I don't blame national football pundits for not knowing much about the Seahawks. It's not as if they don't have time for anything but studying Seattle's roster. They've got 32 teams to cover, and believe me, researching and writing articles on pro football is a time-consuming job.
So when NFL.com's Steve Wyche slapped a pic of Matt Hasselbeck onto an article entitled "QB all that's missing from these teams", I didn't immediately spit out my Mountain Dew. Despite the fact that the Seahawks are hurting immoderately at almost every position and that a quarterback will not solve everything, I just decided to give the guy a break. I'm not insecure about my team; I don't need sportswriters to give the Seahawks their deserved diligence in order to feel good about them. Their defeat of New Orleans gave me two years' worth of punk-headed confidence to coast on. And besides, it's just too easy to mock sportswriters. Picking on easy targets makes you look the worse.
Nevertheless, I knew Wyche was wrong without even reading the article. For all my rants about the QB position and how its importance justifies no other draft pick at #25 if a top-four QB remains, the Seahawks have dire needs all over the roster.
So here's my shot at a position-by position assessment of Seattle's roster. Just to be different, I'll assess each position on a scale of one to ten - ten indicating a well-filled position, one meaning a bleeding hole.
Showing posts with label Leon Washington. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leon Washington. Show all posts
Friday, April 8, 2011
Monday, March 28, 2011
Decoding John Schneider: Beating the Late-Round Odds
Everybody wants something for nothing. Coupon shoppers clip, Internet ads beckon with "$5,000 a month from home", and every NFL general manager would love to find quality starters with cheap picks from the fourth to seventh rounds of the draft. The common misconception is that there's always a huge reserve of hidden talent just sitting untouched in the late rounds, missed by dimwitted general managers or stubborn coaches clinging tightly to a different scheme. Every once in a while, a Tom Brady or T.J. Houshmandzadeh emerges and gets fixated upon, seeming to prove that theory but really just distracting from the 50 players drafted before and after him who neither see nor deserve an NFL start. Exceptions always get more attention than the rule.
Is it really sensible to look at a player who drops into the fifth round, and assume that the combined research and intelligence of thirty-one other NFL teams' scouting departments all got it wrong? Much less four times over? Teams don't struggle to find late talent because they're blind, mis-prioritizing, or risk-averse; they struggle to find late talent because it usually isn't there. The real talent gets snatched up in the first hundred picks, and the pool is left mostly dry. Even the Patriots' late-round performance has been controlled by this dynamic; it's kinda out of their hands. There just aren't a lot of diamonds to be found in the rough of the draft's third day, because everyone else is also looking for them. Any true diamonds often find themselves permanently benched behind incumbents by their teams. Traffic shortcuts and fishing spots are only lucrative as long as nobody else knows about them, right?
But I know this general manager who is trying very hard to beat these very odds. He comes from an NFL management lineage that's proven this draft prowess, and he might even be close to actually pulling it off in his new job. His name is John Schneider.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
A Dissenting Opinion on the New Kickoff Rule
The NFL has approved a new rule moving kickoffs from the 30-yard line to the 35 and requiring coverage players to line up no more than five yards behind the tee, taking away the running start they usually have. The ostensible reason is player safety.
If the end result of the NFL's new kickoff rule is to reduce long kickoff returns, then yeah, I'll be pretty let down. As Bill Belichick said, kickoff returns are one of the most unpredictable, and therefore exciting, aspects of the game. Seattle's Week 3 win over San Diego was not "cheap" or "lucky" because it came through Leon Washington's return touchdowns; is not special teams a legitimate team unit unto itself?
Interestingly, the Seahawks were not one of the teams that voted against the new rule, despite how it might compromise Washington's value. Chicago was, but Devin Hester has not been returning kickoffs for years, only punts - and punts are unaffected by the rule change. (For the curious, the other five "nay" teams were Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Oakland, Philadelphia, and Cleveland.)
Many are rightfully saying that this development will result in a lot more touchbacks and fewer decisions to run the ball back, which is probably true. But Seattle fullback Michael Robinson has a different angle; he feels that the removal of a running start for the coverage team will reduce the speed and violence of front-line hits and allow for more return yardage on the returns that do occur. It will also turn kickoff returns into power plays instead of finesse plays, leading teams to compensate by using larger players. This in turn would make blocks easier, requiring kickers to work harder at keeping the ball away from even less stellar returners. If this bears out on the field, it might make kickoff returns more of a boom-or-bust event.
Although Robinson still feels that the changes are unnecessarily marshmallowing the game, the last part has another possible ramification. When we think of "coverage men" or "gunners", we usually think of the faster and smaller players, because getting downfield quickly is crucial in covering or defending kickoffs. Running backs, receivers, tight ends, corners, and linebackers get the most work here (but only the quicker linemen). It's often at these positions that you'll see teams bringing in spares for training camp, sifting for potential gunners. Such considerations have no doubt helped keep Ben Obomanu on Seattle's roster through two coaching changes. But with larger players becoming more important on kickoff returns now, and any potential speed advantage being nullified by lack of a running start, the value could shift towards larger and slower players. It could redefine "kickoff gunners" a little bit. (Or not. Who knows.)
