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?
  • envyoushawk Email
  • MrSinister Email
  • davidbritton Email
  • gregoryrobinson Email
  • devisscher Email
  • Guest Users: 767
Seahawks Insider
Thursday, January 8th, 2009
Posted by Eric Williams @ 06:19:35 pm

Here's the full transcript of the Seattle Seahawks president Tim Ruskell's conversation with reporters this afternoon, courtesy of the team's public relations staff. It's pretty long, but certainly worth a read and hopefully will answer many of the questions some of you have had over the last several months.

[More:]

On how he’s been holding up through the season: “Oh, I’ve been good. Well, it’s been tough, to tell you the truth. It’s been a tough year. To quote a modern political phrase, it would be hard to put lipstick on that piggy. That was a hard one.

There’s a lot of blame to go around: the front office, players, and coaches. But, I think if you asked me, ‘How did it get that way?’—the injuries, I think, was the number one deal. When you have a Mike Holmgren-coached offense and you lose your quarterback for the bulk of the season, that’s really your engine. Mike, he would say that.

And then couple that with what happened at the receiver position, and then the offensive line, and then when the second engine came in, it wasn’t ready to go—in Seneca [Wallace]—with his injury. He really wasn’t Seneca, I thought, until the end of the year.

There’s other things. I think Coach said it great in his press conference: if you just think this is about the injuries, then you’re not paying proper attention, you know? Guys that we counted on—and count on—to play well for us didn’t have great years. There’s a lot of people in that category. I think the encouraging news about that is, in our exit interviews with the players, it wasn’t the pointing of fingers. It wasn’t, ‘They didn’t do good,’ or ‘That side didn’t…’ It was, ‘I have to do better.’ That was a constant theme throughout the interviews with the players: ‘I have to do better.’ We all do. We were 4-12.”

On how much this past season impacts the program moving forward and whether he shares Coach Holmgren’s opinion that it’s not as bad as it seems: “I do. Yes, I do. I think 4-12 will be the absolute motivation, certainly on the players’ part, to say, ‘We are better than that, and we know that, and we will have to do everything that we possibly can starting immediately to make sure that doesn’t happen again.’ Everybody’s pride was hurt. It’s a prideful group. That group has played a lot better, obviously. I think that’s a springboard into next season.”

On whether he sees this season as an aberration and not as a deep-rooted problem in the organization: “Yes. For the most part, I do. But you can’t just say that and then think it’s going to happen [differently. You can’t say,] ‘Well, it was that, so I’ll just do just like I did last year.’ No. We have to have a total recommitment and dedication from everybody in this building. It does not happen just because we show up and everybody’s healthy. I think Mike made that point, and it’s very true.

You have to really look at yourself—everybody does—and we have to come together as a team. Although, I will say this: if there’s a silver lining in last year’s season, it was how we stuck together. I was proud of the group for that. Coaches, players, it never got divisive, it never got to the finger-pointing stage. I’ve been with teams early in my career [where] that year would have really rocked the locker room, and you would’ve had some problems. But that did not happen. We thought they played hard all year long. We thought they were together. The preparation, all those things that you look for and say, ‘Oh, we’re pulling back here, we’re not the same,’—never saw that. I think that bodes well.”

On whether he was worried that the team would unravel in the face of such a tough season: “You know, we put so much emphasis on the type of guy that we bring into this team that I was pretty sure it wouldn’t happen. But you know, it’s hard when you have that many losses and you know everybody’s against you. I was pretty sure [it wouldn’t happen]. It didn’t happen. I think that also bodes well and will help us as we go forward, the type of guy that’s here.”

On whether there were any pieces he thought were well in place that didn’t perform the way he expected them to this year: “Sure. We all felt good about the defense, right? Not so much how it was assembled, but we just felt like that group, based on what we’d seen the year before—and there was inconsistency in the year before—but at times we played really well and the coaches’ charge in the offseason was, ‘Okay, you played well, you did really good at home, but not as consistent on the road.’

So, really, the theme in the offseason and in training camp was, we shore that up, [and we’re okay]. We all felt that, and that did not happen to any kind of consistent manner. Our rush wasn’t what we thought it would be. Obviously [Patrick] Kerney getting hurt [didn’t help], but you know, that’s not fair [to put it on one guy]. There’s more to it than that.

Our rush was just never consistent all year long, whether it was from the four-man or in our blitz packages. We were not getting to the quarterback. The quarterbacks were having way too much time and were way too comfortable running their pass offense, and we got hurt that way. That, to me, was disappointing. That’s really where we have to…I don’t think it’s an overhaul. I do not. I think we’ve got good players. I just think that the attitude, the sinking of that defense, and then really honing in on pass-rushing: what do we have to do there to make that work? It’s basically the same guys that, the year before, had done a good job. Now, we lost the 14 and a half sacks from Kerney, but there’s more to it than that. It’s not just the one man.”

On whether there’s something he would’ve done differently with the defensive personnel: “You know, we weren’t thinking that way. No. We weren’t. Drafting a [Lawrence] Jackson, and bringing in Red [Bryant] in the fourth round, we loved the way they looked in training camp. I thought Lawrence had an especially good preseason, and then started off the year well, and then—as rookies sometimes do—flattened out, plateaued. So you were hoping to get more juice there, but that didn’t happen. But I just think as a group, as we talked to the guys, they just didn’t have the kind of year they were expecting. It hit a lot of guys at the same time. It was disappointing. They’re disappointed, we’re all disappointed in that aspect. That is really what drives your defense; it’s a pressure game, especially the way we play defense. And it wasn’t getting there.”

On whether the problems on defense were scheme-related: “Hard to answer. It was a catch-22. At times, when we were trying to get pressure and we didn’t get there, then you had man-coverage, and we all know that the big plays increased dramatically from the year before. So that’s the game you play every week. That’s the chess match, and you either win or lose that. Too often this year, we lost.”

On how much he thinks the defense needs to increase in size this offseason: “No, I’m not a believer in the size. We have some small players, but do we get rid of Lofa Tatupu and Leroy Hill? That’s not it. It’s the coordination, the synchronization of the defense, everybody doing their job and putting guys in the positions—based on their skills—to be productive. We’ve got to do a better job of that, and we will do a better job. And then there’s attitude. When there’s one or two guys making the tackle on an outside screen play as opposed to four or five, then you’re not going to get the job done, so there’s that as well. It’s an attitude thing.”

On whether he believes Coach Mora will be more aggressive with the defense: “Yes. The Jim that I knew in the year that I was with him in Atlanta—very much, that is his philosophy. He’s an attacking predator-type guy. It wasn’t that we were so much of a big defense in Atlanta, and the same with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers: that is not a big defense. But their pressure and attacking, they’re very successful, and they’ve been ranked highly. That is his M.O.”

On whether there have been any other definite coaching changes besides Greg Knapp taking over as offensive coordinator: “That’s the only one that we’ve done so far.”

On whether anyone on the current coaching staff has been told that they won’t be coming back: “No. It’s a process, and we’re going through it, and we want to do it right and be fair. So, this is the hard time. This is the hard time for everybody. We’re going to put together the best possible staff we possibly can.”

On whether right now, all he’s doing is seeing if anyone out there is better than the staff he already has in place: “Basically, that’s fair to say.”

On how different the offensive coordinator’s job will be with a defensive mind like Coach Mora’s as the head coach: “They were together in Atlanta, with Jim as the head coach. Greg will call the plays, but Jim will have a lot of influence. He goes into the offensive meeting rooms. He’s one of those guys that will float the building, and has ideas, and very much is into a game plan that incorporates not just the offensive team. If the offense is going to do this, then this is what we have to do on defense, and this is what the special teams have to do. A total game plan. I know that was something they worked on very hard in Atlanta. I know he’ll bring that to our team as well.”

