Seahawks fans

[FlaHawker 24]

I'm Mr. Pessimism, and I'm banging the drum for Curry. He'll be fine. I expect big things this year.

 

This looks like a pressure free fun year. I'll be sure to watch every minute of every game, to see the young guys develop. This team looked bad about a month ago. Now, it's a world of difference.

I hope you are right. The problem I have is that it appeared that Carroll was moving Curry to the elephant position to maximize and make better use of his rush skills. Now that isn't the case. Chris Clemons has been given that position which means Curry will be used like he was last year? If so, I don't expect much at all. Curry cannot cover.

[FlaHawker 24]

Jim Rome interviews Matt Hasselbeck:

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/...k-with-jim-rome

[FlaHawker 24]

Three questions with LB coach Ken Norton Jr.

Posted by Ben Malcolmson on May 10, 2010 – 11:18 am

 

 

Throughout the coming weeks, each assistant coach will answer a trio of rapid-fire questions regarding his position group in light of the two recent minicamps and the additions through the draft. Here’s linebackers coach Ken Norton Jr.:

 

What’d you see from Aaron Curry during the two minicamps?

 

I thought Aaron Curry was very good in all different parts of his game. He’s been very focused and he’s improving a lot. From minicamp No. 1 to minicamp No. 2, he grew so much. He’s a fast player who’s understanding how to play fast. He’s extremely powerful and he’s understanding how to use his power. He’s a weapon and he’s understanding how to be a weapon. The more he plays and the more he realizes all the tools that he has, he’s going to be really special.

 

What kinds of things are you noticing from Lofa Tatupu?

 

Lofa has been very special. There’s no question he’s the leader of the defense and a leader on this team. And there’s no question of his football IQ — he’s extremely instinctive and very competitive and he always rises up to this high standard he’s set for himself. He will never go below it for anything. He’s not very happy about that he’s been injured the last couple of years, and he’s out to prove his durability and that he’s the same player as he was before his injuries.

 

There seems to be a corps of strong back-ups at the linebacker position. Which guys stand out to you the most?

 

Will Herring is extremely good. He could start on any other team in the NFL, it just so happens that he’s on a very competitive squad. He’s very versatile, which makes his value very high because he can play all three linebacking positions, on third downs and on special teams. Anthony Heygood is young, fast, very athletic and who’s emulating everything that Curry does. Sometimes when you see Heygood play, you think it’s Curry. They’re very similar — they’re very fast, very powerful and very athletic. He’s going to surprise a lot of people. He’s going to step in and play a lot of football this year and be a force on our special teams. David Hawthorne stepped in last year when Lofa was hurt. He’s extremely explosive, a big-play guy and a very good tackler. He’s the type of guy that you can’t hold back. You need him on the field. I don’t even consider him a backup. He’s a starter until someone unseats him.

http://blog.seahawks.com/2010/05/10/three-...-ken-norton-jr/

[Kopy 491]

I love Tatupu, Curry, Hawthorn, and Herring. I'm not sure who this Heygood kid is, but I'll be sure to find out.

 

This is why I say kick Hill to the curb. Get a 3rd or 4th rounder for him and cut your losses.

[FlaHawker 24]

I love Tatupu, Curry, Hawthorn, and Herring. I'm not sure who this Heygood kid is, but I'll be sure to find out.

 

This is why I say kick Hill to the curb. Get a 3rd or 4th rounder for him and cut your losses.

I have no problem dumping Hill; his act has become tiresome, but I don't think the Hawks could get a 3 or a 4 at this point.

[phillybear 364]

I hope they can think up a defensive scheme where we can start 5 linebackers.

[Joey Gladstone 33]

If only we could package Hill, Branch, and Julius Jones for one good d-lineman to take some pressure off Mebane.

[e-factor 13]

If only we could package Hill, Branch, and Julius Jones for one good d-lineman to take some pressure off Mebane.

 

Hmmmmmm. Good thought, but dumping three crappy players for one good player is a tough sell in the NFL, especially since the Raiders seemed to have turned smart when no one was looking............

[Joey Gladstone 33]

Hmmmmmm. Good thought, but dumping three crappy players for one good player is a tough sell in the NFL, especially since the Raiders seemed to have turned smart when no one was looking............