Robinson's Twitter account is worth the occasional look. His blocking value on the field is also a bit underrated by Seattle fans, in my humble opinion, but that's for another day.
If the end result of the NFL's new kickoff rule is to reduce long kickoff returns, then yeah, I'll be pretty let down. As Bill Belichick said, kickoff returns are one of the most unpredictable, and therefore exciting, aspects of the game. Seattle's Week 3 win over San Diego was not "cheap" or "lucky" because it came through Leon Washington's return touchdowns; is not special teams a legitimate team unit unto itself?
Interestingly, the Seahawks were not one of the teams that voted against the new rule, despite how it might compromise Washington's value. Chicago was, but Devin Hester has not been returning kickoffs for years, only punts - and punts are unaffected by the rule change. (For the curious, the other five "nay" teams were Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Oakland, Philadelphia, and Cleveland.)
Many are rightfully saying that this development will result in a lot more touchbacks and fewer decisions to run the ball back, which is probably true. But Seattle fullback Michael Robinson has a different angle; he feels that the removal of a running start for the coverage team will reduce the speed and violence of front-line hits and allow for more return yardage on the returns that do occur. It will also turn kickoff returns into power plays instead of finesse plays, leading teams to compensate by using larger players. This in turn would make blocks easier, requiring kickers to work harder at keeping the ball away from even less stellar returners. If this bears out on the field, it might make kickoff returns more of a boom-or-bust event.
Although Robinson still feels that the changes are unnecessarily marshmallowing the game, the last part has another possible ramification. When we think of "coverage men" or "gunners", we usually think of the faster and smaller players, because getting downfield quickly is crucial in covering or defending kickoffs. Running backs, receivers, tight ends, corners, and linebackers get the most work here (but only the quicker linemen). It's often at these positions that you'll see teams bringing in spares for training camp, sifting for potential gunners. Such considerations have no doubt helped keep Ben Obomanu on Seattle's roster through two coaching changes. But with larger players becoming more important on kickoff returns now, and any potential speed advantage being nullified by lack of a running start, the value could shift towards larger and slower players. It could redefine "kickoff gunners" a little bit. (Or not. Who knows.)
Robinson's Twitter account is worth the occasional look. His blocking value on the field is also a bit underrated by Seattle fans, in my humble opinion, but that's for another day.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Seahawks Re-Sign RB Washington, Tender DT Mebane
In what ranks amongst the best possible news of the Seahawks offseason, the Seahawks have re-signed RB Leon Washington to a four-year contract.
The deal comes across as quite cheap next to the large contracts being paid to other champion returners:
*The cost to the Seahawks also pales in comparison to what the New York Jets offered Leon before the trade to Seattle. Leon's contract with the Seahawks is fair to Leon and appropriate for what Leon is - a special-teams stud with huge potential to outplay 2nd-string status, but a 2nd-stringer nonetheless.
The deal comes across as quite cheap next to the large contracts being paid to other champion returners:
| Player | Contract | Per year |
| Josh Cribbs | 3 yrs, $20M | $6.7M/yr |
| Devin Hester | 4 yrs, $41M | $10M/yr |
| Leon Washington 2011 | 4 yrs, $12.5M | $3.1M/yr |
| Leon Washington 2010* | $5M/yr |
*The cost to the Seahawks also pales in comparison to what the New York Jets offered Leon before the trade to Seattle. Leon's contract with the Seahawks is fair to Leon and appropriate for what Leon is - a special-teams stud with huge potential to outplay 2nd-string status, but a 2nd-stringer nonetheless.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Looking Back on 2010, Part 2: Daft Drafting
Continuing a series of posts re-capturing the moods, debates, and plot twists of Pete Carroll's first year in Seattle. You can find Part 1 here.
On draft day of 2010, Seattle fans turned on their televisions without any real idea of what to expect.
New head coach Pete Carroll had dashed onto the scene and made it clear at once that Seattle was moving into a new mentality, and that nobody's job was safe. He had followed his words with action by mowing a blazing personnel path through the tall dead grass that made up the Seattle Seahawks. Nate Burleson, Seneca Wallace, Darryl Tapp, Deon Grant, and Rob Sims were all gone. None of these were significantly responsible for Seattle's decline, but neither had they done much to stem that decline. Fans saw the radical changes in different ways - some called it moving forward and being willing to take risks, others saw a confidence in Carroll's plan, others called it "change for the sake of change" and observed that Seattle had obtained only mediocre free agents in return.
On draft day of 2010, Seattle fans turned on their televisions without any real idea of what to expect.
New head coach Pete Carroll had dashed onto the scene and made it clear at once that Seattle was moving into a new mentality, and that nobody's job was safe. He had followed his words with action by mowing a blazing personnel path through the tall dead grass that made up the Seattle Seahawks. Nate Burleson, Seneca Wallace, Darryl Tapp, Deon Grant, and Rob Sims were all gone. None of these were significantly responsible for Seattle's decline, but neither had they done much to stem that decline. Fans saw the radical changes in different ways - some called it moving forward and being willing to take risks, others saw a confidence in Carroll's plan, others called it "change for the sake of change" and observed that Seattle had obtained only mediocre free agents in return.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)