Is the offense "complete"?

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Re: Is the offense
Tue Mar 12, 2013 11:52 am
  • kidhawk wrote:
    Honestly I don't see a specific need for a 3rd RB on the roster. I can see us drafting one later in the draft and maybe putting them on the practice squad, but Leon was pretty much just there for special teams and really only played RB very rarely.


    It'd be different but I guess it could be possible. 2 QB's, 2 RB's free's up a lot of space. Keep some on PS ready to go with Robinson, Harvin, and Golden able to fill extreme injury needs, spot carries. Doubt they actually would do it, like near 0% in my opinion, too much injury risk at RB and we like to run the ball a lot. But it'd allow serious roster flexibility.
    User avatar
    JKent82
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3009
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 12:13 pm


Re: Is the offense
Tue Mar 12, 2013 11:52 am
  • kidhawk wrote:Honestly I don't see a specific need for a 3rd RB on the roster. I can see us drafting one later in the draft and maybe putting them on the practice squad, but Leon was pretty much just there for special teams and really only played RB very rarely.


    True. And I agree, I don't think we necessarily SHOULD have a 3rd RB on the roster. But at the RB position, injuries happen all of the time, and you never know when the next man needs to be able to step up. So it's not to see the field much, as it is more a safety net. I don't know how Pete and John see it though, obviously. They only carried two QBs on the roster, so maybe their mindset is the same for RBs. But RBs are more at risk for injury IMO, and they don't take all the snaps like a QB does.
    Image
    nategreat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1337
    Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 11:36 am


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 11:57 am
  • kidhawk wrote:
    Recon_Hawk wrote:I'd also like a speed RB added to replace Leon.


    Harvin and Tate can both be that speed guy being used with the occasional end around, or in the screen game to supplement the power run attack.

    I'm envisioning a speedy 3rd RB as a backup returner and depth at RB more than anything else. Lynch and Turbin should still get 95% of the snaps, but depth is still vital considering the physical nature of Lynch.
    I am Godzilla, you are Japan!
    User avatar
    Recon_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2064
    Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:01 pm
    Location: Vancouver, Wa


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:04 pm
  • O-line and TE depth are the only areas that need to be upgraded IMO. We get some depth there, watch out.
    Image
    Radish and Cheinhill — Gone, but not forgotten
    User avatar
    HawkFan72
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11456
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Antioch, CA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:09 pm
  • We still need Sidney Rice insurance and an upgrade at TE would be nice. But for the most part, yes.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10912
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:09 pm
  • CANHawk wrote:
    Recon_Hawk wrote:I'd say the core of the offense is on the roster, but with as much two tightend sets the hawks run, I'd like to see an upgrade over McCoy with a better receiver, YAC type.

    I'd also like a speed RB added to replace Leon.


    I think McCoy is just fine as depth for Miller. He was really solid as a second TE last year. What I'd like to see is that H-back/Joker type of tight end added to the group, but if we go into the season with just Miller and McCoy, I'll be comfortable with that.


    I'd be fine with that too, but I think McCoys big plays were more a result of the position he plays as the #2 tightend in a bootleg offense than him creating matchup problems and making big time individual plays. An athletic, receiver type like Reed or Escobar (or Eifert had we had our first round pick) would be that ideal #2, IMO. I'm also a fan of Kelce who would be an upgrade over McCoy as well as the all-around backup to Miller but can block and catch better than AM.
    I am Godzilla, you are Japan!
    User avatar
    Recon_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2064
    Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:01 pm
    Location: Vancouver, Wa


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:10 pm
  • JesterHawk wrote:I would rather see Michael Robinson's eventual replacement as a 3rd RB. Love MRob but he is 30 this year, we gotta get the FBOTF on the roster NOW!


    :sarcasm_on: ?
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11311
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:19 pm
  • I'd like better depth on the O-line .
    User avatar
    General Manager
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2260
    Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:04 pm


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:22 pm
  • General Manager wrote:I'd like better depth on the O-line .


    I'd like better starters on the oline.

