Johnny Knox

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. RATING: PG-13
Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:06 pm
  • Any takers here on a bargain 4.3 receiver?
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:08 pm
  • His back is shot, so not really.
    Kam Chancellor: The Chancellor of Defense
    Bruce Irvin: BruceMode
    Tharold Simon: Humble Thug
    Paul Richardson: BPR
    User avatar
    FortWorthSeahawk
    USAF BadAss
     
    Posts: 1097
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:24 am
    Location: Charlottesville, VA


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:09 pm
  • who was the nasty knee injury that we played i thought it was knox he is not 4.3 if it is him.
    God Bless America and God Bless the SEATTLE SEAHAWKS - TEZ

    Mike Bullene ‏@12thManM1ke 45m
    @TDESPN Though, you did say the other night you cannot win the SB riding a defense. Even though you are literally the poster child for that. --twittered back at dilfer after he tried to slam hawks fans.
    User avatar
    hawkcrazzed
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 931
    Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 8:55 am
    Location: Toronto Canada


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:10 pm
  • If he could pass a physical.
    Hargrove(as a seahawk) bent him in half BACKWARDS!

    I really didn't like seeing that, but it was not a cheap shot. None the less, hard to watch.
    "When is the NFL going to start fining receivers for running routes across KAM’S MIDDLE?!?!"
    -bpup33
    User avatar
    Sprfunk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 738
    Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:57 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:10 pm
  • Yeah he messed up his back but he seems to be rehabbed from it. I think its a low risk/high reward move that we should look at. If he still has that deep speed, he could be just what this offense needs. Also think we need to take a hard look at Jared Cook. 6'5 and 4.4 speed.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:11 pm
  • Totally fine bringing him in to camp and seeing if he can still play. If not just move on. No risk.
    User avatar
    Missing_Clink
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2488
    Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:12 pm

Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:43 pm
  • we have one injury risk receiver, half the point of bringing in any other receivers is insurance policy.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2798
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:46 pm
  • Hawknballs wrote:we have one injury risk receiver, half the point of bringing in any other receivers is insurance policy.


    It seems ppl dont understand the concept of risk/reward
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:46 pm
  • He was really good before the injury, and could also give us a boost on kickoff returns.
    User avatar
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 3547
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:42 pm
    Location: St. Louis, MO


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:52 pm
  • SDHawk wrote:
    Hawknballs wrote:we have one injury risk receiver, half the point of bringing in any other receivers is insurance policy.


    It seems ppl dont understand the concept of risk/reward


    If the Bears don't want to retain him (and they have a worse receiver situation than we do) what makes you think we'd want him?
    Kam Chancellor: The Chancellor of Defense
    Bruce Irvin: BruceMode
    Tharold Simon: Humble Thug
    Paul Richardson: BPR
    User avatar
    FortWorthSeahawk
    USAF BadAss
     
    Posts: 1097
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:24 am
    Location: Charlottesville, VA


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:55 pm
  • FortWorthSeahawk wrote:
    SDHawk wrote:
    Hawknballs wrote:we have one injury risk receiver, half the point of bringing in any other receivers is insurance policy.


    It seems ppl dont understand the concept of risk/reward


    If the Bears don't want to retain him (and they have a worse receiver situation than we do) what makes you think we'd want him?


    Worse because they have Brandon Marshall? We'd want him because the risk/reward. He could be had for peanuts and if he can come in during situational downs and provide us a deep threat, that would be worth the perceived risks.

    Sorry, still waiting for a response that makes sense.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:58 pm
  • Johnny Knox was a good WR on a crappy team. if he is a vailable to come to Seattle and being singed on the cheap, it would be criminal not to "kick the tires" on him.

    Jared Cook is a rock solid TE as well.
    Cheesehead Seahawk Extraordinaire
    User avatar
    Bipolar
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 749
    Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:58 pm
    Location: Bellevue


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:59 pm
  • Bipolar wrote:Johnny Knox was a good WR on a crappy team. if he is a vailable to come to Seattle and being singed on the cheap, it would be criminal not to "kick the tires" on him.

