Move on Mora Jeez!

As much as i hate to mora now, i gotta hate him more, if we got sanchez, lets see how he would do behind no offensive line.

I dont think we would have done any worse with the Dirty Sanchez under center than we did this year. I think you put someone under center with a big arm that can buy some time and maybe make something happen when nothing is there would have changed the entire dynamic of the offense. Plus, next year would be year 2 in his development. Now we have just wasted a year that could have been used to develop a QB. Curry clearly was not the best LB in the draft and was basically a safe pick. I saw nothing this year that shows Curry will be special or a game changer. You cant win in the NFL when your star player is an above average LB.

Besides that, what the front office did to Mora at the end with not telling him he was being let go before the presser, I think he can say whatever he wants about who he liked in the draft. Sanchez might never be a star but his potential to as one player make a franchise competitive is greater than Curry's and that doesnt even factor in the depth the Hawks already had at LB.

You're taking this out of context. In that quote, i dont see him dogging on the Seahawks at all. Plus, he was asked i'm sure what he thought about Sanchez. He answered truthfully. The organization has moved on, i'm sure he's in the process also.

Also, i really hope this post doesn't turn into a bunch of idiots saying we should've gotten Sanchez. He's a below average rookie qb behind a monster offensive line, with an insane running game, and an even more insane defense. Any quarterback would fare well in NY. Sanchez is and will always be a turd.

Even if we drafted him, he would not have seen much (if any) playing time. And if he did get any playing time behind our porous O-line he would have been pounded. With our incompetent OC calling plays and the tool we had as the HC running the show, Sanchez would not have developed at all. He had the perfect situation in NY with the best rushing attack, the best defense, and one of the best offensive lines in the league.

As more of this stuff comes out about the disfunction behind the scenes at Seahawks HQ, maybe the way Mora was fired was fitting.

Steve - you are off the mark on this one. I think it is probably a rare day when and entire staff is completely in consensus on the ranking of all the guys in the draft, even though the team goes into the draft with an agreed ranking of players. That dissent goes into where the guy finally gets ranked on the team's board.

Also, NFL Network has Mora on it's show for his expertise, and most recently his insider knowledge is going to be full of stories about the Hawks. That's a no-brainer. What do you expect him to talk about? He's gonna talk Niners, Falcons and Hawks. Duh!

Maybe he is bitter, but it doesn't show through in his comments. I might suggest that you are the one that needs to get over Mora, rather than the other way around.

I agree. I think this blog entry is an over reaction. Although I did not listen to Mora, and only read about it here.

I understand all of your points. I think that Sanchez will be a great QB in the league but not for the Hawks. Curry was the best option at #4 not Sanchez. The purpose of the article was to show that there was too much tension behind the scenes and that it was obvious with how the Hawks played.

I'm not overly upset that Mora got let go. It was the best for the team. But I don't think he's a bad guy and I don't think he has hidden agendas in what he says. Give him a break. Most fans die for inside info like what he was sharing. Better than sharing the usual cliches. Give him a break...

I didnt detect any bitterness from his words. He's probably just trying to get out what he thought of Sanchez so the world doesnt think he's a fool for passing on him. Which is fine.

Im still glad we didnt pick Sanchez. I think it would have ruined him to see playing time this year on our team, in that offense. And Curry will be fine. Besides, Sanchez could still turn out to be Rick Mirer: 12 TD's and 20 picks is WAAAY worse than Mirer managed in his first two years with a much worse team. Just sayin', jury is still out on that guy.

Curry had a disappointing year, and he was baffling lousy in covering TE's, that much is true. But remember, in college he mostly stuffed the run, and was fantastic at that. His size and speed are great, and you cant teach speed. He just needs some coaching up, and a real defensive scheme, and he will be a great one.

Those who doubt him werent paying attention in games 2-6 when he was tearing it up against the run. And his speed and passion should translate well in rushing the passer, once he gets more experience. Remember, even DE's take 2-3 years to become good pass rushers.

Last years crop of LB's was the best ever. And part of the success of those rookie's was the defensive schemes and coaches on those teams. We had nothing in that dept.

I heard a football coach talking about a player he liked. I read a story about someone projecting his own bitterness.

Curry will be good ,but we had better start looking for a QB. Mark Sanchez is going to be a good Player.We were already stacked at LB so the Curry pick may turn out to be a bust if he does not turn into a perennial pro-bowler.

Curry's gonna be a monster unleashed, but yeah it takes time and proper coaching to bring that out.

Mora isn't bitter? Where are you coming from? Anytime this guy has a chance to speak on any platform it will be some sort negative tone that someone did something wrong. READ BETWEEN THE LINES JOESMACK! Jim Mora will be bitter for a while. It's something he will not get over until he finds a place he can settle and show that he's a good coach. What Mr. Mora needs to do is search high and low for a coordinator's position or a sports analyst to get his mind off Seattle. Now, for you to say that Steve needs to get over Mora is an immature statement coming from uneducated fool who knows nothing about reading between the lines. Mr. Joe mucketty muck,if you were in Mora's position you would be so freak'n upset about the situation that you too would want to lash out when ever a platform was giving. Watch and see, Jim Mora will have plenty to say through out this year.

1. Sanchez was HORRIBLE last year!! Those of you on here saying we were dumb for passing on him make me laugh cuz that is you telling everyone else that you are okay in having the #28 ranked QB last year and that is behind a very good OL. Not to mention that Hass was ranked higher with all the problems we saw him have and being injured. Have your Mark "Bust" Sanchez and jump on the bandwagon because his TEAM did well in the playoffs.

2. Aaron Curry's downfall this year was due to completely misusing him. The coaching staff messed with his game like they did with LoJack when they tried making him learn DT as well hindering his progression as a DE. Curry is an animal and now that we got a coaching staff that are not only getting along but on the same page, he will progress to the player that caused us to draft him.

