Well it seems that Shaun and the Hawks may be playing a high stakes game of Texas hold em! I just saw a story on ESPN about The Seahawks are renewing trade talks with the Bills for Henry. The jist of the story is that after Shaun made his comments last week ...the Hawks contacted the Bills about henry and are slated to continue talking this week.The story goes on to say that the hawks may not be to quick to give Shaun long term deal. Is this just a game of who blinks first? or are the Hawks ready to remove the Franny tag from Alexander and trade for Henry? And yes the franchise tag can be removed at any time ...making the player a free agent. The only problem with doing it ... is that the only team in dire need of a RB is the Cards...
My guess is that its a bluff....but Henry is much more the north /south runner Holmgren likes so...it looks like a long week ahead. It should be noted that the Hawks can start talking to Shaun again on Saturday ....so the timing of this story really makes it look like a barginning chip. Also, the Jags are suppose to put taylor through some heavy duty work outs this week to see if they need to find a back up!
Might make for a good week
huge seahawk fan here. just found this blog. cool.
ReplyDeletei agree that Henry does look more like the type of back that Holmgren likes. Hits the hole faster and harder then Alexander.
Posted by opaco
sure, it's posturing. but i think there's some truth to the idea that the seahawks don't really want to sign shawn to a long-term offer. if they keep him around for this year as a franchise player, then ok. but i don't think they want to invest a long-term contract into a player they don't think really fits into their scheme.
ReplyDeletetravis makes more sense, fits better and would be more motivated to come to a reasonable agreement simply because he wants out of buffalo.
The cardinals don't need a back, they drafted a great one in J.J. Arrington, and they still believe Shipp is worthwhile. I think Jacksonville, Tennessee, and maybe Tampa Bay are more likely candidates.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I still don't want him to go. I don't see why people like the "bruiser back". One of Shauns big upsides is that he has never been seriously injured, and it's due to his playing style. Everyone says he doesn't fit Mikes style of offense, but to me if you look at the TD's hes gotten over the last few years, and the yardage he's gained, (including almost getting the title last year), it seems to me that he's doing pretty darn well in the system. To me, that's like saying that because Tony Dungy is a defensive minded coach, he needs to get rid of Peyton Manning and pick up all defensive guys.
And don't give me this "west coast offense" bit. No one, including Mike, runs a true west coast offense. They all adapt it to the plays they like and the players they have. So I don't know why we can't do the same thing. In fact, it seems to me that we have, with fairly good results (as far as the runnning back is concerned). If the receivers catch the ball, we do a lot better. Period.
Posted by PaulieP
I think personally Seattle is trying to take the easier way out...
ReplyDeletethey seem really tired of dealing with our players contracts, and it is starting to look as if they already have their mindset on what they want
and if SA doesnt abide, they'll take the easy way out
not a knock on the FO, but its how the situation looks right now...
i personally think 5-7 years from now, after a long term deal, fans will be whining about SA...so if he wont got for a 3-4 year deal, then he will have to work under the tag
and thats what i think the FO wants...3-4 years
I'm sorry, this topic really fires me up. Why are we thinking of getting rid of one of the few pieces of our offense that works? Our reciever drop balls, our tight ends are inconsistent, and even our QB has games where his head is just not in it. Why are we taking the one piece of the puzzle that is consistently reliable? If we give Shaun the ball a 25-30 times a game, we win. It's that simple. It really makes no sense to me. You can talk all you want about his attitude (traditionally great, with the exception of one comment), his running style (which keeps him healthy and productive a lot longer than the backs who like to run over people), his age (he's 28, with only 4 real years of football under his belt. Because of his style, he'll be around for a long time), his asking price (tell me why he doesn't deserve what he's asking for? Can you seriously name more than 1-2 backs in the NFL that deserve a bigger contract than Shaun does?) or whatever else you can bring up, but the bottom line is that Shaun is the most productive member of the Seahawks. He outscored all but 5 people in the NFL last season, and the only people that outscored him were kickers! He scored 120 points people! And don't give me the crap about it being a contract year. In 2003 he had 96 points. It's not a fluke year. It's not a phase. He's going to be good for a long time, and we will miss him dearly if he's gone.
ReplyDeleteI'm done for now.
Posted by PaulieP
ADP, don't think I was mad at you by the way, you just posted while I was typing. I just worked myself up.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
lol its ok...
ReplyDeleteim on your side, i want SA to stay...just not for 6 or 7 years...
im more neutral in this situation then anything...i think SA is asking too much, but I also think that the FO isnt giving any leniance
Posted by ADP
gee, paulie... taking things a bit personal, aren't you? some news came out, that may or may not even be true. thinking about how serious all of it is, well, that's what we do. it's posturing. it's negotiations. it's something to talk about.