 

3 crappy players and two bad contracts. Pure wishful thinking on my part.

[FlaHawker 24]

Pete Carroll on Brock and Salk

[Yippie Skippy 0]

What do you guys think about adding QB JP Losman??

[FlaHawker 24]

What do you guys think about adding QB JP Losman??

I think Hasselbeck and Whitehurst better stay healthy

[Kopy 491]

What do you guys think about adding QB JP Losman??

 

He'll battle Teel for the 3rd spot. Really nothing to see here.

[Kopy 491]

This is interesting.

 

" Leroy Hill-LB-Seahawks May. 18 - 10:22 pm et

 

According to Profootballtalk, Seahawks WLB Leroy Hill's contract can be voided if he receives a suspension from the NFL.

 

This could explain why the Seahawks have kept him out of offseason practices, as they don't want to risk an injury that would guarantee Hill's $6 million base salary. Per precedent in the Larry Johnson grievance last year, the Seahawks would have to keep Hill on the roster until the NFL issues a suspension. This is not to say the Seahawks plan to dump Hill, only that they're aware of their options going forward.

Source: Profootballtalk on NBCSports.com

"

[FlaHawker 24]

This is interesting.

 

" Leroy Hill-LB-Seahawks May. 18 - 10:22 pm et

 

According to Profootballtalk, Seahawks WLB Leroy Hill's contract can be voided if he receives a suspension from the NFL.

 

This could explain why the Seahawks have kept him out of offseason practices, as they don't want to risk an injury that would guarantee Hill's $6 million base salary. Per precedent in the Larry Johnson grievance last year, the Seahawks would have to keep Hill on the roster until the NFL issues a suspension. This is not to say the Seahawks plan to dump Hill, only that they're aware of their options going forward.

Source: Profootballtalk on NBCSports.com

"

He's always hurt anyway, good riddance.

[Gepetto 985]

The Seahawks made an initial inquiry regarding Terrell Owens physicality and availability. -NFL Network

[FlaHawker 24]

Mike Teel cut .

 

http://blog.thenewstribune.com/seahawks/20...e-qb-mike-teel/

[FlaHawker 24]

The Seahawks made an initial inquiry regarding Terrell Owens physicality and availability. -NFL Network

Try adding the right context to the quote next time:

 

 

 

According to Steve Wyche, the Seahawks made an inquiry about free agent wide receiver Terrell Owens.

 

Don’t get your hopes up though, this apparently happened earlier in the off season– before the Seahawks drafted Golden Tate.

http://12thmanrising.com/2010/05/19/seahaw...-terrell-owens/

[Gepetto 985]

Try adding the right context to the quote next time:

 

 

 

 

http://12thmanrising.com/2010/05/19/seahaw...-terrell-owens/

 

He didn't say that second part on NFL Total Access. And this was live and tonight's episode.

[phillybear 364]

Mike Teel cut .

 

http://blog.thenewstribune.com/seahawks/20...e-qb-mike-teel/

 

About time.

[phillybear 364]

The Seahawks made an initial inquiry regarding Terrell Owens physicality and availability. -NFL Network

 

I greatly respect Owens, saw him up close in Philadelphia, and would welcome him with open arms. Reid and McNabb screwed him.

[FlaHawker 24]

He didn't say that second part on NFL Total Access. And this was live and tonight's episode.

Gotcha.

[Hawkfin 32]

I greatly respect Owens, saw him up close in Philadelphia, and would welcome him with open arms. Reid and McNabb screwed him.

 

I think Owens gets more bad media rep then he deserves sometimes. and he's always been a great wide.

 

But, I don't want Owens at all........

He's lost most of his skills he once had. He's on a big down turn now and he's not that player he was in Phily. Even then he was starting the decline somewhat, but the overall talent in Phily helped.

He CAN NOT separate from defenders anymore. He drops allot of balls. He's a media circus and a fall guy and a can be a complainer.

But most of all he is used up. We need to stay far away from guy's that will come here instead of retiring like they should be.

 

We do not need his used up services on this rebuild team.

 

We need to let our rookies come right in and start. (Tate and last years dude) Get them game experience and any growing pains that they might have out of the way. Give Tate the proper chance to become a #1 wide.

