February Brings Changes, Perspective to Coaching Staff

Written by Mike Parker

Monday, 01 February 2010 18:02

While Feb. 1 might not be a really significant date across the NFL, it marks a new era for the Seattle Seahawks.

Head coach Pete Carroll convened his staff together today for the first time, as Danny O'Neil reports. And even though things have barely gotten off the ground in Renton, there's a decidedly positive vibe circulating throughout.

"I am really excited about it," Carroll said of his staff while in Alabama last week. "I think we had an outstanding 'staff' season ... it's a great group, and I feel very fortunate that we put it together like we have.

"It's an excellent group of guys."

It's hard to think that all this upheavel began on Jan. 8, when the news broke of Jim Mora's abrupt firing, and then the resulting fallout that showed everyone that egos were truly the center of the organization under Tim Ruskell. Personally, I had been a supporter of Ruskell's after many wrote him off, but my support was largely garnered from the encouraging 2009 draft he managed. The group looked great on paper: Aaron Curry, best linebacker in the draft? Max Unger, the future of our offensive line? Deon Butler, a legitimate deep threat?

It all seemed too good to be true, especially when factoring in Jim Mora's energy from early press conferences. But we all know the story by now of how quickly that ship sank, and thanks to the infamous text message leak from Ruskell to Mora that came after both were no longer employed by the team, it was clearly time for both men to get out of town. The franchise would not have survived another year under that regime.

But while there is much reason for optimism at this point, there's still a lot of work to be done. We have yet to see anything, collectively speaking, from the brains of this new-look staff. Jim Mora brought his friends and fellow co-staffers from Atlanta and other places with him to Seattle, and while that approach seemed promising at first (and a good sign after a 4-12 season), it was doomed to failure from the start.

Pete Carroll has a proven success record as the mastermind of a football program, and he has assembled an excellent-looking staff. Names like Alex Gibbs and Jerry Gray are not exactly wallowing in the depths of mediocrity like Greg Knapp. They're respected names; ones whose ability might even make opposing teams think twice about calling the Seahawks "soft" next year.

Of course, I could be drinking the Kool-aid again.

Either way, Feb. 1, 2010 is the official dawn of the second new beginning in one year's time for the Seattle Seahawks. Hopefully, this new beginning is the glimpse of a soaring future, and not doomed to fail after one more season we'd all rather forget.

Comments (31) Add Comment

Optimism
written by Riggle, February 01, 2010

Yeah. I have the optimism that is characteristic of a Seahawks fan, too.

Here's hoping for good things in 2010! Go 'Hawks!

...
written by USAFANARC, February 01, 2010

Pass the Kool-aid. I will partake liberally once again. Hopefully, I won't barf it up this time. Go Seahawks!

Thank you Paul Allen!....
written by B., February 01, 2010

For making this happen! You put your faith in Ruskell and all he did was drive this organization into the ground. I've got a good feeling about Carroll and Co. and you've shown you'll do what it takes to get our team back on track and make #12 proud once again. Mr. Allen, you're the best owner in the NFL and we appreciate you! Get well soon!

gulp
written by Doug H, February 01, 2010

gimmie more...

Draft
written by hawked, February 01, 2010

We pick 6th. The only three I see as 95% gone are Suh, McCoy, Bradford. Bradford gives the best chance as being picked after said givens.
This leaves in no order: Berry, Spiller, Clausen, Okung, Campbell, McClain, Bryant, Holden, Paul, Davis, Morgan.
Two are picked before you, we are stuck in 6th best WHAT!
What really scares me is how much better teams get with their first round picks in 2010.
The ones we can not sign because of our basic needs and poor record.
I have to say stay the course with Matt! We can not watch Fare 3 years my young bust up this leauge like that. Knappm+morra=perfect assault on Mt Ranier, and belittle our comish.
hahaha

...
written by cts, February 01, 2010

Hawked-

I forgot to buy the cracker jacks to get the decoder ring to understand your post. Sorry man...

I'm really hoping Schnieder impliments his trade, trade, trade for more picks, picks, picks philosophy. I wouldn't mind trading back twice in the first round to have something like #14, #20, #40, #45 and a late 2nd early 3rd. There's so many prospects and holes I have my eyes on.

I'd love to see something like Campbell, Iupati, Allen/Brown/Graham, Hardy/Capers/Cox/Jones, Matthews/etc.

Or Spiller, Iupati, Brown/Capers....

You get my drift. There could just be SO much more value doing that and with all the holes we have would be more than prudent. Fat chance, but it has happened before. A couple of years ago if I remember correctly.

By the way, those were random numbers pulled out of my @ss. My thoughts were trading back 5 spots or so for a 1st and 2nd then back again to mid-late 1st and a late 2nd/early 3rd while retaining the original #14.

