Bobby Wagner vs. Jordyn Brooks?

[Hawkspeed]

I am hoping that LB Patrick Queen will follow coach Macdonald to the Seahawks.

Bush should be sent packing...But, we do have two good linebackers in Wagner and Brooks. Brooks still has promise, but I am also leaning towards keeping Bobby Wagner, despite his "loss of a step" and possible liability in pass coverage. Especially in this "transition season", Bobby could bring stability to the locker room and be a "coach on the field".

Here’s a look at how both of them rank on PFF’s list and their grades from the 2023 season.
https://seahawkswire.usatoday.com/lists/seahawks-players-on-pff-top-free-agents-list-2024/

Bobby wins in that comparison...

 

[bigcc]

Bobby's decline is heavily overstated here.

I'll take Bobby as as a 2 down lb over brooks for 3 all day.

Brooks is not very good at anything really, I truly don't get the fascination and I have to wonder how many brooks hype men were also also carrying water for bum ass Barton.

EDIT: I'd be happy keeping brooks at a low cost, I didn't mean to imply that he was even remotely as worthless as Barton, I just think he'll probably be too expensive

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

I’m actually in favor of keeping Bush over the other two but as a WLB and that he’ll likely be the cheapest of the 3. I feel like MM really values coverage ability from his 2nd level units (as well as edge players) and Bush was okay.

But really it all depends on market value if you can get all three or at least 2 of 3 back around $4-5m per, then I see why not, that’s a good deal. However, I can see Bush pushing $4-5, Bobby settling for $6-8, and Brooks potentially getting $8-10, maybe upwards $12m.

If Mac can convince Queen to come aboard at like $10-12m, I’d be all on that.


However, doing some research sporttrac estimates Queen’s market value around $18m per, Brooks at $11m per. Wagner and Bush aren’t listed (yet?).

My darkhorse candidate though is Bills FA LBer, Tyrel Dodson, 25 years old, 6’0, 237, market value is listed around $5m per through sporttrac. Dads a Bills fan so got to see a lot of their games and he stepped up like a warrior for a defense that was consistently decimated with injuries. He looked like the best player on their D in a lot of games.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Bobby and Brooks are not fits for MM's system. This system asks a lot of LBers when it comes to coverage and it's a great deal more complex than Carroll's system. Wagner is not good at coverage in this point of his career and Brooks is even worse in that regard. I think he made some progress this year, but on the same hand he struggled at times and was a straight up liability in coverage. I suspect LB and safety are going to be some of the biggest targets going into the NFL draft.

 

[bigcc]

I’m actually in favor of keeping Bush over the other two but as a WLB and that he’ll likely be the cheapest of the 3. I feel like MM really values coverage ability from his 2nd level units (as well as edge players) and Bush was okay.

But really it all depends on market value if you can get all three or at least 2 of 3 back around $4-5m per, then I see why not, that’s a good deal. However, I can see Bush pushing $4-5, Bobby settling for $6-8, and Brooks potentially getting $8-10, maybe upwards $12m.

If Mac can convince Queen to come aboard at like $10-12m, I’d be all on that.


However, doing some research sporttrac estimates Queen’s market value around $18m per, Brooks at $11m per. Wagner and Bush aren’t listed (yet?).

My darkhorse candidate though is Bills FA LBer, Tyrel Dodson, 25 years old, 6’0, 237, market value is listed around $5m per through sporttrac. Dads a Bills fan so got to see a lot of their games and he stepped up like a warrior for a defense that was consistently decimated with injuries.

https://x.com/Patrickqueen_/status/1730405131718373606?s=20

Don't cross your fingers for queen it ain't happening lol

 

[nwHawk]

Brooks is not very good at anything really, I truly don't get the fascination

Yup. Over drafted. He did play well in spurts last season before he got hurt. I think he could be serviceable in the right role, and with limited reps. If we are looking for a starter it would probably be best to move on.

 

[DarkVictory23]

I don't feel like Bobby's decline is overstated. He's a good LB for two downs and the biggest liability on a team with a hobbled Jamal Adams on 3rd down.

But, if Patrick Queen comes here, we almost assuredly aren't keeping Brooks because they play the same LB spot and Queen is taking Brooks' money.

Brooks looks worse because of Bobby. Bobby's limited lateral and backwards quickness means he constantly cheats to be in position for what he is good at, but that means Brooks is now responsible for far more field than he should be.

Wagner can still be good, but we made him the Mike because of his knowledge and experience but now we can't take him out on third and long and opposing teams know exactly what part of the field is going to be available.

He can't be brought back in the role he's in and the question for Macdonald becomes whether Bobby's worth bringing back when he can't be the QB of the defense which is the best thing he brings to the team. I think he is, just for locker room leadership and the fact that he has good instincts when used in a specific way, but I could understand if a brand-new coach with no history with Bobby doesn't feel the same way.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

https://x.com/Patrickqueen_/status/1730405131718373606?s=20

Don't cross your fingers for queen it ain't happening lol

My personal free agency plan is one that wants to flush out as many high contracts as possible to free up future cap space if you can trade some players and get quality value back, do it, fill this team with low cost players, double down on the comp process for future picks, churn picks into more picks, and then re-established or sell this place as a UDFA destination. I’m not really hoping for big splashes. Just healthy economics, strategic math, and a young blood competitive atmosphere where players are battling to learn and earn everything.

