The ‘not so fast’ group…

March 8th, 2012 | Written by Rob Staton

A wide range of names are paired with Seattle in the various mock drafts doing the rounds, with some suggestions more realistic than others. Today I wanted to look at a handful of players that are often projected to the Seahawks that I think are unlikely to be on the team’s radar on April 26th.

Luke Kuechly (LB, Boston College)

Solid and dependable, Kuechly will offer a team leadership and no-nonsense tackling ability at the second level. The Seahawks face a possible crisis at linebacker if David Hawthorne and Leroy Hill both depart, leaving two positions that will need to be addressed during free agency or the draft. Kuechly’s performance at the combine answered questions about his athleticism and size, with many now suggesting he could be a top-15 pick.

So why not Seattle?

Kuechly isn’t a pass rusher and although he’s totalled incredible tackle numbers at Boston College, he doesn’t make enough plays in the backfield to warrant such a high pick. Seattle’s biggest issue on defense is a total reliance on Chris Clemons for pressure and they must find more pass rushers. Whether it’s another player who can rush the edge or an outside linebacker who can cause some problems, the Seahawks need to spend the #12 pick on a prospect that will help create more pressure. This front office has found production in former UDFA David Hawthorne, 4th round pick KJ Wright and 7th round pick Malcolm Smith. Simply put, middle linebacker’s aren’t worth the #12 pick unless they’re called Ray Lewis. Kuechly will be a fine, unspectacular pro at the next level and whoever drafts him probably won’t regret it. However, the Seahawks are unlikely to draft a defensive player who won’t tangibly improve the team’s pass rush in 2012.

Ryan Tannehill (QB, Texas A&M)

Considered by many to be the third best quarterback in this draft class (an opinion I disagree with) Tannehill has been touted as a possible top-10 pick. Although there’s room for serious improvement on his 2011 performance for Texas A&M, some teams love his upside and he compares favorably to Jake Locker – drafted 8th overall by Tennessee last year. Depending on how the Robert Griffin III & Peyton Manning sweepstakes play out, Tannehill could be available at #12.

So why not Seattle?

The Seahawks didn’t rate Locker that highly last year and probably would’ve passed on him even if he was available with the #25 overall pick. Although Tannehill has certain ‘point guard’ tendencies, he’s also proven to be quite erratic and his composure in the pocket leaves a lot to be desired. Despite utilising naked bootlegs and a lot of play action, the Seahawks want someone comfortable in the pocket and not a player like Locker/Tannehill who will always prefer throwing on the move. Tannehill is a bit of a boom-or-bust type on the field and will appeal more to the Mike Shanahan’s of this world than the Pete Carroll’s, even though both offenses share similarities. That in turn is another reason this probably won’t happen – does Tannehill get past the Redskins at #6? Cleveland hold the better hand in trade negotiations for Robert Griffin III with their two first round picks and will be able to out-bid Washington at any point. Peyton Manning won’t compete in his brother’s division, so what does Washington do if they don’t make a deal with St. Louis? It seems likely they’d take Tannehill at #6, removing him from contention at #12 altogether.

Michael Floyd (WR, Notre Dame)

Floyd did his best to spoil a blossoming career with a series of off-field incidents at Notre Dame and a major act of indecision over whether to declare or not for the 2012 draft. Despite beginning the year with a suspension, he actually enjoyed a productive 2011 season and got people talking about his football skills again. While a lot of receivers have struggled at the Senior Bowl or combine, Floyd has excelled including a good display in Indianapolis. He could be the second receiver drafted after Justin Blackmon.

So why not Seattle?

Pete Carroll chased two big name receivers in Brandon Marshall and Vincent Jackson, before finally signing Sidney Rice to a big contract prior to the 2011 season. The Seahawks also offered extensions to Mike Williams and Ben Obomonau, drafted Golden Tate and found a diamond in the rough with Doug Baldwin. Tight end Zach Miller was also signed to a big contract, while Anthony McCoy and Cameron Morrah have also flashed at times. You can never have too many good receivers (ask Green Bay) but the Seahawks have other priorities. Receivers generally take time to adjust to the pro-game and with an inconsistent quarterback situation, Seattle might not feel the benefit of such a high pick. Floyd would be a luxury at #12 and they just aren’t likely to go receiver in round one this year.