    Giacomini and McQuistan are both slightly older players who could be upgraded long term.
    <A>
    <IMG></A>
    User avatar
    McGruff
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 1579
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
    Location: Elma, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:23 pm
  • McGruff wrote:We need one of our three young guards to become what we hope they can be . . . and we need long term upgrades to Giacomini and McQuistan.


    I know the guy is the new .NET whipping boy, but Breno is only 27 and he doesn't have that many miles on him. And he's cheap. I'm not sure why everyone is falling over themselves to 'upgrade'. It was in a different thread, by a smarter poster than me, but the challenge was posed: Name 3 starting right tackles in the NFL not including the Seahawks. I consider myself fairly NFL savvy, and I can't do it.

    Also, McQuistan was really quite good for us last year. I swear, unless we have the 49ers o-line, some people are never going to be happy.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15020
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Is the offense
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:24 pm
  • Recon_Hawk wrote:
    CANHawk wrote:
    Recon_Hawk wrote:I'd say the core of the offense is on the roster, but with as much two tightend sets the hawks run, I'd like to see an upgrade over McCoy with a better receiver, YAC type.

    I'd also like a speed RB added to replace Leon.


    I think McCoy is just fine as depth for Miller. He was really solid as a second TE last year. What I'd like to see is that H-back/Joker type of tight end added to the group, but if we go into the season with just Miller and McCoy, I'll be comfortable with that.


    I'd be fine with that too, but I think McCoys big plays were more a result of the position he plays as the #2 tightend in a bootleg offense than him creating matchup problems and making big time individual plays. An athletic, receiver type like Reed or Escobar (or Eifert had we had our first round pick) would be that ideal #2, IMO. I'm also a fan of Kelce who would be an upgrade over McCoy as well as the all-around backup to Miller but can block and catch better than AM.


    Well, you could say that about most #2 TE's. It's a bit of a mismatch game. As long as you can get a guy in there who's good enough to not totally shit the bed when the ball comes his way, they'll produce. McCoy does not shit the bed. Yes we could improve on him, but i wouldn't call it a priority at this point.
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11311
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:26 pm
  • Sarlacc83 wrote:
    McGruff wrote:We need one of our three young guards to become what we hope they can be . . . and we need long term upgrades to Giacomini and McQuistan.


    I know the guy is the new .NET whipping boy, but Breno is only 27 and he doesn't have that many miles on him. And he's cheap. I'm not sure why everyone is falling over themselves to 'upgrade'. It was in a different thread, by a smarter poster than me, but the challenge was posed: Name 3 starting right tackles in the NFL not including the Seahawks. I consider myself fairly NFL savvy, and I can't do it.

    Also, McQuistan was really quite good for us last year. I swear, unless we have the 49ers o-line, some people are never going to be happy.


    That last sentence is true.

    Breno is making $3.5 million this year. He's not cheap. He's an average tackle, which makes him one of our worst starters.

    If we can upgrade, we should.
    <A>
    <IMG></A>
    User avatar
    McGruff
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 1579
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
    Location: Elma, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:44 pm
  • We still need a Rook FB to develop the skills for when MR decides to hang it up, and another developmental WR should one of our starters get banged up AGAIN.
    Obo has had pleanty of time to strut his stuff, i think it's time to move on from that experiment, next up, Ryan Swope.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3559
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 1:15 pm
  • In the short term, I'd say yes.

    We do however need to begin the process of adding players to compete and succeed some of our starters that may not get resigned.

    Tate
    Rice
    Miller
    Carpenter

    Those are guys that will command large salaries. This is still a good year for WR, and I would not be surprised to see us still take one. Getting a solid outside target can be difficult and take more than one attempt to resolve.

    Even if you expect Rice and Miller to sign for less -- they will still command hefty salary numbers. They won't fit salary wise when it comes to locking up players on the defense. Okung and Thomas are going to get big numbers and that won't allow for us to keep most, if not all of these guys. Sherman and Wilson will follow suit shortly thereafter.

    I don't see us needing to fill holes offensively. But I do see us needing to preemptively fill needs in the near future. Our salary outlay on that side of the ball is very large and our very best offensive players are still on their rookie deals. If we don't address DT early, I could still see us taking guys to replicate Tate and Rice on day 2.

