Seahawks Insider

Morning links: Cap casualties

Post by Eric Williams on Feb. 28, 2012 at 8:08 am with 112 Comments »
February 28, 2012 8:08 am
Marcus Trufant

Brian McIntyre writing for Football Outsiders takes a closer look at the Seattle Seahawks salary cap situation in his review of the NFC West.

McIntyre estimates that Seattle will have between $30 to $35 million in cap space once free agency begins on March 13th . He predicts that Marshawn Lynch could be franchise with the tag for running backs estimated to be around $7.7 million, while defensive end Red Bryant likely will not be franchised, with the estimated tag for defensive ends around $10.4 million.

McIntyre also writes that cornerback Marcus Trufant and receiver Mike Williams could be potential salary cap casualties. Releasing trufant would free up $4.467 in cap space, but more important would save Seattle $7.3 million in cash that could be spent on other free agents. And while McIntyre says it’s unlikely, releasing Williams would clear $3.425 million off the team’s salary cap.

Andrew Brandt of the National Football Post has a nice breakdown of the franchise tag process, with the deadline coming on Monday.

Brock Huard of ESPN 710 Seattle takes a look at the quarterbacks and their performance at the NFL Scouting combine. Huard believes that Michigan State quarterback Kirk Cousins helped himself while Arizona’s Nick Foles hurt himself last week.

More Huard: He believes Seattle should target Wisconsin’s Russell Wilson in the draft.

Rob Rang of NFLDraftScout.com writes that defensive tackle Michael Brockers poor showing in the combine tests could be a red flag for teams looking to take him early in the first round.

Michael Lombardi of the NFL Network offers a blueprint on how the Rams can maximize the trade value for the No. 2 overall pick.

Categories:
Morning links
Leave a comment Comments → 112
  1. SeahawkFan12 says:

    Why would Seattle target Wilson? He’s the shortest QB in the draft. I like what I’m reading about Cousins, and he could be a nice backup behind Manning/Flynn.

  2. Wow. I didn’t realize we’d have around $40 million (perhaps more) in cap space available if Tru and BMW were released. While I don’t think BMW will be let go, it wouldn’t surprise me either. I think it’s a given that Tru won’t be around at that price tag (although I could see him back at a reduced salary).

    I know we probably won’t be able to sign both Flynn and Mario Williams, but can you imagine the optimism around here if we somehow manage to pull it off? The 1st round pick would be gravy.

  3. RDPoulsbo says:

    St. Louis is only $3-6M under the cap with Bradford, Smith and long accounting for $47.42M alone. Under the old CBA, being perennially one of the worst teams and drafting at the top was a loser’s tax indeed. It’s going to be tough to unravel that mess.

  4. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    bobby, i cant believe you are so sold on both manning and flynn. i cant shake the feeling that flynn is is kolb 2.0 and manning is hass 2.0 at best you get 2-3 years out of him if he can hold up under this young line.
    i would love to see the team address the Qb problem but not at the expense of the future. if we could get cousins in the third and take a DL/OL in the first 2 rounds life will get better for us fans. and i am still a fan of picking decastro in the first if he is there when we pick, i think it is the best pick we could make by far.
    my big question is would Dontari Poe fit in a 4/3 as a DT? the guy is a beast and could be a great back up for big red as well. if by some chance he made it to the second??

  5. Dukeshire says:

    Lol. Let’s take it easy here. They appear to have the cap room to make a legit run at Flynn, which is a great thing, presuming they’re interested.

    Huard is such a dumbbell. Seattle should target Wilson? Not a chance.

  6. Couldn’t agree more – I would pass on Wilson.

    Much more interested in Flynn, Manning, Tannehill or go through 2012 with T Jack. Hey, even Brock osweiler seems like an ok option later in the draft.

    Getting 2-3 years out of Manning would be terrific. Assuming he is healthy enough to play at a high level, wheres the downside? Sure you have to look for a quarterback again in 2-5 years, but thats not a significant issue in my view.

  7. Dukeshire says:

    I think that is the downside: he’s essentially another rental. It’s really not a responsible way to solidify the position. At least as I see it.

  8. chuck_easton says:

    We all know how this is going to play out. Team will make a play for Flynn. Team will likely bring Manning in for a physical.

    No issue with either of those moves. But if we don’t get either is #12 too high for Tannehill? If it is that means we draft a mid round QB and go with TJack for another season.

    Aside from the thought of having to read Bobby’s weekly anti TJack rants I have already resigned myself to accept it’s another year of TJack and a 2nd or 3rd round project to push him in 2012 and take over in 2013.

  9. “No issue with either of those moves. But if we don’t get either is #12 too high for Tannehill? If it is that means we draft a mid round QB and go with TJack for another season.”

    I’m wondering what happens if Tannehill is gone by #12, who knows what we do at QB then . . .and it could happen. Esp if Manning isn’t healthy, or is he is snagged by a team like the Jets (which has been rumored recently), not one of the QB-hungry teams we’ve been accounting for.

  10. Dukeshire says:

    Chuck – I believe your last paragraph is how it is most likely to play out, as well

  11. I don’t know – is renting a race car and winning the Indianaplois 500 with it just another rental?

    A peyton Manning rental is not the same as a Charlie Whitehurst or T Jack 2 year rentals.

    Sure, you have to shop for a QB again in 3-5 years. But so what?

  12. chuck_easton says:

    blocis,

    What if you rent the race car and it crashes halfway through the race and can’t finish? What if you rent the race car and still finish middle of the pack, but slightly better than what you would have finished driving your current car and saving up to buy a shiny new car next year?

    Is it still worth it?

    Manning doesn’t guarantee a trip to the Superbowl. He may give us 2 or 3 more wins in regualar season, but nowhere does his contract come with a money back superbowl or I play for free guarantee.

  13. I think everyone considering Manning is assuming that the Seahawks (or any team) does their due diligence and determines he is healthy enough to play football.

