocking a trade in a mock draft just makes you look foolish.

  8. I don’t understand people making mock drafts. 99% are wrong once the draft comes around any way. but I guess it is fun to speculate. I am sure if I had more knowledge of players in college then I would probably enjoy trying to figure out what team is drafting which player. But alas, I am a dummy when it comes to college football and scouting for the NFL draft.

  9. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dukeshire- the 2013 mock drafts are out if you want to get a jump on next year. Lol.

  10. beerbobj says:

    Thoughts on Jason Campbell as an unrestricted free agent? Should be cheap enough to bring in to compete with Tarvaris and I think Campbell was really beginning to bloom as a QB last year before his collarbone injury.

  11. Dukeshire says:

    I think part of the reason Mercilus is underrated is that he’s a bit of a one-year wonder. He really didn’t do anything his first two season there. And coming from a 3-4 there will be a bit of a transition to 4-3 for him (but I do believe he’s best suited for 4-3). From what I’ve seen, he’d be a nice fit at RDE. I’m not sure if he fast enough to play Leo (the RDE in the under front we saw most of ’10) but certainly potential at RDE in the over we saw most of this last year. A team like Indy could take him in the second, but if he’s there at 43 / 44, wherever they end up picking, he’d be worth a look. It will be fun to see him in whichever all-star bowl game he plays in, and his combine and pro-day results.

  12. Dukeshire says:

    Georgia – I’m beginning to assemble my 2016 mock for incoming freshmen.

    Mocks are an easy way to “scout” players for most people. Only redeeming quality about them. The thing that kills me about the people that put mock drafts out regularly, is when they change what players teams take, week to week. How are they making those determinations? Especially before the Sr Bowl or any pro-days or combine. It’s all so arbitrary and nearly all nonsense. But, ’tis the season, so I’ll stop bitching about them until after the draft.

  13. piperfeltcher says:

    I do not see enough burst off the line from Mercilus to believe he will ever be a pass rusher in the NFL but I think he will be great against the run and with his power will be average in his pass rush. I would be surprised if the Hawks did not take a look at Campbell as he seems to fit the mould style wise of what Carroll wants to do and has ties to Cable. If Campbell does not get hurt I think Oak. would have made the playoffs.

  14. piperfeltcher says:

    I think this will go down as one of the strongest drafts in recent years and I am really looking forward to watching the combine.

  15. JazBadAzz says:

    HawkfaninMT: I posted it because he was going to stay but changed his mind with all the coaching changes thats going on here at UofI. Zook was fired and there is much turmoil over the coaching contracts of the assistants. The dispute is from the offensive side of the ball.

    He was a very good player his previous seasons but was out shined by Corey Liuget, which was a first round pick by the chargers. Mercilus was a stud against the top offensive lineman in the Bigten, we all know where the best Olineman come from.

  16. williambryan says:

    Sutton reminds me ALOT of Forsett.

  17. On a side note, I know Tebow Time is all the rage and I get it. The guy is a winner but would he be such a winner without that unbelievable Offensive Line? I mean is it just me or did he have all day to throw that ball most of the game vs. Steelers? I was amazed at the amount of time he had given how good Steelers D has been over the years. I figured they’d be able to adjust to Denver’s offense but htye couldnt. I just don’t think they could come up with an answer for Tebow with all the options of running, passing, handing off….wish Seattle could get an OL like that. I was impressed.

  18. mock drafts are mostly just fun for sportswriters and fans. And like Duke said, an way to get interested in certain players and follow up on their scouting reports.

    But I think mock drafts are very interesting from our perspective this year. Much more than most years.

    There could be huge trades on day one of this draft. It seems pretty clear that a competition will ensure for the top few QBs between Cleveland, Washington, Miami, Seattle, and possibly Buffalo or Kansas City. It is also pretty clear that the Rams holding the #2 pick are in a great position to trade down since there will be huge competition for RG, and the Rams can trade down and still draft the top WR. So, IMO, every new info or rumor that comes along makes the possible story lines of what happens in the top 12 picks of this draft very interesting. This story could end up being a big piece of the Seahawks future.

    besides, what other news ya got? ;)

  19. hawkdawg says:

    Michael Robinson is 6’2″, 240. This dude isn’t even close to that. He’s a bigger Forsett, if he’s anything.

    Nice clip though. Shows some power, burst, vision and moves.

  20. One more thing about mock drafts. The mock drafts written now may be more believable than those we see in April in many ways.

