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?
  • beerBoy2 Email
  • bassnw Email
  • hayleybailey Email
  • mdawg2110 Email
  • bigwavedave Email
  • Olbird Email
  • mocarob Email
  • Guest Users: 647
Seahawks Insider
Thursday, January 8th, 2009
Posted by Eric Williams @ 03:20:10 pm

Seattle team president and general manager Tim Ruskell took questions from reporters this afternoon at the team's practice facility. Ruskell was honest in addressing a wide range of topics during the 45-minute conversation. I'll offer a couple of tidbits here and follow up later with the full transcription of the conversation.

Ruskell said keeping Leroy Hill is a high priority, and will consider all options in keeping the free agent linebacker, including the franchise tag.

Ruskell characterized the transition from last season to next season as more of a tweaking than an overhaul, and believes Seattle has the majority of the talent in place to compete for an NFL title. Like Holmgren, he said the main reason for the team's slide in 2008 was the rash of injuries the Seahawks experienced. However, he said during exit interviews that the players said they also share the blame for the team's demise, and understand that injuries weren't the only issue.

But Ruskell believes with an attitude change and renewed enthusiasm, along with an infusion of young talent, Seattle could be right in the thick of things again, similar to what happened with Miami and Atlanta this season.

[More:]

Matt Hasselbeck is the team's quarterback, and they are not considering trading him. They liked what Seneca Wallace did as well, and would like to keep them both. But Hasselbeck is the guy.

Olindo Mare will be back in 2009. But Brandon Coutu may be as well. Ruskell said they kept Coutu around as security because of how well he performed during the preseason and because of Mare's recent injury history. But they were more than happy with Mare's performance. However, they wanted to protect their draft pick in Coutu.

Ruskell said the only coaching change they had so far is the Greg Knapp hiring, and that the process could play out through the end of January. The rest of the assistant coaches are being considered, except for assistant special teams coach John Jamison and tight ends coach Jim Lind, who both retired.

Offensive line coach Mike Solari will be back, Ruskell said. And offensive coordinator Gil Haskell may be considered for another assistant coaching position, or as a consultant.

Ruskell said the team's scouting department has been infused with energy by having the No 4 overall pick. Usually those guys are looking at players who they will pick later in the draft, but now they get a chance to evaluate some of the top players. Ruskell said he'd rather be drafting 32nd overall, because that means you've won the Super Bowl.

On his strategy, he said all options are open for the No. 4 pick, but that he doesn't necessarily like drafting offensive lineman that early because he believes he can get a talented guy later in the draft and the success of an offensive line has more to do with the cohesion of the entire group. He pointed to guys like Ray Willis, Rob Sims and Mansfield Wrotto, all guys Seattle drafted in the fourth round.

Ruskell said he believes the team has above-average talent at offensive line and good depth after watching the backup perform admirably at the end of the season, further strengthened the idea the team might look elsewhere with the No. 4 pick.

He also said he doesn't want to get caught in the same predicament the team experienced this season with the rash of injuries the team experienced at receiver and not having enough depth at the position.

Ruskell said bringing in Keary Colbert might have been a desperate move to shore up the receiving corps and maybe was unfair to Colbert to bring in him and expect him to perform at a high level. However, he believes if the Seahawks want to they can get back another pick for the 5th rounder they lost in the trade to Denver, and that second-day picks are easier to make deals for.

Ruskell also said he believes Seattle is in a good position financially, and will not be handcuffed to make the moves they want to, both in free agency and the draft, to improve the team during the offseason.

That's all for now. I'll have more later.

Categories: Interviews 59 comments

COMMENTS:

BobbyK @ 15:27 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I'm glad they are keeping Solari.

And I feel the same as Ruskell... there is talent on this team and there's no reason we can't do what Atlanta and Miami did. He just needs to have a good FA period followed by a good draft.
BobbyK @ 15:31 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
If drafting another Rob Sims in the 4th round is in Ruskell's mind, I think he will in fact have lost his mind.