    Jared Cook is a rock solid TE as well.


    Thank you, this is what I think as well.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:00 pm
  • SDHawk wrote:Yeah he messed up his back but he seems to be rehabbed from it. I think its a low risk/high reward move that we should look at. If he still has that deep speed, he could be just what this offense needs. Also think we need to take a hard look at Jared Cook. 6'5 and 4.4 speed.


    Let's see some video of his progress. Otherwise, it's just hearsay. If he's willing to take change and a year or two, I say why not. I'd rather see some kind of evidence that shows he's NFL ready or at the very least close to it.
    Image

    Go Hawks.
    User avatar
    SouthSoundHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2197
    Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:02 pm
  • SouthSoundHawk wrote:
    SDHawk wrote:Yeah he messed up his back but he seems to be rehabbed from it. I think its a low risk/high reward move that we should look at. If he still has that deep speed, he could be just what this offense needs. Also think we need to take a hard look at Jared Cook. 6'5 and 4.4 speed.


    Let's see some video of his progress. Otherwise, it's just hearsay. If he's willing to take change and a year or two, I say why not. I'd rather see some kind of evidence that shows he's NFL ready or at the very least close to it.


    Not sure what you're arguing here. I'm pretty sure the FO would give him a physical before signing him to a contract.

    Are you saying we shouldn't even bother taking a look until we have "video of his progress"?

    This is a guy who had* the same Mike Wallace speed and can be had at less than 1/10th the price and on a shorter commitment. I don't see any issue with working him out and giving him a 1-year prove-it-to-me contract. He is a potential game changer.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:05 pm
  • I'd take our receiving corp over theirs in a heartbeat. So there's that.

    And since he more than likely won't have 4.3 speed again, I don't see why taking a flyer on him would be that great. He has average, maybe above average hands and isn't very big and is an average route runner outside of go routes (better than Hester, but that's not saying much). We could get that in the 3-4th round this year without the major injury concerns. Maybe you're still waiting on someone to agree with you and that's the only response that "makes sense" but I tried to lay it out with reasons. We all have our opinions though, so I won't fault you for sticking to yours.
    Kam Chancellor: The Chancellor of Defense
    Bruce Irvin: BruceMode
    Tharold Simon: Humble Thug
    Paul Richardson: BPR
    User avatar
    FortWorthSeahawk
    USAF BadAss
     
    Posts: 1097
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:24 am
    Location: Charlottesville, VA


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:09 pm
  • Not arguing one bit...

    I'm saying for the sake of this thread, lets see some video of the guy coming back from getting Baned. Then we'll know what we're dealing with, no one on this board has a say in whether or not this dude gets a workout...so I don't care about physicals, but we can watch video and evaluate him as fans of the 'hawks. Then form an opinion on him as the off season continues to unfold.

    That's not asking for much.

    If you want to play fantasy owner, sure bring him in...let the doctors give him a once over and let Sherm/BB/Kam/ET have at him for a few weeks.
    Image

    Go Hawks.
    User avatar
    SouthSoundHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2197
    Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:11 pm
  • SDHawk wrote:Sorry, still waiting for a response that makes sense.


    Comments like that are more likely to merely make people chuckle and put you onto their ignore list.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11312
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:15 pm
  • FortWorthSeahawk wrote:I'd take our receiving corp over theirs in a heartbeat. So there's that.

    And since he more than likely won't have 4.3 speed again, I don't see why taking a flyer on him would be that great. He has average, maybe above average hands and isn't very big and is an average route runner outside of go routes (better than Hester, but that's not saying much). We could get that in the 3-4th round this year without the major injury concerns. Maybe you're still waiting on someone to agree with you and that's the only response that "makes sense" but I tried to lay it out with reasons. We all have our opinions though, so I won't fault you for sticking to yours.