ReplyDeletehe's their franchise player. they haven't cut him, they're trying to get him to come in at a reasonable price. if he doesn't, then it's good to have backup plans.
or maybe they hate him and will do anything to get rid of him. we don't know.
when you break it down...there are a lot of points that can confuse you, because they contradict each other...
ReplyDeletebut the thing thats throwing me off the most is...they havent made an offer
under brett's two points, im going with the 'they hate him' one until i hear that they made an offer in the past, or are planning on it when they can start discussing a deal
Posted by ADP
I'm with PaulieP. Why dont they give him a contract?
ReplyDeleteHe's the only consistently productive memeber of the offense.
I have a few questions for MH and the FO
If you don't like him and don't want him around.. They why put the F**kin franchise on him? If he doesn't fit your "system" then let him walk! You'll be happy and he'll be happy. And in that case why draft him in the first place?
And if you want something for him then please DO trade him for a 3rd round choice. He would much enjoy running over a 2nd rate defence for a quick 200 yards on his old team that didnt want or respect him...
and the best part for him? He wont have to pick up a 3rd down blitz, cause it's never more then 2'nd and 4!
Posted by maomatt
I believe that the Hawks FO knew exactly what they were doing when they tagged Shaun. Hass would have likely recieved a lucrative offer from another team because there just aren't any available QBs that match his skill level. The risk of losing him was not worth the money we gave him to be long term, which most agree is the right move, money issue aside.
ReplyDeleteNot quite sure why they chose to finally give Walter his long term other than he has proved that he is solid regardless, he could easily hook up with another contender that needs help on the left and possibly that we are paying him more to continually have him play for the tender since each year it goes up and the least expensive way for us to go was tag Shaun.
The gamble being, that we could bring in a solid back for a bit less money that would do well in our system. Also, that of the three, Shaun blinks first. Its the least of all evils, for the team, if he leaves. They also knew that the market would be flooded with quality draftee and FA backs and nobody really had the cash to spend on Shaun long term partly due to his age. We know that he's healthy and will likely last a few more seasons and there was nobody else willing to take that chance.
My take on this whole situation is that the FO is sticking to what their theme has been this entire offseason and that is what is in the best interest of the Seahawks. Is it in the best interest to keep S.A. around for the next 3-4 years? Yes. Is it in our best interest to keep him around 5-6 years with a fat contract? No.
ReplyDeleteI am actually encouraged that the office is taking this stance as it show some consitency in their philosophy which has been lacking for some time now. Take the G.Winstrom contract for example, I like that he is a high motor guy and I think he is a good fit for us, but I believe we overpaid for his services. Even if he signed a contract for 1-2 mil less that is money I think we can all agree we could use right about now. The problem was that the FO in the past didn't think about the future and how these contracts would affect us and that is why we had so many FA's this year. This office, I believe, is considering that which should help us maintain an elite level for some time once we get there.
Let's say we do sign Shaun to a 5-6 year contract for big $$$. Is he still going to get those big yards if we can't sign Hutch this year, or Womack the following year? What about when Mack retires? Shaun is a great back but you have to give a lot of credit to that left side of the line and Mack's ability to be a great lead blocker. I don't remember Shaun making that many sick juking moves in the open to get those TD's and long runs, most of those runs are the benefits from great blocking and if we can't afford to keep those guys or replace them with guys of the same caliber then we will continue to be the same ol' Seahawks.
Posted by SF Hawk
it doesn't matter if he signs a 3 or 5 year deal. either way, when the contract matures, he'll have to restructure or be released, i'm sure.
ReplyDeletePosted by opaco
Opaco brings up another point. It's not the length of the contract that the team is balking at. The team can cut Shaun at any time. It's the signing bonus that they worry about.
ReplyDeleteI still believe the entire thing centers on that signing bonus, and how it's affected by the lack of a new CBA. As soon as we have a new CBA, we have a long term deal with Shaun.
Posted by PaulieP
"Let's say we do sign Shaun to a 5-6 year contract for big $$$. "
ReplyDelete"it doesn't matter if he signs a 3 or 5 year deal. either way, when the contract matures, he'll have to restructure or be released, i'm sure. "
Depends on the bonus. If you offer Shaun a ridiculous 80 Mil contact for 10 years, but the bonus is reasonable, say 15 Mil, and low salary (under 4.5 Mil) for the first 5 years, what you essentially get is a player you can cut in 5 years, you'd take a hit at the end because the bonus would go from 15 Mil over 10 to 15 Mil over 5, I guess that would be a 7.5Mil hit of dead money. If you cut him after June 1 it would be 3.75 over 2 years, that seems pretty reasonable, I think we have more than that this year and next already. That would get the fat contract number he and his agent seem to want, with a reasonable contract out for the Seahawks. But I don't think Shaun would go for it, he seems pretty smart. Although McNair went for it, kinda... probably not that small of an initial bonus, but he had all kinds of crazy roster boni (I recall 50 Mil roster bonus they had to get out of last year or the year before) written in so his contract number was huge.
