Are we edging closer to a Kam Chancellor trade?

September 17th, 2015 | Written by Rob Staton

Kam Chancellor’s hold-out shows no signs of ending, as he prepares to sit out the Green Bay game

On August 27th we discussed the likelihood of Kam Chancellor’s hold-out lasting beyond week two. The only possible leverage he can muster is if the Seahawks start 0-2 and panic.

Both sides are digging their heels in and it’s unlikely two road defeats will force Seattle’s hand. They also know the money Chancellor owes in fines is starting to stack up. Having gone this far, the Seahawks aren’t going to be the ones to budge.

So it’s up to Chancellor. Clearly Ray Lewis’ strong words (re-tweeted by Chancellor on his Twitter timeline) haven’t pulled at the heart strings. So what might he consider if Seattle does lose in Green Bay this week?

— Potentially he could return knowing the Seahawks are at home in three of the next four games and have an opportunity to go on a winning streak. He’d probably have to pay some or most of the fines accumulated so far, but he might feel his negotiating position is strengthened for another tilt at an improved contract in the off-season. If he can point to 0-2 without him and a four game winning streak on his return, he might think this was all worth it if a new deal is signed in the spring.

— He could also continue to hold-out in the hope Seattle continues to lose and feels obliged to act as pressure increases to get Chancellor back in the team. It’s fanciful to think the Seahawks would capitulate even in the worst case scenario of an unexpected prolonged losing streak. Stranger things have happened though — and this team won’t want a wasted season right in the middle of a Championship window.

If there’s no progress after the Green Bay game — suddenly those phone calls over a trade might actually warrant a longer response than a firm “no”. Eventually they have to be able to move on from this. It can’t dominate every press conference and every analysis of every defensive performance or defeat.

As much as the Seahawks want Chancellor in their line-up — they also can’t have this shadow cast over the 2015 season.

Would it be giving in to the player to deal him? Not really. The Seahawks need to send a message. Either you want to be here or you don’t.

There are other teams, sure. But there are very few facilities like the VMAC, very few coaches like Pete Carroll and very few home-field advantages like Century Link.

More importantly, there are very few teams with the talent to make back-to-back Super Bowls — and get there again in the future.

Look at the New England Patriots. How did Deion Branch’s hold-out end up? He went from Super Bowl MVP catching passes from Tom Brady to the last throngs of the Mike Holmgren era in Seattle, struggling to make an impact.

Sometimes the grass isn’t always greener, even for a few more bucks.

The Pats have to be used as an example here. They’ve consistently known when to move on. Branch in 2006, Richard Seymour in 2009, Randy Moss in 2010. Chancellor is much more important to Seattle than any of those players were to New England at the respective times they were traded. But what use is Chancellor to the Seahawks if he’s refusing to play — eating $250,000 a week in the process?

If there’s a fear trading Chancellor will encourage further unrest — bring it on. Build the team around those who genuinely want to be in Seattle. There are plenty of players who will come and play for this team.

The Seahawks would inherit a significant dead money charge for dealing Chancellor but they’d be taking the hit in 2015. That’s workable if not ideal. At what point has any of this saga been ideal for either party?

I doubt either the Seahawks or Chancellor want it to come to this — but eventually the team has to do what is best for them. Just as Chancellor feels this lingering hold-out is in his best interests.

If a team calls offering a 2016 first round pick — do you start considering a deal with no sign of a breakthrough? It’d be a hefty price for a strong safety — yet Chancellor’s stock is growing and will continue to grow if the defense struggles without him.

For that reason a parting of ways might be one or two weeks away unless a compromise can be reached. If an 0-2 start doesn’t act as a catalyst to compromise, what will?

142 Responses to “Are we edging closer to a Kam Chancellor trade?”

  1. Tien says:

    Interesting analysis Rob. Do you think there’s a realistic chance of us getting a 1st round pick for Kam if we trade him? If so, just to cut our losses, I might be supportive of such a trade. The concern I feel about whether we’d get this much in return is 1) Whichever team that trades for Kam would need to give him a new report with more money otherwise, why would he report to them either? How many teams are willing to do that? I don’t know. 2) As a result of the 1st point, other teams knowing that the Hawks are in a tough spot with Kam, and also knowing that due to Kam’s injury history, the team who signs him might only have him for a couple of years before his body breaks down. Given all these factors, I’m not certain that a team would give up a 1st rounder (and give him a bigger contract) for him.

    If not a 1st rounder, what would the Hawks accept? Ideally, we don’t go lower than a 2nd but push comes to shove, I guess we can choke down a 3rd rounder also. Anything below a 3rd rounder and it’s almost like we’re giving him away and in that case, my preference is that we keep him, fine him, and don’t pay him until he reports.

    I strongly feel that the Hawks don’t trade Kam unless we get good value in return. At this point, we should treat the holdout as a long-term injury and plan as if he’s not available for the entire season. My gut feeling is that Kam will likely be worn down by seeing $267K go down the drain each week (and knowing that most of his fines won’t be forgiven by the Hawks at this point) and will eventually report. He may be disgruntled at that point and it will be far from an ideal situation but I think that this is probably the most likely outcome. Kam’s situation is not at all like the Percy mess (Kam’s a much better player and is still well-thought of by his team and the rest of the league) so there’s no need to have a fire sale on him.

    But man, I’m still crossing my fingers, hoping that one of his confidantes gets him to see the light so that he’ll report soon!

    • Rob Staton says:

      I wouldn’t take anything other than a first rounder. Can they get a first for him? Perhaps.

      • Trevor says:

        Rob

        I agree a trade looks like the most likely scenario now. Win or loss in GB I dont see what will change on either side to spur action.

        I think doing nothing and having this holdout be the focus not the team is the worst option. The players and coaches have to be exhausted with it.

        I think a 1st rounder would be the dram scenario but what do you think of this.

        Kam to the Jags for a 2016 2nd and 4th rounder + Johnathan Cyprian who has not really worked out there at SS. Gus knows him and that team needs a leader. I dont think they would give up a 1st but maybe a 2nd what do you think? What are your thoughts on Cyprian in our system?

        Also Washington makes sense given JS familiarity with the Wash GM and the fact that their starting SS went on IR. The Wash GM knows Kam well and they could bring him in to mentor Collins. I just dont know if they would give up a #1 either as it might be too high a pick but perhaps a #2, #4 and Jeron Johnson who knows our system. Plus Kam is from Virgina.

        Either of these trade scenarios make any sense to you?

