Steve Hutchinson: The Truth

Ah, didn't we win that Redskin game? What the F is he talkin about?

One of the better reads on the topic. Wyman finally explains the transition tag in a way other than "zOMG s000 dumm."

Was it the right choice or the wrong choice? Probably wrong, but it was NOT a slap in the face and it was NOT entirely Ruskell's fault. The agent poisoned the well and made it impossible for Hutch to sign. Remember the Hawks tried to make adjustments to neutralize the PP but the NFLPA refused to be reasonable.

I agree with the article about who to lay the blame on, but I'm not buying the "he's just a "GUARD" sentiment. Every lineman is extremely important and it takes great technique and athleticism to perform well. Rob Simms is doing a decent job these days. We need a new left tackle, and most importantly continuity.

Im not buying he is just a guard deal,every game I watched on tv bragged on how we had the best left side of the line in the NFL.I once bought tickets off Ebay great seats good deal right behind the Seattle bench Hutch was clearly in charge of the line,they sat down he paraded up and down chewing butt to the point I thought the rest of the line would say set down and shut up,they didnt.I like this from the article ..........That crap last Sunday when Darnell Dockett shoved his forearm into Matt Hasselbeck's neck…that would've been "handled"….by Hutch. Hutch was a quiet leader but he was THE Alpha Dog.

Man I miss Hutch! ...................That is what we are missing and now The Defense Ruskell has spent years building go up against the O line Hutch ended up on, any bets???......I think Hutch screwed us when he left,why who knows,think he thought he should of been offered a contract during the season or in 2004.He should of been locked up.Point blank Ruskell did a horrible job and we fans are suffering from it.I would love for him to be shown the door.I dont think it will happen for a year or two,we the fans will suffer more.

Umm... Ruskell wasn't the GM in 2004 so he couldn't have locked hutch up.

I liked this article a lot. It seems to me like Hutch probably wanted to stay pre-05 season completion. Ruskell wasn't sure how to value a guard and wanted to play it out. From an outsider's point of view, I think Ruskell did the right thing by letting the market decide. It sounded like his intent was to have the market decide Hutch's value and then to either match it or not. Sounds like a very reasonable approach and in good faith. Hutch probably got annoyed with the process. Had Hutch held his end of the bargain by not allowing his agent to instill the poison pill into the MN contract, Hutch would be making the same kind of money playing for the Hawks. I for one am sick of everyone crediting Hutch with the success of our 05 line - a line is made up of 5 guys (Walter, Hutch, Tobeck, Gray, Lock) who play together for a long time. Our 05 line was healthy for the entire season and had played together for a while. If we have Walt - Sims - Spencer - Unger - Lock together for the entire season, I guarantee you that we look a lot better than we do today.

I agree with Wyman that Hutch is only a guard. Had Ruskell focused on the O-line the way he did with our D-line, we don't talk about Hutch at all. He's only a guard.

How I see it, Ruskell negotiated in good faith. Hutch did not. Is Hutch a good player? No doubt. But we lost a guard. We move on. I discredit Ruskell with not paying enough attention to the O-line; not the loss of Hutch.

Now, we need one heck of a LT from this upcoming draft and we start to build the O-line up. Solari needs to provide Ruskell with strong input on O-line talent. One thing is for sure - Ruskell does not have a nose for finding O-line talent. But no matter how talented our O-line is, we still need them to stay healthy and gel with each other.

I agree completely with Wyman and have the whole time... Hutch knew of the poison pill clause and agreed to it essentially telling Seattle and their fans to stick it (as well as Walt). I hold Hutch and his classless agent responsible far more than Ruskell, who actually tried to do him a favor by allowing him to go out and determine his own market value. The NFL by allowing the pp to stand just further proves how much they dislike the Seahawks... SB XL, Testevarde TD, etc.. I'm surprised they even fined Docket.

I hate Hutch and I hate the Vikes.. and the Cards

Well said Hawkdude, thats a perfect way of breaking it down. Could not agree more.

