Jarran Reed injury highlights glaring problem for Seattle

August 15th, 2020 | Written by Rob Staton

Poona Ford and Jarran Reed picked up injuries on Friday

According to media members at Friday’s training camp session, Jarran Reed left the field with a lower leg injury and didn’t return to practise.

It was also reported that Poona Ford picked up a calf injury but stayed on the field.

If the season started tomorrow, which thankfully it doesn’t, the Seahawks would presumably be starting Demarcus Christmas and Bryan Mone at defensive tackle with only undrafted free agent rookie Cedrick Lattimore for depth.

It’s an incredible situation.

Why the Seahawks haven’t added a defensive tackle so far is a mystery with only one reasonable answer. They cannot go into the off-season with such weak depth at the position. The only plausible explanation is they are saving their remaining cap money for something more important — such as a hope that Jadeveon Clowney will eventually re-sign. There can be no other explanation.

Players are available. Only last week they were said to be interested in Marcell Dareus. They could sign him at any moment. So why wouldn’t you bring him in? Training camp has started now. New additions need every second possible to adjust during this strange, Covid-impacted pre-season. Aside from all the testing you have to do first before even taking the field — you need to learn the scheme, get in shape and work through any issues without pre-season games.

There’s just no logic to not having another veteran defensive tackle on the roster right now unless they’re saving their remaining money for a potential Clowney return.

Such an approach has arguably already cost them primary Plan B in Everson Griffen. If they don’t land Clowney and ultimately miss out on Griffen, Dareus and others who could’ve boosted their D-line — it’ll be a huge own goal for a team that has already done a poor job handling its self-confessed biggest off-season priority.

The injury to Reed (and also Ford) could easily happen early in the season. A defensive line that has already been ranked by PFF as the worst in the league would then be in an absolutely desperate state.

The problem is Clowney, seemingly, isn’t budging:

They’ve made their bed and are sleeping in it until the bitter end. Despite reports that a Griffen or Clay Matthews signing was ‘close’ (that was 10 days ago now) or that they had interest in Dareus — nothing has happened.

It’s quite strange really. This whole situation regarding the D-line feels like it’s being papered over. Most people recognise the need for more up front — but nobody’s really being pushed on it. And if they aren’t waiting for Clowney, what’s the hold up?

This is a season-undermining problem that needs to be addressed as soon as possible.

You can now support Seahawks Draft Blog via Patreon by clicking the tab below.

Become a Patron!

97 Responses to “Jarran Reed injury highlights glaring problem for Seattle”

  1. Big Mike says:

    Unless there is no plan to add DT depth this approach makes zero sense. If they plan on doing so after a hoped for signing of Clowney, what’s holding them back from just doing so now and making the financial adjustments necessary to add him if and when that comes to be?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I can only presume they feel like they might need every penny available for Clowney and that’s why they haven’t signed a DT.

      And perhaps if they sign Clowney they’ll just roll the dice with their DT depth. Who knows?

      But either way this is a situation that should every fan, every journalist and every pundit asking ‘what the hell is going on’? We need some answers, an explanation and some clarity. You cannot start the season with this level of depth on the D-line and this little talent.

      • Mike says:

        Obviously, talking about the D-line inadequacies is beating a dead horse at this point. Not having depth to rotate out tired players is one thing. Or enough skill to rush the passer. But Even more concerning is lacking the guys inside to keep the large investments in LB group clean to make plays. Its just absolutely absurd. Even if you dont get QB pressure, you wont be able to stop the run, or even allow the all-world bobby wagner and crew to do what they do best. How is a safety gonna be able to play freely when there’s a gaping hole right up the middle?

        • Elmer says:

          Maybe, sadly, the time has come to forget Clowney and use the available dollars to sign the best D-line options available. As Rob says, who knows? But injuries to Reed and Ford are the worst nightmare come true. Clowney’s time is up. Either agree to a contract right now or go look for another job.

          • Rob Staton says:

            The problem is though Elmer — Clowney is 100 times better than any other player you can acquire at this stage. If you say, ‘sign now or get stuffed’ then the chances are you’ll merely be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

            They will have to move on at some point. They’re more or less stuck at the moment though. They either meet whatever demand Clowney has or they just wait even longer. Because this team with Clowney is ten times better than the team without him.

            • Alex Higgins says:

              Rob: I agree that the only plausible explanation is to save money for Clowney. I wonder if there is an internal deadline on that, however. Can they go until the end of August holding out hope? I suppose it’s not too difficult for a DT to “learn the system.” Probably the easiest position to jump into without too much playing time.
              The only other thought is that they plan to pick up the cut DTs from other teams. That seems awfully risky though. Like an unheard of way to shore up an obvious weaknesses.

            • Elmer says:

              I get your point. He is the best option by far, so wait as long as you can. My post was an emotional reaction.

              Looking at the actions of Clowney and his agent, doesn’t this seem like a strange year to hold out to the last minute? We are in a COVID-19 pandemic, there is uncertainty everywhere.

    • dcd2 says:

      They might like some guys who are on rosters now, that they feel are ‘likely’ to get cut.

      Maybe Dareus, Snacks, etc. want $4M-ish money.

      This series of recent moves or lack of, does indeed point to being all-in on Clowney. At this point the impact that he would make on the line VS anyone else who is available is so significant, that Clowney is the only player who would even move the needle in terms of improving the DL.

