Seahawks walking a delicate line with popular players

KitsapGuy · Nov 20, 2017

Just ask the 2004 Mariners.

Cornerback Richard Sherman and strong safety Kam Chancellor won’t be in uniform. Both are nursing injuries severe enough to end seasons and — let’s be honest about this — imperil careers.

Absent a pair of its pillars, the Legion of Boom is an entity in name only, rather like the Four Tops still touring the casino-club circuit as the Four Tops. They perform the hits, and the band plays on, but the act is a mirage.

As he observes the present state of the Seahawks, Schneider must begin mulling the team’s future. He also might want to consider the mistakes in the past. Specifically, mistakes committed by the Hawks SoDo neighbors, the Seattle Mariners.

The chaos can be traced to 2004, when the front office trusted obviously aging players would produce numbers consistent with those posted on the backs of some very old baseball cards.

Schneider and Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll are approaching the same predicament that derailed the Mariners 13 years ago. They want to show loyalty to the veteran players who were the cornerstones of a Super Bowl championship team.

Loyalty is an admirable virtue, the key component in keeping family ties and sustaining lifelong friendships. But when the issue regards the construction of a pro sports team’s roster, loyalty is less a virtue than a horror-movie staple.

Just when you think the coast is clear, it haunts some more.

http://www.thenewstribune.com/sports/sp ... 59728.html

UK_Seahawk · Nov 20, 2017

I'm not concerned they know whats what. They will do whatever is best for the Seahawks.

BullHawk33 · Nov 20, 2017

It is easy to write this article when players go down to injury. I agree with the premise that it is difficult to get rid of popular players when you think they are declining but they way John and Pete go about their business, it is all about the competition and the players know that at some point they will lose that competition.

When healthy, Sherm is the best cornerback on the field for the Seahawks, if not top 5 in league. When healthy, Cam is great and while he hasn't shown the same flash this year as he had last year, he's still a top 15 strong safety. I think the article is right that they will have to say goodbye to great players but that is not this year and, more than likely, not until after next year at the earliest.

Sox-n-Hawks · Nov 20, 2017

They were wounded not killed. They'll be back. Look at ETIII

SoulfishHawk · Nov 20, 2017

Next man up. Can't sit around and mope about it. Just an opportunity for someone else to step it up. It's going to be a massive challenge, but it can be done. The Offense can put up a 30 burger.

EverydayImRusselin · Nov 20, 2017

I think this FO has shown in the past they will move on when they feel it's time. They let Clemons go even though he had finally recovered from his injury and was pretty dominant during the SB run in the playoffs. They also moved on from Big Red.

Hollandhawk · Nov 20, 2017

Sherman was playing great (even though he was already playing injured), Kam was playing good football too. It is not like we are talking about aging vets here that took a step backwards in their ability.

12thbrah · Nov 20, 2017

Sherm and Kam are popular but they were both playing well before they went down with injuries. We're fortunate the FO actually made some moves in the off-season to add some depth. Right now we're not as good in the secondary but the guys who are playing are serviceable. Now if we lose Earl again that would be catastrophic.

Boycie · Nov 20, 2017

Sox-n-Hawks":1azuxs0f said:
They were wounded not killed. They'll be back. Look at ETIII

I think that the time is coming to look at possibly moving on from some of these guys via trade while their value is still high.

Seymour · Nov 20, 2017

That may be a good article to write before we signed Kam to a 3rd contract. Writing it after the injuries (now) is stating the obvious. Most of that has been discussed here for over a year.

WindCityHawk · Nov 20, 2017

Unfortunately, the chance to sell high on some of these guys has passed. But hopefully Schneider has learned from that. Know why the Pats are successful every year? They leave sentimentality to the fans. It's not a fun fact, but everyone saying we should have traded Kam before is looking a little smarter today.

The goal in 2017 is to win in 2017, not manage a farewell tour of our favorite players from 2013.

I suspect a lot of this has to do with Seattle learning how to be a championship team. Cities and fanbases like New England (to keep a consistent example) have learned to take the win and move on, but I think Seattle wants to hold on to our fresh, shiny Super Bowl moment, and repeat it with the same cast of characters (and why not? We almost did!). But that's not a sustainable formula.