On whether Greg Knapp’s emphasis is more on the run game than the passing game: “It could. You know, what they’re going to do a really good job of is based on the personnel. What can we do based on our personnel? [It’s] not so much, ‘Okay, just get the guys that fit our scheme.’ [It’s more about,] ‘Who do we have here, and what are we going to best be able to do?’ Obviously, with some of the things that we’ve done with the people we’ve brought in with the run game, with the addition of Mike Solari and Greg Knapp—those two guys worked together as well in San Francisco—I think we continue to improve our run game. I’m very much a believer in the run game, as is Jim, and if you get the run game going, and the defense, you look at a lot of these playoff teams, that’s a formula that works.”

On whether there are any assistant coaches that will definitely return next season: “Yes, there will be. We’ll figure all that out. Like I said, as anything gets changed or added, we’ll make sure you know.”

On whether Coach Solari will definitely be around for another season: “He will be here, that’s correct.”

On whether he and Coach Mora have a timeline for when they’d like to be finished building the coaching staff: “No. We’d like to do it as quickly as possible, but we’re not going to make a silly decision. Jim’s very thorough in his interviews. Some would say way beyond. [Laughs.] There’s a lot of late nights going on. He really wants to get to know these guys that he’s not as familiar with. So, I can’t really put a timeline on it. But we’d like to get that in place—ideally, you’d say, ‘It’d be nice to have it by the Senior Bowl,’ but I don’t know if that’s realistic.”

On whether he’s helping Coach Mora build the staff: “It’s a collaborative effort. It absolutely it. That’s the way we worked together before, and that’s the way we’ll continue to work. Obviously he knows a lot of coaches. He’s a coaches’ coach, and he’s been in this league a long time, as I have, so we run names by each other and then we decide, ‘Is that a fit?’ And then we make a decision.”

On the plusses and minuses of announcing that Coach Mora will be the head coach in 2009 last year: “Well, the plus is that I’m not in the middle of a head coaching search. Whew! [Laughs.] That’s a good one. You know, I look back and I don’t know that we would change anything that we did. Obviously we would all change how the season came out, but Coach [Holmgren] was very adamant when he made his decision that this was going to happen and we needed to get on with looking for our next coach.

Jim was in the building and we liked what he did for us in terms of what we asked him to do with the secondary. He was a good fit for us, and we all felt good about that. We thought, ‘Let’s minimize the distractions and the controversy by just going ahead and naming him the next coach. Then that’s out of the way and we can concentrate on the season ahead.’ By and large, I thought that worked perfectly.

And then you have a coach now who has been with the team. He’s not coming in here trying to assess the players; he knows these players! And he has an idea of what he wants to do with them. So you don’t get that chaos of, ‘Is this guy going to wipe out one side of the ball because they don’t fit his scheme?’ which a lot of these teams are going to get with these new coaches. So, many more plusses than minuses, the minus being that it was tried to be made [out] as a controversy and I don’t think it was. You guys talked to the players all year: ‘Is this a problem?’ But I don’t think it was a distraction. There’s really no other real minuses.”

On whether having Coach Mora already in place worked to the team’s advantage during a poor year: “Right. [The coaches and players would have said,] ‘Not only do we not know who the next guy is, when is that going to happen?’ It would’ve been distracting for Mike, ‘Jeez, what am I going to do?’ So I just think that that was the right thing to do. I’m not saying it’s a blueprint for the rest of the NFL. Everything has to be in place. You have to have a guy you feel really good about, and the coach has to decide, ‘My time is near,’ but it worked for us.”

On the current speculation that the team might let Matt Hasselbeck go: “Do I have to address that one? Matt’s our quarterback. We’re very happy that he is.”

On whether there will be any major personnel or scheme changes with the new coaches: “You know, I think the fair thing to do is get the staff together [first]. I don’t anticipate that. I really don’t, because Jim has looked at this and he knows that the players we have fit that. Obviously, you don’t want to make too much of a dramatic shift in terminology, where the guys are starting from ground zero with their learning. I think we have that with Greg. Now, will Greg Knapp’s offense be different? Absolutely. It comes from a base, and they branch off. He’s got new ideas and different ways of doing things, so if that’s dramatic, then yes, you’ll see that. But certainly no real overhaul in the players. We like our players, and they fit what we try to do.”

On how, in previous years, he’s redone a few different position groups, like the linebackers and running backs, and whether that is in the cards this year: “I don’t think to that scale. I know this: we don’t want to get caught with the situation we had at receiver going into this year. That was more driven by the health deals, and we’ve got some guys that are recovering. But I wouldn’t put it to that level. That would be a point of emphasis.”

On Coach Holmgren hinting at the fact that he might want to return, and whether he ever said that to him: “No, he didn’t. But it makes sense. The way he put it in the press conference, I thought, was perfect. You’ve made this decision, and now you think that we’re going to have a really good year, and there’s no distractions, and here we go, and we like our football team. And then boom, it’s not going well. And you say, ‘I don’t want to go out like this.’ That’s how he explained it, and that’s how I took it. He never expressed that to me or Tod [Leiweke], but I can understand that. Jeez. This is not how this was supposed to be written! But I don’t think it was anything more than that. He said, in his quiet moments and in his time of reflection, that he knew absolutely it was the right decision.”

On whether Leroy Hill might get a franchise tag: “Sure. He’s an absolute priority.”

On where Bobby Engram fits into the organization going forward: “We like Bobby. As a matter of fact, we had a conversation last week. We have great respect for each other, and he wants to be here, and who wouldn’t want him to be a part of it? What I told Bobby was, let’s get the staff together and just see where the fit is for him and for us. He said, ‘You know what? That’s the right thing.’ And we’ll talk again.”

On whether he’s open to signing Engram to a multiple-year contract: “I don’t want to get into any of that. We had our disagreements last year about how to do that. The same arguments will come up. But the bottom line is, he would like to be a Seahawk and finish his career a Seahawk, and we would like that as well.”

On whether there are any surgeries coming up in the offseason that haven’t yet been disclosed: “You’ve seen the bulk of them. All those that you just mentioned [Walter Jones, Nate Burleson, Patrick Kerney] are going well, and ahead of schedule. What we would like to have happen is, as many guys that were injured during the season, have them back for the minicamps so they don’t miss anything. I don’t know that we’ll get there with Kerney and Walter, but I think most of the rest of the guys, we will. That’s a good thing.”

On whether Coach Mora will hold the new extra minicamp: “Jim’s very focused on doing that. You can do that in early April, I think as early as the first weekend in April. It’s generally a voluntary deal, but you have that one to play with.”

On whether Tatupu will require surgery: “They’re assessing that right now, with his thumb. Is that what you’re talking about? They’re talking about the thumb, [not the knee].”

On how Deon Grant is: “He’s fine, yes.”

On whether he believes that the pieces are, for the most part, in place to have another championship season next year: “I do. When I say that, I’m also counting that we have a pretty high draft pick, and we’re going to get an influx of some really young energy, and guys that we think can play for us. We’ll have strategic use of free-agency as well, and re-signing our own players. So I incorporate all that when I say, we’re pretty much there in terms of the people we have right now staying with us on the roster. You’re not going to see a major overhaul.”

On whether the organization thinks, financially, that it’s in good shape to build the roster and make moves: “We do.”

On whether there are some high-paid players who will need to be let go or at least have their contracts restructured: “Everybody around the league is going through the economic crisis that we all are, so we’re looking at that hard. But in terms of the question that you’re asking: is that going to force us to get rid of a player, or restructure? I don’t anticipate anything like that. We can do what we need to do. But everybody, you’ll see moves being made around the league because it’s tight for everybody. It puts pressure on all your revenue streams. We’re all going to be cognizant of that.”

On when he expects Walter Jones to be back: “We expect him for training camp. I’m very encouraged by how that went. It went very well.”

