Seahawks Insider

Morning links: Predicting the Manning sweepstakes

Post by Eric Williams on Feb. 29, 2012 at 7:51 am with 125 Comments »
February 29, 2012 7:51 am
Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning throws a pass against the Jacksonville Jaguars during the third quarter of a football game in Indianapolis, Sunday, Sept. 24, 2006. Indianapolis defeated Jacksonville 21-14.(AP Photo/Darron Cummings)

Peter King of Sports Illustrated goes through the list of possible teams in the running to secure quarterback Peyton Manning in free agency under the likely scenario that Indianapolis releases him March 8, along with the elite quarterback being able to prove that he’s healthy.

King lists Miami, the N.Y. Jets, Seattle, Arizona and Kansas City as possible destinations.

Here’s what King says about Seattle: “The injury-prone Sidney Rice makes this a tough call. But the Seahawks certainly have the cash to make this happen, and it’s exceedingly logical to think they’d be interested in both. With Rice and Mike Williams the current projected starters, you’d think Pete Carroll would use Williams and Golden Tate as swing players and injury insurance, with the heady Doug Baldwin the kind of slot receiver Manning could use as his new Brandon Stokley.”

However, former Seahawks fullback Mack Strong, who had a similar neck fusion surgery to Manning, tells Bob Stelton and Dave Grosby of ESPN 710 Seattle that it’s highly unlikely Manning will play another snap in the NFL in this audio link. The conversation starts about 25 minutes in.

Mike Jones of the Washington Post reports that the Redskins are prepared to part with two first round picks and more to trade up to the No. 2 spot with St. Louis for the chance to draft Robert Griffin III.

ESPN’s Mike Sando believes Houston defensive end Mario Williams would be a good fit for Seattle in free agency.

John Boyle of the Everett Herald believes there’s little chance that Leroy Hill will return to Seattle after the latest incident in Seattle.

Jason Wilde of ESPN Wisconsin reports that the Packers are unlikely to use the franchise tag to set up a sign-and-trade scenario.

Matt Bowen of the National Football Post lists Illinois defensive end Whitney Mercilus and Memphis defensive tackle Dontari Poe as two prospects to do some more homework on after the combine.

Pat Kirwin of CBS Sports gives us a nice breakdown of why NFL personnel people are looking for athletic players who can run defensively, and gives us a list of combination players who can play multiple positions and provide flexibility for a defense.

Seattle slips to No. 2 in Forbes’ list of America’s most miserable sports cities.

Morning links
Leave a comment Comments → 125
  1. SandpointHawk says:

    Hey Forbes had Seattle number one last year. We’re moving up….

  2. Dukeshire says:

    As usual, Peter King makes little sense. Williams is both starter and a “swing player” (whatever that is) and insurance against Rice’s injury history? Which he, Peter? And Baldwin’s “heady”… That’s a euphemism for un-athletic.

    I have to admit, this Mario Williams talk makes me giddy. That would be a fun scenario.

  3. Soggybuc says:

    Saw that Bart Scott has permission to seek a trade. with Hill in trouble again that would be an interesting add.

  4. raymaines says:

    I just printed the Pat Kirwin article and will keep it around until the draft. It should be fun to see how things shake out in April.

  5. Soggybuc–Scott is aging and slow. I cant see how he would fit with Caroll and Schnieders stated goal of getting faster at LB. Just my 2 cents.

    Sad to say, but BMW may not be on the team come week 1, let alone the starter. I like the guy a lot, but T-joke wont throw the ball to him unless he’s open by a mile–which is almost never. The only guy T-Joke will throw the ball to when covered is Sidney Rice.

    I still think Seattle is a good logical fit for Manning, but then again, our line isnt set, and we still need a couple good defensive players (a pass-rushing DE and a stud DT) to be a really good team. And Seattle is in South Alaska…right?!

  6. hawkfan777 says:


    I didn’t take the “heady” comment as derogatory from Peter King. Baldwin is an extremely intelligent guy. Perfect for a slot receiver because he knows how to find the open places quickly. Heady is a great attribute for a slot receiver and I believe his intelligence is what led to his success as a first year undrafted receiver. I think “heady” was a compliment from King. It is a reason that Manning would be attracted to the Hawks.

  7. SeahawkFan12 says:

    I’d love to see Manning sign here. He’d be a great fit, better than Flynn and more proven. The injury is a concern, but the “experts” (sorry, but former players don’t qualify in my book, though I love and respect Mack) seem to think Manning can still sling it. We’ll see. Should be an interesting next couple of weeks.

  8. Soggybuc says:

    While Scotts 54 solo tackles and 4.5 sacks in 2011 are a career low they are not that far below his average.
    Thing is he would be a plug and play guy on a D that could very well lose 2 veteran LB’s. if the younguns are set to go that’s fine. but a vet to bolster the line up might be in order.
    That said I would welcome him only if he comes cheap.

  9. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Manning wouldn’t be running head first into linebackers too!

    I just don’t see Manning wanting to play in Seattle,( for mostly geographical reasons).

    And I am also giddy about the Mario Williams talk!

  10. Dukeshire says:

    Hawkfan777 – Baldy absolutely is a smart dude, no question. And perhaps it’s my dislike of King that’s clouds my interpretation, but simply calling him “heady” diminishes in my eyes, how talented he is. I would say it’s a backhanded compliment, at best.

    I’mI curious why Manning would be a better fit here, than Flynn? Seattle’s offense doesn’t resemble anything the Colts did with Manning.

  11. RDPoulsbo says:

    Manning may not be running head first into LBs, but he’ll be taking blind side hits from DEs. [Insert my anti-Manning to Seattle rant here].

    Mario Williams is intriguing, but wouldn’t he rather go to a true 3-4 team? Yes, Seattle runs a hybrid but that’s just another hurdle to explain his role. It would seem there would be more to landing him than talking dollars. Any thoughts on Avril? He’s young and will probably be much cheaper.

  12. SeahawkFan12 says:

    Duke, I believe Manning and PC would work together to “rewrite” the offense; in other words, PC wouldn’t be handing over the reigns like so many assume would be the case, yet Manning would take on a bigger role in the play-calling department (something TJax cannot do). Also, depending on what happens with Carlson, we have the TE presence here that Manning loves to utilize, as he did w/ Dallas Clark. Further, we have an emerging running game, something Manning will appreciate since he didn’t have that in Indy. Don’t get me wrong, I see the potential in Flynn. I just think Flynn will do great in Miami (mostly because his former O-coord is installing the same offense). I have to confess, I do not know what Cleveland’s offense is like relative to GB’s/Flynn.

  13. “I’mI curious why Manning would be a better fit here, than Flynn? Seattle’s offense doesn’t resemble anything the Colts did with Manning.”

