Would you consider drafting Todd Gurley in the first round?

All the rumor and conjecture over Marshawn Lynch’s future in Seattle will continue for another week at least:

For what seems like the fifth consecutive Sunday, the gameday media will be filled with talk about Lynch and the Seahawks. At least this time it’ll come from the horses mouth. Who knows what he’ll say, or what Michael Robinson will ask? Even something as simple as, “do you want to play for the Seahawks next year” would provoke an intriguing response.

Whatever your opinion is on this story, there’s at least some realistic chance Lynch won’t return in 2015 — forcing the Seahawks to bring in another running back. I think that’s fair to say. I appreciate the role of Robert Turbin as the #2 back but wouldn’t expect him to be used as the new #1. Christine Michael has struggled to earn playing time.

If Lynch goes, they’re probably going to add a running back in the draft.

Indiana’s Tevin Coleman is seriously underrated. We all know about Melvin Gordon. If the Seahawks are willing to entertain an early round pick at the position, they’re two names to consider.

But what about Todd Gurley?

After serving a short NCAA suspension this season, Gurley returned for Georgia only to tear an ACL in his comeback game. At one time he was being tipped to be a likely top-15 pick. Now you have to wonder where he’ll be drafted. The seriousness of the injury, the nature of the position and his possible inability to work out before the draft will be concerning. Any running back expected to go early needs to be healthy, not carrying too many miles on the clock and they need to look good at the combine.

The team that drafts Gurley will be taking a major punt if they use an early pick. Can he return to play as a rookie? How effective will he be? Can he avoid future injuries?

A good team picking in the late first might consider it — especially a team that can play the patient game. Cost-wise it’s no gamble at all. Teddy Bridgewater, the final pick in round one this year, doesn’t earn more than $2m until the final year of his deal. His cap hit in 2014 is just $1.2m. Stashing Gurley for the long haul wouldn’t be a problem.

I fully expect Gurley to be a first round pick. The New England Patriots were willing to draft Dominique Easley at #30 this year coming off an ACL injury. Everyone expected he’d go in the middle rounds. In the end he was too good. The Pats took a chance on talent. Sure — he worked out pre-draft in a light pro-day. It’s unclear whether Gurley will be able to do the same. But the point remains — if Easley can go in the first round coming off an ACL, so can Todd Gurley.

If the Seahawks make the playoffs and pick anywhere between #26-32, would they consider it? Would you?

On the one hand it’d be an opportunity to draft a player who would normally be out of reach. Gurley is a phenomenal talent — capable of getting the tough yards up the middle due to his size, while also providing unique home-run-hitting ability for a 230lbs back. He makes plays in the passing game and he’s capable of taking a kick-off return to the house. He’s an incredible player.

Alternatively, there’s no guarantee Gurley will be as effective post-recovery. His size could be a negative — putting strain on the body and encouraging further injuries. Particularly if he rushes back to hold a pro-day. He’s already missed time with ankle and hip injuries. Can you trust him to stay healthy?

It really comes down to how much you rate his potential. If you think he can be the next big thing at running back — an average cap hit of around $1.2-2m is probably worth the risk over four years. Any player can get injured. When you’re picking late in the first round, it’s not like you’re passing on a top-ten talent to take the gamble. If you don’t trust him, well, it’s an easy decision.

Even if the Seahawks keep Marshawn Lynch in 2015 they could still draft Gurley and red-shirt him as the heir apparent. Whether he features next year or not, at least you’d be replacing your best offensive player with a prospect who at least has the potential to pick up the slack.

Or maybe spending a high pick on a running back would open up old wounds with Lynch? Unless of course you hand him a decent pay-rise in the off-season.

There are other things to consider too. If Seattle is able to make some choice additions in free agency (improve the defensive line depth, add a big target for Russell Wilson) this becomes a more attractive proposition. If they’re relatively inactive in free agency and concentrate on extending the contracts of Wilson and Bobby Wagner, this might be considered something of a luxury depending on the other options available. Just yesterday we discussed Texas defensive tackle Malcom Brown — the best 2015 eligible prospect nobody talks about.

The Seahawks need to eventually replace Lynch with another effective runner. They have their point guard quarterback, but the physical style of the offense also requires a top class running back. Any player you draft late in the first is going to carry a degree of risk — there’s unlikely to be a better overall talent available. The worst case scenario is it’s another wasted first round pick. The best case scenario is you just solved the dilemma on how to move on from Beast Mode and possibly added a generational talent to your roster.

The injury could be a gift for a team picking late in the first if he regains his best form. Admittedly it’s a big ‘if’.

Let me know what you think. Would you consider drafting him in the first round?


  1. kevin mullen

    Nope. *See Marcus Lattimore.

    I’d rather have a healthy body that can come in and make an impact immediately over a redshirt player with my 1st pick (wherever that may be).

    It can be DT, DE, OLB, OL, TE, and/or WR (not in any order). Personally, I think we can compliment a lack of run game with a dynamic short passing game, a RB that can catch passes ala Forte, Pierre Thomas, Bradshaw, etc. There’s ways to move the ball in our system if we need a 3-5yd gain without actually running it. Hell, our 2nd best rusher is our QB. The read-option can still make an impact.

    Would I rather have Lynch? Of course, I think we can afford him next year since we traded away Harvin. But would I rather over-draft a guy with a blown ACL in November of 2014? No.

