John Schneider interview on 710

[hawknation2015]

Let's play a game. Which player is Schneider referring to?

Q: How do you tell you really loves to play football before they're here?
"Just the way they play it. If you watch Marshawn Lynch run the ball in college, you pretty much know he loves football. Earl Thomas, the way he ran to the ball in college. We're going through it right now. We're watching players who don't finish plays. And what is that? What does that mean to you? It means there is a certain lack of intensity to them. And those players can't make it here. They will get passed over. And you can get tricked by the speed or the athleticism or the upside, and we've done that plenty of times here. And you have to be able to avoid those mistakes. If you do make those mistakes, you have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can."

It's a scouting question in reference to the draft only, imo. When he says 'we're going through it right now" he's talking about evaluating prospects in college "before they're here", not the Seahawks roster.

Is there questions about Lockette's love of the game? I've never noticed it. He plays special teams, an under appreciated job, as intense and emotional as it gets.

We did watch Lockette fail to finish a play and attack the ball, as Bevell has already said.

Does that show a lack of intensity in the way he runs routes? I would say yes. Is that correctable? Perhaps.

Maybe, but in that instance I think Lockette was just in over his head. He's has 18 career receptions and this was on the biggest stage of his life. I think his inexperience and the realization of the moment caused him play slow on his route, not a lack of passion or love of the game.

I still stand by my thinking he was basically talking about college prospects, but if we were to speculate on this referring to current players, couldn't you say he's talking about Lynch? I mean, he is the one contemplating retirement.

You could, perhaps, except for the fact that he specifically says Lynch was not one of those players. His two model examples were Lynch and Earl Thomas' ability to run to the ball.

Also, Lynch is almost always in attack mode when he runs the ball, so it's doubtful he would be referring to him, even if he hadn't said so explicitly.

 

[hawknation2015]

Let's play a game. Which player is Schneider referring to?

Q: How do you tell you really loves to play football before they're here?
"Just the way they play it. If you watch Marshawn Lynch run the ball in college, you pretty much know he loves football. Earl Thomas, the way he ran to the ball in college. We're going through it right now. We're watching players who don't finish plays. And what is that? What does that mean to you? It means there is a certain lack of intensity to them. And those players can't make it here. They will get passed over. And you can get tricked by the speed or the athleticism or the upside, and we've done that plenty of times here. And you have to be able to avoid those mistakes. If you do make those mistakes, you have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can."

It's a scouting question in reference to the draft only, imo. When he says 'we're going through it right now" he's talking about evaluating prospects in college "before they're here", not the Seahawks roster.

Is there questions about Lockette's love of the game? I've never noticed it. He plays special teams, an under appreciated job, as intense and emotional as it gets.

This is correct....it's what they are evaluating right now for the draft...in watching film of college players, "...Marshawn in college...Earl in college...", "...shows a lack of intensity....they can't make it here....they will get passed over...". It's NOTHING to do with current Seahawks but in determining future players they will draft!

If that is the case, then what did this next statement refer to: "And you can get tricked by the speed or the athleticism or the upside, and we've done that plenty of times here. And you have to be able to avoid those mistakes. If you do make those mistakes, you have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can."

That's obviously referring to players ("mistakes") who they have already signed. Could be Harvin . . . could be Lockette . . . and almost certainly others.

I found this whole interview to be really fascinating with so much innuendo and so many angles for fans like us to mull over.

The comment about Lynch knowing that if he returns next year it won't be at his current salary level was also intriguing.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

If that is the case, then what did this next statement refer to: "And you can get tricked by the speed or the athleticism or the upside, and we've done that plenty of times here. And you have to be able to avoid those mistakes. If you do make those mistakes, you have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can."

Aaron Curry would be the best example of what John's talking about.

A player that on paper looks to be everything you want, but they're fools gold because they lack the grit, heart, nasty streak, love of the game and chip on their shoulder that John and Pete require to be in this team.

 

[kidhawk]

Let's play a game. Which player is Schneider referring to?

Q: How do you tell you really loves to play football before they're here?
"Just the way they play it. If you watch Marshawn Lynch run the ball in college, you pretty much know he loves football. Earl Thomas, the way he ran to the ball in college. We're going through it right now. We're watching players who don't finish plays. And what is that? What does that mean to you? It means there is a certain lack of intensity to them. And those players can't make it here. They will get passed over. And you can get tricked by the speed or the athleticism or the upside, and we've done that plenty of times here. And you have to be able to avoid those mistakes. If you do make those mistakes, you have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can."

