Seahawks meeting with Jonathan Bullard

March 25th, 2016 | Written by Rob Staton

This isn’t a big shock. Seattle’s two key needs — and the most likely picks in the first two rounds — are O-line help and a DE/DT hybrid.

Bullard ticks so many boxes. He can play DE in base and shoot the B-gap. On third downs and in nickel he can move inside.

Seattle met with Mario Edwards Jr a year ago and drafted similar inside/out players in Cassius Marsh and Frank Clark. They’ve since dropped weight — so presumably the search continues for that type of pass rusher.

Edwards Jr was hard to judge in terms of his range. Jason La Canfora made a strong case for him being a first rounder last year. He was the #35 pick to Oakland.

Bullard is getting similar grades. As we noted yesterday, Tony Pauline thinks he’ll go in round one while others insist he’s a second or third round pick. It really depends on scheme. Bullard’s not an automatic fit in the 3-4 and he’s equally not suited to an orthodox 4-3. He’ll do his best work moving around the line. It’s not surprising that Oakland (with Ken Norton Jr as their defensive coordinator) took Edwards Jr and Bullard is equally a good fit in Seattle’s defense.

It’s not just the scheme fit that will likely appeal to the Seahawks. Bullard has tremendous grit and spirit. He carried a major chip on his shoulder in 2015 after getting a mid-round grade from the draft committee. He admitted he returned to Florida to prove he was better than that. He’s a former 5-star recruit — something the Seahawks seem to like.

Bullard performed well at the combine and plays with a real fire and intensity. He doesn’t take snaps off and if the Seahawks really want to become the bully again this year — here’s a guy who can help them get there.

There aren’t many DE/DT hybrid’s in this draft class. Sheldon Rankins is probably the ideal but he’s expected to go in the top-15. Bullard might be the only other option for Seattle otherwise they’ll just look elsewhere (at maybe a pure edge or a DT).

For that reason it could make Bullard a very serious option at #26. They won’t be able to get at the top offensive tackles in rounds 2-3 — but there are likely to be interior line alternatives such as Connor McGovern or the rising Joe Haeg.

It wouldn’t be a total shock if the Seahawks approached the draft as follows:

1. Are Rankins or Bullard available at #26?

2. If not, take an offensive lineman with a high ceiling (Germain Ifedi)

3. If you go O-line at #26, take the best DT or EDGE at #56

They could equally just be so focused on the offensive line that this is a moot point. After all, Pete Carroll noted it was a priority at the end of the 2015 season:

“I don’t think we’ve nailed it yet. I think this needs to be a really competitive spot again, and we’re going to work really hard to build it up. For the course of the season, we weren’t consistent enough.

“We found a real good rhythm, but we can’t start and go through that again. We don’t want to have to experience that if we can avoid it. I think that’s a real area of focus again.”

They might be prepared to see how far Bullard lasts and consider trading up in round two. That enables them to get their guy on the O-line at #26.

Either way, the good money is on an OL/DL pick to start off the draft. Running back (did I mention Tyler Ervin is pretty good?), further O-line competition and possibly receiver will also come into play starting in round three.

225 Responses to “Seahawks meeting with Jonathan Bullard”

  1. If we don’t go OL at 26, this (DE/DT) is the route I want to see us go for sure (Rankins or Bullard). It will all come down to who is available and what does the FO want to upgrade more? Also do they value OT?

    If priority #1 is upgrading the interior OL, and they feel confident in Gilliam at LT and Webb at RT, then they can take a DT/DE at 26 and then grab McGovern and one or two other O-linemen in the draft (a Dahl/Glasgow type and a OT to compete with Britt for LG). But if they value OT and want competition and a potential long term starter at RT they can draft a guy like Ifedi at 26, move Webb in to LG (upgrades two OL positions) and then grab a DE/DT at 56 (bummed we’d lose out on McGovern tho).

    Overall as long as we spend 3 of our 4 earliest picks on OL & DL I will be happy. Then use that other pick on a RB like Ervin.

    • Greg Haugsven says:

      I like your thinking Nathan. IMO the interior of the oline might be more important than the outside. If the Hawks think this way as well, the DE/DT might be a very serious candidate at 26. Sowell might even come into play for LT as well and have Gilliam at RT with Webb at LG.

      • Rob Staton says:

        The interior probably is the more important but the Seahawks tend to like tackles they can move inside.

        LT is Gilliam’s job to lose. He’d have to be lousy in pre-season to open that particular door.

        • I can’t help but not wonder if Soko could be ready to play at LG. I know he is training there with Center duties I imagine being slowly added in (Pete says he needs another year before he could compete at Center). But if you remove the Center duties, is he consistent enough with his technique and have the brains to compete at LG and win? If so that would be huge.

          While I love what Ifedi could do for us at both RT and LG (his presence at RT moving Webb to LG, benching Britt), I am starting to get high on the idea of drafting a DLinemen like Bullard at 26 and going OL at 56 and 90 or 97. If we can do this:

          R1: Bullard/Rankins
          R2: McGovern
          R3: RB/Dahl
          R3: RB/Dahl

          I would be quite happy. We’d most likely end up with the week 1 OL of; Gilliam-Dahl-McGovern-Glow-Webb. Russell can avoid pressure from his right side as long as the interior is pass protecting well. It seems pretty clear that giving Russ pass pro from the interior is better than pass pro from the edges if you had to pick only one.

          The only thing I don’t like about it, the reason I like R1: Ifedi R2: McGovern R3 RB/Dahl R3 RB/Dahl is (as I said before) it allows us to have 4 of the 5 OL spots filled with young, cheap, talented players that will protect Russ as a group for the next 4+ years (his peak years). By going DL instead at 26 we push our need for a quality OT to 2017, with Webb being a temporary patch at the position.

          • Darnell says:

            My concern with that projected oline would be that in a year where the Hawks are gunning for the Super Bowl, you’re starting an oline with only 1 career start in the interior (Glowinski) with the LG & C being rookies playing positions that they weren’t playing in college last season.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Carroll stated quite firmly at the end of the season that they would keep Sokoli at center and allow him to concentrate on one position. They seem to like his fit at center and he really needs considerable time to adapt to the offense if he’s going to make it work.

            • Darnell says:

              I have to wonder though, with the most successful conversion to date being Sweezy to G, why they then decided to convert Jared Smith and Kristjan Sokoli to C, as opposed to G, where there is even more mentally to take in. They obviously know more than me, but in theory you’d want to reduce the learning curve as much as possible. To be fair to Sokoli, the jury is absolutely still out, and just making the team makes for a successful first season.

            • I realize that, but if we draft McGovern (or Dahl or Glasgow) to play Center, I imagine they would become our long term Center…and unless they want Sokoli at Center no matter what (meaning they want him as a cheap hyper athletic backup Center or would move the player at C to another position so they can get Sokoli in at Center) I just don’t get not having him compete for and playing Guard.

              The Center project of Sokoli makes sense if we don’t draft anyone to be our Center and we will roll with Lewis in ’16, then I get it, but if we do draft someone then why not move him to LG where he can beat Britt and become a starter? :/

              • monkey says:

                Which is why I keep thinking that we will still see the Seahawks add a veteran center, someone like Wisnewski before all is said and done here.
                If they go ahead and draft a center, then you have the problem you just laid out. If, on the other hand, you pick up a vet on something like a one year prove it deal, then you’re giving Sokoli time to blossom, while not having any reason to look at moving him elsewhere.
                My guess is, they draft a guard to push Britt, but at center, they either sign a vet to push Lewis (which I would prefer) or they just stick with Lewis, because drafting a center throws a monkey wrench into the Sokoli project.

        • troy says:

          Rob I realize its tremendously difficult to look so far ahead into next years draft but how do you feel about the OT coming out next year? Do you think they might feel as though “we can get solid quality in that position group next year if we’re not able to address it now”? So maybe they grab Bullard or Rankins @ #26 and RD2-3 focus on the interior?

  2. Volume12 says:

    He’s an ideal fit really. Also has that overcoming adversity background that every single one of Seattle’s first selections have had.

    This OL Lene Maiva is pretty damn good. How’d we miss him?

    Great foot speed, team leader, has a Jesse Williams like personality, can/has played every position but C. Comes from a hurry up, ZBS, he was part of a line that has produced a 1,000 yard rusher or more for 3 straight years, and is used to blocking for mobile QBs.

    Put up 34 reps on the BS, and his arms are solid muscle. Very physically imposing. Just seems like a TC tough/gritty/ piss and vinegar kind of cat.

  3. badjujus says:

    1. J bullard
    2. C McGovern
    3. T Ervin
    3. get back to me

    • Volume12 says:

      Haha. I like that.

      Right now, I see 4, maybe 5 needs.

      OL, DE/DT, RB, NT, and probably another O-lineman. Not necessarily in that order.

    • This would please me as long as that second 3rd round pick is used on a guy like Dahl or Glasgow or maybe a OT that can compete with Britt and win the LG spot.