    Is it really a question? One guy is the best QB of our generation, and only a year removed from a pro bowl level season. The other guy is basically an unknown. I know, of course, the injury factor is the question, but if we make the assumption that we only do this if he passes the medical check, then can we really talk about Manning and Flynn as if they’re at a similar level?

  14. Dukeshire says:

    That makes some sense, but I believe the team that does land Manning will have to “turn the reins over” to him. If you read how Indy conducted their practices, he ran the show, so-to-speak. And my impression is that he’ll want control of how the offense is run. I’d be surprised if Manning would be comfortable running someone else’s offense, considering how few years left he would seem to have.

    The TE situation in interesting as well. Flynn will be coming out of an offense that utilizes multiple TE sets, something Carroll noted last year, that he’d like to run here with Miller / Carlson.

    But overall, considering how varied the concepts are that Manning has run his whole career, to what Seattle has in place (and personnel-wise) it just feels like Manning will opt for a “softer” landing spot. But we’ll see.

  15. Dukeshire says:

    pdway – If we’re talking scheme here, there is no question that Flynn is a better fit here, than Manning. If we’re simply using achievements as a measure, then of course Manning is a better fit. But from an Xs and Os standpoint, and familiarity with what Seattle is trying to do, Flynn is the better fit, IMO.

  16. “But overall, considering how varied the concepts are that Manning has run his whole career, to what Seattle has in place (and personnel-wise) it just feels like Manning will opt for a “softer” landing spot. But we’ll see.”

    I tend to agree with that – and feel like it’s a long shot he comes to us. We do have a good running game, and a good defense, both things that are a QB’s best friend. I’m glad to at least keep hearing our name as being in the running on these QB options – nice to know our management knows the issues with the team.

  17. “But from an Xs and Os standpoint, and familiarity with what Seattle is trying to do, Flynn is the better fit, IMO.”

    I hear you – but it’s always seemed to me that Manning has maybe the highest football IQ at his position as well, and will be able to grasp what we’re looking to do, at least as well as a guy who hasn’t played many games in the league.

    Re Flynn in general, I’m very much going to trust in our management, if Schneider thinks he’s the answer, then I’m with him.

  18. RDPoulsbo says:

    Duke is absolutely right. For the most part, Indy uses a simplistic Air Coryell scheme while Seattle’s offense comes from the same branch of WCO played in Green Bay. The 2 offenses are completely opposite of each other in their very core philosophy and Seattle is no way set up personnel-wise to make that kind of switch from the coaching on down. If there’s a good landing place, in the slim chance he gets back to football ready, the Jets seem to be the best spot.

    The scheme compatibility between Seattle and Green Bay is why people are so high on bringing in Flynn besides the 2 good regular season games he played.

  19. chuck_easton says:

    Rather than using supposition and opinion, let’s look at empherical facts.

    Manning ran the Colts offense for over 10 years. His backup was there for at least 3 of those years. When Manning went down the Colts attempted to plug in one backup after another (remember Kerry Collins started the year) and each and every one of them failed.

    So, either the Colts have the worst group of QB’s in the history of the NFL outside of Peyton, or Peyton is the only one that can run the Payton offense. I’m going with the later.

    If Peyton comes here we either teach our entire offense how to run the Peyton offense or we require a future HOF QB to undo what he’s done for a decade and learn a whole new system. I don’t like either of those options to be frank.

  20. What would people want around here with our #1 pick if we signed Mario Williams and got one of the free agent QBs? Unlikely, of course, but as long as we’re at it, who would you like specifically (not position)?

    I think I’d want Nick Perry if Mr. Happy believes in him. He’d be another dynamic edge rusher and the G-Men have shown that you can’t have too many good pass rushers. Also, Clem is in the final year of his contract and is on the wrong side of 30. There’s always a way to get a dynamic pass rusher onto the field in pass rushing situations.

    However, if the free agent QB is Manning, then I think you’d seriously have to consider Tannenhill if he’s still available though.

  21. RDPoulsbo says:

    I’m pretty sure the money would mean just 1 or the other. I’d go with Still or Brockers. They need to improve their interior pass rush and not rely solely on the Leo spot for pass rush.

    I’m starting to think Avril would be a good fit for Leo though. I think he’ll be much cheaper than Williams and have comparable production.

  22. Soggybuc says:

    Pete and Bevell both have to intrigued by what schemes and plays they could dream up working with a guy like Peyton. likewise i’m sure Peyton would be intrigued by the idea of helping re-design an offense that fits his strengths and Seattle personel. got to be a bit of a wet dream for both.
    You talk of offenses as some static set in stone thing when the truth is they are always getting tweaked and evolving. new plays are getting put in all the time to exploit a weakness you spot on mon or tue film study. you can put your money on the fact that Bevell has spent some time this off season in dreaming up some specificaly designed to get Baldwin the ball.

  23. RDPoulsbo says:

    Soggy, as Holmgren once said, dreaming up new plays is never the problem. The problem is getting the team to play as a unit to make the play work in context of all the other plays called over the course of a game and season. That’s why all the plays fall under a framework that relates to the rest of the plays in the overall scheme. Each team has their own twists, but there are really only about 5 or so overarching schemes played in the NFL.

  24. HawkfaninMT says:

    As stated I don’t think they could afford Williams AND a Free Agent QB that would be an upgrade to T-Jack. So my preference would be to Sign Williams and draft Tannenhill. TJ could start for a year then turn it over to the kid.

    I’ve seen Avril’s name mentioned acouple of times. All signs that I have seen point to him being franchised if he is not signed.

  25. ryanryan says:

    okay, so I live in the number 1 city and root for the sports teams in the number 2…if this trend continues I will be packing my bags and heading for Pittsburgh…f*** the steelers.

  26. I only want Manning IF

    1. Healthy
    2. Price is right
    3. We draft a QB to be learning

    I am good with Drafting Tannehill (1), or Cousins (2), they both seem to fit what the powers want.

  27. RDPoulsbo says:

    I hadn’t thought about Avril much until I saw the link to team cap situations Eric posted the other day. Detroit seems to have the same cap problems as Houston. If Houston can’t tag Williams for cap reasons, Avril wouldn’t be tagged either unless they could restructure Suh, Stafford and Johnson’s contracts and time is running short.

  28. HawkfaninMT says:

    I think the big hang up with Tagging Williams is that he was tagged last year (Avril was not). Due to this Williams will cost a percentage more than he was paid last year instead of paying the average of top 5 or whatever the formula is now. The new CBA is a little more prohibitive than the last with regards to tagging a player a 2nd time and even more so against tagging them a 3rd

  29. RDPoulsbo–Mario Williams spent most of his career and college playing DE in a 4-3 defense, and thats what he’s best at. He is such a great player, he did fine last year as a 3-4 outside LB. He could play either DE position for us. Could you imagine him and Clemons onfield on third and long?!