And rely on TJ to be our solid Vet leader in the WR corp. You sign Owens - Then Tate doesn't get to start.

 

I don't want to see T. Owens at all!!!! We need to go young - Not old.

[phillybear 364]

I think Owens gets more bad media rep then he deserves sometimes. and he's always been a great wide.

 

But, I don't want Owens at all........

He's lost most of his skills he once had. He's on a big down turn now and he's not that player he was in Phily. Even then he was starting the decline somewhat, but the overall talent in Phily helped.

He CAN NOT separate from defenders anymore. He drops allot of balls. He's a media circus and a fall guy and a can be a complainer.

But most of all he is used up. We need to stay far away from guy's that will come here instead of retiring like they should be.

 

We do not need his used up services on this rebuild team.

 

We need to let our rookies come right in and start. (Tate and last years dude) Get them game experience and any growing pains that they might have out of the way. Give Tate the proper chance to become a #1 wide.

And rely on TJ to be our solid Vet leader in the WR corp. You sign Owens - Then Tate doesn't get to start.

 

I don't want to see T. Owens at all!!!! We need to go young - Not old.

 

At this point, I expect TJ and Mike Williams to start, Tate to play the slot WR, Branch to get playing time when healthy, and Butler to possibly get cut or be a very deep reserve. It's not a bad group at all, but as long as Hasselbeck is starting, I have no problem with old WRs that are still game breakers. I don't expect Owens to land in Seattle, but I certainly would not be against it, especially if Carroll feels they could compete for the division this year.

[Hawkfin 32]

At this point, I expect TJ and Mike Williams to start, Tate to play the slot WR, Branch to get playing time when healthy, and Butler to possibly get cut or be a very deep reserve. It's not a bad group at all, but as long as Hasselbeck is starting, I have no problem with old WRs that are still game breakers. I don't expect Owens to land in Seattle, but I certainly would not be against it, especially if Carroll feels they could compete for the division this year.

 

Maybe if Owens came cheap enough and we think we could make a run at the Div. I guess I could see it.... But, I think I'd still go with what we have.

 

I still do think Branch will be cut. He is pretty much worthless to me. I'm surprised you would say that about Butler though? We don't even know what we have in him yet do we?

He has some speed on the outside that could be very usefull to us and showed some skills in preseason last year. (More so then Whitehurst has shown)

I'd give the kid a shot before we cut him..... He could at least fill #4 role. (Cut Branch)

 

Tate probably would be good in the slot - But I'd like to see him be more that #2. But, if M. Williams really does get things together then I'm fine with that.

Thus - more reason to not get Owens.

 

I don't have to much faith in Mike Williams though. Even if he looks good now, i'm not sure he can do it in the Reg Season. But, I like the potential there anyway. I'd rather see Tate take that job and I think he will.

What about Reggie Williams? - He showed me some things in Jax. He might surprise and play some? I havn't heard to much though?

 

I think Branch is all but gone - Same with J. Jones. - But I've said they should be gone for awhile now so who knows.

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

At this point, I expect TJ and Mike Williams to start, Tate to play the slot WR, Branch to get playing time when healthy, and Butler to possibly get cut or be a very deep reserve. It's not a bad group at all, but as long as Hasselbeck is starting, I have no problem with old WRs that are still game breakers. I don't expect Owens to land in Seattle, but I certainly would not be against it, especially if Carroll feels they could compete for the division this year.

 

Most of the Hawk fans around here seemed really adamant that the team has/had a ton of holes and needed to be building through the draft and through youth. It was a main point toward why passing on a guy like Brandon Marshall was good for the team.

 

That whole Marshall debate aside, I can totally agree with a team like Seattle needing to build through the draft/youth and I think bringing in a guy like Owens would be very counter productive, even if he comes cheap. He is not really known as much of a mentor and it would probably be best to get someone like Golden Tate as much play time and experience as possible.

 

I agree with whoever said to just let TJ be your veteran leadership.

[Joey Gladstone 33]

No thanks. Keep him the fock away from Tate (and to a lesser extent Butler). He wasn't worth the headache even when he could play.

