| 10 February 2010
As Steve posted earlier, tomorrow is the first day to use the franchise tag. With everything still up in the air--with just about everyone expecting the CBA to expire causing the NFL to enter an uncapped year and convert the majority of young free agents to RFAs--I wouldn't be shocked to see a few teams slow play the tagging ritual a bit, just in case something breaks. You don't want to slap your tag on a decent UFA assuming that your best player is going to be a restricted free agent, jusssst in case a deal is reached.
That said, I don't expect this to be a big issue for the Seahawks. There are few important free agents who won't likely convert to RFA -- Darryl Tapp, Rob Sims, Chris Spencer, all will. In reality, the only potential unrestricted free agent departures are Justin Griffith (seeya), Nate Burleson (please stay?), Damion McIntosh, Kevin Houser, Cory Redding and Olindo Mare. Of those, only two play crucial roles: Nate Burleson and Olindo Mare. The franchise tag for Burleson would be way, way, wayyy more than he's worth. You would be paying a #2 receiver top-5 money. Nahgunnadewit. (Last year's WR hit was a hair under $10MM.)
That leaves Olindo Mare, a move that makes a load of sense. Mare is 37 years old, which means he could have a few more years in him, but he might be done after one or two. You give him a one year contract of less than $2.5 million, and you lock in one of the top kickers in the league for a year with exclusive rights to negotiate a longer contract. It's also pretty low-risk and keeps a strength a strength.
Also, quick question: two years ago, Tim Ruskell debated between two kickers: Brandon Coutu and Garrett Hartley. On he drafted, one went undrafted. I'm pretty sure one is out of the league and one has hit 92% of his regular season FGs and nailed three 40-yard plus kicks in the Super Bowl, but I can't recall which was which? Anybody? Anybody? (To all dormant Ruskell haters, you're welcome.)
Comments (26)
kickers
written by hawked, February 10, 2010
written by hawked, February 10, 2010
Ya draft a kicker...(Ruskell) keep him on the side when you already signed a vet, then your buddy who backstabs you calls out the vet for having a bad game. Sums up Ruskell n Mora dont it...No way Holmgren keeps two kickers or drafts in 7nth. I do believe this was done to infurate Holmgren in his last year and why Mora was such a idiot savant. God for spell check on this site! PEACE hahahah
-
- -1
-
-
...
written by Riggle, February 10, 2010
written by Riggle, February 10, 2010
I agree that there may be a spot for Rob Sims. Zone blocking requires smarts and athleticism. He is very athletic for a big man. Not sure if Sims has the smarts though. We'll see.
-
- +0
-
-
Hey "Hawked"
written by LouieLouie, February 10, 2010
written by LouieLouie, February 10, 2010
I can tell by the temperament of your comment that you are clearly a class below most the other people who post comments on this site. The less comments that you post,(at least like the one above) the better this site will be.
Have a nice day.
Have a nice day.
-
- +1
-
-
Hey Chris:
written by LouieLouie, February 10, 2010
written by LouieLouie, February 10, 2010
Interesting point about franchising Mare. Compared to most franchise moves, this one is relatively cheap. Several different writers have named him the MVP of the 2009 Seahawks. I can't think of a more deserving Seahawk to franchise.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by cts, February 10, 2010
written by cts, February 10, 2010
I think that we need to retain Spencer too. Vallos shouldn't be considered a valued backup C. I'm all for Unger but if he goes down we need a true C to fill in. He shouldn't be much of a financial concern as he hasn't wowed anyone, but if Unger goes down I feel better with Spencer snapping the ball than Vallos. In no way am I advocating the tag, just sporting my opinion.
I do think, despite how much I like Sims and Frye, that if either, or any linemen for that matter, are let go that it would be after Gibbs has a chance to evaluate them and give his input on who fits what he is looking for.
I do think, despite how much I like Sims and Frye, that if either, or any linemen for that matter, are let go that it would be after Gibbs has a chance to evaluate them and give his input on who fits what he is looking for.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Darnell, February 10, 2010
written by Darnell, February 10, 2010
I just don't see any way that after watching the tape on Rob Sims from this year that they wouldn't come away impressed.
if you look beyond the crapiness of the oline as a whole - Sims was very very good. Awsome in pass pro, tough, quick off the snap, looked athletic enough - and if you wanna do your best against Suh 2x a season you need a dude like Sims next to Unger.