David DeCastro (OG, Stanford)

Consistently regarded as the top interior lineman available and rated as one of the best in recent years, David DeCastro will be a guaranteed top-25 pick next month. Andrew Luck deserves a lot of the hype he’s received in the last two years, but he’s also benefited from a superb offensive line including both DeCastro and Jonathan Martin. Possibly the best pulling-guard you’ll see on tape, DeCastro is a pure technician who excelled at right guard for the Cardinal.

So why not Seattle?

Having spent first round picks on offensive lineman in back-to-back years, the Seahawks will surely look elsewhere in 2012. The team remains high on Robert Gallery – a Tom Cable favorite – and the rest of the line is young and developing with quality depth. For years Seahawks fans clamoured for a good offensive line and know that they have one, it’s time to concentrate on other matters. Replacing Gallery is not a priority and having played right guard for much of his college career, DeCastro may be best suited to the same role in the NFL. We’re only 12 months removed from Seattle drafting John Moffitt and even if DeCastro is as good as advertised, it seems like a major stretch to think the Seahawks will draft yet another offensive lineman with their first pick next month. It’s time to address other areas of the team.

Fletcher Cox (DT, Mississippi State)

An incredible athlete with superb speed and mobility for a 298lbs lineman. Cox has done more than most prospects to boost his stock this off-season by interviewing better than expected and exploding at the combine. Although his college production and tape isn’t quite as spectacular, the combination of size and speed will interest teams looking for an interior defensive lineman or a five-technique pass rusher.

So why not Seattle?

I’m not convinced the Seahawks will draft an interior defensive lineman this year and believe they will go all-out to re-sign Red Bryant. Although Alan Branch offered very little pass rushing ability alongside Brandon Mebane in 2011, I think the team liked the impact their ‘big three’ had against the run and will look to add another edge threat to compliment Chris Clemons. Although I suspect the Seahawks would really benefit from a talented three-technique, I’m not convinced that’ll be Cox’s best position at the next level. He always seems more comfortable working the edge and has a ‘runaway train’ style to his pass rush – he’s often off balance with his head down charging at the quarterback. He doesn’t have a lot of lower body power and the Seahawks could lose a lot of their run-stopping quality by swapping Branch for Cox. On tape, there’s not a lot of evidence of him collapsing the pocket from the interior and he looked more comfortable playing end at Mississippi State. Although the size/speed combination offers some upside, technically he’s still incredibly raw.

55 Responses to “The ‘not so fast’ group…”

  1. Wes says:

    What about Whitney Mercilus? I am surprised he gets little love from Hawk fans. Given that Pete wants to get faster on D, wouldn’t Mercilus make a lot of sense as a super athletic pure defensive end than Upshaw? Seems like exactly what the doctor ordered for this team.

  2. Stay Off The Flowers says:

    So do you get to Upshaw consistently mainly through process of elimination or is it really him standing out as an elite “Top 12″ talent? Glad you didn’t put Richardson in here, if your analysis does reflect reality (logically, it makes sense).

  3. Ben says:

    Makes sense. Good analysis.

  4. Ben says:

    I’d venture that Rob has been pretty clear that he believes Upshaw stands out as one of the elite nfl talents of this draft and believes the Hawks feel similarly.

  5. Glen says:

    Maybe I’m just a SDB homer, but when I watch Upshaw play, he is everywhere…making plays. He is high motor kid, that is disruptive in the backfield….Sure he plays on a great defense and he didn’t blow the combine up. The eye in the sky don’t lie….as they like to say…I’m all for a violent, aggressive guy like Upshaw playing for the ‘Hawks D.

    I also see Mario Williams as a significant player to keep an eye on. He would take the pressure off hoping one of the top 3 DEs fall, & actually afford PCJS luxury picks if the board doesn’t fall perfect.