The spell of sentiment needs to be broken for this team to grow again, just as trees and flowers have to be pruned to stay healthy.

MontanaHawk05 · Nov 20, 2017

WindCityHawk":1hcwg7hb said:
Unfortunately, the chance to sell high on some of these guys has passed. But hopefully Schneider has learned from that. Know why the Pats are successful every year? They leave sentimentality to the fans.

That's got nothing to do with it. They haven't had a consistently good defense since 2005 and their drafting has been filled with busts since 2007 (they've gotten better this decade).

Nobody would be complaining right now if Kam were uninjured, and the fact that people acknowledge his play will be missed, backs that up.

WindCityHawk · Nov 20, 2017

MontanaHawk05":okxguro3 said:
Nobody would be complaining right now if Kam were uninjured

Dude, have you seen this board?

SoulfishHawk · Nov 20, 2017

+1, this board complains after WINS :lol:

Sgt. Largent · Nov 20, 2017

Sox-n-Hawks":zzacj65t said:
They were wounded not killed. They'll be back. Look at ETIII

Maybe, but probably not here...........at least not Sherman who's in the last year of his deal next year with 11M in savings if we cut him.

Kam there's not as much savings (2M) if we cut him, so I could see Pete and John taking a wait and see approach in the off season with Kam.

But Richard? Not sure they want to wait and see with that much cap space being taken up on a guy coming off a major achilles injury in the last year of his deal.

MontanaHawk05 · Nov 20, 2017

WindCityHawk":3o4ys7f8 said:
MontanaHawk05":3o4ys7f8 said:

Nobody would be complaining right now if Kam were uninjured

Click to expand...

Dude, have you seen this board?

SoulfishHawk":3o4ys7f8 said:
+1, this board complains after WINS :lol:

I meant about Kam, ya kumquats.

SoulfishHawk · Nov 20, 2017

Boycie · Nov 20, 2017

WindCityHawk":2d7mqvqh said:
Unfortunately, the chance to sell high on some of these guys has passed. But hopefully Schneider has learned from that. Know why the Pats are successful every year? They leave sentimentality to the fans. It's not a fun fact, but everyone saying we should have traded Kam before is looking a little smarter today.

The goal in 2017 is to win in 2017, not manage a farewell tour of our favorite players from 2013.

I suspect a lot of this has to do with Seattle learning how to be a championship team. Cities and fanbases like New England (to keep a consistent example) have learned to take the win and move on, but I think Seattle wants to hold on to our fresh, shiny Super Bowl moment, and repeat it with the same cast of characters (and why not? We almost did!). But that's not a sustainable formula.

The spell of sentiment needs to be broken for this team to grow again, just as trees and flowers have to be pruned to stay healthy.

Exactly! Once you stop adapting, and reinventing yourselves, you lose ground because just like most things in life, the NFL is constantly changing whether it be personnel on teams, or coaching/schemes etc.

Uncle Si · Nov 20, 2017

a. The Pats are successful every year because they've never had to make a decision on their Hall of Fame QB. let's not forget how good Tom Brady is.

2. the analogy to the Ms is a poor one. Baseball is 9 at bats and a pitcher. the influence of 3-4 players is obvious (and reflected in the salaries). A roster of 52 is not as influenced by the shortcomings of previously high caliber players as baseball.

3. The team does have tough choices ahead

chris98251 · Nov 20, 2017

Uncle Si":26v94uuc said:
a. The Pats are successful every year because they've never had to make a decision on their Hall of Fame QB. let's not forget how good Tom Brady is.

2. the analogy to the Ms is a poor one. Baseball is 9 at bats and a pitcher. the influence of 3-4 players is obvious (and reflected in the salaries). A roster of 52 is not as influenced by the shortcomings of previously high caliber players as baseball.

3. The team does have tough choices ahead

They have not on Brady but they did with Bledsoe which was controversial at the time but proved to be the right onw.

Seahawks walking a delicate line with popular players

Moderator

Well-known member

Member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Similar threads