I've said it before and will say it again, Shaun should get Rudi Johnsons contract, about 30 Mil over 5 years, 15 Mil bonus. If he wants more guaranteed, up to 20 Mil, fine, but the cap hit won't be over 5 Mil unless its year 5, and then homebody better be still going over 1400yds per season, restructure, or retire.
And I agree with someone, prolly Paulie, Shauns sissy running style loses us the "tough yards" at the end of an already long run, but saves his body. He'll be able to play at this level until he is 32 for sure, IMO.
Posted by JoSCh
"SA is a good back...but has he ever played hurt??? "
ReplyDeleteOf course not, he's never been hurt!
The teams are not willing to take a high priced player. They don't want to pay the signing bonus, especially when you consider that all the signing bonus must be paid over the next 3 (might be 4) years. If Shaun gets his desired signing bonus (18-20 million) it'll count between 6 and 7 million for each of the next 3 years. This is why the new CBA is so important. Not to mention that if we don't get one in place, after the 2007 season, every player becomes a free agent.
And what made you think he wasn't a team player? Other than that one comment, he has been nothing but a team player.
If I make it sound like he's the second coming, others are making it sound like he's completely expendable and replaceable, which he is definitely not.
Also, who is your source? If it's Mary, I might believe it, I haven't read the post, but she's been good in the past (I don't count the Mili signing, as we all could have predicted it, but the Koren thing was pretty "inside")
Posted by PaulieP
GOX, allow me to retort.
ReplyDeleteWhy won't another team trade for him? Trades don't happen often, when they do its usually for a player who is elite and still has upside. Shaun is elite, but his shelf life is very limited, 5 years tops. Also, the team who traded for him would have to assume the franchise tag and hope that they could sign him to contract, that isn't guaranteed. And a second round pick could get a team a player with Shaun skills, but w/o the Shaun contract, at least for the next 4/5 years.
"has he ever played hurt??? "
Has he had the "opportunity" to play hurt? I know he played through a bruised knee in the week 2 Tampa game last year, he had bad stats, but everybody did in that game, when the defense was still bad-ace.
Re trading for Emmitt, I think he was a product of the system more than Shaun, although both are talented backs, and its possible that that would have been recognized. Re Sanders or Peyton, Shaun isn't the same caliber as them, few are, and none are playing today, IMO.
Not a team player, I require more examples than one backstabbing comment in the heat of the moment. And to provide an example of team playership (playerness?), his daughters birth (not in a contract year),
and from here
"Alexander wanted to have his contract extended earlier in his career, he said.
"I told them three years ago that I love playing here and let's do something now. Let's meet," Alexander said. "It was just me and Mike [Holmgren]. There were no agents involved. I said, 'You know what? My wife's here. My family's here. I want to be here until I retire. It's really funny because back then I would have worked for peanuts."
Hearsay, good politics, maybe, but that is the only recent info available, other than the Coach saying
“I choose to think we’re going to keep him,”
Re the Mary thing, I believe that, that is a good tactic, but I still would think that the FO would try to work a deal once he signed the tender, even if he isn't the THE RB we want long term, its pretty hard to argue with results.
Posted by JoSCh
I would still love to see us trade our headache to th eIggles for thier headache, straight up if nothing else.
ReplyDeleteThis is just a poker game though, I still think that he'll play for us this season.
TO?
ReplyDeletePosted by JoSCh
Almost every point that you made about him being a team player directly resulted from that one comment! I've never heard him say he didn't get along with his coach. I've heard him say that he doesn't agree with the playcalling, but most premiere backs wouldn't! "Seems much more interested". Pure speculation. Everyone gets up more for the national games, it's the way sports works. I could say the same thing about most of the players on our team.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you think that Henry could get 140 and 12 in our system. You do know of course that Shaun got almost 1700 yards rushing, and got 20 touchdowns, right?
As for the playoff game, he only got the ball 15 times. It's been said time and again that when he gets the ball 25 times, we win.