It's a scouting question in reference to the draft only, imo. When he says 'we're going through it right now" he's talking about evaluating prospects in college "before they're here", not the Seahawks roster.

Is there questions about Lockette's love of the game? I've never noticed it. He plays special teams, an under appreciated job, as intense and emotional as it gets.

This is correct....it's what they are evaluating right now for the draft...in watching film of college players, "...Marshawn in college...Earl in college...", "...shows a lack of intensity....they can't make it here....they will get passed over...". It's NOTHING to do with current Seahawks but in determining future players they will draft!

If that is the case, then what did this next statement refer to: "And you can get tricked by the speed or the athleticism or the upside, and we've done that plenty of times here. And you have to be able to avoid those mistakes. If you do make those mistakes, you have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can."

That's obviously referring to players ("mistakes") who they have already signed. Could be Harvin . . . could be Lockette . . . and almost certainly others.

I found this whole interview to be really fascinating with so much innuendo and so many angles for fans like us to mull over.

The comment about Lynch knowing that if he returns next year it won't be at his current salary level was also intriguing.

You really are just looking for anything at all you might be able to interpret as him speaking negatively about current players. If you've paid attention to Schneider long enough, he just doesn't do that. It's not in his DNA. He is inferring that they've made mistakes in the past and when they figure that out, they move quickly to fix that mistake.

Schneider isn't tipping his hand as to any player's future here. No matter how much you may or may not want him to.

 

[McGruff]

Tons of really interesting info in that interview.

Sounds like we'll get 10 picks overall, not 11 so we likely won't get 4 comp picks but 3.

Sounds like RW's contract will be "out of the box" and JS hinted at RW taking a discount of sorts to allow the team to be competitive for the long term. This is great news! Note that this doesn't necessarily mean he'll take less, but maybe structured in a way to help the team or setup a restructure down the road.

Interesting info on Percy and his lack of fit.

JS like the "balance and depth" of this draft class. Has been working on it for a couple of months already.

They want Lynch back. Unsure if Lynch wants to come back. One thing is sure, either he'll retire or play under a new contract. He won't finish out his current contract. This could actually help us as his first year cap hit would be lower than his current 2015 number although it would extend it 2 years likely.

Great stuff overall. Here's the link for anyone who wants to listen:

http://mynorthwest.com/category/pod_pla ... and%20Salk

I was just coming here to post this. For those looking to hear it from the horses mouth and get a little excited for things to come, it's a great listen. I may never totally get over that loss, but I'm now ready to move on. Definitely a worthwhile listen.

On Wilson's extension, I didn't take it as much as a discount, but more that they will work out a contract that allows us to be able to keep other players. This may be more of just contract structure instead of actual discount. Will be interesting, I'm sure.

PFT is speculating that it may be a discounted contract, on par with Tannehill's reported deal ($15 million per), but fully guaranteed.

 

[kidhawk]

PFT is speculating that it may be a discounted contract, on par with Tannehill's reported deal ($15 million per), but fully guaranteed.

Guaranteed money at a lower annual rate would be another possible route to go, although that type of contract can really bite you hard if the player were go get injured. If they went that route, they'd better invest in Offensive line, and keep T-Jack because one bad luck hit could see us in an immediate cap bind.

I'd rather see him get more per year, but less guaranteed to alleviate the risk of too much guaranteed monies. It's very likely there could be a mixture of philosophies in this particular contract to keep everyone happy and keep us in good shape financially.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

If that is the case, then what did this next statement refer to: "And you can get tricked by the speed or the athleticism or the upside, and we've done that plenty of times here. And you have to be able to avoid those mistakes. If you do make those mistakes, you have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can."

That's obviously referring to players ("mistakes") who they have already signed. Could be Harvin . . . could be Lockette . . . and almost certainly others.

There's a number of draft picks this could refer to: Kris Durham, Mark Legree, Chris Harper. And of course we all know John Moffitt had zero love for the game.

The reason i believe John is talking about the evaluation process of college players is because he's made this exact same reference before last years draft when talking about drafting prospects who didn't have the drive to compete against the players on this team and that was before Harvin was an issue at the time.