    Everybody also knows that getting Manning (or Flynn or Tannehill etc.) gaurantees nothing. Not a Superbowl, not a division title. Nothing. We all know this.

    The point is, that knowing Manning would be likely play for 2-5 years should not stop the Seahawks (or any other QB needy team) from considering him. We signed Whitehurst to a two year contract, we signed Jackson to a 2 year contract…… so why not consider Manning as the next 2-5 year QB?

  14. RDPoulsbo says:

    Once again, people are thinking even if Manning recovers from his injury, he’ll just be able to pick up where he left off in Indy as if nothing ever happened even with nerve damage in his throwing arm that will undoubtedly change his throwing motion and release. Nevermind a completely new team where he has no rapport with his WRs and a new scheme he’s never had experience with in his entire football career. People need to give up this fantasy and understand wherever he goes, it’s not going to be pretty.

  15. FleaFlicker says:

    BobbyK: I don’t think we’ll be able to bring in Mario Williams, even though it would be awesome. Way too much money required.

    Check out that last part of the Andrew Brandt article where he breaks down the Tag mathematics: “Thus, Williams will either make $22 million with the Texans or sign a long-term contract with the Texans or another team for guaranteed money that will certainly exceed $22 million. It’s good to be Mario.”

  16. I am assuming that whatever team considers him will do their due diligence and ensure he is healthy and can still play football at a high level.

    Guys – this is what professional managers, trainers, doctors and coaches do. If they don’t do their due diligence and the guy can’t play they lose their jobs. I don’t see anybody ‘taking a flyer’ on Peyton Manning. Its not like his injury situation is a secret.

  17. bigmike04 says:

    I would take Peyton & his injury over Tarvis Jackson because what put me over the most about what, I am saying is Peytoin is proven winner & has won the big games, Jackson isn’t a winner & he just prove this season that, he cannot make the right decision, he came into system that he already knew in Minnesota & still failed big time.

    It a lot of smoke & mirrors with the colts & Indy because their owner is trying to look like a good guy with the eventually released of Peyton, that why he released his injuries stuff to media, Peyton has to defend himself..

    I think if seahawks traininers get a chance to do their thing with Peyton to see if he is healthy & they clear him than Seahawks should sign him & draft a QB in this draft but later in the rounds or wait until next yr for matt barkley from USC…

  18. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    reguardless of how well he has healed how much more abuse can his body take? he had a neck fusion the weak spot and stress points are now the points where it is not fused. in otherwords the disk above and below the fusion. it is stupid to even take a flier on an old injured QB. i keep hearing everyone say weeden is too old you couldnt get enough time out of him. if manning last 2 years i will be amazed i will be even more impressed if he plays at 60% of what he played at before injury.

  19. Dukeshire says:

    blocis – With due respect, worst annalogy ever. If there was anything even close to a guarantee he’d bring a Super Bowl victory here, then maybe. But that doesn’t exist in professional football. Moreover, the financial investment to get him here for 2-3 years, makes little sense to me, knowing they’d have to develop another QB shortly after, starting the process all over again.

  20. RDPoulsbo says:

    Peyton released his medical info himself, if anyone else did it, they’d be looking at jail time. Payton’s own agent says no one is certain when or if he’ll completely heal because there’s just nothing they can do medically or through rehab…and he’s the guy Peyton pays to hype him up. The asking price will be low, but he’s not worth the roster spot. The only certainty here is he will miss most off the offseason workouts, which means T-Jax will have to be the #2 QB as insurance. That bumps off any QB of the future from the draft and makes Seattle’s situation at that position even worse.

  21. Can people stop saying we can get our QB next year, I mean seriously, if anything, we will be in a worse draft position because the Hawks are getting better. Sign Flynn and be done with it, otherwise draft a QB in the first, second, and third, and pray one of them pans out. Fill the rest of the holes in free agency. Once we figure out which QB pans out, draft for need next year, that’s more realistic then saying go for Barkley, he’s going to cost as much as Luck and RG III this year except we’ll be drafting later to begin with. And resign Hill while your at it, especially if Heater is gone. Thank you.

  22. JazBadAzz says:

    Well if Manning is passing physicals, throwing well and can can be at least 90% of his former self like you guys pointed out….Why in the hell would the colts let him go? The money wont matter, you got Luck in the wings just in case he doesn’t hold up and if he does play well all the better! Im done talking about Manning…if the Colts let him walk and he kicks ass next year, then they will be ridiculed for a decade!

  23. This horse is so thoroughly down and kicked. But for what it’s worth, I totally agree with you Blocis. But then I think I’ve already said my feelings on Bringing PM in. So you have to bring in another QB in in 2-3 years. So what. It’s not like players aren’t a constantly revolving door. It’s not like we only have one certain window with which to win. Players will retire, new players will come in, players will get hurt. That’s just a part of it. So in 2-3 years we have to find a new QB. But maybe at that point Portis is ready. Or maybe we take a QB in the later rounds to groom for the future. Voila…in 2-3 years he’s ready. I don’t think anyones suggesting that we bring PM and then otherwise ignore the QB position.

  24. Dukeshire says:

    There is no way the Colts can afford to keep Peyton’s contract and pay the #1 overall while rebuilding a roster that is aging at a breakneck pace. No chance they can have both and do what’s necessary to fill their many holes.

    The Colts won’t be ridiculed for letting Manning walk. It’s assumed that he’ll play well, wherever that is, next year. Case in point: there are people here who feel he can take this half built roste to the Super Bowl at less than 100% of his former self. No, the Colts are in full rebuilding mode and face difficult decisions. Releasing Manning is clearly the most difficult they face.

  25. Dukeshire says:

    Competitive teams do not have revolving doors at QB.

  26. Dukeshire – sorry for the poor analogy.

    Cornutt – thanks for your support! Its true, all players are rentals.