[phillybear 364]

I cannot stress enough that you cannot depend on a rookie WR for much of a contribution for a few years. It happens over and over again. It would be a mistake to start Tate. He will not pick up the offense in the first year.

 

Butler was a bad pick when it happened, and he showed me nothing last year. What exactly does he does that is even as good as average?

 

The staff likes Branch a lot. If he can't stay healthy, you need to look for another veteran WR. Maybe it's wishful thinking that Mike Williams will perform. But if not, what then?

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

I cannot stress enough that you cannot depend on a rookie WR for much of a contribution for a few years. It happens over and over again. It would be a mistake to start Tate. He will not pick up the offense in the first year.

 

regardless of how quickly it takes rookie WR's to pick up the game (i agree with you) what harm does starting them do? its not the same as QB's where they might get battered around and become gun shy ala David Carr. Seems to me a WR will learn a little quicker at least if he sees more snaps.

 

TO would be a 1 year rental at best. What would he do for the team? Sell a few extra tickets to people who want to see the TO Circus? He isn't getting you over the hump to a Super Bowl and probably not a division championship either. Even if you think he might be enough to help this team win the division, a team in Seattle's situation probably needs to take baby steps to improving the team as a whole rather than worrying about adding 1 over the hill vet.

[phillybear 364]

regardless of how quickly it takes rookie WR's to pick up the game (i agree with you) what harm does starting them do? its not the same as QB's where they might get battered around and become gun shy ala David Carr. Seems to me a WR will learn a little quicker at least if he sees more snaps.

 

TO would be a 1 year rental at best. What would he do for the team? Sell a few extra tickets to people who want to see the TO Circus? He isn't getting you over the hump to a Super Bowl and probably not a division championship either. Even if you think he might be enough to help this team win the division, a team in Seattle's situation probably needs to take baby steps to improving the team as a whole rather than worrying about adding 1 over the hill vet.

 

The Seahawks have been decimated by injuries at WR for a bunch of years in a row now. I'm sensitive to the fact that depth at that position is important for a basic West Coast offense.

 

Maybe not Owens. How about Muhsin Muhammad? I'm simply advocating depth at a position and adopting the Carroll philosophy of lots of competition at every positions.

 

You could throw Tate about there, but it's not going to make Hasselbeck happy to see a guy consistently running the wrong routes. Once he goes down, what is Tate going to learn catching from Whitehurst or Losman. I prefer to ease Tate in slowly and build up his confidence, especially in a slot role, his strength. A young guy's confidence can be fragile.

[Corporal Punishment 0]

I don't think TO is seriously being considered anymore, and that's probably for the best.

I'm a little surprised that Losman gets no interest at all for this group. He wasn't terrible in Buffalo, he was just on a really bad team.

Understand, I certainly don't think he's the future of this team. But I wouldn't be surprised to see him start a game or two in November or so. Hasselbeck, unfortunately, probably will get hurt again, and then after Whitehurst has a bad game or four, Carrol will have to try something else.

[phillybear 364]

I don't think TO is seriously being considered anymore, and that's probably for the best.

I'm a little surprised that Losman gets no interest at all for this group. He wasn't terrible in Buffalo, he was just on a really bad team.

Understand, I certainly don't think he's the future of this team. But I wouldn't be surprised to see him start a game or two in November or so. Hasselbeck, unfortunately, probably will get hurt again, and then after Whitehurst has a bad game or four, Carrol will have to try something else.

 

I'd take a 3 legged chair over Mike Teel. My disdain for that guy has been consistent. Losman is certainly a decent gamble. I liked him in college. If we can try reclamation projects with Lendale White, Mike Williams, Reggie Williams, etc, why not Losman. I really like that move. Yes, it's insurance if Whitehurst flops.

[Hawkfin 32]

I cannot stress enough that you cannot depend on a rookie WR for much of a contribution for a few years. It happens over and over again. It would be a mistake to start Tate. He will not pick up the offense in the first year.

 

Butler was a bad pick when it happened, and he showed me nothing last year. What exactly does he does that is even as good as average?

 

The staff likes Branch a lot. If he can't stay healthy, you need to look for another veteran WR. Maybe it's wishful thinking that Mike Williams will perform. But if not, what then?

