Basis4day
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 5,924
- Reaction score
- 0
If anyone is curious and wants to hear the podcast, it broke during hour 3 of Bob n Groz.
hawknation2014":1q3z2jz4 said:rainger":1q3z2jz4 said:This smacks of Pete Carroll and his philosophy.
Honestly, I can't recall a time when something similar has happened during Pete Carroll's career with any team. I thought Harvin was one of Carroll's "favorites," a unique athlete he was willing to be extremely patient with in the hopes that it would pay dividends in a big game. This move is extremely uncharacteristic of Carroll. To me, it is somewhat of an overreaction to Harvin's short term struggles in learning the playbook. I think they could have found a better trade deal after this season.
Andrew Brandt @adbrandt
Knowing John Schneider and importance of trust to him, he did not hoodwink Idzik. The @nyjets know exactly what they're getting.
kearly":19ay0oxh said:This is sudden and shocking, but not surprising. I would have expected Harvin to be on the trade block next March, this was just a bit sooner. He's owed a ton of money without getting the kind of production that money requires, he's a high maintenance player who has clearly impacted Bevell's playcalling this season.
At our best, Harvin makes Seattle a much better team, but at our worst he posed too much of a threat to Seattle's "control to win" identity. For Seattle to get back on track to being a team that controls to win, that would mean more Lynch and less Harvin, and it's not hard to see how this would create headaches in the locker room.
As Scotte says, this move is 100% Pete. Just like the move to get Percy in the first place. Pete wanted Harvin for a really long time.
There is a degree of truth to Pete's official explanation. Running an offense that could feature Harvin and still impose it's will is very difficult to do, and I think Seattle would rather have a team that controls the game more consistently even at the expense of being less explosive or dynamic.
But that said, this is clearly motivated by locker room issues. And this isn't the first time we've seen Pete do this. In 2009, Housh was our leading WR. He didn't even catch a regular season pass here in 2010, because Pete valued "buying in" that much. The move to cut Housh didn't save Seattle a single cent, in fact it actually cost them money because they had to pay his replacement. Contrast that with the team paying Sidney Rice all that money all those years because he was a good organizational soldier.
I'm not trying to impugn Harvin's character. But we knew before the trade that he's a guy that's difficult to be around if things aren't going perfect. The struggle between dynamism and control and managing the ball-hogging egos of Harvin and Lynch proved too much. Especially when the more problematic of the two was the one who needed to be minimized for the benefit of the team.
This trade makes all the sense in the world to me. I am not the least bit upset. Seattle is not able to control teams with defense in 2014. However, they have the tools to control teams with their offense, but only if they marginalize Harvin. In the two games where they didn't control the game on offense, they lost. Of course, reducing Harvin's role would cause problems in the locker room, if there weren't problems already. That Seattle has been looking to trade Harvin for some time is not a surprise to me either.
And though I really hate to say this, I wouldn't be surprised if we also see Christine Michael being traded as well in the next calendar year. There are very few plausible reasons for him not being activated for games other than one of the coaches (probably Cable) hating his guts.
Moving forward, this trade gives Seattle some much needed cap flexibility with their current 3 year plan, and it will give Seattle a draft pick in the area of the draft where they've had success.
As far as the original trade, I had my reservations about it at the time, because I wondered how Harvin would fit personality wise with a coach who values relationships more than any coach in the NFL, especially given Pete's past history with players like Housh and Lendale White. I think Pete knew this was a gamble and sometimes you lose those. What Pete was not wrong about is that this team badly needs a true #1 WR and I can't blame him for trying to get one.
The part of the original trade that hurts the most is that the 2013 draft was one of the best late 1st round groups of talent I've ever seen. Had they kept the pick, they very well might have drafted DeAndre Hopkins, and even the somewhat pedestrian Datone Jones would be a nice fit on our D-line too.
For those wringing their hands for Tate, I'm not saying the rumors about him and Wilson's wife are true, but the FO acted in such a way that made me think they believed the rumors. They lowballed his ass and did not make a counter offer when given the chance, even though they knew full well how valuable he was to our team.
Pizza Mane":2mornoc3 said:rumoursthe Tate punch was in response to his messing about with RW's wife. Neither are the protagonist if that's the case.
TwistedHusky":3ml4c8wr said:with effectively one of the worst WR corps in the NFL
LymonHawk":42x9t50x said:On the bright side: I didn't buy a Harvin jersey.![]()