ESPN: Seattle Worst Off Season of all

[JerHawk81]

My thoughts:

1. We didn’t get enough for RW. Hogwash. We can debate whether trading RW was the right call, but we got a freaking haul for him.
2. We didn’t replace RW with a starting caliber QB. True - though I can see scenarios where we still get one, or we opt to not get one to tank.
3. We drafted a RB waaaaaay too early. Well, our 2nd Rnd RB is basically the starter today with RB1 and RB2 out injured - and likely injured for much of the year... so...
4. way overpaid for Dissly. True, but minor. We did overpay for him, but he's a good player, and the overpayment was not a team-limiting mistake.

Seattle Worst Off Season of all: This is either silly or nearsighted. I'm not sure we had an amazing, franchise-establishing, filling all holes, playoffs-in-a-year making offseason, but that's wasn't feasible, and wasn't even what we needed. We needed a good offseason that made us younger, added talent, rebuilding, and positioning us for salary cap space and draft capital in the future.

 

[BlueTalon]

Information:

ESPN's "paywall" is normally geo-locational. Set your VPN to UK, (or normally any European country that isn't using servers in the Netherlands), and the paywall disappears. @Shaggy doesn't like Dutch IPs either.

Thanks for the tip. Kinda regret wasting that few minutes, though. I read through the bottom three teams, and it seems the guy had no consistent criteria or situational awareness.

 

[BlueTalon]

3. We drafted a RB waaaaaay too early. Well, our 2nd Rnd RB is basically the starter today with RB1 and RB2 out injured - and likely injured for much of the year... so...

Plus, that particular RB with that particular set of skills & physical abilities simply wasn't going to be there any later for us.

 

[HawkStrong]

On the point that we didn't get enough for Wilson, are we forgetting Wilson apparently vetoed better deals to other teams? The no trade clause screwed Seattle's ability to get the highest possible return.

 

[HawkStrong]

If you like to think of penises all the time you might want to keep that to yourself. This is a Seahawks forum.

First off, why would I need to keep that to myself? Are you afraid of penises?

Second, I think you will find this forum has its fair share of dicks.

 

[BlueTalon]

On the point that we didn't get enough for Wilson, are we forgetting Wilson apparently vetoed better deals to other teams? The no trade clause screwed Seattle's ability to get the highest possible return.

You're absolutely right. Context is everything. That's why I said the guy has no situational awareness.

 

[HawkStrong]

Not just historical trends, it is reality. Belichick is still the best to ever do it, but it's just not the same without Tom Brady. QB's are far more valuable than coaches.

Only if they win playoff games.

 

[Rainger]

It’s behind a paywall but the gist is:
1. We didn’t get enough for RW
2. We didn’t replace RW with a starting caliber QB
3. We drafted a RB waaaaaay too early
4. way overpaid for Dissly

one or two quotes. I think that’s allowed right?

as to drafting a RB
“Beyond the Wilson deal, the Seahawks further committed toward their philosophy of a 1970s offense.”

as to what we could have done better: “Well, they could have kept Wilson and fired Carroll. If the relationship between quarterback and head coach had deteriorated to the point where one had to go, Seattle made the wrong choice.”

a lot more than that but if the writer could have easily just read only my comments and written that article and it would have looked exactly the same.

sad times.

Barnwell ranks NFL offseasons from first to worst: How much better are the Broncos?

The Broncos have a franchise quarterback, while the Seahawks ... don't. Let's stack all 32 teams based on their offseason moves.

www.espn.com

ESPN the worst woke, political "sports" organization in the world. Don't give a damn of anything that spews from that organization or their story fabricators.

 

[Chuckwow]

Dissly has monster potential. He's great and necessary in line and IF we get him a QB that can get him the ball...he'll catch that ball and he'll drag tacklers for first downs and more. I do feel we over-paid for his services...but I'm basing that on the way he has been used to date. I'm surprised the author didn't just say Will can't catch the ball. Using the criteria that he doesn't have many catches. But a wiser bystander would first take a look at his targets...or lack of.

With Fant in the picture and a hopefully emerging Parkinson, I'm unsure we will get our money's worth from Dissly in 22. But a different team surely could. In short, don't hate the player, hate the game. And if overpaying Dissly is the worst thing that happened this offseason (cuz the rest is just lazy journalism). I'm pretty OK with this off season.

Oh...and how did Tennessee do with that "70s offense" they run? The old adage will forever be true " only 3 things can happen when you pass the ball and 2 of them are bad". I don't adhere to this notion that you can draft an RB " too high". What spot was too high for Henry? How about Marshawn? If we used the first overall on either of those guys, I'd be plenty happy.

 

[Scout]

First of all the ideal value spot for drafting potential starting caliber RBs is now in the bottom half of the first 1st round/ 2nd round of the NFL draft league wide. Saying that the Hawks over drafted Walker is silly when the Broncos took J. Williams with a 2nd round pick in 2021 and in 2020 Swift, Taylor, Akers, Dobbins, and Dillon were all drafted in the 2nd round.

Others have covered that the Seahawks RB situation is unsettled because of a variety of reasons before they even drafted Walker.

Also the importance of drafting Walker becomes more valuable seeing that R. Wilson is not even on the roster anymore. The Colts didn't ever entertain the idea that they were not drafting J. Taylor because we have old man P. Rivers at the QB position....

As for compensation the other aspect of the compensation comes next off season with the draft haul of 2023. That first and second round pick can be potentially a lot higher than the media wants to believe so it is too early to judge that side of the compensation. And even then we do not know which players the Seahawks select with those draft choices.

But brushing aside Harris, Fant and Lock as if they do not have value is baffling.

First, Harris is under contract for two years with a very cap friendly deal. Fant also has two years on his contract and it is dirt cheap which essentially makes the Dissly deal a wash when you combine the total cap numbers of Fant and Dissly. Combined cap numbers for both players is $23 mil over the next two years which is very friendly for the cap.

Then we have D. Lock and if he ends up starting that is huge value for a team with large dead cap space in 2022 as his cap number is very tiny. Even if D. Lock doesn't start his contract for a #2 QB is still dirt cheap compared to the rest of the league.

Throw in the freed up cap space in 2023 and it puts the Seahawks in the driver seat to really turn it on in 2023 with draft capital, established roster and loads of cap space.

 

[bigskydoc]

Do you want to be the Cleveland Browns?

Because drafting a QB in this draft, or overpaying for one of this year's malcontent free agents, is how you become the Cleveland Browns.

 

[bigskydoc]

I admit. I have rose colored glasses when it comes to Dissly. We over paid for his past, but hit the target on his potential, especially considering the likely direction this team is going. With our cap situation, I can't argue with anyone who says that we aren't in a position to be paying for potential.

I wasn't a huge fan of the player, but I can't argue with where Walker was taken. It was definitely a position of need, and we picked up the player I wanted in that draft slot in the next round.

All in all, it was a solid off-season for a team that has the long vision. Start getting younger, shed some dead cap, build a solid core before bringing in a stud rookie QB. Where have we seen that recipe before?

 

[Aircrew]

ESPN the worst woke, political "sports" organization in the world. Don't give a damn of anything that spews from that organization or their story fabricators.

I could not agree more. ESPN should be a case study of what happens when a company becomes too large to be effectively managed, lose sight of what made them successful and who the customer really is. They need to fire everyone and start over if they ever have a prayer of being what they were at one time.

 

[flv2]

No team has gained more 2023 Draft capital in the last 4 months than the Seahawks. They gained that capital by trading away 2022 talent. By definition the Seahawks should be last in 2022 improvements. No reason to be upset at such a ranking. Personally I don't like what the Seahawks have done outside of the Wilson trade. The QB situation implies a 'tank' approach but everything else implies an overspend approach to winning in 2022. It's not a joined-up approach, (unless you believe Lock is going to be a top 16 QB).

 

[HawkRiderFan]

A trend that I have noticed so far with the National media, and I guess it's an obvious one. The guys who think Russ is a good as ever are really down on the Hawks, like this article. The guys who think Wilson has regressed are less critical. I mean no-one is saying the Hawks will be fine but not saying it will be a "disaster" either.

 

[jammerhawk]

Just who is Bill Barnwell? Is hisopinion actually relevant or just more parroting of the same ol’ negativity sold by some as legitimate a thought out opinion?

Given how formula like this article is, he seems to not really know much about the team.

Click bait rubbish to me, but whatever flats your boat.

For me ESPN has always had an anti-Seahawks bias.

 

[toffee]

ESPN piece is taking the common view that in this league, a team couldn't go far without a franchise QB, as the league rules are such that this is a passing league. Under that, Seahawks do not have a franchise QB, so we shall suck.

Some of us here has been questioning the effectiveness of Wilson's game in relationship to his age and mental makeup. He has helped us with winning seasons, but not much else. Plenty of blames for the front office, coaching etc. But Wilson is of that problem too, which ESPN didn't take into account.

I am good with where we are at, and ESPN need to hire better analyst, someone actually analyze, evaluate, before forming opinions.

 

[balakoth]

I always forget Pete made Wilson run around like a chicken with his head cut off. I gotta work on that

 

[Ruminator]

Pretty sure this will be an amusing article to revisit in a couple of years.

 

[Appyhawk]

I don't hold it against Russ and/or his agent for doing everything they could to make the most of their relatively brief opportunity in the limelight. ESPN and the media in general have invested in making Wilson a STAR, and they aren't ready to bail off that horse. So they contrive evidence to support that stance with an opinion piece.
To say the Seahawks are doomed to failure due to having parted ways with aging stars is short sighted and ignoring what is a pretty solid existing roster, except for the QB spot, and even that one could turn out to be a big surprise to them and to a lot of fans who buy into the gloomiest possible point of view.
A chip to carry on the shoulder can be a good thing. This is a good example of something that could add to motivation for the players we have.