We got Jadeveon Clowney !!!

[TwistedHusky]

I think it could be argued that Clark is the better player. Certainly the more dependable.

But we didn't have Clark at the time of the trade. So it isn't as relevant.

You could argue that if we are even thinking of keeping Clowney, we should have just extended Clark. But we didn't have a lot of important pieces locked down yet (Wilson and Wagner). I don't know Clark was even on the radar considering those priorities.

Also we HAD Clark last year and we didn't move the needle much. We certainly were not a contender by any means. So we know what we had in Clark, we might as well see what we can get with Clowney.

I think in hindsight Martin is going to be a good player. He seems to get a lot of pressure, almost Rufus Porter-y in a way. He probably ends up a solid starter for a number of years in the NFL. But I think you had to make the Clowney trade because you never know, sometimes these work, and Duane Brown was such a believer/advocate in him.

I don't see a scenario where it makes sense to keep him by signing him to a big contract (what he wants). But if he plays with his hair on fire for a year and that gets us to the playoffs or even does damage in the playoffs? Great!

 

[Thunderhawk]

You are so incorrect Cartire.

Harvin had a track record of behavior, injuries, "injuries", and other issues. Not only did he repeat and build on that track record - but his cost destroyed our ability to reload because of the draft cost. Oh, and he cost us Golden Tate - which you could argue almost assuredly would have won us another SB. With Tate, we don't lose that SB against New England as a for instance. Harvin kept this team from being a dynasty.

Then we have Graham, a guy that was already well known to us as a player that got 'alligator arms' when facing our defense. A guy that we had stories of our defense intimidating before the game. Trading for him destroyed our offense line, killed our run game, led to Lynch eventually leaving and for the most part....he never produced enough to make up for what he cost. He was a soft player that ended up injured anyway, but even when healthy never made up for the damage that trade did to our line or the other draft pick we lost.

BOTH were terrible moves and they were clearly terrible moves before the deal happened.

Clowney probably is not as good as Clark as a pass rusher (though we will see if the 4-3 is better for him) but he plays the run well. Maybe that trade works out, at least he is playing for a new contract so he probably won't be unmotivated (an issue with him). This should work out for us.

But the Harvin and Graham deals were stupid when they were made, Stupid after they were made. And glaringly bad moves even before they took the field for us.

Agree 100%. Additionally, both moves affected the culture within the locker room. Percy by being a selfish, injury-faking thug and Jimmy by being a finesse player miscast in a power offense. I like Jimmy but no-question his style made our offense softer. I hated both trades the moment they happened. BTW Harvin didn't just cost us Golden Tate but cap-strapped us from pursuing needed free agents. Those moves really derailed our potential dynasty.

But, to their credit, John and Pete have seemed to really learn from those mistakes and are recapturing our identity. So glad we're playing bully-ball again.

 

[McGruff]

Also, in popular football parlance, 5 tech for Seattle has become synonymous with the bigger end opposite the LEO.

While it might not be technically correct, that's just how people have come to refer to that roll.

It's really annoying.

They think the only way both Clowney and Ansah can be on the field at the same time is to stick Clowney at 5T, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Totally agree with you there.

There are kinds of combinations of Clowney, Ansah and Collier that are possible and likely.

Including having all three on the field on passing downs.

 

[AgentDib]

Like most I'm a big fan of this trade. However, there is a real cost in losing vets like JB, Marsh, and Taylor due to needing to clear space. That's a bigger deal to me than the third round pick although I'll also miss Martin. We've gone heavy youth and that may be exciting for fans but it also could lead to growing pains this year. Still worth it for Clowney IMO.

The interesting thing for next offseason is do the Hawks even want to pay $20 plus million for a D lineman who’s never had double digit sacks? Obviously D lineman can dominate in ways other than sacks, but that price range is usually reserved for the pass rush monsters.

Clowney has been one of the best in the NFL against the run over the last three seasons and Pete has never shown a tendency to idolize sack numbers. If Clowney stays healthy and dominates his gap like he did with Houston then I would expect us to offer him a huge deal.

 

[McGruff]

I dont believe those cuts had any thing to do with this move. We were sitting on 20+ million in cap space.

 

[A-Dog]

Also, in popular football parlance, 5 tech for Seattle has become synonymous with the bigger end opposite the LEO.

While it might not be technically correct, that's just how people have come to refer to that roll.

It's really annoying.

They think the only way both Clowney and Ansah can be on the field at the same time is to stick Clowney at 5T, which couldn't be further from the truth.

No "we" don't.

The traditional base defense in Caroll's scheme is a 4-3 "under" with a 9, 3, 1, and 5.

Does he play that all the time, or even most of the time, on mixed downs, especially in recent years? No.

However, I don't think it's ridiculous to think that he will play it some, and I also don't think it's ridiculous to think that when he does, Clowney might at times play in the 5-tech. He played some 5-tech at Houston, and he has the power and length to hold up there. Ansah is more limited so if they are playing with a 5-tech and both Ansah and Clowney are on the field together (which should be often if they are both healthy), it makes sense that Clowney would play at 5-tech and while Ansah plays at 9-tech.