    As of now, NFL scouts have done 95% of their work. They scouted the players and are reviewing film for the thousandth time. They have their scouting reports based on 3 or 4 years of games and film. They’re mostly ready to draft.

    The most ridiculous part of the story between now and the draft will be the combine. This is where a bunch of guys that scouts already decided are not great football players will run, jump, and dance their way toward getting far too much attention from sports writers. Those workout warriors will move up in the mock drafts in April, and magically “fall” on draft day. The real scouts don’t like them now and won’t like them then. Some lame GMs will fall prey to the combine hype and pick the next Aaron Curry.

    The more important part of scouting that happens between now and April is private interviews between coaches and players, and between scouts and college coaches, and we will never get any of that info. Otherwise, coaches are getting vacations and players are healing injuries. But most all the scouting has already been completed. I wish they would just hold the draft in February and start teaching the NFL playbooks to the rookies early.

  21. HawkyHann says:

    RG3. Do it, make no excuses, be bold, get a game changer. Cannon arm, olympic track speed, and smarts. Yes, he has got it.

    Did someone really mention going after Jason Campbell? That’s hilarious.

  22. Dukeshire says:

    While Liuget was the star for the Illini last year, not sure it’s fair to say he’s the reason Mercelius didn’t receive much attention. He combined for only 25 tackles and 2 sacks his freshman and sophomore seasons. Not really impact numbers.

  23. beerbobj says:

    I did mention Campbell- I think he’s better than Tarvaris, will be relatively cheap (comparing to Flynn), and gives us flexibility in the draft. Listen, I want a franchise QB as much as all of you, but I doubt RGIII will be there when we pick at #11/12. Without Barkley and to a lesser extend, Landry Jones, I think this years QB depth is pretty poor. I’d be perfectly fine with us building up the rest of our team through the draft, getting Campbell for a 2ish year contract similar to what we did with Jackson and Whitehurst and see how he competes. This wouldn’t keep us from drafting a guy later on in the draft such as Kellen Moore.

    By the way, Tannehill at #12 is a huge reach and I would be upset with us wasting a first round pick on the guy.

  24. yakimahawk says:

    Ok Duke or someone, please help me out on a question…Why is it that the Seahawks would take a DE that is an every down player, it would take Big Red out of the mix? I would think it would be smarter to draft a monster linebacker (which we need anyway) to create a monster pass rush? Like a Matthews or Von Miller type..The linebacker core seems very deep in the draft this year…

  25. beerbobj says:

    I think the big thing is that Red plays mostly on 1st and 2nd down and we don’t have anyone to go to on passing downs to get a pass rush. If you look at some of the better defensive lines in the league (Lions, Giants, etc.) one of the things that they have is depth to keep their players fresh throughout the game.

    I’d agree that LB depth is needed, but a LB in our scheme is unlikely to have as much impact as a Miller or Matthews on their teams since we run (for the most part) a 4-3 defense rather than a 3-4.

    My 2 cents.

  26. Dukeshire says:

    yakimahawk – I think it depends on where you’re talking about drafting that player. If we’re talking about a first round pick, he’s got to be selected with the idea of being an every down player. The investment alone requires that. But the further down a given player is selected, you can choose based on situational needs.

    To the specifics of DE vs LB. I would disagree that Seattle needs a “monster LB”. Regardless (and that can be debated at another time), I think what we saw from Wright toward the end of the season is just what you’re referring to when you talk about Matthews and Miller: Strong side LB that brings pressure. And while GB is a little difficult to draw comparisons to because their 3-4 scheme, the Broncos are not with their 4-3. And I think we’ll see Seattle use Wright much the same way as Miller; dropping into coverage more than Matthews, but used as a pass rusher more than most Sams.

    But if increasing the pass rush is a true priority, Bryant would seem to be the odd man out, as tough as that is to admit. He’s one dimensional, and this is a pass happy league. Given that, I would think it’s smarter to have your situational players (which is basically how I see Bryant) not be a part of the base package. And while they have the same issue at 3-tech with Branch, DE is the more obvious place to add a pass rusher. They have to generate more pressure from the front 4 (without sacrificing run D. Tough balance). Good defenses can’t always be taking players out of coverage to get to the QB. It becomes too predictable. But if Seattle is happy with their front 4 as is for their Base package, they will not select a DE in the first. That’s how I see it, anyway.

  27. yakimahawk says:

    Thanks Duke and beerbobj…It makes a lot on since, but would hate to see Red displaced..