  6. JC says:

    Wasn’t David Hawthorne signed by Ruskell and Co? I guess I could look it up and it really doesn’t change the point you’re making.

  7. Belgaron says:

    It’s a bit early to rule all of them out but if the roster is the same on draft day as it is today (including their own free agents) then I would concur with this list. Kuechly, Floyd or Cox all may be on the team’s board if they sign/trade for a pass rusher before the draft. There will be some new free agents this week as cap casualties.

  8. Hey Rob, you mentioned R. Tannehill, and I’m interested because of hearing the exact opposite from the NFC West Blog. There is an interesting quote from JS here, and quotes seem to stick with me, as did PC’s supposed quote about Upshaw earlier on. Here is the quote, what do you make of JS’s comment here? (Starts with Sando’s response to Tannehill)

    “Quarterbacks and pass-rushers are generally the most important players on any team. The Seahawks, while generally laying a solid foundation, need help in both of these critical areas. They’re pursuing Peyton Manning and could consider Matt Flynn if Manning signs elsewhere. Adding one of those players would push back the quarterback question at least one season and possibly longer. Seahawks general manager John Schneider, speaking at the combine, had this to say about Tannehill: “The guy was a quarterback in high school, just a football player. First and foremost, that’s what we’re looking for. Especially at that position. Guys that have always been in the quarterback schools, the special camps, and all that kind of stuff, they make me a little nervous to a certain extent. This guy is a real football player. He played defense. You could see him last year when he stepped in, he just went out and played. He had like this natural toughness about him that the players really rallied around and went on a winning streak and he did a great job. I felt like this year, he had well over 60 drops. He did a nice job.”

    I’m personally not sure what to do with Tannehill, but maybe he could be a good developmental pick, although it seems strange for a 1rst rounder.

  9. Michael (CLT) says:

    I would suggest we put this one to bed and move on to other topics. This site has come to a screeching halt in the first round. Move on to the 2nd.

  10. Stuart says:

    Rob, I am a daily reader of your site and enjoy the fact that you respond to questions. For a while now I have been pretty high on Fletcher Cox “the runaway train”. He plays in the SEC, made 1st team all SEC and is a budding star. He is only a true Junior and IMHO had he stayed for his Senior year he would be a “top 5″ pick next season and the Seahawks would never get a chance at this elite talent.

    In watching the clip you put together for him (excellent work btw), he plays all over the D Line. His strongest position may likely be DE just like you said. He is 6’4 nearly 300 lbs, a mountain of a man.

    Since it’s true that Clemens and Branch are FA’s after next season, it seems wise to grab a play with this type of potential! With PC coaching him up, look out! Remember he is only a true Junior and his best days are ahead of him. Even if the Hawks pass on him, we will see his name on the pro bowl team in a few years.

    If the “big 3″ you write about are gone, and Richardson too, would Cox be your choice? If not who do you like if that was the case? Thanks for the great work!

  11. James says:

    Good analysis. It does appear, based on need and the talent of this draft, that the Seahawks will go with a DE in round one, my guess is Ingram if available, or Perry from USC, who already plays the Leo position. Either Cousins or Osweiler should be available in round two. If the Seahawks have gone with Flynn at QB, then it will be best available. LB’s are a must in the middle rounds.

  12. tompage says:

    Fletcher Cox was a player I was interested in so thanks for writing this. If Red is not re-signed then I expect Alan Branch to slide over to the 5-technique. If that happens then the most glaring need is for a starting 3-technique, but it sounds like you don’t think Cox is going to be a high quality 3-technique. One thing Coach Carroll said is we need both inside and outside pass rush guys. Drafting a new 3-technique in round one could significantly improve the interior pass rush, albeit at Red Bryant’s expense.

  13. Rob says:

    Wes – I suspect opinion might be a little mixed on Mercilus. Athletic potential, but inconsistent tape. Major production in 2011, nothing before that. A lot of question marks there, but also things to like. He won’t go before Upshaw, Coples and Ingram though.

    Stay Off Flowers – It’s a bit of both. I rate Upshaw very highly, but it’s also a case of two other candidates being off the board in Ingram and Coples. I think we need to zone in on that trio, with Richardson a wild card.