    • Rob Staton

      A note on the Lattimore comparison. Marcus Lattimore tore his ACL, PCL, and MCL and dislocated his knee. It’s without doubt the most shocking injury I’ve witnessed watching sport. The fact he didn’t retire immediately is a credit to the player that he actually fought back. Gurley has a much more standard ACL tear which is much easier to repair. Adrian Peterson had a recent ACL tear, plus Chris Clemons. Both made swift and productive comebacks.

      • kevin mullen

        I get that and fully understand that Gurley did’t suffer a “Varsity Blues” type knee explosion but a big dude with a bum knee usually means more risk than reward.

        Here’s a list of ACL injuries for 2013 :


        To look at this list and see how many of these guys are back to their former self is pretty defeating. I could count maybe 3 to 5 that are really playing back to starter quality. Too much risk for a 1st round pick. Sorry Rob, I have to disagree with your argument, not worth it.

        • John_S

          That list isn’t necessarily a whos-who of NFL stars, however of the players on that list of any significance, they are performing well.

          Also, you have to remember that it usually takes players 2 years to fully recover from an ACL injury. Adrian Peterson is a freak of nature and it skews peoples perception on how long it should take for a player to return back to form.

          If Gurley is the best player on the board when the Seahawks make their pick then I say go ahead and take him and redshirt him.

          Jeremy Maclin – 71 rec 1088 yds 9td
          Maurkice Pouncey – moved to RG and playing at Pro Bowl Level
          Henry Melton – 5 sacks – 2.5 off career high
          Brian Hoyer – #’s similar to previous year
          Reggie Wayne – 54 catches on 95 targets 636 yards 2 td
          Geno Atkins – still rounding in to form
          Rob Gronk – 65 catches – 910 yards – 9 tds
          Tyrann Matheiu – still rounding in to form
          Von Miller – 11.5 sacks

          • kevin mullen

            So Gurley probably wouldn’t be even on the field until 2016, that’s even if he’s back to form. That’s too long for ROI having to use a 1st round pick. If there’s one thing we’ve learned from PC/JS is that they love value and guys that tilt the field. Knowing Gurley has a blown ACL doesn’t represent value for a 1st round candidate. Knowing that a blown ACL for a RB a year prior doesn’t necessarily say he’s gonna tilt the field once he’s back. Look at RG3 this year: unbelievable talent coming into the league, blows his knee, now is scared to death of getting hit. An ACL tear is not only physically tolling, but mentally too.

            I think there’s this rush to find a replacement for Lynch prematurely, the guy is 28 going to be 29 next year, his cap number isn’t that ridiculous and would be in line as a top3 RB in terms of pay. Exactly where his performance matches the price tag. We can use a 1st round pick in other areas that’s not a RB who won’t even play til 2016. Shit, I’d rather we trade up for a healthy RB if JS was dead set on drafting a RB in 1st round.

          • Rob Staton

            ACL injuries used to be a career death sentence — not any more. Science has moved on. That list is a good example of how times have changed.

          • Turp

            Nice list John. Makes me wish we had been able to sign Melton. He’s my favorite 3tech after Geno Atkins.

        • Michael M.

          I think the real problem is simply the positional value. The comparison to Easley is a poor one because of the difference in position. Form regained or not, he’s still a running back entering a passing league that has largely decided to stop taking even healthy RB’s in the 1st round. Just take a look at the RB’s that have racked up more rushing yards than Beast Mode so far this season:

          1. DeMarco Murray – 3rd rounder
          2. Le’Veon Bell – 2nd rounder
          3. LeSean McCoy – 2nd rounder
          4. Justin Forsett – 7th rounder

          Sure, maybe none of those guys is Marshawn Lynch, himself the 12th overall pick in a draft that included Adrian Peterson, but the point is you don’t need a generational talent to have an effective running game. Maybe Gurley would have been a 1st rounder before the injury, but even that was not a sure thing. I have a hard time seeing it happen now.

          • Michael M.

            To further illustrate my point, I crunched a few nubmers:

            Since the Oakland Raiders went on the clock with the first pick in the 2007 NFL draft (the year Marshawn’s pro career started) there have been a total of 140 running backs (not including FBs) selected. Of those 140 selections (+1 UDFA in Arian Foster), 16 of them have earned a selection to the Probowl. Only 6 of those 16 Probowlers, were drafted in the 1st round. So that means that Since 2007, 62% of the Probowl RB’s were found OUTSIDE of the 1st round. That is a huge number when compared to some of the other positons:

            QB – 43%
            LB – 33%
            CB – 36%
            OT – 29%
            DT – 29%

          • Rob Staton

            We can say it’s a passing league, but the Seahawks aren’t a passing team. They’ve made the run their identity. Other teams with high octane passing games might feel like they can just plug guys in. Seattle are different. And it’s probably why aside from the Lynch trade they’ve spent second and fourth round picks on the position too.

            • Michael M.

              2nd and 4th. Not first. And not on a guy coming off knee surgery.

    • Volume 12

      You have to seriously wonder though how much longer the read option will be affective with more and more elite athletes on the defensive side of the ball I mean RW will always be effective scrambling because he has this rare ability to turn on a dime and make guys miss. But having a short passing game as your running game is not the same. It doesn’t impose a will on the defense, it doesn’t wear guys down and it ain’t physical at all. It just isn’t Seahawks football. Have to agree with rob and say Gurley could be a generational/field tilting type back. Either way I think Seattle will find they’re guy just like last year when they brought Terrance West into the vmac and I’d say dude is pretty damn good. Gotta remember Seattle will go against the grain when it comes to the draft.

