Aseahawkfan wrote:I guess a veteran minimum contract to try to revive his career would be ok. Not like we're deep at safety right now. It will be a few drafts to rebuild given how empty the cupboards were in Seattle due to five years of pretty poor drafting prior to the last two.
River_Dog wrote:He's not worth the roster spot. No matter what, he's not part of our long-term future, so why deprive an up-and-coming rookie of an opportunity for an injury prone, one trick pony/situational player who doesn't participate on special teams and has an attitude?
River_Dog wrote:He's not worth the roster spot. No matter what, he's not part of our long-term future, so why deprive an up-and-coming rookie of an opportunity for an injury prone, one trick pony/situational player who doesn't participate on special teams and has an attitude?
Aseahawkfan wrote:If he wants to compete for a job on a veteran minimum contract, what do I care? If the rookie beats him out, he loses his spot. Not like it sounds like we're signing him to some guaranteed long-term contract as a starter. If he wants a vet minimum contract to compete, then I don't have a problem with it.
Old but Slow wrote:I am rapidly becoming doubtful about Schneider. He seems to trend to mediocrity, and I think the job is maybe a step beyond his abilities. He presents well, is likable, and is able to adapt to changes, but does not seem to understand the basic needs. Besides never taking a shot a later round QB, or trading for Adams, or putting a decent O-line together, he does not seem able to make the kinds of moves that make the team better.
But, we all love him. Don't we?
Aseahawkfan wrote:I guess a veteran minimum contract to try to revive his career would be ok. Not like we're deep at safety right now. It will be a few drafts to rebuild given how empty the cupboards were in Seattle due to five years of pretty poor drafting prior to the last two.
NorthHawk wrote:It's being talked about that if Adams is re-signed he would play LB and not Safety.
It would make some sense but he would just get beat up quicker when teams run right at him. I don't think he's worth the roster spot and possibly losing a younger player for 8 or 9 games of Adams playing average football.
NorthHawk wrote:It's being talked about that if Adams is re-signed he would play LB and not Safety.
It would make some sense but he would just get beat up quicker when teams run right at him. I don't think he's worth the roster spot and possibly losing a younger player for 8 or 9 games of Adams playing average football.
Oly wrote:Spot on
Old but Slow wrote:Thank Dog he won't be a Seahawk. Field Gulls has an article about it, but the picture they posted is perfect. The receiver is catching a TD pass, and Adams looks like his feet are planted and he is reaching weakly toward him. Typical. Good riddance.
NorthHawk wrote:From an assets given up perspective it is the worst trade in Seahawks history, but in impact to the team I'm beginning to think the Unger for Graham trade is close on it's heels as we've never fixed the Center position and the OL has been in flux for the last decade as a result. Maybe this coaching staff will demand that gets fixed as a priority along with the two Guards. They also have to consider if Cross is the answer longer term and hope Lucas is healthy enough to continue his career long term.
NorthHawk wrote:At least with Cross and Lucas, they've let them play the position they were drafted for and not shuffled them from Guard to Tackle and vice versa like they did with Ifedi.
Cross isn't big enough to play inside so he has that limitation, but he does have good feet for a larger man. One of the questions of him is will he be aggressive enough for Grubb's Offense (if he employs the same philosophy as he did in College)?
I'm not sure that is something that can be taught. I think they have to decide if they want to give him an extension this year or decide to let him become a FA in 2026.
The IOL? I just hope that Olu is the answer in the middle and last years draft pick Haynes can be a good starter at one of the Guard spots. There's a lot of doubt right now like there has been for 10 years, but I guess we can only hope at this point.
NorthHawk wrote:At least with Cross and Lucas, they've let them play the position they were drafted for and not shuffled them from Guard to Tackle and vice versa like they did with Ifedi.
Cross isn't big enough to play inside so he has that limitation, but he does have good feet for a larger man. One of the questions of him is will he be aggressive enough for Grubb's Offense (if he employs the same philosophy as he did in College)?
I'm not sure that is something that can be taught. I think they have to decide if they want to give him an extension this year or decide to let him become a FA in 2026.
The IOL? I just hope that Olu is the answer in the middle and last years draft pick Haynes can be a good starter at one of the Guard spots. There's a lot of doubt right now like there has been for 10 years, but I guess we can only hope at this point.
NorthHawk wrote:Looking back, it was almost as if they were experimenting as to whether that shifting players to new positions could work. It might have worked if the players had learned their original positions first then tried switching, but I think that all it did for most young players was confuse them and made them doubt their assignments for each play. It ended up with mediocre to bad OL play.
Users browsing this forum: Aseahawkfan and 73 guests