    HawkfaninMT–Tannehill only has one season as a starter under his belt (?) and will likely need more than one year before he’s ready to start in the NFL. Starting him too early would just turn him into another Sanchez.

    Remember when everyone was howling about how great it would have been to have drafted Sanchez?! I never liked him and Im still glad we didnt waste that pick on him. Looks like my boy Crabtree would have been the “best” choice there…and that shows how crappy the top-10 in the draft were that year. At least Curry is gone with no more cap hit…the Jets will struggle on for years trying to get out of the Sanchez mess.

  30. We do have the money to get a qb and Williams. Seattle is projected to be nearly $40 million over the cap this year. But getting them to come here without drastically overpaying will be the problem.

    Also, I doubt Seattle spends all their cap this year or every year. They wont overpay a la Timmmay! Ruskell, and they will roll over the cap without worrying about it, waiting for the need to arise to make big money splashes.

    Ol Timmay! pissed me off overpaying second-tier “talent” like Julius Jones and Duckett when he could have signed first-tier guys like Michael Turner–for about the same or even a little less. Who wouldnt have rather had Turner than those two feebs?!

    I think Seattle will be careful about signing FA from here on out, but when they do, it will be big ones–impact players they are sure will continue to perform at the top of thier game for years to come, just like GB. Remember when GB got Woodson and Seattle just watched–we were content to spend just as much on a couple other players that had 1/4 his impact. Der!

  31. UNDER the cap. Doh!

  32. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    i still can’t beieve people are still kicking that dead horse that is manning. i just dont see pete hanging his coaching future on a broken QB.
    i like trading down and getting poe in the first, the guy is scary quick off the ball and between him and mebane they could tear a pocket up. that said add avril to the equation and you have a devistating d-line.
    draft cousins in the second and let him compete with TJ and see who comes out on top.

  33. HawkyHann says:

    Peter King is right on about Sidney Rice. Until he proves his worth, he’s going to be heavily scrutinzed. Get your body right and show up your a true #1. Shoulder, hip, concussions, yada yada….

  34. Dukeshire says:

    Poe and Mebane would play the same position: NT. Seattle needs a 3-tech.

  35. Remember when GB got Woodson and Seattle just watched–we were content to spend just as much on a couple other players that had 1/4 his impact

    True but the key thing there is “Woodson” and “a couple other players” The difference being GB needed a player and we needed multiple players!! but I do agree with you that Woodson made more of an impact but we first need to get to the place where that ONE (right) FA pick up can make a difference on our team.

    I am feeling that we are getting very close to that with the drafting and overall improvement this team is seeing.

  36. Dukeshire–Poe also played 3-tch and has the skills to do it, despite his enormous size. The problem is he’s known for taking MANY plays off each game. The guy seems a lot like Coples–could be a great player–if he wants to.

    I like Devon Still and a couple other guys. Who knows what will happen? But I think if we sign Williams, the Hawks will take a 3-tech DT in the first.

  37. Dukeshire says:

    I like Still as well. I’ll be very surprised if Poe plays anything else besides NT on Sundays.

  38. Poe seems a perfect NT in a 3-4, but I guess it all depends on who drafts him.

    One other reason for the Hawks possibly looking to sign Manning is to prevent him from landing with the Tards.

  39. xcman–right, and I think Seattle is almost there. We need to settle on our offensive lineman, and we could use a DE and a DT. Other than that, its all gravy (well, except the elephant in the room, qb). It would be nice to have a real number 1 WR to complement or replace Rice, and another CB would be great.

    But we’re pretty close to where we can use our cap space to pick up one or two big-name young FA who can put us over the top. Then the hard wait for our qb of the future.

  40. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    correct me if i am wrong but a 3-4 nose tackle is big and a lane clogger. 4-3 3 tech is a big but ideally fast type that can colapse a pocket and get after a QB, sounds like poe. and i wonder if he still takes plays off when his contract depends on his performance? also how much more fun for him in a 4-3 to pin his ears back and go after a QB on passing downs. just a thought. he comes out of his stance as fast as any DT i have ever seen.

  41. If we’re going to talk about Woodson, lets be clear on the facts. The Packers were not a player like Woodson away from competing. My gosh, they were 4-12 the season before they signed Woodson and their head coach got canned because of it. And in his first year in Green Bay, they were 8-8. They were in a rebuild and Woodson was only part of it.

  42. I would love for us to sign Mario Williams. But I don’t think it will happen because of…… Red Bryant and Chris Clemons. What I mean is, who do you take off the field to put Mario Williams on the field? Its pretty obvious that on passing downs Red Bryant would come off the field. But I don’t think Mario Williams is a part time or rotation DE. So if we sign Mario Williams, I think Red Bryant has to walk. Otherwise, if we are commited to having Chris Clemons and Red Bryant on the field we should sign a lesser DE, still a pash rusher, but not a Mario Williams every down DE.

    I am not going to dive into the Manning conversation – its been talked to death for me.

  43. Yeah. I don’t think there’s a way that both Williams and Big Red both play for the Seahawks next year.

  44. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    blocis, i would asume if you bring super mario in he is your starting leo and clem slides in to reds spot situationally on passing downs when red goes to 3 tech. its one of the reason i like the idea of getting a stud DE in FA and stud DT in the first round such as poe/still. i believe the problem isnt so much at DE but more so at DT. we are great at stopping the run but our DT cant get to the QB consistantly enough colapsing the pocket. i am not sure getting mario is really needed clem still has 2-3 years left. although mario does sound good.

  45. SandpointHawk says:

    Well I love the Big Red One, I’m on record many time singing his praises. Love his father in law also…
    That said if it’s Red or a healthy Super Mario Williams? I’m going with Mario…

  46. Having pass rushers is like having shutdown cornerbacks; you cant have too many. Not if youre smart enough to use them all, and have the cash. We have the staff, and we have the capspace and bucks.

    Clemons is getting old, and putting him in on third down, and second and long, replacing Williams, who would then take Big Red’s spot, sounds like heaven to me. Clemons could then concentrate on giving 110% every play.

    Big Red’s agent will make him test the FA waters, but he wont be as valuable to anyone else, as he is a tweener: too big to be a real pass-rush threat from DE, yet doesnt cut it at DT either.

  47. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    sandpoint, mario cant play red’s position in this D it calls for… well Red. mario isnt that type of player. the whole idea with bring him in is to replce aging DE brock in particular. mario plays clem’s spot clem moves to situational pass rusher.