    JC – Yes he’s a Ruskell guy, but they still got some use out of him after they inherited him. He took on a permanent role in the team really for the first time under Carroll.

    Belgaron – It’s not ruling anyone out, it’s looking at five guys mocked a fair bit to Seattle thatI disagree with and doubt will be on the radar. But I don’t expect free agency to shape much for Seattle – it may shape it in terms of people who don’t think this team will go pass rush early, but I guess we’ll see what happens next week.

    Chris – Schneider was asked specifically about Tannehill and it’s not a major shock he spoke glowingly of the player. For me it’s a case of what the team is looking for, what Mike Shanahan is looking for at #6 if he can’t get Griffin III and what the team intends to do this year and next in the draft. I would be amazed if they went QB in round one this year.

    Michael (CLT) – We have over a month to talk many subjects, this is one we haven’t covered. We are in the middle of a series on R2 & beyond linebackers that will continue this weekend with Ronnell Lewis. Tomorrow, Kip has another installment of late round quarterbacks.

    Stuart – First of all, thanks for the kind words. All feedback we get is appreciated (even the negative stuff) and I hope you’ll continue to enjoy this blog as much as we enjoy writing it. There’s a lot of physical potential with Cox and I think he could actually become a very effective defensive lineman. However, I also think his true position will be in an orthodox 3-4 and I have serious doubts about the three technique position or interior role due to a lack of lower body power and stoutness versus the run. In terms of an athlete he’s sensational, but it hasn’t always translated to a great pass rush on tape. I’d also like to see more of a nasty streak. In the event the big three and Richardson are off the board, I would probably look to move down in order to find a place where it’s realistic to draft this group: Doug Martin, Mychal Kendricks, Vinny Curry. And if I think that’s a realistic scenario, I’m ringing up Mario Williams’ agent next week.

    Tom – I think if we lost Bryant and found ourselves in a position where we felt obliged to take a defensive tackle, I would chance my arm on Brockers (more comparable to what we have) or Poe (bigger, insane athletic potential, raw but could be elite). I like Cox but for me he’ll always be most effective as an orthodox 5-tech. And as much I’d rather attack the edge rushers in this class, the potential of Poe in particular is hugely intriguing.

  14. Stuart says:

    Tompage, that would be horrible, losing Big Red. My thoughts on drafting Cox were never meant to assume we would lose him. We just get deeper! You cant have enough quality big men up front, think NY GIANTS.

  15. Rob says:

    For what it’s worth, I expect Seattle to beat anything Red Bryant gets offered in free agency. In fact, I suspect it was always their intention to let him test free agency, set a market and then better that offer. No point over spending if you don’t have to, and if someone makes a big offer – I’m sure Bryant will give the team a chance to match it. I’m thinking Bryant will be the team’s #1 priority next week.

  16. Derek says:

    Hey Rob, were you ever able to get that interview with Vontaze Burfict?

  17. Stuart says:

    Just now I came accrross this EXCELLENT 7-round mock draft. The mock is just another mock but the trades, detailed anaysis about each draft choice AND other draft options…

    The player he picks for Seattle has been mocked to us before but his write up on him made you really think hmmmmm……..Would it take for us to sign F/A Mario Williams maybe?

    http://www.rantsports.com/mock-draft/2012/03/07/2012-nfl-mock-draft-7-rounds-3-0/

  18. Rob says:

    Not yet Derek – I’ll pursue it. I would be surprised if he talks though considering where his stocks at. Right now he’s looking back end of the draft.

  19. Derek says:

    That’s cool Rob. I just figured his stock couldn’t be much lower and maybe a personal interview could help salvage it somehow. Even if he is back end of the draft, it would still be an interesting piece on a once very highly rated prospect. Would you take a chance on him now in the 5th or later?

  20. Belgaron says:

    Red and Carlson could easily be back unless some team out there is ready to overpay and even then they might still choose to come back.

  21. shams says:

    If Burfict has an agent, I bet part of that agent’s job would be to keep him from doing interviews. First rule of holes, right?

