I am now willing to rethink my position that we need to use our #1 pick to trade down a few times to get extra picks this upcoming year.

If Matt Stafford is there, we should think about getting a franchise QB and trading our players around 30 or older (of value) for draft picks in the '10 and '11 drafts.

Let the rebuilding begin, but do it by giving up on a few years (while Stafford develops) to ensure extra, extra picks in future drafts. That way the "rebuilding" process won't take so long.

Screw being consistently above average most years... lets go down and then build up a dynasty with lots of extra picks through the draft...

I don't think we have to give up a few years just to go after a championship down the road. I think if we build around core players and find talent throughout the draft you can be competetive for a long time. I think that getting additional picks could benefit the team, as they seem to need help in multiple areas. But to assume that we do this and give up on the next couple years doesn't make sense. We play in a week division and have done well in the playoffs before. Anything can happen once you get there, regardless of whether you have the best players on the field.

Every team in the NFL has at least a few "core" players. The Seahawks, Rams, 49ers, and Cardinals do.

Each of those teams will get an equal amount of draft picks from next year through eternity. Each team is on a level playing field. If their GMs make good/lucky decisions with those picks, those teams will prosper. If they strike out a lot, the teams will suffer.

My point is why not give up a few years while the QB develops? I don't know of too many teams that win a Super Bowl with a first or second year starting QB anyways.

Why do we want to go into the '11 and '12 seasons with an equal number of picks at the Rams, 49ers, and Cardinals?

Wouldn't it be nice if we had 2 first rounders in each of those drafts, 3-4 second rounders (including our own), and a few extra picks in the 3rd/4th round areas? That would put us at a distinct advantage to rebuild.

We could get a #1 in '11 for Trufant.

We could get a 3rd or 4th in '12 for Grant.

I bet some idiot team would give up a 3rd/4th rounder for Jennings if they didn't have to give up a pick until 3-4 years from now.

I bet we could get a #3 pick in '11 for JP.

Tatupu could fetch a 1st and 2nd in the '11/'12 years. Or, worst case scenario, a few second rounders.

Kerney could land us a 3rd/4th rounder in '13.

LoJack could probably get us a #1 in '11 or '12.

I bet Mebane, even though guys like him and LoJack are young, could get the team 2-3 higher draft picks in '11/'12.

The NFL is a win now type of league with all teams on an equal playing field with respect to the draft and salary cap. Screw being on an even playing field. Lets set ourselves up for lots of picks and lots of talented players in our future.

I know our salary cap would be screwed up for a few year, but who cares? We don't care about winning anyways while Stafford (or some young QB) develops.

I'd want to keep some guys of value like Walt and Carlson to give Stafford a chance to be successful. You don't put a rookie QB behind a horrible line (guess we'd have to dump Spencer/Sims) and zero targets.

Offenses take more time to build and gel anyways.

If the Cardinals would have taken this approach for 2-3 of their years from Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush --- they sure as hell would have won more than 1 play-off game since '47.

GMs won't care as much about trading picks in those years because if their team doesn't win now or in the near future they won't be around to draft anyone in those years anyways.

Great, loose a few games and Bobbyk looses his mind. You are throwing in the towel way to early. Have an injury plagued season and loose some games and your ready to rebuild the whole thing, do you think Walt is a spring chicken? heck, lets trade him to. Why not get rid of Hass and just start a rookie QB? We are winners even if are record says other wise and I won't give up on THIS team, even if they don't do well this year I think they'll remember that and be back next. Besides, I can think of several reasons why we could still win out this year. What a story, after a 1 and 5 start the Seahawks rally to win the NFC west after defeating the Cardinals in Arizona in week 16. Its the Cardinals, they choke every year, just give them time. We started bad, they'll end bad and if I remember right, last year the Giants played all their starters in week 16, no rest and it carried them to a title. I like the idea of Holmgren being forced to play his starters throughout the season because I have always thought that when he rested them they where rusty once the playoffs started. Keep the faith is all i'm saying, enjoy watching are Hawks even if they don't make the playoffs, and remember, this is not over as a lot of people think.

That plan would be an disaster for the franchise.

1st - the franchise would lose huge amounts of money. Who's going to renew season tickets, advertising sponsorships, radio/TV deals, etc. for a team guaranteed to go 1-15 at best for the next 3 seasons? Qwest stadium will be a mausoleum. Seattle fans are fair weather fans and only turn out for winners. The Mariners are a slight anomaly because people like to go to Safeco Field in the beautiful summer. They won't go to Qwest in November to see a loser.

2nd - it will be a horrible team. If they are, let's say, a 6-10 team with the current talent, how on earth can they possibly be better than 1-15 if you trade away 3/4 of the existing talent?