      • Big Mike says:

        “They might like some guys who are on rosters now, that they feel are ‘likely’ to get cut.”

        OK at least that has some logic behind it dcd2. Of course they thought the Clowney situation would be resolved long ago so their expectations seem a bit off this year thus far.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I know John and Pete have both talked about players becoming available.

          But let’s be right here — there is very little chance a good player is getting cut in this season of all seasons.

          When’s the last time Seattle added a player on cutdown day who ended up having even a moderate impact?

          And then you’ve got to be the team that actually lands that needle in the haystack if it does happen.

          You can’t bank on that. That’s an added bonus after you’ve done all your work. Not how you build your roster.

          • dcd2 says:

            Just using the Sherlock Holmes method: When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable is the answer.

            The question of “why haven’t they signed a DT yet” can only be that they want to see who gets cut, are saving the money for Clowney or think whatever is left at DT is interchangeable with each other. Possibly more than one, or all 3.

            I’m thinking that “we’re good at DT, no need to add any other depth/competition” is an impossible conclusion.

            • Rob Staton says:

              I think it’s clearly answer B — saving the money for Clowney.

              There’s no other realistic solution.

              As soon as they sign a DT they make it harder to sign Clowney. They know the D-line needs him badly, I believe they are still desperately hoping to bring him back and until that possibility has gone (he signs somewhere else or announces he’s sitting out) — I believe they will save their money in order to make it possible to get him.

              The Clowney domino needs to fall first. Now if they sign Clay Matthews instead, that’s the domino falling. They will have moved on then. But as I said 10 days ago when the Mike Silver tweets came out — they read like a nudge to Clowney, not an indication that they were genuinely close to signing EG or CM. And so it proved — as they signed neither. They also didn’t sign Marcell Dareus who was linked at the same time.

              They have waited from March to August for this and they are still waiting and hoping now. There will come a time when they can wait no more but clearly that time hasn’t arrived yet.

              I’ll say this though — if Jarran Reed has an ankle injury then all bets are off. Because that will force their hand.

              • dcd2 says:

                For what it’s worth, I agree completely.

                I also wouldn’t be surprised if the DT we do get is a trade for a conditional 7th rounder near cut-down date. Put out the feelers to every team about wanting a DT, so don’t cut your guy outright w/o talking to us first. This part is merely speculation though.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  I can live with a trade for a cheap serviceable body at DT. Preferably one with good gap discipline who can absorb blocks and keep LB’s clean.

                  I can’t live with Benson Mayowa being the primary rusher.

  2. Jordan says:

    Rob,

    Obviously, it didn’t have to be an either or situation, but given what Griffen signed for and what Seattle paid Bruce Irvin and Mayowa, don’t you find that a little surprising? To me, I’d rather have Griffen than either one but maybe Pete and John don’t feel the same. But seriosuly, how could they want Mayowa over Griffen?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I can only presume in March that the price for Griffen wasn’t $6m.

      This one has real potential to bite them on the arse. Griffen is going into a good situation in Dallas. Decent team in a terrible, rotten division. Lots of opportunity to collect sacks and stats. If the Seahawks don’t land Clowney and Griffen produces for such value — we’re going to be bringing this up throughout the season. Why didn’t they set a deadline for JC and move on to players like Griffen? Or just get it done with Clowney if you want him that badly?

      I’m just stunned that we’re sat here on August 15th with the D-line in the state it is. And for anyone wondering when I’ll stop talking about this — that’ll happen when they address this mess and sort it out. Because you cannot make a serious challenge for the Super Bowl with this D-line.

      • cha says:

        My gripe is this is the 2nd year in a row they’ve gone all the way to training camp without really addressing the pass rush.

        Last year they had Martin, Marsh, Mingo, and Ziggy after trading Clark away. No Jarran Reed for 6 games.
        Rookie Collier too I suppose but counting on a rookie to take a major role on is not a high-percentage proposition.

        Clowney fell into their lap.

        I’m left to wonder if there is some organizational philosophy where they will only buy low on pass rush. I’ve they’ve drawn a line in the sand and refuse to go beyond that, no matter how much it shreds the defense.

        Which in turn, makes me wonder how they can feel confident running a defense predicated on getting push from the front 4.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think they’ve just done a really bad job.

          Not sure if it’s arrogance, over-confidence, misjudgement or what.

          But the end product is not good for two years in a row.

          • cha says:

            I hate saying this, but it’s so poor right now, that Adams, KJ and Wagner are going to have to absorb free shots from a 330lb guard roaming free at least once a game. Not only is that adding a layer of injury possibility that is completely needless, it’s going to add up over the course of the season and our mutli-draft-pick and $25 million investments are going to be battered by the time the playoffs roll around.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Their plan makes no sense. They’ve pumped picks and money into the second and third level and it’s all going to be undermined by the worst D-line in the league.

              • cha says:

                If the Reed and Ford injuries have any bit of seriousness, forget the DL ranking, they might be in the running for worst position group in the NFL.

  3. cha says:

    Meanwhile…

    Ian Rapoport
    @RapSheet
    The #Packers and NT Kenny Clark have a 4-year extension for $70 million, source said. Deal includes a massive $25.0 signing bonus. Makes him the highest paid NT in league history and the 12th highest paid defensive player in the NFL.
    7:56 AM · Aug 15, 2020

    • dcd2 says:

      Incidentally the guy taken one pick (27th) after we traded down in 2016. We got Ifedi and Nick Vannet instead.

      On the bright side, the Broncos were the team we traded with at #26 and they took Paxton Lynch. That looks a lot worse.

      • Cortez Kennedy says:

        mmm, that 2016 3rd round 3pack of Vannett, Ohdiambo, and Prosise.

        • Big Mike says:

          Drafting for the most part has been shite for 5 years now. Not entirely, but………….

          • Zach says:

            The other possibility is that it’s not the scouting, it’s the player development and the churn of their best coaches.

            2012 coaching staff
            1) Gus Bradley => Chargers DC
            2) Robert Saleh => Niners DC
            3) Kris Richard => Cowboys DC
            4) Ken Norton, Jr. => (was Raiders DC)

            Also Dan Quinn who play a big role in the Superbowl run is now HC in Atlanta

  4. GerryG says:

    The DT roster construction is baffling.

    You can you say what you want about the talent, $, draft capital etc about the OL, DE, LB, S spots on the roster, but there is a lot of depth and competition at all of those spots. We have too many starting LBs, we have two moderate to high draft picks at S, plus two trade acquisitions, they drafted 2 DEs, signed 2, and have 2 other recent high draft picks, plus B Jackson. They signed every OL that needed a job this spring.

    DT? Well, we have two starters, and a grand total of one guy that has ever logged an NFL snap beyond that. And that guy was PS player most of the year.

    • dcd2 says:

      Yep. Not only that, but it’s been this crummy situation for the entire off-season. They lost Woods and QJeff, both of whom played a ton of snaps at DT last year, and replaced them with no one.

      I thought DT was one of, if not THE top priorities in the draft and they just punted it completely.

  5. RipleyRay says:

    I suspect you are right that they are saving everything hoping for a Clowny resigning. I also think their backup plan should that fail is to pick up scraps when other teams begin cutting D linemen.

  6. Dr Donald Duck says:

    Is it possible that the Seahawks do not believe that there will be a 2020 season because of covid-19 and are planning accordingly?

    • Rob Staton says:

      No.

      Why do people keep suggesting this?

      Is it a troll attempt? Am I missing something?

      Pete Carroll. Mr. Always Compete. The man always looking for a competitive edge. The most jacked up 69-year-old on the planet. He’s thinking… ‘let’s not have a D-line this year because maybe the season won’t happen’.

      • Dr Donald Duck says:

        I am. no troll. I am very concerned about the rising death rate in the USA from covid-19. Without putting the players and their families in a bubble (similar to the NBA), I don’t see how we can have a full NFL season. The Pac-12 has suspended its football season because of the pandemic.

        I am trying to make sense of the Seahawk’s other wise baffling decisions. You suggested that the only explanation for not moving on defensive linemen is that they are waiting for Clowney. I merely suggested another possibility.
        I may be completely wrong but my intention was not to troll anyone.

        • Aaron says:

          The NFL season is happening. The college football situation is quite different. The NCAA didn’t have a centralized plan to deal with COVID-19. Also many schools don’t have the money to spend on the constant testing and sanitation required to keep players and coaches safe. Pro sports have the money and infrastructure to make this work. The bubble, or lack thereof, is a good point though. We’ll see if the NFL can keep going without a bubble like the NBA. As for the Hawks confusing offseason, at this point there’s no excuse for their patchwork approach to the d line.

          • Big Mike says:

            I know baseball has had 2 teams that have had to shut down (Marlins and Cardinals), but for the most part it has succeeded without a bubble as I believe it’s only 1% of their entire operations population have tested positive. NFL can be just as good though it’ll be real interesting what happens if one teasm has a major outbreak as far as scheduling is concerned.

      • cha says:

        I don’t think they’re tanking 2020 or planning on no season. I get what you’re thinking Rob but ‘always compete’ and ‘looking for a competitive edge’ (while 100% accurate to PC) so completely flies in the face of what they’re doing on the DL. It’s so awful fans are struggling to find logic in the face of the absolutely confounding decisions they have made.

        • Rob Staton says:

          They’ve made a dogs dinner of their self-confessed priority, for sure.

          And it’s hard to accept and understand.

          But it’s not a sign that they’re thinking in anyway there won’t be a season.

          This is the last team in the NFL that would base their decision making on the tiny, remote possibility of no season.

  7. paul difuria says:

    Look, someone is going to sign Clowney. It may be that he has made enough money and is willing to sit out a season but I can’t imagine that would improve his negotiating position next year. Harder to be one of the best athletes in your prime and having to watch the games on TV while foregoing an 8 figure amount.

    Just as what undoubtedly happened with Griffen, JS will get a call from Clowney’s agent with an opportunity to beat any offer on the table. I bet the league knows that Seattle will outbid…because they have no other choice at this point.

    I’m still giving the Hawks an incomplete offseason grade. If Mone/Christmas are seeing meaningful minutes this season, then they’ll get a nice participation award.

  8. pdway says:

    It could happen – but i’d be surprised if Clowney sits out the season. He’s 27 – not old – but giving up a full season out of the 5-6 (at best) he has left, isn’t nothing.

    I tend to agree that the Hawks lack of activity in signing some bodies for the D-Line is because they are keeping what $$ they have left in stock for Clowney. But it is getting maddening.

    Question – if Clowney really is at $20MM/year or bust stance – do people here want him on say a 3 yr/$60MM deal?