  48. BobbyK–Right, but GB at the time preferred signing one big FA and bringing along thier younger guys and building through the draft to the idea of filling all your holes with second and third-tier FA and then drafting. And they have held to that.

    Our FO is building through the draft, and waiting for guys they have identified as worth chasing to become FA. They are willing to pay big bucks to star quality players (Rice, Gallery, Miller) rather than sign several more so-so players. Our FO is like GB–they see no reason to fill backup slots and depth thru FA when they can do so through the later rounds of the draft.

    We now have decent depth. What we lack are a couple impact players on both sides of the ball. Rice has one more year to earn his pay, IMO, or he’s toast. At some point Seattle needs to spend a mid-first round pick on a real WR. But first, the all-important position of qb!

  49. I think we should sign Manning, and then sign Flynn, and draft Tannenhill in the 1st and Cousins in the 2nd. Then we play with 5 OL and 1 WR. Nobody will ever know which QB will throw to the receiver! Think of the madness! However, one of the tackles will always report in as an eligible receiver. Every once in awhile, we could get James Carpenter “streaking” downfield all by himself as another option for the QBs. He’d be good for 10-12 TD receptions, even with a bum knee. Then we can use our other 1st round pick (the one we acquired a few years back for Seneca Wallace after the trading deadline and before he became a free agent) to move up to get Tannenhill if need be. And with Tannenhill being a former WR, the Seahawks could revolutionize offensive strategy in the NFL!

  50. There is zero chance…ZERO…that Manning will end up here. Think about it. He doesn’t fit the “plan”. He’s not young. He’s not impressionable. You’d have to basically hand your offense over to him, thereby losing control of your youngsters that ARE impressionable. Not gonna happen. Look to Matt Flynn, or most likely, someone down in the third, 4th or 5th round that has a lot of football smarts, is very coachable, and has something to prove. (Can you say Kellen Moore?)

  51. maddog12 says:

    Bobby I hope you did not hurt yourself with that post.

  52. Seahawks2620 says:

    You definitely don’t choose Bryant over Mario Williams, if it boils down to that.

  53. Dukeshire says:

    I agree. I’ve got to believe they see Williams as a LDE in their base package. Although, he’s versatile and could play the weak side as well. But if they’re serious about improving the pass rush in base sets, you wouldn’t replace one rusher with another, you’d add one.

  54. freedom_X says:

    I’d use Clemons as a trading chip if they sign Williams. Or he’s cheap insurance if the Seattle Free Agent DE curse strikes. But I doubt Seattle would be able to resign Clemons if Williams is on board.

    Michael Turner got a huge contract. Way more money than Julius Jones and TJ Duckett combined (at least guaranteed money.) Those two guys were relatively low-end signings. To be honest, Seattle was never really in major salary cap trouble under Ruskell. If I were to cite examples of Ruskell overpaying, it would be for wide receivers. A lot of money for average or less production.

    I don’t think people on this blog give Red Bryant enough credit. We tend to focus on what he’s not instead of what he is. People say “run-stuffer” and figure he can be replaced readily.

    Seattle’s defense in 2010 collapsed when he went out. It was solid all year in 2011 when he was healthy. There’s some correlation there, though of course it’s not all him. He does do some unique things that wouldn’t be easy to replace.

  55. Soggybuc says:

    If you have a shot to take Williams you do it and find creative ways to get them all on the field. seems to me their is a group of people about to get some shiny new rings who do it that way by design.

    I think Bobby might be on to something. Manning takes the snap and tosses right to cousins who flips it back Tannehill who tosses it across the field to Moore who hands it off to Flynn on an end around headed back right who flea flicks it back to Manning who hits the wide open and completely forgotten Rice in the endzone!

  56. Even though Williams is better than Clem, if we trade him (Clem), then we’re back to square one of only having one legit pass rusher again.

  57. Pardon my double post. I thought this was appropriate for this discussion and timeframe:

    All teams have gaps. Every year teams are holistically different. To not pick up a Hall of Fame player for fear of failure, or the somewhat arrogant excuse of “holes” is… well… ludicrous. Tick, tick, tick, tick. Next year we will lose more players, have more holes, and still have to sell the farm for a QB. The free agent market most likely won’t have a Hall of Fame player available. But I digress. By all means, fill your holes. Good luck with that.

    Seriously, the 2005 Seahawks team had “massive” holes. Where the 2005 team was better was at the QB position.

    Another year of 7-9, and JS will have to panic. JS has four years to win. If by 2013, this team does not have an identity at the QB position that is long term, he can get his resume out.

  58. Year 1 – the got Charlie Whitehurst. Fail.
    Year 2 – they got T-Jack to weather the storm. Fail (although it wasn’t expected to succeed anyway, so that can’t mean it’s a true fail).
    Year 3 – Seriously, how many years can they go by kicking the can at the QB position? They can’t continually keep worrying about the QB position and not dealing with it until “next” year. That’s too much like a Cubs fan.

  59. Palerydr says:

    How many others write a post only to get the FRACKING error message seems to happen to me wayyyyyyy to often!

  60. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    duke is the problem really our DE’s or is that we get almost no push up the middle? how many times do our ends get there just to have the Qb step up in the pocket because our tacles are right where they started? freedom is right in that this D is designed for an End like Red .hence why i like poe so well, not only does it look like he has the quickness to abuse O-linemen on a regular basis and more importantly learn Red’s position just in the off chance of another injury.

  61. JS is going to build a hell of a base team for the next GM that comes in here and doubles down on a QB. Sad but true.

  62. I don’t remember hardly any times this past season when a DE would be coming off so hard around the right tackle and getting significant pressure on the QB and then the QB would simply step up. Hey, I’m not saying that a 3-tech isn’t needed to help generate a pass rush, it is desperately needed, all I’m saying that Red, Brock, or whoever coming off the RT rarely ever got any significant pressure on opposing QBs.

  63. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    bobby go back and watch some games, a lot of the ones we won we got pressure up the middle. my point being if poe could do braches job better on passing downs and we were to get mario/avril you have clem spelling mario/avril and taking brocks place on passing downs. effectively fixing the pass rush i hope. that leaves the second round for Cousins. i am just throwing ideas out there for feed back i enjoy the speculation.

  64. Palerydr says:

    If we sign Williams it’s gonna be in the 15-18 mil a year range you don’t pay a DE that kind of money to be a part timer. I would expect them to flip Williams from side to side which you will have to game plan for. If we sign Red he will be signed for part time money which I’m not sure he will accept.

    Manning doesn’t fit what the Hawks want in a QB. I admit I liked the idea of him playing here but now I expect them to kick the tires but ultimately not sign him.

    That leaves us with trying to sign Flynn or as Chuck and a few others have pointed out another year of Jackson with a pair of younger guys or even another vet possibly Kyle Orton all competing for the job. What I don’t expect is for them to ignore the QB position for another year.