At least Mora was right for once. Curry is not even the best rookie at his position coming out of the draft. Wake Forest is not exactly a stellar football college. I would have loved to have Sanchez starting for the Hawks with Matt in the backup role where he now belongs.

Did they not teach you how to read on the farm Paul? I said Mora is bitter. I also said that it did not come through in any of the comments he made in the conversation being referenced by your buddy Steve.

Wow! You made a whole raging post based on a comment that you either were incapable of reading or were unable to understand. That's sad.

Hawksfan80--Dude, you are worse than me with Ruskell! Every post you slam Hass! You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I dont mean to hammer you for voicing it. But damn! If he were as bad as you claim, his stats would look something like Sanchez'!

Its pretty much a no-brainer that Sanchez would have flat sucked with our offense around him.

You may be right, and Matt may be a washed up system qb. Guess we'll all find out.

Relax, guys. There's no need for namecalling.

Mora probably is bitter. Just like all year long when he constantly blamed the players in the Pressers when any fool could see the coaches were at least equally to blame, Mora blames everyone but himself and his assistant coaches (especially his Bosom Buddy Knapp) for his epic failure.

He can console himself with his millions in unearned pay.

But I didnt get any bitterness out of his words. Just his usual shining on of the press, trying to make himself look good.

hawksfan80-

Do you honestly think that Sanchez is better than Hass or in anyway should have been a starting QB for ANY team? Way to ignorantly pass blame onto Hass as opposed to the OL who forced him into all of those situations.

Sanchez had a great OL and still had a much worse year than Hass. Anytime a QB throws only 12 TD's and backs that up with 20 INT's I think it's safe to say that he's not ready to be a back up QB let alone the starter. Seneca did better than him and I think most agree that Seneca will NEVER be a starter, yet he performed better than Sanchez. I'd be willing to bet that if he was behind the Hawks OL last year his stats would look more like 8 TD's and 26 INT's... easily.

Did you even watch the Jets play other than the post season or is that what you are basing your opinion on? Cuz if you did then you would know that a tightly coiled piece of dog sh*t on a lawn had more football talent than Sanchez did last year. You really put in some good research on that one buddy...

Wow this one got some people fired up!

If Sanchez started for Seattle last year he would have ended up like Ryan Leaf, never heard from again barring some kind of drug activity or another rape allegation. I don't like the kid at all but he still has some hope because he has a stellar line, running game and D. That helps QB's develop. I am sure Big Ben would have been nothing if he ended up another team, but know he has learned and developed into a pretty good qb. My guess when it is all said and done Curry will be considered more of a star than Sanchez ever will be (except for these few weeks in a playoff run that wasn't really about him)

Sanchez will have a much more noteable Career than Curry. I doubt Curry will ever make the Pro Bowl unless as an alternate. Hass sucks whether he has a good o-line or not. Hass is just an average quarterback and now he is an old average quarterback who looked good in Seattle because the bar here was set very low. I'll take Sanchez and over half of the NFL quarterbacks over Hass any day.

its waaaaaaaaaay too early to call either Sanchez's or Curry's careers. Give them both a few more years to develop before making that call...
Sanchez did a lot in his rookie year. Not every QB is going to be Payton Manning or Matt Ryan out of the gate, but he did play well in 3 playoff games, so why the hate?
We really haven't seen what Curry is capable of, because he is still learning how to be an NFL player and the coaching staff we had weren't getting the most out of our players. I am excited to see what Ken Norton Jr can do with him. Just look at Norton's stable of current NFL linebackers taught by him at USC. Yes, Brian Cushing and Clay Matthews had better seasons than Curry, but i would argue that they were more pro ready due to the coaching they received in college.

I think we are all to quick to make judgements here, but it wouldn't be the Pacific Northwest without a "I can't believe we passed over that guy" argument... Not that we don't have the right, after the Sam Bowie over Micheal Jordan and the Brandon Morrow over Tim Lincecum Drafts....

Sorry man, I'm having a raging male-PMS day! Nothing is going right! Anyway, my apologies.

I doubt Sanchez will ever start a pro bowl either

Way to man up FarmerPaul!

It's all good. I'm just having one of those days.

Go Seahawks

breathe and chill on the personal attacks please.

I agree Matt's washed up and its easy to say in hind sight Sanchez would be a good pick. If we did pick him last year, he would have been on the bench.

Too ealry to make anything of Curry. Although the kid did piss me off w/ his hold out. I was pretty bent about that and didn't like how he and his agent handled that. He's in debt still to the org. I'd say Pete Carroll wanted to review his film firt, b/c he's the biggest liability on the team, given his contract vs production. We need to get our value out of him, regardless of wanting to "help" him.

I was never sure Sanchez was any good, I'm no talent evaluator. He is proving to be mroe than many ppl on here thought he was last year at draft time. I like the kid, and he seems to have a future brighter than most.

Thanks for accepting that.

BTW I am sure Sanchez never imagined he would be such the lightning rod for Seahawks coaches. http://ballhype.com/video/pete...aving_usc/

here is a news article that just came about an hour ago.
check it out: http://www.examiner.com/x-5385...in-Seattle

Oh, and can I mention that Vince Young looked pretty decent in his first year too. It is way too early to pass judgement on any of the 2009 class - even Cushing, etc. One year of production does not make for a great draft pick/player. Another example: Marcus Tubbs - is he a sweet pick because he was amazing when he was on the field or is he a bust because he was injured two years in a row and had a very short career?

One thing for sure I bet we take a shot at a QB in the latter rounds unless they feel they can work with Teel.It is time to have a good QB in training.I know nothing about Teel.Is he worth keeping around?Has he shown any promise at all?Also in my mind we have very little choice but to go after a RB.

GnarlyHawk-

Can you honestly say he's proving to be more than most thought on here, cuz he finished #28 on the QB ranking for the year and only mid-pack in the post season despite making it to the AFC Championship. All this blind praise bothers me when EVERYTHING points in the opposite direction.