    It remains unclear what the Harvin deal means in terms of how Pete/John see this DT pool. About the only thing I can take from it, is that there isn't one guy we are really solid on that would have necessitated us using #25 to get him.

    Last year was supposed to be a good year for big WRs. And it was a perceived position of need. But it turned out we didn't like that pocket of talent at all. It's entirely possible we don't like this DT class much either.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 711
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 1:20 pm
  • Miller and Rice will not be re-signed if/when their contracts expire.

    Tate probably doesn't have a future here.

    Carpenter hasn't done a thing to warrant a big second contract from anyone.
    <A>
    <IMG></A>
    User avatar
    McGruff
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 1579
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
    Location: Elma, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 1:21 pm
  • For me, the TE position needs one more guy, and I would like a good 3rd running back. Running back is one of those spots where you can be three deep one week, and 0 deep the next. And need I remind everyone about the 2010 Bears playoff game where a lack of depth on the TE spot killed our offense?
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11014
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 6:33 pm
  • we need a quick change-of-pace back who can run for average; and another big, te/wr target. also, o-line depth...
    mrblitz
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1102
    Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 10:34 pm


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:39 pm
  • I think for the most part everything is in place, however I think an upgrade at TE would be really beneficial. Miller shows flashes of being a big play maker but he is not someone I would heavily rely on such as Gonzales or Gronk. Obviously a player of those magnitudes would be very costly but I think an upgrade over McCoy is needed non the less.
    Image
    User avatar
    Seattle Patriots
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 12
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:19 pm
    Location: Snohomish, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:43 pm
  • Also Giacomini needs upgrading after his contract is up. Im reminded of the hawks first game of the season against the cardinals and all his false starts. He looked awful that game. He did get a lot better but I just don't like him for this team.
    Image
    User avatar
    Seattle Patriots
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 12
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:19 pm
    Location: Snohomish, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:48 pm
  • McGruff wrote:
    Tate probably doesn't have a future here.


    Why not??
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1674
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:58 pm
  • The offensive line, as others have said, a healthy Carpenter, solid replacement for right tackle, but as well I think depth on an offensive line is important and I like guys with a bit of versatility between guard and tackle. I'd like to see us draft at least two solid offensive linemen of the pass protecting kind.
    Image
    User avatar
    SeAhAwKeR4life
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3966
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 2:43 pm
    Location: Port Townsend, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:59 pm
  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    McGruff wrote:
    Tate probably doesn't have a future here.


    Why not??


    Things could change, but when you've got 30 million+ per season tied up in Rice, Harvin and Miller, it kind of puts you in your place.
    <A>
    <IMG></A>
    User avatar
    McGruff
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 1579
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:14 am
    Location: Elma, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:01 pm
  • I could see them resigning Rice and grabbing another wideout in the draft. Tate, while talented is expendable due to the amount of receivers we have and will have if we get another in the draft plus he will likely demand a pretty penny.
    Image
    User avatar
    Seattle Patriots
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 12
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:19 pm
    Location: Snohomish, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:07 pm
  • I guess if I graded the offense - it would go this way - I'd be happy to start any season with these blessings - so in response to the OP, I think we're basically done with the upgrades.

    QB: Starter A, Backup B - Russell Wilson - amazing first year, no reason to suspect a drop off, Flynn is a capable backup and I feel very good about it. QB3 - not relevant for this dialogue
    RB: Starter A, Backup B- Lynch has had minor injuries the past two years, but has played through it. Without Washington, you lose a lot of football IQ and experience. Turbin is a capable backup. RB3 might be a nice add
    WR: Starters B, Depth B - Like that Rice stayed healthy last year, but still plays in a way that gives me fear about his durability. Harvin, again not much in the way of full seasons - but so versatile and love that testimonial from AP's Twitter post. Tate, Baldwin - nice pieces. Might need a WR5 in the draft or is Kearse the guy?
    TE: Starter A-, Depth B - I really like what we have here. Perhaps one more for depth - interested to see what Fells has. I really love McCoy - great swagger and explosive.
    OL: Starters B, Depth B- - Would love to say everything is locked up - but like the overall depth due to the ZBS - some players are exceeding expectations while stars are shining (Okung, Unger). A lot of guys played meaningful downs last year - love that.