The comment about Lynch knowing that if he returns next year it won't be at his current salary level was also intriguing.

Probably the thing that stands out the most to me. Does this mean a pay increase on a 1 year deal or is it that they want him to sign an extension that allows them to back load his contract to free up cap space? Intriguing for sure.

 

[hawknation2015]

You really are just looking for anything at all you might be able to interpret as him speaking negatively about current players. If you've paid attention to Schneider long enough, he just doesn't do that. It's not in his DNA. He is inferring that they've made mistakes in the past and when they figure that out, they move quickly to fix that mistake.

Schneider isn't tipping his hand as to any player's future here. No matter how much you may or may not want him to.

I think we should just agree to disagree about whom these mistakes are that he was referring to the . . . the ones with speed and athleticism that will fool you, but who don't finish plays. I appreciate the fact that you now admit you were wrong about the comment referring solely to Harvin. You were pretty adamant about that at first. Like Harvin, Lockette also won't be a Seahawk next year if he is not signed to a new deal.

Schneider can make an ambiguous comment that refers to making mistakes, and many people can have their own opinion about what he was referring to and what they plan to do to "compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can." Because of the ambiguity, nothing he said was throwing anyone under the bus, which is different than Bevell's comment that referred to Lockette by name.

I think of it like Bob Dylan referring to an anonymous woman in "Like a Rolling Stone." Because no one is mentioned by name, everyone is free to disagree about what and whom he was referring to. It's a matter of interpretation.

:th2thumbs:

 

[kidhawk]

You really are just looking for anything at all you might be able to interpret as him speaking negatively about current players. If you've paid attention to Schneider long enough, he just doesn't do that. It's not in his DNA. He is inferring that they've made mistakes in the past and when they figure that out, they move quickly to fix that mistake.

Schneider isn't tipping his hand as to any player's future here. No matter how much you may or may not want him to.

I think we should just agree to disagree about who these mistakes are that he was referring to the . . . the ones with speed and athleticism that will fool you, but who don't finish plays. I appreciate the fact that you now admit you were wrong about the comment referring solely to Harvin. You were pretty adamant about that at first. Like Harvin, Lockette also won't be a Seahawk next year if he not signed to a new deal.

Schneider can make an ambiguous comment that refers to making mistakes, and many people can have their own opinion about what he was referring to and what they plan to do to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can. Because of the ambiguity, nothing he said was throwing anyone under the bus, which is different than Bevell's comment that referred to Lockette by name.

I think of it like Bob Dylan referring to a anonymous woman in "Like a Rolling Stone." Because no one is mentioned by name, everyone is free to disagree about what and whom he was referring to. It's a matter of interpretation.

:th2thumbs:

You want to agree to disagree, because you want it so badly to be Lockette. If that were true, we'd not keep bringing him back. Lockette could have done better on that singular play, but Lockette is not a guy who regularly doesn't finish plays. If anything he may overplay a play, especially as a gunner.

As for being adamant about Harvin, I never was adamant. I made a quick reply after reading your first post. I then went back and listened to the interview and re-listened to that specific portion several times to be certain of what he was saying. I am absolutely adamant about him not talking about current players, but obviously that is what you want it to be about, so there's no changing your minds.

For the record, I don't see the ambiguity in it that you see, therefor I don't see this as agreeing to disagree. In this instance I believe 100% that you are as wrong about it being Lockette as I was originally about it being Harvin. The only difference is I went back to check what I heard and came to a much better conclusion. You still hear what you want to hear. No amount of facts I present here will change that, and since I don't know Schneider personally ,I can't get him to answer the question for you (not that you'd believe him if he did). So we'll just have to disagree.

 

[hawknation2015]

You really are just looking for anything at all you might be able to interpret as him speaking negatively about current players. If you've paid attention to Schneider long enough, he just doesn't do that. It's not in his DNA. He is inferring that they've made mistakes in the past and when they figure that out, they move quickly to fix that mistake.

Schneider isn't tipping his hand as to any player's future here. No matter how much you may or may not want him to.

I think we should just agree to disagree about who these mistakes are that he was referring to the . . . the ones with speed and athleticism that will fool you, but who don't finish plays. I appreciate the fact that you now admit you were wrong about the comment referring solely to Harvin. You were pretty adamant about that at first. Like Harvin, Lockette also won't be a Seahawk next year if he not signed to a new deal.