Is it possible that Carroll never plays with a 5-tech when both Ansah and Clowney are on the field together? Sure. I happen to think that he will at times.

My point is that, like McGruff said, Clowney can play many different roles well.

What I find annoying is when people act like THEY KNOW EXACTLY what the coaches will do, and that anyone who thinks it may go differently is an idiot who doesn't understand basic defensive concepts.

 

[hawxfreak]

Texans boards are saying he wasn't suited for a 3-4 defense and didn't enjoy jj watt
If that's true he's going to be another lineman that comes here and out performs everything he has done before and then gets paid huge to go somewhere else and flop or we resign him
Either way we didn't lose more than the potential benefit
If he feasts then we aren't going out in the first round and we won't even play in the first round
Great trade with a big upside considering our cap space
:2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs:

 

[MontanaHawk05]

You are so incorrect Cartire.

Harvin had a track record of behavior, injuries, "injuries", and other issues. Not only did he repeat and build on that track record - but his cost destroyed our ability to reload because of the draft cost. Oh, and he cost us Golden Tate - which you could argue almost assuredly would have won us another SB. With Tate, we don't lose that SB against New England as a for instance. Harvin kept this team from being a dynasty.

Then we have Graham, a guy that was already well known to us as a player that got 'alligator arms' when facing our defense. A guy that we had stories of our defense intimidating before the game. Trading for him destroyed our offense line, killed our run game, led to Lynch eventually leaving and for the most part....he never produced enough to make up for what he cost. He was a soft player that ended up injured anyway, but even when healthy never made up for the damage that trade did to our line or the other draft pick we lost.

BOTH were terrible moves and they were clearly terrible moves before the deal happened.

Clowney probably is not as good as Clark as a pass rusher (though we will see if the 4-3 is better for him) but he plays the run well. Maybe that trade works out, at least he is playing for a new contract so he probably won't be unmotivated (an issue with him). This should work out for us.

But the Harvin and Graham deals were stupid when they were made, Stupid after they were made. And glaringly bad moves even before they took the field for us.

This post is so full of assumptions, shaky dot-connections, and flat-out falsehoods that it's impossible to take seriously.

The OL was destroyed by Cable's incompetence and cheapness. Don't try to move strings between thumbtacks when nobody's looking.

Tate was judged as not worth the money he was asking entirely independent of what was happening with Harvin. He has done little to convince anyone otherwise since.

Graham killed our run game? I'm pretty sure that Lynch petering out, Rawls' injury getting into his head, the Christine Michael pick, and the OL going kaput killed our run game. Plenty of blame for that to go around.

Graham got double-digit touchdowns in 2017 - how many receivers in the league accomplish that annually? - and was almost our entire between-the-20s passing offense in 2016 singlehandedly. Not one person here was complaining about him until December 2017 when the Rams broke the entire team's spirit. Then all of a sudden it flips over into revisionist history. (Same with sheldon Richardson, without whom we go 6-10 that year).

Look - these weren't bad picks. They were gambles. There's a difference. Graham and Harvin were insane talents. Harvin was the more dangerous and I felt worse about that one that I did about Graham, but there's a difference between gambles and bad moves.

The problem is that people in this fan base want all the moves to be nice, risk-free, and cheap, and buddy that's not how it works in the NFL. You want greatness? There's a cost. But the self-appointed cap experts see every gamble as unacceptable, and that isn't a valid way of looking at things. They see only the cost and not the possible benefit.

 

[evergreen]

Who in their right mind would be against this? This is a season changer. Boom! Hawks are now #2 in NFC. We will have fresh Reed for second half. Just got to stay healthy. We were hoping for playoffs. Playoffs? Playoffs? We’re in the super bowl picture now..,

 

[TwistedHusky]

Sorry Montana but it isn't that far of a stretch we can get into the specifics, but we traded a boatload for Percy when Tate essentially did what Percy did. Was Percy better at it? When healthy? Sure. But he wasn't going to be healthy and he had a track record of being a team cancer that turned out correct. It was a terrible move.

The loss of Tate and Unger literally turned this team from a SuperBowl contender to a wildcard team. Getting Harvin was the Catylist for that change and it was doubly frustrating because Tate was a slightly less effective but much more durable/dependable version of Harvin already. It was stupid. Weirdly, Tate was a better embodiment of the team attitude. Tate was tough, aggressive, almost a bully. Harvin was gutless, brittle, mentally weak, and whiny.

Trading Unger was another indicator this team was shifting from a bruising physical team to a finesse one.

We brought in Graham and we paid dearly to get him. Too bad Graham was a p*ssy.

I would argue the Harvin move and subsequent loss of Tate are literally the worst moves by the FO in the history of the Seahawks. Even over drafting Mirer. Because they turned a SB contender to a wildcard team.

Is this move in that vein? Doesn't seem to be. Those other moves were screaming 'poor fit' before the first kickoff. They were glaringly stupid then and that bore out. This one seems to have a reasonable upside and fit.

 

[Fade]

Also, in popular football parlance, 5 tech for Seattle has become synonymous with the bigger end opposite the LEO.

While it might not be technically correct, that's just how people have come to refer to that roll.

It's really annoying.

They think the only way both Clowney and Ansah can be on the field at the same time is to stick Clowney at 5T, which couldn't be further from the truth.

No "we" don't.

The traditional base defense in Caroll's scheme is a 4-3 "under" with a 9, 3, 1, and 5.

Does he play that all the time, or even most of the time, on mixed downs, especially in recent years? No.

However, I don't think it's ridiculous to think that he will play it some, and I also don't think it's ridiculous to think that when he does, Clowney might at times play in the 5-tech. He played some 5-tech at Houston, and he has the power and length to hold up there. Ansah is more limited so if they are playing with a 5-tech and both Ansah and Clowney are on the field together (which should be often if they are both healthy), it makes sense that Clowney would play at 5-tech and while Ansah plays at 9-tech.

Is it possible that Carroll never plays with a 5-tech when both Ansah and Clowney are on the field together? Sure. I happen to think that he will at times.

My point is that, like McGruff said, Clowney can play many different roles well.

What I find annoying is when people act like THEY KNOW EXACTLY what the coaches will do, and that anyone who thinks it may go differently is an idiot who doesn't understand basic defensive concepts.

Could you please link me some film where he is playing 5T with the Texans?

He is the best edge run defending Linebacker in the NFL, 5T isn't edge. In a 34 it is the outside LBers.

In Pete's scheme it is Sam & Leo due to their 34/43 hybrid base defense.

When Seattle goes Nickel they are a traditional 42. No one is playing 5T in Nickel.

 

[Bigpumpkin]

This one seems to have a reasonable upside and fit.

What does one consider a "reasonable upside"? One sack per game and two "hurries"? Combined with five "tackles"? I would like to see this trade make us Defensively stronger right from the "get go".

 

[QuahHawk]

This makes us a top 5 defense.

I really liked Frank Clark and he was damn good. I am confident Clowney is a better fit for this defense and will contribute to this defense becoming something fearsome again.

 

[Donn2390]

This is a really bad trade and one that will once again bite us in the ass!!!

Pete and John have lost their minds. ukeface:

Considering your nickname you seem surprisingly short sighted.

Exact opposite. You are excited for all of 1 years play the way it stands now. I'm looking to the future and learned from from Richardson deal that 1 year rentals blow up in your face if you fail in the post season.

It's been clearly explained that we give up zero in the future if he turns into a 1 year rental.
At this point you are just arguing to argue.

...but you knew that about him a long time ago....!!

 

[A-Dog]

Could you please link me some film where he is playing 5T with the Texans?

Not gonna spend time digging through YouTube vids. A quick google search:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/sp...ney-s-talent-strength-give-Texans-9229769.php

For much of the Chicago game, Crennel used Clowney as a 5-technique over left tackle Charles Leno Jr. (6-3, 305). But Clowney also lined up between Leno and left guard Josh Sitton (6-3, 318). In obvious passing situations, Clowney lined up wide - outside Leno to rush in space.

Here’s another:

https://www.battleredblog.com/2016/12/2/13813408/the-film-room-jadeveon-clowney-has-arrived

Aside from health, one of the things that has changed with Clowney is the primary position he plays. Houston moved him from a stand-up outside linebacker to a right defensive end. His hand is down. He's buried in the trenches as a five technique.

P.S. You can stop fadesplaining defensive fronts to me, thx

 

[AgentDib]

I dont believe those cuts had any thing to do with this move. We were sitting on 20+ million in cap space.

Which sounds good, except we also have a significant amount of potential cap liabilities in the form of NLTBE incentives and roster bonuses. Some (many) of those are going to be earned and require accounting for. We can look at the roll-over cap at the end of the year and see how necessary shedding those veterans ended up being, but I will bet we'll be rolling over much less than their salaries.

 

[Fade]

This makes us a top 5 defense.

I really liked Frank Clark and he was damn good. I am confident Clowney is a better fit for this defense and will contribute to this defense becoming something fearsome again.

The Seahawks have never had a guy set the edge in the run game like Clowney, he is unbelievable, and it will come in handy against the Rams & Niners who are adept at wide zone runs.

Pass Rushing is the question, he is still ascending in this area, so he could finally pop and have a monster sack year finally, but even if he comes up with only 8 sacks, he was still worth it.

Clowney puts the Seahawks over the top for the division, and they have a real shot now at making a deep playoff run.

 

[dopeboy206]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AgentDib]

What does one consider a "reasonable upside"? One sack per game and two "hurries"? Combined with five "tackles"? I would like to see this trade make us Defensively stronger right from the "get go".

Pressures would be nice, but we were #32 in the NFL last season in yards per rush attempt surrendered. An important upside of this move (and others) is getting back to a top ranked run defense.

 

[chris98251]

Clowney wanted to come here, held out to come here, players that come here tend to really want to stay.

Unlike Richardson who wanted nothing more then get paid, Harvin who wanted to be showcased and get paid, Graham who wanted to also get paid this move was pushed by Clowney to get out of Texas and up here. He may still want a fair paycheck but we have heard nothing like the other three as far as what and how they feel respected and want to be the top paid guy.