On having such a high draft pick and whether they might use it for a replacement for Jones: “Well, you’re not going to find a Walter Jones, that’s for sure. [Laughs.] I can say that right now. Sure. As I look at it, there’s really no position that we can really rule out. We like what we’re seeing in the draft, so we’ll have to see past January 20th to see who got added, and we have not had those meetings to really nail that down. Certainly, you want input from the new staff, but we like what we’re seeing in the draft, and we will help this football team. But there’s really no position that’s out or in yet. We haven’t done that yet. But we have to look at, sure. You always have to look at that group and say, ‘Where are we at? Are we getting too old?’ Same with the defensive line. You don’t want to let those slip because they drive the train behind it.”

On whether it’s becoming more common for teams, like Miami this year, to go from a dreadful season to suddenly being a championship contender: “I think what it shows is that the teams are pretty close in their personnel. Maybe you take two or three off the top and two or three off the bottom, and you look at those 26, 27 [ranked] teams, you say, ‘You know what? They’re kind of close personnel.’

So really, what it comes down to is just attitude. Those teams changed their attitudes. That came out via the coaching staff, or whatever changes they made they made in the front office or what have you. So yes, our league, because of the stress of parody over the last ten or 15 years, it can happen. You’re absolutely right. And the personnel is pretty darn close team to team, so if you get an attitude shift, or a team’s gone through something really horrible in terms of a bad season, and all the players are upset and want to change that, you get that commitment and the chemistry going. You can do it.

That’ll be part of what we have to do. We have to change the attitude. [In Miami,] really, other than the quarterback, a lot of those players were on that team. Porter was there. But the way they played compared with the year before in terms of being physical and aggressive and taking on the personalities of their head coach, I think that’s where you saw the change. It wasn’t so much the overhaul of the roster.

It really wasn’t an overhaul of the roster. [There were more] personnel changes in Atlanta, when you’ve got the running back who came in and the quarterback, obviously, just played fantastic. But attitude—Coach Smith’s attitude, what Mularkey brought to the offense in terms of putting the right touches with guys playing their natural positions, and the scheme, that all contributed. But you know, was it still 80% of the roster from the year before? Yes, it was. It was. So, you can do it, more so probably than in the NBA or Major League Baseball, in the NFL you can make the change quickly.”

On the Rams being terrible and then winning the Super Bowl the next year, and whether that could happen for the Seahawks: “That was a biggie. I’m sure there were other ones, they’re just not coming to mind right now. In the advent of free-agency, obviously that’s been easier to do. Back in the 70s and 80s, you never saw that. You always heard about the three-year plan and the five-year plan, and those were real. A new coach was not expected to come in one year and turn it around. Now, you better get it done right now! It’s hard. That’s why you see so much turnover in our league; the impatience of that. But it can be done. There are many examples, maybe starting with the Rams, on through this year.”

On whether he felt targeted by the fans and media this year for the first time because of the losing season: “You know, I don’t think that way. I love what I do. This is a great job. That’s something I can’t control. I know I’ve been accused of being silent this year, but that’s really been a philosophy that we’ve had since I got here. I kind of learned from Rich McKay and the way he handled it in Tampa and the way he handled it in Atlanta, in that, during the season, you let the coach be the spokesman for the team. The players should know that any talk about the team’s coming from the head coach. And then in the offseason, he would take over. I thought that was the right way to do it. That’s always been my philosophy and we’ll always do it that way. No, I haven’t felt like a target. I’ve heard the criticism, but it just doesn’t really affect me.”

On the criticism that he took credit for winning seasons but then was silent during this season: “I don’t remember taking all the credit when we were winning. I’m all about team guys; everybody in building is all about team. When we do poorly we should all own up to it, and if we do well then there is plenty to go around. I don’t think about it being about me. Jim is not like that, and that is not the way we think. Football is the ultimate team sport and it can’t just be the players, it has to be the front office and it has to be the coaching staff. Those departments are just as important as the players. If the players look upstairs and see our group is tight and connected, then it puts the players at ease. That is the way you have to do it, and that is the way we do it here.”

On making moves this past season to try to salvage it: “Sure, many talks that way. I think we ended up making the move for Keary Colbert and that was a move out of desperation. If we would have sat and thought and said, ‘Let’s just give these young players some more time…’ We thought we needed another veteran and we did that move and it didn’t pan out. I regret that move, and that was born out of desperation. With the guys we had here who were with us all through camp and knew the offense…It was hard to incorporate someone new into the offense and it really wasn’t fair for Keary.”

On the play of Koren Robinson this past season: “I’m proud of him. He convinced us when we started doing research on him and found out that he had changed in terms of what he has done with his family and rehab. The trigger sometimes for people who have an addiction or a problem is pressure. It’s a good story, and I’m glad we did the deal. And he helped us. It made him feel good, and he was able to come back and conquer a demon and finish what he started. I know he really appreciated coming back and Coach Holmgren giving him another opportunity to play. Not everybody gets a second chance. He did a nice job for us; the way Koren blocked for us this year was great. The problem is, it never made the highlight film! On most of our big runs, he was involved and did a heck of a job. We told him that. Almost every week he had a couple of nice catches that helped us out.”

On whether Koren Robinson will be coming back next season: “We have not made that decision. I want to get the coaching staff together and we will make the decision on guys like him.”

On whether any assistant coaches have decided to retire: “Yes: Jim Lind and John Jamison.”

On a possible role for Gill Haskell next season: “There are consulting jobs around the league, offensive assistant positions. But that is something that he and Jim would have to talk about. It is actually pretty common for guys to go into those types of roles.”

On picking up another late round draft pick for the one Seattle lost in the Keary Colbert trade from Denver: “You can do that, especially on day-two of the draft. Guys call up and ask to trade their six for my two seven round spots. We are not worried about it and there are options open for us to get our fifth-rounder back, we are not focused on it right now. For us to go get another third or fourth round pick, then you’ll have to give up something. A fifth rounder is very doable.”

On having the fourth overall draft pick: “It really invigorates the scouts. So many times they like to scout the top players because they are the ones making all the plays and are on ESPN. We usually say, ‘Let’s forget about those guys,’ and give them a list of guys we wanted them to concentrate on. It invigorates the personnel staff and makes us work harder to know everything because the stakes are higher and the dollars are higher. Everybody gets involved and it brings the personnel and coaching staff together because we want everybody to be on the same page. The whole building is going to make sure whoever we choose is successful, and it’s fun.”

On not selecting an offensive lineman with their first-round pick: “I have never been fond of the high offensive lineman, but I don’t know if that is a correct way to look at it, with the increased importance placed on the left tackle. It’s not a sexy pick and you can’t really show the highlights. It is important, and it’s the nuts and bolts to the football team. The reality is, there are guys who warrant that pick and there have been guys who have been successful in our league. Just looking at it, the offensive linemen in this draft are pretty strong.”

On having two kickers all season: “We drafted [Brandon] Coutu and he was seven-for-seven during the preseason. There was a lot of talk about him and we thought we should hang onto him till at least the trade deadline. Olindo [Mare], coming off the year he had [last year], we wanted to make sure he was healthy. He had two down years prior to coming here. Obviously, as the season continued, Olindo was fantastic. After the trade deadline, there was never any pressure that we had to have another roster spot, so we kept Brandon as insurance. Is Brandon coming back for training camp? Right now he is. I understand why people would question why we would have two kickers. The deadline was over so we didn’t have the pressure to make a change at that spot on the roster.”

On bringing back Olindo Mare: “Yes, we would be crazy not to. All those years when he was with the Miami Dolphins—[that is] the Olindo I had always known. It is these last two years prior to last season that didn’t make sense to me. When we tested him out, the leg is still there. All credit to him for working hard during rehab and for having a fabulous year. I wish it was a year where we were winning games and going to the playoffs, because he deserved it.”