 

[bigcc]

Bobby being the reason brooks has never been better than mid his entire career here is quite the take lol

And queen isn't coming so give up on that one.

 

[kidhawk]

I don't feel like Bobby's decline is overstated. He's a good LB for two downs and the biggest liability on a team with a hobbled Jamal Adams on 3rd down.

But, if Patrick Queen comes here, we almost assuredly aren't keeping Brooks because they play the same LB spot and Queen is taking Brooks' money.

Brooks looks worse because of Bobby. Bobby's limited lateral and backwards quickness means he constantly cheats to be in position for what he is good at, but that means Brooks is now responsible for far more field than he should be.

Wagner can still be good, but we made him the Mike because of his knowledge and experience but now we can't take him out on third and long and opposing teams know exactly what part of the field is going to be available.

He can't be brought back in the role he's in and the question for Macdonald becomes whether Bobby's worth bringing back when he can't be the QB of the defense which is the best thing he brings to the team. I think he is, just for locker room leadership and the fact that he has good instincts when used in a specific way, but I could understand if a brand-new coach with no history with Bobby doesn't feel the same way.

Brooks looks worse because of Bobby is the biggest load of shit I’ve read on this forum in a long time and that is saying a lot. Brooks has always looked better with Bobby here than without him. Brooks has a lot of talent physically but mentally needs a Wagner in the field to point him in the right directions. Brooks was utter trash the year Bobby was a Ram. If we aren’t keeping Bobby than letting Brooks walk is a must.

 

[Mistashoesta]

Keep both. Trade back in the first that nets you a second round pick, then use it on Edgerrin Cooper.

If I had to pick one, I'd pick Bobby. Brooks, although very physically gifted and at times can just flat out ball, he dissappears a lot during games and his injury history is a concern for me.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Macdonald is looking to replace all the LB's Seattle has right now. Just going to take some time. If it's between keeping Wagner or Brooks, its a tough call. Probably Wagner honestly. Neither can cover anybody, but Brooks is totally lost being the general. At least Wagner knows what he's doing out there even if his body won't cooperate.

 

[kidhawk]

Macdonald is looking to replace all the LB's Seattle has right now. Just going to take some time. If it's between keeping Wagner or Brooks, its a tough call. Probably Wagner honestly. Neither can cover anybody, but Brooks is totally lost being the general. At least Wagner knows what he's doing out there even if his body won't cooperate.

I also think Bobby would stay on a short contract (likely one year unless they need to make it two for cap reasons). Whereas Brooks is coming off a rookie deal and will likely want a bit more financial security in this contract so he’s not much of a stop gap guy.

 

[keasley45]

Brooks looks worse because of Bobby is the biggest load of shit I’ve read on this forum in a long time and that is saying a lot. Brooks has always looked better with Bobby here than without him. Brooks has a lot of talent physically but mentally needs a Wagner in the field to point him in the right directions. Brooks was utter trash the year Bobby was a Ram. If we aren’t keeping Bobby than letting Brooks walk is a must.

not quite buying that Brooks doesnt have the grey matter to make the calls on D. I agree that he struggled when Bobby left for the Rams. But what aspect of the D didnt struggle? whether before bobby left, while he was away, or after he returned.

We arent going to be able to untangle whats what in terms of value and fit until we see them play in the system. i think anyone watching film can see that the scheme on defense was so crossed up and confused that about the only thing one can REALLY, 100% evaluate is A. talent , B. ability and in specific instances where the D as a whole was coherent, C. aptitude for the respective position.

The rest is tangled up in the hot mess of confusion and indifference that that side of the ball became.

I think Mike has already heard about what happened and from all accounts, is familiar with stepping into a situation where a unit is underperforming and turning it around. Not via mass turnover, but by connecting with players, adapting the schem, and putting his guys in a position to succeed.

the same stuff some are saying about Brooks, the Baltimore fanbase was saying about Queen before last year.

based on that, i dont see how you keep Bobby in any significant role. I think Mike is looking at Brooks and seeing a situation where he can plug him into his system, give him a clearly define role and set of parameters and cut him loose without all of the confusion that existed here before. Bobby? All time great, but he doenst have the physical tools to fit what Mike did in Baltimore. Thats not to say he gets cut. i think they keep both. But if it came down to one? You have to keep Brooks and see how he fits in Mike's scheme... the same way Queen did.

 

[DarkVictory23]

Brooks looks worse because of Bobby is the biggest load of shit I’ve read on this forum in a long time and that is saying a lot. Brooks has always looked better with Bobby here than without him. Brooks has a lot of talent physically but mentally needs a Wagner in the field to point him in the right directions. Brooks was utter trash the year Bobby was a Ram. If we aren’t keeping Bobby than letting Brooks walk is a must.