And I don't want to be an Atlanta or Miami... they were one and done in the play-offs. I had to rephrase that a little. We have more talent than either of those two teams did at this time last year.
Dukeshire @ 15:34 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
He speaks. A few thoughts; I like that he singled out HIll as a high priority. I've always thought he was the most important free agent. And if they are perhaps looking elsewhere besides o line at #4 the I would think that bodes well for resigning Willis as well. What is it that the players understand about sharing blame for the teams demise? Attitude? Focus? Effort? Preparation? Execution? Or was it something more, like they didn't give Holmgren what he asked of them because they knew Mora was the de facto head coach? And lastly, thank you for putting the Hasselbeck non sense to rest.
redneckhawk @ 15:35 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Why am I getting the feeling he is going to screw up the #4 pick? Why do you hate OL???
Dukeshire @ 15:35 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Yeah, singling out Sims as the type of player you can get in the 4th round is crazy. That is an argument for taking a lineman earlier.
QB_Sneak @ 15:39 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
If I'm reading between the lines correctly, sounds like they want Crabtree with the 4th pick.
BobbyK @ 15:43 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I think Ruskell is doing what any GM would do... not giving you an answer as to what they want with the 4th pick... As a fan, I want to know, but I understand he can't come out and say "We'd really to draft Sam Bradford." Or whoever. I don't think even those guys know who they want yet.
War_Hawk @ 15:47 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Smoke and Mirrors.

You don't expect him to tip his hand do you? Ruskell likes to draft seniors from big schools in the first round, I wonder if he sticks with that strategy picking this high? That would be the likes of Aaron Curry (Wake Forest) Michael Oher (Ole Miss), Malcolm Jenkins (Ohio St), Eugene Monroe (Virginia), Brian Orakpo (Texas)
Dirtdawg @ 15:49 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
is there video of ruskell or he will keep hiding from the 12th man
jammer @ 15:51 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Sneak:

Don't believe a word of what any GM says at this time of year about the draft because they wouldn't tell anyone straight up what they were really going to do anyway. Most of what they say about the draft choice is misdirection and BS until the pick is actually made.

This could mean anything and reading between the lines is a mistake but I'd infer the same as you or conclude he really wants to take a T but others don't or he doesn't want to telegraph his intentions.

So far his Oline draft choices have been pretty awful so so I'd hope we fix the OLine with a FA or two.
Dukeshire @ 15:55 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
To be honest, everything that has been happening is what I expected. I assumed they would keep Solari, I'm glad. As far as free agents go, I'm interested to see what they do with Weaver. Knapp doesn't use fullbacks to carry the ball much. I wonder how he now factors into their plans.

Dukeshire @ 15:56 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
His FA signings haven't been stellar either. Paging Mike Wahle.
JoeHawk51 @ 16:00 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
They may have some idea as to who thay may want, but until all the underclassmen declair and the combine is over, they do not have all the info you should require to spend the money for a fourth overall pick.

My dream would be for us to trade down twice. We could end up with two more 2nd rounders and still pick ahead of last years 1st round about 20-23rd. A couple of role players are far better than a single "maybe stud".

That said, QB Sneak is right, picking today it would be Crabtree in blue and green.
JKEOLA @ 16:04 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Look around the league...a lot of quality offensive lineman come in later rounds. Drafting for impact should be the focus. Who that player is will be a closely guarded secret as always but depending upon what happens during FA period that choice will become clearer. Trading down to pick up additional picks is an option as depth is important.
Dukeshire @ 16:05 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Apparently Ruskell also said that Gil Haskell may return in an advisory role. I hope that happens. I think that would help smooth the transition between Matt and Knapp.
BobbyK @ 16:13 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I just had a thought (I know, kind of scary)...

It sounds like Ruskell really wants to resign Hill (which is good).

We brought that 3-4 guy in for an interview for the defensive coordinator position.

If you want an impact player in the draft, linebacker is usually the way to go.

We could run a 3-4 defense next year.

Hill was an ILB his fair share of time at Clemson, and I've always thought he'd make a good inside linebacker in a 3-4.

Ruskell could draft Aaron Curry and put him at OLB.

That would be a GOOD group of LBs with JP and Tatupu.

What would that mean for our DL? I don't know exactly.

3-4 DL aren't glamorous jobs - but we may have a few guys who would fit the bill.

Wherever you put Mebane, I see him being solid. I know he's not 350lbs, but I think he'd be a fine NT. Red Bryant would be a good 320lb role player at NT.

I do not see Lawrence Jackson as a future Osi Umenyiora, but I think he could develop into a solid DE in a 3-4. He's not undersized. Granted, he's not a 300lb brute either. DEs in 3-4 defenses aren't expected to get double digit sacks per year.