  22. williambryan says:

    There’s a lot of talk about drafting for “need” or drafting “BPA.” Would it be fair to say that JS/PC don’t really do either? Maybe they draft for “want.” in the first draft they identified LT Williams and Okung, and they got Okung. They wanted Thomas but thought he would be gone so had a plan to trade down but then he fell to them. Last year they went Oline with there first two picks when a lot of other talent was there. JS recently said that if they had two more late round picks last year that Portis and Baldwin would have been draft picks. It would be interesting to see how big (or small) there board is. It seems like they have a pretty straight forward strategy and as I type this I’m realizing Rob’s thoughts for continuing to mock Upshaw at pick 12 (with the note that it WILL be Upshaw, Ingram, Coples, or Richardson).

  23. Ryan says:

    Perhaps I’ve missed it, Rob, but I don’t think I’ve seen your thoughts on who you think the next man is if Upshaw, Coples, Ingram, and Richardson are off the board by #12. Maybe another good scenario for a future mock?

  24. david says:

    Stuart- i love that mock, it was pretty good, some picks i dont agree with though

    Nick Foles isnt mobile enough for Pete, and especially in the 2nd, dont think they’d go for it. but im just a Joe Schmo haha. Hakws wouldnt pick Foles over Cousins, if hes on the board, just for the fact that reports have come out saying how much pete likes Cousins and have been scouting him since some Academy thing Cousins was attending, i dont recall what it was haha

    Also we dont have 8 picks like he believes, and i didnt notice any trades so i dont know how he got that number.

  25. Ben2 says:

    Stuart-thanks for the link to that mock but I gave to admit I’d probably cry if we ended up kuelchy & Foles w/our first 2 picks…the Curry pick might have permanently scarred me – no LB in top 1/2 of draft (unless of course a 3:4 outside linebacker but Pete, while flexible, seems more philosophically aligned with 4:3 principles)

  26. shams says:

    Not to put it muechly– I’d like anyone but Keuchly!

    And while I know nobody’s purfict, let’s pass on Vontaze Burfict.

  27. Brandon says:

    Hey Rob, love the site, been a reader for a long time!

    My question: Why isn’t Nick Perry considered one of the elite pass rushers in this class? I think he’d be a great fit for Seattle. I’d certainly prefer him over Coples (his inconsistency scares me) and I think he’s a more explosive athlete than both Ingram and Upshaw. Matt Miller of Bleacher Report (@nfldraftscout) has been mocking him in top 10, and I think he should absolutely be considered for the #12 pick if available.

    Go Hawks!
    @AuRevoirBrandon

  28. Colin says:

    The scary thing about Perry is what scared people about Lawrence Jackson. Is he really a good pass rusher, or just a benefit of the system he is apart of?

  29. Phil says:

    Rob – (quoting from your response to Stuart) this is the first time I can recall you saying what you would do if Ingram/Coples/Upshaw/Richardson are gone by #12:

    “In the event the big three and Richardson are off the board, I would probably look to move down in order to find a place where it’s realistic to draft this group: Doug Martin, Mychal Kendricks, Vinny Curry. And if I think that’s a realistic scenario, I’m ringing up Mario Williams’ agent next week.”

    Count me in with this scenario — except I’d try to get Cousins in there someplace (maybe if either Martin or Kendricks was gone).

    But, before I’d trade down, I’d call Mike Shanahan and offer him our pick at #12 for the Redskins 2012 2nd round pick (37th overall pick), 2012 3rd round pick (70th overall), and their 2013 first round pick. I’d tell Shanahan that this would give him the chance to offer the Rams two 2012 first round picks (#6 & #12) for the rights to RG3 which should better the offer that Cleveland might make (#4 & #22). For the Seahawks, this would give us two more picks this year and an extra 2013 first rounder (even if it turns out to be a late first rounder) to use in the Barkley sweepstakes.

  30. Hawkspur says:

    The problem here, Phil, is that the deal needs to be done before the number 2 pick has been taken. They need to commit to this scenario before the draft if they’re going to get it done. If the FO want to see if one of their guys for #12 is available to them that deal can’t be made. Personally it sounds like a good deal that you propose though.