...
written by BillT, February 02, 2010

How many players do you guys consider to be elite players in the draft this year? Suh, McCoy, maybe Berry? Who else gets in there as top shelf, blue chip, almost bulletproff talent?. Anyone else on a level with those guys?

Here's the thing. With quarterbacks being valued so highly, both Bradford and Clausen have a good possibility of going top 5 too. If there's only 2 or 3 of these blue chip elite players and the two top quarterbacks that get taken in the top 5, will Seattle be the first team to be selecting a players from the next tier down unless someone whiffs like last year when Curry dropped.

I'd love to see someone like McCoy or even Berry slip down to us at number 6 but I have this feeling that the top 5 will be Suh, McCoy, Berry and the two QB's and then the question I have. Is there one more absolute blue chip stud player left at that point (who?) or are we in a bit of a lower tier of players at that Point?

Opinions.

Bill T
written by everetthawkfan, February 02, 2010

Dez Bryant..Experts say hes better then Crabtree last year..Then Joe Haden...best CB in this draft.There will be somebody worthy of the 6th pick for us....BPA except no more Linebackers

...
written by Rugby Lock, February 02, 2010

Mmmmmm... Kool-Aid....

Anything
written by GnarlyHawks, February 02, 2010

Is better than having to listen to Mora blabbering all offseason.

Isn't it funny, how almost every post now, regardless of topic, turns into a draft discussion?

We have some seriously off-topic folks on our boards

I love the new changes, at least it's interesting and we don't know the tendancies yet; which makes it exciting for me.

...
written by cts, February 02, 2010

Yeah, I kinda changed it a bit, but I was refering to Schneiders draft history.

BillT-

I would hands down put Berry on the list. He's #1 for me. I wouldn't put Bryant on there, but Haden definately deserves that vote. He's considered a true shutdown corners along the lines of Revis, Mathis and Asomugha. The only other name I would consider is Okung and I don't see him dropping to #6 either.

...
written by omar little, February 02, 2010

I agree with Haden being a true elite talent, I also see Berry in that group. I would be shocked to see this guys disappoint, let alone bust. To me the elite talents are Suh, McCoy, Spiller, Berry and Haden. The others are good picks but these guys are the best, safest picks.

Glug, glug, glug
written by Beer Can Farmer, February 02, 2010

Many thanks to Mr. Allen.

"It's an excellent group of guys." But I though last years group was supposed to be excellent too!

BillT. Even top draft picks are still a crap shoot. Suh and McCoy seem to be the only real McCoy's. More than likely @ #6 we are already in the second tier. The real sweet spot is in the teens. Trade down is unlikely as who would want to trade up to get whom at 6. Never the less a trade down would be the best outcome.

Billt;
written by Hawksince77, February 02, 2010

If Omar is right, then at least one on his list will be there at #6, if not more than one:

1) Berry (my first choice)
2) Haden
3) Spiller

And Dez Bryant if Everett fan is right.

...
written by cts, February 02, 2010

Beer Can-

I agree with the whole trade down scenario, but there are always lots of trades. With guys like
Berry, Haden, Bradford, Clausen, Okung all having a possibility of falling to #6, especially with the whole Sanchez thing last year, finding a partner to trade with isn't too unlikely, but yes, not probable.

Let's not forget that there was about a 50-50 split on Ruskell and most were very concerned with Knapp. The only thing people were looking forward to with Knapp was a little variety. All in all I agree, but there were 2 big ?'s by 2 very important pieces of our staff. Not to mention no one outside the organization realize the internal turmoil that was going on with all the bickering.

I'm more excited this year because the internal problems were exposed and, as far as we know, corrected. Not to mention that the focus was to bring in guys who are considered more "football minds" than we had last year. I'm more psyched than I was last year, that's for sure.

...
written by BillT, February 02, 2010

If we agree that Suh, McCoy, Berry, Haden, and Okung are all elite blue chippers and figuring that at least one of the top 2 QB's will get taken before us if not both, at least one of those blue chippers will be available at number 6.

That's the very definition of BPA. Whoever it is should be our pick regardless of who it is. We could use any of those five players. Realistically, Suh and Okung will probably be long gone but stranger things have happened. We never thought we'd have a shot at Curry last season.

This April's draft is our Super Bowl this year.

OT
written by Hawksince77, February 02, 2010

If Okung is the real deal (I have heard it both ways) then he would be a perfect pick at #6. It could be that he is simply the highest rated OT in a poor OT class (that seems to be the consensus, and if so, not worthy of a top pick).

I can't get a clear picture of the QBs: some people think they are the second coming, while others have them as non-first-round-worthy picks.

A few mocks (not many) have McCoy falling to #6, and that might be great.