      My reasoning for liking our going OL more (Ifedi-McGovern-Ervin-Glasgow/Dahl) is because we have the opportunity to have 4 of our 5 starters be long term, young, cheap starters. We’d be Gilliam-Webb-McGovern-Glow-Ifedi…and in ’17 we’d cut Webb and have a big competition to find our long term starter at LG (Soko? Poole? Draft pick?) then we’d have all 5 OL spots filled with long term quality young starters. Perfect timing too because Russ would be 29 y/o, and we’d be giving him talent, youth and consistency up front for 4+ years (so 28-32+). That is HIGHLY ideal. To me that is worth passing on a DE/DT like Bullard and accepting w/e Hill and others give us.

      Here is the thing, on the DL we have this talent: Michael Bennett, Frank Clark, Cliff Avril, Jordan Hill, etc. That is some top tier talent and talent with high ceilings. On the OL we have Gilliam-Britt-Lewis-Glow-Webb right now….Glow MIGHT be good, and Gilliam MIGHT be solid-to-good, Lewis at best is solid and I’d bet $100 that Britt and Webb would suck. Which side of the line of scrimmage needs more attention? Which side protects the most important/expensive player on the team? Which side can help us score 30+ points a game?

      I’d rather our pass rush be middle of the pack due to a lack of interior pressure but have elite talent on the DL, elite talent in the LB corp, and elite talent in the secondary, then would having a top 7 pass rush and our OL have bad players on it and FA’s that are band-aids/patches and are most likely mediocre at best.

      • Jujus says:

        Well I disagree. And so does Pete.

        Pete prefers us holding opponents under 24 points and the offense doing their thing. Guess what we win 99% of the time.

        Interior pressure on the defensive line is the difference between 2013 sb and 2014.

        It’s the missing variable that makes our defense ascend to further greatness rather then fall towards mediorcrity.

        • Pete cares about the Line of Scrimmage and controlling it, both on the offensive and defensive side of the ball. Here is the thing; our DL has high quality to elite level talent on it right now (Bennett, Avril) and talent with high potential (Hill, Clark). Our OL doesn’t have that. Our OL has “solid” at best Lewis, “alright” with potential in Gilliam, 1 great game Glowinski and Webb, Poole, Sokoli, Nowak, Sowell, etc.

          Even if we decide to get a DL/DE pass rusher in the 4th or lower, we will be alright in 2016 in regards to pass rush and the DL. Heck maybe we re-sign Jesse Williams and he is in football shape, healthy and can produce in the NFL. What we can also do is find that DE/DT we love in the ’17 draft and pick him.

          This allows us to go OT, G/C, Ervin/Dahl, Ervin/Dahl in the first 3 rounds. That allows us to potentially completely fix our OL issues short and long term, having 4 of the 5 starting jobs on OL filled with young talent who are under club control for years. That is worth more than adding a DE/DL to be used in rotation only in pass rushing situations.

          OL is a every down position group, with huge impact on our QB’s ability to function and stay healthy. Bullard vs Ifedi if you assume both end up being really good players…i’d pick Ifedi because of our QB. We can get a DE/DT next year, right now let’s build this OL.

    • H M Abdou says:

      Sounds pretty good.

  4. AndrewP says:

    Rob- Are you of the opinion the Seahawks are looking at Justin Britt as a missed prospect and or sunk cost? I ask b/c to me it impacts how many RDs 1-3 picks they will put into the OL. If the answer is 100% yes, it’s probably two. If it’s 50/50, then it wouldn’t shock me to see them leave Day 2 having taken only one OL, which would of course open up more options early.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think they pretty much understand they have to upgrade Britt. But I doubt it’s as clear cut as having totally written him off. More likely they want him pushing a draft pick and competing.

      Plus — it won’t be the worst thing in the world if he ends up just being a backup with starter experience at LG and RT. He might be the swing G/T backup.

      • Darnell says:

        He could be the new Paul McQuistan, which isn’t what you want this early from a 2nd rounder, but is still something of value on any team when he’s inexpensive. McQuistan had a career to be proud of; so will Britt, but he may eventually have to be someone elses cheap swing T/G backup where he can be accepted for what he is and not seen as a dissapointment (as he’ll always be perceived amongst Seahawks fans).

  5. Forty20 says:

    How far would Rankins have to drop in the first for you to be tempted to trade up to go and get him, Rob? New Orleans are now favourites to sign Nick Fairley so I guess there is a chance they pass on Rankins at #12…is that a big enough opening for us?

  6. J Boy says:

    Rob- If the Hawks don’t go for Ifedi, what are some LG alternatives that you like later in the draft?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Would probably have to be a tackle convert. Connor McGovern might be able to do it, Joe Haeg is rising and tested well in terms of agility. Joe Dahl might be an option.

      • Trevor says:

        Glad to see you are coming around to Haeg. I always liked his athletic background being a former hockey player and wrestler. I don’t think he is a tackle at the NFL level but could be a really athletic guard in a ZBS system I think. I like all they guys you have mentioned + Glasgow as 3rd round options and perhaps Westerman in the 2nd but he is more of a C/RG for the Hawks it seems.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I’m still not a big fan of Haeg — but they travelled to his pro-day and he did test well for agility. He’s being talked about as a top-100 guy. Not a guy I’m crazy about but I’m not making the picks.

      • That is great news to me. If we go DT/DE in the 1st and then grab McGovern to transition to Center, we can grab Dahl or Haeg in the 3rd and have them compete at LG and beat Britt. Yes we’d still have Webb at RT but the interior of the OL would be completely upgraded (Dahl-McGovern-Glow). I can be happy about that.

        • Mike L says:

          2nd round seems a little high for McGovern..I think we could at least trade back into the early/mid 3rd and still get him…

          • If possible; great. But if the FO isn’t sure I believe they have shown in the past the willingness to take “their guy” and not care what the NFL and critics say in regards to them “reaching.” If they love McGovern and they aren’t sure if he will be there in the early/mid 3rd then don’t get too cute, just grab him where you know you can get him.

  7. TJ says:

    I could easily see them go D line in 1 and interior O line in 2/3. A round 1 OL pick would presumably mean that they want a tackle. If they identify G or C as a priority, they wouldn’t need to use their top pick to find a solid player who could provide an upgrade.

  8. Volume12 says:

    Here’s why I’m not concerned about WR in the mid rounds.

    IF they select Tyler Ervin, he can fill that role. As can a guy like Arizona St’s DJ Foster.

    • Trevor says:

      I think Foster would be a great late round pick for that reason.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      Foster and Ervin have Patriots written all over them. Now with 2x 2nd round picks, 1 might be spent on Ervin….. damn you evil hoodie…. damnnnnnn youuuuuu *shakes fist*

      • Naks8 says:

        2nd and even 3rd seems pretty early for a smaller back like Ervin. Even de’anthony Thomas didn’t go until the 4th even though he was probably a more accomplished returner. Seems like these small fast rbs are third down backs, fly sweep guys and special teamers so 4-5 feels more reasonable for that type of player. And if he’s not available then you get a dj foster guy late.

        • Darnell says:

          Yep.

          The relative lack of NFL impact thus far from Tavon Austin, De’anthony Thomas, Dexter McCluster, and Dri Archer has probably disvalued that type of player.

          Though Ervin has more pure RB to his game , similar to successful dudes like Sproles and Woodhead.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Ervin is Brian Westbrook IMO.

            • RealRhino2 says:

              Or he’s LaMichael James. Can he block?

              • Rob Staton says:

                I don’t see any similarities in playing style to Lamichael James.

                • Volume12 says:

                  Ervin plays much bigger than his size. A true ‘field tilter.’

                  Picking at 90 is essentially a 3rd rounder anyways. And if Seattle feels like he’s a guy they can’t leave the draft without, then they’ll take him where they want.

                  They do things a different way and take prospects that leave most fans scratching their heads.

                  LaMichael James, D’Anthony Thomas, McCluster weren’t the focal point of their offenses, nor did they put their team on their back.

                  Blocking can be taught to a back. C-Mike wasn’t a blocker, neither was Rawls.

              • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

                LMJ was totally miss used or not even used by the 49ers. HE should have been a decent RB in the NFL…. with his versatility.

            • Naks8 says:

              or sproles? I guess a lot depends on whether he can become Westbrook or if he turns out to be a gimmicky rb and special teamer only. Also, the game has evolved a bit since Westbrook was relevant

  9. Dan says:

    Why wouldn’t Josh Garnett be an option at LG? I’d like to see OC Kelly at #26 and Garnett at #56. They would solidify the inferior of the offensive line.

    • Trevor says:

      I really like Garnett and his intelligence, nasty attitude a lot but he is a pure guard and does not offer the flexibility and athleticism of a guy like McGovern.

      I do like the of fixing the C and LG spot with the first two picks and replacing the Lewis and Britt but they we would still have Webb at RT.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Garnett just doesn’t feel like a Seahawks pick to me.

      • Dan says:

        Because he would play a position that he actually played in college? Doesn’t Cable want lineman who have played in a pro-style offense where lineman actually get into a 3 point stance and move people off the ball? That’s Garnett.

        • Rob Staton says:

          That’s not been a figure of what the Seahawks look for. Cable thinks virtually every college OL needs re-training so scheme doesn’t really seem to come into it. They appear to what size ideals and upside they can coach up, plus the right attitude for the mentality of this team.

          They’ve generally sought tackle experience and most recently a level of athleticism.

      • Darnell says:

        Garnett’s kind of a fatty too. Cable likes dudes that look like Gilliam and Sweezy.

