Grading Seattle's Free Agency: Offense

Tarvaris Jackson (#7): C+

Signing the former Minnesota backup isn't exactly a coup in and of itself. Despite his tools, starting experience, and spotty handling by Brad Childress, the fact is that Jackson struggled in Minnesota despite being protected by an awesome offense. He's a popular example of how a good team doesn't necessarily elevate a bad QB.

But the signing looks better when you compare it against the other options. Seattle could have overpaid for Kevin Kolb, risked Vince Young, courted the Carroll-misfit Kyle Orton, or become the next victim of Donovan McNabb. Instead, they went for the best combination of value, experience, cost, and system familiarity in Tarvaris Jackson. His 2-year, $8 million contract leaves Seattle free to keep looking without settling for Derek Anderson-type ineptitude in the present. Jackson should be a little better than that.

I am a little surprised that Carroll just up and handed Jackson the starting spot based on system familiarity. But it's not as if Charlie Whitehurst was likely to pick up the new system with such a short time to practice. Call it "lockout fallout". Hee hee.

More Than Just a QB Away: Offense

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.

Carroll: Stacy Andrews Moving to Right Tackle

At the NFL owners' meeting, Pete Carroll said that Seahawks lineman Stacy Andrews will compete for the starting right tackle position in 2011:

"Stacy is a legitimate factor at right tackle. That is his natural position. We brought him in to play right tackle and when Max Unger got hurt, it necessitated the move right away and he didn't get a chance to play right tackle. ... That's a spot that Stacy will compete at. That to me is an exciting opportunity. His body type and his mentality and his background, even though he played guard at Philadelphia, he really is a natural tackle. Hard-working guy and all that kind of stuff. We'll see how that works out."

This is good news for me, and not just out of a desire to replace Sean Locklear. Andrews was a disappointment at right guard, but that's because his size and talents don't fit right guard. They fit right tackle, where he started - and prospered - for the team who drafted him in the fourth round (Cincinnati), earning a franchise designation in 2008. Once he was traded to the Eagles after a severe injury, the Eagles insisted on starting him at guard, where his height has negated his leverage against effective 3-4 defensive tackles ever since. Fred Robbins and Richard Seymour gave him particular trouble last year.

Carroll's quote indicates that Seattle, rather than also mis-judging Andrews, saw the proper fit for the guy and played him out of position for a reason other than "we're desperately experimenting". The best solution for right guard in 2010 ended up being Mike Gibson, who has fought his way up the depth chart but still remains good depth rather than a good starter.

Andrews, who was obtained from Philly for a seventh-round pick, could end up bouncing back and providing a good in-house solution for an aching problem on the offensive line. He has that potential; most people don't realize that he was solid in Cincy and traded because of injury. It would behoove Seattle to try and reduce Andrews' large salary, the factor that truly endangers his tenure with the Seahawks, but reducing bloated contracts was one of John Schneider's greatest successes in his first year with the team.

I suppose the move could also be Pete Carroll trying to jack up Andrews' value for a potential trade, but after Andrews' reputation the last couple years (whether unfair or not), I can't imagine Andrews being heavily sought after.