  28. SeahawkFan12 says:

    On no….PLEASE NO TANNEHILL! What a ridiculous mock draft to have Tannehill go in the middle of the first round. I don’t care who is returning back to college, Tannehill is not a first rounder.

    Draft a pass rusher and take Kellen Moore in the 3rd or 4th before he gets swiped by another team.

  29. Dukeshire says:

    yakimahawk – I agree. I like him and love his passion and energy. If he was capable of just some consistent rush, he’d be perfect. He will be a tough decision for Schneider and Carroll, for sure.

  30. grizindabox says:

    Another take on drafting a DE early is that outside of Clemens, who is 30, there is no one, especially anyone young on the roster that is a pass rush threat. The Hawks can still use Red on 1st and 2nd down, and use the drafted DE on 3rd and also to give Clemens some plays off also. Most good teams have 3-4 guys that they can rotate, which is something the Hawks lack.

  31. SeahawkFan12 says:

    The great thing about this team is they are SO CLOSE to being a playoff contender, and the NFC West is shaping up to be a competitive division. This is why I’m totally cool with being aggressive in going after Luck or RG3, BUT see the value in staying put and drafting an elite pass rusher as well.

    I’m still not sold on Flynn, but he could very well be an answer as well.

  32. Last year, in April, after the combine, after pro-days, after endless mocks, almost nobody on this blog predicted who we ended up drafting. If I remember correctly, someone guessed Carpenter…in the 2nd or 3rd round, and I think someone else guessed KJ Wright.

    Is it still January?

  33. Dukeshire says:

    I guessed Moffitt. lol

  34. Moffitt was the only one I got right on the mock challenge, too:)

    If Tannenhill turns out to be a good QB then there’s no way it’s “too early” to take him at #11/12. I remember the Vikings took Ponder “too early” last year and now he looks like a legit QB of the future and it turns out they made the right call.

    It is, indeed, fun to think of how close we are, however, those two pieces we’re lacking are arguably two of the most important areas of any team.
    1. QB
    2A. LT
    2B. Dominant pass rush (we need more than Clem)
    In terms of importance, we’re lacking in two of those three and that’s not good.

  35. raymaines says:

    Last week sometime Brock Huard was pretty high on Brock Osweiler going to the ‘Hawks. BH said the NFL profile for a QB is (among other things) between 6’2″ and 6’5″ and anyone outside of that profile has to have something special to compensate. Osweiler, at 6’8″, has the athletic ability to be mobile, has a quick release, is smart and makes quick decisions.

    And he’s Six Foot and Eight f****** Inches tall for God sakes.

    Hey, I’m sold. Draft him then coach him up. Win the next 15 Super Bowls. Draft 10 more QB’s along the way, coach them up and trade each of them for draft picks. Pick, coach, trade!! Yee Haw!!

  36. HawkfaninMT says:

    I saw Brock abuse the high school team I was teaching at a few years back. He was amazing then, probably still is. But I didn’t watch a single ASU snap this year unfortunately. Gonna have to look into some of his gametape

  37. The last 6’8″ qb we had was Dan McGwire. That bar would be easy for Brock to raise.

  38. RDPoulsbo says:

    If they go DE, I kind of get the impression it will be Clemons as the odd man out and coming in on passing downs. I think Bryant stays as an early down DE because the 49ers and the Cards (with much lesser success) want to be run first offenses and the first thing you need to do to be successful in the league is take care of your division. It would still be smart to get a DE because you can never have too many good ones.

    I do think they should go after a beast 3-technique DT though. I think that spot is the weakest position on defense and an upgrade would go a long way in helping the unit improve overall. It would improve a non-existent interior pass rush by collapsing the pocket, helping the edge rushers get more production and less time to cover receivers in the secondary.

  39. SeahawkFan12 says:

    Osweiller is really bad, guys. Have you seen much of him? His height and arm strength are over-rated; some have tried to compare him to Kaepernick (while he was at Nevada) except Kaepernick is very mobile and athletic. Check out this blurb, look who he compared to, and read some of the reader posts from people who have watched him throughout his career:

  40. SeahawkFan12 says:

    That is not the only post I’ve read like that, I just didn’t feel the need to pepper this blog with redundant stuff.

  41. HawkfaninMT says:

    Another aspect to this Brock talk is that he will probably be drafted in the 4th-5th rounds. As SeahawkFan12 points out, he has flaws, but the benefit of drafting him in 5th is the low risk involved. He can learn without the expectation that he will have to start his rookie year.