Now I'm not going to sit here and say that Sanchez will never develop into a franchise QB. That was never my point. My point is that Sanchez wasn't even moderately productive this year and was hands down a #5 pick bust for the season. He hurt his team more than helping it. It's sad when you people say how "bad" and "washed up" Hass is when he put up 50% more TD's than Sanchez and less INT's and that's with one of the worst OL's, no protection/time and he was injured for a few games. Not to mention that the last time Hass was healthy (injuries due to a lack of protection) and the OL was moderately healthy we had one of the most prolific passing games in the NFL and that was also with an average to slightly above average WR core.

So those of you with a man crush still on Sanchez I ask you again, would you still have rather had taken him at #4 last year and had Hass sat the bench? I certainly wouldn't and I agree with Tom1700 100%. If Sanchez didn't have the OL, run game and defense of the Jets and played for us for example, he would be the next Ryan Leaf. He almost already is. Matt Stafford is a much better QB than Sanchez and they had almost identical seasons with Stafford on a much worse team. Stafford actually had more TD's and the same # of INT's and he missed a few games. The only reason you praise Sanchez over Stafford despite the better stats is because Sanchez had a team that could carry his poor play and win a few more games. Put Stafford with the Jets this year and I'm willing to bet that they finish with a few more wins and a much better shot at Indy.

Maybe it hits a bit close to home for me as I feel Clausen is in the same boat as Sanchez as the one year wonder and many are hailing him as the next savior of Seattle. No thanks, I'll pass on that one. I'd be all for Bradford IF he didn't have a bum shoulder that ended his senior campaign and IF we didn't have much bigger needs.

My choice would be either Taylor Mays or Gerald McCoy with our #6 and Mike Iupati or C.J. Spiller with the #14. I know all the talk is on Sanchez, but I was getting bored so I posted this.

Just in: http://seattletimes.nwsource.c...kna_1.html

Taylor Mays is incapable of covering a soul and his stock has dropped to the point where he is no longer a top 10 pick in most mock drafts.

If anyone here is going to equate winning with good QB play (looks like none of you have) then you're stupid. Sanchez was terrible this year.

Re Hasselbeck - When a QB is 36 and isn't Favre or Warner then they are likely finished. Get over it. If you could get over Shaun leaving (but wasn't that the offensive line's fault?) then you can get over replacing Matt THIS YEAR.

That last paragraph regarding Hass wasn't directed towards Paul, just an above comment about Hass' stats.

This guy is getting high raves at the Senior Bowl practices. If we were to get this guy we all would forget about the Ruskell/Hutchinson debacle. I know we are building a foundation on the zone blocking scheme which doesn't necessarily depend on girth, but this guy not only has girth and strength, but also athleticism. We want this man! We need this beast!

I would say that Taylor Mays will be lucky to go in the top 20 at this point and may even slip to the very bottom of the first round/top of the second. He's taking a beating by scouts and "draft experts" around the country for his terrible angles, lack of coverage skills, and tendency to go for the big hit and not the ball. He's a physical specimen and a big hitter, but that's it. He will be a big time project for whomever takes him and may not have the instincts to be a good cover guy. I'm praying he's not the Seahawks project. He nearly lost USC the game against Notre Dame because he went for the big hit and got a personal foul. According to reports, he's drawn the ire of scouts at the Senior Bowl for doing the same thing...going for the big hit and not the ball....and they're not even in full pads!

Thanks Farmer Paul.

I saw that Knapp has a new job in Texas as QB coach and was going to post, but you did the honors.

Good luck to the Texans, and glad Knapp can put food on his family's plate (in another town).

Good luck, Mr. Knapp, and thanks for the memories...er, uh, strike that last part.

SSReporters-

There's a difference between trying and not trying. SA hit the ground faster than anyone I've ever seen at the sign of first contact. He gave up and even if the OL gave him good blocks he still lacked that 2nd effort. When Hass had a remotely healthy OL and decent pass pro 2 years ago you can't deny what he did for the Hawks. 63% completion, 28 TD's with 12 INT's and that was with an average WR core and no run game. Those stats don't spell out "finished" do they?

But the one constant is that we have not had even a decent run game since 2005. So how can you not say that it lays on the shoulders of the OL? Even with Forsett, Jones, Duckett, MoMo, etc. no one has shown any light. I know the FO hasn't exactly brought in superstars and still managed to have a poor running game, but when you consistently cycle out RB's and yield the same results then the root of the problem isn't the RB's but more likely the OL.

Our failure to solidify the OL has obviously led to the decline of our offense as a whole. And let's not forget that the last time we had a true LT that was healthy and able to protect Hass's blind side was in 2007. Protection goes a long ways in confidence and overall production from your QB.

All I'm saying is that the last season Hass actually had a chance to play to his potential he did very well. That said, I think it would be foolish to over look that fact and ship him out without giving him a proper shot with an adequate OL. There are much more blaring needs in other positions, OL especially, and there is no QB worthy of taking at #6. Not Bradford with his shoulder and certainly not Jimmie "gonna be a repeat of Sanchez" Clausen.

I haven't read the other comments yet, but it seems to me that Mora is still trying to deflect any blame for what went wrong here in Seattle.

To think I defended the guy up until the day he was fired! But the texting leak and now this have convinced me that his detractors were right and I was wrong about his motives and ethics.

I'll try to maintain a more healthy skepticism in the future.

GnarlyHawk-

Can you honestly say he's proving to be more than most thought on here, cuz he finished #28 on the QB ranking for the year and only mid-pack in the post season despite making it to the AFC Championship. All this blind praise bothers me when EVERYTHING points in the opposite direction.


Yes, I honestly can. Sure, he had some really bad games. As a rookie, this can be expected. I'm not praising him for the sake of blind praise. Where he had horrible games, he also had some very good games and showed he belonged in the NFL, and that he is a gamer.

