Wow. This question evokes lots of emotion.

I was always under the impression that Thurmond was competing for nickel.

Both are essentially playing for new contracts. Tical said Browner could play for any team. So not true. Browner is a brutal press corner, but doesn't look so good in zone. There will be a number of penalties with his style of play, there just will. Pete has acknowledged as much.

Montana pointed out he lost a game once. Well, he won the Panthers game. After he settled in, his play vs Washington in the playoffs was great. Brutal, but IIRC, the Washington receivers did a lot of yapping that week and initiatied the rough play.
And vs Atlanta, Browner was good. Thurmond was where? 22 out of 48 games is not reliable.

When I try to figure out which one to keep, age vs injuries is the question. Versatility vs single side corner. Brute vs technician. playmaker vs possible shutdown corner who is in repair shop more than half the time. PED user (which might be behind some of the sentiment) vs as yet clean player. I get the feeling a little patience will take care of the question. Jeremy Lane is part of the equation as well.

TDOTSEAHAWK wrote:Besides I have have seen many many good things from Browner. Beyond his size (which can't be stressed enough in a Carroll run defense) and durability (which cannot simply be ignored) he had 64 passes to his side last season and he gave up 30 receptions. His 5.5 yards/target is the 3rd best in the league. His adjusted success rate - which takes into account penalties was 61% - good for 10th. He certainly benefits from playing opposite Sherman but he is no slouch himself and is well above average as a second outside corner. Anyone remember Kelly Jennings?

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-a ... stats-2012

If anything I'd say the opposite is true - because Sherman and Browner don't follow receivers around, he often finds himself lining up against the opposition's number 1 receiver as teams want to avoid Sherman.[/quote]

The benefit is having ET over the top favouring his side. Browner would not be as effective without help over the top because jamming the receiver is one of the more effective parts lf his game (which is by design in a Carroll system).

By the way, on another note, I have never seen the "homer" card played at such an innapropriate time. Backing a pro bowl caliber starting corner vs a guy who has shown flashes of brilliance in 2010 and at three TCs is the furthest thing from homerism. It is simply rational.

Sherman can play basically 1 on 1 with anyone and can close off his side.

Thurmond could as well but his lack of physicality off the line hurts him on the outside in our system. Bigger recievers may manhandle him. Our whole defensive backfield philosophy is to disrupt timing by being aggresive off the line. I think with Browner on thr team, Thurmond is more appropriate for the nickel where his fluidity is a great asset.

Interesting discussion, guys. For one thing, I'm certainly glad that the discussion of our DBs has evolved from "who will do the least damage and get burned the fewest times" to "who will be the best player to put out there" with the argument being between some pretty good players.

We have a good selection of DBs of differing styles, sizes, and talents. Frankly, I could see a bit of mixing and matching vs different opponents and receivers. Even our backups are not slouches. We were in a bit of a panic when BB was suspended last year, but that turned out to be one of the most successful parts of the season. Not because BB was gone, but because our bench stepped up and made us not miss him that much. It ended up being like the OL the year before. Injuries knocked out 'key' players, but the team carried on. If there is one thing that Pete & Co have brought us that we have had little of for many years, it is resilience. Discussions like this only reinforce, to me, how deep this team is across the board.

In answer to the initial question: Will Thurmond win the job over Browner...? I'd say it's doubtful, but I guess it could happen.

Tical21 wrote:Agreed with the past few posts. LOL at the people asking what Browner has shown us vs. what Thurmond has shown us. I was pumped for Thurmond out of college and think he has talent. People saying he no question is the more talented? Based on what? His junior year of college? Thurmond is still halfway through his first cup of NFL coffee in terms of playing time. He looked pretty good in three games. Fantastic! What has Thurmond shown us? IMO he has shown us that he needs quite a bit longer track record of being able to stay on the field before you risk pissing off one of your better starting players.