  31. Phil says:

    Hawkspur – When I said “before I’d trade down”, I meant that I’d call Shanahan today (or ASAP). The Rams have said they want to trade the #2 pick before the draft, so the Seahawks front office better get on the phone!

    Imagine re-signing Red, picking up Mario Williams in free agency, picking Martin & Kendricks in the second round, and still having the chance to go BPA with our two third round picks!

  32. Hawkspur says:

    Understood. I think that’d be a great deal. The Redskins may well be up for it now that it looks like Manning ain’t keen.
    As you say, you may then have a shot at Martin, Kendricks & maybe Irvin, Dwight Jones, Ronnell Lewis etc. I’m sure it’d be an option if they decide to sign Mario Williams.

    Colour me keen.

  33. Hawkspur says:

    Osweiler would be nice too, if we have an extra 2nd or 3rd.

  34. Phil says:

    Let’s look at this scenario more closely. http://www.rantsports.com/mock-draft/2012/03/07/2012-nfl-mock-draft-7-rounds-3-0/
    This mock has the Redskins offering the following to the Rams in exchange for the #2 pick overall (presumed to be the rights to RG3).
    (1) 2012 #1 (6th overall)
    (2) 2012 #2 (37th overall)
    (3) 2012 #3 (70th overall)
    (4) 2013 #1

    Instead, the Redskins could offer items (2), (3), and (4) to the Seahawks in exchange for the Seahawks 2012 #1 (12th overall).

    Then, the Redskins could offer their 2012 #1 (6th overall) plus the 2012 #1 from the Seahawks (12th overall) — that is, two 2012 #1s — to the Rams, bettering Cleveland’s potential offer of two 2012 #1s (the 4th and 22nd overalls). In other words, the Redskins could offer a better deal to the Rams by getting the Seahawks involved, too. And, the “cost” to them in terms of what they would be giving up is the same.

    Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

  35. Smeghead says:

    I would love that scenario….

  36. woofu says:

    Holmgren won’t give the Rams what they want. Snyder may have to.

    Keuchly’s forte is tackling and pass coverage. Whoever needs that is going to get a very good player.

  37. Jarhead says:

    Yeah Chris Ransom is clueless. A few weeks ago he was dead set determined that the Seahawks were going to sign Matt Flynn. If he even has the idea that Foles is on Seattle’s board, wow get a clue, friend. And more Cousins talk? Oy… Well hopefully someone just overdrafts him and takes him in the second round or the Seahawks do as Rob inferred and don’t look QB until after round 4 so we never have to hear about Average Man again. I agree with all these players not being on Seattle’s board. We have established well who fits in to personality and scheme for Seattle, and these guys are just not what’s happening this year. A speedy end, a forceful backer and a power runner are the high marks, somehow I think Seattle will get their guys

  38. Misfit74 says:

    More and more pundits, such as Mayock, are stating that Trent Richardson is ‘a top-10 talent’ but not a ‘top-10 pick’. Nothing really new here, but it does confirm some hope about Richardson falling to #12. That would be a coup, but I also suspect that with Lynch re-signed we’d pass on him and get a Doug Martin in 2 or Turbin in 3 or 4 and draft another position in 1. Fun to dream of the BeastRich backfield.

  39. Rob says:

    Ideal situation that remains realistic? Upshaw and Richardson dropping out of the top ten. You’re guaranteed to get one player. As long as the pass rush can be addressed in another way… Richardson/Lynch in the backfield would be something else.

  40. Stuart says:

    That would be somekind of a dynamic duo if that happens Rob. The mock I listed up above was good reading but the “Hawks” choices were not very solid, it seems no national mocks ever are. That is another reason that this is my favorite site and enjoy coming here daily to see the writeups AND hear the local perspective!

    Regarding Trent Richardson, that mock had TR going 6th to the Rams who traded with Washington. The Rams RB has 7 straight 1000 yard season but is 30 so it makes sense. Also the Rams new HC apparently likes to use two back sets where he could play both of them together. That would be a great problem to have at 12, choosing with both Upshaw and Richardson on the board. What if Coples was there too? Would that even matter?