 

Sorry, I don't agree with you here at all. I think you CAN plug a rookie wide in and should plug him in esspecially if you have high hopes for the kid. And it's a good time for it because he's got a Vet QB that will help him and TJ. He comes in with less pressure being #2. (Although I do like the slot for him also - Just get him on the field!)

 

Getting him on the field is the best way to get him rolling and gain reps. If you sit on him to long and 2-3 years go by you may never see him and you will have never known what you actually have until 3 years down the line. And his speed and youth is that much older.

 

Besides - Are we really going somewhere this year? You act like were going for the playoff's and SB?

So what if he struggles - We are a 5 win team and need help. The best thing for his growth is Reg. season action and he can learn on the job. We need him to be at his BEST come 3 years from now. Not completely raw and new.

 

Also, I wanted to talk about Butler:

His regular season career stats were 15 catches for 175 with 32 long. That's not horiable for the limited time he's seen. Also, PER your theory they have took it slow with him.

So do we REALLY know what we have with him yet? He has not seen any kind of reps! So since they have sat on him for a year, he should be a whole lot better right? Per your theory.

And you're talking about cutting him? So should we cut Tate after we sit on him for a year?

Makes no sense!!!!!! Play the kids. See what you got.

 

Here is why I think there is potential for him also though:

Preseason Game Log:

 

Game 1 - 2 for 7 *3 targets

Game 2 - 2 for 47 and TD - 23.5 AVG (34 LG) *4 targets

Game 3 - 2 for 27 0 TD - 13.5 AVG (17 LG) *4 targets

Game 4 - 2 for 45 and TD - 22.5 AVG (23 LG) *2 targets

 

I for one see some potential here and he has shown some speed on the outside. Something we may not have still? (not sure Tate is that kind of guy)

 

He NEEDS to be used MORE!!!!!! (This is why we should plug Tate in from day 1)

Sitting on them does no good for anybody in my view. Make him work. See what u have or have not.

[FlaHawker 24]

I don't think TO is seriously being considered anymore, and that's probably for the best.

I'm a little surprised that Losman gets no interest at all for this group. He wasn't terrible in Buffalo, he was just on a really bad team.

Understand, I certainly don't think he's the future of this team. But I wouldn't be surprised to see him start a game or two in November or so. Hasselbeck, unfortunately, probably will get hurt again, and then after Whitehurst has a bad game or four, Carrol will have to try something else.

Losman is horrible.

[Kopy 491]

Sorry, I don't agree with you here at all. I think you CAN plug a rookie wide in and should plug him in esspecially if you have high hopes for the kid. And it's a good time for it because he's got a Vet QB that will help him and TJ. He comes in with less pressure being #2. (Although I do like the slot for him also - Just get him on the field!)

 

Getting him on the field is the best way to get him rolling and gain reps. If you sit on him to long and 2-3 years go by you may never see him and you will have never known what you actually have until 3 years down the line. And his speed and youth is that much older.

 

Besides - Are we really going somewhere this year? You act like were going for the playoff's and SB?

So what if he struggles - We are a 5 win team and need help. The best thing for his growth is Reg. season action and he can learn on the job. We need him to be at his BEST come 3 years from now. Not completely raw and new.

 

Also, I wanted to talk about Butler:

His regular season career stats were 15 catches for 175 with 32 long. That's not horiable for the limited time he's seen. Also, PER your theory they have took it slow with him.

So do we REALLY know what we have with him yet? He has not seen any kind of reps! So since they have sat on him for a year, he should be a whole lot better right? Per your theory.

And you're talking about cutting him? So should we cut Tate after we sit on him for a year?

Makes no sense!!!!!! Play the kids. See what you got.

 

Here is why I think there is potential for him also though:

Preseason Game Log:

 

Game 1 - 2 for 7 *3 targets

Game 2 - 2 for 47 and TD - 23.5 AVG (34 LG) *4 targets

Game 3 - 2 for 27 0 TD - 13.5 AVG (17 LG) *4 targets

Game 4 - 2 for 45 and TD - 22.5 AVG (23 LG) *2 targets

 

I for one see some potential here and he has shown some speed on the outside. Something we may not have still? (not sure Tate is that kind of guy)

 

He NEEDS to be used MORE!!!!!! (This is why we should plug Tate in from day 1)

Sitting on them does no good for anybody in my view. Make him work. See what u have or have not.