    The amazing part about the offense is its interchangeable parts and flexibility of formations. The read-option gave even more life to the running game last season - so with the addition of Harvin, I expect that trend to continue. This is a team that scored among the leaders in the 2nd half. I don't expect that to change. As a matter of fact, I think this team might score more than any other Seahawk team.
    Image
    User avatar
    nsport
    * NET Sports Handicapper *
     
    Posts: 1435
    Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:13 am


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:46 pm
  • I don't think the term "complete" means much of anything in the NFL. There's always something to be improved, some new weapon to be added. So if you're asking whether I'd be comfortable going into the season with our offense looking like this, I'd say absolutely. But if you're asking whether there isn't any place left to upgrade, I'd say no.

    But specifically, I think there are one or two spots they're probably still looking to upgrade. The main one is the big-bodied receiver/TE. Look at some of the moves they've made in the past three years and I think it's clear that they are looking to fill a particular role: BMW, Winslow, Durham, Edwards, Even Moore... probably some others I'm not thinking about. Oh, right, that new basketball player, Darren Fells. It seems like they really envision a player like that as part of their ideal offense. McCoy could be that guy, but I think if he was going to do that full time it would have happened last year.

    And then, yeah, the line. Everyone pretty much covered that though. If you don't have probowlers at every spot there I think you're always looking to improve.
    User avatar
    aku
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 116
    Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:50 am


Re: Is the offense
Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:54 pm
  • Recon_Hawk wrote:I'd say the core of the offense is on the roster, but with as much two tightend sets the hawks run, I'd like to see an upgrade over McCoy with a better receiver, YAC type.

    I'd also like a speed RB added to replace Leon.

    Ditto. I'd like us to trade with Oakland to get Taiwan Jones, because they never really gave him a fair shake at RB (they're switching him to CB). Look up his college tape, the dude is low 4.3 fast and shifty as hell, great balance. Just needs to hold onto the ball better.
    For custom Seahawk backgrounds and signatures, click HERE!
    User avatar
    SE174
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1253
    Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:11 pm
    Location: Spokane


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:39 am
  • I think there is a little too much belief that golden tate is a failed percy harvin.
    If anything golden tate is a guy who can do a good percy harvin imitation, but is secretly a good over the top guy.
    Go back and look at all the big first scores we had. Aside from the two big ones in chicago and of course the pats, tate was always our deep guy.

    I feel with Percy Harvin doing REAL Percy Harvin stuff, golden Tate is free to streak until he just gets tired of touchdowns. Tate might actually look better.

    im sitting here watching the seahawks/vikings game on dvr, we just got to the point where adrian bitch slapped us to first and goal. God ponder is horrible.
    We are the 2014 Superbowl champions and it can never, ever be taken away.
    Greatest defense in NFL history.
    User avatar
    Seeker
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1343
    Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:21 pm


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:10 am
  • An offensive line is never complete. #AlwaysBeDraftingOline
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 25393
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Wed Mar 13, 2013 7:12 am
  • With a lot of people bringing up TE, I wonder how Morrah's recovery is going. He seemed to be pretty decent with some solid upside.

    I have been very critical of Giacomini, but watching tape he seemed to be trying to cheat over a little to help whoever was playing right guard except when McQuistan was in, so I have given him a little more benefit of the doubt. He is solid.
    Image
    User avatar
    BASF
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1518
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:07 pm


Re: Is the offense
Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:43 am
  • RolandDeschain wrote:An offensive line is never complete. #AlwaysBeDraftingOline


    It seems as inevitable as the tides, that Seattle will take a CB, S and OL in day 3 of every draft. Looks like this is where we like to infuse new development prospects at those positions.

    I also don't expect we'll ever take an OL on day 1 until we're looking for a LT. I believe those days are officially over.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 711
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Is the offense "complete"?
Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:09 am
  • We look good this year, though I agree if there is a upgrade available on oline we might want to do it.
    CPHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2207
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:49 pm


Next


It is currently Fri Sep 19, 2014 5:57 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information