  41. Colin says:

    Brian Billick just released his top 100 draft picks of 2012 on FOX sports.com. Upshaw came in at 9th and Richardson was 5th (?). Exciting times lay ahead.

  42. Doug says:

    Love your thinking Phil, then we could also have 2 #2’s to grab Barkley next year.

    Trouble with it all is that it all makes ways too much sense!

  43. Doug says:

    I mean 2 #1’s

  44. Chris from Bolivia says:

    Rob,

    Two free agency questions to think about which I would like your opinion on.

    So Manning may actually be interested in the Broncos, and perhaps it could be a good fit, with that good, good run game. The defense obviously did well last year as well, and the WR group is not too shabby. Our chances seem slimmer now that Manning doesn’t seem to even want to visit Seattle. Preferably, I’d like the following scenario:

    You said we could pick up the “odd guy out” and that would be Tebow. Is Tebow a PG type of QB? Is there anybody else better at those roll-outs and throwing on the move? Is he a PC type of player? Everything I know about him screams YES, but then again, we didn’t draft him. He definitely compete! He looks like a Jackson with a lot more potential, grittyness, and leadership.

    My second FA question is about Jacobs. Why not pick him up to back-up Lynch? He has always been a favorite of mine, but he is more effective as a #2 back, though he might want to get paid. What do you think?

    Thanks!

  45. Rob says:

    What if Barkley is available to the Seahawks anyway? This is the problem with planning too far in advance. You could end up with a pick much lower than #12 in a year’s time.

    Chris – I don’t believe Seattle were ever interested in Peyton Manning, as noted in my piece earlier in the week. For a team supposedly coming out, “Checkbook blazing”, it’s certainly gone very quiet. I maintain that all along they’ve had an ‘anywhere but Arizona’ approach and have tried to start a market beyond what the Cardinals can afford.

    Personally, I don’t want Tebow in Seattle. A nice story last season, but I just cannot see him being a long term starter in the league. But who knows – maybe the Seahawks think differently? Jacobs for me has lost most of his effectiveness and will end up becoming TJ Duckett this year. There’s going to be a lot of value for Seattle in the first three rounds to get a quality back to double-head with Lynch as the Seahawks continue to build around the run.

  46. peter says:

    I’m confused by the idea that if Cleveland doesn’t give up a ton of picks for RGIII then Washington must.

    Why couldn’t it be that Cleveland says thanks but no thanks, and Washington says sounds good, but we’ll go Tannehill in the 6 spot, and Miami bungles the Manning situation and takes Flynn as a consolation, and then the battle changes where Jacksonville could simply say…”Well St. Louis, we heard your offer but, we’ll trade firsts and give up a 2nd instead of a ransom, since…your hand got played out,”

    I’m rambling but “why,” a bidding war, It’s not like St Louis with a number one overall QB is in a great position to be fooling around, they can’t take RGIII with out having to trade Bradford and his prohibitive contract for next to nothing.

    Sorry, but after seeing mocks particulary from Rams fans, wherein they net themselves up to five picks, it dawned on me that all the other FO’s could just mess up the Rams overall plans.

  47. peter says:

    A per Tebow in Seattle, good lord, (pun intended perhaps) that guy is Terrible. And I unfortunately live an hour north of Denver and then fans out here are so freaking far out of their minds about his ability it is ridiculous. Billboards for John Fox to start him, Radio call-in lunatics getting in tantrums when a sports broadcaster or another caller even remotely says he might not be the answer at QB, yeesh I do not wish that on my hometown….And it doesn’t hurt that he can’t throw the ball without looking like a high school shot put athlete…there is that.

  48. David says:

    What about Dwight Freeney to play the Leo? What do you think Rob?

  49. Rob says:

    It would depend on price I guess. If the Colts cut him and he’s available for a low deal, you consider it. For around $16m, a draft pick and at his age – I pass.