Just a thought, but this isn't anything I'm opposed to. That would be a great group of LBs.
airbags @ 16:18 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email

i'm glad to see that matty's coming back. i was getting tired of the "trade matt" shenanigans.

War_Hawk @ 16:18 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
BobbyK,

I actually have been thinking about that too. That would be a dominent group of LB's!
Dukeshire @ 16:21 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
The 3-4 starts with a NT, and until there is definitive answer to that, the switch will not happen. It just seems so far fetched in every way. No one that Ruskell has signed or drafted have skills associated with a 3-4. I don't mean to shoot it down but, I'm shooting it down. Even if Jackson was a Osi clone, the Giants run a 4-3 so it wouldn't mater.
Anniee882000 @ 16:23 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I, too, was sick of the "trade Matt" crap and am glad Ruskell put that to bed. Imagine what it must be like for Matt and his family to read this crap day in and day out after everything he's done for our team.

I predict Matt to have another pro bowl year. And I don't mean a Favre (picked only cause you're popular) type pro bowl year.
firejimmoradotcom @ 16:30 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
The second sentence of this post is unknowable, unprovable, and inappropriate.
edstang45 @ 16:31 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Hey guys, give Ruskell a break. Most of you would blast any GM who would be in there. I for one like the guy, he runs on character, He does what he thinks will help this Team and so far he's done great!! It's always a crap shoot when you draft young guys. And another one when you get established Vets as FA's. We had never been on the threshold of a Super Champion until 05, over the last 5 years or so we'vr been in the mix!! We still are, get behind our team and quit blasting these guys for the sake of blasting. Do any of you really think you could match their skill!!!
Dukeshire @ 16:34 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Saying that he was honest? lol
rodman @ 16:35 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009
Who is Casey Bradley?

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/01/national-football-post-tavern-talk-93/
descari @ 16:35 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
War_Hawk totally agree with the Seniors from big schools thesis. I'd also like to add that consecutive starts without injuries is big for Ruskell. Also like any NFL GM he has an ego and a large one, so I kind of think that precludes him from drafting a position that he has recently invested big dollars or high draft picks in. For all of those reasons I just can't see him drafting Crabtree #4.
twocolorcrayon @ 16:35 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
That'd be a lot of money tied up in Tatupu, Hill, JP, and Aaron Curry BobbyK! But DANG, it'd be pretty crazy to see those 4 guys running around making plays. I still hope we draft Crabtree once is all is said and done, I've seen the guy play, and his numbers don't lie. You can say he's numbers are inflated because of the system... well, cut those numbers in half, and those are still stud numbers... Just watch videos of him, look at his explosiveness and ability to get open. Plus he has good size and is strong so he'll be able to block. It'd open up the game for Branch and Burleson too, especially Carlson. Crabtree is the real deal and isn't a risk imo, he's pure stud. I know it's a longshot, but GOD I would love for them to sign Haynesworth, but it'd never happen. Imagine getting Haynes... resigning Hill, and maybe trading down to get Mays. That would make our defense scary, he'd literally make everyone on that defense better. There's only 3 guys I can get excited about drafting, that's Crabtree, Mays, and Oher.
Dukeshire @ 16:41 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
rodman - He is the Bucs linebacker coach who came in for an interview day before last. This is the second place I have read that, but I don't trust either source.
BobbyK @ 16:47 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
If Jackson WAS an Osi clone, then it would be dumb to talk about switching to a 3-4, as we'd have that superstar pass rushing DE. We don't currently have that. You don't take DEs like Osi and make them do dirty work in a 3-4. You put them in a 4-3 and let them rush the passer. I think you misinterpreted me. LoJack seems like he may have the skills to be a decent 3-4 DE, but doesn't seem like a potential star DE in a 4-3.

It doesn't matter who you have as DBs in a 3-4 or 4-3 defense.

We have the LBs to excel in a 3-4 (by drafting Curry) or 4-3.

Tapp certainly wouldn't be a good fit as DE in a 3-4 though. Same for Kerney. But I think Mebane would be fine as a very good dirty work DE type or even a good job at DT. He stuffs plays and can get some penetration. If anything, I think he would make a better DL in a 3-4 than he would in a 4-3 and I already think he's a very good player.

I'm not saying I support it, I'm just saying that I wonder about it.

