Originally posted by Rsrkshn:
You have no idea whether or not Allen is meddling or forced a football decision on Carroll. I'm speculating . . . absolutely not.
And your assessment of how Carroll and his GM "have been doing things", is also way off the mark. Making a play for Harvin sounds exactly like something Carroll would do. He made aggressive moves for Flynn last year and gave up good draftpicks to San Deigo for their 3rd string QB, Whitehurst. He's not afraid to make bold moves through trades if he thinks that it will help his team.
Harvin was one of those rare franchise quality players entering his prime who sometimes becomes available. This opportunity does not come around often. He was not a scrub who you could be dismissive about.
Hindsight is always 20/20. Now that Harvin is hurt, it's easy to be smug and criticize that trade. But at that time it was almost universally applauded. In fact, I didn't hear ANY credible critic saying that it was a bad move. Harvin was talked about as an MVP-type player before he was injured in 2012. He is young and entering his most productive years as a player. Never had been seriouly injured.
You make similar claims that it was a move the Niners would never make, when it was reported by reliable sources that the Niners were very interested and were the other team in the frame to acquire Harvin. Probably for a #1. The Seahawks shut them out with a better and more aggressive offer, including a higher #1. It was considered as something of a coup for them and even moved them ahead of the Niners in the power standing in many eyes.
Even first round draft picks, especially late round draft picks, are no sure thing. You mean to tell me that you would not trade AJ Jenkins for a healthy, uninjured Percy Harvin?! Come on!!
1. I have no idea? Yes, I have an idea. I've expressed it. It's presumptuous of you to assume anyone around here has no idea. You have an opinion and it differs from mine - that's all that's going on here.
2. I'm not "way off the mark" on how this is different from the way they've been doing things: From the Seattle Times:"As unorthodox as the Seahawks have been under Schneider, they have not taken big risks. Lynch cost Seattle only two picks in the back half of the draft, and Browner simply would have been cut if he hadn't been ready for the NFL. And as important as Wilson is to this team, if it hadn't worked, the Seahawks would only have been out a third-round pick. That's the same spot the team used a draft choice on eminently forgettable quarterback David Greene in 2005.
The acquisition of Harvin is different."
3. The idea that this was a risky move is not unique at all. Lots of analysts have characterized it as "high risk for a potential high reward." This Seattle Times story is titled "This is a High Risk, High Reward Move for the Seahawks." Analysts at virtually every sports media outlet have pointed out that Harvin has a history of injuries and questionable character. Everyone knows he's a great player. If you'd like to argue that he doesn't have questionable character, you're on thin ice. He's had problems on every single team he's been on since high school. He's attempted to strangle a coach. He's been a disruptive presence in locker rooms. This is all common knowledge so I'm not sure why you're pretending this isn't an issue.
4. Again, this is just a question of opinion, but I don't think Harbaalke EVER seriously would have considered giving up draft choices and a $67 million contract for a player like this. What I think is that they did what teams often do especially to division rivals - feigned interest to drive up the perceived value and force Seattle to make the move. And, if it was such a "coup" for them, why did Vegas still have the Niners at the best odds for winning the Super Bowl after the Harvin deal was consummated.
5. I don't happen to agree that Harvin is "one of those rare franchise players." He had 89 yards and no receptions in his game against the Niners last year and that was not the Niner defense's best games. That's not what I call a "game changer." He's a very fast, quick slot receiver who also doubles as a good KO returner and sometimes carries the ball. If you think that's worth $67 million and three or four draft picks, you're entitled to your opinion.
6. Nobody is being smug. I criticized the trade long before he had this injury. I was straightforward in my opinion that I thought the Seahawks were risking far too much for a dynamic slot receiver, especially one with questionable character and a history of injury. I hope he doesn't need surgery and plays this year. I don't want any excuses from Seahawks fans. I'm happy to give the Seahawks 89 yards and no touchdowns when they have to mortgage their future, make it harder to sign their existing free agents and have a harder cap situation for years to come. That's fine with me.
7. And finally, I'm not sure why you are such an avid Harvin fan, but to say the trade was "almost universally applauded" borders on delusional. Even John Madden, in his weekly radio spot here in the Bay Area, characterized it as a questionable move. A number of ESPN and NFL.com analysts characterized it as a departure from Seattle's normal SOP and a risky move.
[ Edited by GNielsen on Jul 28, 2013 at 3:48 PM ]