  65. I didn’t mean to be as critical as it must have sounded. Heck, if I could add any defensive player in the NFL to the ‘Hawks, I’d take Suh simply because of his ability to dominate up the gut. That’s what I’d like most. In this scenario with Williams though is that he’s a guy who is probably going to be a “free” agent and is available. And, unlike a Ruskell signing, he just turned 27 so he’s got plenty of great years ahead of him too.

    I absolutely love Red Bryant. I love that he’s so unbelievably dominant at stuffing the run on the strong side. I can live with his liabilities in rushing the passer, but we need more players to pick up that pass rush slack if we’re not going to get as much from him there in base sets (and I’m fine with adding a guy like Nick Perry in the 1st round to spend his rookie year potentially as a designated pass rusher). The obvious position is 3-tech. The only problem with that position though is that I think it’s so hard to evaluate those players and not many are ever going to be guys like Sapp, Such, etc. Your 10-15-20 sack a year guys are usually the DE or OLB types who can get after it. I agree that I’d rather have a dominant 3-tech, but those big sack guys are ones who come from the outside (and, yes, they are more effective if the QB can’t step up).

  66. freedom-x–I dont remember what Turner was garuanteed, but his salary average was about the same as what Duckett and Jones were signed for. I argued passionately that Ruskell had lost his mind on that one. Did Duckett and Jones equal Turners production, even in year one?! No, they didnt even achieve HALF Turners production. Duckett was given more than 2 million garuanteed, and more than 2.5 mill a year base if I recall–and no one else in the NFL even wanted him. It was a ridiculous case of overpaying. I wont even go into Jones, whom I loathed.

    My point was that Ruskell’s way was to sign second-tier guys and overpay them, trying to make himself look brilliant. In the end, it backfired and thats a major reason the fool is out of football, likely for good.

    And it couldnt have happened to a more deserving fellow.

  67. Seahawks2620 says:

    I love the scenario of signing Williams, and drafting Cousins in the second or third round. I honestly have little to no interest in Cliff Avril, only because I feel as if it is possible that he was only above average due to the great line that Detroit has. I am not saying that he couldn’t produce elsewhere, just that I am wary of his ability to perform on a weaker line. Obviously, the Seahawks have a “stout” line, but only in size. We definitely do not have a force such as Suh, who can man handle offensive lineman, and wreak havoc on almost every down. I am not downplaying our line’s ability, just referencing to the fact that as alluded to in prior posts, we don’t have defensive tackles who are capable of getting to the QB consistently. Bottom line, Cliff Avril was under no pressure to produce last season. Signing Williams doesn’t automatically subtract Bryant from the equation, it just means that the coaching staff will have to get more creative. Fortunately, Williams is alot more versatile than often given credit for. It will be a bit easier to plug Williams and Bryant into a rotation, allotting both players ample face time, than originally thought when observing with the naked eye. Seahawks need a big boost in pass rush, Williams is a very real possibility.

  68. BobbyK–Finding a true franchise qb is hard to do. You dont just throw all your eggs in one basket. Exactly what were JS and Caroll supposed to do–pull a rabbit out of a hat? Who did they have a legitimate chance at landing–Dalton is all I can think of. And while he looks good, its still to early to declare him a Franchise QB.

    Three years is pretty short. Look how many teams go a decade without a top-echelon qb. While no one wants that to happen here–and it wont–those caliber qb’s arent available for any price most of the time.

    Personally, I was disgusted with them offering Hass such a fake-ass insulting contract; they pretty much told him to piss off. I was disgusted by signing T-Joke, and I hated and still hate the Carpenter pick. But I understand thier reasoning behind all those decisions, and I support them. Not everything they do will work out, but overall they are doing a fine job.

    They will find us a great qb, but it may take longer than you can stand. There patience doesnt mean they wont do whatever it takes to get thier man. They will move heaven and earth if they love a guy. I bet they are trying hard to get RGIII, but theres just no way they can compete with the other interested teams.

  69. Palerydr says:

    If we sign Flynn then I don’t want to go beyond 10 mil a year for 4 years with 60-70% guaranteed. I’m not that high on his potential he’s a real bang or bust prospect to me. If we do sign him and Willams for a combined 28 mil there’s very little left for a Heater/Red So in this case I would draft Luke Kuechley he’s fast(4.56 at combine) and a tackling machine. In this scenario Malcolm Smith will start at the Wil. This will give us the speed that Pete has already stated he wants to achieve at the LB spot. I also see us dropping down a few spots to achieve this possibly picking up a 2nd rounder.

  70. Dukeshire says:

    There is no chance any NFL team drafts a 340+ lb interior D lineman to play 3-tech. Please stop with that impossible scenario / speculation, that he and Mebane will pair up. It’s not happening.

  71. Duke–RIght. And there’s no way anyone would take a 320 plus pound DT and make him the LDE in a 4-3 either…right?!

    Nothing is impossible. If Seattle thinks Poe will be good at 3-tech, they will put him there. Besides which, they could move Mebane back to 3-tech, and with a stud like Poe at NT, he might bring the pass-rush we glimpsed his rookie year. It isnt like Mebane has had a great NT to pair with when he was at 3-tech.

  72. Though we’re more likely to end up with Still or Ingram than Poe. 3-4 teams will be dying to draft Poe, as 3-4 NT’s are so hard to find.

  73. GeorgiaHawk says:

    There will be more free agent d-lineman out there besides Williams.

    I hope that we can fill our pass rush needs through free agency, and then draft Upshaw! that would put our defense over the top ,IMO.

    However our greatest need, imo is on the other side of the ball.

  74. I like this scenario: St. Louis surprises everyone and picks RGIII. Trades Bradford to Seattle. Not saying it will happen, but I like it.

  75. I’d love to have Bradford. I don’t see it happening, but I’d love it!

  76. GeorgiaHawk says:

    The more I think about it, the more I like Decastro at 12! Especially if we sign Flynn or Manning.
    However my favorite 1st round pick at this time is Upshaw, followed by Decastro, and Richardson.

  77. GeorgiaHawk says:

    It sucks that we can’t make a play for RG or Bradford because we are in the same division as the Rams!

  78. I think we can, but I don’t think we can compete with what Washington will offer.

    If we had a chance to trade some pick to a divisional opponent and it meant we’d get all kinds of their picks in the future, I think we’d have to consider it (wouldn’t it be fun to own about 5 future picks from the Cards, Rams, or SF?).

