Some much needed perspective

June 13th, 2018 | Written by Rob Staton

It’s becoming increasingly trendy to roast the Seahawks these days.

I suppose it’s something to talk about. It is June after all.

Here’s the latest offering…

Forget how they built one of the greatest defenses in NFL history, found a franchise quarterback in round three and were a yard away from back-to-back Super Bowl Championships.

Ah, but now they’ve appointed an unpopular former GM as a consultant, so they’ve clearly lost their edge.

Let’s have a bit of perspective. I thought it was worth going back to 2012 to find out what people were saying about Ryan Grigson when he became the Colts GM.

Here’s a section of a piece by ESPN:

Grigson has been listed as a future front-office star after helping to build two Super Bowl teams including the championship-winning Rams in 1999, his first season in the front office.

In 2001, Grigson became an area scout for St. Louis. He joined the Eagles as a regional scout in 2003 and gradually moved up the ladder from regional scout, to director of college scouting and eventually to director of player personnel, the job he had held for the past two seasons.

“He has been a great adviser to me and somebody I have leaned on to bounce ideas off of many times over my career,” Eagles GM Howie Roseman said in a statement. “He leaves no stone left unturned in his efforts to find good players and we were lucky to have him here in Philadelphia.”

That’s Howie Roseman, the guy receiving widespread praise for building a Super Bowl winning Eagles roster in two years.

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

Become a Patron!

43 Responses to “Some much needed perspective”

  1. Cameron says:

    It will certainly be entertaining when, in 5 months’ time, the pundits and writers scramble to turn their narrative into, “I saw the signs that were there all along, it was clear the Seahawks still had the tools to succeed, where many thought they would fail.”

  2. SeanHarker says:

    Bunch of shock jocks on twitter now, all they want is clicks and to start debates

    • Ty the Guy says:

      Makes you appreciate this website, even that much more.

      I would love to get paid like some of these members of the “sports media.” It’s an easy business model…
      Step 1: Find a team on a down year
      Step 2: Point out all the obvious flaws
      Step 3: Sound confident like you have all the answers
      Step 4: Repeat

      I just don’t know if I could respect myself after.

      Thanks again to Rob for all that he does.

  3. Cameron says:

    It will be quite entertaining when, in 5 months’ time, the pundits and writers scramble to turn their narrative to, “The signs were clearly there all along, the Seahawks still had the tools to succeed, where many [not me of course] thought they would fail.”

  4. Nick says:

    You’re so right, it’s open season on the Seahawks. Frankly, I’m here for it. Get them pissed off the world. We know Pete works best with that mentality. So does Russ for that matter.

    The funniest thing I’ve seen is people freaking out about all the Carson hype and what it means for Penny. First off–two above average RBs to start a year? What’s bad about that? What am I missing?
    We would have given so much mid-way through last year to get a RB with Penny’s talent.

    I cannot wait for training camp so we can start talking about things that matter.

  5. cha says:

    The other gripe I have is this national narrative that the defense is somehow awful because Sherman and (likely) Kam are gone.

    This defense played well without Sherman & Kam for 7 games in 2017. They have McDougald and two young players behind him. They brought Maxwell back and have a rising star in Shaquille, a great find in Coleman, have plenty of young guys with actual game experience behind them and some intriguing draft picks in the pipeline.

    It’s not like they are replacing franchise pillars with undrafted free agents.

    • GerryG says:

      Agreed.

      It’s not even the narrative to go after. THE weak spot on the roster is DE, especially hearing Clark has had bad hammy all off season, and Jordan has more knee trouble. If you are going to highlight their “demise” that is the angle to take. I still dont buy it, 2012 they had exactly one top DE (Clem) and still fielded a great D.

      The rest of the roster has lots of young talent/vets that can step up and play.

  6. Largent80 says:

    Evan Silva is who?????

    Does anybody care who he is or what he says??

  7. Hawktalker#1 says:

    I love hearing this stuff. The Seahawks have been the big dog for quite a while with the ever-threatening LOB.