BobbyK @ 16:52 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
That would be a lot of money at a specific position. Oh well. At least it would be good.
twocolorcrayon @ 16:58 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I know we have problems on defense, but honestly, I wish we could draft Crabtree at 4 and then that Shaun Greene in the 2nd round. That is a stud RB right there. It's not like he was in the WAC and rushed over a 100 yards every game... I know it won't happen, I just really like that RB. I wonder if Duke Robinson dominates his part of the trenches in a few moments here... ;)
moeflo @ 17:01 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I agree Annie.
My day just got that much better after reading that from the man himself.
I can take a fresh breath of air now and watch the game tonight in peace.

Please win Oklahoma.
And Duke you're right (from earlier) I'm sick of these analysts on the Gator train. Did you see one of them put on the gator head? Ridiculous.
descari @ 17:03 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Ruskell really could regain credibility by getting Duke Robinson and an extra 2nd round pick for #4 overall. Of course trading down twice would be icing on the cake.
Dukeshire @ 17:05 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I knew what you meant, I said that for effect.
"It doesn't matter who you have as DBs in a 3-4 or 4-3 defense." I don't know that I agree with that. The scheme a D runs has everything to do with the type of players they have, including CB.
Dukeshire @ 17:08 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
No, I got burned out on the pregame coverage a couple of hours ago.
descari @ 17:09 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I'd really love to see Ruskell's biggest gaffe finally put to bed and massively improved interior line play would be awesome to boot. It seems like he's pretty happy with Rob Sims and Mike Wahle though... This Ruskell character is a mystery wrapped in enigma.
hawks31 @ 17:13 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
edstang45,

A GM is graded on how the team develops and improves. Since 05, we have steadily gone down hill. He brought in small players, old FA, and didn't put a fight to keep some our lineman. I don't know how one couldn't be critical of him. Of course "we" couldn't do better, we don't do it for a living. There are plenty of people in the NFL who do. Make comparisons to them and not the public.
moeflo @ 17:17 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Lucky man you.
It wasn't a pretty sight.

Here we go! And Oklahoma gets the ball first. :)
oceanic @ 17:26 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
It scares me that Ruskell thinks the Hawks have above average talent on the O line. They have been bad for three years running. No wonder thay can't run the ball. No wonder Matt has been so badly beat up. Ruskell can't see that? But I like keeping Solari.
moeflo @ 17:49 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Hmm Bobbyk I'm not liking your boy Duke Robinson right now.

Ahh!
moo @ 17:52 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Eric, thanks for the great post.

I'm thrilled that we're keeping Solari. I consider him currently the most important member of Holmgren's staff left.

I agree with keeping Mare; he had an almost perfect season. But how long can we carry 2 kickers? It would be convenient for Coutu to be "injured" during spring training & placed in ir for all of 2007.

Glad they hope/plan to keep Hill. I'd also like to see Weaver stay, & while it's unlikely, we're so thin at WR that working something out with Engram would sure be nice.
moo @ 17:52 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
Oops, "2007" should have read "2009".
BobbyK @ 18:09 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
There's a difference in DBs from a 4-3 defense to a 4-3 defense. No typo on the 4-3.

Does anyone know how much Knapp has used his FB in the past?
War_Hawk @ 18:13 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
"Does anyone know how much Knapp has used his FB in the past? "

It looks like Knapp doesn't use a Fullback :( http://www.fieldgulls.com/2009/1/7/711707/seahawks-hire-greg-knapp-a
BobbyK @ 18:57 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
War_Hawk,
Thank you very much!
War_Hawk @ 19:24 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
No problem, I remembered reading it.
moo @ 19:29 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
That's what we get for hiring a Raider............

Weaver is the best back on the team.
CowboysP @ 19:38 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
I just don't know what the advantage is to Ruskell tipping his hand that he would very possibly franchise Hill.

Doesn't that just tell Hill his value is the average of the Top 5 salaries for LB's in the NFL?

I would have just held that thought to myself, unless he isn't really serious.
hawkfaninoklahoma @ 20:39 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
hill is'nt even top 10 LB, mark my words he gets hurt again this ytear missing even more time.
freedom_X @ 21:23 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
The "franchise" comment is, IMHO, just Ruskell sending a signal that they're not letting Hill go for nothing. If Ruskell really believed Hill had the value of a franchise player, he'd have gotten him signed up months ago. It wouldn't have taken franchise money to get Hill signed to a long term contract 8 months ago.