  2. Colin

    No, I wouldn’t spend a R1 pick on RB. It’s just simply unnecessary. I’d rather take 2 backs late in the draft and attempt a RBBC style of play like Carroll implemented at USC. This team needs to elevate the passing game and make it a bit more functional. Right now they are relying on scheme and Russell Wilson’s improvisation to beat opponents through the air. No one is afraid of getting beat deep by this group. They need a couple of targets on the outside, and frankly they could stand to draft another guard, as I can’t see them re-upping with James Carpenter.

    • Rob Staton

      Regarding whether it’s necessary — I would argue Marshawn Lynch has been integral to Seattle’s progression into a Super Bowl champion. He was the #12 overall pick in 2007. It’s necessary if you can find the right guy.

      Also a note on Carroll & USC — he regularly convinced 4/5-star recruits to come and compete for carries at RB. It’s not like he brought in 2/3 star guys and ran a basic committee. I’m not sure the comparison works because the guys Carroll fielded at RB were elite difference makers coming into college. It doesn’t mean you can’t find elite athletes or productive running backs later on — but it’s harder than simply going out and recruiting the best of the best.

      • Colin

        To your first part I disagree because how many guys out there are like Lynch? Practically none. There just aren’t many backs coming out of college who can withstand the pounding Marshawn can. Pick a back out of college in recent years and he’s either ineffective or can’t stay healthy. There are very, very few high selection running backs worth their salt. It just doesn’t strike me as an effective use of draft resources.

        As to #2, yeah you are right. Carroll did get elite talents to fill his stable and the Seahawks simply won’t have that luxury- which tails into my point about re-structuring the offense. Being run first is awesome; being reliant upon it because you don’t have any decent pass catchers (or blockers) is entirely another. Russell Wilson is set to make a massive amount of money. We must protect it and aid it.

        • Phil

          Colin — right on! The chances of drafting a RB who is going to “replace” Marshawn are next to zero. I hope the Seahawks spend their draft capital where it has the greatest chance of making an immediate positive impact on the team. I think WR is the way to go — and I think too much emphasis is being placed on the need for a “big” WR. Instead, I’d look for guys who have the ability to gain separation, who can cut off their routes and improvise, and who will contest for the ball.

          • Rob Staton

            Let’s not mistake replacing Lynch with an equally effective running back and replacing Lynch with an exact replica. It’s not about finding Lynch 2.0 as much as it’s finding someone who can figurehead the running attack, even if they bring a different running style.

  3. Vin

    If the Hawks do end up picking in that 26-32 range, then I guess I wouldn’t be too opposed to drafting Gurley there. Chances are that whoever they draft there probably makes no impact anyway, which really bugs me. Of all the 1st & 2nd rnd picks, ET & Wags are their best gets, followed by Okung and Irvin. Jury’s still out on Carp, lost our @$$ on the Harvin trade. Still don’t know what to make of CM. At least Britt and PR are playing, even if they’re taking their lumps.

  4. JeffC

    Hindsight 20-20 pick: The hawks drafted Joel Bitonio and Martavis Bryant in 2014, then yes, bring on “the project” Gurley. We love projects since we have so few needs.

    The reality pick: They picked Prich and the matador Justin Britt. Too many needs, created by their overcreativity. They need to make this first round pick start and have an impact. And as you’ve stated so many times and I totally agree with you, RW needs weapons. So “no” for me on Gurley. Second round? You bet. But if he lasts all the way to the 64th pick (bwahaha) then that’s a red flag that his injury is worse than advertised.

    • JeffC

      One caveat: If Gurley were the next Adrian Peterson, then you pick him without hesitation.

    • mrpeapants

      the matador justin britt love it

  5. Mark

    I’m concerned they may not have taken full advantage of Christine Michael’s potential. We never really hear explicitly why he is behind Turbin. We’re just left to make a guess as to why. I would cringe if he got traded or let go in FA only to see him break out with a new team.

    • JeffC

      Every time he celebrates a 5 yard run and showboats, I draw further and further away from the excitement I once had for him.

      • Phil

        Jeff – maybe I’ve missed his showboating. Could it be that maybe he’s excited to have a chance to prove what he’s got?

        • Phil

          CM has 18 carries this year and has averaged 6.2 yards per carry. Why is everyone so quick to throw him under the bus?

          • AlaskaHawk

            It seems like it is the Seahawks that have thrown him under the bus. Why won’t they give him more playing time? They said they were going to use more of a running back by committee approach this year, but 80% of the time it is Marshawn.

            • Phil

              I can understand that right now he is #3 on the RB depth chart. But, I don’t think this means that the FO has given up on him. He has to wait his turn — but I don’t see a need for using high draft pick on another RB to replace Marshawn.

        • JeffC

          He does this over the top celebration whenever he picks up a few yards that kind of justifies that overused phrase “act like you’ve been there before.” It makes you wonder if what they don’t like about him are maturity issues. I know on one of the ESPN radio local programs, it was Danny Oneill who mentioned after the Dallas game (I believe) who said Christine Michael needed to tone it back. There was a turnover before the ball got to him on the play and he said, that Michael’s reaction to “not getting the carry” was not good for the team in a key moment and screamed “it is all about me.”