  79. Dukeshire says:

    STRBM – Seattle runs a unique d line scheme that makes Red an end in a 4-3 possible. But more importantly, as I’m sure you’ve noticed, that experiment comes with a price: zero pass rush outside of the weak side end, or sub packages. My point is, no right minded team drafts a situational player in the first round. And drafting Poe to play 3-tech would be just that, IMO. I see him as BJ Raji, 2.0. He’s a rare athlete, that can anchor the middle. Playing him elsewhere isn’t impossible (I’ll recant that) but it is foolish and irresponsible, as I see it.

  80. Dukeshire says:

    And look, with due respect to everyone, how can anyone rationalize drafting another o lineman in the first, again this year? With all the more pressing needs on this roster, I find that logic absolutely absurd. To me, its such short sighted thinking. (Again, no disrespect intended.)

  81. If we wanted it bad enough we could acquire St. Louis’ #2 pick but that seems very, very far fetched. We would be puking every April for years to come.

    Palerydr mentioned a top out contract for Flynn at 4yrs & $10 million per season. I’m more in the 5 yr $60 million range and willing to pull out all the stops that this is our guy. GET ER DONE!

  82. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dam I hate this anticipation of what we will sign and/or draft in the next month or so!

  83. As for the possibility of drafting DeCastro it has little to do with logic OR thinking. More the gut FEELING that this guy is going to be an absolute beast and cause a tectonic shift for the O-Line that he plays on.

    Yes we have more pressing needs. No doubt about that. If the pass rusher that they want is not there though I will still be ecstatic to get one of the best players in the draft. A sick, sick Offensive Line is fine by me.

    That said I still have visions of Grant Wistrom crawling on his hands and knees toward Rburger and not getting there. If Brockers, Perry, Upshaw, Coples, Ingram or whomever is THAT guy then by all means pull the trigger. If not then don’t disregard someone who might be a perennial All Pro because on paper that is not perceived need.

  84. Question – How many times in the past 30 years has a team with a top 3 pick traded down with a division rival? And how many times was a QB the target of the team trading up? I’d be curious to know the answers, but I am guessing it is zero in both cases. So no trade with the Rams. No signing of Peyton. Think like PC and JS and you have to believe they will go pass rusher in round 1, and Cousins in Rd 2. But then again, Cousins may just sneak into round 1. So it’s a gamble.

  85. Palerydr — happens all the time!!!!

    nbk35zw — I am hoping that doesn’t become true, but it just may

  86. GeorgiaHawk says:

    If you have an o-lineman at #12 like Decastro then it’s a no brainor, imo.
    You seem to think that our O-line as a group is our second best strength, however in reality, imo, is that the running back group, the WR group, and the d-lineman group are ahead of the O-line at this time!

    If you are talking about potential then that’s another story, however if you are talking about reality then the o-line still has much to prove!

    Yes it seems that it would be foolish to take another O- lineman in the first round, however if there is player that will be a huge upgrade to what we have now then it’s a no brainer, imo!

  87. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I should just shut up and let Galena speak, because she makes much more sense than Dukeshire when it comes to our o-line.

  88. Okung, Moffitt, Unger, DeCastro, Giacomini to start the season. Carpenter can take his time healing and competing for PT.

    Flynn taking snaps and Lynch taking handoffs. Time of possession in our favor. Defense resting. Ahhhh.

    Now if we just had 3 or 4 1st round picks these decisions would be soooo much easier.

  89. “And look, with due respect to everyone, how can anyone rationalize drafting another o lineman in the first, again this year? With all the more pressing needs on this roster, I find that logic absolutely absurd. To me, its such short sighted thinking. (Again, no disrespect intended.)”

    Agreed. First round needs to address the QB situation, and if we do somehow sign one of the FA QB’s, then we need a DL more than on O-lineman. I think I’d rather take a RB to compliment Marshawn than another O-lineman, given the personnel we’ve got right now.

  90. Galena is just the name of my favorite Alaskan village. Balls are still attached where they belong(not on the fireplace mantle yet). I couldn’t resurrect my old id “ALASKAN” so I had to start over.

  91. More points would make our current front seven much better. Maybe more points = better pass rush?

  92. Dukeshire says:

    The RB unit is ahead of the o line? I’m guessing you didn’t watch the Cleveland game. D Line is ahead of O Line? D line is nearly universally agreed upon, one of the teams biggest needs. WR is ahead of O Line? That is as thin a unit as there is on the team.

    Look, I’m not saying the O Line is settled. But to endorse drafting on “gut feeling” as you have done Georgia, is irresponsible. It’s the same philosophy Matt Millin used in Detroit, drafting WR in the first, year after year, that lead no where. How any objective viewer watched all 16 games last season could suggest that O Line is now and still a pressing need, over other positions, is beyond me. Perhaps you are right. But sadly I know you are not.

  93. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Perhaps I am right as you say Dukeshire, however there are more important things to deal with now!

  94. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dukeshire- how many of our running backs played in the probowl?
    Now how many of our o-lineman played in the probowl? Simple math!

    And you are accusing me of gut feelings? What a joke! Explain your way out of this! Lol.

  95. Duke, if I had the choice of adding a beast on the DL or the OL this season it’s 100% on the DL. Who is that guy? I hope Pete and Co know. If that guy IS NOT available I have seen enough of DeCastro destroying people over and over again that it will still cause excitement knowing that that guy is going to be a Seahawk. Pete and Schneid have more up their sleeve than we know. Free agency will clear up the picture somewhat. If they can address needs at DL, LB and God forbid QB than we don’t have to go into the draft in panic mode.

    Matt Millen was an idiotic GM. But Detroit finally got it right with Calvin Johnson even though they had blown so many picks on WRs already. We can’t see all the twists and turns that will come. Injuries and busts happen and what was a strength is suddenly a weakness. If we can get an All Pro DL I’m all for it. If that’s not an option but we can get an All-Pro OL then sign me up. Get players, who cares what round they come in or whether it’s via free agency or trade. The point I guess is that a great player causes a positive ripple effect on the entire team. An effect that we can’t calculate on paper. Those are the players who get you to the promised land! When there is a chance to get one of those guys, regardless of position, get them.

    We all know what we need and that is a Superbowl champ. The recipe for that team is not set in stone(except in our case it includes Matt Flynn).

  96. Dukeshire says:

    Georgia – I’m not accusing you of “gut feelings”. You flat out said Glaena makes more sense than me because he said DeCastro is a “gut FEELING…”

    Moreover, if you can’t (or choose not to) see the talent on the o line now, (the youngest in the NFL, mind you) vs the other glaring holes on this roster, there is nothing I can say here to open your eyes. Just prepare yourself for major disappointment when Seattle passes on yet another O Lineman in the first, come April.

