Seeker":3uf19v7y said:Paul Allen.
He'll buy the 31 other teams and refuse to sign any Seahawks..?BobcatHawk":2wai0lna said:Seeker":2wai0lna said:Paul Allen.
I know he's rich and all, but exactly how does that help us against the cap?
CANHawk":ysghvri0 said:He'll buy the 31 other teams and refuse to sign any Seahawks..?BobcatHawk":ysghvri0 said:Seeker":ysghvri0 said:Paul Allen.
I know he's rich and all, but exactly how does that help us against the cap?
MLOhawks":2ecj5atx said:I like Browner more than Sherm, but we got to keep ALL FOUR of our secondary. It would be a disaster if we lost any of them.
The only change I see is I'd let Wright go and bring back JonesJazzhawk":rpripcvm said:Earl Thomas
Richard Sherman
Kam Chancellor
KJ Wright
Brandon Browner
Golden Tate
Jason Jones
Alan Branch
The first 5, to me, are the identity of the team and are critical to keep. The last three I like, but I don't see them as critical in growing the team. Golden is coming into his own, but I think there are rookies in the draft that can be had to replicate what he gives us, and the same with Branch and Jones. Does that mean I want to jettison them? No, I would love to have long-term relationships for them here. I just know I won't lose sleep if we can't keep them. I don't feel that way about the Legion of Boom, however.
You'd also have to ask if continuety and the chemistry would play a part in bringing in an unknown, remember Koren?zayden185":3fewi5k1 said:CANHawk":3fewi5k1 said:^Amen. Tate is super important to the offense. I'm a huge fan of what he brings. I wouldn't even think about parting ways with him at this point (unless he demands a totally stupid contract extension that is.)
What you have to ask is...could a cheaper rookie do his job? That's it...it's a bidness, and I waod say that any number of 4-7 draft picks can do what he does...and get separation as well on a consistent basis.
Had a great year..but replaceable
In fact I could argue that a faster taller version I him could do more!
And cheaper mid round pick with a chip on his shoulder fighting for veteran contract
HawkAroundTheClock":3411f0pz said:It is the belief in the philosophy that has this team, and individual players, getting better all the time. I foresee this belief being essential in keeping the core components and key players together as long as they're productive.
Sgt. Largent":1ro8yj84 said:HawkAroundTheClock":1ro8yj84 said:It is the belief in the philosophy that has this team, and individual players, getting better all the time. I foresee this belief being essential in keeping the core components and key players together as long as they're productive.
I always rolled my eyes a little when Pete goes into his "Always Compete" mumbo jumbo.
IMO the brilliance of how Carroll and Schneider have built the Hawks is because they've made a concerted effort to draft and bring in players with chips on their shoulders for one reason or another.
- Lynch: Told he was a head case and not worthy of being an elite back
- Wilson: Told he was too short
- Irvin: Pass rushing specialist with a troubled past never going to achieve anything
- Sherman: Converted WR too slow and big to amount to anything at the DB position
- Chancellor: Too big to play Safety, should have been drafted as a late round LB
- Browner: Canadian Football wash out
You get the point, all players that are going to bust their ass, study, prepare and scratch and claw every ounce of effort to prove the haters wrong. THIS is the genius behind the rebuilding process over the past 3-4 years.
HawkAroundTheClock":38lflxiy said:That is true, no argument. But that chip does no good if there's no support system to funnel the resentment into competition. A guy can have something to prove, but with no unifying guidance – in a team sport especially – it does not necessarily translate to success. Without the philosophy, there's just an angry young man out for himself. If the players rolled their eyes at competition "mumbo jumbo" we would not be having this conversation. With a lesser coaching staff, or an incomplete philosophy, we would be trying to figure out how to get rid of all these head-cases and bitter late-round picks. Pete's approach is not a bumper-sticker slogan ("It's NOW Time", anyone?) it's an approach to the game and to life that he has refined through experience and reflection. Richard Sherman answered a chat question last week asking what Pete Carroll was like behind closed doors with "Just as he is in front of everybody." There's no posturing, no head games, no grandstanding. Doing your best is not about listening to him, it's about what is inside each player. You compete at every moment to maximize your potential and this belief is the focus of this team. No doubt, you gotta get the right guys to buy in; those chip-on-the-shoulder guys you mentioned are a perfect fit for this FO's approach.
Sgt. Largent":25ani0zb said:HawkAroundTheClock":25ani0zb said:That is true, no argument. But that chip does no good if there's no support system to funnel the resentment into competition. A guy can have something to prove, but with no unifying guidance – in a team sport especially – it does not necessarily translate to success. Without the philosophy, there's just an angry young man out for himself. If the players rolled their eyes at competition "mumbo jumbo" we would not be having this conversation. With a lesser coaching staff, or an incomplete philosophy, we would be trying to figure out how to get rid of all these head-cases and bitter late-round picks. Pete's approach is not a bumper-sticker slogan ("It's NOW Time", anyone?) it's an approach to the game and to life that he has refined through experience and reflection. Richard Sherman answered a chat question last week asking what Pete Carroll was like behind closed doors with "Just as he is in front of everybody." There's no posturing, no head games, no grandstanding. Doing your best is not about listening to him, it's about what is inside each player. You compete at every moment to maximize your potential and this belief is the focus of this team. No doubt, you gotta get the right guys to buy in; those chip-on-the-shoulder guys you mentioned are a perfect fit for this FO's approach.
Don't get me wrong, Pete's positive approach to football (and life) is infectious........so I'm sure that rubs off on the players. But if we were to divide up into percentages as to what's making this team tick? I'd say it's 80% roster of players playing with a purpose to prove people wrong and get paid, and about 20% Carroll's "always compete happy happy" philosophy.
Sarlacc83":ztduh3zr said:Sgt. Largent":ztduh3zr said:HawkAroundTheClock":ztduh3zr said:That is true, no argument. But that chip does no good if there's no support system to funnel the resentment into competition. A guy can have something to prove, but with no unifying guidance – in a team sport especially – it does not necessarily translate to success. Without the philosophy, there's just an angry young man out for himself. If the players rolled their eyes at competition "mumbo jumbo" we would not be having this conversation. With a lesser coaching staff, or an incomplete philosophy, we would be trying to figure out how to get rid of all these head-cases and bitter late-round picks. Pete's approach is not a bumper-sticker slogan ("It's NOW Time", anyone?) it's an approach to the game and to life that he has refined through experience and reflection. Richard Sherman answered a chat question last week asking what Pete Carroll was like behind closed doors with "Just as he is in front of everybody." There's no posturing, no head games, no grandstanding. Doing your best is not about listening to him, it's about what is inside each player. You compete at every moment to maximize your potential and this belief is the focus of this team. No doubt, you gotta get the right guys to buy in; those chip-on-the-shoulder guys you mentioned are a perfect fit for this FO's approach.
Don't get me wrong, Pete's positive approach to football (and life) is infectious........so I'm sure that rubs off on the players. But if we were to divide up into percentages as to what's making this team tick? I'd say it's 80% roster of players playing with a purpose to prove people wrong and get paid, and about 20% Carroll's "always compete happy happy" philosophy.
I'm pretty sure the desire to win makes up more than 0% of that.