    The point is, we rented Whitehurst. We rented Jackson. If he is healthy and can still play at a high level, why not consider Manning as our next QB rental? Thats all I am saying *consider* Manning. It would be irresponsible not to consider him.

    I’m also ok with longer term options like Flynn, Tannehill or even Osweiler, but don’t have any reason to remove a healthy Mannning from consideration.

    Hey, I don’t even mind sticking with Jackson for another year. (TJack haters can go ahead and respond)

  27. I kinda think that we might be looking at Tannehill(1st) or Cousins (2nd). I really don’t know why – just a feeling.

    I don’t think they are interested in Manning at all but they may kick the tires a little bit.

  28. Agree with Jaz, if the Colts let Manning walk and he lights it up somewhere else, yikes. Also, a rookie is not going to be able to come in and do what Manning did with what Manning had. Colts with Manning = playoffs/possible superbowl and finishes his career there, fans happy. Colts with Luck and w/out Manning = rebuild, most likely just some sad football or continuation of last year, setting Luck up for failure with unrealistic expectations of him, fans pissed/unpatient. In my eyes if the Colts let Manning walk and he’s healthy, it’s a slap in the face to everyone, him and the fan base. Manning is the Colts.

  29. Dukeshire says:

    I believe you have to stop the rentals, because in order to build a contender, one that’s consistently competitive, not just for a year or two, you need consistency at QB. I cannot think of one example of a team that’s been a perennial championship contender without stability at QB. Seattle is now at the point where the rest of the team is close and can no longer afford to “rent” stop-gaps at QB, and continue to progress, long term.

  30. Dukeshire says:

    But TruBlu, that’s exactly how the Colts great run began in the first place: rookie QB with ridiculous upside that they were able to build around. Los early, playoffs, year after year to follow.

  31. “Competitive teams do not have revolving doors at QB.”

    I hear you Duke. What I was trying to say is that good teams can make successful transitions from one QB they believe in, to another–just like at every other position. Switching QB’s isn’t inherently bad. It’s only bad when the incumbent is not as good as its predecessor.

  32. RDPoulsbo says:

    The FO has been trying to address the QB position 2 years in a row with hedged bets, not rentals. CBJ and T-Jax were both here on basically tryout contracts for a chance at long term contracts and both failed. Both Manning and Weeden, given their age, are rentals.

  33. bigmike04 says:

    Matt Flynn only has 2 starting game under his belt & yet PM at 90 percent is better than Jackson & Flynn.. I say take flyer on Peyton & let Portis be the 2nd string, than draft QB later in the rounds..

    How much will seahawks save if they cut Jackson which they need to do..

  34. Sarcasticus says:

    This year’s crop of qb’s are so unexciting. Anyone getting excited over this group (outside of Luck and RGIII) is delusional and that includes Flynn. Any quarterback they pick this year will just be holding the fort till something comes along. I am sure an upgrade can be found but the chances they get that SB qb this year are slim.

    Defense looks deep in the draft. I say go defense and hope our qb doesn’t give the game away.

    Jenkins, Poe, Perry all looked really good this weekend. Hill is quite intriguing on offense.

  35. I don’t think our leadership ever viewed TJ as a franchise potential QB. I think they were biding their time until they could find the guy they really wanted and could groom themselves. Thus making him a rental as well. I’m not against rentals though, and that’s the point. Why not kick the tires on a player of unknown potential?

    With PM it’s a bit different scenario, given who he is and what he has accomplished. Still a rental. But a rental with insane upside for 2-3 years. In reality, all players are rentals, because there are never any guarantees. Ever. Signing Flynn or drafting a QB doesn’t ensure that we’ll have stability at QB for the next 10 years in any way. Might as well attack it from multiple angles. Have your cake and eat it too.

    I get the idea that transition is hard though, especially at the QB position. If JS/PC are in love with Flynn, I’ll get behind it. Just seems like handing a big contract to someone unknown is no better than handing a shorter contract to someone who is known. Why not sign PM and have a drafted QB sit and learn for a few years? Might make sense, given our draft position. Unless we trade all and go for RG3. :D

  36. Dukeshire says:

    Cornutt – I think that’s very true. The Packers and 49ers before them, are great examples of that transition. But consider too, that they already had an established QB in place, for years prior.

    RD – its not as though Jackson and CW were rookies. They’ve each been in the league for years and one would think they’d be past the “tryout contract” phase. I’d be surprised to learn that Carroll / Schneider viewed either as the long term solution to the position. If Seattle signs Flynn or drafts a QB in the first round or two, it will confirm in my mind, they were / are so-called rentals.

  37. For all his greatness, Peyton Manning only went to the Super Bowl twice in all his years. We went once during the same time period. Those who want him here are grasping at straws. With all the good things he brings, he would still set the franchise back. Because he has to have control of everything – and then when he goes out with an injury, who steps in? If he’s here, I’ll cheer for him with the rest. But I don’t think it’s a good idea.

  38. Duke: Good point. That is a distinction that should be made, for sure.

  39. JazBadAzz says:

    In the same respect that I said previous about Colts will be ridiculed if they let Manning walk and he lights it up….what if he walks, and a team picks him up and he flops? Now that franchise will face the same dillema! I’d rather stay away.

    T.jack is better than 12 starting QB’s in the league…with more time in the offseason to prepare and our players that didn’t quite grasp the offense because of the shorten season was a big blow. Doug did great because he has high football I.Q. and Rice did some good things as well…let all these guys get caught up this offseason and let see what happens. As always release the Beast first and foremost!

  40. Duke, I could be mistaken, but weren’t the Colts pretty horrible before Manning? Now the Colts have been a Superbowl “contender” for the last decade, that would be a serious drop-off. If Luck is as good as they say he is, wouldn’t it be benificial to allow him to learn the system behind Manning so the transition wouldn’t include a collapse? Also, Cornutt, if I had it my way, I would sign Flynn, AND draft a QB in the 2nd or 3rd depending on who was out there. I would sign a QB each following years with picks as high as the 3rd round just for insurance and for grooming purposes. You can never have to many QB’s, plus not all of them pan out.