This way, he either gets another team to trade for Hill, or he gets one more year out of Hill (at a high price, but it's only 1 year.)

It's not a case where Hill had a knockout year that raised his value even higher than before (i.e. like Albert Haynesworth 2 years ago.) I'd say Hill had a solid year, but sub-par by his standards (just his fellow linebackers.) So that's I think this is principally a "we aren't letting him go for free" statement.
Hawkfan1951 @ 22:37 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
As War_Hawk and jammer said, "smoking mirrors" and "Don't believe a word of what any GM says at this time of year..."

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was Holmgren and/or Ruskell having an interview several years back (at the Combine?) with Bob Costas(?) saying basically the same thing... "you can't believe a word GM's say at this time of year. They can't telegraph their hands to the other teams. The NFL is a small fraternity with 32 teams and it isn't that hard to know what each teams' needs are and what they're after, so we obfuscate (it was the word obfuscate that stuck in my mind) so as to get as much of an edge as possible."

As has been said above, it will be an interesting Free Agency again, and as has been said above, I still think the O line guys need help. I can't believe Ruskell said that about "O"linemen! "Just another Guard" again!?!?! Unreal!

Go Hawks!
Osiris33 @ 23:18 - Thursday, January 8th, 2009 Email
http://seahawkboys.blogspot.com/
I am not in favor of trading Matt. They should just cut the guy and move on.

This interview is alarming, because it shows me Ruskell is delusional. This team is miles away from a playoff run, much less a Super Bowl. And Michael Oher is better than Willis, Sims and Wrotto.

All put together.

You have to get vaule for a pick this high, and Oher is it. Crabtree is riskier and I love Taylor Mayes, but 4th overall?

We'll see what he comes up with, besides placing his career in the hands of a 34 year old QB with a bulging disk in his back and a 57.8 passer rating.

CowboysP @ 06:09 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
"This team is miles away from a playoff run, much less a Super Bowl".

Yes. But those words sell tickets and jerseys, and keeps the fan base interested.
CowboysP @ 06:12 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email

"This team is miles away from a playoff run, much less a Super Bowl".

Yes. But those words sell tickets and jerseys, and keeps the fan base interested.
oceanic @ 06:32 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
There will be several good OLBs available in free agency and the draft. Considering Hill's injury history the Hawks need to be careful not to over pay him.

A plus for Ruskell, the suddenly available Pac Man will not be a Seahawk.
NickLicatasucks @ 10:27 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
Ruskell isn't dumb enough to make the same mistake twice. Odds are they'll do a similar strategy as with Trufant, except Hill isn't as good as Trufant. Its interesting to see what other teams are willing to pay Leroy Hill. I love his attitude and the badassness he brings to the field. Team is not as tough without him.

Hill gets hurt every year and misses games. How replaceable is he? That is the question. I think he's more replaceable than the other two linebackers we have. Hate to say it...but he's no Lance Briggs.
mister andersen @ 12:53 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
I agree, take an impact player in the 1st round and use the high later picks for OL and defense. Crabtree, Moreno, Beanie?

I have heard this could be a bretty good draft for WR, so maybe we can pick up a couple of them and say goodbye to Mr Taylor and Mr Kent.
freedom_X @ 13:00 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
If they are going to be more run-oriented then a running back makes sense. What happens to Maurice Morris may be an indicator. If they want to draft a RB #1 or #2, Morris will not be back. If they resign Morris, scratch a high round RB off the list, and it will indicate that the offense will still lean more towards passing overall, even if they emphasize the run more.
nighthawk2 @ 15:56 - Friday, January 9th, 2009 Email
"However, they wanted to protect their draft pick in Coutu."

Yeah, because 7th round kickers are soooo hard to replace. (rolls eyes)

"Ruskell isn't dumb enough to make the same mistake twice."

Yes he is. Drafts a bum as a guard in Sims, drafts a bum as a guard in Wrotto. Both in the 4th. Let's Hutchinson get away in FA, causes a problems we still haven't fixed. Sends Darche away in FA, causes problems we still haven't fixed. Ruskell sucks.
BobbyK @ 22:32 - Monday, January 12th, 2009 Email
I don't think Wrotto is a bum. I certainly don't think he's Hutch though!!! I think Sims is worse than 349 bums.

The 7th round kicker is tough to get back (more eye rolls)... And he never kicks it to the end zone like Mare...

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