I also like that even though the oline was bad and it was obvious, Sims stood up for his boys when Mora called em out publicly.
Keep Sims, put Lock at his better ZBS RT spot, keep Unger at C draft a LT at 6,14 or 40 - and we may be on to something.
if you look beyond the crapiness of the oline as a whole - Sims was very very good. Awsome in pass pro, tough, quick off the snap, looked athletic enough - and if you wanna do your best against Suh 2x a season you need a dude like Sims next to Unger.
I also like that even though the oline was bad and it was obvious, Sims stood up for his boys when Mora called em out publicly.
Keep Sims, put Lock at his better ZBS RT spot, keep Unger at C draft a LT at 6,14 or 40 - and we may be on to something.
-
- +4
-
-
FA
written by lars hanson, February 10, 2010
written by lars hanson, February 10, 2010
Spencer has shown he doesnt make the cut. Sims is the only OL free agent to retain. Vallos is not an NFL center or backup he's proven that.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by cts, February 11, 2010
written by cts, February 11, 2010
Lars-
Spencer is a true C whether he's been a bust or not. I agree that Vallos is nothing more than depth, but he shouldn't play C at all. I'm saying keep Spencer, because he is the ONLY other C we have on the team. He is a former 1st round draft pick, which doesn't mean much, but I'm hoping that Gibbs can refine his skills enough to be an adequate back up and maybe challenge for some OG play time. Unless the FO plans on drafting a C or going after one in FA then we HAVE to resign Spencer.
Spencer is a true C whether he's been a bust or not. I agree that Vallos is nothing more than depth, but he shouldn't play C at all. I'm saying keep Spencer, because he is the ONLY other C we have on the team. He is a former 1st round draft pick, which doesn't mean much, but I'm hoping that Gibbs can refine his skills enough to be an adequate back up and maybe challenge for some OG play time. Unless the FO plans on drafting a C or going after one in FA then we HAVE to resign Spencer.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by BillT, February 11, 2010
written by BillT, February 11, 2010
I've always thought Spencer would make a better guard than center and since we need interior offensive linemen, it would be foolish to get rid of Spencer particularly in a year when there are likely to be few free agent options on the OL. We don't have enough draft choices to completely re-tool the OL so unless someone offers Spencer elite player money (unlikely), we should make an effort to re-sign him.
Gibbs has the reputation of motivating guys like him and making great offensive lines constructed of blue collar linemen of which Spencer fits the bill. Let's put that to the test. Spencer is athletic and has good footwork. He had trouble leading the offensive line with all the adjustments and lineup calls he was required to make from the center position. I think he might flourish at a position where all he has to do is comeup to the LOS, get his assignment and execute instead of setting everyone else's assignment too. Let's see if he can play better if he's only responsible for his own play.
Gibbs has the reputation of motivating guys like him and making great offensive lines constructed of blue collar linemen of which Spencer fits the bill. Let's put that to the test. Spencer is athletic and has good footwork. He had trouble leading the offensive line with all the adjustments and lineup calls he was required to make from the center position. I think he might flourish at a position where all he has to do is comeup to the LOS, get his assignment and execute instead of setting everyone else's assignment too. Let's see if he can play better if he's only responsible for his own play.
-
- +3
-
-
...
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
I agree with you on Spencer BillT, I think he would make a very good guard. Some guys aren't made for the center posistion, he seems to have everything you want physically but I don't think he has that grasp of the game that guys like Saturday or Birk have.
We should really keep Spencer because if we let him go the starting right guard will likely be Mansfield Wrotto. I'm not exactally jumping for joy about that one.
All we really need on this OL is a new LT. Sims seems to have settled into his RG spot and is flourishing, Unger is locked into center, RG may be a concern but Spencer could be the long term solution, and if Locklear can stay healthy our RT spot is solid. This unit is not as bad as most seem to think, with one or two upgrades and Gibbs this can be a pretty good unit.
We should really keep Spencer because if we let him go the starting right guard will likely be Mansfield Wrotto. I'm not exactally jumping for joy about that one.
All we really need on this OL is a new LT. Sims seems to have settled into his RG spot and is flourishing, Unger is locked into center, RG may be a concern but Spencer could be the long term solution, and if Locklear can stay healthy our RT spot is solid. This unit is not as bad as most seem to think, with one or two upgrades and Gibbs this can be a pretty good unit.
-
- +3
-
-
...
written by S.TTBM, February 11, 2010
written by S.TTBM, February 11, 2010
Excellent points Billt.
The sad thing with Spencer is that he has awesome physical size, and loads of talent/potential, but he just isnt smart enough to play C in the NFL. He seems like he could possibly convert to G, but he isnt great at pulling--which is utterly key in the ZBS for a RG. Spencer would probably be an excellent RG in a man/power blocking scheme--but that isnt what we run.
I wonder if Seattle could drum up a deal with another team that runs a man scheme, trading Spencer for a smaller, more athletic lineman we could make our RG. I realize trades are super rare in the NFL, and such a move would come with risk, but: Spencer just doesnt seem to fit with a ZBS.
Whatever happens, it makes sense to keep any player youre not 100% sure that you can replace with a better one, no matter how frustrating they may be (Spencer, Burleson, Babineaux and even Hass for some of you impatient folks
)
Can we please have Pork Chop back?! He outplayed every Hawk lineman last year in Cleveland, as I predicted he would. Ironic as hell that he now starts in Cleveland for Holmgren!
The sad thing with Spencer is that he has awesome physical size, and loads of talent/potential, but he just isnt smart enough to play C in the NFL. He seems like he could possibly convert to G, but he isnt great at pulling--which is utterly key in the ZBS for a RG. Spencer would probably be an excellent RG in a man/power blocking scheme--but that isnt what we run.
I wonder if Seattle could drum up a deal with another team that runs a man scheme, trading Spencer for a smaller, more athletic lineman we could make our RG. I realize trades are super rare in the NFL, and such a move would come with risk, but: Spencer just doesnt seem to fit with a ZBS.
Whatever happens, it makes sense to keep any player youre not 100% sure that you can replace with a better one, no matter how frustrating they may be (Spencer, Burleson, Babineaux and even Hass for some of you impatient folks
) Can we please have Pork Chop back?! He outplayed every Hawk lineman last year in Cleveland, as I predicted he would. Ironic as hell that he now starts in Cleveland for Holmgren!
-
- +2
-
-
...
written by CWEH, February 11, 2010
written by CWEH, February 11, 2010
Crucial Role? Chris, please enlighten me on how Nate (bless his heart) or Mare played a crucial role on the team? Nate keeps missing games and last I check Mare cost us a game or two this season.
Neither player deserves the tag nor would I be upset if they leave. Point made with Hartley! Kickers are dime a dozen and easy to get. If anything, I would make sure we keep our punter (since he was more crucial then Mare). As for Nate, we will never get a full season from him, time to detach ourselves and move forward. If he is willing to accept a decent contract, then bring him back. He has not done anything spectacular here or with Viking’s to deserve all this “Nate Love”. Just because he is a hometown product, does not mean we should bend over backwards for him.
Neither player deserves the tag nor would I be upset if they leave. Point made with Hartley! Kickers are dime a dozen and easy to get. If anything, I would make sure we keep our punter (since he was more crucial then Mare). As for Nate, we will never get a full season from him, time to detach ourselves and move forward. If he is willing to accept a decent contract, then bring him back. He has not done anything spectacular here or with Viking’s to deserve all this “Nate Love”. Just because he is a hometown product, does not mean we should bend over backwards for him.
-
- -2
-
-
Nate and Mare
written by LouieLouie, February 11, 2010
written by LouieLouie, February 11, 2010
Hey CWEH - I disagree with you about Mare. He may have helped us loose against Chicago, but he was solid the rest of the year. He may have even been able to win one or two last year if we hadn't been down by multiple touchdowns so many times.