  41. Dukeshire says:

    This much I’m sure we can all agree on: the QB decision is complicated and the most important one this FO will make.

  42. Well of course. There will be all sorts of ramification with whether PM succeeds or not. If he flops for your team, it sucks. If he’s great, it’s awesome. I think the same can be said for every team at every position.

    I’m a glass half-full kind of guy though. Incurably so.

    Still. I’d rather not suffer through another year of TJ. Lets try another recipe, whatever the type of cookies.

  43. Another reason for the Hawks to stay away from Manning is the style of offense he runs. He basically calls the plays at the line which is exactly the opposite of what we do here in Seattle. Plus, I don’t think you can really teach that style to a rookie, especially in a mold of what I think PC is looking for. Also to that note, that could play into the hand of the Colts if Luck has the football IQ as advertised because if he has the smarts and whereabouts he could run that type of offense. And, even further, this has been pointed out earlier, if Manning goes down, you got to go back to the drawing board with the play calling as you saw last year with the Colts.

  44. Yes sir, hope they get it right.

  45. Dukeshire says:

    Tru – That’s an important distinction. Manning has never run a WCO, so does he fit into Bevell’s offense or do the Seahawks taylor to him? On either case there will be a transition period that will not be seemless. It’s not a plug in and go situation.

  46. chuck_easton says:

    Let’s throw another potential kink into the chain.

    Assume Seattle makes the deal with the devil ,um Manning cartell, and tells Payton sure come on in, bring Reggie Wayne with you so you are comfortable, and of course we will let you run your offense exactly how you like it!

    Fast forward 2-3 years from now. Is there a Lombardi trophy in the case? Maybe, maybe not. Do we have the Franchise QB ready to step in? Maybe, maybe not.

    If we do have that QB in the wings CAN HE RUN PAYTON’S OFFENSE? I think the 2011 season goes to show that only Payton can run Payton’s offense.

    So, back to the drawing board and we have just thrown away two or three years of development.

    There’d better be a Lombardi in the case or heads would roll down at VMAC.

  47. I’m not sure signing Manning really would set the franchise back 2-3 years, and I’ve explained why. But wouldn’t you trade those years for a legit shot at winning it all?

    Does he gives you a better chance than say Flynn or Tannehil…certainly yes in the short term. In the long-term, no.

    If it’s between signing PM for a few years and moving up to draft an elite prospect–I’d rather do the latter. Because in that scenario, we have a young, huge upside guy to get excited about. But the idea of keeping TJ and having Tannehil as the heir apperant? Not super exciting, at least to me.

    It is highly debatable just how good PM could/will be, and I get that. I guess I’d be willing to take that risk though.

  48. I think that Flynn and Manning are out.

    1. Neither player is well suited to the WCO we run.
    2. The asking price will be too high for Flynn.
    3. Manning is too old and too risky healthwise.
    4. Flynn would already be here, if Schneider was that sold on him.

    I think we’re going to stick with T-Jack, sign one or two rookie QBs in later rounds, and focus on building this team for another year.

    We’d all like to know who our QOF is going to be, but it just doesn’t seem to be falling into place right now.

    1. Luck is out of reach because Indy wants him.
    2. Griffin is out of reach because the Rams are a division opponent and other teams will give up too much for him.
    3. It’s unlikely any of the other QBs are ready to step in as starters.

  49. I think Mario Williams could be our big FA splash this year…and he’s not a bad consolation prize because he’ll help this defense go from solid to elite.

  50. chuck_easton says:

    LOVE me some Mario Williams (in the football sense…get those minds out of the gutter).

    How does he fit into this defence? Not that this is a bad problem to have, but where does he play? Does he put Clemmons on the bench? Does he bump Red out of the starting line-up? Can he play OLB?

    Again, these are the ‘problems’ we would love to have for a change in Seattle instead of wondering if the pizza delivery guy can throw a 50 yard post and hit the WR on the fly (because we know our current QB sure can’t).

  51. Mario Williams would play inside the personal space of opposing quarterbacks.

  52. Soggybuc says:

    They also plan on giving Portis the full off/preseason to see how much he can progress. if he looks very good in the preseason it very well could be TJ in 12 with Portis taking over in 13.
    You have to remember that in 2010 this team had a lot to do personel wise and Seneca was out the door. that left Matt as starter and 2 practice squad guys as back ups in what was a poor market for QB’s remember Derek Anderson was the hot commodity in FA. they had no real choice but to go get Charlie. Indy showed why you need to have a capable guy at backup. Charlie is not great but he is capable.

  53. Let’s lay down the cards right now and have everyone malke a prediction. So answer with your predictions:

    1. What ONE QB will the Seahawks aquire this offseason?

    2. What ONE DL will the Seahawks aquire this offseason?

    3. What ONE LB will the Seahawks aquire this offseason?

  54. Soggybuc says:

    1. who ever is left in the 4th round
    2. someone nobody saw us picking.
    3 someone even Rob Rang and Mike Mayok never scouted.

  55. This Seahawks team is very unique. It’s built to win NOW (with an added pass rusher). However, it’s so young, it’s built to win for years to come (depending on how many of our current youngsters and future stars we can keep after four years of NFL service before they hit free agency).

    With that being said, I like Peyton Manning for 2012 (assuming doctors trust he’ll be fine, even after some NFL hits from 300lb monsters).

    However, it’s not an either/or for Manning. If we sign Manning, we MUST also add a QB. I don’t care if it’s Tannenhill at #12 either! Manning would be the now, obviously, but I can’t think of a better player for a Tannenhill to learn under than Manning (for the future). And if Manning turns out healthy for 2-3 more years, I don’t care (ala Aaron Rodgers learning under Favre). If Manning gets hurt and his career is over in week 5, well, then turn everything over to Tannenhill NOW (no wasted reps in ’12 and be ready to rock with Tannenhill in ’13 for a legit run).