I really don't care if you don't like all the praise he gets, his hair or if you feel we have man crushes. I do see that he could have been a good pick for us, especially in a learn and mentor role. I do care that we passed up on him when we really needed to find a successor for Matt. He showed enough this season to give Jets fans a trip to the AFC Champ game and hope for the future that he can get consistant play. He showed enough to parallel some of the greats in their rookie year. He also showed, swagger, humility and maturity in front of the camera. He's been a text book example of a franchise quarterback, from the marketing and business angle too.

This is why I give him some credit and why he has a bright future.

I would be okay with both first round picks going to the OL. Say Okung or Buluga at 6 and Lupati at 14.

Okung is a no brainer, as he is the most talented Tackle prospect in the draft.

Buluga is big, athletic and has experience in the Zone blocking system, as that is what they employ at Iowa.

And the last time we drafted a Big 10 guard in the middle of the 1st round(Steve Hutchinson), i remember it turning out pretty well for us.... well, until Ruskell f**ked it all up by not franchising him...

wait, sorry.... my bad... Lupati is from idaho, and buluga is the big ten guy.... guess i am getting confused in my old age....

He would come out and say that he was pushing as hard as he could for Michael Oher, and everyone else on the staff was against him. Were that true, I would really view him in a different light.

Taylor Mays will be converted to OLB.

You're a fool. I mean seriously? Matt as a back up role? Thank God you have no say in personnel decisions for the Hawks. They'd likely be playing in OKC by now with the Thunder.

The only consistency Sanchez had was consistently poor. And other than the game winning TD against SD that the Sanchez fan club is crutching on, he was average in the post season. If the Jets had a legitimate QB they would have been true contenders. They had a better D than Indy and a much better run game. You throw in a good QB to throw the ball and I believe they could have knocked off Indy. All I'm saying is despite their run in the playoffs, Sanchez cost them a few games this year and potentially a SB birth. The Jets offense was worse because of him and he proved to be a bust at #5.

Bulaga is most certainly a reach at #6 and he is just big. He is not all that athletic and although he may have been in a ZBS, he does not project well to one in the NFL. Okung is kind of along the same lines, but I'd be happy with him. Campbell projects the best in my opinion and he may have the most upside as well. Call me crazy, but I'd be okay with Campbell at #6 as I think his stock will sky rocket after the combine. Still have my heart set on Berry or Haden though.

Iupati (not Lupati, fyi) is a monster, but I also feel that he is a bit of a reach at#14. Not to mention that I have a major man crush on Spiller at #14. Can't say that I'd be too broken hearted if we picked up Iupati at some point in the draft; however, Ducasse and Johnson are more athletic and may fit a ZBS better and would be better value at #40 than Iupati at #14 in my opinion.

And yes, Hass will never be in the back up role. The day that Hass isn't the starter is the day he retires. It would be like Favre coming back next year to sit the bench, or Warner for that matter. Just doesn't happen this late in their careers.

Not so sure Mays will be converted. Let's not forget that he is a SS for a reason. He's young and raw and will be a bit of a project but with the right coaching he more than has the measureables and ability to develop his coverage to become a great SS.

To open up another topic, just out of boredom, I thought I'd ask about potential free agents. Maybe this can become a topic Chris or another SA writer can tackle by position.

I for one have been a big advocate for Spiller at #14 but there are a couple RB's hitting the market that I'd be interested in.

Rumor has it that LenDale White wants out of Tennessee ASAP due to his lack of carries. He's my favorite option out of the bunch.

I've also heard that Bush may be getting the axe due to his cap hit next year. I'd be interested in that and I'm sure it's something going on in Carroll's mind.

What do you guys think? Any other names to throw in the hat?

Honestly, we really do not need a "hard hitting" SS. We had that remember, his name was the hammer. Mays is a freakish athlete, however he does not have great cover ability. Huge gap between Mays and Berry. I would not waste our 14th pick on Mays; the guy is falling down the draft board for a reason. If we don’t walk away in the first two rounds with one the following combo's, then the draft is a failure.

OL/QB/RB* if clausen is not there at 14, then OL/RB (Spiller)/QB
OL/RB/QB
QB/OL/RB* only if Okung is gone
QB/RB/OL* only if Okung is gone

As of 1/25/10 Tod McShay has us picking up Berry @ 6, Spiller @14,
http://www.mynfldraft.com/NFL-Mock-Draft


I would be okay with Berry at 6 and Spiller @14, if Okung and Clausen are both gone by now. It could also be a very good chance that we can end up with Both Okung and Clauson. If Rams pick Sue, then Clausen can be had at 14. There is only one team that needs QB before the 14th pick, the Redskins, which will draft Bradford (unless Bradford is not fully healed and has a horrible showing). KC and the Lions have a lot of needs; they are the wild card if Okung will fall to us.

My opinion: Sanchez will be a good qb after a couple of years under his belt, he's not a bust but Curry hasn't showed anything yet. He will Our new coach is drooling and surrounding our players with good coaching. When we went 4-0 in the pre-season i was super stoked. Thank god we got an overhaul! We have so many immediate needs that i can't justify paying mega millions to a rookie qb who won't pay off for at least a couple of years.
I think we should target Spiller with our #2 pick.

I'm not debating that Mora shouldn't have been let go, but I certainly don't have an issue with what he said. Every team has discussions and disagreements on who to bring in, and Mora was stating the obvious. So he likes Sanchez. So what?

If he is average, held them back and the team could have been better w/out him, what does that say about them last year. When they had Brett Favre, esentiallly the same team and Mangini calling shots? As I recall, they didn't end the year on a high note and watched Miami go from 1-15 to playoffs in their place. If I follow the debate logic correctly, Favre would also be a downgrade from Sanchez.

