5_Golden_Rings":12d9dago said:
I only addressed if you meant a scheme fit. If you meant a roster fit, then yes. But scheme? Foster can and would do very well in that scheme (as would Brooks).
So, I agree that this was a good trade for Seattle, but it's because of the roster, not the scheme.
It's a combo of both, scheme and roster. Obviously if the Seahawks were playing 3-4 -- (which they kinda do, in that their LEO plays like an LB at times) they would draft foster in a heartbeat.
And still, there is some scheme consideration. Example: They really do need a linebacker, however, the Seahawks SS linebacker, which they call SAM -- has to do a few things that Foster cannot do.
#1 The SAM linebacker is responsible for containing outside running plays, picking up the occasional wide receiver, tight end, AND has to take on the left tackle. He has to have long arms, speed, and bulk. Foster has A: short arms, and B: sub par speed, and he's a bit small. KPL is an example of a guy who has the speed to play SAM in our scheme but really struggles and is limited because he's a touch too small. He gets completely swallowed by tackles, and trucked by bigger backs and tight ends. Morgan has the same issue. Foster is about the same size or a little bit smaller than KPL and Morgan, in addition he is slower.
If he was about 2 inches taller and ran a 4.5 to 4.6 instead of a 4.6 to 4.7, you can bet your ass the Seahawks would have drafted him.
So, it's really a combo of roster and scheme.