    Personally, I don’t see how we could lose in that scenario (unless Manning was guaranteed mega money in future years, which I don’t think anyone would responsibly do — and if someone does, then Manning can go there and we don’t need him, IMO).

    In my world, I’d rather have Flynn. More long term investment with ONE guy instead of pretending you are a smart like Joe Gibbs (Mr. Happy is no Joe Gibbs in his prime, IMO) and can take clowns like broken leg guy, Doug Williams, or Mark Rypien (no legit HOFers) and win Super Bowls with them.

    Remember, if you sign Manning, you are also essentially giving up a top 1-3 pick b/c one must be used on a QB of the future. If you sign Flynn, you don’t need another high pick on a QB and can use that on another position (think front seven).

  56. raymaines says:

    I want Minn., Wash. or Miami to take a chance on Peyton Manning. I’ve decided I don’t want the ‘Hawks to rent him, but I want one of the QB needy teams that draft ahead of us to grab him.

  57. chuck_easton says:

    I’m game…

    1. Tannehill (after trading back from #12 to later in the 1st round)
    2. Mario Williams (a guy can dream)
    3. Jarret Johnson (Ravens)

  58. nidhighe says:

    “Esp if Manning isn’t healthy, or is he is snagged by a team like the Jets”

    If that happens, wonder if Carroll and Schneider would try to work a trade for Sanchez?

  59. 1. Matt Flynn
    2. Adam Carriker
    3. Lofa Tatupu

  60. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    bobby i have to agree with audible. neither flynn nor manning fit in the wco. like it or not manning is headed for the glue factory, that horse is lame. that being said i like cousins in the third, poe in the second, and ingram in the first get a true olb in the 4 and later.
    i think poe and mebane could blow up a pocket working together.

  61. Flynn has been trained in the WCO for 4 years. How doesn’t he fit?

    I agree they may be somewhat different versions of the WCO around the league but they (Sea-GB) certainly aren’t drastically different versions either. And, really, if you look at the Bevell offense of this past year (with T-Jack) and with Favre last year and ’10, AANNDD prior to Favre… those were different offenses too (with the SAME offensive coordinator!!!).

    IMO, Matt Flynn couldn’t be more made for this Seahawks offense with Bevell and Company!

  62. Clarification…
    Bevell = T-Jack ’11
    Bevell = Favre ’10 (until he got hurt), Favre ’09
    Bevell = Clowns in ’08 (T-Jack/Gus)

  63. Who says if Manning is signed as a free agent that the Hawks have to look for another QB in 2-3 years? Perhaps Portis, or a mid to late round pick can develop under Manning and take over after 2-3 years. Even if Manning isn’t as great as he was before, he is still better as a teacher and example to any young QB on the roster than T-Jack would be. For the right price, Manning would be a solid addition, but he’s probably going to be overpriced.

  64. Dukeshire says:

    Forget it Bobby. This ill-informed narrative that Flynn isn’t suited for a WCO has already taken hold here. Simply because the Packers version of the WCO incorporates spread concepts, and they run out nearly identical packages to Bevell’s version, doesn’t mean he’d be a good fit. In fact, he’s so unfamiliar with WCO concepts, he likely can’t spell WCO. Jesus Christ, where does this crap come from? He may tank badly. But let’s not invent a false argument, everyone.

  65. piperfeltcher says:

    Even if we draft a QB in the 1st round there is still around a 40% chance we will be looking for a new QB in the next 3-4 years.

  66. Dukeshire says:

    At 340+ lbs, Poe is slated to be a NT. Seattle needs a 3-tech, not another NT to pair with Menane. And ‘Bane at 3-tech was a failed experiment. Can’t see Poe on the ‘Hawks radar.

  67. freedom_X says:

    I actually think the “Joe Gibbs” model is exactly what Carroll is building for.

    The problem with the “got to get our franchise QB now” theory is that there are years where there *are no* franchise QB’s available. The best QB option available in a given year doesn’t mean you got your franchise QB, and some years none of the options pan out.

    So if you keep pouring everything into “getting a franchise QB”, you can end up getting nothing. Though that way, you’ll end up with more chances in the future because you’ll end up getting plenty of top 5 draft picks.

    Isn’t that the goal of every team, to have an elite QB? So why is Seattle going to be able to get one this year, and so many other teams aren’t?

    In other words – is Matt Flynn (or any other option) truly a franchise QB, or simply the best shot at one this year? There’s an important difference there. If Matt Flynn (as the most prominent example) is a franchise QB, period, in any year, at any time, he’s the right move. If he’s who we should go for because he’s the best available option – I’m not too sure about that.

    I believe the Seattle front office will make the decision based on absolutes, not relative to what’s there this year. They showed that last offseason. Last year’s Flynn was Kevin Kolb, there were scads of rookie QB prospects, and in the end they didn’t feel any of them were surefire enough to make a big move for.

  68. HawkyHann says:

    Ochocinco would like a chance to compete in Seattle. According to the latest report from Mike Florio and the Cincinatti Herald they’ll be in camp.

  69. Dukeshire says:

    Lol. I’m sure he’d like an opportunity to compete for a job anywhere.

    Freedom – That’s a great question about Flynn. And an important one, to be sure.

  70. HawkyHann says:

    I’d be cool with letting him try out. He’d probably help us out.

  71. Duke: do you consider the Seahawks a competitive team? Is 7-9 the margin for a “competitive” team. If so, I want to work for you!

    Your argument against Manning can also be said for any player. At least Manning has a history of greatness.

    Why are so many in Seattle forcing mediocrity?

    I suspect many of us will eat crow when Kolb lights us up this year. I just have a feeling.