Can he improve on his blocking? Yes. Of course. But there isn't a single player in the NFL who can't improve on something. As for his running style, i hope he never changes. You may prefer a smash mouth guy, but that isn't the kind of guy I like. That's the kind of guy that plays for a short time, and soon succumbs to injury.
Bottom line is, he is very good. He is irreplaceable by anyone who is available. We will be a lesser team if we lose him.
Posted by PaulieP
1) Already said you can't use that one :-D
ReplyDelete2) You gotta link that.
3) Game logs
The way I see it, a good game from your RB is 80 yds rushing and a touchdown or 100 yds rushing, minimum. SA had 10 last year, not all were nat'l spotlight. Agree, that this is kinda FFL, but you can't call your RB good if he caught 12 passes for 20 yards, ran for 45 and never thought about the endzone, while laying devastating blocks on every pass play. If that is ok, then start Mack! (I will probably regret that...)
4) Speaking of Mack here is him coming to the defense, at least regarding the comment. "It's a non-factor," fullback Mack Strong said. "Nobody even brought it up today, which I think is the right thing to do. Shaun did what he had to do yesterday, in a press conference and a formal apology. As far as I'm concerned, it's done." Sounds to me like all is forgiven. Also, I don't think a player or anyone else would speculate that Shaun could've got the TD if given the chance, cuz he wasn't given the chance. And I am not saying he should have, the Coach called the right play, he got the TD and the win. But Shauns TD stats over the last 4 years say he had a better chance than most...
5) I question whether this has anything to do with being a team player or the guys running style. Regardless I checked out this website, Football Outsiders to see what they had to say. These guys are stat mongerers, and have all kinds of wacky rankings, sort of based on baseball/moneyball, based on value per play, down and distance, etc. Pretty interesting stuff. I looked at the list from 2004, SA is near the top, right under C-Mart and Dillon. Not too shabby. Then I checked the stat that would most correlate to his wussy running style, success rate. He is 25th on that list, fugly. But then I looked for LT. He was 28th on SR, 23rd on DPAR. Maybe he doesn't fit the SD system? Maybe he is a me first player?
Regardless, SA is a very good if not great back, he is one of the top 5 playing today, and consistent. I don't know why he can't catch a pass, he did in 2001, 2002, and 2003. Last year he quit being targeted. Its it because in training camp in 2004 he dropped too many? Why did his target rate go down? You can't blame a guy for not catching much if he ain't thrown to, is all I am saying.
I can't argue about his poor blocking, thats the truth there. Can't they coach that, I mean when he shows up that is...
And re lastly, 16 touches, 65 yards, just over 4 yards a touch. While hurt. Can't fault a RB for not getting the touches against "The Greatest Show Coached by Smurfs", and playing from behind until the 4th quarter.
Posted by JoSCh
"Sorry if you all think that 65 yards is a good game when your are playing the leagues worst Run Defense."
ReplyDeletefrom the NFL site
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/teamstats/NFL_20050108_STL@SEA
Did you watch the game, Ghost? Seattle came out with a pass happy game plan against one of the worst run defenses in the league. That is more of a coaching decision than anything Alexander did or didn't do in that game.
as for Soft, I guess Seattle should have gotten a tough runner. Like Ron Dayne. Remember him? Drafted well before SA in the same draft. Whenever somebody mentions reloading in the draft I just mention him.
Fumbles? Alexander fumbled 4 times last year in 353 carries. For camparison, Mack Strong fumbled 2 times in 36 carries! And SA is called a fumbler.
You harp on Alexander's fumble against the Jets costing the game. dude, the score was 37-14. I think a whole lot of other people contributed to that loss as well. Balance that against how many other games Seattle would have lost if he wasn't out there
Posted by maomatt
Seattle sure must have played in a lot of nationally televised games last year! To put up the type of numbers he has put up, how can you say he doesn't come to play everyday?
ReplyDeleteHe wasn't very nice to Matt, and has made fun of him. Wow, you have never played on a team before have you. That goes on all the time, have you ever read any of Tobeck's quotes? He is constantly making fun of everybody! Does that mean he isn't a team guy?
Posted by Mike K.
well crap...if i tried to catch up through all of this, id retire by the time i got done reading...
ReplyDeletePP you bring up a good point regarding the bonus...thats part of the reason why i think it would be better to sign him to a shorter length-wise deal...7 years, he'll still have a 3years left on his contract, and we'll only see him as a backup then...so the bonus kills us...now with 2-4 years, his bonus will be smaller, and we're not stuck being forced to pay him as long...
i dunno, i dont think the FO wants him back...i think now that we dont really have any replacement available...they're going to stick with him this year, and see what they can do in the offseason...basically, they're not letting him ago unless a new replacement is a 'sure thing'...
i think both sides are at fault right now...its not wrong for SA to want a long term deal, but threatening to sit out the season only hurts his cause (i dont mind sitting out through TC...Jones always did it and never fell on his ass last year...funny noone bashed him)
the FO is understandable to not want a long term, but not making an offer? IF thats true...then SA wont be back for awhile
i think Holmgren is trying to lure him to TC with the whole 'we cant discuss a deal if he doesn't sign the tender' crap...if they wanted him in a deal, why didnt they make an offer before franchising him?
SA might of made some mistakes, but i think he got slapped the hardest in the face...they went out of their asses to get Jones, Hass, and several others locked up...they just slapped the tag on SA and didnt even try to get a deal done
there has to be more to this story...
Nice blog - 1st time poster, long time fan.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts on SA are pretty much spelled out elsewhere but i will add this: Until they got Corey Dillon, the Patriots did not have a dominating back yet managed to wim a few Super Bowls. And Corey Dillon didn't do poop in Cincinatti...
The Colts have made it to the playoffs recently a few times despite Edgerrin James'non-performances.
The Ea-girls did not make it to the Super Bowl on Brian Westbrook's stellar performances ( he's a good back to be sure, just not a great one).
I think the Patriots have made it painfully obvious that you win Superbowls by functioning as a team first, individual second.
What Shaun has said publicly and what other team members said about him during the season has convinced me and apparently the FO and MH that he is not really a team player.
The rest of it, the money, the contract etc. is secondary. If he were really passionate about Seattle football and the team, this would have been worked out. But you don't ever hear that passion from Shaun do you.
I for one do not think he would be missed if we picked up a back who was a good North South rusher, caught passes (even on an occasional basis...I mean, cmon, you're getting paid 5 bazillion dollars...you should be able to catch the occasional pass) and was a decent blocker - a solid all-rounder.You marry that guy with a good OL, a competent quarterback, a few less dropped passes and a solid D and you have Superbowl contenders.
That's what's known as a football "team".
Posted by pjo
this new guy makes sense.
ReplyDeleteGood news for those of us who want to keep Shaun:
ReplyDeleteDespite a report, the Seahawks did not confirm that they have recently talked to the Buffalo Bills about trading for running back Travis Henry. The purported acquisition makes some sense, but isn't likely to take place. Tennessee and Jacksonville are more likely destinations for Henry. Henry, 26, asked for a trade from the Bills soon after the 2004 season ended, having lost his starting job to Willis McGahee. Injury problems for Henry led to the decision to go with McGahee.
-- Seattle Times
Posted by PaulieP
I want proof that he isn't a team player though. He made one overblown comment and suddenly he's a bad guy. If you show me more examples, rather than just giving me what you feel or what you've concluded based upon what the FO has offered, than your arguements will hold more water. As of now, the "bad guy" argument is based almost exclusively on one comment.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
Who said he doesn't want to be in Seattle? He has repeatedly said that he wants to retire here. That he loves playing here, his family likes it here, and he wants to be here.
ReplyDeleteAs for Hass and Jones, their signing had nothing to do with whether or not the FO wanted Shaun. Right now, Shaun is very expensive. That's the whole problem.
Can the team win without him, of course. Will I support the team without him? I should be offended that anyone would even wonder about that. But are we a better team with him? Significantly. And I stress the word TEAM.
The fact that he hasn't signed the deal yet doesn't mean he doesn't want to be in Seattle. And the fact that a long term deal hasn't been worked out doesn't mean that the Hawks don't want him. And neither of those has anything to do with what kind of team player he is. Football is a business. And that's all this holdout and these negotiations are about. Business.
Posted by PaulieP
It's possible, but I just can't accept everyone's speculation that he's a cancer and not a team player without some form of proof. And I won't understand how people want to get rid of the best (yes, I said the best, better than Jones, better than Hass. By the by, who's to say that the line is making Shaun look good? Who's to say that Shaun isn't making the line look good?) player on our team. Sure he wants money, but so does every player in the NFL. We'll just have to disagree on this one ghost.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
"Look I not gonna defend myself any more " GOX, you don't need to defend yourself, nobody is attacking you. You and I have a different opinion, we are stating so, thats what the offseason is for! In November we'll both be cheering Alexander, or Morris, or Henry, or whoever. If I said anything you took (or will take) personal, sorry buddy...
ReplyDelete"alexander is on record as saying at the beginning of training camp last year that he had not been nice to matt ...in fact he said that he had made fun of him....yeah thats a good team player...."
Better fire Toebeck too, he messes with Matt all the time.