  42. Dukeshire says:

    RDPoulsbo – The only reason I’d disagree with Clem being odd man, is that they are wanting to improve the pass rush, and he’s the only “consistent” threat on the line. They have redundency there now with Red, ‘Bane, and Branch. Adding a 4th run stopper is far too one dimential as a unit.

    I do agree though, that they need an upgrade at 3-tech. Branch should not be an every down player. I like the fact he can play at 3 and kick to 5, but he provides next to nothing regarding pressure and he was something of a liability against the run as the season wore on. SF imparticular really moved him aside. Not taking into account the necessity to improve pressure on the QB, 3-tech is the weakest spot along the front.

  43. I used to think of 5th round picks as low risk, but this FO has changed my mind about the value of later round picks. Carroll does like ‘em tall!

  44. chuck_easton says:

    No QB in the 1st round for Seattle.

    1st pick Colts will take Luck.

    2nd pick Rams will either get a king’s ransom for somebody wanting to jump up and get RGIII or they will take Blackmon (Bradford needs a WR)

    3rd pick Vikings are ‘happy’ with ponder. They’ll trade the pick if someone doesn’t pay the Rams price.

    4th pick – if Luck and RGII are both gone, the Browns will do something ‘stupid’. It’s in their history Holmgren not withstanding. If RGII is still there at 4 he won’t be afterwards.

    5th pick – TB has Freeman and needs help everywhere else.

    6th pick – Washington. Needs a QB in the worst way. If Luck and RGIII are both gone this is the franchise I am betting does the crazy thing and makes a big reach for Tannehill. No way do I think Tannehill should go 6th but it’s the Redskins.

    Miami at 8 will take any of the three QB’s that are not gone by then if they haven’t moved up.

    Kansas City might take a QB and they may draft ahead of Seattle if they win the coin toss.

    So Seattle at 12 (or even 11) has no chance for any of the big three.

    My totally uneducated guess is Seattle isn’t close to a sniff at any 1st round talent QB so I am personally moving on.

    For those that think the team should sell the farm to get up into consideration, that hasn’t been Schneider’s MO and I don’t see it happening. I’d love to be proven wrong, but I don’t think I will be.

    It’s either a later round development QB, Seattle tries to win the Flynn bidding war, or we wait for 2013 for our QB of the future.

    Feel free to tell me I’m wrong. It makes for fun debate this time of year.

  45. Chuck, you might be right on that all the first round QB talent will be gone before pick #11. I think they will go early.

    And I agree with Bobby: “If Tannenhill turns out to be a good QB then there’s no way it’s “too early” to take him at #11/12.”

  46. As for the idea that drafting Ryan Tannehill at 11 or 12 would be a reach? NOT if the Seahawks think he is their starter of the future.

    Remember, gone are the days when first round rookies carry huge risky contracts. The game has changed a bit for GMs.

    IF the Seahawks are considering signing Matt Flynn as an alternative to drafting a first round QB, AND believe that Tannehill may have a higher upside to his future career than Matt Flynn, then drafting Tannehill at #11 would not be a reach, it would be the kind of good business decision that Schneider was hired to make.

    Matt Flynn will likely be signed as a Free Agent for something close to $10M a year.

    In 2012, rookie players drafted in the top 10 will be paid a salary equal to the average of the top 10 current players at their positions. So, a top 10 QB (luck and RG) will both be paid about $10.5M a year for 4 years, plus an option year.

    After picks 1-10, the rest of the picks in round one will be paid the average of the #3 to #25 players at their positions. So a QB drafted at 11 or 12 will be paid the same as a QB drafted at 32. In either case, Ryan Tannehill, if drafted in round one, will be paid about $6.7M.

    Its not a reach to sign your QB of the future for 6.7 Million a year. It may be a bargain in this market. If Pete Carroll sees his QOF on the board, drafting him at #11 is the thing to do.

  47. HawkfaninMT says:

    Does anyone think teams try to project who will be the worst team the following year, in an effort to project where they will be drafting?

    In the scenario I am seeing in my head is the hawks trade their 1st this year, for another teams first this year and next. With the hope that that team will end up with the number 1 overall pick. I came to this because as Chuck stated, we may be looking at next year for our QBotF, and I don’t think we will bad enough to grab Barkeley or whomever the best QB ends being. Yes, even with T-Jack as our QB.

  48. I wonder if we could get Tannehill in the 3rd or 4th, since he has a broken foot and won’t play in the senior bowl, or compete at the combine. Let him hold a clipboard while he heals, learn the system, don’t rush him into starting…what do you guys think?

