There are 118 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Seattle's 2014 draft

  • Giedi
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,721
Originally posted by Existence:
You know you just described the Raider's draft philosophy for the past twenty years, right?

I wouldn't be so sanguine, Raiders have 3 superbowls in their closet.
  • Giedi
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,721
Originally posted by LisaTwelve:
No, I didn't know that.
If so, then I guess having a philosophy and implementing / executing it can be two different things


some other Hawks draft tidbits . . .
http://mynorthwest.com/292/2519984/What-we-learned-from-the-Seahawks-2014-draft

I Read the article. Gus is really gone. Looks like Dan Quinns team now. Dan likes small fast defensive dudes. I think he coaches differently from Gus. It remains to be seen whether or not a smaller Seadderall defense is a *better* Seadderal defense. I know our defense sucked when he was coaching the 49er D line. Seadderall's defense was great against the pass last year but dropped a bit on the run, I look forward to it going mid-teir this season. Your pass defense will still be good though, I don't doubt that one bit.
Originally posted by Jcool:
2012 NFL Draft Grades: Ranking Teams That Failed on Draft Day

No. 1: Seattle Seahawks

After one of the worst picks in the first round I can ever remember, the Seattle Seahawks didn't draft any positions of need or draft for the future.

Pete Carroll is proving why he didn't make it in the NFL the first time. Not only was Bruce Irvin a reach at No. 15, the Seahawks proved they were oblivious to their madness by celebrating their selection.

As if the day wasn't bad enough, Seattle selecting Russell Wilson, a QB that doesn't fit their offense at all, was by far the worst move of the draft. With the two worst moves of the draft, Seattle is the only team that received an F on draft day.

Grade: F

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1165320-2012-nfl-draft-grades-power-ranking-teams-that-failed-on-draft-day

What is the point in showing this? Besides Wilson and Wagner, the others are very average. Their first round pick (Irvin) had a good 1st season, but had to move to a new position just to get on the field. For a pass rusher, hes had 10 sacks in 2 seasons. Yawn. Their 4th round pick, Turbin, has 618 yards. By comparison, Kendall Hunter (our own 4th round RB) has double that in only 9 more games. Turbin=Yawn. Howard did nothing for them, Toomey nothing, Lane is an depth player, Guy did nothing, they were smart and moved Sweezy to offensive line not bad for a 7th rounder, and Scruggs did nothing. So 2 (Wagner/Wilson)out of 10 were good, 2 are average (Sweezy/Irvin), and 1 is depth (Lane). Not that impressive.
[ Edited by Travisty13 on May 12, 2014 at 2:06 PM ]
Originally posted by Giedi:
I wouldn't be so sanguine, Raiders have 3 superbowls in their closet.

The Raiders had some success with that philosophy, no doubt - but mostly before scheme and technique became as important (if not more important) than freakish athletic ability.

My point is that there is nothing particularly novel or special about that approach.

Oh - and the last Raider's SB was well over 20 years ago...
I thought they did alright other than the justin britt pick in round 2, that was kind of a head scratcher they must really like the guy
Seattle knows what Seattle likes and to be honest it is dumb to grade a draft because you don't know what a team hopes to accomplish going into the draft, nor are you talking to these kids, or their coaches, or their parents/family/friends. If a guy is an absolute stud but has a personality that you know will not fit in your locker room i'd imagine it'd be hard to draft him knowing he has little chance to be a member of the team.

I mean if Jordan Mathews, Marqise Lee and Davante Adams aren't willing to take ped's then maybe they're just not Seadderall material....

[ Edited by WINiner on May 12, 2014 at 3:48 PM ]
I didn't like Richardson, so was happy to see Seattle take him. Of course, nobody knows for sure if it's a good draft or not. We'll find out.
  • Giedi
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,721
Originally posted by Existence:
The Raiders had some success with that philosophy, no doubt - but mostly before scheme and technique became as important (if not more important) than freakish athletic ability.

My point is that there is nothing particularly novel or special about that approach.

Oh - and the last Raider's SB was well over 20 years ago...
The 49er defenses during the dynasty years were undersized but fast. Our current defense sports one of the fastest linebacking corps in the NFL. No the last raider super bowl was in 2000, they just didn't win it. The raider defensive philosophy is that speed kills. It's valid now as it was back then - in my opinion. Seaderall's head coach was a 49er defensive coach. You have to remember that. Walsh coached
with the Raiders and a lot of what Al did defensively is what Walsh and Seifert did with us during the dynasty years. Don't make the mistake of underestimating Seadderalls defense or how they are building it.
Originally posted by theduke85:
I'm not sure. Most evaluations of their draft are pretty lukewarm.

Honestly though, Seattle seems to draft somewhat unconventially. If you go back and look at the immediate grades given out after some of their drafts a couple years ago, they were heavily panned by critics. Those drafts went on to produce guys like Russell Wilson, Bobby Wagner, Richard Sherman, etc...