    And that feeling is just as valid as saying Luck is better for Seattle’s future than Manning and so on.

    Win now.

  72. Palerydr says:

    Freedom I like your thoughts as well as that’s something I agree with 100% IMO there are only 2 guys who fit the franchise QB mold this year, Luck and RG3. Anybody else is coming with a much higher percentage of risk including Flynn.

  73. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Bevell is a joke! If the Seahawks are fortunate enough to sign Manning then I say make Manning the qb/offensive coordinator! If he doesn’t get us a Superbowl win at least we will have a competent offensive coordinator for years to come!

  74. Dukeshire says:

    nbk – I don’t get your point. To be clear where I am coming from, however: I’ve never used a win / loss record as a measure for competitiveness. Not so long as 11-5 teams miss the playoffs one year, and 7-9 teams get in, and win a playoff game. But to address what I think you’re getting at: I’ve never believed there are shortcuts to championships. This push for Manning to be brought it feels just like that to me. Win now? That’s fine, but even with Manning at his peak, this team still has holes and vast improvements to make. So while bringing in a very short term “answer” like Manning, by the time the rest of the club is in a position to compete (realistically) for a championship, we’ll be looking to replace, again, the most important position in team sports. I want more for this franchise. I want a guy to build around for the next 8-10 years. I’m not looking for a early ’00s Redskin or current Eagle blueprint. I want to build this thing from the ground up, the right way.

  75. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Fortunately I believe that Carroll will not tolerate this offense underachieving for long!
    That means that the Bevell beware signs are out! Bring in Jackson and Rice, What a waste! And Cable bringing in Gallery, Carpenter, and moffbutt. What a joke!

    Carroll, you have got the D going in the right direction, and now it’s time to figure out the offense!

    That’s the challenge moving forward! Imo.

  76. No doubt Flynn could “tank badly.”

    However, there’s less of a risk with him

    IMO

    even with the mega-contract

    than some of these kids that others comment about liking, with no college WCO experience what-so-ever…

    In the grand scheme of things, I bet Flynn can spell weast cooset ofenc better than any of them even though the talent on the Packers insinuate that they have good enough receivers to run more spread principles (and, yes, I can see them wanting/drafting these too… my Bevell comment/comparison was only to say that good coaches will change to put their players in the best chance to succeed).

  77. And that it can work. I’ve seen Flynn throw slants against the Pats and Lions… just b/c Bevell DID with Favre and Gus doesn’t mean that he won’t with Flynn (as he didn’t/wouldn’t do w/Jackson b/c he knew T-Jack sucked too bad at those types of throws). Again, Flynn can work in this offense, IMO, even though it’s not the exact same as the lksjdf sdlkfjsa osdjfopi as what the Packers run.

  78. GeorgiaHawk says:

    There is no such thing as building an NFL team from the ground up the right way, unless you factor in getting an elite franchise qb!

    Just look at the Ravens, 49ers, and Falcons! Do you honestly think any of those teams will win a Superbowl?

    I don’t want to be the Ravens of the NFC! I want to be the Patriots, Stealers, or the Giants of the NFC! And what do they all have in common? An elite franchise qb!

    It can’t get anymore simple then that folks!

  79. “Tannehill (after trading back from #12 to later in the 1st round)”

    If either of Manning or Flynn goes somewhere we’re not thinking about -then I think Tannehill might not be there for us at #12.

    And then if PM isn’t healthy, that’s another team that will be looking to draft a QB early. It’s an interesting year, w/two desirable FA’s and two franchise-type QB prospects all joining teams at once. Colts, Redskins, Browns, Dolphins, all need QB’s as much as we do.

  80. freedom_X says:

    The Ravens, 49ers, and Falcons all spent 1st round picks on who they thought would be elite franchise QB’s. How is it going to be different for Seattle?

    Unless Seattle’s front office is smarter than the Ravens, Falcons, and 49ers. If that’s the case, we shouldn’t complain about them *not* spending big on a QB if they choose not to, or complain about the guy they do pick.

    Whereas, the Patriots got their franchise elite QB with a 6th round pick.

    I hate to say it, but if the 49ers can go from putrid underachievers to almost winning the NFC Championship game, it’s hard to say they’ve peaked. I hope they were a flash in the pan and it was all Harbaugh smoke and mirrors, but I don’t think they are. It’s more likely their best football is ahead of them, unfortunately.

  81. Dang Duke, I’m trying to get you riled up… but I know what you mean and respect it. X & O wise I know you’re definitely smarter than most of us. I understand where you’re coming from (and know you’ve admitted that Flynn is the most attractive alternative this off-season).

  82. Dukeshire says:

    Georgia – You’re right. But what you seem to be missing is that those teams were built primarily, and more importantly at QB, through the draft. Not through FA, especially with an aging QB with real medical issues.

  83. Dukeshire says:

    Bobby – I like Flynn. And I don’t think he’ll tank. I think Seattle ought to pursue him. Of course, you know this. It’s just the Manning talk that drives me nuts. It seems so short sided to me. But, we’ll find out soon enough.

  84. I can’t handle another season of T-Jack starting. I’m to the point where I’ll take anyone else before enduring another year of that. I feel like a German (I am 1/8 German, I guess) living in the early 1930s looking for anyone to tell me it won’t be more of the same! *Not meaning it to be a sick joke, just a comparison of something much less importance in the grand scheme of things.

  85. Dukeshire says:

    And before anyone gets on me about my support of Flynn and support for building through the draft, it has as much to do with age and the long range future as it does with the diminished possibilities of what Manning can do for this franchise, beyond the immediate (presuming the immediate is what we’re used to seeing from him. No guarantee and a ton of variables).