Schneider can make an ambiguous comment that refers to making mistakes, and many people can have their own opinion about what he was referring to and what they plan to do to compensate for them as quickly as you possibly can. Because of the ambiguity, nothing he said was throwing anyone under the bus, which is different than Bevell's comment that referred to Lockette by name.

I think of it like Bob Dylan referring to a anonymous woman in "Like a Rolling Stone." Because no one is mentioned by name, everyone is free to disagree about what and whom he was referring to. It's a matter of interpretation.

:th2thumbs:

You want to agree to disagree, because you want it so badly to be Lockette. If that were true, we'd not keep bringing him back. Lockette could have done better on that singular play, but Lockette is not a guy who regularly doesn't finish plays. If anything he may overplay a play, especially as a gunner.

As for being adamant about Harvin, I never was adamant. I made a quick reply after reading your first post. I then went back and listened to the interview and re-listened to that specific portion several times to be certain of what he was saying. I am absolutely adamant about him not talking about current players, but obviously that is what you want it to be about, so there's no changing your minds.

For the record, I don't see the ambiguity in it that you see, therefor I don't see this as agreeing to disagree. In this instance I believe 100% that you are as wrong about it being Lockette as I was originally about it being Harvin. The only difference is I went back to check what I heard and came to a much better conclusion. You still hear what you want to hear. No amount of facts I present here will change that, and since I don't know Schneider personally ,I can't get him to answer the question for you (not that you'd believe him if he did). So we'll just have to disagree.

Not at all. In fact, as I have said in the past, I think Lockette is worth bringing back on a minimum deal because he is a terrific special teamer and blocker.

This is purely my interpretation of one of the "mistakes" I think Schenider was referring to . . . the one he plans to compensate for as quickly as he can.

He doesn't refer to those mistakes by name, so I disagree with you that you can know with any certainty what those mistakes are and how they plan to correct them.

 

[kidhawk]

Not at all. In fact, as I have said in the past, I think Lockette is worth bringing back on a minimum deal because he is a terrific special teamer and blocker.

This is purely my interpretation of one of the "mistakes" I think Schenider was referring to . . . the one he plans to compensate for as quickly as he can.

He doesn't refer to those mistakes by name, so I disagree with you that you can know with any certainty what those mistakes are how they plan to correct them.

He doesn't say he "plans to compensate for them" he said "if we do make those mistakes we have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you can". He never said that he plans to compensate for any particular mistake. He is talking about a philosophy. He doesn't even have to "compensate" for Lockette because he's a free agent. We don't need to do anything, so to believe he's somehow planning to compensate for some perceived error with Lockette just doesn't hold water.

 

[hawknation2015]

Not at all. In fact, as I have said in the past, I think Lockette is worth bringing back on a minimum deal because he is a terrific special teamer and blocker.

This is purely my interpretation of one of the "mistakes" I think Schenider was referring to . . . the one he plans to compensate for as quickly as he can.

He doesn't refer to those mistakes by name, so I disagree with you that you can know with any certainty what those mistakes are how they plan to correct them.

He doesn't say he "plans to compensate for them" he said "if we do make those mistakes we have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you can". He never said that he plans to compensate for any particular mistake. He is talking about a philosophy. He doesn't even have to "compensate" for Lockette because he's a free agent. We don't need to do anything, so to believe he's somehow planning to compensate for some perceived error with Lockette just doesn't hold water.

By my interpretation, he would compensate for Lockette's inability to finish plays by not exercising his ERFA and replacing him with a player who will.

 

[chris98251]

Lockette is not the target, he referring to past signings, players types he is referring to are not amongst the team, they purge them. Lockette plays with seep and love of the game, his roll is not a inside receiver so you can discount that pass attempt as a knock on him from Bevell.

The past draft picks especially Durham types that they saw speed and size and a huge upside but didn't do well in our in your face competitive practices, other s as well, Harvins desire to be a me first player, thats what he is talking about.

 

[kidhawk]

Not at all. In fact, as I have said in the past, I think Lockette is worth bringing back on a minimum deal because he is a terrific special teamer and blocker.

This is purely my interpretation of one of the "mistakes" I think Schenider was referring to . . . the one he plans to compensate for as quickly as he can.

He doesn't refer to those mistakes by name, so I disagree with you that you can know with any certainty what those mistakes are how they plan to correct them.