Browner is also still improving. He's already damn good. There isn't a single team in the NFL he wouldn't start for. Of course it would be a good thing if Thurmond outplays him, but to say Thurmond has earned the chance to start after 8 healthy practices is borderline idiotic. Sure, let him run with the 1s a few times to see what he's got and to press Browner to play better. But demote your very good CB for a guy that hasn't shown anything besides looking good in street clothes? Out of the 34 games the Seahawks have played the last two years, Thurmond has been healthy enough to play in 8. If Browner wasn't damn good, sure, roll the dice, but lets see Thurmond can manage to suit up for a few games before we get too far ahead of ourselves.

Agreed. But it sure is a nice "problem" to have. I still remember the Kelly Jennings days. Except being able to play for anyone. I believe Browner is a system guy that happens to fit our scheme like a glove but have him playing zone? Not so good in my opinion.

I think reading comprehension is an undervalued thing here on the olé message board.

Nobody is saying that thurmond has earned the starting spot nor should he have it right now. But... If he out plays browner he should get it as the mantra here is competition.

Thurmond has a lot to prove. Not only to the coaches but to himself.

Personally, I don't see him supplanting Browner.

Let them compete! That has been, and continues to be the ethos of this team. Do I think Thurmond is capable of taking Browners Spot? No, not based on the body of work I have seen from him thus far in his career. Any coach would be a fool to mess with the startlingly efficient combination that is the LOB. Thurmond was brought in to supplant Kelly Jennings IIRC. And he would have, had he stayed healthy and had Browner not come to the party and impressed all with his Pre-season play the following year. As others have mentioned, Sherman is going to be the tipping point for any of these guys. If Sherman winds up getting the kind of money that has been discussed, then the Team will simply have no way to keep the current LOB intact! That opens doors for guys like Lane and Thurmond. It will surely be fun to watch!

Thursday night can't get here soon enough!

It's a great problem to have, it's all about depth and competition. Not long ago, we had Jennings and Wilson, ugh.

SoulfishHawk wrote:It's a great problem to have, it's all about depth and competition. Not long ago, we had Jennings and Wilson, ugh.

Touché... and no Shat!! *shudder*

To the question of whether WTIII would beat out Browner for starting RCB, trust has to be part of the conversation with the coaches. If WTIII wins the job based on play, would the secondary coaches put their jobs on the line and sign off on trading Browner for the sake of keeping locker room distractions to a minimum? Sort of like moving Jackson once it was obvious Wilson had the juice. I couldn't make the trade. Could JS/PC?

The same question applies for WTIII beating out Winfield. I think Thurmond ends up with the same role he had last year when he was active. I do think WTIII will be the more likely of the two vs Browner of being a target to re-sign. I could see the team re-signing him with a chance for him to compete for the starter in place of BB.

There is also a pretty good chance a trade is going to happen in this position group, though it isn't going to be for a high pick. I think WTIII is a possibility in a trade scenario as well.

HawkGA wrote:Browner should be used like the enforcer in hockey. Bring him in to give hard checks, then sit him in the penalty box for a bit. I still love seeing the fight he got into in the Green Bay game.

That deal with Jennings wasn't it? Set the scene for the rest of the league. As I've said before after someone catches the ball all other receivers become down field blockers. No one else in the league did anything about that since Dick Butkus.

But Browner wants to give those guys something else to think about than jogging down the field so he legally knocked Jennings on his ass. It was Jennings that jumped up and ran at him ready to fight. He then did the smart thing, (of course the humor in it was a little bitty receiver going after a monster sized DB), grabbed him, protected himself without retaliating. Jennings was the one that should have gotten the penalty there.

The entire NFC hates Browner because he hits receivers within 5 yards. HIT being the primary word. Everyone else just chucks them, Browner hits them enough to screw up the timing of the play. Receivers are thinking about getting hit rather than catching the ball.

THIS IS HOW FOOTBALL SHOULD BE PLAYED!!

I have heard tho can't confirm Browner spoke with the officials and talked about how he played and thought they were giving him penaltys based on their "perception" of him doing something illegal rather than the actual fact of it. Whether its true or not notice how the penaltys directed at him have dropped off a lot since that first season?