  86. Soggybuc says:

    The only thing that make someone a WCO qb is good anticipation because often your throwing to a spot not a receiver. nothing in the world says just because some one ran a different O in college they can not learn it.
    If a guy has skills enough to play in the league he can be coached, same goes for Manning I’ve no doubt he can learn Seattle’s O A good QB is is a good QB and really there are only so many ways a guy run around on the field and try catch footballs,

    Georgia I really don’t see cable as a problem, he also brought in Giac and Mc Q. that was a move that saved the bacon in the second half of the season.
    With as complete a shuffle as they had on the line some struggle was expected. had there been no lock out a lot of the issues we saw early would have been ironed out in OTA’s

  87. Dukeshire says:

    And BTW – Moffitt was the mos solid lineman, outside Okung, prior to his injury, and improving. Bringing him in was a joke is one false narrative I’ll argue all night long.

  88. HawkyHann says:

    With Hill smoking his way out of VMAC, I like LB Mychal Kendricks from Cal. Pac 12 player of year and ran a 4.47 at the Combine, the fastest for a LB since 2000, and also topped the field in the vertical and broad jumps.

  89. If Vikings traded up for RGIII, would you trade Hawks #1 pick for Ponder?
    Would you trade a #2 to NE for Ryan Mallet?

  90. Soggybuc says:

    No way Snappa, whats going to happen is we are going to swap firsts with the Titans and give them a 3rd and a 5th along with a condition 4/5 next year for Locker since they stole him from us last year.

  91. HawkyHann says:

    Snappa- no way. I’d trade a 3rd rounder for Ponder and/or Mallet, maybe.

  92. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dukeshire- I am not exclusively on the Manning bandwagon, however I also don’t believe that we have to fix this qb challenge through the draft.
    I would be content this year to just get a qb that can compete and take over for Jackson, whether that is through the draft or free agency.
    We just can’t rule out a healthy Manning, or for that matter Flynn.

    Who knows, perhaps the Saints will have a difficult time signing Brees, and instead sign Manning, leaving it open for us to sign Brees.

    But you are right that the ideal way to do this is to draft a long term franchise qb.

    In case we can’t do that I would hope that the FO will look at all other options.

    Some successful qbs that were not drafted by their teams-

    Steve young- 49ers

    Drew Brees- Saints

    Jim Plunkett- Raiders

    Matt Hasselbeck- Seahawks

    Matt Schaub- Texans

    Matt Flynn- Seahawks- Oops! I mean future qb that was not drafted by their team. Lol.

  93. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dukeshire- Let’s see how Moffitt does moving forward without the performance enhancing drugs.

  94. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Soggybuc- How much of our rushing success last year had to do with Lynch?

    Cable’s girlfriend better hope that Carpenter and Moffitt gets their act together next year!

    BTW- I think that Cable is a very effective coach, however a talent evaluator? Not so much!
    Now if he Can talk the FO into drafting Decastro, then he will have indeed learned his lesson from last year! Lol.

  95. Good joke, Soggy! Hawky, Ponder was a first rounder last year, they won’t give him up for a 3. Georgia, his drug was Adderall… It’s not like it’s steroids. I don’t think it’s even prohibited, just needed to be reported (or have I missed something?) It would be interesting to know how many NFL players take adderall.

  96. I don’t care who we draft/sign/trade etc as long as we are 10-6 or better, Win the West and playing well heading into the play-offs

    Is that too much to ask?!?!?!?!?

  97. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Snappa- Adderall is basically legalized speed.

    Prolonged use, prolonged high doses of amphetamines followed by an abrupt cessation can result in extreme fatigue, insomnia, irritability, and mental depression. Chronic abuse of amphetamines can result in the manifestation of amphetamine psychosis.

    So like I said, let’s see how Moffitt does moving forward.

  98. I’d give up our #1 in a heartbeat for Ponder. He did some good things this past year and also some crappy things. He was a rookie. He did what you’d expect him to do (even as someone who WILL be very good).

    That’s part of the reason I disagree with many of you who think that we can wait another year to address the QB position. What you fail to understand is that a #1 pick next year is going to have normal growing pains so then we’re not going to be in good position to make a legit run late into the season until 2014 (and possibly ’15 if he doesn’t develop as fast as we’d like).

    Personally, with Ponder being protected by a rookie in Kalil next year (I assume he’ll be their #1 pick) and no number one WR (but a good complimentary WR in Harvin), he’s going to struggle to a degree again this upcoming year.

    However, make no mistake, he is a guy you’d like moving forward. I saw enough of that this past year to feel confident in saying that. On the flip side, he’d look a lot better in 2012 if he had a great line and great WRs, as opposed to a good LT (supposedly) and not much else on the OL, in addition to a bad group of receivers, outide of migrane guy, there’s not much he has this year even though he’s going to be good later. It’s the opposite of what he’d have in Seattle… with really good offensive talent around him in ’12. Actually, I think the early success of Locker and Ponder, both being picked “too early” according to the “experts” last year will make it easier for teams to pick a guy like Tannenhill “too early” this year as well.

  99. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Concerning our offensive line, I think we have more questions then answers at this point.
    Same with the qb position.
    Same with the WR position, ( excluding Baldwin.)

    So why do so many think that we absolutely need to draft defense?

    Look, the Packers, and Patriots made it far into the playoffs with two of the worst defenses in playoff history!

    We have a better defense right now then those two teams!

    If we were to sign a player like Mario Williams, then I would hope that the FO would load up with offensive players in the draft!
    Because that’s where we need to get better, and not just the qb position. Imo.

  100. The Packers and Patriots can afford terrible defenses because they can overcome it by having Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady.

    That’s a HUGE difference than having T-Jack and a bad front seven.

    Hey, there’s no one perfect way to build a team (as some have alluded to on this post).

    However, there’s a way to give you the best chance and going with T-Jack and a bad front seven doesn’t exactly give you very good odds. Can it be done? Yes. Of course. But does it give you the best chance? No.

    I understand and respect the anti-Manning crowd. I really do. He’s not going to be the long-term answer, but the intrigue is there, for me, if there are no long-term answers (like another year like the last two where nobody in our organization believes in any of the QBs available in the draft… AGAIN).