          I would like to see him get more of Turbin’s carries, regardless. They know what they have with Turbin. He’s no mystery (and he’s a limited role player at best). I agree they don’t completely know what they have with Michael.

  6. CC

    I’d be in the no camp – we seemed to have drafted a few too many projects already. Carp, Irvin, Preach, Michael – so I’d rather see a solid D lineman or tall receiver/TE in the first.

  7. Cysco

    I think you can only draft Gurley if Marshawn is coming back for another year. At that point, he’s a bit of a luxury and you can afford to sit him for most/all of his first season.

    If Lynch isn’t coming back, you have more urgency and need to solve RB by training camp. I seriously doubt the FO will feel comfortable drafting a question mark at RB and give the RB keys to a Turbin/Michael RBBC next year.

    As far as the injury goes, Adrian Peterson and Frank Gore have both suffered ACLs. They both are physical backs and both recovered. Gurley is a lot younger and I imagine he’ll fully recover.

    The big question I would be asking myself is how much better is Gurley than Tevin Coleman (who I’m a big fan of) If both were sitting there, I’d have a hard time taking Gurley with the injury over a health Coleman. Gurley might be the sexy pick, but I think Coleman is going to be a stud.

  8. MichaelH

    I agree with JeffC, I think this front office gets a little over creative with their early round picks. It seems like it’s speed or projects, I just want solid contributors. Both sides of the line need an infusion of talent and depth and we need to go early on both. There’s a part of me that wishes they’d go the free agent route with known commodities, to be honest I don’t trust Cable making these choices (or at least, giving serious input). I understand the wish for both a big receiver and future RB but I’d rather take my chances later in the draft.The lines always take a beating through the year, I think the Seahawks are a little too comfortable with the patch it approach. Unger, Okung and Carpenter have all had their ailments, let’s find the next generation of starters.

    • AlaskaHawk

      I totally agree with you. I really expected our offensive line to come back in superbowl form this season. Instead we went back to square one. There are reasons for that including a lot of injuries. But we can’t have season after season of starting back at zero. Plus Wilson is bound to get injured behind the patchwork line, probably right after he signs his big contact like Carson Palmer did.

      • Rob Staton

        Not this again.

        I’m almost at the point where I want the NFL to ban offensive lines so we don’t have to keep going back to this. Watch the Dallas O-line versus Washington and Philly. People have unrealistic expectations of what an offensive line actually does on a Sunday.

        • mrpeapants

          wwhat do u expect rob? we see our franchise super bowl winning qb take a pounding almost every game. its bad! especially britt(the matdor lol). so i think thats a pretty natural reaction. think of it this way, if rw is hurt how much chance do we have? yes we have other needs too but you cant win games in this league w/o a franchise qb go hawks

          • Rob Staton

            I feel like we’ve been over this subject so many times.

            For starters, he takes pretty much the same pounding most QB’s take not named Brady or Manning. I think we’d all agree Dallas has the best O-line in the league. Go watch them against the Skins, Cardinals and Philly. That’s the best line in the league. Look at the pressure they gave up. Seattle has only given up six more sacks than Dallas and they’ve faced some excellent pass rushers this year. San Francisco has given up seven more sacks than Seattle.

            Then you throw in the fact Seattle creates chaos DELIBERATELY. Carroll is on record as saying he wants to be the best scrambling team in the league. When an offensive line doesn’t know where they need to create the pocket because Wilson is moving around, it’s nearly impossible to create this perfect scenario everyone hopes for. Let’s say Okung anticipates the right bootleg but the other team contains the edge perfectly. So Wilson sits. Okung takes a narrow stance and tries to ride out the DE, potentially right into Wilson. Or RW checks to the left and suddenly he’s running outside Okung who is taking up a running lane. Seattle wants to create these situations because it negates the height issue and it accentuates Wilson’s brilliance out of the pocket. But it also means we risk sacks more than the pure passing teams. Whenever Wilson runs he’s a threat to break off the Moeaki pass play for +60 or he’s a threat to be sacked. Unless you want to abandon this system, cut Wilson and sign a statue style QB with a quick release, you aren’t going to get the situation you hope for.

            I’m surprised this continues to be a talking point, especially when Seattle went 13-3 last year and won a title starting McQuistan and Bowie at tackle for a large portion of the year. This year is a massive improvement on that. The run blocking continues to be exceptional. This is what Seattle wants. We know that by now. And we’ve also spent so much stock on the O-line already. You can’t just keep throwing picks at this.

            • mrpeapants

              Seattle has only given up six more sacks than Dallas. San Francisco has given up seven more sacks. I never would have guessed that. although that can be a little misleading considering that rw is a magician.

              Your points are well taken Rob. I just don’t see a better oline as a bad thing. do we need to cut everyone and just start over? no. could we upgrade some of the positions on it? yes
              would upgrading the line help the passing game, run game and red zone issues? yes
              It wouldn’t solve everything but it would help everything. go hawks

              • Rob Staton

                If you offered me a better offensive line, I’d take it. But there are two issues at play for me. One, I don’t see who you could draft in round one who would start. I don’t see any reason to move on from Okung on $7m for 2015 and Britt is a rookie second rounder. I don’t like the idea of drafting a first round guard given La’el Collins will be long gone and that’s really the only option. So I don’t really see a player who you place in there as a starter.

                Secondly, I think there are more pressing concerns. We can win with this line. I think we’ll be an even better team with an improved pass rush or a big target for Wilson. And if Lynch goes, RB has to be a consideration too.

                • peter

                  I think continuity, though anecdotally informed opinion by myself and others, seems to be the greatest path to success on the o line. If the Seahawks could scale a season or hell a few games in a row with the same line I think a lot of the problems would be relieved. plus draft capital…unger is a 2, Carp and Okung are 1’s, Britt is a 2….how many more times do we do this to get it right? Plus I think Britt will be greatly improved next year and we’re on to backups we can live with, which I think is Cable’s way anyways

                  • Rob Staton

                    Continuity is the key to success Peter. You are spot on. Seattle has spent their picks on the OL. Continuity is now the key.

                  • JeffC

                    Hopefully when Unger comes back we’ll see less of the false start type of penalties and boneheaded unforced penalties that put RW into long yardage situations. Perhaps after playing with Lewis it gets them to come together better and execute better when Unger is in their making the line calls.

  9. Michael (CLT)

    Not even healthy. I’d rather have Chubb.

    Gurley, in my mind, is like Lagerette Blount. Upright big guy who will be average in the NFL. If he loses any speed, he is undraftable.

    I just don’t trust Georgia players in the NFL. I want to find the next CJ Johnson. Pissed off for greatness. Compact player with decent measurables, tough as hell, and runs through contact for big plays. Jay Ajayai.

    • Ben2

      The knock on AP coming out was that his running style was too upright & people questioned his ability to stay healthy.

    • Volume 12

      Jay ajayi is almost the same size as Gurley.

      • Michael (CLT)

        Watch how they run. Ajayi runs with his pads low, using Marshawn feet spacing, with great vision. Gurley runs upright with skinny legs, great in space, and iffy between the tackles.

        • Rob Staton

          Skinny legs?

          • Michael (CLT)

            Yeah. That’s poor analysis on my part.

            But watch the run where Gurley gets hurt. He simply plants wrong. He is not built for NFL punishment, in my opinion… Not humble.

  10. Michael (CLT)

    I think we ought to look hard at Duke Johnson as well. He runs a lot like Gore. Tough as hell. Decent measurables. Great after contact.

    I am less interested in 40 speed and pretty moves in space.

    I am interested in great vision, love of the game, toughness, and yards after contact.

    I would be wise to do some research 🙂

  11. Jon O

    It is easy to pile on Gurley why he is out, but ever since he stepped on campus in Athens, he has been a “Man among Boys.” It isn’t easy living in the shadows of greats like Hershal Walker, but he made it look easy.

    I don’t expect Marshawn back next year 1)extra time staff tends to his needs (ie extra time off, helping him avoid media throughout the season , and make excuses for him skipping the White House and 2) A scouting staff with greater knowledge to the real wear and tear to Marshawn’s body.

    Gurley’s size, strength, speed and ability to break tackles make him stand out compared to any back to come out since AP. While this draft potentially features depth not seen in years (Gordon, Gurley, Ajayi, Johnson, Yeldon, Cobb, Coleman, Langford and Abdullah) his rare abilities,intangibles coming back from an injury and most importantly his lack of fear of being on a big stage and stepping in the shadows of a legend (possibly Lynch) makes him an outstanding pick.

    I don’t know that I agree he will go in round 1 after the injury and RB depth, but I would make the case of trading the high 4 we get from the Jets along with 2nd round pick for a pick at the top of round 2 (after we draft Bud Dupree of course).

    Go Hawks, my wife and I will be rooting them in Philly on Sunday!

  12. Johnny

    If Lynch is not with the Seahawks in 2015, then I think the FO has a massive decision to make, both in terms of draft needs and creating a new identity for the offense. While I’m all for PC/JS drafting a RB in the first round, everyone must remember the massive amount of money RW is about to rake in. While the offensive philosophy need not shift from run-first to a pass-dominant identity, I think it’s time that we unleash the reins off of Russell and let him earn that massive contract. Draft/acquire some big targets either through the draft or free agency and let’s actually strike fear in our opponents’ collective hearts through the air. Too long has Wilson been labeled a “game manager” because of our run-first mentality. I am 100% certain that if Seattle had Indy’s receiving corps, Russell’s numbers would skyrocket.

    Again, I must stress that I’m not saying that we need to switch the offense to an “Air Raid” type philosophy. I just think that if Lynch leaves (or even if he returns), more emphasis needs to be placed on the passing game. Even if Lynch returns next season, he won’t be around forever. We need Russell to start developing more as a pocket passer and threatening teams through the air, as well as the ground.

  13. Amar

    If Lynch leaves or is let go , which I hope doesn’t happen, then would we consider Adrian Peterson? He is almost a certainty to be released by the Vikings (might have happened even before he got in his mess due to his ballooning cap number). I know there are moral issues with signing AP but I am sure somebody is going to give him a chance.

    His salary would be about the same as Lynch for next year and he’d be on a “prove it” deal.

    Again, I hope it never comes to that and I hope all parties involved work the issues out.

    • Cysco

      I don’t see anyone outbidding Dallas for Peterson.

      Also if the Hawks are willing to give that kind of money to AP, they should be more than willing to give that money to Lynch. The issue appears to be that the Hawks don’t want to spend that kind of money on RB. They appear to want to get younger at the position.