  49. Tannehill’s foot does throw a monkey wrench into the draft, doesn’t it? I think it might cause him to fall in the draft, but might now. Its just a metatarsal, I’ve broken those and they heal pretty fast. I think teams already know whether they want him or not based on film from this past season. Somebody will jump for him in round 1.

  50. * might not

  51. I was listening to an interview with the guy who does color commentary for the Packers…

    He said that the Packers drafted Brian Brohm in the 2nd round the same year they drafted Flynn in the 7th.

    From day one, it was obvious that Flynn was the better QB, and the Packers FO believes he can be a top ten QB in the NFL. He compared him to Hasselbeck and said he has the leadership skills of an on-field general. I’m sold.

  52. Oh and…Schneider was heavily involved in drafting him.

  53. piperfeltcher says:

    If we draft a pass rushing end I think we keep Red and have the rookie spell Clemens a few plays then come in for Red on passing downs. This would allow Red to move inside to DT on passing downs. Red is a far better pass rusher from DT then is Branch and Clemons is 31 next year and a free agent who is going to draw a lot of intrest. I do not see the Hawks passing on a pass rushing DE in this draft just because they have Red and Clemons.

  54. piperfeltcher says:

    I am a lot more sold on bringing in a QB then drafting one now that Barkley is out of the mix. Bring in either Flynn or Campbell and a LB in free agency and draft a pass rushing DE and some O-line depth and the Hawks would definatly be a contender if they can stay somewhat healthy.

  55. I still have concerns about RG3, Tannehill, Weeden in the fact that they hardly ever take the ball under center, but in all fairness the NFL is using more Shot gun but they still need be able to read as the back up from center.

    Not that they can’t learn but it is different and take time,

  56. Oh and I agree with Gannon – what you see is what you get with Jackson.

  57. RDPoulsbo says:

    I’m hoping they draft a QB even if they bring in a guy like Flynn. There are a lot of QBs deeper in the draft that have great potential. Portis is intriguing, but I don’t really see him with that high of a ceiling. Besides, if they can grab one of these lower round guys that are more in the NFL mold and develop him, he can be good trade value down the road. I’d love the Hawks to be able to churn out a Cassel or Kolb for other teams to throw draft picks at. It doesn’t matter if they pan out, just that other teams think they could.

  58. Dukeshire says:

    There is a decent chance of that, I would think. Especially when you consider Schneider selected both Flynn and Brohm in the same 2008 draft. And they currently have only one QB under contract who has any game experience. (Although, Jackson may be the only one under contract period. Did we ever learn the detail of Portis’ deal?)

  59. Just think how crazy this place would be if we sign Flynn and then draft Moore in the 3rd?

    Would be like pure craziness all over the place.

    I think Portis can go. He has never developed into a leader in all the chances he has had. all the tools (so they say) but guys don’t rally around him – the anti-Tebow if you will.

  60. Kingpear says:

    I would have to agree with Dukeshire. Looks like Forsett is a goner.

    As far as Mocks and Drafts are concerned… they are fun to look at. I am a bit of a draftnik, but it is a little early to take them seriously before the Pro Days.

    Tannehill (although I like him) is a reach at 11. You are close enough to the top to take a D lineman (Nick Perry from USC comes to mind), solidify the o-line, or if Kirkpatrick is available… a no brainer in Carroll’s vision of Cornerbacks.

    Nick Foles is intriguing in the second round, but he has suffered from accuracy issues.

  61. Sign Flynn. That’s it. Case closed. QB problem solved. Get-er-done!

  62. Could someone elaborate on why everyone trashes Kellen Moore, aside from him being short? All he does is win and have ridiculous TD/INT ratios.

  63. Who trashed him here (at least today?) all I said is the place would go nuts if we got both Flynn and Moore.

    How about Kirkpatrick or Perry in 1. C. Polk in RD 2 and Moore in 3 :)

  64. Sutton is a good pickup, better speed and power than Forsett, and a decent blocker.I can’t believe anyone would mention Campbell as a starter for Seattle. I agree with Rich Gannon’s comment about Tarvaris already peaking in efficiency. This cannot be about popularity because they’ll never improve as a team. Get Matt Flynn, he will be better than some rookie. A DE is good to go along with Clemons on passing downs but that won’t take snaps away from Red; they have different jobs. If Sutton can cut it, he would be a great addition, he was NU’s running game in college.Somebody even mentioned Hoyer as a possible choice, but; I think they need someone who is really good, not “kinda good” at QB

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