    Almost feels like we have little choice at this point. We’ve really put all our eggs in one basket.

    • GerryG says:

      Yes.

      Because if they don’t do that they mortgaged the future on a Safety while having a replacement level DL.

      Maybe Clowney is too much of anjury risk for 20 Mil, and that’s why nobody was willing to do it. But now they have to. Hell even if they sign JC, they still dont have a very good DL. Need DT depth, and their rookies will probably have zero impact.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Reportedly he has lowered his demands to less than 20m and more than 15m.

      Offer him an average of 17m over three years. Maybe they have already, who knows? But if that’s what it takes… get it done.

    • Bmseattle says:

      If Clowney didnt like all the double teams he faced last year, he’s probably looking at our current roster in disgust.
      It’s probably smarter financially at this point, to take substantially less this year, to play on a team with a better defensive line than ours, so he can potentially accumulate more sacks.

      • Big Mike says:

        If he’s only interested in a one year deal then there’s logic in your thinking. I doubt that’s the case tho.

      • pdway says:

        “If Clowney didnt like all the double teams he faced last year, he’s probably looking at our current roster in disgust”

        It’s a good team though. Add Clowney to the D, and you’ve got some playmakers at each level – esp if Brooks contributes.

        RW is in the prime of his career and a top-3 QB by every measure, and the skill positions look better stocked than we’ve seen in many years. Yes the O-line is a question mark – but we’ve seen Russell play well behind mediocre offensive lines for years now.

        It really is down to the D-line. You have to be able to rush the passer. Add Clowney to this mix and we’re a notch below only KC/SF/Balt in my mind – and if we can keep a playoff game close, I think we still have the best 4th quarter QB around.

        • Bmseattle says:

          I dont disagree with your assessment of the team, necessarily.
          I was speaking specifically on Clowney’s potential perspective on his ability to thrive (on a statistical level), with the current state of the defensive line.

          I’m assuming that he isn’t getting a long term deal anywhere close to what he wants, so would be coming from the perspective of playing on a team that would allow for more playmaking from *him*.

          Just speculation on my part, clearly.
          Putting myself in his shoes, I could imagine not seeing the current situation regarding the Seahawks defensive line (in particular) being conducive to maximizing future value.

  9. Submanjoe says:

    Does anyone else think this Kenny Clark contract points to Rodgers exit after this year?

    It is frustrating seeing these contracts lately and wondering how or why the Seahawks won’t work things out with Clowney

    • Rob Staton says:

      I don’t think it points to that. The Chiefs have shown you can keep your best players if you want to.

      Rodgers’ is on the countdown though. But they won’t be rushing him out the door unless the new guy looks right and ready.

      • dcd2 says:

        I heard on the radio from a GB insider that they essentially want to move on from Rogers – today. If he didn’t have $30M in dead cap that is.

        He all but assured the host Rogers would be gone next year. That was the whole premise of moving up for Love. He comped it to the Favre/Rogers situation from a few years ago.

        Take it for what it’s worth, as I can’t speak to his level of knowledge. You don’t trade up for a 1st round QB with the thought of letting him ride the pine for 3-4 years though.

        If I were wagering, I’d say this is Rogers’ last year in GB.

        • Rob Staton says:

          My thought on what they were doing, based on no knowledge or research of the feeling in GB, was that they were sensibly planning ahead. Rodgers is 37 this year and it might take two or three attempts to find the heir apparent. Even if you’re using first round picks, you’ve got to keep looking until you find ‘the guy’. Certainly if Wilson is still in Seattle in five years time I hope the Seahawks start spending picks on possible future replacements.

          (A minor point here — to be fair the trade up in this instance was a minor one.)

          It also works to what they did with Favre. They took Rodgers near the end of round one and then three years later drafted Brian Brohm in round two — despite Favre and Rodgers remaining on the roster. It looked like the Packers were buying a number of raffle tickets to increase their chances of adequately replacing Favre. Then Rodgers emerged as the future.

          Perhaps they are sick of Rodgers’ schtick. He’s an entitled, complaining misery guts with a rod up his arse. I can imagine he’s very difficult to coach and manage. Yet he’s also a legendary player who keeps the Packers relevant. If they’re hoping this is a Patrick Mahomes type situation — good luck. Jordan Love needs a lot more fine tuning than Mahomes did. It’s easy to say now Mahomes is on a trajectory to be the greatest QB to ever play the game but it’s also very true. Personally I hope they do move on next year… as long as they don’t trade him to the Niners…

          • dcd2 says:

            Very true and you’re right. If Love turns out to be Paxton Lynch or Brandon Weeden, you try to figure it out with Rogers.

            Much of what you say, was also mentioned by the GB guy as well. They’re sick of his attitude, his smugness, etc. Not the player per se, but he made it sound like both parties know where this is headed and are perfectly fine with the inevitable outcome.

            As for the 9ers. They were the team that took Alex Smith, when he thought it would be him. Hopefully he still harbors some ill will toward the perceived snub from his hometown team. Chicago would be a good spot IMO. Those would be some fun games in the NFC Norse.

  10. cha says:

    Ben Arthur
    @benyarthur
    Practice is over. K.J. Wright didn’t participate in team sessions. It was all 1st-rd pick Jordyn Brooks alongside Bobby Wagner at LB in offense vs. defense.

    Not sure if it was the shoulder or rest w/ Wright. But Seattle got its first extended look at Brooks as a starter at WLB.
    2:50 PM · Aug 14, 2020

    Just an interesting note. Nothing to get overly excited about – keep in mind this time last year Wagner was not practicing while working his contract out and Barton was earning raves for his play with all the reps he was getting.

  11. Rashi says:

    Not strange at all. People here have convinced themselves that the Seahawks are extremely sad about how things have gone this offseason. That their plan all hinged on Clowney.

    This logic is wrong because thats not how anybody at the level John Schneider is, allocates their resources.

    You simply do not go all in on one player for a “position of need”. You don’t boom or bust the season based on an unpredictable player who has already held out before… in a season where holdouts are way more common.. That would be extremely unnecessary risk taking. The Seahawks clearly view this additional pass rusher as a luxury. Sure if they get Clowney, they would love to have him back. But they don’t view this as a do or die situation.. Lets again remember the Seahawks added 4 pass rushers this offseason, again, you can fairly disagree all you want about the quality of players they got, but the Seahawks clearly feel comfortable with it.

    Its real simple, the Seahawks said that the pass rush was their priority this offseason. d

    Sure they would love to have Clowney back, and is probably why they are holding back on signing anyone else. But this is not some do or die situation. They made their bed with the DE situation when they clearly identified that their biggest need was in the secondary rather than the dline.

    If their need was so dire, they would not have let Griffen go to Dallas for pennies. They would have persued other pass rushers in the offseason.. we saw 0 reports of them being interested in Quinn, Barrett, etc.

    Everyone here who thinks that a person at the executive level of a Billion dollar business that Schneider is in, will risk the season on one unpredictable player making a decision, is just fooling themselves. The core moves have been made, everything else is luxury and filler.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Seven paragraphs and you’ve said absolutely nothing that counters any of the points made here.

      Your argument seems to be ‘John Schneider is a GM so therefore we must assume everything he’s done has been part of a masterplan and if you disagree you are wrong’.

      That’s just an appeal to authority and the kind of crap I’ve got no time for. You’re not making any counters, no points. And in this community we don’t do that.

      You’ve admitted yourself that they said pass rush was the priority. So unless you think their big plan was signing or drafting zero defensive tackles (while losing two), letting Clowney walk and then signing Benson Mayowa to replace him, then holding onto millions of dollars in cap deep into August while watching Dallas sign Everson Griffen (despite being interested) — no, this hasn’t been the masterplan and the likelihood is they have been trying all this time to re-sign the one player they singled out as the priority in February.

      • Rashi says:

        Nope you are not understanding my point.

        Its just real simple. Someone whose profession is resource allocation is not going to risk the entire season on an unpredictable player’s decision making. Thats not how any of it works. Yes I admit that this was the Hawks biggest need but that does not mean they did not address it.

        And yes Rob, the plan was to sign Benson Mayowa, Irvin, draft a second rounder, and draft another 5th rounder. When you add Collier, Jackson, and Green, I count 6 very rosterable pass rushers (maybe 7 if you count Robinson) on the team. That is more than what they carried into last season. They went into last season with 6 pass rushers. When you factor in Shaquem getting some pass rush snaps, then that is more than enough quantity.

        And no the plan is not to sign 0 DTs. As I mentioned in my previous post, Clowney is a luxury. They are hoping to have him back so they are saving money, but if it doesnt work out they will sign one of the many legit DTs still available.

        Rob, you are incorrectly making this about how I am assuming some sort of masterplan. Nope I am not, actually am in complete agreement with you about how the quality of what they have added is bad. Wish we went after more top end guys. What I am saying is that according to the principles of resource allocation, there is no way Clowney is some must get at this point. They just gave up a fortune to get another position, they have 7 very rosterable pass rushers, they have a LB who has gotten many snaps at LEO. In no way can you say that they are short on numbers at pass rush. And whenever Clowney makes his decision, they will go get a DT based on whether they got Clowney or not.

        • cha says:

          Someone whose profession is resource allocation is not going to risk the entire season on an unpredictable player’s decision making.

          So they’re risking the entire season on having a crap DL. What’s the difference?

        • Rob Staton says:

          Nope you are not understanding my point.

          Yes I do. I understand your point completely.

          Its just real simple.

          I bet it is.

          Someone whose profession is resource allocation is not going to risk the entire season on an unpredictable player’s decision making. Thats not how any of it works. Yes I admit that this was the Hawks biggest need but that does not mean they did not address it.

          I’ve explained this in great detail about 300 times this year. Why do I need to repeat myself? Just watch the podcast. The Seahawks stated very clearly numerous times that re-signing Clowney was the priority. We know they made him a serious offer. As I’ve suggested over and over again — in my opinion they correctly judged his market during their research at the combine and came up with an offer that was below his expectations but was probably highly competitive to the market he eventually received. I think they believed, given time, that Clowney would see it as the best offer on the table and after a few days would return. They’d left on good terms and felt they could recruit him. Clowney, instead, unpredictably, resisted. They didn’t then immediately sign Benson Mayowa. They only signed Mayowa when the stalemate was well and truly set-in. Mayowa cost $3m — which is chump change. And they always, throughout the off-season, kept money available. Just as they are now. It’s blindingly obvious they have pursued Clowney all year and still are. And yes — it has seriously impacted their free agent plans, their draft and what they’re able to do now. Otherwise they would’ve signed a DT by now. Things like this happen to teams every single year. It’s an unpredictable business. On this occasion Seattle misjudged the situation and it has impacted them.