To me personally I miss the toughness that was mentioned in the article. I do like the progression that our young OL (Unger, Sims, Spencer) are showing, but none of them seem to have that attitude/leadership we had when we had Hutch and Tobeck on the team. I was really hoping we would have drafted Andre Smith for this very reason, he has that mean streak we currently lack. Aaron Curry is our attitude guy on D, now we need that guy on O.

Let Ruskell go test the market, should not be hard to match that one.

Maybe if we had a smarter, quicker, more accurate mobile quarterback that we would not have to put a brick baby crib around there would not be so much whining about losing one player. Lets face it, Hass has never been all that.

I'm still not sure what we have in Teel. Do we adress the qb situation in this years draft or are we grooming him up? I do know our priorities lie in the OL and a decent cb who can cover taller receivers.

Face it...Hutch didn't want to be in Seattle. So, what if we would have franchised Hutch that year? He probably would have signed the tender only if Seattle agreed not to franchise him again. Then he would have been gone after only one more year. He wanted out and he found out how to get out....the poison pill. If he didn't force the "no more franchise tag" thing, then we would have been using our franchise tag on him every year since.

Just a couple of things- as BillT pointed out, Ruskell came to the team in 05 so you can't blame him for not locking Hutch up. Andre Smith, mean streak? Did you watch Hard Knocks? He comes across as a giant softy, both literally and figuratively. We need a smarter, tougher, more accurate QB? You know what? I give up. I'm not even going to dignify that with a response. I'll be over at Fieldgulls where the commenters are much more knowledgable and don't make uninformed blowhard statements.

BillT,
Thanks for putting up that link. I read the article a couple days ago, and it said everything I've been saying about the "Hutch fiasco" from the beginning (including the use of the word "solid", lol) I understand that everyone was pissed when we lost Hutch, I was too. But Ruskell was not at fault (unless you consider his refusal to do contracts during the season a fault)Ruskell tried to do right by Hutch, and Hutch screwed him for it. End of story...can we move on now?

Your really going to doubt the Andre Smith has a mean streak??? LOL, watch Hard Knocks all you want. Thats not football in case you didn't know, go watch an old Alabama game and then tell me Smith is a "giant softy". Most of your tough players are like that when off the field, but on the field its another story.

so, let me get this straight.... Hutch went to the Vikes and said "Hey, why don't you put a clause in my contract that would make me the highest paid lineman if the Hawks match... cause hey, I'd HATE to go back to the Super Bowl."

GET REAL !!!!

I'm not even sure Hutch can READ his contract, let alone comprehend it.

That was his agent, 100% plain and simple. He did what agents do... got his client the most money possible.

Did he want to play somewhere else? Maybe. I'm sure there are lots of guys in the NFL who'd prefer to be elsewhere. but guess what?.....


Ruskell KNEW THIS !!!!!! if he wanted to keep Hutch here he could've "overpaid" with the franchise tag while working on a long-term deal. Had he done that Hutch COULDN'T have left, period. Instead, he took a calculated risk, and lost.

Ultimately, this deal stinks from every angle. Hutch wasn't worth Walter Jones money, as good as he was. However, Ruskell's big failure was not finding an adequate replacement. In fact, looking at the many people he's brought in either by FA or the draft, he has failed to bring in even one true stud lineman. Considering his weakness in this area, it seems he should've been willing to overpay for a known commodity.

But let's not blame Hutch, or even the NFL, who I'm sure decided that it wasn't worth a battle with the player's union to nullify the shady but perfectly legal poison pill. This was Ruskell vs. Hutch's agent, plain and simple.

What if the top guard in the NFL came on the market right now?Would we not do anything to land him?When Hutch came up a of of teams must of been thinking that same thing.Ruskell took a huge gamble and lost,period.It sounded reasonable to me at the time,but I am not a GM.So the front office lost Hutch ,Ruskell was in charge,he was at fault.How can you put this on Hutch he was looking out for himself Ruskell should of been looking out for the team.I also agreed with the Curry pick even though we had great linebackers,it was a gamble , probably should of took a left tackle,but I am not a GM.I have zero trust in Ruskell and will be one happy fan when he is gone.

Sonics leave Seattle. The Willingham years at UW. Pittsburg wins the Superbowl again.

Anyone see a pattern here? Yup. Ruskell was GM of the Seahawks for all those years.

why the hell are we talking about this? You guys remind me of that poor "friend" that was dumped by his GF 4 years ago and still was not over it. instead of sitting and wasting your time over something that can not be changed, you should be protesting on the direction of our current team. Point blank, we need Russkel out, his so-so moves has the hawks in a hole and if this teams goes into next year without a major change then we are looking at another 7-10 season at best.

What I don't understand is why did the vikings not recieve some sort of punishment for using the poison yet we did when it came to Burleson's contract?? We had to give up a third rounder for that, total BS.

Ruskell has attempted to replace Hutch. Don't forget that Ruskell tried to land Deilman (sp?) from San Diego and he went back to San Diego despite Ruskell offering him more money...what more could he do? He also just drafted a pretty damn good guard in the second round.

Please, armchair GM's, tell me who he should have landed in FA to replace Hutch?

USAFANARC,

the criticism isn't that Ruskell didn't TRY to replace Hutch... it's that his several attempts failed.

The very fact that he allowed that to happen, knowing full well that Tobeck and Gray were at the tail ends of their careers, is itself deserving of criticism. And here they are, 4 years later, STILL trying to establish an interior offensive line... and oh by the way, need a left tackle as well.

After 5 drafts it has become apparent that offensive line is not one of TR's strengths. I like Unger, but so far his potential far outweighs his performance, so not ready to label him above average just yet.

I like Ruskell but it has become clear to me that he is a much better scout than GM. He did a great job of landing Forsett in the 7th. What was he thinking though last year letting Forsett get away to Indy to keep space for two kickers?
He likes to cut it way to close on things. With Forsett, he got lucky and got him back from Indy. With Huthch, whose more important, he tried to save $700,000 and ended up losing him.

TacomaHawk,
Who should he have landed in FA? Good offensive linemen are few and far between in free agency and he went after one hard (Dielman). Do you think we should have drafted a guard in the first or second round in prior drafts? He drafted Sims in the 4th (2006) and Wrotto in the 4th (2007) and Unger in the 2nd (2009). I'm curious what the answer was...and I'm not being sarcastic. I don't know what the answer is. I neither hate nor love Ruskell. I think he's done a decent job with some hits and some head-scratchers. However, I don't think he's going anywhere after this year, so I wish everyone would stop beating a dead horse, calling for him to get fired.

The thing I get sick of is people (not you, TacomaHawk) that throw out random things that they would do (or would have done) as GM. For example, "We need to get an OT and a G in FA, draft a RB and a QB, and trade Branch for a DE"....or whatever fantasy they come up with. Those are worthless statements. What OT and G? Are there any available? If you are going to post about who we should pick up, know if there are any quality players in that position available in FA or the draft in 2010. Otherwise, STFU. Sorry, I'm venting.

USAFANARC,

well, you hit on the one thing I believe TR deserves criticism for. He brought in Sims, Wrotto, Willis, Vallos, Spencer, Unger, Wahle and.... the guy from New England whose name escapes me, yet the offensive line is still below average. Not one true stud in 5 years of drafts and FA periods. That's why I suggest he bring in an assistant or consultant or somebody with a track record with linemen. Maybe Solari should be involved with the draft, I don't know, something. But that's his big weakness.

I won't pretend to know which free agent/s will fit the team, play well, AND stay healthy. Oh ya, and want to come to Seattle. Personally, I'm not real big on the high-profile FAs anyways. Just saying the criticism of Ruskell on this issue is fair. I mean, why offer Dielman big money when you could have just put the franchise tag on Hutch, who you already knew fit with the team? If you're gonna overpay, better the guy who's already done it for you.

I'm not for firing TR right now either. But if he can't fix the OL in the next year or 2 he should be fired. There have been plenty of resources at his disposal and he has one of the better line coaches in the NFL, so the excuses are running out.

