HawkShack.com

Wilson to Willson = T.D.

Michael Smith is looking slow and weak, like he is resting on his laurels. Pete needs to throw a couple of M-80's under his feet. Raider O-Line blowing out our #1's.

Adams new nick name should be burnt toast. We are not looking too good, I guess the 1's wanted to play more than just a series...

I have been defending T-Jack but he is making a statement, and that statement is that he wants to get cut.

We virtually have no pass rush, not looking good at all. lots of guys playing themselves right out of the league.

If Pryor brings the Seahawks back to victory then he will make the final cut.

Preseason game 4.........................ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..........

LOL Pryor, LOL.....

Have to say, the db play has been pretty bad in this game ( well minus the guys that will actually be ON the team)

HumanCockroach wrote:LOL Pryor, LOL.....

I think he did not play well enough to make the cut.

Not sure how much they use one game as a barometer in these things, honestly, BJ Daniels has been the most consistent backup this pre season, which is a bit surprising to me. Dude makes plays against those box boys, the thing that worries me most, is Pryor hasn't played well, even against the twos which can't bode well in the game evaluation, but who knows how they'll handle that as a franchise? I like Daniels, and could see him as an actual "long term" back up, neither of the other two fit the criteria ( ie age, starting insistence etc) IMO if they decide to carry three, I would prefer it be Jackson, and Daniels in that back up spot ( of course behind Wilson)....

I have to admit, I finally saw what the Pryor supporters have been talking about. Yes, Pryor is a project, a work in progress but what an upside the young man has. One part of me says yeah, put him on the practice squad. Another part of me says put him on the final 53 because it would be a shame to lose him to another team. But, what team would pick him off of our practice squad and have to keep him on their roster the whole season?? That team would have to have a roster spot they don't mind wasting or be really desperate.

Pryor has all of the physical tools of a Cam Newton but is still a very raw talent.

We all know what T-Jack can do and, what he can't. 4 years ago we said his torn pectoral muscle limited what he could do. We also said our very leaky O-Line limited what he could and couldn't do. Well, his Pecs are fine and while our O-Line is nothing to write home about it is much better that when he was the starter and he is still making some of the same mistakes that he used to do.

Right now if the worst happened and RW had to miss some games T-Jack could manage the offense enough so that it wouldn't be a complete disaster. But, with some reps T.P. could really mesh with the other weapons on offense and be really explosive.

I vote to keep TP on the final 53 and next year he will win the # 2 spot behind Wilson straight up!

Uggh, again? TP isn't signed beyond THIS year, and has said, he WILL NOT sign anywhere he doesn't have a chance to be the starter, he can NOT be placed on the PS because he has to many games played in the league, which means, if you keep him it HAS to be on the 53, and you are developing him for SOMEONE ELSE.... doesn't make any sense....


These things have been brought up numerous times, by numerous posters. Unless he can help THIS year, there is no point, well, Unless you are into paying a man, to take up time, space, and money, so he can go somewhere else and be still pretty mediocre ?????

Honestly, he didn't play as horribly as he has played this pre season, but the bar is so low, I'm not sure how he could.... He indeed has those physical traits and tools, but they are not going to benefit Seattle in any way shape or form, unless TWO QB's go down.... ( and even then it is a question)... IMHO they would be better off holding on to Daniels than TP.

Well I sure wish I could infer something about our respective teams from the way each played tonight.

But we talkin' bout praccctice!! Not the game. Not the game that I watch and die for . . . . But practice games.

Cmon man, we talkin bout practice games still? Practice??

Old but Slow wrote:What about the choice at backup fullback? Coleman is likely a lock, but Ware had an up and down performance, and Small looked intriguing.

This one I'll take an educated guess at; I don't think they will carry a backup FB at all this year.
I think they'll put Small on the practice squad (he's not going to get claimed because he's a fullback) and I think Ware is going to be cut, leaving Coleman as our #1, for those occasions (which are steadily getting less frequent) when we actually use a fullback.

EDIT: I agree on that "Carr kid" I thought that he was by far the most intriguing QB prospect this last draft. In fact I though he was the ONLY intriguing prospect. I doubt any of the QB's drafted this last draft end up making it long term (including he who I will not name, as ESPN cannot stop naming him). I guess I would give Bridgewater a shot at being a league average starter for a few years and an outside shot at being a long term backup in the league, and that's about it.
None of the QB's from this last draft look good to me at all, except Carr.

monkey wrote:

Old but Slow wrote:What about the choice at backup fullback? Coleman is likely a lock, but Ware had an up and down performance, and Small looked intriguing.

This one I'll take an educated guess at; I don't think they will carry a backup FB at all this year.
I think they'll put Small on the practice squad (he's not going to get claimed because he's a fullback) and I think Ware is going to be cut, leaving Coleman as our #1, for those occasions (which are steadily getting less frequent) when we actually use a fullback.

EDIT: I agree on that "Carr kid" I thought that he was by far the most intriguing QB prospect this last draft. In fact I though he was the ONLY intriguing prospect. I doubt any of the QB's drafted this last draft end up making it long term (including he who I will not name, as ESPN cannot stop naming him). I guess I would give Bridgewater a shot at being a league average starter for a few years and an outside shot at being a long term backup in the league, and that's about it.
None of the QB's from this last draft look good to me at all, except Carr.