          And no the plan is not to sign 0 DTs.

          So which is it then? Either they nailed their plan or they didn’t? If signing no DT’s wasn’t part of the plan why haven’t they signed one?

          As I mentioned in my previous post, Clowney is a luxury. They are hoping to have him back so they are saving money, but if it doesnt work out they will sign one of the many legit DTs still available

          Funny… I seem to remember the direct quote being that he was the ‘priority’ not a ‘luxury’. And the fact they didn’t sign Everson Griffen, haven’t signed a DT and are keeping money available sure seems to suggest to me he is still a ‘priority’.

          What I am saying is that according to the principles of resource allocation, there is no way Clowney is some must get at this point.

          He’s a must get for several reasons. Firstly — they have the worst line in the league and they’re not stupid. They know this as well as we do. Secondly — they have spent all year pursuing him, as I’ve already detailed.

          They just gave up a fortune to get another position, they have 7 very rosterable pass rushers.

          No they don’t. They have a collection of backups and replacement level players. As I’ve already said, they could easily cut Branden Jackson tomorrow. They’ve already done it once.

          And as I stated in my previous message — you are appealing to authority in a way that is pure anti-debate and not welcome on here. You said in one of two now deleted messages, and I quote:

          “Genuine question, how much is the biggest amount of money you have managed? Cause I really don’t think you will be able to grasp what I am talking about unless you have managed over 10 million dollars or ran an equivalent business where you are beholden to multiple stakeholders.”

          Nobody, including you, is shutting down debate on this forum because we’ve never been a GM or run BMW or Starbucks or Kentucky Fried F-ing Chicken. We are free to criticise, analyse and debate Seattle’s off-season freely without having to answer to this abject nonsense.

        • pdway says:

          I don’t agree w Rob on every single thing – but I do pretty strongly agree that the answer can’t always just be, “PC and JS know best” . . and that’s the end of it. Now, they are good at what they do – and they’ve earned a ton of love/respect from all of us for this run. And, I’ll go further, I will continue to give them benefit of the doubt when it comes to talent analysis of guys we’ve not seen at the pro level (i.e. Brooks).

          But, when we see the roster, and it’s guys that we’ve seen play at this level – then I think the criticism is fully fair game. We know what we have in the D-line as it stands – god, maybe we’ll get lucky and Collier or Green will make a leap, but there’s not much evidence of that. The rest of the guys aren’t on the cusp of any sort of breakout, if we’re being realistic.

          It just feels like more and more of a miss, b/c the rest of the roster looks very contend-y to me.

          • AlaskaHawk says:

            It has been pretty clear to me since May that Clowney will not be a Seahawk. I still hold out hope – but I just don’t think he will be. I’m not sure it is just about money either. He had a good look at the team last year. He may say he wants to play for the Seahawks – but does he really want to play for the Seahawks? People say one thing and do another all the time. Ultimately it’s about signing a contract and I don’t see a signature.

            The sad part of this situation is that if the defensive line is as bad as people say and if the offense has hiccups, the first round draft picks they traded away might be worth something.

            • pdway says:

              what’s keeping hope alive is that neither party has done or said those things that players/teams do when they’re really breaking up and moving on. We all know the signals when we see them – and really, both sides, to the extent they’ve said anything, have continuously kept the door open.

              And, of course, there’s the obvious fact that Clowney hasn’t signed elsewhere. Just feels like a good old stalemate. someone just needs to blink.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Yes, Clowney wants to play for the Seahawks.

              The suggestion that he might’ve been lying all along isn’t based in reality. A fantastic franchise, great culture, one of his best friends on the roster, right scheme, player friendly coach — but nah… he hated it here and would rather be unemployed.

              We don’t need to second guess Clowney’s motives. It’s clear and obvious. He wants to be paid what he believes is a fair amount. Nobody has offered what he thinks is a fair amount. It really is as simple as that.

            • AlaskaHawk says:

              Don’t you think this decision would be easier for him if it was a team with a great defensive line? Say the 49ers for instance. If he was double teamed a lot last year, does he really want to spend the next three years in more double teams and have a poor QB sack percentage? That won’t help him with his next contract. That is why I would question his desire to play for the Seahawks. Maybe I’m just over guessing the situation.

              • Rob Staton says:

                No I don’t. It really is as simple as nobody has matched what he perceives to be fair value.

                • Kaesotullius says:

                  That seems true, dunno if it’s entirely the factors weighing into Clownety’s intentions. He hasn’t really said much. He probably has some minimal reason he might prefer to play for the 49ers, Titans, what have you, even if he has equal or better reasons to play for the Seahawks. Can’t say I’ve closely followed what he’s been reportedly offered, but if he had a matching or better offer from some other team, he may prefer to play for that team. Does seem like the Seahawks are gonna need to make it financially where it’s at for Clowney, if he’s gonna sign though.

                  I don’t know why, but, it reminds me of Kam’s holdout in some way. Only because I do think they both want/ed to play for the Seahawks, but were willing to pursue other options. I’d imagine those situations are quite different, but I don’t really remember Kam’s too well.

                  • Rob Staton says:

                    Any team is going to need to make it financially where it’s at for Clowney if he’s going to sign. Not just Seattle.

                    It really is as simple as that.

                    He wants X amount. Nobody is offering X amount. Therefore, he hasn’t signed anywhere.

                    The questions are now a) will anyone match what he wants? (seems unlikely) b) will he be willing to sit out the whole season if he doesn’t get what he wants? (seems possible) c) will he lower his demands enough to sign someone, maybe on a shorter deal?

                    It’s been a mess for months, a true stalemate with no sign of a breakthrough. The Seahawks have to find a breakthrough though. And the fact they are protecting their money and waiting it out suggests they haven’t given up hope just yet.

          • Alex Higgins says:

            I hope and pray that PC/JS have a plan and know what they’re doing. They have shown success in the past, but they’ve also shown failures in selecting players and spending money (e.g., Eddie Lacy, Malik McDowell, etc.).
            Just saying that you hope they are right is not an argument that they have done a good job this year. Objectively, they have not done anything significant to improve a DLine that got pushed off the ball against the run and could not generate any pass rush. I’ve re-watched some games. They were AWFUL against the run most of the year. The Linebackers and safeties had to do A LOT of tacking and overcompensation.

        • JC3 says:

          I think they are just plain cheap. Keep drafting RB, LB, S so they can pay less on second contract.
          This is Ken Bering 2.0 after Allen died, then they should just trade Wilson if they want to pull a “re-imagine” like what Dipoto did.

  12. Steve Nelsen says:

    Rob,

    I think it was PC that made a comment recently that JS expected some surprise cuts as a consequence of the 2021 cap reduction. Similarly, some veterans might become available for trade. In addition to waiting on Clowney, I think they are waiting to see who they might get that is better than the current FAs.

    • Rob Staton says:

      If he said that, I think it’s ridiculous personally and hopefully not serious. How do they know who’s going to be cut in three weeks time? So much can happen between now and then.

      Let’s imagine for a second they legitimately were waiting on that. Imagine banking on the last possible opportunity to add players — and then being totally dependant on other teams cutting specific unwanted players to address a crippling need, then being in a position to claim or sign them.

      That would be quite unbelievable.

      It should be a mere bonus if someone you like is cut and you have a shot at them. Nothing more, nothing less.

      Because any barely reasonable player is not going to reach you on waivers.

      • cha says:

        PC did allude to it in the Softy interview. When asked about bringing in a veteran DE he talked about cutdown day.

        I give it about as much credence that they can find someone useful after the cuts as I did when PC said earlier this offseason they can get 8 sacks each out of Taylor and Robinson.

  13. Albert Bryan Butler says:

    Or, Clowney just doesn’t want to go to training camp. I am reminded of the chapters in Tim Green’s book The Dark Side of the Game. One of them is called”Rookies in Shorts.” Apparently there is nothing more dangerous than a rookie in shorts. Ke”mah Siverand is proof of this. The other one was called “Why hold out?” in which he illustrates that training camp is a mine field. Holding out keeps you out of training camp, helps keep you healthy and sometimes it makes you more money. This book is from a different era though, when holdouts happened all the time. Especially with rookies.

    Still, I wouldn’t be surprised if Clowney signs somewhere a week before the season starts.

    • Robert says:

      Well, I suppose that’s possible. Sort of a modern day Walter Jones situation. How many years did he hold out from training camp?
      I kind of doubt that’s what’s happening here – I’m sure the Seahawks could manage his training camp work load is that was the issue.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Training camp is very different these days.

      This isn’t the old fashioned camp.

      It’s all about him not getting value. Not sure why people are so keen to complicate this.

      • Albert Bryan Butler says:

        I suppose the pandemic might give him extra incentive to avoid that headache. I mean, we know you’re not getting laid in Renton.

        • Jordan says:

          Except you can though… Given you just follow the covid protocol for guests/family/etc…

          The whole sneaking in someone to have sex with in the team hotel w/o following covid protocol and getting fired is such a ridiculous situation lol. Maybe he didn’t want documentation of her.

  14. GoHawksDani says:

    Tbh 2 vet DTs + Griffen/Matthews/anybody >>>>> only Clowney.
    I like Clowney but put Mone and Christmas inside with Clowney and he’ll get double/triple teamed easily and can do nothing.

    I think they might see a ton of their guys as multiposition players who can play inside and out: Collier, Green, Jackson, etc. So they might think as a plan B they can move them inside if injuries happen.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Clowney is a game changer. He elevates the line to a level that simply isn’t possible with a 34 year old rotational rusher and a body at DT.

      And yes, they have inside out rushers. But you can’t use those guys inside on early downs, mid or short range downs or any other situation than obvious passing downs.

      So it is not a solution for a lack of DT depth.

  15. Hawkdawg says:

    For what it’s worth, I have a passing acquaintance with Art Thiel, once a PI sports columnist and now a writer for Sports Northwest, an on-line sports website. He and I had lunch once to discuss my comments on his analysis of the Frank Clark pick, which focused on his concern regarding the domestic abuse allegations against Clark. I thought he was getting some aspects of the law wrong, and he wanted to discuss the matter in person. Decent guy, who normally has good contrarian instincts, important to journalism.

    When Pete got through his first couple of press conferences without ANY journalist taking a decent shot at this pass rush issue, I posted a plea to him on his blog, saying I understood his interest on the effect of Covid on the NFL, college football, society, etc., but would he PLEASE ask Pete about what in the world was going on with the Hawks’ “#1 offseason priority.” I laid out what I thought the problem was, and he promised he would give it a shot, the next time Pete was at the podium.

    So we’ll see. Personally, I’m not counting on Pete doing anything more in response than happy-talking in fine Pete fashion. He’s not about to admit there is a real problem when that admission would serve no purpose other than to increase the leverage others might gain over the team. So the best we are going to get is body language and perhaps certain Pete vocabulary that history teaches is indicative of a concern. Like the Hawks are “battlin'” to improve things, etc.

    Also, just as an aside, I don’t put much stock in the theory that Pete and Schneider said X, Y or Z in the offseason about their desire to improve the pass rush. They also held forth on the desirability of the OL staying together, for Chrissakes. What matters is not what they said–they say all sorts of things with all sorts of motives over time. What matters is what our eyes, and the stats, tell us–the DL was a real problem last year, in all respects. It needs impact players, and right now it has none.

    • cha says:

      Thanks for talking to Thiel Hawkdawg. He has always struck me as you say, having more of an outsider’s tendencies toward being contrarian. I’ll be interested to see if he does ask the Q and how PC responds.

      As for what PC says about their offseason plans, he’s been pretty straightforward in past offseasons about their priorities. I recall him talking about re-establishing the run game. That was after a rough 2017 where every RB got hurt and RW was the lead rusher with one good knee. Bam, they drafted Penny.

      I tend to believe them when after a terrible pass rush year, they say pass rush is a priority and Clowney is a priority.

      • Hawkdawg says:

        I believed them, too, but because my eyes told me to agree, not because they said so. As I said, they also stated they wanted to keep the OL together, and given what happened this offseason I think that was very unlikely to be true at any time, including when they said it. Moreover, my eyes in that case were telling me that doing so should probably NOT have been a priority, at least in the abstract. As to whether they improved the OL, time will tell. There doesn’t seem to be much reason to believe so, on paper. It’s not like they brought in acknowledged studs there…

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think we’re in danger here though of taking one comment (‘we’d like continuity on the O-line’) and now overstating that one comment after they made three changes to the O-line.

          There are numerous examples over the years where Carroll has said something and then followed up those words with action. Whether it was prioritising upgrading the run in 2011, getting more speed in the front seven in 2012, saying he wanted more touchdown makers in 2013, needing to fix the run in 2018 and so on. There are other examples.

          So when he said the D-line and fixing the pass rush was the priority this off-season, he clearly meant it. Because it was stating the obvious. And maybe he won’t say it on camera but it’s absolute certain he doesn’t constitute what they’ve done so far as fixing anything on the DL.

        • cha says:

          I get what you’re saying but it takes two to dance on keeping OL continuity.

          They brought Iupati back so the left side has continuity.

          Britt at center – PC recently spoke of him not being ready to play Week One so continuity there was already disrupted by forces beyond their control.

          Right Guard – Fluker is great but they were able to land a prospect they really liked at his spot, and has depth with guys who have played at RG when Fluker was banged up (which was pretty often) in Simmons and Jones.

          Right Tackle – Ifedi taking such a minimum offer with Chicago speaks to something not smelling right. Whether the Hawks never offered him a contract, or they did and Ifedi just wanting a fresh start somewhere else.

          So yeah, continuity is nice and deserves lip service, especially when their OL has been such a work in progress this year. If I had to guess, it might have been a little tip in the press to Ifedi that they’re open to bringing him back, or to Britt that they want him back, but he might have to accept a lower salary in 2020.

    • Elmer says:

      They apparently worked out a DT named P.J. Johnson today. Not a household name. Late round draft choice in 2019 and a practice squad guy. I would say not an automatic upgrade from Christmas, Mone, etc. We’ll see if they sign him.

  16. Pran says:

    What has changed from teams perspective to not give him what Clowney wants. They traded for him for a season and talked high but apparently not willing to meet his price. Clowney was holding out when they traded for him so they have an idea on the ask.
    JS’s trades, free agency decisions, and drafting is spotty at best in recent years.

  17. Trevor says:

    I think the Hawks have to sign Clowney to a longer term deal and a DT like Darius now if they consider themselves as a contender. There simply are no other options.

    With the lack of quality on the DL and draft capital the next two years it seems like the only option. They are going to need to use an early pick or free agent $ to address LT in the next year or two so If they can lock up Clowney ans develop some of their young guys like Taylor they might be ok. If not I just don’t see how the problem gets fixed with the limited options they now have.

    • Scot04 says:

      If the rumors of Clowney willing to take a contract at 17M per year. It seems crazy to me the Seahawks wouldn’t come up to that on a 3 or 4 year deal. I don’t think anyone would have would have complained if we signed him to a contract like that to start Free-agency. It’s time to do it.

  18. cha says:

    JP Finlay
    @JPFinlayNBCS
    ·
    5h
    Let’s point out a few things with Alex Smith – this is not about money. He’s making $20 million this season regardless.
    JP Finlay
    @JPFinlayNBCS
    ·

    5h
    Also let’s stop with the notion that he just wants to prove he can come back. The dude wants to play football. He’s a cut throat killer athlete wired to compete. He’s a former No. 1 overall pick. This isnt about a nice story.

    JP Finlay
    @JPFinlayNBCS
    And lastly – I’ve heard from multiple people with WFT that Alex Smith looks very good. This is a real competition. Buckle up.

    Football aside, I’m so happy for Alex Smith. What a comeback! Just being cleared to play is a huge victory, but it appears the story has more chapters to go. Great for him.