      • Ben2 says:

        kam & Irvin to Atl for Julio 😉

      • CharlietheUnicorn says:

        I’;m very confident that they would get no better than a second rounder and most likely a pair of 3rd or 4th round picks for him. That is the going rate for probowl or allpro players. Sorry, unless it was a QB… no one will give up a single 1st rounder, let alone multiple high picks.

        Hopefully they can get this worked out soon. Do I believe Bam Bam is the reason Seattle lost to the Rams. No, I think there is plenty of blame to go around… O, D and ST….. hime being there may have increased the Seahawks winning chances, but the overall schemes and playcalling left something to be desired.

        • Rob Staton says:

          We’ll see. We’re talking about a player that looks increasingly like the heartbeat of the best defense in the league. We’ve sign tight ends traded for first rounders.

          • Miles says:

            Given the history of Seahawks trades in the past, I think a first round pick would be the secondary compensation the Seahawks would look for in trading Kam. They will likely first find a player who can contribute this year and strengthen another position.

            The Seahawks are not interested in getting better later. They are interested in getting better now. If they can’t have Kam now, I bet they’d go looking for a starting-caliber O-Lineman or Receiver. I’m not really sure who that might be, but who needs secondary help the most?

            I wonder if we could do something like acquire Joel Bitonio from the Browns for Kam. If that trade were on the table, it would be hard to pass up.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Player for player trades are very difficult and extremely rare involving high profile starters.

              They are in win now mode, but if Chancellor isn’t playing in 2015 they’re not really losing anyone anyway. Plus they know they need to replace some key players in the next draft (eg Okung). Having the capital to replace him with a first round tackle would be a huge bonus.

            • David Stinnet says:

              I agree, they would rather get a proven player now than a draft pick

        • bigDhawk says:

          Pats got a first round pick (17th overall, 2011 draft) from the lowly Raiders for Richard Seymour, which turned into Nate Solder.

      • Kevin says:

        At this time trading him is worse than letting him sit out the year and trading him next year.

        If I have read the rules correctly we can count fines accrued this year as cap space on the next. If that is correct we can get 5m extra cap plus only 2m dead money next year. Total is 3m added to cap.

        If we trade him now it would be total 3m dead money subtracted. 6m difference.

        Not to mention that if players find out they can be traded if they hold out, the line outside most clubs would start tomorrow

  2. David Crockett says:

    Gotta say, I couldn’t disagree more on this one. I just don’t see where it makes business sense to deal Chancellor based on the dead money hit alone. What possible reason would propel Seattle to lose Chancellor’s production AND pay a big dead money charge? It’s difficult to imagine a sensible trade return that would be worth it.

    If the fact that people keep asking about it is moving the needle for the front office I’d be pretty surprised and extraordinarily disappointed. Kam may not play for Seattle in 2015, but I doubt he plays anywhere else. The off-season might be a different matter.

    • Rob Staton says:

      The dead money charge would apply to this year. Considering they aren’t likely to bring in any more big name veterans, they can wait until the end of the season make some cuts and get under the cap for the start of the new league year (a regular challenge for a lot of teams).

      • Gerry says:

        How much dead money are we talking about?

        50% of the signing bonus?

        • Rob Staton says:

          It’s around $7.5m, but you’d be losing the cap hit. So you’d be inheriting around $2.2m extra in 2015 I think.

          • onrsry says:

            considering first round pick’s salary,it’s like there would be no cap space gain after a trade. Maybe they will consider trading that 1st round pick too.This is a really hard situation.You don’t gain anything with trading Kam, and that 1st round pick can be a bust.

            • Volume12 says:

              Not only that, but do you lose the locker room or certain core players if you trade him?

              • arias says:

                And have you lost the locker room and core players any way if you keep him on the bench?
                If things start heading south or a losing streak develops maybe.

  3. Nate says:

    First, I hate everything about this discussion because Kam is my favorite athlete I’ve watch play any sport.

    That being said, even if you do trade him, I don’t think there is any rush to do it until the off season. Any trade will most likely be for draft picks and will not help this season whatsoever. And this early in the season, you wouldn’t really know what picks you are getting anyway.

    So unless someone offers up a completely stupid deal (2 1st rounders, 1st + 2nd + 3rd, a currently active perennial all-pro talented player, etc) why the need to move on midseason?

    • Rob Staton says:

      If a trade is going to happen I think the unknown factor adds a layer of credibility. A team like the Giants, who showed interest, want to make the post-season and might feel an aggressive move helps them get there. If they don’t make a deal and pick top-15 again — they aren’t making that move in March.

    • Trevor says:

      You really the coaching staff and the players want to talk about whether or not Kam is going to show up for the next 10 weeks. Every time they loose it will because Kam was not there. It sounds to me like Pete and everyone else is sick of talking about it. Time to cut out the cancer and move on. Look at the improvement last year after Harvin got traded and that distraction was no longer around.

      My initial thought was let him sit all year and trade him before the draft but I am tired of the media circus and hope the Hawks trade him and move on with the year.

  4. Ed says:

    I always jump early Rob, I said the same thing about Bennett. But Bennett at least participates and plays hard, where as Kam just drove up to pick up his date and just kept going.

    Oakland lost both safeties, what about taking a 2nd (pretty much a 1st) and 4th and send him to one of the worst organizations in the league.

    • cha says:

      I was thinking the same thing Ed. Oakland has cap room too to make him happy. He actually might be really good for the Raiders and he’s familiar with Norton already. But would that be enough to convince the Raiders? They have a decent young core. Would Kam be around/useful when they all develop together and really start getting competitive?

    • Turp says:

      This works for me. Kam gets his money and gets to toil in Oakland. We get more draft capital.

  5. cha says:

    I think the Seahawks have made their point. At this moment, if they trade Kam it will be like trading Harvin mid-season. Get him out of here and spend a game or two re-shaping things and move forward.

    Would be very interesting to see the inside of how a trade discussion would go forward on this issue. I recall reading the Rams basically just had an open auction for the #2 overall pick (RG3). “Fax us your best offer by noon, the best offer will be accepted.”

  6. Cameron says:

    My understanding of the cap situation is the Seahawks are hard up against it. So close, are they, that if Kam were to report they would have to make a roster move (likely a restructure) to ‘afford’ him. They haven’t had to make a roster move because they haven’t had to pay Kam’s salary to date.

    Trading Kam would result in 1.8 million cap charge for 2015. For a team already hard against the cap that will mean a serious restructure, forcing the team to convert salary to signing bonus for someone like Richard Sherman. That’s a pill this FO doesn’t like to swallow. This is just another reason why I think a trade of Kam is unlikely, at least not until later in the season, at which point the cost savings of not having paid Kam any salary factors into the economics.