  97. Dukeshire says:

    Galena – No where have I run down DeCastro. But I am a firm believer in drafting for need, not BPA. That is; you take the best player available that fills a need. O line is not a 1st round need for this roster. I they need to trade back, gain an additional pick somewhere else, in order to feel comfortable selecting their guy, then great. But simply because a player is on the board that projects well doesn’t mean they should take him, if it spells redundancy (as would DeCastro, for this roster).

  98. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    duke so youre saying that poe would not be an upgrade over branch? and moreover i am talking about him starting not being used here and there. and i do believe minnesota ran two 330 lb DTs in a 4/3 with jared allen on the outside, oh and if i remember they got pressure and you couldnt run on them. you put poe at the 3 or switch him with mebane doesnt matter with his speed and quickness he will draw a double a lot freeing mebane up.
    my first pick would still be decastro for one reason, they say he is the second comming of hutch. if thats true someone please tell me they wouldnt take hutch in his prime again even with who we have on the line. plus if we dont take him the cards may.
    lastly there is not a third QB woth a first round pick in this draft and taking one would most likely hurt more than help

  99. Duke, I understand what you are saying. BPA doesn’t matter anyway if you don’t really know who the BPA is.(which proves out every year to some degree) Of course you draft for need. What I’m getting at is that it’s good to be adaptable and flexible with drafting philosophy. Meaning, just because today it appears on paper that we have a bright future at position X does not mean come game day that that is the case. If player Y gives your team a better chance of winning the superbowl than player Z who would you draft?

    Not at all do I suggest we lock on to DeCastro only at #12 but to rule him out entirely doesn’t make any sense.

  100. Soggybuc says:

    BPA does mean different things to each Team. if your GB with a roster as stacked as they have it means BPA no matter the position.
    If you SF it means the BPA with hands!!!!!!
    For the Hawks it means the BPA who likes the taste of QB’s

  101. Soggybuc says:

    Oh and WTF is up with you guys this past week? I’m really starting to worry the TNT might start docking Eric’s wages for all the bandwidth we’ve been blowing up.
    really in the 3- 3 1/2 years i have been reading and posting on this blog it’s been rare to see a thread get over 50 posts and lately we are pushing most of them to 100’s.
    And by all means don’t because i’m enjoying the hell out of it!

  102. Soggybuc says:

    Oh and WTF is up with you guys this past week? I’m really starting to worry the TNT might start docking Eric’s wages for all the bandwidth we’ve been blowing up.
    really in the 3- 3 1/2 years i have been reading and posting on this blog it’s been rare to see a thread get over 50 posts and lately we are pushing most of them to 100’s.
    And by all means don’t because i’m enjoying the hell out of it!

  103. Soggybuc says:

    see you guys have broke the Blog!, i only hit submit once!

  104. bigmike04 says:

    Can I just say that this just my opinion on the whole Peyton Manning, Matt Flynn, Mario Williams situation & how that plays out for seahawks..

    Matt Flynn: I think it comes down to 2 teams that are Cleveland & Miami as both run the same type offensive that green bay runs.. A case can be made for both team & here is both team case.

    Browns: They feel like Colt McCoy isn’t that good of QB & have lost faith in his ablity to lead this team & to play the QB position, I do think Mike Holmgren will be on hot seat if they don’t do better this up coming season.

    Miami: Their new HC was the old OC for Green Bay so has good conection with Flynn so that plays in their favor, they are in desperate need of QB real bad as Chad Henne wasn’t that good & than go out and get Matt Moore & JP Losman than you reek of desperation.. It not knock on matt moore but it was poor decision on picking Chad Henne as your future QB. They don’t need to get Peyton because they have young OL that couldn’t protect their QB so how are they going to protect Peyton!!

    Peyton Manning: I think it comes down to team that are desperated for QB who can come in & help them, thought Peyton is most likely going to want to go to team that is playoff Potential which I think is Seattle Seahawks who would make perfect sense, I know of lot of people on here don’t like the move but Tarvis Jackson is just not that good of QB, I say signed Peyton, release Jackson, Portis is 2nd String & draft QB in this yr draft, don’t wait but don’t have to be in 1st rounds as their always good QB in later round mind you all..

    Mario Williams: I have to say their would be plenty of interested because this guy can potentiality make your defensive side of ball better.. Thought as for him coming to seattle which in my opinion highly doubtful, I just don’t think he would be best for our defensive alignment, thought I do think Pats will throw him the most cash to help their defensive get better.

  105. Lynch really didn’t do much last year outside of the Quake incident. However, I still likd him. Same for the first part of this last season, if you remember. There were people on here complaining about him and how the position needed an upgrade. Then, all of a sudden, they started feeding it to him AND the OL started opening some holes. Then he became the Beast we know and are about to franchise. Lynch wasn’t good statistically until the OL began pulling their weight and became a good, funtioning unit. If they hadn’t improved they way they had, Lynch would have continued to have sucked and there’s no way he’d have played in the Pro Bowl.

  106. Dukeshire says:

    hawkfaninoaklahoma – Minn and Seattle don’t run identical fronts, so that comparison my be difficult. But if Seattle were to adjust their scheme (which they have done up front before) then that’s a different story. That said, he may or not be an upgrade over Branch at 3-tech, but my argument is that his best position moving forward would be NT, that’s all. I do know, and have said a dozen times, 3-tech is one of the biggest needs on the team.

  107. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Bobbyk- If Lynch is only as good as his o-line then why would the FO want to franchise him.
    I think he deserves a little more credit then that.

  108. Dukeshire says:

    Bobby can certainly speak for himself. But he did say:

    “Then, all of a sudden, they started feeding it to him AND the OL started opening some holes.”

    It doesn’t appear that he was saying Lynch was only as good as the OL.

  109. I thought Lynch was a stud last year. I also thought he was great early this past year. He couldn’t and didn’t do it all by himself. He is one of the best backs in the league, I’ve never doubted this. My comments from last year and the first month this past year were defending him and saying he’s good/great. It’s not until he got help, blocking, did many others start to believe what I already knew: He is damn good. It wasn’t an anti-Lynch statement, it actually was the opposite but no many outside of Barry Sanders can turn water into wine and Lynch is no different.

  110. chuck_easton says:

    Sure this team still needs upgrades at several positions. And everybody is right an upgrade regardless of where that person plays is still an upgrade.

    BUT, I will go on record right now and say the areas that I will fall down with a heart seizure if Seattle drafts in the 1st round are:

    Safety (don’t need it), CB (strong enough, more pressing needs), OL (same as CB, sure could use an upgrade anytime, but more pressing needs, Punter (we have one of the best), Kicker (only the Raiders draft a kicker in the 1st round, long snapper.

    Every other position can and should be upgraded (QB, DL, LB, RB, WR…in that order). If our 1st round draft pick doesn’t come from one of these 5 positions, with an emphasis on the first 3, then I may just have to vacate the JS/PC love shack I’ve been residing in for the past 2 seasons.