  101. If we don’t get a stud WR – then ignore it. They are good enough now and we have a glut that teams know we can’t keep – but if we could trade one or 2 of them with a draft pick to get a slightly higher pick GREAT – don’t see it happening but great.

    I am HIGHLY concerned about LB right now. We have, let’s see, KJ Wright – and a bunch of guys coming off of injury and 2 starting holes to fill. Scares me to death right now.

    OL
    Okung – can he stay Healthy
    Gallery – closing in on the end of his career but solid
    Unger – I am ok with him
    Moffit – I think will be fine
    Giocamimi – played solid to end the season – gotta
    Carp – was improving and will be the future Guard I believe
    McQuiston – Great depth while we can keep him

    Not a perfect bunch but I can live with them.

    WR – Given a good QB

    Rice – will be good – I know built of glass but I will take him
    Baldwin – we all love him – keeper
    Tate – Dynamic with the ball – if he can just get open to get the ball
    Obo – well you just have to have a guy like him on your team – good support WR – and a way above average ST player

    then you have Williams, Butler, Lockette to sort out.

    Again I can live with this group unless you get a stud to add to it.

  102. Great article from my favorite sports writer (sorry Eric, you’re #2) about RGIII…

    For the record, I don’t know enough to know if RGIII is going to be good/great. All I know is what I’ve heard about him as a person and interview. From that, that’s EXACTLY who I want to the face of “our” franchise. He’s exactly the type of person I want to buy a jersey of for my little guy and be proud of that he’s wearing his jersey…

    http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Robert-Griffin-speed-might-slow-his-progress-jason-whitlock-analysis-022712

  103. Dukeshire says:

    Georgia – I’ve said numerous times, I want Seattle to make a run at Flynn. You’re trying to box me into a corner that doesn’t exist.

    And if you watched Moffitt play, you wouldn’t run him down, as you have today. You and I couldn’t see the o line more differently. After the secondary, it’s the most solid and deep unit on the team.

  104. Duke – who in the world would have agreed with you a year ago that the OL is the second most solid area of the team a year ago (or that the secondary was the most solidified)?

    Crazy how things can change in one year! Wow!

  105. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dukeshire- Why would you assume that I am trying to box you in a corner that doesn’t exist simply because I mention Flynn as well as manning as an option? ( your accusation couldn’t be more wrong!) I never said that you didn’t want to make a run at Flynn!

    Those of us who think that Manning may be a good option if healthy are also open to other options ( Just like the FO is ).

    You may not like it, but the fact is that our FO is considering all options, and Manning I bet is one of them.

    And again you are wrong with your assumption that I have not seen Moffitt play, and that I am running him down!

    He is average at best at one of the easiest positons to play in the NFL, imo. And I would like nothing better for him to develope into one of the better Guards in the league, however just because I dont’t have my blinders on here and can see that there may be some concerns and/or questions with him, ( injuries/performance enhancing drugs/ four game suspension), It doesn’t mean I don’t want him or any other player to succeed moving forward.
    That’s why I said let’s see how he does moving forward.

    Geesh Dukeshire, Sometimes you get so sensetive. Lol.

  106. Dukeshire says:

    It is amazing. Lol

  107. I love the arguments regarding what to do at our qb position, and the fire everyone brings to the discussion. But a few arguments really get my goat. First and foremost, is the idea that we should “get Flynn and be done”. First of all, Flynn isnt in a hurry to sign with anyone, second he wants HUGE garaunteed money and he has less starting experience than Kevin Kolb did before last year, and third, if he’s smart, this is all a way to get the most money from Miami. Tell me why he would go anywhere other than to his former OC?! Miami vs Seattle?! C’mon!

    The “and be done” part is what really gets me. There is absolutely no reason to think Flynn will instantly cure our qb woes. I doubt our front office is going to put all thier eggs in one baskett. WE’ve got Portis to develop, and they are going to look hard at adding 2 qb’s this year. Whether thats a high pick, or a vet and a lower round pick, the arent ignoring the position.

    Panicking and deciding you have to get a franchise qb RIGHT NOW, would be the worst thing they could do. They wont take Tannehill unless they are sure he’s the guy. How many times have we taken a qb because we “had to”, and how many times did it work out?!

    I dont see Manning setting us back at all, especially if there isnt a qb available the team believes can be “the guy” within 2 years. Even if Manning cant play for beans all year, he’s worth the risk. I dont care if he does want all the offense his way, his film study skills and insights will only help our backup qb’s. Why wouldnt you want Peyton Manning, the human computer, teaching your qb’s?!

  108. Thanks, Georgia, for the link. Actually, I did know that part. As someone who takes/has taken adderall, I know that it’s an amphetamine, and it is highly prescribed for ADD and ADHD. Obviously it can be abused, and it would be interesting to know if Moffitt was taking it as prescribed by an MD for an actual issue, or if he was jacking himself up. The answer, it seems, would be if he goes back to the league and gets clearance for it, which the article implies is something that can be done. If not, then you’re right, it’ll be interesting to see if he slows down – or maybe tries to hit too many different people at the same time. :)

  109. 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.

  110. I agree with something BobbyK mentioned earlier. The team is built to win now with a few pieces. Look how fast San Fran turned it around, and they aren’t unique, it happens all the time.

    A healthy Peyton Manning is a top-3 QB in the NFL. He’d make our WR corps insane and open holes for Beast Mode. Why would we not consider him at the right price?

    Our offense would become top-5, the defense is already that good. If we learn to cover punts… #1 seed in the NFC is there for the taking.

    It’s not like rolling with T-Jack is a better option than Manning in any scenario (do you want T-Jack mentoring our QBoTF?). Worst case, Manning goes down and we rely on T-Jack (or new FA/Portis/QBoTF to be named later) to guide us into another losing season and get game experience.

*
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