    So carrying a 3-4th round rookie for 3 years is less risk than taking a rehabbed Johnny Knox for 1 year? There are only 2 or 3 receivers in this class with Knox's speed and both Tavon Austin and Marquise Goodwin are under 5'10 and 180 lbs. Let's see those guys take a couple hits.

    You did lay out a couple reasons, I just don't think they are reasonable. There is obvious homerism when you say you'd take our receivers over Brandon Marshall and Alshon Jefferey. BMarsh had 1500 yds and 11 tds to Sidney Rice and Tates combined 1500 and 14 tds.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:17 pm
  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    SDHawk wrote:Sorry, still waiting for a response that makes sense.


    Comments like that are more likely to merely make people chuckle and put you onto their ignore list.


    Thanks for the heads up.

    I'm not here for attention. I'm here to discuss ways this team can make itself better. So, if looking at bargain deep threats is not something you feel could improve this team, please ignore me and move on.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:26 pm
  • You want to talk improving this team?


    http://walterfootball.com/draft2013WR.php


    Here's a comprehensive list of WRs that could add something to this team, and are as much of a risk as a dude that's been sitting out for a year plus.
    Image

    Go Hawks.
    User avatar
    SouthSoundHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2197
    Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:34 pm
  • SouthSoundHawk wrote:You want to talk improving this team?


    http://walterfootball.com/draft2013WR.php


    Here's a comprehensive list of WRs that could add something to this team, and are as much of a risk as a dude that's been sitting out for a year plus.


    Thanks, I prefer we focus on DT/OLB via the draft.

    I think there are enough option in FA for WRs... deepest FA pool in a while for receivers, no? Whereas if we use FA to address our needs at DT, we'll be looking to fork out tens of millions of dollars for an impact DT.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:37 pm
  • I would rather spend big money on the D-line in the free agency. We are already paying Zach and Sidney big contracts. I would focus on WR n TE position in the draft because it should be cheaper. There should be a few options available in top 3 rounds.
    Richard Sherman to Skip Bayless: "I'm tired of your ignorant pollution!"

    Follow me on twitter: @seahawks_fan12
    User avatar
    SeahawksFanForever
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1991
    Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:11 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:47 pm
  • SeahawksFanForever wrote:I would rather spend big money on the D-line in the free agency. We are already paying Zach and Sidney big contracts. I would focus on WR n TE position in the draft because it should be cheaper. There should be a few options available in top 3 rounds.


    No one said anything about spending big money anywhere.

    I do think we will explore the FA market for the DL... But if we don't get someone like Desmond Bryant, I don't see why we couldn't leverage our draft picks plus Matt Flynn to try and get an impact DT in the draft like Sheldon Richardson and/or Kawann Short.

    Kawann Short
    Sheldon Richardson
    Brandon Mebane
    Bruce Irvin

    ^That would put alot of pressure on QBs

    Then we dont have to blow our budget and we can make smaller FA moves like Jared Cook, Johnny Knox and Tarvaris Jackson.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:51 pm
  • http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/features ... =WR&y=2013


    Not sold on any of the available guys to be honest. Each one of these FAs can be replaced by a player in the draft.


    If anything the 'hawks should go after a beast TE to compliment Zach. Wilson seemed to like Zach as a reliable dump off guy, won't hurt to have two.
    Image

    Go Hawks.
    User avatar
    SouthSoundHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2197
    Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:04 pm
  • Thanks SouthSound. I should have prefaced everything by saying I want to explore the most cost-effective way to improve this team. It seems most everyone here is operating under the assumption that we will make a huge spashy move and leverage our cap space to the max this offseason. I just dont see that as being realistic. I don't see us signing Henry Melton or Mike Wallace. I think the most efficient use of our resources is to pursue impact DTs in the draft and to sign bargain FAs like Jared Cook, Johnny Knox and Tarvaris Jackson that can still make an impact but wont necessarily break our bank. I dont see many bargain DT/DE/OLBs in FA.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:07 pm
  • SDHawk wrote:
    SeahawksFanForever wrote:I would rather spend big money on the D-line in the free agency. We are already paying Zach and Sidney big contracts. I would focus on WR n TE position in the draft because it should be cheaper. There should be a few options available in top 3 rounds.