  111. Dukeshire says:

    Chuck – That type of reasonable list of priorities has no place here!

  112. GeorgiaHawk says:

    If we upgrade the QB and DL positions through free agency, then that totally changes how and who the FO targets in the up coming draft.

    Again though, reaching for a player in the 1st round to try and fill a need is a foolish way to draft, imo.

    Take chances in the later rounds not the first.

  113. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dukeshire- I think most folks here are in line with Chucks reasonable list of priorities, and I think the FO is too, however so many things can happen before and during the draft that will change the way the FO will do it. Free agency, trades, injury updates, things behind the closed doors that us fans or the media is not aware of yet, ect..

    The bottom line for me when it comes to the first round ( because we have many other rounds plus free agency to help fill the needs also) is to pick a player that can step in right away and make an impact for years to come. Low risk high reward type player. Ideally that will be a player of high need, however it just might not work out that way.

    Last thing I want to see is the FO reach for a player like last year when they picked Carpenter because o-line was a high need.
    What good is it going to do choosing a d-lineman this year in the first yound( just because it’s a great need) just to see him not produce well.

    Personally I would like for us to pick Upshaw with our first, however if he is gone then I will not be disappointed if they take a guy like Decastro. And I certainly will not vacate the PC/JS love shack. Lol.

  114. I’m 100% with GeorgiaHawk on this. A quick look at our 1st round draft picks since 2000:

    2000 #19 Shaun Alexander: League MVP
    2000 #22 Chris McIntosh OT: Injury bust
    2001 #9 Koren Dropinson WR: Bust
    2001 #17 Chris Hutchinson OG: Heart of the OL
    2002 #28 Jeremy Stevens TE: Bust
    2003 #11 Marcus Trufant CB: Solid
    2004 #23 Marcus Tubbs DT: Injury bust
    2005 #26 Chris Spencer C: bust/dissapointment
    2006 #31 Kelly Jennings CB: bust/midget
    2007 Trade for Deon Branch WR, AHHHHHH!!!
    2008 #28 Lawrence Jackson DE, bust
    2009 #4 Aaron Curry LB, Bust
    Regime Change
    2010 #6 Russell Okung OT, on the right track
    2010 #14 Earl Thomas S, All Pro
    2011 #28 James Carpenter G/T, injury/incomplete

    Out of 15 picks we have 8 busts + Branch which I consider a lost 1st round pick. We’ve got 5 solid players out of those 15 and Carp has yet to prove out either way.

    What is most important in the 1st round is that you get a PLAYER that IMPROVES the team!!! You are limiting yourself when you go into the draft believing that “In the first round we HAVE TO draft a QB/DL/OL/WR” etc. What I’m saying is keep your options open and don’t rule out anything that could improve your team. Maybe it’s trading down or out of the 1st round, maybe it’s drafting Perry, maybe it’s drafting DeCastro or Tannehill. If any of these guys are impact players are we going to look back in 3 years and wish we hadn’t taken them? Scout the guy, do your homework and if you think he’s the one for your team in the 1st round take him.

    There are players to be had in every round, we know this. The round in which we get them is irrelevant. Going into the draft level headed(which this FO so far has seemingly done) is the way to go. Covering your holes in FA let’s you draft without desperation.

  115. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    chuck list sounds good and agree to a point however if a player falls to the hawks that is a once in a decade player do you no take him?
    that was my point with decastro everything leads me to believe this guy is going to be very very good even great and do you pass on him for a need you can address either in FA or later in the draft? this staff has shown a talent for finding good players late in the draft. seems to me OLB can be addressed late in draft or mid way thru so take that out of 1st round seems to me that the first round really should be DT/DE-BPA. if the front office takes decastro it will be because he can offer a big improvement over lets say gallery.

    duke all i am saying is poe can play 3 tech it has been stated several times, more importantly with his quickness he would be a problem to block. i coukld easily see him getting 5-6 sacks a year not to mention incredibly stout against the run. i guess in the end we will all be suprised who the team picks.

  116. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    galena, nicely said

  117. If we draft any OL in the first round, outside of DeCastro, I’ll be upset, angry, irate. I want to justify not taking him b/c he’s not at a position of need. We have other fish to fry (like Tannenhill if we still don’t have a QB). But, man, I sure do think he’s going to be a multiple Pro Bowl beast too. About the only way I think this happens though is if we have signed a QB and a good DL (or great one like Williams).

  118. GeorgiaHawk says:

    One position I do not want us to draft with the first pick is WR. I don’t care how good they are or how much we may need them. Seems like they are the biggest head cases for position in the NFL, and the higher they go in the draft the more likely they- Wait! I take this all back I forgot all about Larry Fitzgerald, and Calvin Johnson! Lol.

  119. chuck_easton says:

    So, BPA no matter what? What if BPA at #12 is a Safety?

    Or BPA that fits some specific person? Say DeCastro, or Blackmon?

    Or BPA that fits a need the team has?

    I still say go with #3. Don’t reach for a QB in the 1st round if the top 3 are gone. But if I’m drafting and DeCastro and a highly rated DL are both still on the board, I go with the DL. He may not rate out as high as DeCastro but he fills an immediate need.

  120. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I hope I am wrong but I don’t think the FO will pick Decastro in the first, even if he is clearly the best pick only because they invested so much last year early in the draft and with gallery for the o-line.

    I just hope they shore up the D-line and qb through free agency so if Decastro is available at #12 it will be more difficult for the FO to pass him up.

    I think I just repeated what BobbyK just said but in a different way.

  121. GeorgiaHawk says:


    I don’t think anyone is saying BPA no matter what. It’s not as simple as that.
    It’s more like how much better one player is from another, imo.

    Sure if one player is slightly rated over another that is more of a need for the team you pick for need. However if one player is clearly rated higher then the bigger need pick you go with BPA, or trade back if you can and get another pick. The last thing ( imo ) you want to do is reach.

    And fortunately there are no safeties in this draft that are worthy of a #12 pick.

  122. If the Seahawks sign Mario Williams, I think we draft De Castro at #12 because I don’t think the Seahawks will reach that high for Tannehill.

    I’d expect them to then take a QB in the 2nd and another one later in the draft to compete with T-Jack and the credit card thief.

  123. DeCastro would change this team for the better for upwards of ten years.

    Not many other candidates at 12 can convince me of that.

    Stop trying to fill needs, and draft Hall of Famers.

    Two years from now, we’ll all be lamenting our horrible line and wishing we had drafted with the grain (OL) rather than against it.

    In fact, I would suggest that, without the string of late round bloomers, JS has been a major bust in the 1st round.

    Stop trying to fill needs at the expense of talent.

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