3rd - if you say it's due to bad coaching - then putting decent coaching in would turn the existing talent around. Anybody who could get 6-10 or 8-8 out of a team where 3/4 of the best players are traded, could get playoffs out of the talent if it were left intact.

4th - the hit and miss ratio for mid round picks is pretty low. If the front office is smart enough to hit on most of those picks, they can rebuild the team with their existing complement of picks. If they aren't, then all the picks in the world aren't going to help. Look at all the post draft evaluations where team x is called a winner. Then look at that draft 3 years later. Most of the time the "winners" are really losers, and often vice versa.

5th - though you pay lip service to trying to keep an offensive line around the rookie QB, bottom line is that with all those veterans gone, the defense will be as bad or worse than it is now, that QB will have to play from behind, and that QB is going to get creamed. No matter how good he is, he'll likely end up like Archie Manning, David Carr, Jim Plunkett, etc. - talented QB's on abysmal teams that were beat to hell and never realized the promise of their great talent.

6th - once a losing culture gets instilled on a team, it's like an infection. It's hard to get them back into a winning mentality. Top teams manage to have continuity partly from that winning spirit and culture passing down from year to year. In Seattle's case, it looks like that spirit is fading out, but it will be killed dead if we do a complete implosion, Who knows how long it will take to get them back to a winning mentality?

If nothing else, that's what Holmgren needs to get credit for. The Seahawks were perennial losers after the Chuck Knox era no matter what the circumstances (easy schedule, lots of talent, whatever) - they would always fall short no matter how low the bar was. Holmgren finally got the team to get over the bar that was set for them and into winning the division, getting into the playoffs, and managing to win playoff games. One can try to discredit that achievement all one wants by citing weak division, conference, etc. but the facts are the Seahawks could never manage that before, no matter what their circumstances were.

Well whatever happens I hope we don't have the Holmgren version of the WCO next year. I am sick of this dink and dump stuff. I'd like to see a little more smash mouth football with some long down-field bombs thrown in for good measure.

Part of the problem I see with the WCO is that it is so precise it has no resilience - it totally falls apart if the timing gets out of whack because of injured players. That is part of what is going on now. I think it takes less brains to run between the tackles and let the bombs fly - it is easier to plug someone in and less prone to totally come unravelled with injuries.

now,WHY would you even think about trading a quality player like Matt for a lesser pick/.he;s got the skills,the heart,and,still the fire to deliver.................

At least having something to think/talk about is more fun than focusing on the reality that we keep losing almost every week.

It is a good topic to think about how the team could be rebuilt. I forgot one huge reason why mass selloffs don't happen in the NFL though - salary cap.

If all those guys got traded, their pro-rated bonuses would get accelerated into the current year, and suddenly Seattle is looking at a Yankee-like cap number. :( So I think that Seattle is largely locked into its talent (especially on defense) for some time, since most of the guys were signed in the last couple years.

Therefore, if Seattle were going to rebuild, it likely would manifest itself in very few free agent signings, and perhaps a lot of draft trade-downs (trade the 2009 high #1 for 2 #1's, a lower 2009 and then the 2010, etc.)

The track record for high-round QB's is pretty bad, it seems to me - aren't most of them busts? If nothing else - if Seattle can get Holmgren to help them evaluate QB talent for the 2009 draft, we might find a lower round pick that pans out. (problem is, we need Holmgren to coach them up.)

Of course Holmgren isn't infallible - contrary to popular belief, Holmgren approved of the David Greene drafting. That was not Ruskell forcing Green down Holmgren's throat. But other than that, Holmgren's track record of QB drafting is much better than the track record for 1st round QB's in general, in terms of percentages and how they turned out.

The point of rebuilding is to bring in young talent, not trade it all away. We just drafted JoJack this year, why trade him away for another draft pick? All that will do is slow us down cause we will still have to draft another D-end. Same thing on Mebane, only Mebane has 1 year on LoJack. If you want to rebuild a team and plan for the future why get rid of the young guys that already have started developing to bring in new unknown players and just start all over. Trading Tatupu is just outrageous.

If you are going to develop a young QB, he is going to need talent aropund him to help him learn. Look at Kyle Boller and Alex Smith. Both very good in college, both high draft picks, both came to teams where they had to talent aound them, both lost their jobs. Lets not join that group.

Here's an idea, lets keep our team together, draft a QB, and let him learn from Hass for a couple of years, then do like the Packers did when Farve left and not lose a beat.

Trading Hershel Walker was bad for Dallas.

I'm with you bryce, we can win with who we got, and we can still win this year.

"Trading Hershel Walker was bad for Dallas."

Bobby - You're kidding, right?