      • Ben2

        Dallas already has a pretty good running back. I don’t see how they can spend premium $$ on 2 tailbacks…

        • Ghost Mutt

          Murray’s out of contract in the off=season though. They need to pay Dez and their cap isn’t great, maybe if Demarco asks for too much money they get AP in on a lesser deal.

        • Cysco

          Dallas has to pick to pay Murray or Bryant. Bryant will win. Murray will be gone. Jerry Jones is in love with AP. Always has been. AP will be cheaper than Murray. He won’t be able to resist pairing up Dez, Romo and AP. Down here in Dallas it’s pretty well accepted that AP will be a Cowboy next year.

          This is also why the team is having no problem running Murray into the ground. Most down here believe the Cowboys have already made up their minds and don’t mind risking Murray’s future since that future won’t be with Dallas

  14. peter

    I like the idea from a conversation piece but from a tired fan stand point its getting to be a long time since our early picks have made significant contributions and I for one would love to see Seattle go DL/DE in the first and second.

    our identity may be running the ball but our real identity is punishing defense. And now with Bane a little older and injured it may be time to look to his replacement plus Williams as well as increasing any pressure from the edge.

    I’m also a bit concerned about the future of the LB’s in this contract year and what the FO’s game plan is going to be for that.

    ultimately I feel that a red shirt from anyone as noted by our early season performances just isn’t worth it. Especially since a great RB like Coleman may be available, maybe, and no one is really going to spell lynch so an offensive philosophy tweak may be in the works either way.

    • franks

      I hear you on the tired fan standpoint but for me, myself, I just wish they’d pick a guy in R1 that theres more consensus on and outfox the fox later.

      I think Gurley can be that guy, a R1 talent that we draft in R1. Give Marshawn a raise and let him play out his contract, and have Gurley and Michael going forward. RB is important in this offense.

      • peter

        Fair points. I like Gurley quit a bit. I like your idea with lynch and a red shirt year for Gurley.

        • Cysco

          IMO you can only draft Gurley if Lynch stays. If he’s gone, you probably should look to grab someone who can contribute right away. You can’t rely on him being ready for the start of the season and the last thing you’d want to do is rush him. So, if Lynch is gone, you need to find a replacement and a RBBC of Turbin/Michael isn’t going to cut it for an entire season.

  15. Barry

    See Trent Richardson. I don’t believe Gurley is over analyzed as Richardson, but is a actual special talent prior to the injury. There are plenty of other fine backs to go with especially if you are the Hawks with two serviceable backs behind Lynch. Second round is the best place for Gurley at this time.

    I the team looks to always bring in talent at the RB position every year to create the competition Pete loves so I wouldn’t be a shock to see them take a RB at any spot in the draft if they like the spot and the player.

  16. Jason

    Some of you need to go back and watch some Gurley tape. We should make that pick and never look back. Dude has the power and vision to run inside, the speed to go outside…and can even take kick returns to the house. Not many backs do that. Frankly, he has been carrying an average Georgia team for the last two years.

    For a Seahawks team and system that is just not the same without Lynch, we should be highly interested if he is there. Not many times is a top-10 talent sitting there at the end of round 1. We have a bounty of picks this draft (with comp picks factored in); we can afford to move back up in certain rounds if the right player is there (meaning DL, WR, etc don’t have to be ignored at the expense of Gurley).

    • JeffC

      If Gurley didn’t have the torn ACL, I might agree with you. This team HAS to hit on that first rounder. The lack of downfield weapons for RW is a crime. It’s a very talented team, but it does have holes. If they do part ways with Lynch, at this point, I’d rather they draft a rb that can contribute immediately, rather than wait. And we’re not certain about Gurley. Trent Richardson was considered by some to be the best back since AP, and look how he’s turned out.

      • JeffC

        Rather than wait for Gurley’s injury to heal, I should say.

  17. AlaskaHawk

    I really don’t see why we would pick an injured running back in the first round when we have so many other needs. Why not pick a healthy defensive tackle, or offensive tackle, or wide receiver with good hands and ability to high point? Just to name a few needs.

    I am also a firm believer that running backs can be found in the third round or later. There will probably only be 3 or 4 running backs chosen in the first two rounds vs the many running backs out there to choose from. Plus we already have two spare running backs and probably will have Marshawn next year. I think we are creating a need where there isn’t one.

    • Rob Staton

      So who are we dropping Alaska for a potential first round offensive tackle? The top-ten tackle from 2010 who is still under contract at a modest $7m next year, or the second round pick from 2014 who they are trying to develop for the long haul?

      • AlaskaHawk

        If that was the scenario I would start them at left guard and move them to left tackle as needed by injury. I like Okung when he is healthy, but that is a big if. Of course if we are talking first round the Seahawks might be able to find a person that can play multiple positions. So I guess I would drop Carpenter.

        • Rob Staton

          But what if they don’t suit left guard? For example, you’d never dream of playing Andrus Peat at left guard. Or Ronnie Stanley IMO. Or Cameron Fleming. So you end up with a left tackle playing left guard and then Okung stays healthy for a full year and continues his good play. You toss him aside because you forced this pick? Or you keep a player out of position?

          What if this all follows the same path as the last tackle they drafted and then switched to left guard? AKA the player you’re willing to drop?

          This team does not need a first round left guard and they don’t need to draft Okung’s replacement in 2015 with a first rounder. Drafting OL in round one shouldn’t even really be a debate. I expect they’ll add depth at some point but even then it could be later round at best.