On the situation at running back: “I feel good about it. Obviously we have a couple of free agents that we have to make decisions on. We would like to have both [Leonard] Weaver and [Maurice] Morris back. Greg Knapp is looking at the position to see how he likes it. Julius started off the year good and had a couple of big games, but he got into the doghouse a little bit with the fumbling. Maurice was able to emerge and have a good second half. We increased our run per carry this past season, so I thought there was improvement, and I think you will see that more and more with [Mike] Solari getting comfortable with our offensive line. I thought we made improvement. Would I have liked it to be more dramatic? Sure, but it was pretty good.”

On the health of Chris Spencer and Rob Sims: “They are doing well and we need them to be doing well.”

On whether Spencer will need back surgery: “That has not been determined yet and everything we did was geared towards not having surgery. That has not been determined yet.”

On the play of the offensive line the last few games of the season: “It made us feel good. We think we have some depth there and just the way [Mansfield] Wrotto and [Steve] Vallos developed bodes well for the future. Those guys looked good in training camp, but you never know how they will do in the regular season—and they did a good job. They went toe-to-toe with some very good defensive lineman. Kyle Williams hung in there and those guys hung in there and showed they can play. This gives us the depth, and we will have some interesting battles this offseason and in training camp. Having guys we know that can play is very helpful for us going into next season.”

On whether they’ll re-sign Ray Willis and Floyd Womack: “I want us to get together as a group and look at them objectively. If we did lose one of these guys, are we okay? The good news is, we do like those guys and they did get a chance to play. Our guys have done a great job at drafting offensive lineman in the fourth round. We started with Ray Willis, then Rob Sims and finally Wrotto. That lends into my philosophy of not drafting a lineman so high in the draft. If they are well-coached and they work together and you have tough guys then they can work together. Everybody knows the offensive line is about continuity. Once you’re above the bar talent-wise, then it’s about continuity and working together.”

On whether he believes the offensive line is above the bar talent-wise: “I do, yes.”

On whether Vallos will become the starting center: “That is not for me to say. I like both those guys and when Chris [Spencer] was playing, he did a heck of a job. We didn’t know what we were going to get with Steve but he did a heck of a job too. You want competition and if you have two good centers, then you’re that much better off. Steve has played other positions; he played tackle in college, we drafted him as a guard and now he has played center. The versatility is really important.”

On the health of Matt Hasselbeck:
“He just needs to rest and we’re making progress but it’s slow. That is the way backs work.”

On Seneca Wallace proving he can play in the league: “We have resigned him twice since I have been here. In ’06 when he had to play four games and we were 2-2, he did some nice things. The Seneca we saw earlier in the year was not Seneca Wallace. Even in the Miami game, he played well but from the third quarter on, he could barely move. I always felt good about him and do feel good about him and I’m glad we have him. Defenses know how good he is and they have to prepare a little more because of his running ability.”

On thinking about the next franchise quarterback: “Sure, you have to think about the future, and Matt [Hasselbeck] is not going to play forever. He is still playing at a high level and he is still our quarterback and we feel really good about that. At some point you will have to plan for the future and we are cognitive of that.”

On Seneca Wallace being mistaken that a clause in his contract deemed him to be a free agent this offseason: “I don’t like to discuss players’ contracts. All these guys have clauses in their contracts that if they hit certain numbers they get extra money. We are happy to oblige because that means they’re playing good.”

On having three players with back injuries last season: “We look at everything in terms of conditioning. You hear a lot of from teams of overtraining guys because it is a year-long process now. We don’t want to say luck or bad luck drives what we are going to do. We will look at everything. Part of it was things just not going our way with injuries towards certain positions and how many guys were hurt. I think you always have to keep looking at your offseason programs, training camp, and what you’re doing in the weight room. When you see you a trend you will make changes and it’s not like it has been this way every year.”

On franchising Leroy Hill: “All options will be open. Obviously we are starting talks again with his agent. Our priority is to have him back on the football team.”

On Leroy Hill coming back from the stinger injury: “Yes, he is good. Too bad we don’t have a game this week. He would be ready to go hit somebody!”

On having a large percent of the salary cap tied into the linebacker positions: “It’s unusual, but if that is one of the strengths of your team or your defense, then that is your identity. Maybe that means you can’t go with as many guys getting paid on the defensive line or in the secondary. Sometimes teams have three guys in their secondary getting paid. It’s something we have to think about because it’s not like we don’t have a salary cap, and every move affects every other move. We have those conversations every day.”

On looking back at the Deion Branch trade a few seasons ago: “Obviously it has been frustrating that Deion hasn’t had a stretch were he is completely healthy. Before he was hurt last year with the calf injury, he had a streak of about seven games where he was the man. To me, he finally figured out the offense and then he got hurt with the knee injury in Green Bay. He really hasn’t had a streak where we can see his full potential. When he is healthy and playing, I like him and I’m glad he is on the team, and he is a good player for us and will be going into the future. He is a guy the team can jump on his back and he’ll carry you for stretches at a time. He is guy who can make a lot of catches and score touchdowns and that is what’s frustrating for Deion and for us. I hope that is coming next season. I think he will finally have an offseason where he is here for the whole offseason and he will be incorporated into the new offense. My hope is, we will see Deion play 16 games and help us win.”

Categories: Interviews 78 comments

COMMENTS:

BobbyK @ 18:43 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I really like what Ruskell says about playing the players to their strengths. That's important and I hope it's more than lipservice.

I also really like what he says about the blocking of KoRo. I hope he truly understands that a good blocking WR is also important. It was so nice seeing Jurevicius dominating CBs in '05. Guys like Branch and Bobby just can't block. I know a WRs #1 job is to catch the balls and make plays --- but it's so damn nice to have WRs who can also block (and block well).
BobbyK @ 18:54 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I hope he honestly doesn't think Rob Sims is a good player. He is horrible. He is terrible. He is one of the most pathetic starting NFL offensive linemen I have ever seen in my life. Going into '09 with his as a starter just means that the coaching staff hopes that Matt Hasselbeck breaks his neck and dies because that's what is going to happen to any QB who have Rob f-ing Sims blocking for him. OMG - that guys is worthless.

At least Willis and Wrotto seem like they are worthy of being called decent or good 4th round offensive linemen.
twocolorcrayon @ 19:21 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Hmm. Curious.
airbags @ 19:29 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email

he confirms matty. leroy. says bobby's got a good shot at sticking around.

then talks up sims and spencer.

he's a gm, that's his job.

he says all this now, but then watch as they trade matty after the second pre-season game, cut bobby during the trimming to the fifty-three man roster, and some team is ballsy enough to give up two first-rounders, and we see leroy go.

i don't believe anything he says... not even "hello".

lol

COHawkFan @ 19:33 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009
"stress of parody" ;-)
airbags @ 19:37 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email

lol - good catch... freudian slip?

BobbyK @ 19:46 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I'd be happy if some team gave up two first rounders for Hill.
QB_Sneak @ 19:46 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
brother.... airbags, when has Ruskell openly lied so much that you don't believe ANYTHING he says? Of course he spins things here and there. And don't say the word "hutchinson". There's too much he said/he said there, and a lot of revisionist history. Your comments are just absurd.

I found his candor refreshing and agree with most everything he says.

Except about Sims, that guy sucks!
heyyou_66 @ 19:47 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I particularrly find this question and answer ......interesting!


"On the current speculation that the team might let Matt Hasselbeck go: “Do I have to address that one? Matt’s our quarterback. We’re very happy that he is.”


I say Ruskell has Matt half way out the door. He is considering that second round pick trade offer but is trying to find just a bit more!
heyyou_66 @ 19:48 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Bobby k.....two first rounders for Hill.I am right there with you...............
Kerney @ 20:02 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
He seems resigned to the fact that we're going to lose one of our two best replacement linemen, either Ray Willis or Porkchop.

I'd really be unhappy to lose Willis, he's a beast run blocking and has much more upside than Chop, who up until this season has always, always been injured.
DJammmer @ 21:25 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Any other year, I wouldn't care if we lost Womack.

However, are you aware he played more snaps than any other OLineman? (Including Jones.)

He's normally the one who can't stay on the field, but this year he outlasted EVERYONE else.
DJammmer @ 21:27 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
How do you turn Hill into picks? I thought Hill was a UFA...
redneckhawk @ 21:31 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Idiot.
Sims a good player?
The OL above-the-bar?
On whether the problems on defense were scheme-related: “Hard to answer." But he talks of the small defense needing to be better trained and utilized.
On the criticism that he took credit for winning seasons but then was silent during this season-- this answer really got to me.

I wanted Ruskell fired. After reading this, I want him fired and banished from the state.
airbags @ 21:37 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email

of course my comments are absurd.

you're just NOW catching that?

why do i need to be serious? there are plenty of people here who do that already ;)

snydro22 @ 22:13 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
You franchise him
bigmike04 @ 22:13 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
If Timmy doesnt trade matt and say he our man that good. I hope Knapp knows how to build plays to keep matt here.

Let wallace go as he just a backup QB and not even that good enough to be on any other NFL team starter. So he not a big lost. Now if we draft QB later in rounds to devolope let him be 2nd string.
Golfhack1396 @ 22:14 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
You could turn Hill into picks by Franchising him. A team can still sign a franchised or transitioned player (i.e. Hutchinson 2006) away from you, but for a franchised player, the compensation is usually two 1st Round Draft Picks. Seattle got two first rounders from Dallas for Joey Galloway following the 1999 season, but it's a rare occurance.
snydro22 @ 22:14 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
That was in response to DJammmer..
OutSydeDog @ 23:30 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Well, I'm just glad that we finally heard from him on what's going on with the existing staff.
BobbyK @ 06:16 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
We have bodies that can occupy the offensive line positions, it's just too bad there aren't many good players to actually put on the field.

Rob Sims is a body. He is not a player. One thing I will say for the guy; he has a bright future as a doorman. He can allow people past him with the best of them.

My fondest Robs Sims memory (I mean this in a bad way) is when he got b!tch slapped by Kris Jenkins last season in Carolina. Anyone else remember that? Jenkins whacked him with a hand/arm and Sims went flying.

I think we've all seen bad offensive linemen. Most of them are back-up material who were forced to start due to injury. Rob Sims is/was a freaking starter! There's no way Ruskell can be serious about him being a starter for us ever again, is there? If he is, lets just forfeit the '09 season because there's no use having a gun when you don't have any bullets.
BobbyK @ 06:18 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Glad to see the right hand side of the blog updated!
HawkFromDay1 @ 06:23 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I really liked the description of Mora putting together a comprehensive game plan, which includes all phases.

I think Holmgren would more go into his offense cave, and just hope the defensive staff got it together. A holistic approach makes a lot of sense.

Should be fun to get Ruskell going with such a nice draft position. He will earn his money, or his firing with this draft.

Now let's go get Julius Peppers!!!
nidhighe @ 06:51 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Bigmike, are you crazy? Wallace is good enough to start in he NFL. He'll never be a great QB, but he's much better than his W-L record.
oceanic @ 07:11 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
My guess is Julian Peterson will restructure his contract to allow the Hawks to re-sign LeRoy Hill.

Pork Chop admitted that in past seasons he showed up overweight and out of shape which contributed to his injuries. He showed up leaner and in good shape in 08 and stayed healthy. I hope Seattle keeps both Womack and Willis. I have no confidence in Spencer staying healthy and little confidence in Vallos as a starter. Sims has been a matador, wave as they go by. Matt cannot have another injury filled season. The O line has to improve.

Anyone who has followed Ruskells moves knows Albert (stomper) Hainsworth is not an option.
mkelly534 @ 07:12 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Good interview. It answered most of my questions. As for the O-line. It is hard to judge the talent when you have to shuffle people in and out all year. I have hopes that with Scolari coaching and more power running we can show great improvement. I really hope we keep Willis and Womack. Pork Chop finally played to his potential this year (so of course he will probably leave.)
BobbyK @ 08:11 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I wished something would have been asked about the status of Mike Wahle. He may get released, but I'm not so sure.
Dukeshire @ 08:27 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
If he does it will come as no surprise. I was totally underwhelmed.
Wernie @ 09:02 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
There you have it( words) from the high mucky muck. This time of year, expect change. I did like what he had to say about the blocking of Koren. When are we going to hear from Coach Mora?
ElPerroGrandeIII @ 09:09 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
"I'm not a believer in the size," he said. "We have some small players, but do we get rid of Lofa Tatupu and Leroy Hill? That's not it.


Ruskell is a moron. Our DEFENSE is going to be pile driven into the turf for years to come. Fire Tim Ruskell IMMEDIATELY, this guy is a total loser GM.
swab @ 09:55 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Notice when he mentions size he doesnt mention our midget corners or defensive linemen. Of course he is not going to blame size, he is the one that drafted all of them.
mquinn73 @ 09:59 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Folks, Ruskell is a GM - this means he has to play a political game. He will talk alot about nothing in particular and, as a result, he will contradict himself. But you have to read between the lines.

I'm more convinced after reading that transcript that we will select a QB with our first pick. "At some point you will have to plan for the future and we are cognitive of that." Hasselback will stay and continue to start while the rookie sits out at least one season [a la Carson Palmer in Cincy] and learns the intricacies of an NFL offense.

I don't think we select a defensive player in the first round as it appears that Ruskell is satisfied with the players we have on that side of the ball - he thinks that they just underperformed in 2008 and are capable of rebounding in '09.

Nor do we go with an offensive lineman in round 1. "Once you’re above the bar talent-wise, then it’s about continuity and working together". Although I do think that he recognises that this group needs to be strengtened [perhaps via free agency? or a mid-round pick?].

The only other possibility, in my opinion, is Crabtree. However, I have serious reservations about that guy. Sure, he's big and strong but I think he lacks the speed to gain seperation against NFL corners. In fact, he actually reminds me of David Terrell albeit with a little more talent.
Dukeshire @ 10:20 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
There is not a quarterback in this draft that warrants a top 5 pick, IMO. No chance they take one. We all know his philosophy on size, but reading him say he's not a believer in it, my god that's alarming. A fast big guy will always beat a fast small guy. Always. It gets very old reading about effort and emotion. Those should be givens, and if they are not, you have the wrong players. The other thing that jumps out is how dramatically he devalues the o line. He won't even suggest that resigning Willis is a priority. I do not like the direction he is taking this team. I sincerely hope I have to eat my words a year from now, but I'm very skeptical.
BobbyK @ 10:34 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
He could just be saying that so Willis' agent won't feel like he has him by the balls in contract negotiations. Ruskell drafted Willis so you'd expect he would want to keep one of his own. We'll see...

I'm not going to claim I know enough about Bradford or Stafford, but if they are a future franchise QB (QBs are risks this high) then I'm okay taking them. That wouldn't bother me at all.

Of what I do know, I wouldn't be mad if we take Bradford.

I just with there was a Reggie White out there just waiting to be scooped up at #4. Oh well, wish in one hand and take a dump in the other hand and see which hand has more in it.
NickLicatasucks @ 10:47 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
bobbyK- Engram is a good blocker. I've seen him pancake some db's. One of them is named Shawn Springs. Granted, I don't think he'd pancake Ray Lewis, but who does? Branch is a willing blocker, but is not as effective a blocker as Koren, or Bobby even. One of the benefits of big receivers, as long as their willing blockers, is blocking. Whenever I saw Courtney Taylor on the field this year, I knew it was likely to be a running play. He's a good blocker too.

All that being said- when your GM compliments you first on your blocking....says a lot about other things. I can see Koren getting an invite to camp, but I doubt he makes this team next year.

The more I think about it, the more I want to evaluate Michael Crabtree. If this guy can make acrobatic catches, and block willingly....and run fast enough- we know his productivity is there- it'd be great to add another playmaker to the offense. Also- the new Knapp offense can no way be as complex as Holmy's. Add veteran QB's like Hass and Wallace, and I think we can have an expectation of a rookie WR to be a solid contributor. Look at what Eddie Royal did this year in Denver.
Dukeshire @ 10:54 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Reggie White? What happened to Duke Robinson?? I'm only kidding, he really had a poor game last night. And yes, if you know someone is going to be a "franchise" type player, take him. It's just from what I've seen this year, I wouldn't want any of them. Bradford reminds me of Danny Wuerffel.
BobbyK @ 11:35 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
We'd all be happy with Duke Robinson in a few trade downs with a later first round pick. And if they weren't happy - they would be happy a few years later when Robinson goes to his first Pro Bowl.

I once saw Tom Brady throw an incomplete pass in college and he turned out okay.

Champ Bailey got burned for a TD when he played for Georgia too.
moeflo @ 11:46 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Did he even play the whole game? I swore one announcer said he wasn't in on a few plays or something like that.
He did have a poor game last night. I was yelling at the TV for that penalty he caused that took away a crucial first down. That nice pass Bradford threw, taken away. Then again, I was yelling throughout the whole game haha. So it doesn't matter. "YOU KNOW ON THIRD AND SHORT TEBOW WILL KEEP THE BALL HIMSELF!" That's what I yelled among other things. A few words are missing.

I felt Bradford's pain last night.

Stinks.
Dukeshire @ 12:26 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
BobbyK - Easy big fella. I like him too, in fact last night couldn't have been better. If his stock falls far enough maybe they can grab him with the 36th pick. It's possible, although perhaps unlikely. And he didn't start the second half, not sure why. But he will be a very good pro, no doubt.


moeflo @ 12:31 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
That's what I thought.
freedom_X @ 12:48 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
A couple points:

1) it's a lot harder to find fast big guys than fast small guys.
2) people seem to ignore the other part of the Ruskell equation - high production in college. If there's a fast, big guy in college with high production, the guy is usually taken with a very high pick. You don't see Ruskell selecting small guys with low production.

A big, fast guy who slips to a lower pick usually was either a) an underachiever in college or b) has some major character questions.

Most of those gambles don't pay off. If you are fortunate and smart, your research may find that maybe a) was because they were in a bad system, or they were unlucky with injuries. b) maybe your research shows the person is not a chronic bad guy.

But I would say 8 of 10 times, issues with a) and b) mean the player will be considered a disappoinment (if a 1st round pick is spent on them.)

I believe even Ruskell will take chances on those a) type players in the mid to lower rounds, but it's true he is very unlikely to ever select a b) type player.
BobbyK @ 12:52 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
That'd be sweet!!!
Dukeshire @ 13:01 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
"people seem to ignore the other part of the Ruskell equation - high production in college. If there's a fast, big guy in college with high production, the guy is usually taken with a very high pick." Then why do teams like the Lions, Raiders, Chiefs To name 3, rarely get better. While The Pats, Steelers and Giants always seem to remain competitive? The answer is that Ruskell is a poor evaluator of talent. He has done well is the second round but he as whiffed repeatedly in the 1st.
Hawkfan1951 @ 14:38 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
The Seahawks put the audio of Ruskell's presser on their site. Just reading the transcript is very interesting, but you have to wonder, how is he saying this or that when you can't tell the voice inflection. So I played the audio and reread the transcript as he spoke.

Interesting! He spoke REAL soft when he talked about Hasselbeck and Hill.....

Go Hawks!
ProblemSolved @ 14:42 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Rich Mirer and Ryan Leaf were "franchise players". Every year half the top ten are franchise players and the other half is terrible and the other half is so-so. (I know, I did "half" three times, it's a joke.) It isn't just QB's, either.

I don't know about this Ruskell guy, but damn people, expecting him to know who the next "franchise player" is isn't fair or realistic. Not one GM can call that. Always look at life from your own perspective. Look at where you work. I do interviews. You do your best to select the right applicant, but sometimes you whiff. People are f-ed up; you can't predict people, especially after you give them a few million bucks.

Maybe this was better when everyone was slurping Eric, at least which made sense and was reasonable.


freedom_X @ 15:29 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I didn't say the "big, fast guy with production" was the best player. Only that those guys usually aren't around by the 20th pick. At that point, they're either gone or everyone is saying "they slipped" for whatever mysterious reason - failed drug test, arrest, slow 40 yd dash time in workouts, etc.

Reiterating a) as low production/underacheiver and b) as character concern:

As far as the Raiders, Detroit, and Chiefs - not sure about all of their picks, but a lot of their busts are indeed due to ignoring cases a) and b). The Raiders always ignore a) and b) - they seem to go mainly off physical attributes, and don't care that much about production or character. Detroit seems to ignore character a lot (Charles Rogers, Mike Williams." Can't remember the Chiefs picks that well, but the biggest bust of theirs I can remember (Ryan Sims) was a underachiever in college, low motivation.

So them bucking the "high ability, high production" rule is in fact a big part of their failings, and also lets good players slide down a bit lower for other teams to grab them. Actually, a lot of the success stories for those better franchises are due to teams higher than them ignoring production over physical attributes.

Let's take two examples:

Neither Ed Reed or Troy Polamalu have great size at safety: in fact, if they were Seahawks, some of the fans would be calling them typical undersized Ruskell picks. But of course they are probably the best safeties in the NFL.

Ed Reed - 24th pick overall 2002, 5'11", 200.
Picked ahead of him: Roy Williams 8th pick overall 2002, 6'0", 225

Roy Williams was not a bad pick, and almost everyone would have taken him higher than Reed. He had good size and production. But the little guy isn't so bad in comparison, is he?

Troy Polamalu: 5'10", 207, 16th pick overall 2003

No other safeties taken ahead of him, so no direct comparison, but lots of size-speed underachiever types. (mostly D-linemen.) Noteably, Charles Rogers (WR)#2, Johnathan Sullivan (DE) #6, Jimmy Kennedy (DT) #12, and right before Polamalu, Michael Haynes (DE) #14 and Jerome McDougle (DE) at #15.

If any of those teams valued production, they could have taken Polamalu, and of course in hindsight they should have.

A lot of people want Taylor Mays because of his size and speed. And he might be the right pick, but I've heard some hints, his production isn't quite in line with his physical talent. Thus, we've got do the homework! Look how many Raider 1st round safeties are busts! They always pick super size/speed safeties in the 1st round, look at their past 10-15 years of drafting. (not saying Mays will be a bust, just that we have to be real careful.)

If McFadden flops for the Raiders, it would be due to inadequate evaluation of b). No law that says a team has to make a good pick at the top of the draft! But it's very rare that big, top-of-the line athletes with great college production slide to the lower part of the 1st round. Those guys are the best players! It's natural they get picked high!
Dukeshire @ 15:40 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
You hit on my point. Ruskell does not have a great eye for talent. When it comes to selecting players that fit his "profile" he misses more often than not. Reed and Polamalu are great examples. Say what you want, but his track record is very poor in the first round throughout his career. He could have taken Ed Reed but he took TJ Duckett. But you're right, the farther down you pick the more discriminating you have to be. He is not good at it. The draft is not a crap shoot, the good team prove that year after year.
freedom_X @ 16:04 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Actually, T.J. Duckett is odd in that he seems to break Ruskell's "rules." Duckett had huge physical talent but as I recall (maybe wrongly) he wasn't that big a producer in college.

By that standard though, probably 20 other teams blew their picks that year, and many blew them a lot worse.

Lacking more information, I'd say Ruskell either broke his own rule (to his loss), already had plenty at the safety position (don't know), or got overridden by someone else in the 2002 draft. Remember, he was assistant GM in Atlanta, not GM. Seattle was/is his 1st GM job.
nighthawk2 @ 16:05 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
"I find his candor refreshing and agree with most everything he says."

Then you're as much of an idiot as Ruskell is. He needs to be fired yesterday.

I like Duke Robinson, as a 2nd round pick. He's not a 1st round talent. But knowing Ruskell, if there's a way to screw up the #4 overall pick, this moron will find it.


nighthawk2 @ 16:08 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
" There is not a quarterback in this draft that warrants a top 5 pick, IMO."

Amen! I feel exactly the same way. Very poor QB class. Bradford sucks too.
BobbyK @ 16:47 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Who will be there at #4?

I would assume the Lions want a "face" of the franchise. Sam Bradford or Matt Stafford?

I see the Rams making me mad and taking Michael Oher. Now we have to face him for 12 years. That sucks.

The Chiefs could go a number of ways. They could take what's left over of Bradford/Stafford or they could go with Crabtree or a defensive player like Aaron Curry. Since their DL is so terrible (they traded away Jared Allen last off-season who proceeded to have more sacks than the entire Kansas City team in '09). Since this is a mock, my money goes to them taking the leftover QB so they also have a new "face" for their franchise.

That leaves with Ruskell to take a senior from a big school who had success in college; Brian Orakpo, Texas, DE

There we have it, our newest Seahawk. Time to start debating who we should take in the 2nd round. It looks like DE is no longer a need:)

freedom_X @ 17:01 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I don't know that much about this year's draft prospects, but it does seem like there's no hot, must have superstar yet. (Often this type of thing doesn't bubble up until after the combine, when somebody puts out giant workout numbers.)

If Matt Stafford is not a franchise QB, then the Lions will do everything they can to trade down. But just like Miami this year, they may find no takers. If trading down is in the cards, the #4 pick may be easier to move than #1.

I have to think though, that the success of Matt Ryan will get Stafford drafted #1 based on what we know today.
redneckhawk @ 17:12 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I bet a 12-pack Hass is gone.
Dukeshire @ 17:35 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
The fact there doesn't seem to be a "must have" player in this draft will make it even more difficult to trade down. A few different mock drafts have the Seahawks taking Orakpo but that seems unlikely since they took Jackson last year. But who knows? Doesn't sound like Ruskell has interest in any o linemen.
Dukeshire @ 17:36 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
By the start of the '09 season? I'll take some of that.
BobbyK @ 17:43 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I have been spending the last few hours looking on the computer; seaching for the "elite" talents and, you're right, there are no "must have" type of guys (which sucks).

We could take Orakpo at #4, or he could slide out of the top 10. Ruskell may want a different dominant college senior; Jenkins, but he could end up falling another 5 or 6 spots if we don't take him. There's just nobody who seems be a "for sure" top 5 prospect except, in my opinion, Michael Oher.

If we had a need at OLB I would be fine with Curry, but we don't. If we allow Hill to leave this off-season I still wouldn't be okay with Curry because it would be stupid of the 'Hawks to let Hill go just so we could replace him with our #4 pick and then pay him more than Hill would have made. We wouldn't have improved. We'd replace one good LB with another potentiall good LB.
Dukeshire @ 17:59 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I know, it's tough right now to make sense of it all. I can't wait for the combine. I posted a few weeks ago that the only way drafting Curry makes sense to me is if they cut / traded Peterson, which I don't think is likely. Jenkins is interesting and T. Mays has been climbing mock boards, for what that's worth.
freedom_X @ 18:14 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
At this time, Stafford to me is the only top 10 pick QB prospect. I am prejudiced against guys who come from spread offenses (OK, T. Tech, Florida, Hawaii, etc.) Their huge numbers are a product of a scheme and it's hard to evaluate their actual skills (especially ability to read defenses, since spread offenses often have the QB pre-throwing to a spot no matter what, so no real decision-making involved.)

So I don't think Sam Bradford is going to be in that top 5 selection, at least right now. I suppose if he runs 4.5 and can throw the ball 75 yards on a rope, then that would change things.
BobbyK @ 18:36 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I don't necessarily see this happening, but you never know:

We take Jenkins with our #1.

Ruskell must understand that Russell is worthless and Grant is getting old. I know Jenkins is a CB, but he has great tackling skills too and some scouts say he'd make a great safety. Now, we all know CBs get paid more and are supposedly more important, but hear me out.

Ruskell wants Wilson and Jennings to keep playing CB (with Trufant). Those are his picks and he wants to see them be successful. In his defense, Wilson showed some skills and Jennings played hurt (ribs) and wasn't the same as the year before (except the part where he got b!tch slapped out of the way on jump balls).

Jenkins has uncanny skills to be a great FS and teams certainly could not cause mismatches by getting this "safety" one on one with a WR. That would be nice for a DC to have - a FS who could also cover (and be good in run support).

I was also thinking of an opposite scenario where Jenkins plays CB and Wilson plays FS. But Wilson is so small. He has a big heart and tries in run support and bump-and-run-coverage - but I just don't see him as strong enough. He certainly would be able to cover an amazing amount of ground as a FS though.

The more I think about it --- the more I won't get mad about Jenkins at #4 (although my first priority is Michael Oher if he's available or a trade down to the later portion of round 1 to get Duke; along with additional picks). No matter what, we must also get better in both trenches if we are to compete for a Super Bowl in '09 (along with good Hasselbeck health).
BSOly @ 19:08 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
In regards to freedom_X's remarks about it being easier to find small/fast players than big/fast players, I'd agree. However, we seem to have an abundance of small players with average speed.
Other that Wilson and Peterson, no one else stands out in that department.
1st round picks DE Jackson and CB Jennings lack the speed to ever be game-breakers at their position.
Out safeties are two of the slowest in the league.
Ruskell also likes smart players, and we probably have one of the "smartest" teams in the league... we're just too small and slow.
BobbyK @ 19:24 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
BSOly - that's funny about having a smart team; just too small and slow
Pilot @ 20:55 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Ruskell is indeed an idiot - someone who gets paid as much as he does should know the difference between an adjective and an adverb. Tatutpu is a good player and he played well (not good) last season. English 101. Sheeesh.
BobbyK @ 21:14 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
It's not what you know, it's who you know. If you get the "right" recommendations --- you can attain almost any job, no matter what type of idiot you are (in this sentence it's okay to use a linking verb to end it).

I think we have enough current talent to pull a major turnaround next season. However, we are not without major holes. And we need to keep Matt Hasselbeck healthy above all else (and remain healthy in general; a big IF). That obviously means Rob Sims cannot be a starter and we need to especially improve on the offensive line, in addition to improving our 3rd down defense.

A big concern I do have is that we went through an entire season without beating a "real" NFL team. Even with our injuries, we should have beat a real team. The Rams certainly aren't a real team. I think the 49ers are horrible. And even though the Jets were okay, and almost won their division, they were in their choke mode when we played them (losing the last month of the season).

We'll see how this plays out... I'm rooting for Ruskell... I really am... I just want to win a damn Super Bowl... Once...
BobbyK @ 21:24 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Ruskell has a chance to totally redeem himself this off-season...

He finally has a top first rounder. He needs to pick someone good, or be shown the door. Oher and Jenkins seem like the "safest" picks.

He also has an EARLY pick in the second round. Which is almost like a first rounder (only about 5 picks later than he took Kelly Jennings). If he can hit on that, that would almost make up for some of his first round busts (I said "almost"), as he'd have two guys early in the draft that were successful.

And then if LoJack can have a good second year... and Branch plays like he did the last month of the season by staying healthy... all of a sudden Ruskell looks like a genius again (as many had him pegged to be last off-season).

We'll see... As I said earlier, I'm rooting for him (not him, the Seahawks)...

Even though I didn't see a lot from a guy like LoJack, he's still got a chance to shine. Wouldn't it be nice if he had an '09 where he was solid against the run and had about 8-10 sacks? I could certainly live with that!
dhardw @ 21:25 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Does anyone know if the Hawks are officially one of the Senior Bowl coaching staffs?
Hawkfan1951 @ 21:43 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Dukeshire said part of what I was going to say, "wait for the combine." I would add also wait the Senior Bowl and the college "Pro Days." My case example is John Carlson. Didn't do that well at the combine due to being sick, and did much better at ND's Pro Day.

I'd STILL bet money (straight up... no odds!!) Ruskell takes a defensive guy with #4. A NT, DE/DT or Safety.

Go Hawks!
BobbyK @ 22:03 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
If it is Jenkins, I won't be mad. Hey, if we're going to beat the Cardinals, we better be able to cover Boldin/Fitzgerald/Breaston. Jenkins is a way to make sure those guys get covered better (in addition to fixing the pass rush). Plus, he's fast and not a midget.

In a perfect world, we get a great OL or DL... but the more I look/think... the more I think Jenkins is going to be the BPA when we select (and Oher has been picked by the Rams). Although I don't really want a CB --- I'd rather have a CB if he's truly the BPA.
bigmike04 @ 22:59 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I am learn to let go Tim Russell Hutchinson move. Some how their had to be miss comunioncation between hawks and hutch agent.

Thought I think this year 08 Draft has best OL coming out this year. If I were him get Michael Oher and put him at LG and let him learn from best LT out their and maybe we will all forget about Hutch.
BobbyK @ 23:18 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I haven't learned that yet. I should. It would be better for my mental health if I could. But when I see him still going to Pro Bowl after Pro Bowl and all of our clowns suck (besides Walt who was voted to ANOTHER Pro Bowl), it still p!sses me off that the greatest guard on the planet (and top 2-3 overall offensive linemen), which also happens to be our biggest need (OL)...

Must forget.

Must forget.

Must forget.
freedom_X @ 00:12 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
Lawrence Jackson isn't small. He's 6'5", 270 (same size as Justin Tuck and Michael Strahan, and only 1" shorter than Jared Allen) and has the frame to add 10-20 more lbs. He is athletic for an end, but not physical enough.

Kelly Jennings is above average height for a CB (5'11".) But's he's skinny and also not physical. His speed is excellent - 4.4 coming out of college. But it looks like he's lost all his confidence. A CB who loses his confidence will get beaten and look slow. He plays slow because of it.

Our safeties are indeed rather slow (though Grant was hurt most of the year - prior to this he was considered a very athletic and fast safety, but not a big hitter.) But both safeties have good size (both of them 6'2", 210.) I'm not sure Russell is as slow as all that, but he may be suffering from Jennings-its (lost confidence making him hesitate, making him react slow.)

If we translate "fast" as "mobile and agile", Lofa is "fast" (but small.) Same with Leroy Hill - very fast, but he's small too by NFL LB standards. Seattle's DT's are a bit short and small, but run well. Darryl Tapp is mobile, but he I would call small (short and not very massive.)

If we could put Darryl Tapp's head and heart into Jackson or Baraka Atkins' body, we'd have our Jared Allen or Justin Tuck.
freedom_X @ 00:36 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
Got to leave the cult of Hutchinson. He's not one of the top 2-3 linemen in the league. He could well be still the top guard, but I could argue Chris Snee has surpassed him. But I'd take at least 4 of the players at tackle over Hutchinson, and I think most GM's would do the same.

There may be something to the Ruskell "playing as a unit" theory to the OL. Kevin Mawae made All-Pro, but I don't think that guy found the Fountain of Youth or got coached up at age 37. You see how 3 Titan linemen all made 1st or 2nd team All-Pro? I don't think the light bulb clicked in all of a sudden for these guys. I think they got comfortable working with each other, got teamwork going, and made each other look good. Same thing happened to Seattle in 2005. It shows how highly Walter Jones is thought of - you rarely see one player recognized for excellence on a O-line where everyone else is mediocre to awful.

We only tend to think of O-linemen as doing these mano-o-mano battles due to the excellence of Jones, who is so gifted he almost never needs help. But if even Jones doesn't show teamwork in helping his fellow linemen, then they will look bad, when they expect their comrade to pick up a defender, it doesn't happen, and the defender makes the play.

This is why Chris Spencer is a huge disappointment - mentally, he makes too many mistakes, and that destroys the cohesion of the line. He probably has one last chance to prove he can master the blocking scheme. Because physically, Spencer could be the most gifted center in the league. But unless he has the instincts to back it up, his career will end a flop. He might have to move to guard.
bigmike04 @ 01:19 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
Hutch from Minnesota and probably wanted to go back so best thing for him. Thought have hard time find his replacement that why I think Michael Oher would be good choice. He can learn from Jones and take over for Jones.

Make decision if Keep Whale to let him fight it out for RG spot with Willis or him or Locklear if move Willis to RT.

Let womack go plain and simple.
AKhawkFan @ 11:04 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
ESPN nwc west blog released this little tid bit.

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2009/1/9/715842/tim-ruskell-speaks-much-sa
Hawkfan1951 @ 12:42 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
BobbyK, there's a difference between "forgetting" and just "letting go."

Forgetting is trying to put a cover over something and it becomes a landmine that can explode unexpectantly whenever something gets close to it. Besides, the unconscience mind NEVER forgets ANYTHING really.

Letting go is simply realizing that some things are beyond your control, and that's okay. It's simply time to put the issue beyond you... and move forward. Time heals all wounds... but only if you stop picking at the scabs.

It's time to stop letting this issue kick your butt! It's time to stand up, brush yourself off and move on Big Guy!! We felt your pain then too, and we moved on.

You'll feel better for it... really. =!)

Doctors Consultation Fee $2500. Please pay the receptionist at the door.

Go Hawks!
oceanic @ 13:35 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
If the defense had any kind of a pass rush on third down the secondary wouldn't look so bad. I really like Wilson and Babineaux but not as corners. Both play better facing the QB. Ruskell won't draft Jenkins because that would be admitting he made a mistake on Jennings and Wilson.

The guy Mora picks as DC will be more aggressive than Marshall. That will help.
freedom_X @ 14:04 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
I don't think that's the case. By that logic, there's no way Ruskell drafts Jackson last year because then he's be admitting "he made a mistake" drafting Daryl Tapp.

And I don't think Wilson was a mistake. It looks like, at worst, Wilson is a fast Kelly Herndon (gets burned, but comes back and makes big plays too.) Wilson has only 2 yrs experience so he can still get better.

Jennings is getting burned but not making any big plays to compensate. I guess people think Trufant had a good year and I'll go along with it, but I really didn't see that many big plays from Trufant.
nighthawk2 @ 17:23 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
"On the criticism that he took credit for winning seasons but then was silent during this season: “I don’t remember taking all the credit when we were winning. I’m all about team guys;..."

What a liar.

"Doesn't sound like Ruskell has interest in any o linemen."

That's because Ruskell is an idiot. He about broke his arm patting himself on the back for drafting 3 bums, Sims/Willis/Wrotto in the 4th round and says he doesn't like drafting offensive linemen in the early rounds (guess he forgot Walter Jones was 6th overall, but then he didn't draft Walter). Willis is less of bum than Sims and Wrotto but he's nothing special. Only a fool would pass on Oher at 4, but that's what Ruskell is. Orakpo isn't worth the 4th overall pick, which is probably why Numbskull would draft him. Oher is the obvious pick if he's there. Ruskell wouldn't know offensive line talent if it bit him in the ass.
BobbyK @ 21:31 - Saturday, January 10th, 2009 Email
Willis isn't a 4th round bum. He's a good player. He may not be elite in pass protection, but he is in run blocking. He's an above average player.

I doubt Oher is there at #4.

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