The picks of R Wilson and Bobby Wagner were not criticized by any media talking heads. They loved those picks. But they bashed the James Carpenter (1st) and Bruce Irvin (1st) picks and so far, they have been right.
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by theduke85:
I'm not sure. Most evaluations of their draft are pretty lukewarm.

Honestly though, Seattle seems to draft somewhat unconventially. If you go back and look at the immediate grades given out after some of their drafts a couple years ago, they were heavily panned by critics. Those drafts went on to produce guys like Russell Wilson, Bobby Wagner, Richard Sherman, etc...

The picks of R Wilson and Bobby Wagner were not criticized by any media talking heads. They loved those picks. But they bashed the James Carpenter (1st) and Bruce Irvin (1st) picks and so far, they have been right.

This is true.
Originally posted by Giedi:
The 49er defenses during the dynasty years were undersized but fast. Our current defense sports one of the fastest linebacking corps in the NFL. No the last raider super bowl was in 2000, they just didn't win it. The raider defensive philosophy is that speed kills. It's valid now as it was back then - in my opinion. Seaderall's head coach was a 49er defensive coach. You have to remember that. Walsh coached
with the Raiders and a lot of what Al did defensively is what Walsh and Seifert did with us during the dynasty years. Don't make the mistake of underestimating Seadderalls defense or how they are building it.

Not bashing -- they've been the best in football. Again I'm just saying that there isn't anything especially new or novel about the approach. It's not like Seattle has some great secret that others haven't yet discovered.

And of course, I meant last super bowl win was over 20 years ago...
Originally posted by kronik:
The picks of R Wilson and Bobby Wagner were not criticized by any media talking heads. They loved those picks. But they bashed the James Carpenter (1st) and Bruce Irvin (1st) picks and so far, they have been right.

au contraire . . .

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24433089/russell-wilson-remembers-people-ripping-seahawks-2012-draft-class

No. 1: Seattle Seahawks
After one of the worst picks in the first round I can ever remember, the Seattle Seahawks didn't draft any positions of need or draft for the future.

Pete Carroll is proving why he didn't make it in the NFL the first time. Not only was Bruce Irvin a reach at No. 15, the Seahawks proved they were oblivious to their madness by celebrating their selection.

As if the day wasn't bad enough, Seattle selecting Russell Wilson, a QB that doesn't fit their offense at all, was by far the worst move of the draft. With the two worst moves of the draft, Seattle is the only team that received an F on draft day.

Grade: F

NO. 75: SEAHAWKS SELECT: RUSSELL WILSON, QB, WISCONSINGRADE
Why does Seattle take him? They paid Matt Flynn and have two others. Strange pick.D
[ Edited by LisaTwelve on May 12, 2014 at 5:02 PM ]
Originally posted by LisaTwelve:
au contraire . . .

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24433089/russell-wilson-remembers-people-ripping-seahawks-2012-draft-class

No. 1: Seattle Seahawks
After one of the worst picks in the first round I can ever remember, the Seattle Seahawks didn't draft any positions of need or draft for the future.

Pete Carroll is proving why he didn't make it in the NFL the first time. Not only was Bruce Irvin a reach at No. 15, the Seahawks proved they were oblivious to their madness by celebrating their selection.

As if the day wasn't bad enough, Seattle selecting Russell Wilson, a QB that doesn't fit their offense at all, was by far the worst move of the draft. With the two worst moves of the draft, Seattle is the only team that received an F on draft day.

Grade: F

NO. 75: SEAHAWKS SELECT: RUSSELL WILSON, QB, WISCONSINGRADE
Why does Seattle take him? They paid Matt Flynn and have two others. Strange pick.D

People weren't really criticizing the player as much as why Seattle would have given a farkload of money to Flynn and then drafted a QB so early immediately after. Kiper was praising Wilson the whole time, saying he would have been a Top 10 player had he not been a manlet quarterback.
Seattle is going through what all Superbowl teams do, a s**tty post-SB offseason. -This happened to the Saints, Giants, and Ravens; crappy draft positioning + contracts to be paid in full (which cripple the SB depth). I think most 'real' Hawks fans know they're probably not going all the way again (probably not even making the playoffs), but they're not gonna admit that (and who could blame them).
Originally posted by SnakePlissken:
Seattle is going through what all Superbowl teams do, a s**tty post-SB offseason. -This happened to the Saints, Giants, and Ravens; crappy draft positioning + contracts to be paid in full (which cripple the SB depth). I think most 'real' Hawks fans know they're probably not going all the way again (probably not even making the playoffs), but they're not gonna admit that (and who could blame them).

As far as I'm concerned, the road to the Superbowl still goes through Seattle, they're the champs until someone knocks them off and I see the 49ers and the Seahawks as being substantially better than everyone else in the NFC.