          • AlaskaHawk

            I agree with you. I really prefer the Seahawks pick a DT first, WR or RB second and third, and Tackle 4th. I agree with you that we don’t need a first round tackle. But we do need 8 offensive linemen for starters and depth. And they should all be quality linemen. I don’t really care how they do it. I just think we need more backups that can fill in as starters. And I don’t trust the line to stay healthy.

  18. seahawks509

    I’d look at Gurley even if Lynch stays. Lynch isn’t going to be here forever and a RB like Gurley doesn’t come around all the time. We can rest Gurley like SF did with Lattimore. Get him ready to take the load the following season with CMike. Turbin probably won’t be around by then. He might get a contract as a main RB like Gerhart. Nothing huge, but something we will probably pass on. Unless there is someone else we really like (WR), I am taking an extremely hard look at Gurley.

  19. dean

    I seem to be higher on Michael than just about anyone so I would pass. I would be lying though if I said I wouldn’t be excited if Seattle did take Gurley. USC as it was mentioned already would stockpile rb’s and let them compete for carries. Wouldn’t shock me to see Gurley on this team.

  20. Nathan

    Is a running back in free agency a viable option?

    Mark Ingram has expressed his desire to test the open market.

    His physical style would suit us.

    • Volume 12

      Wow! This whole ‘get RW multiple big targets,’ ‘lets turn RW loose,’ or ‘we need better o-lineman,’ reeks of misplaced expectations. I’m kinda shocked some people on here seem to forget Seattle’s philosophy and style of play. Is Britt struggling? Yeah, but he’s a Rookie! Give the guy time. You don’t just develop pro-bowl caliber o-lineman overnight. We won a SB with a mediocre to bad o-line. How many SB winners of the recent past have had a dominant on-line? And how many ‘big’ targets do people think RW needs? How many rings do Dez, Brandon Marshall, Calvin, Julio, Fitz, or Vjax have? It seems to me Seattle likes guys who are raw, because for 1. They don’t have many bad habits 2. They like to mold guys into they’re style of play and 3. This locker room is full of superstars or big-time leaders so why draft guys high who think because they’re a high draft pick that Seattle’s system should revolve around them? You need guys who fit not only talent wise, but personality/competitor wise and in the locker room as well. Sorry to vent needed to let off some steam. On to another topic, Rob have you looked at De-Leo Dadi Nicolas? This kid is the definition of the word ‘freak.’

      • Cysco

        well in fairness, we really do need to get Wilson at least one big target, I’m sure PC/JS would be the first to agree.

        The other stuff though, I agree. Offensive line is the last thing we need to be focusing on in the early part of the draft.

        • Volume 12

          I’m not saying that RW doesn’t need a big target because hands down he does. But some people on the site seem to imply that ALL Seattle’s targets should have a specific height requirement or something.

      • peter

        Agreed on a lot of this…its why I want Seattle to draft some DL/DE this year. And by some I honestly want two of each in basically any round they desire to help foster and maintain their dominant defense. Next year they may need to move on from k. Williams, and Bane always a warrior my have lingering issues due to age and size.

        Then who knows what happens with Avril…KJ, or Smith..I know Lb’s…but still part of the front seven.

        I see a lot of sites stating our needs typically as Oline, TE, DL…but honestly I’m fine with Helfelt, Willson, Miller, Moeaki, and can not find, yet, one TE that has the productivity with size that fits Seattle.

        As for the big receiver…that would be great. turns out there are,almost zero in this draft. no hyperbole here. I mean it. Fuchess, DGB, Taylor from Rice are almost literally it at 6′ 4″ and above.

        • Rob Staton

          Issac Blakeney at Duke too — but yeah, the options aren’t great in the draft. Especially compared to other positions.

          • peter

            Thanks for the catch I knew I was missing one! So there it is Four WR’S. Haha…ridiculous honestly

        • Volume 12

          Regarding the lb position you should take a look at Arkansas lb Martell Speight if you can find video or whatever on him. He’s physically imposing, a hard hitter, grew up overcoming multiple tough obstacles and says, I quote… ‘I’ll take that chip on my shoulder wherever I wind up.’ Sounds familiar. I also think he could be had late in the draft. Him and KPL rotating at the Will position would be sweet.

      • Rob Staton

        I have not, but will take a look on your recommendation.

      • JeffC

        I would prefer that every once in awhile, RW doesn’t have to make a big play by buying time scrambling and waiting for someone to get open. It would be really great for him to have one guy who at least creates a physical mismatch down the field that can also snatch high passes out of the air and physically dominates the db on him. I think the red zone inefficiency screams this shortcoming.

        • arias

          I’m not so sure that’s necessarily about guys not getting open. I think Russ just has a tendency to hold the ball longer than any other qb in the league for 3 years running now. Sometimes he’s just shown a lot of hesitancy in getting the ball out right away for whatever reasons, but watching the all 22 it’s not all because his guys aren’t getting open.

    • Cysco

      I suspect the FO wants to get younger/cheaper at RB. Ingram won’t be overly expensive, but a good deal higher than a rookie. The Hawks have more pressing needs for their free agent dollars. I imagine they’ll be looking to spend any money left over after they extend their studs on defensive line.

      • arias

        That might be able do that through the draft though considering the DL talent available there. I would hate it if a year from now we’re reading articles about the best defensive line draft class ever that we also missed out on because we tried get too cute like this year at WR.

