Seahawks Insider
where there is no offseason

Eric D. Williams took over the Seahawks beat and Seahawks Insider blog in December. Williams has covered the Seahawks, Sonics and high school sports for The News Tribune since joining the paper in 2006. Eric lives in Tacoma with his wife and two children.

Tacoma News Tribune columnist Dave Boling also contributes to the Seahawks Insider blog.

Blogroll
Calendar
July 2009
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << <   > >>
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Archives
XML Feeds
What is RSS?
Misc
Who's Online?
  • CustomScoop Email
  • gregoryrobinson Email
  • artman77 Email
  • Guest Users: 447
Seahawks Insider
Thursday, November 20th, 2008
Posted by Frank Hughes @ 04:12:13 pm

Cornerback Josh Wilson, who turned his ankle in Wednesday's practice, was back at practice on Thursday, mostly in the nickel package. Kelly Jennings took care of a lot of the stuff in the straight-up defensive sets. But Wilson looked like there was not much residual effect from the twist a day before. Coincidentally, practice squad receiver Michael Bumpus seemed to get banged up on the same route that Wilson got hurt on the day before. Bumpus laid out for a pass and seemed to stretch his shoulder a bit. He lay on the ground for perhaps 30 seconds before getting up and going slowly back to the huddle.

Also, QB Matt Hasselbeck was back as well after taking Wednesday off to rest a sore body. He will start on Sunday.

[More:]

Not a ton to actually report out of practice, though there was a keen Bocce ball (spelling?) tournament going on in the locker room, as well as a shoot-the-Gatorade-bottle-in-the-trash-receptacle-from-30-feet competition happening. You had to keep an eye out or you would get your eye put out.

Julian Peterson, a native of the DC area (God bless him) said he has about 12 family members coming out for the game, all of whom are talking trash to him because they are Redskins fans. Not all 12 are staying with him. He said he has the upper hand right now because they knocked the Skins out of the playoffs last season, but they are pointing to the records this season.

I tried to get a head-start on asking Julius Jones about next week's Dallas game and his thoughts on heading back to Irving. "Gotta play Washington before we focus on Dallas," he said. End of interview. Thank you very much. Incidentally, Mike Holmgren said on Wednesday that he is staying with splitting carries between Julius and Mo Morris. I already asked Julius about that enough this year; I didn't dip into the well again.

Had an interesting conversation with Deion Branch, which will be the focus of my story for tomorrow's News Tribune. I talked with him about this dynamic: His salary goes up. He has been hurt. He sees what happened to Shaun Alexander when a similar set of circumstances occurred. What are his thoughts? He said he is not naive enough to not think about it, and realize that the organization will have some decisions to make this offseason. But he tries not to let the business side of it interfere with the football side. He is trying to produce the same way whether he is playing for a contract or not. All the receivers -- Bobby Engram, Koren Robinson, Branch -- know that there is a chance this is the last 6 games together, but they can't worry about what upstairs is thinking. Personnel is Tim Ruskell's department, catching passes is Branch's department.

Categories: Notes from practice 23 comments

COMMENTS:

mb23oly @ 16:42 - Thursday, November 20th, 2008 Email
I personally don't think Branch coming back is a bad idea. But I think he needs to be the 2nd or 3rd option to be really effective. When he was the Super Bowl MVP he was a "product of the system," not a big playmaking receiver. He has talent to start in the league but we need to have a big threat next to him in order for him to be effective. Imagine next year having Burleson in the slot, Branch on one side and Crabtree on the other. Then mix in a little Carlson and Payne and our receiving core is more than respectable. Of course none of this matters if Hass isn't healthy. I don't think our offense is too far off as long as our components are healthy.
BobbyK @ 17:38 - Thursday, November 20th, 2008 Email
I really do like Branch outside the always-hurt thing. I think he's a good player, but certainly not a #1 WR. However, he is getting paid like a #1. I don't know if you can justify paying a #2 or #3 WR the kind of money that is reserved for the stars at that position.
kurtisballard @ 18:03 - Thursday, November 20th, 2008 Email
pretty much everybody on the seahawks' roster that doesn't have a rookie contract is overpaid, except for engram, hasselbeck, and walter jones. i think tatupu will return to form next year, but right now he isn't earning that new dough.
madpunter88 @ 19:27 - Thursday, November 20th, 2008 Email
What's wrong with being from the DC area?
scottiedog65 @ 23:21 - Thursday, November 20th, 2008 Email
I'm not a Branch guy myself because I like my receivers durable. After watching the Texas-Texas Tech. game a few weeks ago, I'm definitly on the Crabtree band wagon and since we will almost certainly have a top 10 pick, that should be our pick in my opinion. Of coarse if he's taken already, our next option should be whomever is considered the best lineman on the board.
Bernie42 @ 00:55 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Burleson, Branch, Crabtree, Carlson and Payne...huh? Payne? Seriously?
nighthawk2 @ 02:56 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Branch is going to get $5 million next season. That's too much for a guy who would be considered a 2nd option, let alone a 3rd option. Good job with this one Timmay!, give away a 1st round pick that could have been used on a guy who'd be our left guard for the next decade (Ben Grubbs) for this, and then pay him $39 mil. Brilliant.

Build the o-line in the off season. Sign Goff or Hochstein, draft Duke Robinson, re-sign Willis and Womack, move Vallos to center.
BobbyK @ 06:24 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Payne will be a fine slot/#3 WR.

Just because he isn't going to be a future Pro Bowl and Hall of Famer doesn't mean he can't be a key contributor as a role player. In case you haven't noticed, not everyone on a team can be a Pro Bowler who runs a 4.2 40-yard dash.
DSAhawker @ 06:59 - Friday, November 21st, 2008
http://www.freewebs.com/dsahawker
and look at the play that got Payne hurt....that dude is fearless, will take a hit and hang onto the ball...

I just hope his knee heals up well so he can come back strong
yankinta @ 07:23 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
nighthawk2, I think I have to disagree with you on signing Branch. I don't think Tim Ruskell deserves blame on this. There's no one that could have foreseen the injury. But if Branch didn't have any injury and still didn't perform, then Timmy should definitely get the blame for wasting draft pick and $$.

Having said that, this is why I truly believe we need to start evaluating Branch this year to see if he has anything left after the injury. Otherwise we'll need to release him to save $5 mil.

With our First Pick, I'd like to get one of the following guys.

1. Andre Smith* OT Alabama 98
3. Vontae Davis* CB Illinois 98
4. Malcolm Jenkins CB Ohio State 97
6. Michael Crabtree** WR Texas Tech 96


With our second pick, I'd like to get one of the following guys.

23. Geno Atkins* DT Georgia 93
31. Taylor Mays* S USC 91
32. Darrius Heyward-Bey WR Maryland 90
23. Juaquin Iglesias Sr. WR Oklahoma
25. Mohamed Massaquoi Sr. WR Georgia
nighthawk2 @ 08:19 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
If Mays comes out he's going to be a top 10, probably top 5, draft pick.

I realize no one can anticipate injuries, but there was nothing in Branch's resume' that indicated he's worth a $39 mil contract, or a 1st round pick, in my view. Yes he was a Super Bowl MVP, but he was mainly a role player.
NickLicatasucks @ 08:37 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
What will it take on the open market to get a player the caliber of Branch these days? What are some comparables?

We know Engram isn't the same impact player without other weapons on the field. We know that Branch is not a #1, probably more of a #2 or #3. These are known. Last time I checked true #1 receivers made much more than $5M/year. More like $8M+/year. So in fact, if Branch can perform as a starter, and play at a high level, he is worth keeping around for one more season. He would look a lot better if we had a #1 across the field from him, or at least a guy who stretches the defense in some unique way- due to size, speed, or something else. Then we have Burleson. Who is also not a #1. But again....what does it take to replace him? I think that based on replacement cost...Branch and Burleson, the healthy versions, do not look too bad. I still like the idea of getting a high draft pick at WR, first or second round...to add to the mix. If the guy is ready to start, or play a lot, he bumps a job away from other guys. Maybe then you cut Branch, or someone else making a few bucks.