USAFANARC,

I hear you on the wish lists, ha ha ha. I mean, a LT, OG, RB, QB, AND a DE ?!?! there's at least 20 teams in the league who could get to the SB if they could add all those pieces,

USAFANARC,

Here's the other thing that goes along with your observation. Who knows what Ruskell has tried to do and hasn't been able to get done for whatever reasons? He might have made offers to a number of offensive linemen over the years that we know nothing about or at least explored the possibility and found it to be nothing doing. We aren't privy to the inside of the operation and therefore are making these wild speculations based on nothing factual. Some are basically painting the picture of him just ignoring the situation until we arrived at our current situation. I'm willing to bet that couldn't be further from the truth. For example, the comment about him using outside expertise to help him get good linemen in the draft. How does anyone know that he hasn't been in collusion with Solari the last two years and that's how we come up with Unger.

I personally think he's been acutely aware of the offenslve line problems and has been doing whatever he can but it just hasn't come together yet. A lot of people commenting here seem to think every free agent linemen is drooling to come here and play. Dielman showed us the fallacy of thinking like that. Offered more money, he essentially used Seattle and Ruskell's offer to get the contract he wanted from SD and then spurned Seattle's better offer. Also, look at what some of the free agent linemen like Brown and Birk have commanded in salary for an aging player who may only have two or three good years left. I know that if he made some boneheaded moves in acquiring high priced free agents who became ineffective after signing with us because they were over the hill when we got them, he would be chastized mercilessly for making a big mistake. Look what happend with the Branch deal.

Ruskell himself said that he's not concerned with all the critics and that he'll make any deal he can that makes the team better. That's one of the things I most like about him. He doesn't listen to all the armchair GM's and their should of, would of, could of rants based on limited knowledge not only of football but especially of what's going on in the players marketplace and what free agents will even consider comeing to Seattle. He's confident that he knows what could and what won't help the Seahawks and he pulls the trigger when he feels the time is right.

I feel confident that he'll be around next year and I think we'll see him address some of the biggest problems this coming offseason. He was severly criticized last season too but by the time the draft was over, even his biggest critics were singing his praises for the draft he pulled off and the acquisition of Denver's first round pick. Then the fence hoppers all jumped over the fence again and started in on the annual bitch and moan sessions for this season.

Remember, Holmgren caught just as much flak in 2002 and 2003 when the team wasn't doing well and before his team finally was completed and started winning. Look for the same thing to happen with Ruskell after he's had a couple of years to build and work with Mora without the huge shadow of Holmgren blotting out the sun.

TacomaHawk,

Damn straight. We'll be lucky to add a top tier free agent and maybe a couple blue chippers in the draft if we use our first three picks to get a LT and top rated guard. Unless we don't win another game, the very best LT's will be gone unless we use our two first round picks to move up high enough to get into the top 5 again where those players are taken. Our second rounder might get us another guard like Unger. End of the elite prospects for the year. We'll be looking at 4th rounders and below and 2nd and 3rd tier free agents after that and those kinds of players will provide depth but not patch big needs where we need a star such as a bit time pass rusher (every team in the league wants one of those) and an elite left tackle (ditto).

You have to build your team two or three players at a time as far as impact players go and you're continually getting more hol;es top fill as players age or leave in free agency or become injured. No team can field all impact players. If we got an elite LT, another very good guard (like Unger) and a pass rusher this season, we'd turn this team round if we don't end up with other holes we don't have now.

Its not a personal thing it is a Wins to Loss thing. TR has done some great things.It is just not working here. My true feeling is we have to much Good character guys on this team. Look last week at the Dockett choke. Can you imagine Hutch seeing someone do that to his QB. Cats out of the bag we need to shake things up at the very top I quate Krusty the Clown "sorry kids business is business".

I'm mostly neutral on Ruskell (like him more than dislike him) but one thing I do not want is to see Holmgren backwith the team. He had his chance and he blew it.

Omar, I'm with you 100%.

i like this website