  50. PatrickH says:

    I have to say, going to Denver makes perfect sense for Peyton Manning. The Broncos have a strong defense – kept games close so that even Tebow could succeed. They have good OL and some talents at WR and RB positions. The Broncos are also in the weakest division in the NFL, and they have about $43 million cap room.

  51. woofu says:

    Peter,

    Reportedly Shermur felt equally impressed with Tannehill as RG3. I suspect they could get him at #4 by staying pat. If the Skins are suddenly forced to stare at RG3 or bust they will panic a bit is the assumption.

    Fun times ahead, Colts just dumped Clark and Addai etal.

  52. Jarhead says:

    Now Rob, as I firmly believe, and have said before, Barkley will likely go number 1 overall next year. He had established himself as the clear number 2 QB before his decision to return. I don’t think that would’ve changed between then and now had he been coming out. Andrew Luck didn’t hurt his stock, nor did Peyton Mannning when they returned so it’s not unheard for a QB to only further cement his status as the clear cut number 1. Logan Thomas and Tyler Wilson are both losing serious weapons and will not benefit from lack of defensive competition as Barkley will. The Trojans get the Ducks in LA and if they can get past the Huskies in Seattle- and likely again in the conference title game- Barkley can establish himself as ‘The Man’. He obviously doesn’t have the athletic potential that Griffin or Luck have, but I believe he is the most savvy, smart, technically impecible QB that will arrive since Tom Brady. Barkley is and has been my- well many of our- guy for a while, and I definitely feel the Hawks should posture themselves ASAP to have the bullets to nab him up next year. He will begin a new era for this club, but I don’t think he will be available via convential means and natural draft selection.

  53. Rob says:

    We’ll see… a lot can happen. I’d take Barkley #1 overall, some teams would and some won’t. Four year starters tend to see their stock take a hit more often than not, and he’ll do well to maintain his momentum from 2011. People expect now, the spotlight will be on USC again. And let’s not forget, Barkley is technically excellent but he’s not the same athlete as Luck, Griffin, Newton, Gabbert, Locker – even Bradford. There are three obvious round one candidates IMO – Logan Tomas, Matt Barkley and Tyler Wilson. We will surely see others emerge too. So it’s no lock Barkley goes #1 next year, even if I rate the guy extremely highly.

  54. Phil says:

    Rob – it sounds like you really rate Barkley highly, but you’re hoping that his 2012 performance falls so that the Seahawks can grab him before some other team does. Sorry, but this doesn’t seem like much of a strategy to me.

    If the Seahawks want to improve their chances of getting him next year, they should think about what they can do now to potentially move up in next year’s draft. After seeing what the Redskins gave up to move from #6 to #2 this year, what do you think it might cost us to make a similar move next year? If our strategy is going to involve packaging our 2013 first round picks with first round picks in 2014 and/or 2015, then we have to be sure that this year’s draft and free agent signings take care of any glaring weaknesses because we won’t be able to address them using the first round picks in upcoming years.

    This is a long winded way of me saying that the lack of a persistent pass rush is a glaring weakness and I don’t see that there is a high probability that we will be able to address it this year at #12. Sure, Upshaw may be there and while I think he would be an upgrade, I don’t think he’s a future pro bowler.

  55. Rob says:

    It’s not a strategy, rather an expectation. I think people will expect too much of Barkley as a four-year starter – the spotlight will be on USC again. Every mistake he makes will be scrutinized, every loss suffered will be blamed on the QB. The Trojans had a tremendous 2011 season and despite the hype, it’ll be tough to match. Everyone knows Barkley will declare so he will get more attention. And while I love his technical qualities, he’s not the incredible athlete that Luck, Griffin, Newton and Gabbert were, he’s not even Sam Bradford. Matt Stafford had a huge arm. He’s most comparable IMO to Matt Ryan, who was in a draft class on his own but for Joe Flacco. Barkley will compete with more than that and may suffer. Plus we’re at a stage now where a lot of teams have made investments at QB and there may be less demand. We’ll see. But it’s not hoping Barkley fails and is therefore available, it’s more about the realities of the process.