Look, this wasn't meant as a 'hot take' or a blanket statement, so let me clarify because I obviously overstated:

Overall, Brooks is better with Bobby on the field. Brooks struggled as the Green Dot and Bobby has a much better overall football IQ and experience to lead a defense. Him being on the field takes that pressure off of Brooks. Bobby only makes Brooks worse in specific situations.

That's because Bobby is slow, and he knows it. When targeted by opposing QBs, he often cheats. He'll pick one of the two routes he's supposed to be somewhat responsible for and sell out on it because he knows he can't recover. He vacates his zone early and now Brooks or Diggs or whoever is responsible for their zone but also part of Wagner's.

Not that this isn't completely understandable. If Bobby knows he's too slow to sit as far back in coverage as necessary or that he can't really recover if he hesitates, it's better to be useful on one route or part of his zone than be worthless for the whole thing. But this means Bobby creates a specific liability for other dudes on the field that you have to gameplan around.

I am not trying to say Bobby is 'garbage' or even bad. He's just slow. He's definitely our most consistent tackler and he's quite solid in run defense and there is nobody on the team with his level of experience or awareness. But this board routinely trashes Diggs or Adams or Brooks as 'sucking' because they failed to get to the route that Bobby gave up on. (Not that Adams doesn't suck right now and I don't think Brooks is elite, but not all of their failures are entirely on them.)

 

[kidhawk]

Look, this wasn't meant as a 'hot take' or a blanket statement, so let me clarify because I obviously overstated:

Overall, Brooks is better with Bobby on the field. Brooks struggled as the Green Dot and Bobby has a much better overall football IQ and experience to lead a defense. Him being on the field takes that pressure off of Brooks. Bobby only makes Brooks worse in specific situations.

That's because Bobby is slow, and he knows it. When targeted by opposing QBs, he often cheats. He'll pick one of the two routes he's supposed to be somewhat responsible for and sell out on it because he knows he can't recover. He vacates his zone early and now Brooks or Diggs or whoever is responsible for their zone but also part of Wagner's.

Not that this isn't completely understandable. If Bobby knows he's too slow to sit as far back in coverage as necessary or that he can't really recover if he hesitates, it's better to be useful on one route or part of his zone than be worthless for the whole thing. But this means Bobby creates a specific liability for other dudes on the field that you have to gameplan around.

I am not trying to say Bobby is 'garbage' or even bad. He's just slow. He's definitely our most consistent tackler and he's quite solid in run defense and there is nobody on the team with his level of experience or awareness. But this board routinely trashes Diggs or Adams or Brooks as 'sucking' because they failed to get to the route that Bobby gave up on. (Not that Adams doesn't suck right now and I don't think Brooks is elite, but not all of their failures are entirely on them.)

Here’s the issue I’m having though, you state quite clearly in this post that Bobby’s lack of ability in pass coverage makes Brooks look bad situationally. I couldn’t disagree with this more. I think Brooks looks like a better linebacker with Bobby and he looks like he’s just a bit off when he doesn’t have Bobby calling the shots.

If this were a situation where both were under contract and we had the option I think it could be different but I just see Brooks wanting more than I believe he’s worth. I don’t blame him at all. I just don’t think we have the cap space to pay him market value whereas I think we can keep Bobby and use him smarter for less and have him fill the gap while we build the defense our new staff wants. I don’t see us fixing the front 7 completely this offseason.

 

[Smellyman]

System didn't help Bobby and Brooks in coverage at all. over and over zone drop that allows any OC to take advantage over and over. That is not going to happen anymore.

Queen is going to be way too expensive and one year of being good is hopefully due to Macdonald.

Getting Brooks back would be prudent, need bodies there

 

[Jerhawk]

There was one poster in particular (I won't say them by name) who loved the Brooks pick so much and talked down to anyone who dared to question the selection over Queen.

Here we are now a few years later, and look who was right. The Seahawks passing on Queen was a huge mistake once again by the overrated John Schneider. That was his pick and it predictably backfired.

I vote Wagner simply because he can at least coach up the younger guys. Brooks has no business out there.

 

[bigcc]

There was one poster in particular (I won't say them by name) who loved the Brooks pick so much and talked down to anyone who dared to question the selection over Queen.

Here we are now a few years later, and look who was right. The Seahawks passing on Queen was a huge mistake once again by the overrated John Schneider. That was his pick and it predictably backfired.

I vote Wagner simply because he can at least coach up the younger guys. Brooks has no business out there.

Queen was one of the worst mlbs in the nfl and borderline to keep a roster spot until Macdonald and roquan Smith entered the equation.

I don't even want to keep brooks, but saying queen was that much better is quite a stretch.

 

[nanomoz]

Wagner is still great against north/south run stuff, but he was consistently exposed in coverage against the Rams and 49ers. I'm not sure about Brooks's ability to move sideline to sideline. But I trust McDonald to appraise stuff like that.

The days of two-down linebackers are kind of gone. Faster tight ends and 3/4 WR sets on first/second down are commonplace.