When he's gone, it will be a loss to our team unless someone else comes along to fill his shoes. I'm hoping they manage to keep him a couple of more years with either yearly or perhaps a 2 years contract. I know he's not young by football standards but so far he's still able to do the job.

Lynch Mob wrote:yeah i think PC would go by the match up becuase Browner don't have Sherman's speed and agility to play against anybody. Thurmond does but he don't have Browner's physicallity so i think if the match up was say Steve Smith from the panthers you start Thurmond.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i'd say Browner is the faster of the two between him and Sherm. People underestimate his speed all the time, other than Thomas, i'd say browner is the second fastest out of the starting secondary...

For those who say that Browner isn't a top 10 corner in this league, is burned to often and all the rest. I think you may change your tune once you see what the numbers say. He is ahead of Sherman in a couple categories and they call him a "star". Browner is also a great tackler, which in today's read option is a asset to have on the outside. I think Thurmond "if" healthy may press Winfield for time not Browner.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-a ... stats-2012

I'm sure it has already been said, but if not...WT lost his starting job to Browner due to injury.

Sherman actually replaced Thurmond when he got injured...Browner was already a starter.

The Radish wrote:

HawkGA wrote:Browner should be used like the enforcer in hockey. Bring him in to give hard checks, then sit him in the penalty box for a bit. I still love seeing the fight he got into in the Green Bay game.

That deal with Jennings wasn't it? Set the scene for the rest of the league. As I've said before after someone catches the ball all other receivers become down field blockers. No one else in the league did anything about that since Dick Butkus.

But Browner wants to give those guys something else to think about than jogging down the field so he legally knocked Jennings on his ass. It was Jennings that jumped up and ran at him ready to fight. He then did the smart thing, (of course the humor in it was a little bitty receiver going after a monster sized DB), grabbed him, protected himself without retaliating. Jennings was the one that should have gotten the penalty there.

The entire NFC hates Browner because he hits receivers within 5 yards. HIT being the primary word. Everyone else just chucks them, Browner hits them enough to screw up the timing of the play. Receivers are thinking about getting hit rather than catching the ball.

THIS IS HOW FOOTBALL SHOULD BE PLAYED!!

I have heard tho can't confirm Browner spoke with the officials and talked about how he played and thought they were giving him penaltys based on their "perception" of him doing something illegal rather than the actual fact of it. Whether its true or not notice how the penaltys directed at him have dropped off a lot since that first season?

When he's gone, it will be a loss to our team unless someone else comes along to fill his shoes. I'm hoping they manage to keep him a couple of more years with either yearly or perhaps a 2 years contract. I know he's not young by football standards but so far he's still able to do the job.

This. Well said Les.

It's BB for me all day.

This isn't going to be too popular but I see WT3 as Sherman's replacement. Not for lack of want on my part or the Seahawks, I just don't think they will be able to afford to pay him. Browner could very well be on his way out at that time as well, that's why it's going to be interesting to see how the Hawks handle all their current depth at DB.

What this discussion brings to mind for me is a reminder of how attached to these players I (and I think it's safe to say we) have become in just 2-3 years. I frickin' love this team. I'm going to be pretty devastated when key pieces inevitably leave (the price for having so much talent). This isn't a downer post, but just a reminder to myself and anyone who needs it that we're REALLY lucky right now, this is an extremely fun team to watch. I hope BB and WT3 have great years out there.

I can see our defensive back positions being a huge point of 'contention' for a pretty long time given Carroll's ability to identify and develop CB talent. Personally, I would rather see Thurmond used for deep coverage and Browner used for shorter coverage because it puts both players in the best position to succeed (assuming Thurmond is healthy.) There are only so many spots on the field, of course, and I agree with Montana that if Thurmond is outplaying Browner in practice, he deserves to start, however, this might be one of those cases where it's a bit of a red herring to ask which of the two when it's could be set up that we have both.

However, I also think that if Thurmond can maintain his health, he's the more likely of the two to be retained by Seattle next year.

Good, i still had it.

Browners not fast?