    No one said anything about spending big money anywhere.

    I do think we will explore the FA market for the DL... But if we don't get someone like Desmond Bryant, I don't see why we couldn't leverage our draft picks plus Matt Flynn to try and get an impact DT in the draft like Sheldon Richardson and/or Kawann Short.

    Kawann Short
    Sheldon Richardson
    Brandon Mebane
    Bruce Irvin

    ^That would put alot of pressure on QBs

    Then we dont have to blow our budget and we can make smaller FA moves like Jared Cook, Johnny Knox and Tarvaris Jackson.



    Kawann Short and Sheldon Richardson both? I don't see that as a possibility.

    And, Jared Cook won't be cheap in my opinion.

    A lot of the 4-3 teams are switching to 3-4 this year. There might be some solid under the radar pass rushers available. I would rather focus on that, Randy Starks, Henry Melton, etc in the free agency and draft WR Hopkins in the first round.
    Richard Sherman to Skip Bayless: "I'm tired of your ignorant pollution!"

    Follow me on twitter: @seahawks_fan12
    User avatar
    SeahawksFanForever
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1991
    Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:11 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:26 pm
  • SeahawksFanForever wrote:
    SDHawk wrote:
    SeahawksFanForever wrote:I would rather spend big money on the D-line in the free agency. We are already paying Zach and Sidney big contracts. I would focus on WR n TE position in the draft because it should be cheaper. There should be a few options available in top 3 rounds.


    No one said anything about spending big money anywhere.

    I do think we will explore the FA market for the DL... But if we don't get someone like Desmond Bryant, I don't see why we couldn't leverage our draft picks plus Matt Flynn to try and get an impact DT in the draft like Sheldon Richardson and/or Kawann Short.

    Kawann Short
    Sheldon Richardson
    Brandon Mebane
    Bruce Irvin

    ^That would put alot of pressure on QBs

    Then we dont have to blow our budget and we can make smaller FA moves like Jared Cook, Johnny Knox and Tarvaris Jackson.



    Kawann Short and Sheldon Richardson both? I don't see that as a possibility.

    And, Jared Cook won't be cheap in my opinion.

    A lot of the 4-3 teams are switching to 3-4 this year. There might be some solid under the radar pass rushers available. I would rather focus on that, Randy Starks, Henry Melton, etc in the free agency and draft WR Hopkins in the first round.


    All speculation but I think we can net a 1st rounder if we trade Flynn our 2nd and 5th to a team like the Chiefs or Jaguars.

    1. Sheldon Richardson, 3 tech
    1. Kawann Short, 5 tech or 1 tech
    3. Zaviar Gooden, OLB
    4. Jordan Hill, 3 tech
    5. Ricky Wagner, OT/G
    6. Nathan Williams, DE/OLB

    sign Jared Cook, Johnny Knox, Tarvaris Jackson, LeRoy Hill, Alan Branch

    QB: Russell Wilson | Tarvaris Jackson**
    WR: Sidney Rice | Stephen Williams
    WR: Golden Tate | Johnny Knox**
    WR: Doug Balwin | Jermaine Kearse
    RB: Marshawn Lynch | Robert Turbin | Leon Washington
    FB: Mike Rob
    TE: Zach Miller | Jared Cook**

    LT: Russell Okung | Ricky Wagner*
    LG: James Carpenter | Paul McQuistan
    C: Max Unger | Lemuel Jeanpierre
    RG: JR Sweezy | John Moffitt
    LG: Breno Giacomini | Ricky Wagner*

    =========

    LDE: Kawann Short* | Red Bryant | Greg Scruggs
    LDT: Sheldon Richardson* | Jordan Hill* | Alan Branch**
    RDT: Brandon Mebane | Kawann Short*
    RDE: Bruce Irvin | Nathan Williams* | Chris Clemons

    WLB: Zaviar Gooden* | LeRoy Hill** | Malcolm Smith
    ILB: Bobby Wagner
    RLB: KJ Wright | Mike Morgan

    RCB: Richard Sherman | Byron Maxwell
    SS: Kam Chancellor | Winston Guy
    FS: Earl Thomas | Chris Maragos
    LCB: Brandon Browner | Jeremy Lane | DeShawn Shead

    ================

    We would have addressed our need for pass rushing and explosiveness on offense (Marshawn, Tate, Knox and Jared Cook are all legit 4.4 burners) without breaking the bank.
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:59 pm
  • So you are focusing mostly on the defense in the draft (Which is cool) and not getting RW much help in the draft?

    Jared Cook would be nice but other than that, Johnny Knox is your guy? That's it? I am not sure if I agree with that.
    Richard Sherman to Skip Bayless: "I'm tired of your ignorant pollution!"

    Follow me on twitter: @seahawks_fan12
    User avatar
    SeahawksFanForever
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1991
    Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:11 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:05 pm
  • SeahawksFanForever wrote:So you are focusing mostly on the defense in the draft (Which is cool) and not getting RW much help in the draft?

    Jared Cook would be nice but other than that, Johnny Knox is your guy? That's it? I am not sure if I agree with that.


    RW has this ability to motivate others to overachieve. I think even marginally talented receivers would look great next to Wilson. In my mind, I think he only needs that situational deep threat or maybe a faster TE to turn a profit on those scrambles he uses to extend plays. I dont envision us using many 3 wide sets so... long answer short, yeah Im ok with Jared Cook and Johnny Knox as "my guy".
    User avatar
    SDHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 586
    Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:06 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:38 pm
  • Knox hasn't played since the injury. I wouldn't be suprised if he doesn't play again, he would still need to be medically cleared. I hope for his sake he doesn't come back unless there is little risk related to the injury. Very scary. I can't think of anyone who has suffered and back/spinal injury of that extent and made it back to prior form.

    No way do the Hawks address their WR depth with the only move being the addition of a player that may or may not be able to play football again. This front office is better than this.

    Go young, go healthy. I'd be choked if they passed on guys like Hopkins,Wheaton,Patterson or Woods because they thought the addition of Knox was sufficient.
    Last edited by kobebryant on Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    kobebryant
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1216
    Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 1:45 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:57 pm
  • Didn't like Knox before the injury, and i really don't like him now. The draft is really deep at WR, we could pick someone in the 3rd round(Woods,Wheaton,Swope, and Patton) with way more upside then Knox.
    User avatar
    getnasty
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 921
    Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 8:22 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:06 pm
  • Meh. No chance he makes our top-3. I'd rather have take on a project with more upside. Knox looked decent for a minute, and then when pushed into a larger role, found he was incredibly limited. Doesn't run good enough routes to get open, can't get off jams, doesn't have very good hands, doesn't have ball skills down the field. Worth a flyer, sure, but wouldn't expect him to make the team.
    "So between my friends and I we have been at every home game to date this year, and we have all been plotting the offensive plays called. " ------Anthony!
    User avatar
    Tical21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1491
    Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm


Re: Johnny Knox
Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:16 am
  • to be completely honest, I'd much rather prefer a rookie WR taken in first two rounds over healthy Knox as well, HOWEVER, PC/JS should still evaluate the guy, bring him to training camp and check him out. weirder things have happened.
    Cheesehead Seahawk Extraordinaire
    User avatar
    Bipolar
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 749
    Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:58 pm
    Location: Bellevue


Re: Johnny Knox
Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:42 am
  • SeahawksFanForever wrote:I would rather spend big money on the D-line in the free agency. We are already paying Zach and Sidney big contracts. I would focus on WR n TE position in the draft because it should be cheaper. There should be a few options available in top 3 rounds.


    How does it matter on which position we spend the money if the total cap hit is the same or less one way?

    You go after those in FA that you think you can't get in the draft / you can get in the draft but at a better value in FA or those that while available in the draft you don't plan on using your picks on.