        Stamina/Fitness is a fairly important and little mentioned attribute of Seahawks linemen when you have Russ at QB (occasionally longer plays, more plays with designed movement, pulling in pass pro).

        You don’t want to go back to having to go with a drive by drive substiution pattern like you did with an out of shape Carpenter.

  10. Trevor says:

    Seems like it really comes down to one of two options for the Hawks unless they trade up or trade back.

    Option #1 Rd #1 Coleman or Ifedit (RT/LG) Rd#2 Charles Tapper

    Option #2 Rd#1 Bullard or Ogbah Rd#2 Mcgovern

    Which do you prefer?

    Option #1 all day for me as either Coleman or Ifedi can be a quality starter day #1 and I think Tapper is only a slighter lesser prospect than Bullard with the ability to rush off the edge and move inside as well.

    • Darth12er says:

      I like Coleman, but let me ask this. Do you think Coleman or Bullard will last longer? If they think Bullard gets picked first -maybe because Colemans previous health issues – why not take Bullard with the intention of seeing how far Coleman slides. Possibly trading down. I wouldn’t have a problem with Ifedi, but I’m rooting for Coleman.

  11. Nate says:

    Rd. 1 Bullard 3T
    Rd. 2 McGovern C/G
    Rd.3 TJ Green FS, Cyrus Jones nickel?
    Rd. 4 Feeney LB
    Rd, 5 Rees Odhiambo LG/LT

    • H M Abdou says:

      I’d make sure I can get Tyler Ervin, probably in round 3.

      • JimQ says:

        Comparisons of two DB’s: Keanu Neal, Florida vs: Sean Davis, Maryland.
        Which one looks like the better player???? Both are known as “Thumpers”. In light of some reports that the Seahawks want to get back to being a very physical & dominant defensive team, a “Thumper type DB” would indeed make a great addition to the team. Many here feel that Keanu Neal is worth a high round 2 or even low-mid round 1 selection., but what about this other guy???? An eventual replacement of the slightly aging ET at FS? At a minimum, he’s got to be better than ET’s current Backup, Steven Terrell. IMO: ET’s injury last season was really a scare, and a better backup & future replacement for ET should very much be a viable option sooner, rather than later. Why not this draft? How would you feel if ET was hurt early in the season (knock on wood, but still a possibility!) and is out for the year, how would you feel about Terrell replacing him for the majority of a season?

        I envision drafting FS/CB-Sean Davis as the eventual ET replacement (in round -4?)., with Davis getting on the field as a rookie DB/slot corner while he’s learning the defense as it is done by the Legion of Boom. I’ve watched tape of both players & IMO, Davis is at the very least, equal to (or maybe slightly better than) Neal and much more of a value draft selection for the Seahawks. Davis has some pretty decent speed & very excellent flexibility and I like his FF and total tackles #’s + solo tackle %, which are excellent stats for any DB. Football experience wise, Neal would have a slight edge in competition (SEC vs: BIG-10), however, Davis has played in about 33% more games and has significant experience as both a CB (>2 yrs.) and a FS (2+ yrs.), so he has a slight edge there IMO. The only knock I see with Davis is arm length, but likely he has the acceptable wingspan? Maybe he lets his finger nails grow out a tad? Maybe, like ET, arm length is not as important as his other excellent qualities?

        ——-Tale of the tape:
        DAVIS = 6-1, 201, 31-3/8″-arms, 9.5″-Hands, (Note: ET= sub-32″ arms)
        —————— Projected late round -3 to late round- 4 in the draft.
        NEAL = 6-0, 211, 32-3/4″-arms, 10-5/8″-hands
        —————— Projected late round -1 to early round -3 in the draft.

        ——-Combine#’s:
        DAVIS:= 4.46-40, 1.56-10-yd split, ——- NEAL = 4.62-40, 1.62-10-yd split, (Note: speed/get-off #’s)
        DAVIS = 2.60-20-yd dash, ——- NEAL = 2.69-60-yd dash.
        DAVIS = 3.97-20-yd shuttle ——- NEAL = 4.38-20-yd shuttle.
        DAVIS = 11.53-60-yd shuttle ——- NEAL = 11.58-60-yd shuttle.
        NEAL = 38.0″-Vert. ——– DAVIS = 37.5″-Vert.
        NEAL = 132″-Broad jump ——- DAVIS = 126″-Broad jump
        DAVIS = 6.64-3-cone —— NEAL = 7.09-3-cone.
        DAVIS = 21-reps-Bench press ——- NEAL = 17-reps-Bench press.
        DAVIS = 10.61-agility score ——- NEAL = 11.47-agility score, (Note: lower # is better)

        ——-Spark #’s:
        DAVIS = 134.6-pSPARQ, 1.5-Z-SCORE, 93.3-NFL%,
        NEAL = 121.6-pSPARQ, 0.3-Z-SCORE, 61.1-NFL%.

        ——-Performance Stats:
        DAVIS –
        2015: (12 games @ CB): 88-Tkls, 70-solo, 5.5-TFL, 1.0-sacks, 3-PBU, **5-FF**, 3-INT.
        NEAL –
        2015: (10 games @ S): 96-Tkls, 51-solo, 3.5-TFL, 2-Sacks, 1-PBU, 1-FF, 1-QBH., 1-INT.

        DAVIS –
        Career (50-games – CB & FS), 319-Tkls, 221-solo (69.2%), 11-TFL, 2,5-sacks, 14-PBU, 7-FF, 5-INT
        NEAL –
        Career: (34-games – S), 146-tkls,, 79-solo, (54.1%) 4.5-TFL, 2.0-Sacks, 5-PBU, 2-FF, 1-FR, 3-QBH., 4-INT.

        • Trevor says:

          Interesting comparison for sure JimQ. I have always liked Davis as well. The difference is Davis is a Free Safety while Neal is a strong safety who could replace Kam and be more of a drop down into the box player. He could even be the small hybrid linebacker or deathbacker as Rob likes to call them.

          I do really like Davis and he would be good Safety depth in the mid rounds for sure.

        • Del tre says:

          Earl Thomas is 26 and has never missed a game. He can probably play until he is 35 no need to replace him. He is what makes the defense click no one can cover as much ground there is no better safety in the league in my opinion and he isn’t even completely in his prime yet. The Seahawks will probably want to focus on a strong safety replacement or a swing type player and Keanu Neal plays strong safety I thought? Either way great comp definitely an option I could see them drafting him as a back up or maybe trying to get him to bulk up and play SS? Maybe an inside nickel situation player?

          • JimQ says:

            I agree that ET is an extremely essential part of the legion of boom. Both ET and Kam were drafted in 2010 and Kam is 27 years old. Both were injured late last year. Their future as to injury concerns may be at least somewhat uncertain. Kam has a much better existing backup than ET does, thus Davis would be most logical…….IMO.

            • Del tre says:

              I agree but earl not so much his injury never made him miss time he had a rocky start in 2015 because of his shoulder and carry Williams but Davis would be a good back up my only hope is that he can continue playing that corner back roll and provide some value beyond just a back up like a DeShawn shead because if earl goes down unless the Hawks have an all pro I don’t know if the Hawks will be able to be dominant
              I like the idea of kj dilion from WVU for that role too

            • Del tre says:

              Honestly he could probably fill the role that a lot of people wanted to put Keanu Neal into if he added a bit more weight he could be a beast

  12. Mike B. says:

    If they really want Bullard, but think he’ll at least last into the early 2nd round, trading down several spots could be a good move.

    For example: Trade 1/26 to Tennessee for 2/33, 4/109 (mid 4th), and 6/158 (early 6th), a deal that slightly favors Tenn according to the draft value chart. This would allow Seattle to take Bullard in the 2nd and net themselves a valuable mid 4th pick and a native 6th.

    While they risk losing out on a high-ceiling OT, they could still add a future starting center and guard, add more depth on the DL, and get a good receiver in the 3rd or 4th.

    • Mike B. says:

      *non-comp 6th, rather, which is Tenn’s native 6th

    • Rob Staton says:

      Not sure it’d be worth risking losing the player for a 4th and a 6th. Only so many rookies are going to make the team after all.

      • largentquicks says:

        Rob, I agree to a certain extent that they won’t want to miss on on their guy and trade down just for the sake of trading down. However, if the see value in a player in the early to mid second with similar grades to those that they could get at 26, I see a scenario like this playing out. Also, the early picks (first, second, third) in the second round are often coveted and active trade slots. If they trade down to 33, they could easily take the night, listen to offers for those wanting to trade up and make another small trade down to about the 39-40 range. If they feel they can do this and take Bullard, then trade up from 56 and get Coleman with an extra pick or two left to trade up later for Ervin (trade up earlier in the third), then they will have played this draft very well and I’d be pretty stoked:

        2) Jonathan Bullard (trade down)
        2) Shon Coleman (trade up)
        3) Tyler Ervin (Trade up or potentially at native pick)
        3) Glasgow
        4) Keyarris Garrett
        4) Torian White

      • EranUngar says:

        Rob,

        Those 2 new picks will allow us to either move up with our native 2nd pick and grab the last OT standing in the early 40’s or move our native 3rd pick back into the late 2nd and double dip into the PG/C feast.

    • JimQ says:

      Any trade down IMO could likely include getting to a pick between their current #125 & # 172 picks. I don’t think PS/JC want to sit idle for the majority of the 3-rd day of the draft. Question is what pick do they trade down from?

    • RWIII says:

      Mike: Did you know that one of the teamsame interested in Bullard is Tennessee? So if you want Bullard you had better NOT trade out of the 26 slot.

  13. Mike L says:

    I doubt we’ll see a rookie starting at center for the Hawks this season. Centers have to read the defenses and then make all the line calls/adjustments..that’s an awful lot to expect out of a rookie. besides…don’t the Hawks have something like an .800 winning percentage when Lewis starts?? if it ain’t broke..don’t fix it I say.

    • Rob Staton says:

      They were willing to start Nowak over Lewis. Wouldn’t rule out them starting a rookie in 2016.

      • Naks8 says:

        I wonder if they learned from that mistake? Pete mentioned they made a mistake by not making a change earlier, but he didn’t say that it was a mistake to rush someone into transitioning into the position

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think they’re fascinated by the idea of an uber athletic center. Nowak had the upside so they gave him longer than they should’ve done — and they also drafted Sokoli and seem determined to train him to compete at center. Lewis is, without question, just a guy in terms of upside. I think they’ll likely keep searching for a center that is a plus athlete until they nail it.

      • Mike L says:

        You guys looking for wholesale changes on the OL must have been watching a different team than me last year. What I saw (after they switched to Lewis)..was a top ten NFL offense firing on all cylinders. Even when they were stinking it up earlier in the year..they had 4th quarter leads in every game they lost. It was the defense that was screwing up mostly..

        • Steele says:

          MikeL, yes and no, depends on how you choose to analyze it. The defense did consistently lose leads, but should those leads have been bigger (offense’s fault), and should the offense have been able to control the clock to a better degree? The offense did not always fire on all cylinders. Neither offense nor defense from last season was consistently dominant. Witness the record and the playoff loss.

          • Trevor says:

            Agree completely Steele. Not being able to run the ball in the 4th quarter last year was a huge issue and the biggest difference between last years team and the two previous when it came to closing out teams in the 4th quater. There were several games is we even run to pick up one first down in the 4th Q we win the game.

        • Rob Staton says:

          “You guys looking for wholesale changes on the OL must have been watching a different team than me last year.”

          I’m getting a bit bored of people coming on here and accusing others of overreacting to the O-line situation.

          This is probably the only Seahawks site on the entire internet that hasn’t panicked about the O-line.

          But anyone who thinks they aren’t taking an early pick on the offensive line in this draft (round one or two) is going to be proven wrong. Sorry to be so blunt — but it is what it is. I’ve quoted what Carroll said about the O-line in this article. He spelled it out to us. He wasn’t happy with the O-line performance overall and admitted it was a priority area this off-season.

          Us talking about that and discussing who they might pick for the O-line is a completely fair discussion.

          • Mike L says:

            I think you’re misinterpreting the PC statement. He says he doesn’t want to go thru this season what they went thru last year (which I interpret to mean going in to camp with none of the positions set..and then needing to make wholesale changes mid-season when they realize they got it wrong). Schneider followed that up this off-season by saying they value continuity on the OL over individual skill set. They consistently have talked about how poorly prepared college linemen are to make the transition to the pros. None of this leads me to believe they are about to start a rookie on the OL this year..let alone several.

            • Rob Staton says:

              Nobody has said several rookies would start.

              Most people are saying one is likely, maybe two. Let’s see what happens in camp.

              Don’t really understand why people keep saying stuff like this.

              • Del tre says:

                Honestly that statement could mean that they want to draft a rookie or two and maybe even start them this year that way when the line is let’s say for this situation
                LT Gilliam
                LG McGovern
                C Lewis
                RG glowinski
                RT ifedi
                The line is locked in for 3 or 4 more years at which point they can draft back ups and have then sitting ready. So continuity doesn’t necessarily mean nothing new it could mean continuity for the future

              • Mike L says:

                I think PC wants a set OL heading into camp so he can maximize their reps to try to avoid a repeat of last year. That would point towards a Gilliam/britt/lewis/Glo/Webb starting five. There’s always a chance they’ve spotted someone in the college ranks that they have penciled in a sa starter..but i think those odds are low.

    • Naks8 says:

      Agreed that if you draft the center of the future he competes at guard this year to learn the line calls and get more comfortable with the offense. Then in year 2 he can compete for the starting job. Similar to unger’s transition. That’s why it seems so crazy that nowak started the year off for us. Athletically I’m sure he is gifted, but it’s the mental side of the game that was just too tough for him to master.

      • Mike L says:

        yeah I’m all for taking a guy like McGovern with one of our 3rds (I think a 2nd is too high for him)..but realistically were looking at a redshirt year for him (on the 53 but a healthy scratch on game day)…with the goal of having him compete for a starting spot at LG/C in ’17.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Mitch Morse did not need a redshirt. There’s nothing to say McGovern will need one.

        • Jujus says:

          There’s a reason We target mizzou linemen. Cable has a connection with the coaches there and uses similar teaching and verbage.

          Hence britt starting. Targeting Mitch Morse. Now McGovern.

  14. J says:

    I like Irvin, but my issue is – can he be a lead back? Say Rawls cannot make it back or has a setback (not a remote possibility) and Michael craps the bed again (more likely than not. Right now he has two years of being a bust vs. a few games of looking OK). Could Irvin step in as a three down guy?

    Not that I’m against drafting Irvin, but we would have to invest draft capital in a more traditional RB as well.

    • J says:

      This is just based on his size – would seem a bit small for that rope. Haven’t really gotten around to watching his tape.

      • Steele says:

        J, you’re thinking a traditional feature back. I’d love to see a pro bowl caliber feature back behind RW, but I doubt that’s what we’ll get. I think it will be a committee.

        Rawls+ others.

        Keith Marshall is my favorite sleeper pure RB in this draft, capable of being feature if healthy.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Marshall has nice speed but watching him in 2015 was painful.

          Such a good player early in his Georgia career but he just looked finished at the end of last season — like the injuries have taken everything away except the straight line speed.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s Ervin not Irvin.

      He probably won’t be a 16 game lead back but he can carry the load if needs be — a bit like Lance Dunbar in Dallas. He did it in college to the tune of 1600 yards and was basically San Jose State’s offense. He plays big.

  15. RWIII says:

    “It wouldn’t be a total shock if the Seahawks approached the draft as follows:

    1. Are Rankins or Bullard available at #26?

    2. If not, take an offensive lineman with a high ceiling (Germain Ifedi)

    3. If you go O-line at #26, take the best DT or EDGE at #56”

    Rob: I think you have nailed it.
    Totally agree with this strategy.

    • Mike L says:

      If you draft OL in the first..you’re pretty much committed to starting him.so if they are that confident in Ifedi to be ready to go Sept 1..I think they’ll just take him and get their DL/DT’s later.

  16. H M Abdou says:

    I have to say most everyone who’s posted has presented some interesting ideas, backed by plausible explanations. At this point, truthfully I just want the team to draft some good football players, no matter which names are called. I don’t really care one way or the other which players they draft, as long as they’re good players (with solid character) who can contribute.

  17. CHawk Talker Eric says:

    Pauline:

    “Defensive lineman Bronson Kaufusi stood on most of his Combine numbers but participated in position drills, and as communicated to me, looked like a stud.

    Kafusi looked athletic, smooth and forceful in everything he did. Many say it looks like his upper body has filled in and Kafusi is coming into his own. Known as a class act and high-character person, the senior solidified himself as a second-day pick.”

    A possible OL-DL 1-2 draft punch scenario that Rob posited in a previous post: Ifedi-Kaufusi. I’d have no problem with Kaufusi in R2.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Kaufusi vs Fresno State — everyone should watch that game. He takes it over and just flat out dominates.

      • C-Dog says:

        I like Kaufusi a lot. Played all over the line, some backer. I think he’s a player that could do a lot for the D. Edge, Inside rush, zone drop from the DL, good at getting his hands up in the way of passes. Like Bullard more, think he brings more of an edge to his game, but they aren’t able to snag him, I wouldn’t be disappointed at all if they were able to grab Kaufusi.

  18. Ground_Hawk says:

    This was a neat article:
    http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2016/2/15/10899032/mock-nfl-draft-database-2016-tendencies-experts?_ga=1.153462584.1688394792.1458177265
    The mock drafts of 87 different “experts” were compiled into 31 pie graphs, and the consensus picks were assigned to each team. What was awesome was that the Seahawks end up with Rankins at 26. Obviously it should be taken with a grain of salt, but that would be a solid pick. Then the FO could pick McGovern in the 2nd, so long as he is still available at 56,or even possibly trade up to get him.

    • Mike L says:

      I must be reading it wrong…I see the “Others” category as the largest (21%) for the Seahawks..with Taylor Decker being the next largest at 10%

      • Ground_Hawk says:

        I think that you are right. What I believe the author did was remove players who were already chosen by another team, and also excluded the selection of “others”. I think that they did the later for discussions sake. I could be wrong.

  19. WALL UP says:

    Ervin is GOOD. So good that there’s a big possibility that he’s gone by the 3rd pick at 90, as so many have pegged him for. Is he a must get for Bevel’s offense? No Question! The bigger question would be, ‘How can he be picked earlier than 90 with the apparent OL/DL or DL/OL draft order sequence that seems set for their first two picks?’

    Trading up may be too costly from the their 3rd Rd pick for the 2nd consecutive year. Keeping the 9 picks may be more prudent with all the OL & DL options that are available this year.

    Trading Down from 26 may be the best option to fill the OL/DL or DL/OL & still get ‘their guys’. Who could be a good fit as a trade partner? Tennessee is a team that they may be able to barter with. Tunsil will be their 1st pick. Their other need is at DE. Kevin Dodd could be a target for them to trade for, which would be a good 1-2 selections to start their draft.

    Trade: Seattle’s 1st(26) & 3rd(90) picks for Tennessee’s 2nd(33) & 3rd(64) picks. This would result the Hawks with:

    33. Robert Nkemdiche DT(3Tech) or Jonathan Bullard DE/DT
    56. (44)Shon Coleman OT/OG or La’Raven Clark OT/OG
    64. Tyler Ervin OW
    97. Conner McGovern OG/C or Issac Seumalo C/OG
    125.Trade 56 & 125 & 2017 4th Rd for OAK’s 44
    171.Travis Freeny OLB
    215.Avery Young OT/OG
    223.Joel Heath DT/DE
    245.Marquez North WR

    • C-Dog says:

      I think the risk might be that if they find a trade partner with the Titans, they could be the ones trading up at 26 to grab Bullard. Not sure Seattle would be all that into Nkemdiche, and ready to invest a high pick on Talented But Troubled and Weird after the whole Harvin thing. If Seattle is high on Bullard, McGovern and Ervin, maybe they take Bullard at 26, McGovern at 56, and deal up in R3 for Ervin like they did with Lockett last year. But I get what you’re thinking, and they have shown a bunch a willingness to trade back

      I’m kind of sensing the Hawks could really be coveting Bullard. I think they were pretty into Datone Jones a few years back, and were supposedly really into Dominique Easley. Bullard comps fairly well with those two, and IMO, plays with a bigger edge. If they feel they really need a DT/DE, they might not want to trade back if Bullard is still on the board.

      • Mike L says:

        Is anyone seeing McGovern mocked in round 2?? I’m seeing some late 3rds..but mostly round 4’s for him.

        • WALL UP says:

          That’s why I have him slotted @ 97 rather than 56 or 64. The risk is far greater in losing Ervin than McGovern. There are several other options @ that slot if McGovern is selected before 97.

      • WALL UP says:

        The Trade is made with the assumption that Dodd is ‘Their Guy’ to play DE in their 3-4 scheme, being a better fit (6-5 277) than Bullard (6-3 285) would as a DE. A gentlemen’s agreement is normally consummated prior to a deal.

        Regardless, the pick doesn’t necessarily have to be DL. It could be Coleman @ 33 & Jones @ 44. The point being, Ervin will go to SF @ 68 if the trade is not made with Tennessee. Trading up from 90 & from 56 could be too costly. Trading down @ 26 takes care of the one trade up before 68.

        • C-Dog says:

          Yeah, I totally get that on Ervin, but the tweet above on Bullard indicated Tennessee has an interest as well, though. If Seattle identifies Bullard and Ervin as two “must gets” (and that’s a Big If) there could be a possibility they become their first two picks, and they just take them at 26 and 56. Seems crazy given the state of the OL, for sure, but maybe they would feel that with 2 picks in R3, they can get 2 good interior OL. I kind of think Pauline might be onto Bullard though in him being a R1 pick.

  20. LLLOGOSSS says:

    I love the idea of trading up in the second to add Bullard, while being able to take a SLA animal Tackle in the 1st. Isn’t that the best of both worlds? Sure it would cost a high-mid pick (Rob, would our 2nd and a 4th get us into the rane to possibly take Bullard in the top 40? Could he slip that far?), but we have such specific needs this year in a championship window… We could probably still take a C/G prospect like McGovern AND Tyler Ervin in the 3rd round and have a totally staked upper-class draft:

    1) Ifedi/Spriggs if available
    2) Bullard
    3a) McGovern
    3b) Ervin

    Rob, is this feasible?

  21. sdcoug says:

    Two days ago I posted my line of thinking was Bullard at 26 and McGovern at 56.

    I think the Hawks want to get some nasty back and this seems to be a logical route. With some good interior O options available, it’s smart to grab the defender first and work at G/C next, where the value/position might match up better

    Adding another “Bennett” type that can jump inside or out really helps combat the hurry up teams that try to catch you in your base Def. Clark, Bennett, Bullard…that’s some good flexibility

    • Trevor says:

      Makes sense and certainly a possible option. Or you could go Coleman Rd #1 and Tapper Rd#2

    • C-Dog says:

      Like your thinking. Pete’s DNA is defense. A NASCAR that features Clark, Bullard, Bennett, Avril is really, really tempting if Bullard is at 26.

      They can go interior OL in R2 and R3. Draft OT for depth in later rounds.

    • manthony says:

      Just watched Bullard tape against Bama and Ole Miss plus a few reels.
      And I could definatley get behind those first 2 picks.
      I only watched Rankins tape vs AnM, and at this point, I dont understand why Rankins has all the buzz.
      Bullard looked way better, based off of those games imo.

  22. C-Dog says:

    26: R1P26
    DT JONATHAN BULLARD
    FLORIDA

    56: R2P25
    RB TYLER ERVIN
    SAN JOSE STATE

    90: R3P27
    G CONNOR MCGOVERN
    MISSOURI

    98: R3P35
    C GRAHAM GLASGOW
    MICHIGAN

    125: R4P26
    OT ALEX LEWIS
    NEBRASKA

    172: R5P32
    DE STEPHEN WEATHERLY
    VANDERBILT

    216: R6P40
    OLB B.J. GOODSON
    CLEMSON

    226: R7P4
    CB BRANDON WILLIAMS
    TEXAS A&M

    248: R7P26
    DT VINCENT VALENTINE
    NEBRASKA

    If this mock were to play out as actual, I think the first couple picks will probably stress out a lot of 12s, but the next three would calm nerves and get everyone excited.

    Really like Jonathan Bullard a lot. I think Seattle has not only showed interest in acquiring inside/out DL talent with Clark and Marsh, they seemed to have shown a good deal of interest in R1 players they didn’t land in Datone Jones and Dominique Easley. Maybe this year, they feel they have to land Bullard, if he is sitting there at 26. What I really love about him is not only his grit, but that he is on record saying he wants to play 3 tech in the NFL. It might be just me on this, but I think if you pulled a lot of inside/out DL types, they’d probably say they prefer playing outside. I think Clark prefers it, hence the weight drop. I think Mike B has even been on record saying he’d rather attack from the edge. So, Bullard wanting 3 tech, IMO, is huge.

    I’m buying into the idea Ervin could be the other guy Seattle feels like they must have. So I have them happily taking him here, and while I’ll be happily listening to Dave Softy Mahler and Hugh Millen collectively blow gaskets live on air, when they pass on local kid Josh Garnett.

    McGovern and Glasgow they take in R3 to build up the interior OL and presumably have every opportunity to win starter jobs, asap. Alex Lewis they take in R4 to compete at RT with Webb. Weatherby, they like as another edge rusher, and potentially down the road at SAM. Goodson is a thumper who could compete at SAM. Williams is a raw tall but fast corner, former running back, that might be a project they like at corner. Valentine is drafted to add depth at NT.

    • WALL UP says:

      MCGOVERN & GLASGOW offer the same options. Also, I don’t think the tackle positions are quite set as yet. That’s why I would favor Coleman over Ifedi, because Coleman could compete @ LT/RT/LG. I did have Ervin as the surprise 2nd Rd pick earlier, but I could appreciate the need for OL/DL or DL/OL for their 1st & 2nd picks. Trading down does make things work.

      • C-Dog says:

        On the surface, I would agree, but I think McGovern offers the ability to play tackle, if needed, but obviously more than likely kicks inside to guard or center. Glasgow can do either center or guard. It kinda wouldn’t shock me if McGovern is drafted to play center, and Glasgow is drafted to compete with Britt at LG. Hawks are kinda think-outside-of-the-box cray cray like that, and at the range of the draft their athleticism and versatility could be really enticing.

        In reality, I am almost expecting them to trade down, but in this scenario, I have them wanting Bullard 26, Carroll selling him as the BPA to give them legit inside rush, love his motor, his grit, his edge, been looking for a player like this for a few years, yada, yada.

        As for Coleman, I like him that way too, but I wouldn’t close the book on Ifedi being able to play LT. I like them both a lot.

    • Cameron says:

      Sorry I’m not seeing the Ervin hype. He’s a scat back and offers little to nothing in pass protection, so he’s not a true 3rd down back. What’s his role? We are talking about a 10-15 snap player in the 2nd round? This is at least 2 rounds higher than I’d be comfortable taking him.

      Love Bullard. McGovern and Glasgow are solid picks.

      • WALL UP says:

        Think Harvin, without the headaches that go with it. Not just as a RB, but weapon that would cause mismatches that will cause defenses to have nightmares in defending him.

        • C-Dog says:

          Cameron, I think he’s more than a scat-back, and I think the Seahawks would see him more than one. If that’s all they want, they could take DJ Foster later down the line.

          I like Rob’s Brian Westbrook comp a lot. IMO, now the check is in the bank, the reigns of the offense will continually be given to RW3, and with it the evolution of this offense opening up more. Ervin can run the ball, but I think what he would do opening up things out of the backfield, offering check downs in the flat, screens, etc.. is a very enticing proposition, especially considering the shift to quicker passes. Bevel’s DNA is in the west coast offense. I think Ervin fits that really well.

          Carroll is always doing to see we are a running team, but I can’t imagine you pay a QB $20 Mill to just be that. I think we saw clear signs of that shift last year. Now that 24 is gone, I don’t think it’s just going to be one back anymore, as much as I love Rawls. Ervin and Rawls splitting time, I like that a lot. It wouldn’t shock me, or disappoint me if they take him higher than maybe what he is projected right now.

          • Cameron says:

            All this conjecture about the Seahawks breaking with their big back, pound the ball philosophy is a bit much. Now Tyler Ervin is a nice little player but I’ll emphasize little – as in 192 lbs little. If the Seahawks draft Ervin he will probably be the the lightest running back of the PCJS era by at least 30 lbs. I’m not seeing it – at least not this early.

            I’m not terribly against the idea. There is value in having different types of players and creating roles for them. For my money though I’d want a guy who can pass protect and be work horse back in case Rawls gets injured if I’m taking a guy in the first 3 rounds.

            • Cameron says:

              It’s easy to pick and prod holes at others mock drafts, so here’s mine… fire away 🙂

              26: R1P26
              DE JONATHAN BULLARD
              FLORIDA
              56: R2P25
              OT LE’RAVEN CLARK
              TEXAS TECH
              90: R3P27
              G CHRISTIAN WESTERMAN
              ARIZONA STATE
              98: R3P35
              RB C.J. PROSISE
              NOTRE DAME
              125: R4P26
              DT WILLIE HENRY
              MICHIGAN
              172: R5P32
              CB JAMES BRADBERRY
              SAMFORD
              216: R6P40
              WR MIKE THOMAS
              SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI
              226: R7P4
              DT CONNOR WUJCIAK
              BOSTON COLLEGE
              248: R7P26
              DE ALEX MCCALISTER
              FLORIDA

              • Volume12 says:

                In regards to the Tyler Ervin comment.

                Not convinced that Prosise offers anything different. He’s a spread offense, high volume pasing attack kind of back. I don’t see him being able to make defenders mess, and isn’t strong enough to break tackles.

                • David says:

                  Prosise did not run in a spread attack. Notre Dame runs a pro style offense (albeit with some spread concepts) but a ton of two TE sets under center as well. He also went from a former WR bench warmer to 1000 yard starter in his senior year. Ervin may be higher on PCJS board but I wouldn’t discount what Prosise accomplished in one year transitioning not to mention he better suits what PCJS physically look for in a RB over Ervin.

                  • Steele says:

                    I like Prosise. More than Ervin.

                    I don’t think Ervin is as physical as Brian Westbrook was.

                  • Volume12 says:

                    Fits a spread offense better.

                    Isn’t a bad back by any means, but personally, he’s very ‘meh.’

                    Not discounting him at all, but nothing special or unique stands out to me about him.

                • Cameron says:

                  I’ve watched every bit of game tape available on Prosise and I’m quite confident when I say ND does not run a spread offense. It may seem that way because they use shot gun so much. They actually run off tackle a lot because Prosise has such good vision and excellent patience. They just get him going laterally and he waits and sees the lane to exploit.

                  Prosise excels at reading defenders and exploiting cutbacks, making him a good back for the ZBS. He’s also an excellent receiver having been a former slot receiver (actually only been a RB for one year). He has the speed (4.48) to get to the corner and can make defenders miss and run through contact. At 220 lbs he is plenty strong enough to break tackles and push piles. Tyler Ervin offers nothing in that department.

                  My biggest concern with Prosise would have to be ball security – he fumbles a bit too much. He also has small (8.5 inch) hands, although Derek Henry’s are only 1/4 inch bigger.

                  Here’s Prosise vs UMass in case any of you are interested. He does some freaky things here in terms of reading defenders, seeing and exploiting cutbacks, etc. It’s a good watch. http://draftbreakdown.com/video/c-j-prosise-vs-umass-2015/

                  • Volume12 says:

                    I never said he came from a spread.

                    Please read the comment.

                    I’m sorry man, I see an average back.

                  • Volume12 says:

                    What did Leveon Bell say today?

                    ‘Ball security is job security.’

                  • Volume12 says:

                    Watched that clip, and I something completely different.

                    I see a guy that is a gap, not a zone runner. Don’t see anything physical about him. Matter of fact, he seems to shy away from it,

                    Doesn’t lower his shoulder, won’t take a LB head on, doesn’t hit or find his crease, trys to bounce everything to the outside.

                    More of a 5th-6th round type of talent.

                • matt says:

                  “Not convinced that Prosise offers anything different…I don’t see him being able to make defenders mess, and isn’t strong enough to break tackles.” Vol12

                  Agreed. Prosise is a nice prospect who can do few things well, but is nothing special.

              • C-Dog says:

                Prosise is an interesting player, but considering how much Bevel was working out Ervin, I’m guessing he’s probably higher on their board. IMO, I think he offers more, even with a buck ninety two in change. I think there is a reason they have seemingly been scouting him hard. Also, they did bring back Christine Michael, and he’s a bigger back. I think they could be looking for something different.

                • C-Dog says:

                  Also, love Willie Henry, but IMO, I don’t think he will last into the 4th round. I think if they take an OL at 26, he could become a candidate at 56 or 90, but I think it’s unlikely he lasts until 90, may not be there at 56. In a draft deep at DT, he’s probably one of a few that offers upside as a pass rusher.

                • V12 says:

                  Exactly. Whether they draft him or not, there’s something there that they like about him.

                  Yeah, Prosise isn’t bad. Kind of ‘meh for me personally. Doesn’t have a unique quality or anything that stands out to me.

                  About Bevell. It’s a good point. Kind of odd for an OC to take that time at a guy’s pro day.

                  It’s one thing to attend a pro day. But, private workouts say a ton. And that’s almost what it was.

                  • Volume12 says:

                    Dammit.

                    Rob, could you edit that comment out my man?

                    C-Dog, I responded, but put my reply in the name box.

                    About Bevell. It’s a good point. Private workouts say a ton, and that’s kind of what it was.

                  • David says:

                    I like what Ervin provides in terms of a gadget player (don’t think he has the size to run between a mediocre line for the Seahawks) but would be great as a screen, jet sweep, wheel route, etc kind of player and would be ecstatic if they picked him up. But to reiterate, I do not see him being able to shoulder feature back load (if for instance Rawls goes down again).

                    That said, Prosise, while may not be as electric as Ervin, I think would be a solid 3rd down back type (which I think we all agree is a need at this point) who can catch balls out of the backfield (former WR), has the size and potential to be a pass blocker in the backfield (more so than Ervin) given his size and also could be a good change of pace back for carries behind Rawls and potentially push Michael.

                  • David says:

                    Also, if you can get Prosise with the 3rd round comp (essentially 4th rounder) or native 4th I think that’s great value for a guy who inevitably is going to get better with more carries given his limited time at RB

            • Rob Staton says:

              Ervin could be another Brian Westbrook.

          • Volume12 says:

            Much more than a scat back.

            Matter of fact, I don’t think he’s a scat back at all.

            The Westbrook comp is nice, mixed in with some Tavon Austin. Who says he has to line up in the backfield on 3rd down? Why does he have to be used only on 3rd downs? I don’t get that.

            Pair him with Rawls, get him looks at WR, instant impact on ST’s, jet/fly sweeps.

            He’s a very cool player.

            Unique athleticism, unique speed, game breaker, big time production and character.

      • Rob Staton says:

        He’s far more than just a scat back.

  23. ItsAboutTheDefense says:

    Seahawks currently have the least expensive Offensive Line in the NFL at $6,200,000.
    Is it reasonable to think they would add a $2,000,000 Rookie to it unless he is a Starter?
    Different story if you’re paying the money to an Interior D-Lineman.
    If The Seahawks make a first round pick, it’ll be on Defense. In fact, trading up for a more talented Player takes on an extra appeal if Draft Picks are used. Ending up with less players means Money saved.
    There could easily be a roster spot being freed up to spend any money saved on. Sowell is learning to long snap (see youtube video).

  24. WALL UP says:

    I think Bullard may go later than Coleman as Rob’s source pointed out here: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/2016-nfl-draft-outlook-b99676279z1-370399721.html

    Both may be available @ 33. It all depends on the run of tackles in the 1st Rd.

  25. rowdy says:

    Rob, do you have any full game film on ervin? My biggest questions on him is blocking, doesn’t show any on highlight, and even though that won’t be a big part in what he asked to do, he’ll still need to do some. My other question is how does look when his line doesn’t get a push and open holes? In highlights his line looks nasty often pushing the d line backwards and I don’t see Seattle’s line being able to do that.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Ervin won’t need to block if he’s the #2 and beats out Michael.

      Then it’s up to Michael or another to be the third down guy.

    • Jake says:

      Can’t speak to the blocking, but I highly doubt all the plays he made against Auburn were due to an SEC defensive front being dominated by the SJSU OL. I think he just presses the holes very well and has the quickness and acceleration to explode through them. He might not win every battle at the line, but the fact that San Jose was using him as a 190-something pound short yardage back speaks volumes about his ability to be a tough runner.
      As long as Ervin wasn’t forced into the #1 role, he may not line up in the backfield all that much anyway. Can you imagine having him and Lockett on the field at the same time? You could use odd formations and motions to really turn a defense in knots.

  26. Josh emmett says:

    I was entertains a thought of San Deigo leap froggin back into the first round to screw over Denver and take Paxton Lynch could a cool trade for the Hawks! Trade the 26th pick for the 35th and the 102nd? I took a swing at a mock with that trade in mind

    35 Conor McGovern/ Ifedy if he is there?
    56 Tyler Ervin
    90 Javon Hargrave
    97 Christian Westerman/Graham Glasgow
    102 Stephen Westerly
    124 Devon Casjuste
    171 Alex Mccalister
    215 Rasard Robinson/ Deandre Hall
    224 Dan Vitale
    246 Vernon Adams

    • Josh emmett says:

      *102 Stephen Weatherly*

    • Wall UP says:

      I like the idea of trading down from 26. I would still take Coleman/Ifedi in that order for that 1st slot. I think McGovern @ 35 would be a bit high. I like the inside push from Hargrave @ 90. McGovern/Glasgow would be good @ 97. That would be a nice first four picks.

      • Josh emmett says:

        Yeah, I think this is going to be one of those drafts where the Hawks pretty much just have to address the trenches where there is a ton of value all the way through the draft for that and they just have to pick their spots for competition for the SAM as well as the RB position. If you think about it that way the goals for the Hawks in this draft don’t seem too complicated. Take the Broncos, they are screwed, haha, the draft has to lean a certain way for them or they might be stuck with Dirty Mark Sanchez at QB. Ouch

  27. EranUngar says:

    Another great piece Rob. Finding another Bennett (a 6th round draft pick) is indeed a challenge even in the top two rounds.

    While we focus on the top 2 rounds to provide us with DL/OL talent, we need to pay attention to the following:

    Other then Justin Britt, the player everybody wants on the bench, all other members of both DL and OL are day 3 and beyond picks. Let it sink down and think what that tells us if anything.

    Also,

    On the full roster we have just 1 first rounder(Thomas).

    We have 5 2nd rounders. Other than Wags, the other 4 are Britt (see above) and 3 backups (Clark, C-Mike, PRich)

    In 6 years, JS’s greatest draft hits currently on the roster include 1 first rounder(Thomas), 1 2nd rounder(Wags), 2 3rd rounders(RW, Lockett) and 8 day 3 and beyond players (Kem, Sherman, Lane, K.J., Rowals, Gilliam, Baldwin, Willson)

    I point it out because if this was my draft record I would be dedicating as much attention to day 3 and beyond candidates as i would on my top round picks.

    Maybe we should dedicate some time here to all those day 3 and beyond hidden gems. After all, this is clearly where JS earns his pay check.

    • Mike L says:

      Just to play a little devil’s advocate on Britt…PC indicated this week that he is happy with his run blocking (which I imagine is #1 importance for a LG)..but that he needs improvement in his “pass protection concepts” (or something to that effect). So, physically he’s got everything the Hawks are looking for as a LG…just needs to improve his decision making on passing plays.

      So, hopefully he has spent as much of the off-season in the film room as he has in the weight room improving that aspect of his game. he’s coming up on year 3 of his contract…I think he knows what’s at stake…and will be tough to beat out in camp.

      just my 2 cents..

      • Darth12er says:

        Agreed on Britt. While he’s been a turd, he has a good of a shot as any to start. I saw an Instagram picture of his where he was on the beach with his wife. I wanted to scream at him and tell him to get practicing. I’m really hoping he turns some heads this year. Maybe they should trade him, then sign him back off somebody else’s PS. It worked for CMike.

  28. coachmattson says:

    Why all OL or DL options at 26? What about if Eli Apple is there? I’ve heard some say that he is a “shutdown corner.” Do we take him at 26 and then DL/OL/OL with the next 3 picks? Put Lane as our slot corner where he is best. I could make a case that getting the Legion of Boom back to it’s old self would go a long way in us getting back to the Super Bowl level. Thoughts?

    • Rob Staton says:

      The Seahawks have never drafted a CB higher than round four for a reason. Plus Apple hasn’t got the 32 inch arms they demand from outside CB’s.

      • D-OZ says:

        They took a safety in the 1st, why not a corner? They look at their selections as can this player beat out our current starter? Can Apple beat out Lane on the outside? You improve two positions. And there are health considerations. I am not advocating this, just sayin.

        • Coug1990 says:

          Safety is not corner. If you have regularly been able to turn lower picks into very good players, players as good as Apple, why would you draft a CB in the first round? You lose the opportunity to improve another position that is more in need.

          • D-OZ says:

            I said I wasn’t advocating the move. Thomas is a FS who patrols the back half with good coverage skills. I think they also like their currant depth at corner, although none are a proven commodity.

  29. D-OZ says:

    I see a lot of Sherman’s play style in William Jackson III. I think he is a vastly underrated corner. Watched a lot of film on him. To me him and Apple are the top corners in this class outside of Ramsey.

    • Trevor says:

      I would actually take Jackson as the 2nd best corner in the draft as well. If he ends up with KC they are going to have a couple of real play makers at the back end. I think he goes to Oakland in the top 20.

  30. George says:

    Are we really completely dismissing Nkemdiche? If I recall Bruce Irvin didn’t have the best track record coming out of college. Talent-wise, isn’t he more naturally gifted than Bullard?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Bruce Irvin was completely different to Nkemdiche. Not even comparable.

      Irvin used football to turn his life around. He went to the JUCO ranks, then onto West Virginia. During that period he had zero issues and proved to NFL teams he had turned the corner. His story was one of total redemption — a man who showed to teams he wasn’t going to accept a life of crime and proved that over several years through football.

      Nkemdiche hasn’t turned any corners. His issues exist today. And they are very serious issues. And these issues (that his brother Denzel shares) are going to prevent him from having a football career unless he seeks help now.

    • Steve Nelsen says:

      Nkemdiche has pro-level talent but his character issues are severe, not typical booze and weed as some state. He could blow up as bad as Aaron Hernandez. The Seahawks have dealt with suspensions, including Bruce Irvin, and allowed all those guys to walk because you couldn’t count on them to play. An injury risk like Jaylon Smith might slip to Day 3 because of fear he can’t play. Nkemdiche has a similar risk of not being able to play plus the added risk of legal/PR embarrassment.

      • Steve Nelsen says:

        Nkemdiche is not Johnny Football or Aldon Smith. He certainly has party problems like them but he also has very high violence and friends/family/posse issues.

    • Trevor says:

      His brother/ family are a huge issue and relationship issues like that are hard to break. Unless he agrees to get treatment and completely remove himself from current situation and end those relationships I could see him going undrafted.

      It is easier said than done to end a relationship with your brother but if he wants an NFL career that sounds like step #1.

    • Darnell says:

      Major differences between Irvin and Nkemdiche.

      Irvin had to live a certain lifestyle as a means of survival and came out the other side as a guy who was all about football.

      Nkimdeche was a silver spoon prospect with questions regarding how much he really cares about football.

      Bruce’s issues reflected strength of character.

  31. EranUngar says:

    Here is something totally irrelevant about the 2016 draft:

    I was reading an article about the top 10 athletic freaks in this draft class. This is one of them-

    “Ben Braunecker, TE, Harvard
    Yes, freakish athletes come from schools you’d never expect, too. Enter Braunecker, who arguably dominated the tight ends at the combine more than anyone dominated any position. He placed in the top five among tight ends in all seven of the combine’s testing categories, an incredible feat given the diversity of drills involved. At 250 pounds, his 4.73 40-yard dash, 35 1/2-inch vertical jump and 4.20 20-yard shuttle clocking demonstrate speed, explosiveness and agility.”

    And i immediately remembered-

    “At Rice’s pro day, Willson ran the 40-yard dash in 4.57 and 4.46 seconds. He had a 38-inch vertical jump and a 10-foot-2 broad jump. He ran the short shuttle in 4.28 seconds and the three-cone drill in 7.04 seconds. He performed 23 lifts of 225 pounds on the bench press. All of those totals would have been among the top 10 in his position group at the combine.”

    I think we could do a lot worse then signing his extension contract before the season begins.

    • Mike L says:

      I’m a big Luke fan..but with Graham scheduled to make $9 million this year..and $10 million next year..I wonder if there is room on the Hawks payroll for another high salary ($4-$5 million) tight end. My guess is that they’ll wait to see how Jimmy G’s injury recovery goes and then do something mid-season for Luke if it doesn’t look like Graham is going to get all the way back.

      • Darnell says:

        That may be why you want that early extension with Luke though, to try to save some money rather then waiting to compete with other teams for him.

        He has “productive New England Patriot” written all over him.