Either way, we need to become more reliable and talented at that position next year. I'm not sold we can do that without keeping Branch on board. Because a #1 WR will cost you more than he is making, and a #2 WR may cost you the same, maybe a little less....and may not be as good as him OR Burleson.
yankinta @ 08:40 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Well, Branch was New England's No.1 receiver. Over 90 Catches and 1000+ yards. When he was healthy, he was definitely a top 10 receiver. There's no dispute about this fact.

But the bigger question is, "Does he have anything left"? Since he's small and relies heavily on speed and quickness, if he's not fast, then he has nothing to offer. This is why let's see what he's got left and decide whether or not to cut him.
BobbyK @ 08:43 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Branch had a history of injuries before Ruskell traded for him. They weren't as significant and as often as what he's experienced in Seattle, but Branch did have a tendency to be hurt at least on a somewhat regular basis.

I agree to keep Branch for '09. I'm not happy he makes so much and that we gave up a #1 for him, but it is what it is and moving forward for '09 I think the team is better off with him on it.
Dukeshire @ 08:50 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Would anyone give a first up for Mark Rypien? I love Branch as a player but that contract, my god. If Randy Moss and Darell Jackson were traded for 4th rounders then what does that say about how Ruskell assigns value? That is to say nothing of the dollars involved. With that investment they are obligated to see if he has anything left. I hope he does but I'm doubtful.
Dukeshire @ 08:51 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
FYI; he has never had more that 60 catches or had a 1000 yard season, ever.
Dukeshire @ 08:52 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Correction, 78 grabs in '05.
yankinta @ 09:12 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Randy Moss was a huge risk. That's comparing apples and oranges.

Having said that I agree that Tim Ruskell OVER VALUE having good characters and being smart. Just look at current successful teams. They have a number of players on the team with questionable characters and risks.

The most important thing should be "Having talent and the desire and commitment to win". Having a good core players with good characters should take care of the risks and other stuff.
kinger12 @ 09:12 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Branch should be the new bobby!
Would love us to pick up Boldin and then a young big recviever.. But I think the first round pick has to be O-Line...T or G!
BobbyK @ 09:16 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
You really don't think AZ would trade Boldin to us, do you? Unless it was a Hershel Walker deal, why would AZ help us out?
Dukeshire @ 10:14 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
"Having talent and the desire and commitment to win" Yes, of course. That's what Ruskell wants and he often places the commitment to win (a.k.a. being a good guy) over talent. I don't think the Moss thing was that big a risk. Consider the situation he was leaving. We're talking talent here. Personally, I don't have a problem with his philosophy, but the two don't have to mutually exclusive. You can get bad mfers who stay in line, they are out there. But in looking for them Ruskell has swung and missed, too often.
yankinta @ 14:07 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
If Moss thing wasn't that big of a risk, how come there were no other buyers but the Patriots? Remember, no demand drove the price down to a 4th rounder. If there were people bidding for him, Oakland would have received 2nd or 1st rounder.

But I agree with you on the second part that the two don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Nevertheless Tim Ruskell has one more year to prove his worth or he will be gone.
SharkHawk @ 16:11 - Friday, November 21st, 2008 Email
Haha, Franks and Beenes... you have time to delete my post making fun of the weird capitalization on Wilson's name, but you don't bother to fix it in the title. You guys that run this blog are real tools. Take the five minutes a day you spend deleting posts and come up with some decent content. Larry Larue can do it on the M's blog and the season isn't even going. What's your excuse?

Comments are not allowed from anonymous visitors. Please login or register to comment.