    Now we’re are the regularly-discounted, often criticized club that has purged itself of almost all its good players and is a heavy rebuild (not re-tooling) mode, destined for last place it’s the division. Come and get a free win – just play the Seahawks, that’s all it takes to get an easy “W”. They have no defense, can’t run the ball and the only thing they ever had of value, the LOB, is dead. The only question left is what will they do with their #1 pick in the draft next year?

    Ok whatever you say . . . I like being the underdog will all the experience and talent we have. Underestimate Russ and the Hawks and let’s just see what you get. Sure sleep on the hawks when they come to town if you like. Let’s just see what happens during the season and withhold judgement until then.

    It’s a thrilling prospect, it’s been far too long since I’ve seen a good crow eating contest (and there will be many competitors) . . . caw caw LOL

    Go Hawks

  8. FresnoHawk says:

    Rob you got me slobbering all over myself, instead of commenting, I’m going with the flow. Free TR

  9. seanmatt says:

    So grateful for what you do, Rob. Seriously. But what have the Hawks done since they caught lightning in a bottle between 2010 and 2012? Those years brought us a franchise running from a trade, fantastic free agents, and incredible drafts. Those years were amazing acquisition wise and the results showed on the field. But most of the players from that time period have moved on or soon will be moving on (if they ever see the field for us again). We’ve drafted some nice players since then (not nearly the caliber of those early drafts) but have whiffed big on trades and free agency. I don’t think that people are hating on the Hawks, they’re just being honest. It’s nice to come here and get some optimism, though. We’re all gonna need it this year.

    • AlaskaHawk says:

      The sorry state of drafting and contract negotiations is why they hired Grigson. Whatever the outcome, at least the Seahawks are trying to turn it around. They have been in decline for years now, so it is no surprise that people are starting to write negative reviews. Heck they were even getting them during the superbowl runs.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think the Seahawks have made some clear mistakes since 2012. But I also think it’s a lot harder to keep drafting studs when you pick later in each round and have a largely established, veteran roster.

      People look on the last couple of years as massively disappointing. I understand why. But if you’re winning 10 games every year (and they should’ve won 10 last season) you’re doing something right.

  10. Largent80 says:

    Did anyone watch LAST year?…Jeezus it sucked. I can’t think of a worse winning season in my lifetime. It was brutal to watch and this was with all these guys that people are freaking out about going away. GOOD RIDDANCE and HELLO to a new way of getting it done. The early schedule is hard with all the road games but if they break .500 on those look out.

  11. Greg haugsven says:

    test

  12. Greg Haugsven says:

    test

  13. Dale Roberts says:

    The caution I have about this year comes from Vegas. The over-under-win-total is 7.5. Vegas tends to be a more reliable reference than pundits because they lose money when they get it wrong.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Philly’s win total projection from Vegas a year ago was 8.0.

      They won the Super Bowl.

    • Mark Souza says:

      Vegas doesn’t care about getting it right or wrong, they care about setting the line where they get a fifty-fifty split on bets for the over and under. That has more to do with bettor perceptions than facts.

      • jdk says:

        This is one of the most over-quoted and misunderstood concepts about how casinos set lines. Casinos are not afraid to have a liability (meaning unbalanced action on a bet) if they think they are on the right side. They will look to mitigate a massive liability (which they did in the case of the Knights). However, if the oddsmakers, who use sophisticated analytical tools to asses a team’s future performance, thought that Seattle was an 11 win team, they wouldn’t have the over-under at 7.5, regardless of what the public was willing to bet.

        As Rob pointed out above, Vegas isn’t always right, but they are probably the least biased and most accurate predictor out there.

        Seattle has underachieved for years (yeah they’ve been a double digit wins, but they were the best roster in football for at least 4 years running–one SB is disappointing with that accumulation of talent) and now they are losing Hall of Fame/Pro Bowl players. I still believe that Carroll can field a defense and Wilson gives the team a chance, but I don’t blame anyone out there for looking at the team’s situation from without and doubting its ability to put it all back together.

  14. Hawk Eye says:

    I am glad they are getting disrespected. I would rather have that than have everyone love them and then they disappoint us. This is getting back to 2011 and 2012 when Pete thrived at creating a culture of competition.
    we get spoiled by expecting success every year, every year is different and players and coaches get complacent when they just expect to win.