    If there are good WRs in FA and lots of them so you think you can get them cheap and there are good pass rushers in the draft then that is how you do it. Doesn't matter what we are spending on Rice and Zach
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3484
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Johnny Knox
Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:55 am
  • I have yet to read anything that suggests that Knox is anywhere close to resuming his football career or even being ABLE to.

    From an article posted this past December:

    Srdjan Mirkovic, the Bears' spine consultant and an orthopedic surgeon on staff at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, performed a one-level vertebral fusion on Knox on Dec. 19. The initial outlook was four to six months of a recovery just to perform normal activities, and even longer before Knox could return to football.

    That optimism changed when more structural damage was discovered during the surgery. Knox's back was unstable, and there were more torn ligaments than anticipated. The nerve damage couldn't be assessed until after the surgery, and Knox had to wear a back brace for a while after the procedure.

    Considering how taxing the recovery process has been on him, Knox declined to revisit the incident when approached this week. He is on the physically-unable-to-perform list for the remainder of the season, although he is around the team daily.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8170
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Johnny Knox
Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:09 pm
  • volsunghawk wrote:I have yet to read anything that suggests that Knox is anywhere close to resuming his football career or even being ABLE to.

    From an article posted this past December:

    Srdjan Mirkovic, the Bears' spine consultant and an orthopedic surgeon on staff at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, performed a one-level vertebral fusion on Knox on Dec. 19. The initial outlook was four to six months of a recovery just to perform normal activities, and even longer before Knox could return to football.

    That optimism changed when more structural damage was discovered during the surgery. Knox's back was unstable, and there were more torn ligaments than anticipated. The nerve damage couldn't be assessed until after the surgery, and Knox had to wear a back brace for a while after the procedure.

    Considering how taxing the recovery process has been on him, Knox declined to revisit the incident when approached this week. He is on the physically-unable-to-perform list for the remainder of the season, although he is around the team daily.


    Exactly
    Kam Chancellor: The Chancellor of Defense
    Bruce Irvin: BruceMode
    Tharold Simon: Humble Thug
    Paul Richardson: BPR
    User avatar
    FortWorthSeahawk
    USAF BadAss
     
    Posts: 1097
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:24 am
    Location: Charlottesville, VA


Re: Johnny Knox
Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:32 pm
  • We would be better off with Johnny Knoxville.
    Image

    R.I.P. Brother Les
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24186
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Freddy's favorite song?....Dream On


Re: Johnny Knox
Tue Jan 29, 2013 5:40 pm
  • Welcome to Jackass.
    "Doug Baldwin doesn't get separation, he gets a divorce." -NorthDallas40oz
    User avatar
    jman316
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 366
    Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 10:46 am
    Location: Kingston, WA


Re: Johnny Knox
Tue Jan 29, 2013 7:02 pm
  • mikeak wrote:
    SeahawksFanForever wrote:I would rather spend big money on the D-line in the free agency. We are already paying Zach and Sidney big contracts. I would focus on WR n TE position in the draft because it should be cheaper. There should be a few options available in top 3 rounds.


    How does it matter on which position we spend the money if the total cap hit is the same or less one way?

    You go after those in FA that you think you can't get in the draft / you can get in the draft but at a better value in FA or those that while available in the draft you don't plan on using your picks on.

    If there are good WRs in FA and lots of them so you think you can get them cheap and there are good pass rushers in the draft then that is how you do it. Doesn't matter what we are spending on Rice and Zach


    Because this is not a pass first team and WRs usually get overpaid in the FA. Good D-linemen rarely become free agents and if there is someone available then I would rather sign that guy. We like to play solid D and run the ball. Our D-line needs more help than our WRs group. Alan Branch is going to be a FA. We were not good against the run and pass both.

    I believe that we are better off adding competition at WR position via draft. Just my opinion
    Richard Sherman to Skip Bayless: "I'm tired of your ignorant pollution!"

    Follow me on twitter: @seahawks_fan12
    User avatar
    SeahawksFanForever
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1991
    Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:11 pm




It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 1:15 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online