If Hawks were in position to get LT Michael Oher, that pick would be a good one, and it would be worth the cellar placement this year. Let him learn behind Big Walt. USC's defense is pretty much up for NFL grabs this draft and their LB Cushing is going to be sought after, but he has too much history of injury. If Hawks could pick O(hio)SU's CB Malcolm Jenkins or Texas Tech's WR Michael Crabtree that would also be quite OK, too. If Hawks go on a tear and end up with the 8th to 11th pick, then Virginia's OT Eugene Monroe would be an excellent pick-up that also fall in an area of need. If we couldn't get Jenkins, then Illinois' CB Vontae Davis would do. Hawks could use some more QB pressure on D, so South Florida's DE George Selvie could also be a good selection (@ LB). I would love to see Hawks acquire a star quality free safety, like USC's Taylor Mays. He hits like the Hammer, but can be taught to wrap up, plus he's 6'3/230, athletic, fast and built. Alabama's OG Andre Smith would give Solari the kind of RG he may just be needing. Another USC MLB Ray Maluga would be another great LB acquisition, especially if we lose Hill to free agency.

Cowboy - of course I'm kidding. I'm making fun of the people who think trading one player for multiple future (high) picks is a bad idea.

Let's just say we could get three 2nd rounders each for both Lofa and Mebane --- in the '12-'14 drafts, along with other picks for some of our overrated/crappy defensive players like Trufant, Grant, Kerney, etc. We'd take a hit on the cap and the competitive nature of the team for the next 2-3 years but we'd set ourselves up nicely when we come out of cap hell and have all these early mid-round picks.

One reader made a great point about not being able to fill up Qwest in the next few years though. One solution would be to drastically reduce ticket prices for a few years. There's going to be a lot of dead money out there with the traded defensive players and people could watch NFL football at a reasonable cost --- we'll have less money coming in but will be paying less out in salary (I know there's a cap minimum, but dead money counts so it's not that bad).

If people want to turn their backs on a franchise because they truly suck for a few years, then that's their choice and they aren't the true fans. It couldn't be much worse than being 1-5 with a talented team. At least our 0-6 team would be truly bad so they would at least be playing to their potential, unlike our sissies this year.

Judging by the Super Bowl a few years ago, there aren't many true fans anyways. When the team starts kicking ass again and has set itself up with a dynasty around '14 --- then people will get back on the wagon and lie and claim they have been supporters of the team all along.

Part of the reason Tennessee is so good is because they had so many draft picks in recent drafts. They had 11 picks in '05, 10 picks in '06 and '07.

If we had to shell out $11 million per year for the #1 overall pick and couldn't trade it to anyone, we could always pretend we're the MN Vikings and let teams pass us after our time had expired and actually take someone with the 4-7th overall picks and save millions. Stupid... but part of what I'm saying is just stupid and for fun, as I don't want to accept the reality of thinking about this year's pathetic bunch.

Bobby - I think that you are correct. If you can get multiple picks at the 3rd round level or higher for ANY player, its normally good for the team getting the picks. Especially if that team is in a rebuilding mode.

As Bellicek says, those second round picks are the best ones. You don't have to pay first round salaries.

How much better would the Chiefs be this season if they had Jared Allen? Not much.

But Bobby, the only problem is it goes away from the Seattle "we much win now" mentality.

The theory that if the Seahawks hava a losing record, everyone will stop buying season tickets.

it was supposed to say "we must win now"

The Seahawks franchise is a business...NO WAY in hell that Paul Allen is going to Jettison our talent and wait for 2-4 years to rebuild the team. It's not like collecing football trading cards or playing Madden. In the real world things are not done that way. Instead of fantasizing about drafting unknown players in the draft, why not figure out how to get the most out of the existing talent that we have? I wish I could be twenty one again with all my experience and earning power, but wishing for that is about as useful as starting from scratch with an NFL team. What needs to happen is to improve our coaching staff and develop the talent we have, while making smart draft picks, and shrewd free agent signings.

If we have a high draft choice in this year's draft, we need to draft a LT who can learn from Walt for a couple of years and maybe even play guard and rotating at LT for awhile to extend Walts career.

If we are eliminated from the playoff hunt, I'm hoping that Holmgren will give Charlie Frye a real chance to sink or swim, so we know for sure where we stand at QB. If he does really well, QB might be a lesser priority in the draft. If not, we need to find someone who can learn from Hass for a couple of years.

There are two examples of what we need to do to rebuild this team. Perhaps we could trade for Brady Quinn, if the coaches think they would not be able to do better in the draft. That type of thing.

Get rid of Lofa? That's ridiculous! How many years did we search for a decent MLB. Now we have one, who is still really young. Why take your chances in the draft. That position is nailed down for quite a few years.

Mebane is starting to flourish...another young guy.

The draft is a crap shoot at best...but of course, the grass is always greener, right?