    At that point it will also become more manageable to the acquiring team in terms of cap dollars too, as they will only be paying part of Kam’s 2015 salary (most other teams are fairly close to the cap limit too).

  7. Jon says:

    The dead money would not actually be to bad. his guaranteed salary would be taken on by the other team. The Seahawks would collect on 2 million in fines, and the prorated signing bonus only has 3 million remaining. this means trading him creates only a 1 million cap hit.

  8. red says:

    Give him his money trade him this off season. His dead money for 2016 and 2017 is 3mil over two years so we would free up money to re up a combo of Irvin Sweazy or Okung and picks say a 2nd and 5th or something.

    • Ben2 says:

      Lael Collins plus a 2nd?

      • red says:

        Dallas would not trade Lael Collins makes league minimum four years of team control. Kam had hip surgery last offseason tore his MCL before Super Bowl had an ankle thing that held him out a couple games last year. He has maybe 2-3 more years as a above average SS better to sell early than late.

  9. kevin mullen says:

    I’d take a Zach Martin for Kam straight up.

  10. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    JS has made some surprising moves before, but trading Kam midseason would be a total shocker. I just can’t see the upside to a team that’s in a win-now mode, unless it’s an offer so good they can’t refuse. Even the whole distraction aspect isn’t enough to deal him – for each game Kam misses, that noise grows a little quieter and he becomes less relevant. It’s hard to see that now because he’s one of SEA’s true stars, and he’s the only star not playing, and they lost their 1st game, and his replacement got burned, and the defense as a whole had trouble, etc., etc.

    Assuming Kam continues his holdout, the only way this doesn’t quiet down is if SEA’s season tanks AND it’s a direct result of Kam’s absence. If they lose in GB because RW throws an INT or Lynch fumbles the ball, or just because they get outplayed, I doubt we’ll be hearing the kind of doomsday stuff that’s running through the media about how SEA better change their stance on Kam. Oh, it’ll still be there, but just not as loud. Then, the next week after SEA’s home opener vs CHI, it’ll be even less.

    If SEA’s season tanks, and it is a direct result of Kam’s absence, then SEA has bigger problems than just one player holding out. If one player can tank a team’s season, that team wasn’t going anywhere to begin with.

    The best hope for a decent resolution is for Kam to show up in week 3, play out the season, and either demand a new contract or a trade. In fact, the only hope for a resolution this season is for Kam to show up. I believe the FO when they say they’re done dealing. Absent Kam showing up, or some sort of stupid trade offer, I don’t see anything happening until the off season.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      BTW, Jared Stanger tweeted the following today:

      “Connecting the dots a little bit, but based on where Seahawk scouts have been recently, I think they’re looking pretty hard at strong safety”

      This indicates SEA already may be thinking about life without Kam.

    • Steele says:

      As we have seen, the defense has a lot of problems besides just Kam (lack of talent at nickel forcing Sherman inside, Cary Williams, surprisingly insufficient pass rush, etc), but Kam’s signals and communication were missed the most. The domino effect also screwed up tackling angles across the D. How do you value that? How do you value that over the course of a season? How quickly can the intangibles be fixed?

      Trading Kam could end the noise, but start new ones. Would it split the locker room, cause dissension among those who might be supporting Kam’s holdout now?

      If last week was evidence, both Kam and the Hawks lose. A protracted holdout hurts both.

      • Volume12 says:

        I gotta agree with CHAWK on this one. Would be floored by a trade. Only way I could see it would be as Rob said, if someone offers a 1st or something too enticing to say no.

        Agree with Steele as well. By far the thing missing most from Kam being out was the communication. Followed by his infectious energy.

        As for that tweet. He thinks Seattle might want depth at a position that was already lacking it even with Kam? Connecting dots? Really?

    • neil says:

      I for one would just let him sit and trade him next year. So much of the poor performance of the back half of the defense is attributed to his absencce but I have a different view. I believe more of it is attributed to Kris Richards. I He seems to have a more laid back atrtitude than Quinn, could be that is contributing to the lethargy. I do know I saw Rodgers escape from collapsing pockets time after time to his right where there was always a huge void. I did not see any adjustments for that later in the game. I did not see any blitz”s that I can remember. We plaid pretty much vanilla defense the whole game, I hope that isn” going to continue.

  11. Ross says:

    Jared Stanger asked on twitter who, theoretically, should get Kam’s cap space if he were to leave the team. One answer I thought was really interesting was giving Bennett more money because he’s gone about the process in a professional way by actually turning up for work and playing hard. Not saying I agree, but it did make me think about what kind of message it would send to different people if they were to reward Bennett right now, during Kam’s holdout. It would probably set just the same bad precedent but it could also send Kam the message that there’s a certain way of going about things like this and staying at home, rooting for the team to lose whilst telling the media that you want to be rewarded for your leadership isn’t the right way. Just a thought.

    • Miles says:

      If the Seahawks pay Bennett, it could send the message that if you want more money in Seattle, you show up and you help the team. Staying home just isn’t going to get it done. This could send the message to the whole team, too, that holding out isn’t going to get you anywhere. That could also burn the bridge with Kam, but from the team’s perspective I feel it would be justified. He would have brought it on himself.

  12. Volume12 says:

    Man, Seattle must realy like someone on this ND squad. 2nd game of the year they’ll be at. It’s gotta be for Ronnie Stanley or Jaylon Smith right? Maybe Nick Marin, CJ Prosise, or Elijah Shumate?

    Or like you said earlier CHAWK, looking at GT DT Adam Gotsis?

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      I think they get a 2fer (or more) in this game.

      If they’re scouting R1 – Smith (assuming he declares) and Shumate are out of their price range, right? Stanley could last long enough, so maybe he’s a target.

      Otherwise, call me crazy but I like Prosise, at least what I’ve seen so far. And like I said, I’m very interested in Gotsis.

      • Volume12 says:

        Smith for sure. Unless they trade up.

        Shumate is a mid rounder. Pauline and a couple others havr him as a 6th. More than likely a guy that rises, but still.

        Prosise is exciting and could be a SPARQ demon come February. I’m not sold they’d scout 2 games this close together for a guy that could be had on day 3. Then again, I wouldn’t put it past them.

        This Gotsis kid is going to knock the interview part of the combine out of the water. Says he grew up in a rough little neighborhood on the outskirts of a big city. He wants to have a JJ Watt like work ethic, and says football is adversity and how you respond to it can seperate the good ones. Sounds eerily familiar. And he’s rumored to be a freak athlete.

        Which brings me to Ronnie Stanley. IIRC this kid also checks off the battles adversity/grew up quick box. I think he will last into the part of the 1st they could trde up into. And with O-line play around the league looking awful, it makes sense to grab a guy like him that’s fundamentally sound and athletic. IMO it’s him.

        • Volume12 says:

          Meant to say knock it out of the park. Not water. LOL.

          And this is just me, but Jaylon Smith should be a top 10-top12 pick.

          Stanley I think will last until the 18-25 range.

    • Madmark says:

      I think that Seattle will be watching Ronnie Stanley at the LT spot. The reason I believe this is because I just don’t think we can afford to keep Okung. In fact, I think Seattle has always wanted an OL that could play together for a couple of years but it just never seemed to happen. I could see Okung, Sweezy, and Bailey being gone next year due to cap and performance in baileys case. Baileys been a great backup at all positions but lets face it he’s not a starter and he looks a little run down now. Mark Glowinski is probably Sweezy’s replacement. There are a lot LT in college but only a few that actually project to the NFL at that position. Before the beginning of the year I looked at the LT and where they was being ranked and here is that list for LT.
      Ronnie Stanley ND 6’6″ 315lbs. Sophomore (top 10) after this year he won’t have anything more to prove at the college level
      Laremy Tunsil Ole Miss 6’5″ 305lbs. Junior. (top 10) hasn’t played this year while he’s being investigated by the NCAA. If he doesn’t get on the field he could drop.
      Taylor Decker Ohio St. 6’7″ 315lbs.(18) the way Ohio’s playing this year he could see his stock go up.
      Jack Conklin Michigan St. 6’6″ 325lbs. Junior(21) some people like me have this guy ranked higher than Stanley and Tunsil. I like this guy rock solid and nasty. I wouldn’t move him from LT spot like Rob suggested in the last article.
      Cody Whitehair Kansas St. 6’4″ 305lbs. (41 )I don’t know about this guy looks slower than normal but someone to monitor
      Spencer Drango Bayler 6’6″ 310lbs. (68) the rank seems a little low 50-60 range and he probably do better moving to LG spot.
      Jason Spriggs Indiania 6’6″305lbs. (84) he has good feet but lacks upper body strength a move to RT may suit him better.
      Rees Odhiambo Boise St. 6’4″ 305lbs. (103) Has appropriate size for LG spot
      These are the guys I’m looking at who are playing the LT spot. At this time I’d be willing to trade up for Jake Conklin he would be my 1st pick if possible.

      • Volume12 says:

        Conklin at LT in Seattle? Not sure he’s athletic enough.

        The reason I think it’s Stanley is because he’s unique. Looks like a PF in the NBA, great length, not a sloppy body, fantastic athlete (former BB and Volleyball player), has a unique upbringing with his mom being tongan and discipling him in odd ways, he’s cocky/confident, used to playing under bright lights being from Las Vegas and at ND, when he talks he’s articulate, says playing OL is like a bloody war and he’s a savage looking tyo do damage.

        He’s raw with unlimited potential, a bit overrated, and some teams will be turned off by his personality.

  13. KingRajesh says:

    I don’t think they could get a 1st, but I’d take a 2nd and a 3rd. Or a 2016 2nd and a 2017 2nd.

  14. Trevor says:

    I really liked Marcus Peters coming out. I thought h had the perfect attitude to play on the island in the NFL. So far he looks like and incredible pick for KC. How nice would he have looked opposite Sherm!

  15. DC says:

    Even if Kam pulls a 10 week hold, as long as the team makes the playoffs I will welcome him back. Assuming growth and improvement from what we witnessed last Sunday, this is an experienced group now that shouldn’t need the #1 seed to get the job done. While disappointed that he’s not out there, I still love the guy.

    • Ed says:

      I would welcome him back for the stretch run, but would still trade him in the offseason to Oakland or Jacksonville

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      SEA’s schedule doesn’t favor Kam pulling a week 10 return. Consider this:

      The toughest stretch this season is weeks 5 thru 8. Week 9 is a bye.

      SEA plays @CIN, @SF and @DAL during that span. Including @GB on Sunday (and STL last week), that’s 5 road games against 5 strong opponents, and only 3 home games, before week 10.

      If SEA can win enough of the tough road games during this stretch to be in playoff contention in the back half of the season, that means the LOB will have developed a new chemistry, a working chemistry, which could be upset by starting a guy who hasn’t taken a real snap in like 9 months by then, no matter who or how well known he is.

      If SEA can’t win enough games without Kam before week 10 to be alive for the postseason – both its homers and at least 3 of the first 5 road games – then why play him at all?

      • peter says:

        Pretty much.

      • CHawk Talker Eric says:

        Been thinking more about how this can unfold. Again, if Kam’s plan is a week 10 return, the worst scenario for SEA would be to have a .500 record (4-4) at that time.

        Like I said above, if SEA goes 5-3 heading into week 10, they’ll be in position to make a run for the conference championship without Kam, or at least a wild card. If they go 3-5, they’re likely out of it entirely and Kam’s return wouldn’t matter.

        But if they go 4-4, they’ll still be in play for a wild card. We all expect SEA to win their 3 home games (CHI, DET and CAR). So, if they go 4-4 and win only 1 road game, AND that game is @SF…then they’d still be in contention for the NFCw championship because they play the rest of the NFCw one more time and could go 5-1 within the division.

      • mwsmith1547 says:

        agreed

  16. Kevin says:

    No, we don’t want to trade him for a first round choice, because that’s still leaves us weak in the position (unless there’s someone decent still in free agency). If there’s no one available, we should trade him for a middle of the road player at that position and a 3-5th rounder.

  17. Cysco says:

    A decision like this might not come from the FO. It may very likely come from Paul Allen. Allen is the one that’s put his foot down and told the FO “no more negotiating. He can take it or leave it.” By all accounts Allen is very hands off with FO matters, but things have gotten bad enough with this Kam situation that he’s stepped up and said “enough!”

    To me, he seems personally invested at this point and he’s fed up. If the team loses this week I could easily see Allen telling the FO to shop him.

    If Kam really intends to hold out till week 10, that relationship is permanently broken. Heck, if the holdout goes another week or two it could be permanently broken. The Hawks’ aren’t going to budge. They have to stick to their guns. If the team doesn’t see Kam coming back in the next next week or two, they almost have to trade him.

    The longer they wait the fewer number of teams will be interested and their leverage in a trade goes down.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      I don’t know Allen’s history well enough. Has he ever involved himself in SEA’s personnel decisions before? What about the Trailblazers? An owner making a statement in support of his FO that they’re done negotiating with a player is expected.

      I think the team’s stance regarding Kam is purely JS, with the full support of his owner and HC.

  18. Phil says:

    Another “benefit” from trading Kam is that it would have a positive effect going forward on the Seahawks’ cap and how it is distributed among positions on the team. In other words, the Seahawks may decide that their future plans do not include paying big $$ for a strong safety. They may envision spending their precious cap on guys who play the so-called “skilled” positions — there is a reason that strong safeties do not command the salaries of CBs, or WRs, or pass rushers.

    The question I keep asking myself is what kind of team are we going to have when Marshawn eventually leaves? Are we going to continue to be a run-first team, or is RW going to continue to develop to the point where we would benefit by spending more $$ (or draft capital) on weapons for him?

    I don’t think I’ve made my point very clearly — what I’m trying to say is that Kam’s future salary could be used to bolster other areas of the roster. Sure, we will miss his “leadership”, but even if he comes back now, I think I’d question whether the leadership he would now bring to the locker room is the same kind of positive leadership he brought in the past.

  19. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    OT but GB reports that RT Bryan Bulaga is out vs SEA. This is a big deal, considering Avril had a -4.5 PFF grade vs. Bulaga in the 2014 NCFCG.

    • Volume12 says:

      That could definetly be a big loss for them. I think if they shut down Lacy (obviously) then Rodgers will struggle. Considering that he has trouble with aggressive, physical defenses. I mean he’s lost what, like 5 or 6 in a row to an NFCW team?

  20. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Back on topic, one unexpected positive to come out of Kam’s absence is Sherm covering the slot. He doesn’t seem to fit the role, especially since he’s more speedy than quick.

    Playing the slot will allow him to hone his read-reaction, learn to use his length and body to make up for any deficiencies in quickness/agility, and improve his short area coverage skills.

    • Volume12 says:

      Is he playing slot because Cobb operates out of the slot? Or is he playing there, because Lane is injured, and Simon and Cary are better suited outside?

      • Steele says:

        Sherm, Simon and Cary are all better suited to outside. So is Tye Smith. Cary sucks at nickel. They really should have looked for a nickel specialist in the offseason. They need that even if and when Lane comes back.

    • Rik says:

      I would agree with you about Sherm honing his skills if this was still preseason, but it’s not. Our defense is apparently so screwed up that we are taking one of the 2 or 3 best cover corners in the league and moving him into the slot to make up for overwhelming weakness there. It doesn’t suit his body size and speed/quickness skills, and it seems like a bit of a desperate move.

      Off topic, I was impressed with Denver’s offensive play calling in the 2nd half yesterday. Manning was under a lot of pressure early – lots of hurries, hits, and sacks. Denver then adopted a set of creative plays with quick intermediate passes that opened up the field. So here’s the rub. Why can’t we do that? Why does our play calling seem so uninspired? Is that Pete’s influence?

      • Volume12 says:

        Seattle’s scheme is easy and almost predictable in a way. But it’s set up that way so guys can focus on making plays and adjust easier. The schemes Seattle runs on both sides off the ball are built around the personnel making plays, not the scheme or play-calling dictating the outcome.

        Seattle had multiple opportunities to win last Sunday. It comes down to execution and certain ‘flows’ over the course of a game. And eliminating tiny mental mistakes that can compound.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          Excellent point. PC’s philosophy – put natural athletes in positions to make plays. It’s player-centric, not scheme centric, so when things don’t work, it’s not a schematic problem. At least, up to a point.

          There have been several notable coaching blunders so far this season, mostly with clock management and holding on to a lead late in the half/game, and by some venerable coaches. There also have been some really nice coaching displays/adjustments – think last night and DEN giving up on their offensive scheme and letting Manning call his own game at the line.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          To your point:

          @gbellseattle Seahawks no-huddle produced 10 of offense’s 17 points last wk.
          In Jan’s NFCCG vs GB the no-huddle scored 2 TDs in last 4 mins of regulation

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        First quarter was coach Kubiak calling plays, and he has said he wants the Broncos to have more of a running game. By second quarter Manning started calling the plays from the shotgun and of course went to the pass attack. Denvers defense looked really good.

      • Steele says:

        The weakness of the slot was exposed by Wes Welker. That was months ago. They have not fixed it. Instead they brought in more of the same type of bigger corner. Blackmon blew it. Burley seems to have blown it. Frankly, Lane was already having problems in the SB before he made that TD-saving pick. So I agree with Rik. The slot may be an overwhelming weakness.

        • CharlietheUnicorn says:

          Lane may have been “having problems”, but he also came up with an INT. His loss in the SB ended up being a big factor … in the outcome of the game.

  21. AlaskaHawk says:

    For all the griping that goes on about Bevell’s play calling, I’m surprised no one is talking about the defensive coach. It was his job to prepare the defense and get them in condition for the game. No kam to call defenses? Why not Earl or someone else? Sherman in the slot? Wow that is a radical coaching decision that probably won’t work- but hey let’s talk about it. Linebackers not dropping back far enough? Apparently they couldn’t adjust during half time. I guess we should give him half a season before griping…

    • Volume12 says:

      Again, poor execution. Sure a coach or coordinator can put in a scheme to help, but he can’t hold their hand. Seattle has enough playmakers were the scheme shouldn’t nor won’t matter. Certain play calls, yes.

      Maybe Richard schemed TOO much and had these guys second-guessing.

      If we had won the game, would we still be discussing the defense?

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        We all know that winning trumps everything else. This whole discussion about what Kam is worth is based around the idea that if he were playing we would win. However, the amount of errors from the defense suggests otherwise. I’m not really looking to assign blame. Mostly just trying to point out a double standard with how we judge the coaches. I guess we are just too familiar with Bevell and don’t know much about the defensive coach.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      According to Sherm, he hadn’t even thought about playing slot until the Monday before. Obviously it says a lot about what SEA thinks re Burley and TSmith, at least what they think about those 2 playing slot without Kam in the line up.

      Sort of what they might think of their entire cover-1 without ET.

      ET plays with the instinct, range and speed that it’s almost like having a double team on intermediate/deep routes. Kam plays with the instinct, communication and ferocity against the run that it’s like having an extra LB in run support and an extra DB covering the under zones. Maybe Burley (or Smith) gets the start with Kam in the line up.

      At any rate, there seems to be some support for the idea that Sherm can develop into a decent slot corner.

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        I would rather Sherman was playing the strong safety role if that is a choice. He is intelligent enough to lead the defense.

    • Steele says:

      I agree. Richard needs to be scrutinized. How much of the playbook has changed since Quinn?

      Putting Sherman in the slot, out of position, is very troubling to me. At the last moment without a lot of preparation, even more troubling. Did they not see a problem with the slot in the preseason? No confidence in Burley, who did get burned in preseason. Tye Smith too raw. Blackmon a bust. Seisay hurt.

      The FO is spinning the Sherman switch as a tactical weapon. To me, it looks more like a somewhat desperate band-aid until Lane comes back. Sherman may surprise, but I don’t think he is not quick enough. Really, is there no other choice? If they leave Sherman outside on, say, James Jones, would Burley be destroyed by Randall Cobb?

      Jeez. Can Tyler Lockett play nickel?

      • Volume12 says:

        If nickel and the short passing game are our weakness then why not put out best corner there? If he struggles, we lose nothing. If he succeeds, then we know Sherm can mirror opposing teams best receivers and slide in there when needed.

        • Steele says:

          If Sherm struggles, we lose on big plays, and the game. Sherm personally loses aura. If he shuts down, he proves his greatness. I see this as a 50/50 proposition.

          Putting him in nickel takes him away from where I believe he is best. So there is also the risk of the outside being vulnerable without him.

          The fact that Richard has been forced to juggle and make these choices is troublesome. I think they need to make some personnel moves to address nickel, but they have no $. And there is the Kam thing holding it all up.

  22. M says:

    At some point in time, the prospect of value add less distraction will result in a trade if the price is right. I’m thinking it’s at least a 1st rounder plus….

    Another issue the Seahawks are grappling with is not wanting to “reward” a player’s holdout by trading him into a better contract, which also sets a precedent.

    That being said, there’s always a price point that will make these things happen especially when and if the Seahawks get the sense that Kam doesn’t want to be here. The other question is where will Kam be mentally and physically if he chooses to return but not under his terms.

    It’s clear to me that the line in the sand has been drawn and the ball’s in Kam’s court. Time will tell.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      If the NFL and owners are concerned about setting a precedent then they should compensate the Seahawks for Kams holdout. After all, if Kam is successful they could have a whole bunch of these holdouts next year.

  23. Volume12 says:

    Rob, do you think LSU OLB Deion Jones could transition to an NFL safety?

    And what about Boise St S Darian Thompson as a CB?

  24. Volume12 says:

    CHAWK, I know we were discussing him yesterday. What about CJ Prosise as a WR?

    I’ve just been noticing all the converts Seattle had in TC. Don’t know why it dawned on me now.

  25. Ehurd1021 says:

    If you trade Kam you lose THIS team. You don’t trade the heart and sole of your team when every player in the locker-room knows he is being severely underpaid. And that old moniker of Pete Carroll being labeled a “players coach” around the league and in the locker-room will take a massive hit. We have 3 irreplacable pieces on this team which is Marshawn, Earl and Kam.

    I don’t understand why people keep talking about a precedent being set if you pay Kam or give into his demands… how many Kam Chancellors are on this team? How many players are willing to stack up over a million dollars worth of fines because they know their importance and future worth? And other than a possible Earl holdout in the future – which I don’t ever see happening – which players holding out do you think would have this kind of negative impact on and off the field? I personally don’t see ANY besides Earl. Who exactly are we worried about in terms of setting a negative “precedent”?

    I keep hearing about how Kam is the one holding out because of his “pride” and “dignity,” but why is no one talking about the FO allowing their ego and reputation to be a key in why this situation is ongoing. That is why this entire issue hasn’t been resolved yet IMO. The FO of the Seahawks do not want to look “weak” around the league and don’t want to set a “precedent” for the ENTIRE NFL and 31 other FO.

    • JeffC says:

      I sincerely doubt this has ANYTHING to do with front office ego. As numerous people have said many times before, this is about mathematics. This is about creating a problem for yourself down the road with other players. If you can’t see that, I don’t know what to tell you. The front office put in a policy long ago about waiting until the last year of a contract to renegotiate. Why did they do this? It wasn’t random. It wasn’t just, “Let’s make that a hard fast rule to protect our egos.”

      It allows the front office to develop mathematical models to keep core players under contract within the confines of a salary cap that occasionally adjusts.

      You would say, “If it’s about the cap, then why doesn’t the agent understand this and communicate this to Kam?”

      As Salk said this morning on 710, the agent has indicated he’s already told Kam to report. This is all about Kam.

    • sdcoug says:

      You lost me at “severely underpaid”. How is being the highest-paid SS in the entire league (for the last several years) being underpaid? Fact is, Kam was given a market-setting contract (and huge signing bonus) coming off a subpar season.

      “a possible Earl holdout in the future – which I don’t ever see happening”…kinda like no one saw Kam happening, right?

    • Robert says:

      How is 28 million for 4 years for a SS in the current market a severe underpay???

  26. Ehurd1021 says:

    And no offense to anyone in this thread, but this is the exact reason why I think players put zero stock into what fans think or say especially when they question their loyalty. When the players take a unconventional route or one that the fans don’t respect….. trade’em. I really cant blame them.

    • Trevor says:

      When the player takes an unconventional route? Are you joking? I hope so. He is the highest paid player in the league at is position and is the only player in the entire NFL under contract who sat out this year. That is not unconventional it is an anomaly based purely on greed from a player who makes $7 mil per year. That is why the fans are upset. Not because he did something unconventional.

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      It’s nothing to do with the conventionality of his move (or lack thereof). It’s the damage he’s done to the team, and in so doing, forsaking his his brothers in arms, the organization in general, and the fans.

      Moreover, I didn’t hear ANY trade talk until after @STL. Kam’s being holding out since, well, technically the 1st day of TC (7/29). In other words, it took about 6 weeks, all of TC, then all of the preseason, and finally a tough road loss opener to get to this level.

      But I agree that players put zero stock in what the fans think.

  27. Madmark says:

    Believe me I love all that Kam brings to the SS spot but I can’t agree with this holdout. A team has to know how much they will be paying a player over a certain time period so they can manage their cap. A player holding out disrupts everything as far as going forward in maintaining a team. I signed a contract with the U.S. navy for 4 year of active duty and 2 year active reserves and 2 year inactive reserves. That’s a total of 6 years active of which I spent a year and a half going to boot camp, basic electricity and electronics, and Electronic Warfare Tech school. I do one deployment for 6 months and that completes 2 years of my contract. I’m so good in electronics I tell the navy well I want a pay raise now or I’m not going to show up. What do you think would happen to me if I tried that crap because I sure would have liked to have done it. If you think this is not the same situation as Kam , you are wrong. A contract is a contract and a mans signature or word are as good as his actions. I realize I’m just a no one sailor and Kam is a football superstar but a contract should be as binding to him as it was to me. This all I got to really say, come back and honor your contract or retire period.

  28. Mylegacy says:

    My thoughts about one of the three remaining Kings of the LOB, Kam- in no particular order…

    1) The LOB is CLEARLY much better as a unit than the individual players are. They create a synthesis of perfect performance that is much better than the players as individuals. The loss of Kam IS devastating. The LOB will be DONE. Seattle will have two good defensive backs – Sherm and Thomas. Lots of teams have two good defensive backs…

    2) Kam. Without him Thomas is a short, fast guy who hits hard. Without him Sherm plays like a real great man on man corner and goes where the other teams best guys are (like a normal star corner) RATHER than being just a spectacular part of the BEST defensive back group in football history – a group with the best scheme which is spectacularly suited to their individual skills. The END of the LOB means either the front seven turn into the Seven Samurai or Seattle is just another team with a pretty good defense.

    3) LOYALTY TO THE TEAM!!! What unadulterated BS! The WHOLE set up of the NFL is to screw, and renege on every player, every time they can. Even when they LOVE you they REGULARLY approach real stars with fair contracts to take less or get cut. Any player with “loyalty” to ANYTHING other than his short, painful, brutal, easily ended career is a FOOL. Kam is no fool.

    4) To me BOTH sides are wrong. Kam should have fought NEXT year’s battle – next year. The team should not let the appallingly laughable “integrity of billionaires” argument stand in the way of a move that will end up DESTROYING a massive force, on an extraordinary team, on an extraordinary roll – and most likely return the Hawks to the pack. What a disgusting time for OUR billionaire to destroy his own money’s creation in this, oh so disgusting show of, “My way or the highway.” The TEAM owes the 12s too – loyalty goes BOTH ways!

    • cha says:

      “The WHOLE set up of the NFL is to screw, and renege on every player, every time they can.”

      Perhaps the players should have fought for a better CBA with more guarantees than trying to get less practice time.

      The CBA has legal protections for both players and the owners. Kam is in violation of the CBA. The Seahawks are not.

    • CharlietheUnicorn says:

      The NFL is set-up to try to create parity. Very few buck the trend. We love football because anyone can win any year… we hate football, because the chance of the “dynasty” are greatly reduced, under the new CBA. Only the Patriots have been able to sustain some amount of success in the modern NFL (last 15 years)… and now that is being called into question.

      Love the Seahawks while they are great.

  29. Rik says:

    I rewatched the 2013 Super Bowl tonight, and I paid special attention the the Seahawks defense. Malcolm Smith was the MVP, but guess which name kept coming up? Yep, Kam Chancellor. He was all over the field, and I could see him directing other players prior to the snap. Kam made big play after big play. After really studying that game, my MVP was Kam. So now I’m wondering whether he is in fact the lynchpin (pun intended) of the LOB. If so, shouldn’t he be paid at an equivalent level to other members of the LOB? I’m deeply conflicted, since I agree with other posters that a contract should be honored. But, man, he is a player! And if he is the cerebral mastermind of our defense, shouldn’t his contract reflect that fact?

    • Tien says:

      So based on your scenario, whenever a player has clearly outperformed his contract, we should just tear it up, regardless of how many years are left, and renegotiate a new one? If so, how does a team really plan for the long-term in managing their cap space? There’s no perfect solution here so whether we believe Kam deserves more money or not, with the contract and salary cap structure in the NFL, the Seahawks really can’t give a raise/new contract so soon. Kam’s awesome and I love him as a player but he’s under contract. He needs to decide whether it makes sense to keep losing money by continuing the hold out or whether it might be time to swallow his pride, come in, comply with his contract, and try to be the best SS in the league again. And no matter how underpaid he feels, he’s still one of the highest paid SS in the league.

      • CharlietheUnicorn says:

        Tien hit the points on the head. He may feel underpaid, lack of respect or whatever…. but the end of the day he is already one of the top paid SS in the NFL. I’m not sure what his end game is… because missing this much time only hurts his chances of redoing a deal and increase the chances he might get injured once/if he resumes playing.

      • peter says:

        Excellent points.

        Lets say Kam is the brains of the whole defense. Okay. Unfortunately the other 31 teams feel that SS is a more fungible or at the least a less premium position the nearly every other one on the defense. Meaning Seattle at no time would be in a position to pay a strong safety as much as a corner or even a middle linebacker or as of late the massive defensive tackle contracts. Under the current contract schedules Seattle by paying him extremely well and early was able to lock up Russ, sherm, bwagz.

        Had they given Kam then some contract in line with the best free safety or starting corner they would have literally not had the cap space to work on either russ’ deal or could have done Russ’ deal and not been able to resign bwagz. It’s honestly baffling to me that Kam can not see how contacts in professional sports are not islands unto themselves and that each puzzle piece gets worked in the time that its done to allow the next pieces to fall together.

        • CHawk Talker Eric says:

          “or as of late the massive defensive tackle contracts.”

          I think that’s it right there. It’s a consequence of continued revenue growth for the NFL. As teams (owners) make more money (and they are), personnel who directly contribute to that growth by their exceptional game play will demand, and get, an increased share relative to their predecessors. Especially players who re define their position.

          I’d argue that’s Kam’s thinking in a nutshell. He’s re defining the SS position, and he deserves a commensurate share of the team’s revenue.

          I’d also argue the only thing he’s wrong about is how he’s trying to get what he deserves.

          • cha says:

            But “Present value” does not have much to do with current salary. The Seahawks organization (correctly) projected that revenue would continue to grow as would salaries, and moved to lock up a key piece of the defense in 2013, a year ahead of Kam’s UFA year.

            By definition of the salary cap, teams MUST find players who are playing above their current salary in order to be consistently competitive. It’s at the very core of the Seahawks philosophy to unearth undervalued assets. Good on them for correctly identifying and rewarding a key player as well as saving some cap money by advancing his extension a season.

            Kam had to know at the time of signing the extension that

            1-NFL revenue would continue to grow,
            2-the contract extension being discussed would likely be the biggest contract of his pro career, and 3-he was leaving money on the table by signing a year early (assuming he had faith he’d continue to develop into one of the best).

            Imagine a scenario where Kam refused to sign an extension. He’d be an UFA coming off a Super Bowl win where he destroyed every moving thing that came over the middle of the field. Holy smokes, what a contract he could’ve had. But he chose the security of an extension a year earlier.

      • Rik says:

        All I am saying is that if Kam is the captain of the defense, the vital cog that allows the whole to function at a much higher level than they would otherwise, then I understand why he feels angst at being paid less than the others around him. I’ve said many times that he’s making a mistake by sitting out and that he should report to the team. I think that sitting out in preseason made his point. Time to get back on the field. If he actively helps preserve Seattle’s defensive dynasty, that makes his point more strongly than sitting out does. The contract is a black and white issue. Trading Kam and losing his contribution to the defense is not. Here’s hoping we can find a solution that keeps this historic group together for a few more years. Go hawks!

        • Screeching Hawk says:

          I’m with you Rik trading him is not an option I want the ‘L.O.B’ back but this whole thing has been ridiculous for sure.

        • Steele says:

          From Kam’s point of view, sitting out the preseason did not make his point. Against scrubs and in practice, they did ok without him. Point was only emphatically made last week, when it mattered, making the FO sweat. It might have been gracious for him to report back right after the Rams.

    • sdcoug says:

      “shouldn’t he be paid at an equivalent level to other members of the LOB?” – absolutely not.

      This is not how markets work. He should be recognized (paid) as the best at HIS position (SS) which he certainly is. If Kam wants to try out next year at a higher-paid position (FS, QB, DE, etc)…hey, more power to him

    • Screeching Hawk says:

      You are so right about Kam being in control about positioning and such on defense. He was a QB in high school so He knows how to lead and set up the plays. I would trade Kam Chancellor for happy Kam Chancellor and that’s about it.

  30. Volume12 says:

    Keyarris Garrett from Tulsa can play!

    And my boy Josh Ferguson, Illinois HB, is a stud. He’s a tiny little dude, but he is dynamic.

  31. Volume12 says:

    What about this Le’Raven Clark cat from Texas Tech? He’s interesting, but might be more of a LG/RT type.

  32. AlaskaHawk says:

    I like LSU running back Leonard Fournette, he had 228 yards, 12 ypc. Ran well in traffic, but only a sophomore.

    • cha says:

      Poor tackling by Auburn on many of his runs, but I love seeing RBs who don’t go down on first contact.

      • CharlietheUnicorn says:

        I would not slight him too much. He made the plays that were in front of him. I wonder if the OL for LSU is better than advertised… helping blow huge holes for him to run through.

  33. AlaskaHawk says:

    I’m enjoying the Ole Miss vs Alanama game. We got to get a few linemen from those teams. Ole Miss and Miss State aren’t given enough credit for the way they put teams together. Ole Miss QB Is having a great game boosted by a couple lucky deflections on his passes.

  34. AlaskaHawk says:

    Wide receiver Lequan Treadwell has 80 yards, looks good after breaking ankle last year.

  35. CharlietheUnicorn says:

    Running back Leonard Fournette
    Fournette was incredible. He was an impatient back last season, but was much more patient Saturday, and his lower-body strength and big-play burst were on full display. I waited all season for Fournette to look like Adrian Peterson last season, when Fournette was a freshman, and it never happened. As he broke tackles and showed burst around the edge, he had that “All Day” look. ~Lance Zierlein

    I’m intrigued…. not sure of his fit, but he is a prospect to keep an eye on

  36. rowdy says:

    Jake browning with another strong showing from the true freshman. Can’t wait to see this guy against some better compotition.

  37. Daniel says:

    what if we traded kam for golden tate

  38. CC says:

    I really wonder if Kam isn’t fully healthy and this is fueling his holdout knowing that he may not make it past 2016. It just seems that this stance is so unreasonable that there has to be something else going on here.

    The players would welcome him back and the relationship can be healed with the FO if needed, so I don’t see a trade happening. I think he pissed off Paul Allen – and Allen doesn’t strike me as a guy who likes being called petty. Allen has been generous with his teams, the community, charities – so I wasn’t surprised to hear that PA said no more.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      I wonder about health too. If he has lost a step due to injuries, it makes a lot of difference. One thing I learned from fantasy football is not to fall in love with a players past performance. I would just hate to have the Seahawks finally get an agreement and then discover Kam has health issues.

  39. JJ says:

    Miami sounds like a perfect place. Out of conference and to a defense that has a great front looking to enhance the secondary with a shutdown leader. They had shown the willingness to shell out the bucks. With the right combo of draft picks Seattle will continue to make the super bowl an annual event.

  40. Ben2 says:

    Don’t know if anybody’s said this yet but,Rob, I’d love to hear your ideas on some elite college strong safeties next time you do a draft podcast

    • rowdy says:

      He covered that in his last podcast

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        I would like an analysis of OL Miss players. There was a lot to like on both sides of the ball. Couple receivers, a decent QB in Kelley, some good defensive line play. Any analysis of first round picks is fun for speculation but pretty much useless as a Seahawks pick. So let’s find those good players who will go in the second round.

  41. Screeching Hawk says:

    As A Washington Huskies fan as well this kid Jake Browning is already impressing me as just a 18 year old kid. Wow he just might be very special indeed. The Steelers are whooping the ’89’ers right now just goes to show that nothing is to be expected in the NFL week by week. Let’s go Hawks !!!

  42. AlaskaHawk says:

    St Louis and San Fran is losing. Whoo hoo! We can climb out of the cellar today.

  43. Hawkfan086 says:

    Game time. Where is my open thread Hawk fans?

  44. Screeching Hawk says:

    How many off side penalties does it take to screw in a light bulb? Apartently Michael Bennett is trying to find out. It is getting so old!

  45. Screeching Hawk says:

    I feel We showed some progress, It was bound to be a tough one. Go Team!

  46. Forrest says:

    Improvement from last week. Bennett needs glasses, but the defense did look better considering the quarterback they were up against. The offense looked better, but Lynch and Graham need to be utilized more. ST was meh. Coaching was better. Overall a better game than last week, but as per usual they lost because of boneheaded penalties and not necessarily the play of GB.

    The next couple of weeks should be wins, and the next “big” challenge is Cincinnati. Bears are toast, and the Lions O can’t take on the Hawk’s D. Right now they need to work on defensive penalties and utilizing their weapons on offense. Right now I’m thinking 12-4 is the goal…probably #2 seed. Go Hawks!!!

  47. Frank says:

    No trade take that punks cash.
    He’s a virus
    I’m glad he’s losing money
    He is really dumb.
    So is his agent
    All teams looking at him
    Like he’s a Fool.

  48. Fast Winning says:

    Trade Cam for a new first half offensive play caller. One that calls plays like the second half offensive play caller. We wouldn’t need Cam if we didn’t have to play catch up in the second half of every game. The defense is getting burned out early because the offensive needs to establish the passing game before the running game in the first half. Otherwise trade Cam for a new offensive line.