    • seahawks509

      Ingram will be too expensive.

      • seahawks509

        And not saying he’s getting a massive deal. A cheap deal is sometimes too expensive for Seattle.

      • arias

        What makes you think a RB salary can be too expensive?

  21. Bailey

    What would it take to trade for Jeremy Hill? That guy can be an every down back and has display his abilities when Bernard went down. I would give turb and a 3rd. round pick for him. This would allow us to go WR and DL in the first two rounds.. just a thought.

    • Rob Staton

      I’m not keen on trading for a RB when the upcoming draft is loaded at the position.

      • JeffC

        Since the draft is loaded, why take the risk with Gurley on the first rounder? I suppose if they got a medical report predraft that showed miraculous healing and he could contribute in 2015, I’d be more enthusiastic about it.

        • seahawks509

          Because a player like Gurley doesn’t come very often, and most definitely doesn’t fall to a team like Seattle very often. There’s a difference between value elsewhere and not being able to pass up on a player. There might be value later in the draft but you don’t pass on Gurley.

        • Rob Staton

          Because in a loaded class, he is the cream of the crop and wouldn’t otherwise be available.

      • Bailey

        I understand the draft is loaded with RB but using a high pick on a back that is still a unsure NFL product over a guy that has already showcased his ability to carry the ball 20+ times a game. It just looks like a better option to trade for a guy like hill than to take another chance on drafting a guy with a high pick.

    • seahawks509

      CIN won’t trade Hill. It’ll take probably a 2nd.

  22. M

    If Lynch leaves (he should retire a Seahawk in a perfect world), they’d definitely have to look at RB earlier than they want to.

    However, I look at this situation the other way…the fact that RB value has evolved the way it is means the probability of obtaining greater relative value further down in the draft is higher at the RB position than any other–so to use a 1st means they would need to see truly extraordinary value.

    Moreover, they need to address DL (pass rush, depth + who knows how Mebane recovers), OL (Carpenter could leave) and, of course, a true number 1 at WR. To get an impact player in those areas, especially DL, WR, will likely require their 1st. Thus, the opportunity cost of a 1st rd RB is going to be even higher. Is Gurley that kind of value? Maybe, but with the injury,the bar gets to be even higher.

    Bottom line, if Lynch leaves, their draft gets exponentially tougher.

  23. Kip Earlywine

    Seattle drafted Christine Michael in the 2nd round, and Michael endured not only an ACL tear, but also a broken leg (separate incidents, too).

    Adrian Peterson had arguably the best season for a RB in NFL history after he tore his ACL.

    I don’t think this injury will move the needle much. It might drop Gurley 10 spots, but it won’t drop him a round.

    Gurley seems more athlete than runner, kind of like Knile Davis. I want to find reasons to talk him down because of this, but I can’t. Reason being, I think he’d be an amazing fit for Tom Cable’s system. Cable’s system creates a ton of cutback opportunities and shines brightest with a RB who can take advantage of LBs coming from bad angles.

    • Rob Staton

      Well said.

    • Kip Earlywine

      Basically, Cable’s system is about creating chaos and finding the RB who thrives in it. Lynch is successful in Seattle not because of “beast mode”, but because he is a very gifted improvisational runner. Lynch’s ability to shed a LB is a boon for sure, but more important is his “drunken master” ability to change direction with balance and step over downed bodies.

      With Cable it’s all about mucking things up by design. Our run offense sees a lot of bodies on the ground, both OL and DL. You don’t have to double team a guy to take him out of a play if you get him on the ground. The result is that instead of having consistently clear lanes, it almost looks like Lynch is running through a battlefield with downed soldiers all around him. In this kind of situation, you might need a RB who has the guts to hurdle over people or improvise on the fly. That’s Lynch to a T.

      I see some of that in Gurley too, and like Lynch he’s extremely hard for LBs to bring down unless they can square him up.

  24. HOUSE

    I have been thinking about this all week and I’ve objectively looked at both yes and no to drafting Gurley.

    After watching the past few games back over, 2 MAJOR needs that I had previously assessed as early draft needs were TE and DT. 2 guys that have stuck out on tape that have greatly improved my thoughts of those positions are Tony Moeaki and Jordan Hill.

    TE: Tony Moeaki has stepped in, after being a free agent for 1/2 the 2014 due to injury and has become a reliable target. Call it veteran saavy, dedication to film or just dumb luck, but the guy has made some nice plays with the chances he’s been given and I look forward to the rest of the reason. I personally think he is HIGHLY a re-sign option and could be a #1 TE for us.

    DT: Losing Mebane sucked plain and simple. Being able to get a guy like Kevin Williams on the cheap was an AMAZING steal in FA. I think that Jordan Hill has made the best of his opportunities and is playing to the vision of why he was drafted. Will J. Hill continue to develop and look solid next to Mebane next season? One would hope.

    I love how this FO has worked the draft and we’ve NAILED the mid-rds. Taking a risk on a EXTREMELY talented Gurley could pay DIVIDENDS and at the least, give us a guy that is fighting for backup minutes on a cheap 4-5 yr deal. I have faith in Hill’s development and Moeaki locking up the TE position… I’m DRAFT Gurley…

  25. Greg haugsven

    If they don’t believe in Michael I’d do it in a second. Running the ball is our identity. You need a beast and Gurley is that.

© 2024 Seahawks Draft Blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