  32. EranUngar says:

    And another irrelevant fact:

    We have all heard Gibbs’s mantra – Give me a year and i can turn 5 garbage men into a ZBS OL.

    The current starting OL (per JS) is Gilliam, Britt, Lewis, Glow, Webb. This mighty unit earns 6.23M avg./year.

    They make less per year than Unger (6.46M) or Sweezy (6.5M).

    Even if a first round pick replaces Britt we will still have a sub 7M per year OL.

    33 offensive linemen in the NFL earn 7M + per year.

    Tom Cable will get the chance to prove his mentor’s mantra. Financially, those guys are as close to NFL garbage men as possible.

    • Mike L says:

      did you mean in total they make less than Unger or Sweezy??

      My guess is the only one of those five that get a lucrative second contract with the Hawks is (potentially) Gilliam..and they probably need to be budgeting for that now since that could be $10 million plus per year if he’s determined to be the LT of the future.

  33. bigDhawk says:

    Anyone else have the feeling that, despite all our best intentions of prognosticating early picks to meet our apparent needs on both lines, PJCS will just trade back into the early second round and draft Laquon Treadwell, much to our chagrin?

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think it’s unlikely for two reasons — one, Treadwell won’t be there in round two. Two — they’re going to focus on their key needs and Treadwell really doesn’t solve that at all.

      • bigDhawk says:

        Granted, he might not be there in round two. I should have emphasized that Treadwell might be their guy and they’ll make whatever move necessary to get him with our first pick, despite all our justifiable teeth-gnashing over the trenches.

    • RWIII says:

      Last year the Colts had all these skilled players (receivers/running backs ). They look also neglected their offensive line. Guess what? Andrew Luck missed haft the season because of injuries. That is not a winning formula.

      • Mike L says:

        Romo seems to get injured every year despite having all 1st round draft picks on the OL in front of him…

      • bigDhawk says:

        I’m not advocating for Treadwell to be our first pick. I’m playing devil’s advocate, suggesting that maybe PJCS are satisfied with the state of our trenches, for better or worse, and a player like Treadwell, whom Pete has recently talked up, is ‘their guy’. It would be a huge letdown for all of us wringing our hands over the OL, no doubt, but possible.

  34. H M Abdou says:

    I think Sheldon Rankins is going to be drafted very high in the first round. He’s one of the cleanest players (by cleanest, I mean he doesn’t have anything that would prevent him from being drafted, like a medical, a character issue, or any glaring weakness).

    Rankins is one of the most well-rounded players in the draft. I’d love for the Hawks to draft him, even if it means trading up a couple of spots to land him. But I have a feeling he’ll go top 10; top 15 for sure.

    • Volume12 says:

      Speaking of going early, Jonathan Bullard.

      If he is ‘Seattle’s guy’ I worry that Atlanta or the NYJ could mess up our board.

      I also think it’s very interesting that DC Ken Norton, jr. likes him as a scheme fit too.

      • RWIII says:

        If Bullard is not on the board the probably go offensive line. BTW l think Oakland would be looking at Bullard in the 2nd round.

        • Rob Staton says:

          After a bit more tape review — I’d be pretty surprised if Bullard was off the board. It could happen, but it’d be a review on the first round options more than anything. Post coming in a moment.

  35. Ground_Hawk says:

    If they go defense in the 1st then, for me, it would have to be either Bullard or Ogbah. Their production is great, and they have the athletic profile that the Seahawks seek. It’s great that Bullard is getting a meeting with the Seattle, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they invite Ogbah to the VMAC pre-draft. Ogbah’s 19 QB hurries is unreal, and to go along with 17.5 TFL and 13 sacks, this kid can play football. FWIW Bosa had 14 QB hurries, 16 TFL, and 5 sacks.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Ogbah is horrid on tape though at times — got a piece dropping in a minute that highlights it. Cody Whitehair had his lunch money.

      • Ground_Hawk says:

        Thanks, Rob. I’ll watch the tape, but Ogbah still had a good game against Kansas St. He recorded 6 total tackles, 3 TFL, and a sack. I’m not arguing that he is unstoppable, but he still took care of business that day to help the team with the win.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Yeah — they moved him up against the RT after Whitehair had his way with him. So we can say he played well against a totally overmatched right tackle — and against the NFL lineman he was extremely ineffective.

      • Greg Haugsven says:

        I still like Spence with a pick. Not sure hes still in play with Clark losing weight though.

  36. matt says:

    ” I had the chance to speak to Jaylon Smith and his trainer this week, and the update is all good news. Smith is squatting without a brace and doing 400-pound reps. He’s focused on gaining back the 20 pounds he lost post-surgery and building balance and strength in his leg. At Notre Dame’s pro day on March 31, he’ll do the bench press and meet with teams.

    Smith, who is only 20 years old, is going through the rehab of his first-ever injury. The prognosis right now is a waiting game. It’s a “when, not if” situation with his knee.” Matt Miller-bleacher report

    The last sentence is HUGE! Smith was a top 5 lock before the injury. While it’s still doubtful Smith sees the field in 2016, drafting him now is like trading for a top 5 pick in 2017. He’s a difference maker on defense who oozes athleticism with his play. He can get after the QB as well:

    https://youtu.be/m7dTuAVNPZ0

    If Smith’s case truly is a ‘when not if’ situation, then I’d take him with our first pick. Trading down before taking him would be ideal, but I’d take him at #26. Smith is a special player. JS said Todd Gurley was at the top of our board last year. The war room noticeably cringed after NE drafted Easley before us, during the 2014 draft. When our pick comes up at #26, and if Smith is still available, my guess would be he’s at the top of our draft board.

    • RWIII says:

      Matt:If what you are saying is true. I stll wouldn’t take Smith before the 4th round. By then I am sure some one else will snag him.

  37. nichansen01 says:

    Here we go:

    1. Trade back into the early second, pick up an early fourth and draft Germain Ifedi

    2. Trade up into the mid / early second using our natural second, third and fourth. Draft Jonathan Bullard.

    3c. Connor Mcgovern, C/OG

    4(trade). Tyler Ervin, RB, San Jose State

    5. Will Parks, DB, Arizona

    6. Joel Heath, DT, Michigan State

    7. Lenne Maiva, OG, Arizona

    7c. Alex Balducci, DT, Oregon

    Thoughts?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Doubt Ifedi gets beyond the last two picks in R1.

      • nichansen01 says:

        Could a team at the end of the first be willing to trade up with Seattle? If denver wanted to secure Paxton Lynch for example, ahead of Arizona.

      • nichansen01 says:

        While this is a fair point, Carolina also needs a defensive end and Ogbah or Lawson could be the pick…

        • Rob Staton says:

          I think Lawson will be gone. Ogbah? Probably fades into round two.

          • Ground_Hawk says:

            This highlights the issue of picking at 26 though. The Seahawks may not be picking a player that they grade as a 1st round talent, so if that’s the case they will have to either pick a player with a non-first round grade or trade their pick. I remember reading that last year the FO had less than 20 players that they graded as a first round talent, so picking at 26, this year, they might get a player that grades out as a 1st round talent on their board. If no such player is left then their options are the same as last years: pick a non-first round talent at 26, or trade the pick.

    • nichansen01 says:

      Keep in mind you could switch the order of Bullard and Ifedi.

    • RWIII says:

      I know that JS loves picks. But I think Schneider is now at the stage where he loves/targets players. Just look at last year. John Schneider targeted Tyler Lockette. He traded 4 picks to snag him. BTW My gut feeling us that a couple of years ago Schneider got BURNT trading down. Two years ago Schneider targeted Joe Bitonio. Well Schneider traded. In the meantime Cleveland snagged Bitonio. Schneider was then forced to grab Justin Britt.

      • Mike L says:

        Bitonio had a good rookie year but missed six games with an ankle injury(ies) last year..we’ll probably have to wait another year or two to make a judgement on what we really missed out on..

    • RWIII says:

      I know that JS loves picks. But I think Schneider is now at the stage where he loves/targets players. Just look at last year. John Schneider targeted Tyler Lockette. He traded 4 picks to move up and snag him. BTW: My gut feeling me that a couple of years ago Schneider got BURNT trading down. Two years ago Schneider targeted Joe Bitonio. Well Schneider traded down. In the meantime Cleveland snagged Bitonio. Schneider was then forced to grab Justin Britt.

  38. DarrellLH says:

    Rob, what was it about Drew Nowak that caused the Hawks to start him at center last year? After he was pull from the starting lineup he fell into an abyss. Did the Hawks miss evaluate him that bad at the start of last season? Do you know if he has any consideration in this OL discussion this year?

    • Rob Staton says:

      They clearly believed he had a lot of upside for the role and thought he could get through some growing pains before excelling. It never happened unfortunately.

  39. Dan Gahan says:

    Really cool analysis. I hope the scouts and GM’s from the other 31 teams aren’t reading this. 🙂
    Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I know John and Pete claim to be comfortable with the current group of projected starters (Gilliam, Britt, Lewis, Glowinski, Webb), but they must be kidding themselves. That looks like the worst starting 5 in the entire NFL. Russell was already running for his life last year with a stronger group. Webb used to start for my hometown Bears and he was dreadful. Maybe the worst OL starting in the entire league at that time. Cable is a true miracle worker if he can turn Webb into a quality starter.