He doesn't say he "plans to compensate for them" he said "if we do make those mistakes we have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you can". He never said that he plans to compensate for any particular mistake. He is talking about a philosophy. He doesn't even have to "compensate" for Lockette because he's a free agent. We don't need to do anything, so to believe he's somehow planning to compensate for some perceived error with Lockette just doesn't hold water.

By my interpretation, he would compensate for Lockette's inability to finish plays by not exercising his ERFA.

I understand "your interpretation". What you don't get is the context of what he was saying. Yes you can take his phrases out of context to mean exactly what you said, but not within the context of what was actually being discussed. You will never put them back into the proper context, so there really is no point in discussing it further

 

[Sgt. Largent]

John and Pete have churned over more players than every other team in the league, why are you guys hyper focused on one?

 

[hawknation2015]

Not at all. In fact, as I have said in the past, I think Lockette is worth bringing back on a minimum deal because he is a terrific special teamer and blocker.

This is purely my interpretation of one of the "mistakes" I think Schenider was referring to . . . the one he plans to compensate for as quickly as he can.

He doesn't refer to those mistakes by name, so I disagree with you that you can know with any certainty what those mistakes are how they plan to correct them.

He doesn't say he "plans to compensate for them" he said "if we do make those mistakes we have to be able to compensate for them as quickly as you can". He never said that he plans to compensate for any particular mistake. He is talking about a philosophy. He doesn't even have to "compensate" for Lockette because he's a free agent. We don't need to do anything, so to believe he's somehow planning to compensate for some perceived error with Lockette just doesn't hold water.

By my interpretation, he would compensate for Lockette's inability to finish plays by not exercising his ERFA.

I understand "your interpretation". What you don't get is the context of what he was saying. Yes you can take his phrases out of context to mean exactly what you said, but not within the context of what was actually being discussed. You will never put them back into the proper context, so there really is no point in discussing it further

That's fine. And thank you again for editing your post that criticized my "comprehension" when you were positive Schneider's comment was about Harvin ("Listen to the audio!"). I appreciate that kind of civility. We are both knowledgeable 12s and are entitled to our own opinions.

Outside of Lockette, I agree that Kris Durham would be a prime example of this kind of "mistake" for Schneider, i.e. a player whose speed will deceive you but who can't finish plays.

 

[kidhawk]

John and Pete have churned over more players than every other team in the league, why are you guys hyper focused on one?

Not focusing on the player, but the context of the words that John Schneider said on the radio today. It's just a pet peeve of mine that people's words are kept to the context they are made. I hate to see a meaning twisted to say something it didn't mean in any situation (well except humor of course, but that's another subject entirely)

 

[Hyak]

I listened to the interview and didn't think he was taking veiled shots at anyone. The context was in evaluating prospects as to whether they loved football based on the question from Salk. JS said it shows up on film about guys finishing plays and used a couple of our guys as examples of players who love football.

The closest he came to slamming anyone was with the Harvin questions and even then he did not go into details on it but just said it wasn't going to work.

Obviously he was vague in discussions about Lynch's contract, Wilson's negotiation, etc. I did think it was interesting that he steered evaluation of the game away from the last play to the entirety of it and how the offense started slow, the defense missed tackles, Lane's injury, and so on.

 

[kidhawk]

That's fine. And thank you again for editing your post that criticized my "comprehension" when you were positive Schneider's comment was about Harvin ("Listen to the audio!"). I appreciate that kind of civility. We are both knowledgeable 12s and are entitled to our own opinions.

Outside of Lockette, I agree that Kris Durham would be a prime example of this kind of "mistake" for Schneider, i.e. a player whose speed will deceive you but who can't finish plays.

Just so we're clear, even in the post I edited, I wasn't adamant about Harvin being the subject as much as I was being adamant about it not being Lockette. Of course that discussion is a dead horse that no longer needs beaten.

As for mistakes....Schneider and Pete have brought in many guys with physical skills that didn't have the mental "grit" that it takes to fit in here. They will take a look at just about anyone if they have something special in their arsenal, but if they don't have the "grit" (as John called it) they don't last long. I trust they will continue in the philosophy that has worked so well thus far and will give us continued success through 2015 and beyond....which is why I was so excited after listening to this interview in the first place.

 

[hawknation2015]

"I feel bad for Marshawn not having a chance to win the game." - John Schneider

:13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: :13: