Seahawks

[Y2Buddy]

Seahawks | RB Notes - posted at KFFL (http://nfl.kffl.com)
8:13 PT: According to the Seattle Times, rookie RB Maurice Morris was drafted to challenge and push starting RB Shaun Alexander. The team feels Alexander works harder when pushed and so far he has responded. Coach Mike Holmgren was impressed by Alexander's ability to catch the ball during the weekend mini-camp. Holmgren wants to find a way to get Morris on the field and he also declared it's too early to say Alexander can be a mentor for Morris. "I want (Alexander) to learn how to pass protect and all of those wonderful things before he falls into the mentor category," Holmgren said. "I hope we get there someday, but it is a little early for that."

Ok, I'm really starting to lose respect for Holmgren here. I won't mention he traded away Ahman Green, but last year benched Alexander in favor of Ricky Waters late in the season. Now he has this rookie in there to compete? What gives? If I was a Seahawks fan, I'd scream for his head. Too much athourity and no one will question him.

I can tell you that if we had Shaun Alexander on the Panthers, we would not take a RB in the 2nd round and 54th overall. They have got to have a more pressing need that early in the draft.

Judging from they way they finished last season, and what Holmgren has accomplished thus far, I don't see a 9-7 out of the Seahawks this year, and this could be Mike last year as GM/HC.

 

[Piper]

I agree. He's going into a stronger division. He just had a horrible draft. Randle is gimpy. Lack pass rush, and are aging defensively. Still not set on the offensive line. K-rob still has dropsitis.

 

[mathmajors]

Originally posted by Piper
K-rob still has dropsitis.

Yeah. I wish he had stayed at State for another year. Then again, I wish the Panthers had him, too.

Do we really have a shot at any decent receivers in FA?

 

[SandMan]

Originally posted by Y2Buddy

I can tell you that if we had Shaun Alexander on the Panthers, we would not take a RB in the 2nd round and 54th overall. They have got to have a more pressing need that early in the draft.

I agree. But I have no problems with benching all stars if they faulter a few games - this stick with him, cause he's our guy mentality is boring and often leads to complacency (See Panthers). Yea, picking a RB that early for them, was not smart, but letting Shaun know he has somebody ready willing and able to take his slot is a good thing.

I just get fired up at the money these guys make and then some go out on the field and go through the motions. The NFL could fold up next week - gone, done with. Then they could open back up and say - this is the way it is, If you are a starter, your base pay will be 400,000, if you are not a starter, your base pay will be 200,000- you then you get $25,000 & $12,500 for every game your team wins. Playoffs would of course have higher bonus money.

Yea, you'd see the talent level drop in the short term because all the millionair stuborn boys would just quit. Eventually, it would pick back up and your new NFL would be like it was years ago, where every guy fought on every play.

Well, ok so its a dumb idea - one thing is for sure, we'd no longer have to hear, we gotta play this guy or that guy because of what we are paying them.

 

[Y2Buddy]

Re: Re: Seahawks

Originally posted by SandMan
Well, ok so its a dumb idea

 

[magnus]

I don't like the idea of pulling someone just for the sake of it. It just seems to lead too much into the "I want it now" ideal or even worse, the "I want some controversy" ideal. I'm not trying to say anything bad about what you're saying but if you're going to build something, benching a rook QB halfway into a season ain't gonna get anything good done, and making most people fight for a job they have really already earned hasn't ever generated as many positive feelings as negative.

 

[SandMan]

Originally posted by magnus ver magnusson
I don't like the idea of pulling someone just for the sake of it. It just seems to lead too much into the "I want it now" ideal or even worse, the "I want some controversy" ideal.

I agree with what your saying and based on my history with QB threads, I understand where the "now" and "controversy" are coming from. But "if" I could remove bias etc etc, the real reason I bench a guy is for poor performance, whoever that player may be. I guess its a little "management by intimidation" but I think a player has to know if he does not play 100% and perform... he is going to take a seat, if not for a game then for a quarter or two..