"I hate to tell you but the Front office thought so highly of your boy that they went out and offered long term contracts to Jones and Hass..."
And laid the tag on Shaun. They must think highly of him, they are willing pay top 5 dollars. The tag is not to demonstrate dislike, it is actually the opposite. It is there to lock a player down so a team can work on getting the long term deal done when possible, for a great example of this, see Walter Jones. Even Alexander the Pretty Good had this to say... "For me, it’s one of those things where Matt has played six years, Walt has played eight years, so you get them done,” said Alexander, a five-year veteran. “Then you get me done. With the franchise tag, to me it simply meant that, ‘OK, we have to get you done in July."
I don't absolutely agree with him, it isn't about time on the team or in the NFL, its about value to the team, and IMO, Shaun was third on the list. And that ain't bad, considering Jones is the best LT in all the land, and Hass is of the highest importance to the system.
"Like Ron Dayne." LOL, betcha Ron Dayne runs like a madman for the stupid Donkos. Stupid Shanahanananahan
Posted by JoSCh
i still havent picked a side yet...there has to be more to this story
ReplyDeletegood, bad, selfish or whatever...there has to be a reason the FO never offered him a contract...i mean at least offer him a 3 or 4 year deal...what harm could that do???
its strange
right now im neutral, and i havent been convinced on either side...i still think the FO has been more confusing then SA with this...
this thread holds the new record for most posts
ReplyDeleteOk, last post for me on this. And this is directed to PaulieP but applies to all SA fans out there...I think the bottom line with Shaun is that he is an exceptionally confusing individual, both to his teammates and coaches. And that makes for some wacky chemistry. Up until this year, everyone thought he was aloof and selfish (I've assembled some quotes from around the web to support my opinions...gotta love google).
ReplyDeleteThis was a story in the Wash. Post about Shaun where thetopic was how distant he was up until the 2004 season from his team and how he was trying to make amends:
-----
"Different" is how Alexander says his teammates view him.
Different since the start of training camp in Cheney, Wash., when Alexander sought out quarterback Matt Hasselbeck and apologized to a teammate for the first time. When camp ended at the end of August Alexander had apologized to half his teammates, along with coaches and front-office types.
"I'm going to make an effort to let you know that, man, I'm sorry for just treating you like a businessperson," Alexander told them. "From now on, I'm going to treat you like a brother."
-----
Holmgren has made some comments in the past
First, Holmgren's mentioned that no team has ever won a Super Bowl with a league leading RB. And he's mentioned that none of his Green Bay or SF teams ever had a back that was considered even close to the best in the league.
And, I read somewhere something like "...the good news about Alexander not being in camp is that Holmgren's able to go back to the basics of his system and focus on what works best for him and his offense instead of trying to squeeze Alexander into it...""
-----
And just to clarify..the "stabbed in the back" comment wasn't the real problem - the problem for me is that he never apologized to the coach or his teammates!
(from newswire) Shaun Alexander apologized Monday to fans -- but not his coach or teammates -- for saying he was "stabbed in the back" by Mike Holmgren's quarterback sneak call that may have cost him a rushing title
-----
and let's not forget about this one:
"In a conference call, it seemed like Alexander was just as eager to be with the Dolphins in 2005 as Seattle, which may allow one of the NFL's top young tailbacks to leave as an unrestricted free agent in the offseason."
There was a brief period of time where he listed a bunch of teams he would like to play for. But guess what, not one team wants him!
----
You can talk about RB gluts and how productive he is (although his after contact yards suck and he is a terrible short yardage back overall) but the bottom line is he doesn't fit with Holmie's offense or the team. If it's a bad fit, it's a bad fit...As a fan, I got really tired of seeing the Seahawks and SA in particular unable to convert 3 and 1's becuase he didn't hit the hole and instead tried to go East/West..
I'm willing to take the chance to see what the offense does without him.
rambling rant over
fyi, I will be travelling to Seattle on business somewhat frequently. Is there an official Seattle Seahawks bar where I might catch a game with fellow fans? I get all tingly just thinking about it..having had to endure years of Donkeys and Ea-girls games on the big screen while I watched in the corner of the bar on the 13" B & W set they had set up.
Posted by pjo
there is only a few of us that live in the Seattle area currently...im not one of them
ReplyDeleteif you have trouble catching some of the guys who live there on here you could e-mail them
either that or use the 'shout box' on the main page...thats kind of our general discussion place
pjo - welcome to the site...it was starting to slow (we were ON FIRE for awhile)...but now the offseason is starting to drain out, we'll be one of the 'main' sites...we're definitely different (see Alba)
Posted by ADP
PJO, there are many Seahawks bars around the stadium on game day. We could choose any number of them and be tickled. Lets us know when you will be in town and we'll get together for a game. In fact, the season is getting close, I would like to see if we can arrange a get together with some of us here, (not you Bluefoot)J/K Blue, and possible some of the guys at the Seattle Times site too.