    For the Hawks to win 10+ games, Russ has to prove he is a top 5 QB. No one expects GB to win less than 10 games if Rodgers is healthy, despite a roster that is always flawed. I think Russ has to overcome his bad starts, which I cannot think of other great QB’s doing. Playing great on the 4th qtr and almost winning is not greatness. If he cannot do it, then the team will need to create another great defence in order to win another SB

  15. drewdawg11 says:

    Russell Wilson WITH a strong running game more than makes up for the defense taking a step back. Now please make sure the kicking game is fixed and we will be back in the playoffs, as we should have been last season.

    • Del tre says:

      I’m of the same opinion. If our rookie punter is all that, and of Janikowsi can pull of 1 more year greatness the defense could be significantly better numbers wise. Playing defense is a lot harder when you are on the field 70% of the game. Ball control was so important to this team, giving Russ opportunities at 2nd and 4 and 3rd and 2 is going to make him even better.
      What i think I’m most excited for is the versatility from the running backs, Carson was able to make things happen on screen passes when he lined up outside. Having him out there with Penny behind Russell, they are making room for a lot of creative usage of their running backs.

  16. Zach says:

    OK, but looking at complimentary discussion of Ryan Grigson from six years ago doesn’t change the fact that despite being gifted with a franchise QB on a rookie deal, he did almost nothing to make that team competitive. The Trent Richardson trade by itself is damning, and it’s not like Indy drafted a bunch of good players in his tenure…besides Luck (who was the consensus #1 pick), his only other pick of any quality was TY Hilton. That’s not exactly the track record of a draft expert.

    That’s not to say that hiring Grigson is a monumental mistake (in part because it’s hard to know quite what responsibility he’ll actually have), but his tenure with the Colts proved pretty conclusively that he’s not anything special in the drafting/scouting world.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It doesn’t prove that at all.

      All it proves is when handed the keys, he didn’t do a good job as a GM.

      There’s so much more to a GM’s job than simply ‘scouting’. It’s about free agency, re-signing players, managing the players and the coaches, who you choose to coach.

      Grigson has none of those responsibilities in Seattle. Now he’s just a consultant. ‘Hey Ryan, what do you think of these five college players?’. That’s a massive difference to being a GM.

      You mention the Trent Richardson trade. How many trades is Grigson going to be overseeing for the Seahawks?

      And as the piece highlights, last time he was a ‘scout’ he earned rave reviews by the most highly regarded GM in the league currently. And he was clearly doing something right to get the Indy job in the first place.

      The point of the article is to offer a pushback to all the silly overreactions to the Seahawks making a completely fair and largely irrelevant scouting appointment.

      • Kyle says:

        Some of the negative perception has to do with a simple binary judgment—is this guy good or bad? All fans fall into this trap to some degree, in evaluating players, coaches, even opponents. Thus Grigson was a genius with the Rams and Eagles and a bum with the Colts. The reality is he has strengths and weaknesses as an evaluator and manager, and has the ability to adapt over time , for better or worse.

        In general, hires of senior administrators and coaches to lower positions are pretty safe moves, because those men have generally proven themselves superior at the lower levels, which is what got them to the top spots in the first place.

        • Gohawks5151 says:

          What have you done for me lately league for sure. Schotty was a cant miss offensive mind not so long ago. Now his hire is criticized. Same as Grigson. Time could treat McVay or Shanny that way in 5 years. I see this exactly like a Jeff Ireland hire. Really just a new perspective in the room. Media is gonna make comments whether you cut stars too soon or hang on too long. Trust the process

      • Zach says:

        Saying “he was clearly doing something right to get the Indy job” implies that organizations don’t ever make mistakes in hiring, or in promoting people to jobs they’re not capable of. Even a cursory overview of the NFL would show this to be untrue.

        If Grigson were some sort of scouting guru, then you would think that a bare minimum his Indy teams would have drafted well in his tenure. Yet it’s impossible to look at their drafts over that time span and conclude that.

        I don’t see this as a big deal because I don’t think Grigson will have much input, and obviously Carroll and Schneider will be making the actual decisions, but to claim that the Seahawks are bringing in some sort of scouting expert in Grigson just doesn’t ring true.

        • Kenny Sloth says:

          Saying that doesnt imply anything of the sort. Way to completely misrepresent the argument

          He DID have to be doing something right.

          And Rob goes on to say “a GMs job is more than just scouting”

          It’s not like he was the janitor before his Indy gig. The guy has value in the industry and it’s disingenuous to diminish that

        • Rob Staton says:

          It implies no such thing. It merely highlights that there had to be a reason he was on the radar of teams looking for a GM. It’s not like he was an unknown plucked from obscurity. You only have to read the Howie Roseman reference to see he was highly regarded, respected and had a track record.

          Neither is it ever as simple as “if he was a great scout they would’ve drafted really well.” The coaching staff and being able to develop the talent is vital to that. I think Indy should’ve fired Pagano ages ago. They didn’t, they didn’t develop any players. They actually relied on veteran additions to get by. I think they suffered due to their coaching staff. So there’s blame to pass around.

          They also had to deal with Andrew Luck’s health issues. People will say they should’ve done more to protect him, yet Grigson spent R1 and R2 picks on the OL and inherited a R1 left tackle. So there are reasons why he failed. Some of those are his own doing, some aren’t. That’s football.

          But too often these days people make their mind up about someone and that’s it. He’s a failure. My objective is to provide perspective and not have tunnel vision like that.

          And you’re accusing me of inferring he’s a scouting guru. I haven’t done that. I merely highlighted the opinion of the most respected current GM in the NFL, praising Grigson, as a counter to all of the negativity.

  17. LouieLouie says:

    All those naysayers are right. The sky is falling! We don’t have a chance! We’re washed up! Do you hear that in LA and San Francisco? (I don’t think they’re buying into any of that S%#T). Oh ya, and even as badly as last year went, the Seahawks were still very close to being 11 – 5.

    • Elmer says:

      Yes, let’s not forget that Blair Walsh lost one game for us and likely prevented us from winning another one. Did he WIN any games for us? Don’t think so.

      To comment responsibly on the Grigson hiring you would have to know specifically what he was hired to do and what the Seahawks felt was missing from their organization. As it stands we can say “Thank you for sharing your opinion with us but we don’t care about your opinion”.

  18. KD says:

    I’m generally in support of moves like this, including with bringing in Ireland, just because it’s important to not get trapped in your own bubble. Let’s always keep in mind that, until they leave, this is PCJS’s team. I still remember the story of Pete carroll’s first team meeting as head coach when he asked all the players in the meeting room to stand up and move to a different seat as a way of “seeing things from a different perspective” which seemed to be a small exercise in that philosophy. Players that decided not to move to a new seat were not around for long. Seems like he practices what he preaches.

  19. Georgia Hawk says:

    I guess my biggest question with this move is what prompted it? Did they not feel like they had a good enough in house system? In the business world you generally bring in a consultant when you have a lack of ability or lack of confidence in an area. I can’t imagine it is much different in the NFL, as it is a business and revenue driven. So do they have a lack of confidence in their scouting department somewhere? If they have full confidence and love what they have already, bringing in another voice just muddies the water and makes decisions that much harder…right?

    I dont have a problem with the hire, I don’t really care what his record as a GM was. He was brought in as a consultant, presumably in the scouting department (sure as hell wasn’t as a contract expert). So what void is he filling, what need is there that we dont see? Furthermore, why at this point in the year? Getting a head start on next year?

    • C-Dog says:

      They lost Dan Morgan to Buffalo last month. I think it’s probably a matter of having room in the front office to use his services. Frankly, I think too much is being made of the deal. I don’t think it’s a bad move to add experience, and as Rob mentioned above, he won’t be running the show, more of as sound board as they move forward.

  20. cha says:

    David Irving just got suspended 4 games for substance abuse.

    • Hawk Eye says:

      I think the Cowboys have some sort of weird initiation rite with their D line. Everyone has to get suspended at least once.

  21. Kenny Sloth says:

    World cups are kind of fun, huh. Christiano Ronaldo scratching the GOAT hair on his chin after becoming the just the fourth player to score in 4 world cups. Then finished off his hat trick after. 🐐?

    Wish my country was there. At least they’ll have to let us attend 2026

    Really don’t like American commentators though. One dude slipped and said “Portland vs. Spain”