You better check yourself.

If you catch AP from behind, you are VERY fast, not just average fast.

To answer the OP's question in one word:

No.

Not only the speed to catch AP, but still have the strength to finish by faceplanting AP at the 2 yard line.

Thurmond is getting 1st unit reps so that we can trade him this year for good value....

Here's a piece from Sando:

Thurmond, at his healthy best, could be the better corner. Browner's uncommon size (6-foot-4 and 220 pounds) makes him valuable as well, particularly when the Seahawks face physical receivers such as the San Francisco 49ers' Anquan Boldin. Browner has even covered 49ers tight end Vernon Davis at times.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/ ... nd-to-have

SirTed wrote:It's BB for me all day.

This isn't going to be too popular but I see WT3 as Sherman's replacement. Not for lack of want on my part or the Seahawks, I just don't think they will be able to afford to pay him. Browner could very well be on his way out at that time as well, that's why it's going to be interesting to see how the Hawks handle all their current depth at DB.

What this discussion brings to mind for me is a reminder of how attached to these players I (and I think it's safe to say we) have become in just 2-3 years. I frickin' love this team. I'm going to be pretty devastated when key pieces inevitably leave (the price for having so much talent). This isn't a downer post, but just a reminder to myself and anyone who needs it that we're REALLY lucky right now, this is an extremely fun team to watch. I hope BB and WT3 have great years out there.

Well said. Yeah, it's not a popular thought. But it very well could be true. Sherman is setting himself up to get paid big time. And it's going to coincide with Wilson getting paid as well. I really hope we can keep Sherman. But it's definitely a possibility that the Hawks won't be able to afford him. Hope that isn't the case. But it's worth considering.

No matter who wins it's a good problem to have

I honestly think this is much about nothing.

It will be interesting to see how Walter holds up this season. IF he can stay healthy he is probably our 2nd best cover CB, right behind Sherm. However, it will be tough to move BB out of the starting spot, unless his play takes a large slip.

FlyingGreg wrote:Here's a piece from Sando:

Thurmond, at his healthy best, could be the better corner. Browner's uncommon size (6-foot-4 and 220 pounds) makes him valuable as well, particularly when the Seahawks face physical receivers such as the San Francisco 49ers' Anquan Boldin. Browner has even covered 49ers tight end Vernon Davis at times.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/ ... nd-to-have

And this is what I proposed last year, that BB be our tight end coverage guy when he starts to slow down.

Cartire wrote:Good, i still had it.

Browners not fast?

You better check yourself.

I was just about to say this when I saw you post this. People really underestimate Browner's speed. I remember him running down Adrian freakin Peterson to save a touchdown!

I honestly can't believe this is even a debate. Not only has Browner proven that he is a pro bowl caliber player, he's probably (along with Kam Chancellor) played the biggest part in creating the Seahawk's physical identity on defense. It seems like some of you don't understand how amazing it is to have two physical freaks starting at cornerback. We have an advantage at the cornerback position that no team in the league can rival. Sherm and Browner absolutely bully opposing wide receivers, pressing with their unrivaled (at the CB position) size and strength. Not only does this help our safeties in coverage by giving them more time to react, it gets into the heads of the receivers and quarterback. Having 2 long corners is extremely difficult to pass against. There is very little room for error on throws because of the corner's length. I'll also add that Browner is probably the hardest hitting corner in the league.

I've never understood all the WT3 love/Browner under-appreciation around here. I remember this same thing being talked about last season. I think the fact that WT3 is a Pacific northwest prospect has some to do with it. I get that he has talent, but he has literally proven nothing on the football field to say that he should overtake Browner. Browner would have been a pro bowler again last year if it weren't for his suspension. Hmmm... Pro bowl corner? Or corner who MIGHT be good but hasn't proven a thing? I'll take the former.

This post isn't directed at anyone specifically. Just thought I should add that.

