More players claimed [off waivers] than any other team

[Jville]

"We have had more players claimed [off waivers] than any other team in the NFL over the last three years by a pretty good number," Carroll said. "That is a statement of who you have on your team and that is including the first year, when nobody wanted our guys. There will be teams that wanted our guys coming off this roster, too. We will have a very, very difficult time organizing the 53 this year."

Source link >>> [urltargetblank]http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/106342/closer-look-at-pete-carrolls-roster-claim[/urltargetblank]

 

[Kixkahn]

It will be interesting to see how many end up in our division.

 

[Blitzer88]

Very interesting. Bodes well for our talent evaluators.

 

[twisted_steel2]

"We have had more players claimed [off waivers] than any other team in the NFL over the last three years by a pretty good number,"

Interesting.

 

[bellingerga]

I remember being excited if more than 1 or 2 players in our drafts per year would be good, for like........ over a decade.

Now the current front office is drafting and scouting so well that we're over filled with talent to the point where we are letting some really good players go.

It sure is exciting times to be a seahawk fan.

 

[seahawk12thman]

Put poison pills in their contracts. We need to sign our DB's with clauses that if they sign with a team that wears red and gold their contracts is immediately guaranteed!! :mrgreen:

 

[drdiags]

Maybe because they churn the roster more than anybody else in the league? Look at the second place team (Patriots). They had some poor slob who was like the Seahawks version of the yo-yo guy. The man got cut like 5 times last season. There were a couple of DBs that got picked up last year in Gorer and Adams who stuck with the teams that picked them up. And they started a few games for their new teams. Too bad Sando didn't list all the names or how many remain on an NFL roster.

 

[BlueTalons]

Put poison pills in their contracts. We need to sign our DB's with clauses that if they sign with a team that wears red and gold their contracts is immediately guaranteed!! :mrgreen:

Somebody correct me if I am wrong about waivers...but don't teams that had a high draft position for that year get first shot a waived player? Thus...SF would be second-to-last to pick up a player? But teams can "move up" the waiver wire because a team above them picking up a player moves to the back of the line? Or am I off on this...?

 

[BocciHawk]

Put poison pills in their contracts. We need to sign our DB's with clauses that if they sign with a team that wears red and gold their contracts is immediately guaranteed!! :mrgreen:

Somebody correct me if I am wrong about waivers...but don't teams that had a high draft position for that year get first shot a waived player? Thus...SF would be second-to-last to pick up a player? But teams can "move up" the waiver wire because a team above them picking up a player moves to the back of the line? Or am I off on this...?

Someone will chime in here, but essentially you are correct, waiver claims are initially processed in opposite order from the first round draft pick order. At some point during the season, I think around the third or fourth week, the waiver order is reset to use the current winning percentages.

My understanding is that claiming a player doesn't put you at the end, though i.e. the Jaguars are 2nd I think on the waiver system, and will remain there until the reset in late September... when they might become 1st LOL

 

[BocciHawk]

Oh, and you are right, SF is 2nd to last, i.e. they won't get anyone decent from the waiver wire, unless they screw up their first four games royally and even then they'd only have waiver power after the fourth week... typically the best waiver claims are made in the cut down to 53.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Hopefully Gus Bradley will swoop up whoever we cut. I can't imagine he'd pass up on one of our Defensive players.

 

[SeaChase]

The first two seasons the team had a record personnel turnover, so I'm sure that also played a role in this

 

[PlinytheCenter]

The article also states that none of the players released have gone on to stardom. I figure it's just the sheer amount of roster moves we've made. There's a reason why we let them go. Just another fluff article.

 

[hawkfan68]

Put poison pills in their contracts. We need to sign our DB's with clauses that if they sign with a team that wears red and gold their contracts is immediately guaranteed!! :mrgreen:

Interesting idea but how do you attach a poison pill to a player you're waiving? Usually a "poison pill" is attached to a player you sign (free agent) preventing the incumbent team from retaining that player. See Hutchinson and Burleson as examples. If you waive that player, the contract is void so adding above mentioned stipulations would be voided with the contract.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

I think previous to this year it was indicative of our ridiculous amount of roster churn. This year? We are going to lose a good player or two. Hopefully that's a regular occurrence for the next 10 years as we rack up 2-3 Superbowl wins as a consolation prize.