I agree 1000% with everything here, plus what Hawkfin said in the other posts.

 

Carlson with be even more featured now with the 2 TE system Carroll is employing. TJ did have a good season last year when you consider how bad the team was. Gold will be featured every which way possible to keep him on the field in order to have the ball in his hands.

Butler should be given this year to show something. The kid is good. Give him a chance with the new staff before you pass judgement. With no cap this year. Branches salary means dog sh!t, and if theirs 1 thing he has done, is produce when he WAS on the field. And even though we're a committee. I got to believe the line and the running game will be better. Seriously, how could it be worse than last year?

 

We don't need potential locker room cancer. And we don't need twitter material.

No T.O.

[Kopy 491]

Losman is horrible.

Yes, however, as a 3rd stringer. Who cares?

I'd rather have his potential then Teal's or some other scrub.

Look what Carroll is doing. If he likes you, he'll sign you. If he doesn't, he'll get rid of ya. He'll even do it in the same week.

Losman is really a non story. There's nothing wrong with him making the team as a #3. Or even if he ends up being cut.

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

Yes, however, as a 3rd stringer. Who cares?

I'd rather have his potential then Teal's or some other scrub.

Look what Carroll is doing. If he likes you, he'll sign you. If he doesn't, he'll get rid of ya. He'll even do it in the same week.

Losman is really a non story. There's nothing wrong with him making the team as a #3. Or even if he ends up being cut.

 

you already have a solid 3rd stringer

 

 

 

Charlie Whitehurst

[Hawkfin 32]

you already have a solid 3rd stringer

 

 

 

Charlie Whitehurst

 

haha - that was kind of funny - And you could be right unfortunatley.

 

But, with what we did overall in this ONE draft - I'm fine with the Whitehurst move now. See what he can do for us?

He should be able to be fine for a #2. I don't know how we could think he could become a #1 though, which will need to be addressed.

 

But, I still like Hass anyway for now. I think he just needs some help around him.

 

Next year we might want to go QB first round though! (Esspecially if Hass is gone)

 

 

Loseman is garbage though - Waist - I'd rather have had a rookie come in for "young potential". Other then Teal.

 

But, he does seem like a hard worker so that's probably the reason for it. Push the QB's in camp. Competition like Carrol wants.

But, I can't see where we would ever need, want, or have to start Lossman though. Unless Whitehurst was a HUGE mistake and they already see it and they wanted a more veteran?

I sure hope that's not the case. We still paid allot.

[FlaHawker 24]

haha - that was kind of funny - And you could be right unfortunatley.

 

But, with what we did overall in this ONE draft - I'm fine with the Whitehurst move now. See what he can do for us?

He should be able to be fine for a #2. I don't know how we could think he could become a #1 though, which will need to be addressed.

 

But, I still like Hass anyway for now. I think he just needs some help around him.

 

Next year we might want to go QB first round though! (Esspecially if Hass is gone)

 

 

Loseman is garbage though - Waist - I'd rather have had a rookie come in for "young potential". Other then Teal.

 

But, he does seem like a hard worker so that's probably the reason for it. Push the QB's in camp. Competition like Carrol wants.

But, I can't see where we would ever need, want, or have to start Lossman though. Unless Whitehurst was a HUGE mistake and they already see it and they wanted a more veteran?

I sure hope that's not the case. We still paid allot.

Actually, it wasn't funny at all. Just more drivel from Whitewonderless. Charlie Whitehurst has as much potential as any QB drafted in this year's draft class minus the risk. It's no shame to have sat behind Phillip Rivers. Will he be a #1? Who knows until he gets on the field but even if he doesn't pan out then the Hawks are not on the hook for Jamarcus Russell type money. The lose a 3rd rounder next year. Yeah it sucks but it's not a killer.

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

it was meant to get a reaction just like the one Hawkfin gave.... it was a joke.... sort of.

 

######, let me go find some sources to cite to prove Whitehurst is a 3rd stringer. I was kind of waiting for that hypocritical response from flaker.