Let's just enjoy what is more than likely Browners last year in Hawk blue. Thurmond had better hope he has a decent spring or he is outside looking in.

not this year

Warren Moon just stated on whatever the 3pm kiro sports dudez show is that he thinks one of these two will not be on the team. I don't see either getting cut, maybe one gets traded or is Warren is talking out his backside?

m0ng0 wrote:Warren Moon just stated on whatever the 3pm kiro sports dudez show is that he thinks one of these two will not be on the team. I don't see either getting cut, maybe one gets traded or is Warren is talking out his backside?

I cant see Browner getting cut or traded, what would be the benefit of trading a Pro-Bowl corner right before a season?

kearly wrote:Browner is probably the league's nastiest press corner, and he combines that with smart play, good awareness, a big wingspan and soft hands. He's actually pretty fast in a dead sprint too, its just that he lacks fluidity which really hurts him against quicker receivers with regards to short area quickness. Browner is also a very nice player to have in run support. Browner was a legit pro-bowler in 2011 and was even better in 2012 (disqualified - Adderall).

So it's with no disrespect when I agree with many others that Thurmond is the better of the two. Thurmond's ball skills rival Sherman's, and the rest of his game isn't terribly far behind. Maybe Thurmond really can't stay healthy, but if he does stay on the field, he's on his way to doing great things.

IIRC, Pete didn't shy away from getting his backup DBs on the field last season, even before we lost Browner. So I expect we'll see a lot of rotating at the position, and both will be 2013 contributors.

I couldn't agree with you more Kip. Thurmond's talent is undeniable. The times he's actually been in there he's looked good -- VERY GOOD IMO. In terms of his coverage ability, I'd say he's far superior to Browner, but then again Browner just plays such a different game -- he's the yin to Sherman's yang because of how physical he plays and how he can disrupt opposing WR's routes. Thurmond's biggest problem has always been a matter of being able to stay healthy. If he's actually able to for any sustainable period of time ... then absolutely he's quite capable of winning that starting spot. In the end my money's on Browner, but it should be an interesting competition for sure. Even if he doesn't, I'd say Thurmond's a lock in dime packages and would be an incredible shot in the arm there along with Winfield.

GoldenIsThyTate wrote:

m0ng0 wrote:Warren Moon just stated on whatever the 3pm kiro sports dudez show is that he thinks one of these two will not be on the team. I don't see either getting cut, maybe one gets traded or is Warren is talking out his backside?

I cant see Browner getting cut or traded, what would be the benefit of trading a Pro-Bowl corner right before a season?

I could just about see the benefit of trading him if we were to get a high pick (assuming the FO thought Thurmond was the better option).
Obviously the same applies to Thurmond, but his perceived value by other teams probably isn't an accurate reflection of his actual value.

As such, I don't believe that either will be cut or traded. I could maybe see the logic in Winfield getting cut (for Thurmond), but none of the three have a particularly high cap hit, so I really don't see any value to getting rid of any unless we get a ridiculous offer

Thurmond is fun to fantasize about, but his claim to fame so far is being as durable as wet cardboard, and a pass interference call in the endzone in the Saints playoff game. Until he can actually stay on a field for multiple games in a row in a significant role, I don't think we really have any idea what kind of player thurmond is yet

ensett wrote:Thurmond is fun to fantasize about, but his claim to fame so far is being as durable as wet cardboard, and a pass interference call in the endzone in the Saints playoff game. Until he can actually stay on a field for multiple games in a row in a significant role, I don't think we really have any idea what kind of player thurmond is yet

Again, Thurmond has played 22 games, including 14 in a row during the 2010 season. If he were as much a stranger to the field as you and others are implying, we wouldn't have the football-savvy guys on this board (e.g. Kip and Hawkscanner) comparing him to Browner in net value, not to mention Sando. The distinct goodwill and anticipation for Thurmond that has remained amongst the community, journalists, and bloggers doesn't exist for no reason. He HAS played enough to give us an idea of his potential.

I'm not taking Moon's comment about cutting one of them at face value. Given WT3's injury history, Browner's effective but one-dimensional game, their combined cheapness, and room for both on the roster, there's absolutely no compelling reason to jettison either one. If one must be traded, trade Browner. Thurmond has the talent, we've got Winfield in the slot, there's ridiculous depth, and Browner might well fetch a third-rounder from some idiot front office.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

ensett wrote:Thurmond is fun to fantasize about, but his claim to fame so far is being as durable as wet cardboard, and a pass interference call in the endzone in the Saints playoff game. Until he can actually stay on a field for multiple games in a row in a significant role, I don't think we really have any idea what kind of player thurmond is yet

Again, Thurmond has played 22 games, including 14 in a row during the 2010 season. If he were as much a stranger to the field as you and others are implying, we wouldn't have the football-savvy guys on this board (e.g. Kip and Hawkscanner) comparing him to Browner in net value, not to mention Sando. The distinct goodwill and anticipation for Thurmond that has remained amongst the community, journalists, and bloggers doesn't exist for no reason. He HAS played enough to give us an idea of his potential.

I'm not taking Moon's comment about cutting one of them at face value. Given WT3's injury history, Browner's effective but one-dimensional game, their combined cheapness, and room for both on the roster, there's absolutely no compelling reason to jettison either one. If one must be traded, trade Browner. Thurmond has the talent, we've got Winfield in the slot, there's ridiculous depth, and Browner might well fetch a third-rounder from some idiot front office.

You're aware that the Seahawks have played 51 games during that time frame, right? But Thurmond was able to play 14 in a row!! Let's crown his ass~!

I ask again, since nobody would answer. How many of those 22 games did Thurmond spend significant time at corner? How many were primarily special teams games with a little nickel mixed in?

If you had to bet your house this season....would Thurmond be healthy enough for 12 games?

I don't think anybody has said he isn't talented. Just that there is no way to be sure yet how talented, and that he can't stay on the field anywhere near long enough to be trusted to the point where you demote an improving player that is already a pro-bowler.

Lets see if the kid can even stay off IR for a few weeks before we go around demoting very good players. This is getting ridiculous.

MontanaHawk05 wrote: Browner might well fetch a third-rounder from some idiot front office.

Why on earth would we trade Browner for a lousy Third round pick going into THIS season?

Break up The Legion of Boom for The Legion of Whom??

m0ng0 wrote:Warren Moon just stated on whatever the 3pm kiro sports dudez show is that he thinks one of these two will not be on the team. I don't see either getting cut, maybe one gets traded or is Warren is talking out his backside?

Sounds like Moon is already drunk.

GoldenIsThyTate wrote:

m0ng0 wrote:Warren Moon just stated on whatever the 3pm kiro sports dudez show is that he thinks one of these two will not be on the team. I don't see either getting cut, maybe one gets traded or is Warren is talking out his backside?

I cant see Browner getting cut or traded, what would be the benefit of trading a Pro-Bowl corner right before a season?

A first round draft pick+our first round draft pick=Jadevon Clowney

Cleveland would become really really good defensively with a second stud corner...

When Whitehurst and Depalma are working him I think Browner is fine.

Browner and ET make a great combo. Browner bullies them at the line enough to slow the route down giving ET more than enough time to read the QB.

For all the raving in camp, Thurmond looked incredibly average today. Meh.

Coug_Hawk08 wrote:For all the raving in camp, Thurmond looked incredibly average today. Meh.

He was a step behind all game. Could be him getting up to speed. Could be that he has lost a step. Would like to see more of him. Winfield wasn't tested much tonight, so it is hard to make a real comparison.

Coug_Hawk08 wrote:For all the raving in camp, Thurmond looked incredibly average today. Meh.

Agreed

HawksFTW wrote:

Coug_Hawk08 wrote:For all the raving in camp, Thurmond looked incredibly average today. Meh.

He was a step behind all game. Could be him getting up to speed. Could be that he has lost a step. Would like to see more of him. Winfield wasn't tested much tonight, so it is hard to make a real comparison.

Agree but it was nice seeing Thurmond out there regardless.

Thurmond is probably rusty as heck after spending the majority of every season since he was in HS on the sideline