Have you seen Bortles play? He has looked very good from what little I have seen of his highlights.

I hope that game is just what the doctor ordered- a nice little reminder the other 31 teams in this league are comprised of NFL players, too, and will steamroll you if you don't show up.

There were a lot of players that would normally play that didn't and I wonder if that meant some loss of leadership and focus.
They played for the most part like they hadn't scouted the Raiders and were just mailing it in.
It's also possible that players were being used in situations to see what they can do rather than to optimize the outcome of the game.
That's why it's so hard to fully evaluate players in preseason and why some players that are cut are surprises to us. We don't see how they perform in practice.

Other than RWs first drive that was a pretty brutal exhibition. Hopefully it is a wake up call which would be a good thing cause the guy coming to town next Thursday is a lot better than Derek Carr.

NorthHawk wrote:There were a lot of players that would normally play that didn't and I wonder if that meant some loss of leadership and focus.
They played for the most part like they hadn't scouted the Raiders and were just mailing it in.
It's also possible that players were being used in situations to see what they can do rather than to optimize the outcome of the game.
That's why it's so hard to fully evaluate players in preseason and why some players that are cut are surprises to us. We don't see how they perform in practice.

Huh? Starters seldom play in the 4th game, at all, much less extended periods of time, honestly I was shocked that Seattle left Okung and Britt in as long as they did, ultimately, it isn't up to a player whether they play or not, so not sure how you can jump to a "loss of leadership" reason for why they didn't, unless of course you are critisizing Carroll and the majority of coaches that have coached this game in the last twenty or so years??????

I was torn last night....... after all, it was a 4th pre-season game, so I really did not care about the outcome. I hated the sloppiness (fumbles etc) that gave great field position to the Raiders. On the other hand, it was great to see Derek play so well. D

HumanCockroach wrote:

NorthHawk wrote:There were a lot of players that would normally play that didn't and I wonder if that meant some loss of leadership and focus.
They played for the most part like they hadn't scouted the Raiders and were just mailing it in.
It's also possible that players were being used in situations to see what they can do rather than to optimize the outcome of the game.
That's why it's so hard to fully evaluate players in preseason and why some players that are cut are surprises to us. We don't see how they perform in practice.

Huh? Starters seldom play in the 4th game, at all, much less extended periods of time, honestly I was shocked that Seattle left Okung and Britt in as long as they did, ultimately, it isn't up to a player whether they play or not, so not sure how you can jump to a "loss of leadership" reason for why they didn't, unless of course you are critisizing Carroll and the majority of coaches that have coached this game in the last twenty or so years??????

A lot of players didn't even make the trip and not because of injury.
That sends a subtle message, like it or not.

NorthHawk wrote:

HumanCockroach wrote:

NorthHawk wrote:There were a lot of players that would normally play that didn't and I wonder if that meant some loss of leadership and focus.
They played for the most part like they hadn't scouted the Raiders and were just mailing it in.
It's also possible that players were being used in situations to see what they can do rather than to optimize the outcome of the game.
That's why it's so hard to fully evaluate players in preseason and why some players that are cut are surprises to us. We don't see how they perform in practice.

Huh? Starters seldom play in the 4th game, at all, much less extended periods of time, honestly I was shocked that Seattle left Okung and Britt in as long as they did, ultimately, it isn't up to a player whether they play or not, so not sure how you can jump to a "loss of leadership" reason for why they didn't, unless of course you are critisizing Carroll and the majority of coaches that have coached this game in the last twenty or so years??????

A lot of players didn't even make the trip and not because of injury.
That sends a subtle message, like it or not.

Oh I agree, it sends the message that the staff ( ie Carroll, Schneider, Cable etc) didn't want them there, didn't feel like they needed them there, and wanted certain players to remain behind ( kind of like EVERY coach does, with different players, for EVERY pre season game) it is COMMON to have players not travel with the team for a pre season game. You are attempting to paint this as a player choice, and it isn't, like it or not.

( I have Micheals hamstring, Lane Hamstring, and Thurmond hip not making the trip, who was so key that wasn't injured, that blew the coaching staff off and didn't make the trip?)

It's Michael by the way, not Micheals.
Nobody said anything about players blowing off the coaches and not making the trip.
SMH I honestly don't know how you jumped to that conclusion.

I didn't, I was replying to your claim about loss of leadership, ( which again goes to the coach, not the players in regards to who is playing and who is making the trip) I apologise for pluralising his name, but my point was that there is no lack of "leadership" in this instance.

NorthHawk wrote:
There were a lot of players that would normally play that didn't and I wonder if that meant some loss of leadership and focus


Edit: are you taking about IN the game? I read that as there is a loss of leadership and focus, coming into the season, not just one game..... Even if that was what was meant, I don't think Micheal, Lane,Simon and McDaniel would be a reason to think that... they still rolled out Wilson, Sherman, Wagner, Thomas, Maxwell, Smith, Kearse, etc, etc... If they are relying on those guys for focus and leadership, I would be kind of shocked...