ReplyDeleteI think it could be a blast if a few of us could either go to a game, or spend the day in a drunken stuper getting tossed from as many bars as possible.
Wow, great thread, guys. It sucks to straddle the fence on this one, but here is my take:
ReplyDelete1. The reaction to the "stabbed in the back" comment is certainly overblown. High achieving persons who are goal oriented will generally lose their mind in a situaltion like that.
Think about it: Shaun is among the world's best at what he does. The NFL rushing title is a crowning acheivement of enormous magnitude. He trained his whole career and dreamed of situations like this. And remember, he is in a very high-adrenaline situation. It's really no shock at all that he would be extremely disappointed and say things he would later regret.
There is no doubt in my mind that Shaun is a positive locker room influence. When the Seahawks were slumping last season after the 1st St. Louis debacle, Shaun did and said all the right things. Funny how no one remembers that.
And when criticism was beginning to circulate last season about Shaun's running style, I noticed an immediate but subtle change. Apparently the rumors got back to him and the coaches. He has hitting the hole much harder. He was sacraficing his body for blocks. And he ran like hell.
Sure, there are better blockers in his position. There are better short yardage mashers. But as a pure runner, the guy is amazing.
Consider the offense he is in. Homgren's version of the WCO rarely produces outstanding seasons for running backs. Just the fact that Shaun was in contention for the rushing title is an unfathomable accomplishment to me. His success with the ball just 'made' Holmgren call his number more, (although no enough, in my book) and the Seahawks were better for it.
Having said that, I am not going to kid myself into thinking that Shaun is not a square peg in a round hole. Holmie's offense does not call for a great pure runner. The offense, as a whole, would be just as productive with a back that is an average runner, but a very good pass blocker and receiver. This player would probably cost less than Shaun, too.
Bottom line: I love Shaun. I love the running game. I would have loved to see what SA could have done with Knox as coach. But alas, he could probably make more money and have a more personally successful career elsewhere, where his style of running fits the team. If he goes, we will likely find a well-suited and effective replacement.
But damn, I'll miss his game if he leaves.
Good post, Blue.
ReplyDelete"First, Holmgren's mentioned that no team has ever won a Super Bowl with a league leading RB. And he's mentioned that none of his Green Bay or SF teams ever had a back that was considered even close to the best in the league. "
ReplyDeleteI was curious about MH's comment about leading rushers never winning the super bowl, so I researched a bit, at pro-football reference.com (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/) Absolutely full of data..
I looked at pass vs run attempts for the past 20 super bowl winners, going back to the glory days of the 49'rs and the genesis of the WCO. Also, I looked at who ran for what on each team. My comments on that are beneath the stats.