CTS, What are your thoughts? Have I missed your point somehow? Are there excuses for this logic flaw too? Is Mr Ryan the sole reason QB play didn't cause the team a melt down? Was the coaching so good that it made the QB irrelevent; did they even need a QB this year since Sanchez's contribution is nothing? Is being "average" as you say, for a rookie playing in the AFC championshiop game actually above average for a rookie QB. I'm confused on all points.

Kid has a bright future, like it or not. Doesn't mean he is going to Canton, that he is going to wear multiple rings and eclipse Favre, Manning, Montana and Marino. Just means he's heading up and has much potential. He's showing signs of upward progression. Jeez...

As for Matt, I'll happy dance if he's traded for picks. Even late 2nd day picks. Guy's cooked. Only consolation is if we get a legitmate rookie QB, and do a proper groom while rebuilding. If Matt does have (and I don't see it) a year or two left, he would be better off going to a contender now, than to stay and rebuild with us.

I'd go for that. Trade Matt for a couple decent picks.

Gnarly--youre argument makes absolutely no sense! Last year, the Jets had ManGenius as coach (a definite downgrade from Ryan), they had a MUCH poorer defense, and even thier running game wasnt as good. Also, Favre was kicking butt and they were winning until he tore his bicep. You are comparing apples to oranges. Favre obviously would have performed much better without the bicep tear and with Ryan's defense.

Any way you slice it, 12 TD's and 20 picks is terrible. A couple good games does not a fine qb make. And his stats are far worse than Rick Mirers.

Curry played better than Sanchez. The only difference in the two is Sanchez was surrounded with decent players and coaches, while Curry was undercoached, misused, and surrounded by player and coaching incompetence of epic proportions.

The only reason Sanchez is getting so much attention is he's from USC, and the Jets went places in the playoffs. With that team, I feel even Sage Rosenfels would have done better.

There is absolutely no way to tell for sure whether or not Sanchez and/or Curry will be busts or greats, but Curry has one thing Sanchez lacks--ridiculous speed/atheltic ability. Were I a betting man, I would feel comfortable betting on Curry to be a perennial PRo Bowl talent, while I wouldnt bet anything on Sanchez one way or another.

And I dont see how everyone can look at Hass' stats (especially considering the crap scheme and O-line he had) and say "Washed Up", then look at Sanchez (with his badass run game, O-line, and defense) and his stats, and say "Bright Future". Logically, that makes no sense.

CWEH--Ken "The Hammer" Hamlin played Free Safety, not Strong Safety. Our Strong Safety was Michael Boulware, then others once he failed to progress.

I dont think anyone in the NFL plans on Mays being a FS--he's a SS at best, an OLB conversion prospect at worst.

But I agree we dont need a player like him, who is a liability in coverage allready--that will only worsen in the Pro's with the more complicated schemes and far stiffer WR competition, despite coaching.

Berry or Thomas from Texas project to be far better NFL safeties, and are MUCH better at tracking the ball/coverage. They project as FS, and we could use one since Babs didnt set the world on fire--though Im willing to see what Caroll's staff can do with him. And Im fine with keeping Grant/Milloy/Jamar Adams-CJ Wallace at SS.

CTS--LenWhale White would be an interesting foil to Forsett. IF he loses some frigging weight! The guy is called LenWhale for nothing, and his blubber is bound to be weakening his knees. Get that boy in shape, and he would be a great counterpoint to Forsett/Spiller.

As for Bush, its Bush or Spiller, not both. And with Forsett, do we really need to spend the huge money Spiller and Bush would cost unless we get a bigger back?

We still need a bruiser, as niether FB has shown they can be the go-to short yardage guy.

MontanaMike--I had serious reservations about our offense during our 4-0 Preseason run. I tried to keep my mouth shut and stay positive, as even my family told me I was overthinking things. But damn, I was right--the line wasnt blocking well consistently, the passing game looked fitful and anemic, and Matt wasnt able to complete 60% of his passes. Oh, and the thing that worried me most--bad play calling and futility inside the red zone.

I have never been more unhappy to be proven right.

http://seahawksdraft.blogspot....uture.html

http://seahawksdraft.blogspot.com/2010/01/understanding-zone-blocking-and-future_25.html

Please don't get me wrong as I am not a "Sanchez guy" but I am curious as top how many of you guys saying "he showed nothing but being poor" actually watched more than one game in the regular season or are you just basing it on end of year stats, I just spent a little time looking at his year by game and while he definitely had bad games (like expected from a rookie QB) he also had some decent and some great games mixed in. Matter of fact if you take out his and Hass's 2 worst games they are within 4 points of each other in QB rating. Again not saying that the Hawks should have picked him, but I also can't agree with the idea that he hasn't shown serious promise. And more than that when will the Hawk faithful finally realize that while Hass was great for us, and we all love him but he is done. He's pushing 35 and is no longer what he once was regardless of the OL. He can't throw a long pass, even on the rare occasions when had coverage he checked down, and his body is breaking down. It's time to make a move.

If the Jets had Hasselbeck, they'd be in the Superbowl right now. Some of you guys need to learn a little more about football. It's a team game. When the offense sucks, the QB will suck. Elway will, Favre will, the Mannings will. They all will.

Hass may in fact be done. Its hard, if not impossible, to say after the last two injury-riddled years with a mediocre WR corps, the worst line in the NFL in 10 years--if not ever--and the absolute worst NFL OC since the Tom Flores era.

The line and the horrible offensive scheme would have made any qb look terrible. And yet Matt's stats arent bad, and were alot better before he became desperate and started throwing stupid picks over the last month of the season.

If Caroll and Bates' new offense looks good--the run game works, the soon-to-be-revamped line holds up, the WR's get open--and Hass looks bad or falls apart physically, then its time to say he's washed up.

Quite a few qb's played well past 35. There's no reason to think Matt cant be one of them. As for his arm strength: it never was much, and Im sure its lessened somewhat. But if the line holds and keeps him healthy he has adequate arm strength to make any throw Caroll will expect him to make.

And no rookie qb or retread we could bring in--or Wallace, God love him--will read defenses as well as Matt. Thats one skill he hasnt lost.

Surround him with competent players, and a halfway decent scheme, and 35 or not he'll be fine. And if not, Caroll and company will move on. But there's no way to tell just yet that Hass is done--that's premature.

And we have nothing to lose playing him and seeing what happens. No need to drop a first round pick on any of the qb's coming out this year.

TexasHawk--So with a great defense (number 1), the number 1 rushing attack, and good coaching, Sanchez was ONLY within 4 points of Hass, an aging qb beaten to death playing with the worst NFL O-line, a lousy defense, and the worst coaching staff in the NFL. Um, pardon me but I am underwhelmed.

Sanchez has every chance to keep improving--just as he has every chance to turn out to be Rick Mirer by his third year.

You missed the point of the comment about Favre. The point was not that Sanchez is currently better, thats laughable - he isn't. Instead, the point is that Favre could not take the team to the playoffs with "almost" the same surrounding talent. It is undeniable that Sanchez accomplished success, no matter how horribly his interception stats factored into the overall year.

When Favre lost games for the Jets, Sanchez won those same games. He came on, when he needed too. Sure, there are reasons Favre digressed (injury), there are excuses for his picks late in the season. The opposite happened w/ Sanchez. When the Jets needed him to execute, he did. He single handidly could have knocked them out of the playoffs in the last games of the season. Instead, he accomplished what Favre did not the previous year. Sure he had the benefit of Ryan, better scheming etc. At the end of it, those are reasons & excuses. He has the wins.

Some stats you may also be ignoring. Of all post season QB's; he ranked 6th of 12 for QB stats. That means his stats were better than 6 other QB.s Let me name them for you:

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=1&statisticPositionCategory=QUARTERBACK&season=2009&seasonType=POST

RkPlayerCompAttPctAtt/GYdsAvgYds/GTDInt
1Kurt Warner46597829.55849.929251
2Aaron Rodgers284266.74242310.142341
3Drew Brees406363.531.5444722260
4Peyton Manning568367.541.56237.5311.551
5Brett Favre437061.4355447.827252
6Mark Sanchez416860.322.75397.9179.742
7Tony Romo457064.3354426.322121
8Philip Rivers274067.5402987.529812
9Donovan McNabb193751.4372306.223011
10Carson Palmer183650361464.114611
11Tom Brady234254.8421543.715423
12Joe Flacco244553.322.52235111.503

He performed better than 6 accomplished QB's in the playoffs and as well as the 5 QB's ahead of his ranking in many catagories. All but one QB had no picks, he only had 2 total while playing against fantastic defenses.

Please, quote his rookie season stats all you like, berate those of us who give the kid some credit and even get rude w/ name calling - thats fine. But don't make unjust claims based on perception or limited datasets without providing the full story.

PS... here's Matt's stats in his most successfull post season (2005)

4 Matt Hasselbeck SEA QB 62 103 60.2 34.3 707 6.9 235.7 4 1 34 33.0 37 9 0 5 89.7

Not Sanchez had a better completion percentage by a smidgen.

I think my point and comments that he showed real potential as a gamer and he was a great pick last year in the 1st round are validated.

>>>If the Jets had Hasselbeck, they'd be in the Superbowl right now. Some of you guys need to learn a little more about football. It's a team game. When the offense sucks, the QB will suck. Elway will, Favre will, the Mannings will. They all will

You can't deny that he had a HORRIBLE season. I could probably go back and throw a game or two of stats at you of Ryan Leaf or Sage Rosenfels and do the same thing you just did. His best game of the season was an inflated QB rating against Oakland where he only threw the ball 16 times. His best game in the playoffs rating wise, he threw the ball 15 times. Only 3 times all year, including the playoff (that's 3 out of 19 games), did he throw the ball 20+ times and have a decent rating in the 90's and only one of those times getting into the 100's at 100.3.

I will say it again, his TEAM carried him all year and he certainly didn't show any growth. I do think he played a decent game against Indy, Miami and NE (I watched 2 of those games) and I will give him credit for that but thats's it. I watched 3-4 other games and was not impressed in the slightest. All I could think of was how glad we didn't get him.

In an earlier post I stated that I was not commenting on whether I thought he would ever develop his game, but I stated that as a #5 pick last year he was hands down a bust this year as the #28 ranked QB and that is being on one of the best teams. That's not success and it's not even remotely showing signs of success.

As to your query about last year to this year, STTBM was right on in his assessment. I will add that you proved our point with your statement of them having almost the same team. They were solid that year and everyone knows the longer a unit plays together the better that unit becomes. You learn to know what those players around you are going to do and how they play. They learn how to compliment each other. Look at Baltimore, NE a few years back, Pittsburg, all these great D's had a core of key players who had been playing together and thats what the Jets have on both O and D.

I agree that we need to find a successor for Hass. I'm not just showing a home team bias I just don't think there is "THE" successor in this draft. Clausen is way too much of a liability at #6. He had a good year as did Sanchez and is now on this pedestal destined to fall like Sanchez did. In my opinion, Bradford is the only suitable option in the first round but didn't even play his senior year and has a bum throwing shoulder to boot. To me he is way too much of a risk as well at #6. I personally would only draft Clausen if he fell to us at #40. You don't just draft because Hass is towards the end of his career, you need to fin the right guy and I don't think he is in this draft unless Bradford falls to #14 and that's just a maybe for me. Hass will do just fine if we can protect him.

And for the record, Brett "INT" Favre didn't even throw half as many INT's as Sanchez. Favre's style of play is to throw a lot of INT's but even more TD's. It's a good balance most of the time. That said, if Favre was still the QB of the Jets, they would have gone 12-4 or 13-3 and probably would be in the superbowl right now. Sanchez is, in no way, ready to be an NFL starter whether or not he develops into an average or good one later.

STTBM-

My intention of that post was not to advocate signing both Spiller and either LenDale or Bush. I was just looking at suitable alternatives to drafting a RB. I mentioned Spiller in that post because he is my #1 target.

And I would absolutely love for McShay's mock to come true. Haven't looked at it yet, but I've been clammering for the Berry/Spiller combo all along. Add Brown/Capers or a miracle Campbell falling far enough to trade up and I'd be a happy man!!

GnarlyHakw:
I don’t agree with your logic either. The Jets are not the same team as last year. The pieces that were brought in drastically changed the team.

So your saying the following did not have an impact on the teams success.

New Coach.
New starting safety Jim Leonhard
New Right Guard B Moore
New Fullback T. Richardson
Oh yea lets not forget new LB B. Scott.

They had a total 11 free agent singes, which resulted 7 new starters between offense and defense. Last I checked that’s almost a rebuild. If they had signed back ups or maybe 1 or 2 starters then I would agree that they are the same team. They are not the same team that Farv played for. STTBM is correct on his point.

Give the Hawks 7 new players and see what happens.


TXHawk Fan,

I can assure you that I watch all of the games on Sunday. Not just because I love football, but I do a lot of betting on it. I can assure you that Sanchez has not proven anything to me. He is not going to be great or be a bust (to early to tell). If I had a redo, I would still pick Curry at 4 or traded down and picked Oher.

Gnarlyhawks--I never namecalled anyone! We just disagree. I dont see anything wrong with that. As I said, Im certainly not claiming Sanchez is a bust--just that in my opinion the jury is still out.

Not everyone reads the stats the same I guess. Sanchez wasnt asked to do much, thats true. He shows coachability, but not necessarily the makings of a great qb. He played within the scheme designed for a rookie qb--minimize mistakes, takes whats given. Favre too many times last year tried to do everything himself, youre right.

I think Rex Ryan and the passel of free agents the Jets signed had a lot more to do with the success they had than Sanchez. You owe the staff a lot more credit for the Jets success than youre giving them.

I have to admit I was sceptical of Favre his first few years due to his penchant for throwing picks at the wrong time. So its not like I think I'm some guru. Im just enjoying the hell out of discussing football and being analytical. Honestly, its a compulsion more than anything.

Okay CTS, for the record, drafting your team's needs is NEVER reaching. So taking lineman and secondary players is a major priority in the first round.

Now, do you know what a major reach for the Seahawks would be? CJ Spiller. He might end up being a great running back in the NFL, but the Seahawks have far too many needs to draft a RB in the top half of the 1st round.

Don't believe me? here are some stats you might like:

Looking at the Leading Rushers in the NFL these past 5 years, only 36% of them have been 1st round picks for their teams. the others are all 2nd and 3rd rounders or were acquired via Free Agency or Trade.
The highest number of 1st rounders in the top 10?
4, in 2009, 2008 and 2005.
there were 3 in 2007 and 2006.

In addition, Running backs selected in the 1st round between #10 and #20 have a rather dubious history. Here are the the picks for the last ten years:

Jonathon Stewart
Marshawn Lynch
Lawerence Maroney
TJ Duckett
William Green
Ron Dayne

How many of those are still in the NFL? - Half

How many of those have been in the top 10 for rushing? - None!

CTS--Did I say something wrong? I was just discussing the names you brought up. As I said, I like the idea of LenDale White. When he's on, he's great. I like those human-bowling-ball types.

My point in making this argument is that taking a 2nd or 3rd round RB has just as much of a chance success as taking a 1st round RB, and the risk/reward for a middle round pick is much better, as you don't have the exceedingly high contract associated with a 1st round pick. this is a very deep draft for running backs, So waiting until the 2nd round, when a good one is still available for much cheaper, makes much more sense than drafting a RB that high. We have far too many needs to justify that.

The truth is Sanchez is bitter that Mora got fired.

STTBM-

I was just clearing up that I did not intend for it to sound as if I was advocating taking Spiller AND one of the other names. I thought that's what you thought I meant by your post. Wasn't arguing anything, was just clearing up my thoughts.

Beercan-

There is always risk of reaching and YES you can reach when drafting for need. For example, if DT was our biggest need and McCoy and Suh were off the board at #6 would you consider it a reach to draft a Dan Williams or a Jared Odrick kind of guy? Well I wouldn't and that was my point.

And the point you missed was that I never stated drafting a position that doesn't need an upgrade. In my opinion, Clausen is not good value at #14 and we could get better value in another position of need such as S, RB, OL, etc.

As for Spiller, he is in a position of need and actually does represent good value at #14. He just might be the most prolific offensive threat in this draft. At the same point that I agree with you in finding good value in later rounds I totally disagree with you in terms of the depth of this years RB class. I see Spiller, Best, Matthews and Dwyer really only being the solid options in this draft. Gerhart and Blount are glorified FB's in my opinion; however, I do see dark horse potential in Stafon Johnson.

Two years ago was the best RB class I've seen in a long time. 5 of them taken in the 1st round and 2 in the 2nd. Last year, only LeSean McCoy was taken in the 2nd round. And 3 years ago, nobody worth mentioning was taken in the 2nd round. Of 3rd round talent, I only see Glenn Coffee, Shonne Greene, Kevin Smith, Jamaal Charles and Steve Slaton were worth mentioning. Many of these guys are only good back-up/RB by committee guys. The only 2nd/3rd round starters (excluding starters through injury) are Ray Rice, Matt Forte (poor year), Kevin Smith (poor year) and Steve "Sir Fumbles-a-lot" Slaton who lost his job. Really, Rice is the only one of that bunch who had a 2nd season living up to a true starters potential in the last 3 drafts.

My point being, other than a select few guys, the majority of NFL starters are 1st round draft picks and were drafted because of that "special something" they had, just as Spiller does. Yes, RB is a position of need and our FO has already stated that our run game will be focused on, no Spiller is not a reach at #14 as he is one of the top recruits in the draft and the majority of "true" starters ARE 1st round picks. But yes, talent can be found in later rounds as can any position.

Also, 2 years ago when we had the RB class of Johnson, Stewart, Mendenhall, Jones, etc. we also had one of the best OT and DL classes as well which altered draft position. Those positions are often of higher demand.

Beercan-

I think you may have had the misconception of the 2nd/3rd round prospects as opposed to where they actually got drafted. Johnson, Forte, Smith, Charles, McCoy, Jones, Brown, etc. were all projected to be 2nd round picks; however, most of them actually went in the 1st round.

Dirty Sanchez iz number one! Hez arms arr number one, hez legs arr number one. Hez chest iz number one! (Nacho Libre)

Just figured I would lighten things up a little bit, before I make a few points.

1. I read up above somebody said OL/QB/RB in the first round only. That is ridiculous. Some of the best talent in this draft is on the defensive side of the ball. I think we all can agree it would be nice to have Matt's successor (probably why everyone is so heated about Sanchez) and our O-line is in shambles, but to say we only choose two of these three positions in the first round is as bad as ruskell choosing only to fix the o-line in the late rounds.

2. I want to talk about Earl Thomas. Why would any fan of the seahawks in there right mind want to take this guy in the first round. The last thing we need is another buck 70 half link from the shire. Are you kidding me? He has had one stand out year. Berry has had three. Mays had two, and then a down year with no other play makers on his defense. There is no way on Gods green earth that we take Earl Thomas in the first. I will put my money where my mouth is if anyone chooses to persuade me otherwise!

First off, Thomas is 5'11" 200 lbs. And if that's your argument then why are you talking up Sanchez or, not saying you are, why would you want Clausen? Just saying.

Eric Berry is obviously the favorite here and my hopeful #6 pick.

I definitely agree that some of the best talent is on D. Can't over look Berry, Haden, Suh, McCoy, Morgan, etc.

CTS

Look, my point wasn't to say that we don't need a RB. I just think that when the seahawks select for the 2nd time in the 1st round, there are better options there than just picking a RB, especially given that 3 out of the top 5 will still be there at #40.

The seahawks will have either the best corner or best safety sitting there at 6 when they select, and i think that despite our need for a tackle, they should take one of them. I would also be a fan of Gerald Mccoy being taken at 6 too, if he were to still be there.

That being said, I am a proponent of building the line up to the point that any back could rush for a 4.5 to 5 yards per carry average. Which is something that I feel the seahawks have the position coach to accomplish with Alex Gibbs now as the O-line coach. i think we just need the personnel. I don't see a lot of our current Lineman being effective in this system. the best way to build up is through the draft, and one of our first round picks should be spent on a cornerstone lineman.

I stand by statement about depth. I think Charles Scott and Toby Gerhart are an undervalued RBs. Ryan Matthews is an option, but is injury prone. Joe Mcnight has a similar skill set to CJ Spiller, and for all we know, Jonathon Dwyer will still be there at 40. With all of these possibilities, why spend our #14 pick on Spiller and risk our chance at most of the good lineman.

Just watch this video of Toby Gerhart, and tell me you wouldn't want him on your team...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjLh_yO41jw

or this Charles Scott video... and he is likely to be there in the 4th round!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROrIY31e7yE

I still think that a really good back can be had in the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th rounds. look at some of these draft picks:

Frank Gore: 3rd round
Micheal Turner: 2nd Round
Brian Westbrook: 3rd Round
Tiki Barber: 2nd Round
Chris Henry: 2nd round
Lendale White: 2nd round
Maurice Jones-Drew: 2nd round
Marion Barber: 4th Round
Brandon Jacobs: 4th round
Justin Fargas: 3rd round
Clinton Portis: 2nd round

For the record, I was wrong to title that post to you and then comment on name calling. You did not name call, others did. I expanded the original intent of the post - which was to debate the Sanchez merits, despite his overall season stats.

Peace.

Thomas is big enough, even if they are overstating his height and weight. I dont really want to see him picked at 16, but if he's available in the second, it might be worth a thought.

Berry is better, but he wont be there--barring a lovely miracle, in the second. And I really dont want a safety taken in the top 20 by us.

I like the idea of taking McKnight if he falls to the fourth, or trading up into the third to get him. I think he'd do well here. Dwyer, if he falls to the second, would also be a good back.

Im not sure about Gerhart, he's fast but not all that agile or quick side-to-side. He's more of a Leonard Weaver type. And I'd rather have the Church Van. But what if he too falls hard?

Both Gerhart and Scott are big, but slow. I don't know their 40 times, but it's average at best. This was their big concern from all the critics and it's my concern as well. Their lack of the 2nd gear is why backs like both Scott and Gerhart are glorified FB's.

I already agreed with you that talent can be found in the 2nd-4th rounds, but you are picking out just the ones that made it and are ignoring the rest. In my earlier post I listed ONLY the notable ones and they are really back ups at best minus a couple. IF we were to select the "back of the future", then the statistics show that we AREN'T likely to get it outside the 1st round. That's where Spiller comes in at #14. And I think that there is a VERY good chance that both Dwyer and Best will be off the board by #40 leaving, in my opinion, only Matthews as a viable longterm option.

I agree with the OL help, but in MY opinion, the only OT that merits good value at #14 for our team and scheme is Bruce Campbell. Bulaga, Williams, Davis in my opinion are not good fits for our scheme as they are more big than they are athletic, which is what you are looking for in a ZBS. IF they picked one of them up I wouldn't be upset at all, unless they passed on Campbell for one, because they are better at scouting talent obviously. But based on fit I don't feel they represent good value. Spiller does.

I like Iupati and Ducasse, but both, especially as OG's, are a big reach at #14. So unless Campbell, Haden, Morgan or Bradford (don't really like this option) are still on the board I feel a pick like Spiller, who is good value here, is a very viable option.

i like this website