While Nate may not be the greatest receiver since Steve Largent, he has been solid when he has played. He has also worked with Hass for a few seasons. If any receiver is cut loose, it will be Branch; not because he can't play, but because he is too expensive. If we let too many receivers go, it will look like 2008 all over again.
The O-Line doesn't need to be torn apart, it needs tweeking. A legitimate Left Tackle would be nice.
While Nate may not be the greatest receiver since Steve Largent, he has been solid when he has played. He has also worked with Hass for a few seasons. If any receiver is cut loose, it will be Branch; not because he can't play, but because he is too expensive. If we let too many receivers go, it will look like 2008 all over again.
The O-Line doesn't need to be torn apart, it needs tweeking. A legitimate Left Tackle would be nice.
-
- +2
-
-
...
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
Mare missed 2 field goals out of 16. I believe both of those were in the Chicago game. If thats not valuable IDK what is. He would have gone to the pro bowl if not for Mora's rant. Lets not forget that Mare is one of the best in the league at kickoffs, something that is very important espcially considering our poor coverage team.
If you truly believe that kickers are a dime a dozen go talk to any Baltimore Raven fan. Their kicker (forgot his name) cost them two if not three games. The Viking game comes to mind but he cost them at least one of the Bengal games as well.
If you truly believe that kickers are a dime a dozen go talk to any Baltimore Raven fan. Their kicker (forgot his name) cost them two if not three games. The Viking game comes to mind but he cost them at least one of the Bengal games as well.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
Sorry, I meant to say Mare missed 2 field goals out of 26.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by Hawkdude, February 11, 2010
written by Hawkdude, February 11, 2010
I think we should keep Sims and Spence. They would be RFAs in an uncapped year, so we should be able to keep them for cheap. The thought of facing Suh twice a year, makes me want to also draft Iupati. If we have a LT, Iupati, Unger, Spence, Locklear, I think we have a good line. Iupati would return the "MEAN" to our line while the rest of the line would simply be stable and steady.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
If the Rams do draft Suh (which I don't think they will) Iupati is not a good option to contain him. Iupati is not a very good pass protector, he only impresses in his run blocking ability. Sims however is a very good pass protector and would be a much better option going against Suh.
-
- +0
-
-
Kickers
written by firecap, February 11, 2010
written by firecap, February 11, 2010
...No way Holmgren keeps two kickers......
It was in 2008 that we kept 2 kickers. Guess who the coach was?
It was in 2008 that we kept 2 kickers. Guess who the coach was?
-
- +1
-
-
CWEH
written by GnarlyHawks, February 11, 2010
written by GnarlyHawks, February 11, 2010
Do you realize that Mare is one of the best in the league at kickoffs and consistantly pinns the kick returner in his endzone or 1 yard line. This is an INVALUABLE skill on special teams. It is also stratecically important in the field position battle.
I believe your context on the 2 missed filed goals needs adjustment. He was put into a position to kick 6 field goals that game as well. Something was wrong w/ the FG unit that day.
Please reconsider the relevence of the data. Mare, really is our best asset for a franchise tag consideration. That may sound horrible considering we normally think skill position or critical line positions for a tag. In our situation, it makes sense I think.
I believe your context on the 2 missed filed goals needs adjustment. He was put into a position to kick 6 field goals that game as well. Something was wrong w/ the FG unit that day.
Please reconsider the relevence of the data. Mare, really is our best asset for a franchise tag consideration. That may sound horrible considering we normally think skill position or critical line positions for a tag. In our situation, it makes sense I think.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by S.TTBM, February 11, 2010
written by S.TTBM, February 11, 2010
Holmgren did NOT want two kickers on his roster. It was a compromise wherein Ruskell kept Coutou around to see if he could learn to kickoff adequately (He couldnt), and Holmgren got the kicker he wanted, Mare.
Coutou could kick 54 yard field goals. He was pretty accurate from 50+ yards, and at the time seemed a calculated risk at worst, the best kicker out of college in years at best. He is out of the league due to his pathetic kickoffs.
On Nate Burleson: Steady is definitely one thing Nate is not. What he is, is an aging WR who shows flashes of near brilliance between weeks of dropped passes, poor routes, and a general disappearing act. He would be an excellent third WR on a team that throws a lot and uses 3-5 WR sets. He should go play for Martz in Chicago, he might even get 1,000 yards there to go along with his 20 drops a season.
Coutou could kick 54 yard field goals. He was pretty accurate from 50+ yards, and at the time seemed a calculated risk at worst, the best kicker out of college in years at best. He is out of the league due to his pathetic kickoffs.
On Nate Burleson: Steady is definitely one thing Nate is not. What he is, is an aging WR who shows flashes of near brilliance between weeks of dropped passes, poor routes, and a general disappearing act. He would be an excellent third WR on a team that throws a lot and uses 3-5 WR sets. He should go play for Martz in Chicago, he might even get 1,000 yards there to go along with his 20 drops a season.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by S.TTBM, February 11, 2010
written by S.TTBM, February 11, 2010
Mare IS one of the top 3 kickers in the NFL. His kickoffs are brilliant, and he set a Seahawk record for field goals made in a row that is still active and ongoing, beating out stellar players including Norm Johnson and Josh "Slave to the Businessman" Brown.
Who cares if he can't make a 50 yarder? He's money up to 49.
Ruskell did research, and what he found about kickers is that not one kicker in the NFL averages better than 83% over three years or so. All those great kickers that win games, they still miss easy ones as often as anyone else. They may have one great season, but within a three years it all averages out.
The trick is finding a guy who doesnt miss with the game on the line. And Ruskell did that with Mare for the most part. That Chicago game was lost by the hideous coaching decisions--the atrocious playcalling in the redzone, the pathetic 4th down effort (falling flat on his face) by Redding that resulted in a tD, etc etc. There were so many more people to blame than Mare in a game that never should have been close.
Who cares if he can't make a 50 yarder? He's money up to 49.
Ruskell did research, and what he found about kickers is that not one kicker in the NFL averages better than 83% over three years or so. All those great kickers that win games, they still miss easy ones as often as anyone else. They may have one great season, but within a three years it all averages out.
The trick is finding a guy who doesnt miss with the game on the line. And Ruskell did that with Mare for the most part. That Chicago game was lost by the hideous coaching decisions--the atrocious playcalling in the redzone, the pathetic 4th down effort (falling flat on his face) by Redding that resulted in a tD, etc etc. There were so many more people to blame than Mare in a game that never should have been close.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
written by omar little, February 11, 2010
I don't even fault Mare with that Chicago game. Any time a kicker has to attempt 6 field goals is a litte too much. That was the offenses fault, not Mare's.
-
- +1
-
-
Two kickers
written by hawked, February 11, 2010
written by hawked, February 11, 2010
Holmgren as GM would never keep two kickers and yes he was the coach at the time. Mora was in the wings with Ruskell and I feel Ruskell was playing to the future with Mora. Just drafting a kicker 7th was made fun of. Risk/reward idk but it is hilarious that Mora called out Mare when there were so many reasons, drops, Refs. ect.
It is so fitting and I love the text Ruskell sent Mora after he resigned.
It is so fitting and I love the text Ruskell sent Mora after he resigned.
-
- +0
-
-
Spencer...
written by James N., February 16, 2010
written by James N., February 16, 2010
I know I'm a little late in checking in re. the Spencer debate but I agree totally with BillT, Omar and S.TTBM re. his move to OG - he doesn't seem to have the nous to operate at C, yet has the physical attributes to be at very least a solid OG. I'd advocated this on one or more Seahawks fora some time back (did I mention it in the 'hawks NG maybe a year or so ago, Bill? Must check back in there again soon BTW - haven't done so for a while).
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Out of our free agents I think the most important is Rob Sims. He and Brandon Frye and Max Unger were the only bright spots on the OL last season, we would be stupid to let Sims walk. I would like to keep Spencer around as depth if possible, but I don't really care if he walks. Burleson is a given to stay. With him our WR corp is above average, without him we are a very poor group. Burleson will have to be replaced soon though with a better option, so unless we want to get Bryant, Tate or Williams in the first I think he stays.