This can be hard to read. I recommend pasting it into Excel
Pass Att Run Att Pass % Run %
2004 Seahawks 533 468 0.53 0.47
2004 Patriots 485 524 0.48 0.52
2003 Patriots 538 473 0.53 0.47
2002 Bucs 567 414 0.58 0.42
2001 Patriots 482 473 0.50 0.50
2000 Ravens 504 511 0.50 0.50
1999 Rams 530 431 0.55 0.45
1998 Broncos 491 525 0.48 0.52
1997 Broncos 513 520 0.50 0.50
1996 Packers 548 465 0.54 0.46
1995 Cowboys 494 495 0.50 0.50
1994 49'rs 511 491 0.51 0.49
1993 Cowboys 475 490 0.49 0.51
1992 Cowboys 491 500 0.50 0.50
1991 Redskins 447 540 0.45 0.55
1990 Giants 398 541 0.42 0.58
1989 49'rs 483 493 0.49 0.51
1988 49'rs 502 527 0.49 0.51
1987 Redskins 478 500 0.49 0.51
1986 Giants 472 558 0.46 0.54
1985 Bears 432 610 0.41 0.59
1984 49'rs 496 534 0.48 0.52
2004 Patriots C Dillon 3rd in NFL in rushing (1635 yds)
2003 Patriots 27th in NFL in rushing
2002 Bucs 27th in NFL in rushing
2001 Patriots Antowain Smith 1157 yds rushing
2000 Ravens J Lewis 7th in NFL
1999 Rams M Faulk 5th in NFL in Rushing, despite pass 1st offense
1998 Broncos ** T Davis led NFL in rushing **
1997 Broncos T Davis 2nd in NFL in rushing
1996 Packers E. Bennett rushed for 899 yds. BUT D Levins ran for 566 while Bennett was injured.
Cowboys their combined 1465 yds would have been good for 3rd in the NFL
1995 49'rs ** E Smith led NFL in rushing **
1994 Cowboys R Watters
1993 Cowboys ** E Smith led NFL in rushing **
1992 Redskins ** E Smith led NFL in rushing **
1991 Giants E Byner 5th in NFL. 3 back attack combined for 1976 rshng yds
1990 49'rs 3 back attack
1989 49'rs Roger Craig 10th in NFL in rushing
1988 Redskins Roger Craig 3rd in NFL in rushing
1987 Giants 4 back attack. What is it with Joe Gibbs?
1986 Bears J. Morris 2nd in NFL in rushing
1985 49'rs W. Payton 3rd in NFL. Interestingly, he only led the NFL in rushing once.
1984 W Tyler 5th in NFL in rushing. Combined with R. Craig for 1911 yds rushing
My conclusions?
Mike Holmgren needs a better fact checker. FOUR times in the past 20 years the Super Bowl winning team featured the NFL's leading rusher. And and astounding 12 teams had a back in the top 5!! Even his own Green Bay team had featured backs. As for the SF teams he coached, Roger Craig and Rickey Watters are generaly recognized as top tier running backs in the NFL. Why Roger Craig is not in the Hall of Fame, anyways?
What this told me was that there are many many ways to win a Super Bowl, but on the average the winner has a balanced offence, passing and running about 50% of the time. Note that of the "pass 1st" SB winners (NE 2003, TB 2002, Rams 1999, GB 1996) ALL had top 7 in the NFL type defences. The 2001 NE team was 24th in the NFL in D...
Any other conclusions are left to the reader.
matt
Posted by maomatt
ok, one more post probably won't break the blog. but i have a serious beef and now you all are going to hear it.
ReplyDeleteSTOP POSTING ANONYMOUSLY. it bugs the crap out of me. especially these marathon argument posts that i have to scroll so far down the page just to see who the crap is making the comment.
if you are simply ignorant of how this works, then let me explain it: DON'T HIT THE "VIEW COMMENTS" BUTTON, AND THEN COMMENT. because everything you write will be preceded by "anonymous said..."
the way to do it correctly is to HIT THE "COMMENT NOW" BUTTON. yes, even if you just want to look at everyone's comments! it still works! trust me!
but then you are able to comment through your blogger identity. and if you don't have one, THEN GET ONE. it's not that hard, and if you're posting here on every other post, then it's time to join the club.
ok. i got it off of my chest and i feel better now.
Maybe it's fitting the men who carry offenses on their backs in the NFL are called "halfbacks." When it comes to the grand scope of contract negotiations in the NFL, halfbacks don't get full credit.
ReplyDeleteHow else can you explain the plights of Shaun Alexander of Seattle and Edgerrin James of Indianapolis, the second- and fourth-best runners in the league in 2004? As elusive as they might be to defenders, Alexander and James are in dangerous traps. The NFL pays quarterbacks, left tackles, defensive ends, cornerbacks and wide receivers without hesitation.
For halfbacks, the green light for money turns to yellow, and Alexander and James are finding that out.
Rest of story..
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2107647&num=0
Wow, nice post, mao.
ReplyDeleteI hope I'm not killing this topic, but all of a sudden I can't look at the picture on this thread and think, "Rabbit season."
ReplyDelete"Duck season."
"Rabbit season."
"Duck season."
"Rabbit season."
"Duck season."
"Duck season."
"Rabbit season. FIRE!!!"
Be vewy, vewy quiiiet, i'm hunting wabbit....haahahaha..
ReplyDeletefudd, elmer..
Today's the day, let the negotiations begin.
ReplyDeleteTesting the new stuff out here.
ReplyDeletePosted by Anonymous
Blue, why do we need two fields to post with? Why not just incorporate the one at the bottom of the topics page as the standard?
ReplyDeleteBTW, that was my anonnymous post, Brett.
what negotiations? lol
ReplyDeleteunless something magically change, the Seahawks have no intentions of offering him a contract...they didnt before they franchised him...you'd think they'd at LEAST offer him a buck or two before then...but no attempt whatsoever
I still think he is playing under the tag...i want him here forever, but the FO clearly doesnt want to give him a deal...its understandable for both sides
but yeah, im not telling anyone anything they dont already know lol
and if i offend anyone for posting like this (i too hate it), ...im male...so i do whatever is convienent...i clicked the wrong thing, and im too lazy to go back...
Posted by ADP