My favorite mocks have Berry at #6 and Spiller at #14, but I am thinking Spiller might not be there at #14, plus it sounds like Charles Brown may be a better fit for the Seahawks and he should be there at #14.

...
written by cts, February 02, 2010

I agree BillT.

I love the Berry/Spiller combo as well. I've been on that bandwagon from day one. They are both explosive playmakers and would be 2 sexy picks back to back. When was the last time we got one of those?

Brown would be a reach at #14. I think he'll sqeak into the 1st round but anything higher than 20 is a reach in my opinion.

Hey Mike:
written by LouieLouie, February 02, 2010

Nice article. One minor comment that I would make is; while this may be the second new beginning in one years time, this new beginning is really a major new beginning. The first new beginning was a tweek of what was before. Now there is a new head coach and GM, and with a few exceptions, a new coaching staff. They all really seem to be on the same page.

Go Hawks!

...
written by BillT, February 02, 2010

cts,

A guy like Brown is only a reach until someone takes him higher than the consensus says he should be picked and then he justifies that pick. Think Lofa Tatupu. Everyone said Ruskell reached for him until he made the pro bowl his first three seasons and Ruskell was proven right.

Charles Brown is supposed to be the quintessential left tackle for a ZBS team and if we picked him at 14 and he turned out to be a pro bowl player for our team and the absolute best fit for us, who could say it was a reach?

Now that was just for the sake of discussion. From what I've heard, Campbell is a bigger, faster, and even more athletic version of Brown and if the injury factor can be dismissed, probably the absolute best fit for our team and that includes Okung. Okung grades out higher than Campbell mainly based on the fact that Campbell has been botherd by minor injuries a lot. WalterFootball says Campbell would be the first OT off the board if it wasn't for that factor.

If cleared by out medical staff, I could live very well with Campbell as our number 6 pick. At number 14, I would hope one of the DE's or DB's or Safeties would fall to us or Spiller. I'm not sure if lupati would really be a reach at 14 if he's the next Hutch.

...
written by cts, February 03, 2010

I agree BillT, I've been a big advocator of Campbell and even said I'd be okay with him at #6 too. I still have my heart set on Berry though.

I say Iupati is a reach not only because he's an OG but because he played for Idaho! I can't get past the fact that the top talent he faced all year is Boise St. (no real DE threat there) and other than that the top DE talent they faced all year was from UW.

Had he played in the SEC or Big 12 I'd be all for him at #14, but he didn't, he played in the WAC. That just leaves me worrisome.

I'd be really happy with taking Berry, Spiller then trading up to get Brown.

Power-up
written by Teebone, February 03, 2010

I feel that we should trade down at least the #6 pick and grab a late 1 and 3 this yaer or a 2 & 3this and 2 next.We have the "GURU" of the zone and it is said he can make a star out of later round picks,so we should be fine..maybe grab Trueblood,Donald Penn in FA.To address the D we should target L Bodden,D Robinson(cb)Elvis Dumervil(de.Here are some mid to late round steals...Alterrann Verner,K.Wilson,Kareem Jackson(CBs),Freddie Barnes,Deonte Thompson(4.35),Damian Williams(WRs),Tyson Alualu(DE great motor).WHY ISNT ANY ONE SPEAKING ON JOE McNIGHT(4.4) AND ALREADY KNOWS THE SYSTEM THE HAWKS WILL HAVE...no learnig curve there...actually he would be helping the vets out with the goings on of the system

...
written by omar little, February 03, 2010

I really want to see us take a QB if either Clausen falls to 6 or Bradford falls to 14. Both are good prospects, far more impressive to me than Stafford and Sanchez. We might as well strike while the iorn is hot, we may not be in a good posistion to draft a top talent at QB for quite some time.

...
written by cts, February 03, 2010

I think Stafford is a WAY better prospect than Clausen and even Bradford with his bum shoulder. Especially given his arm strength. It's just another one of those rookies put on a bad team and thrown to the wolves situations. And Sanchez is essentially the same player as Clausen just more athletic and with better arm strength. I think this years QB class is top to bottom piss poor. I feel you have to wait until the 2nd half of the 1st round to find good value in one.

...
written by omar little, February 03, 2010

Sanchez has better arm strength than Clausen?!

Not that it matters much, since brute arm strength is the most overrated aspect in a QB (see Jamarcus Russell and Kyle Boller), but Clausen was a multi year starter for a reason, just like there was a reason Sanchez sat behind John David Booty...

...
written by omar little, February 03, 2010

I mean Clausen may not have Stafford's arm strength, but he is very accurate and his arm will allow him to make all the throws required for an NFL QB. I'm not knocking on Sanchez's arm strenght ever, but it looks to me that Clausen has a bit more power behind his throws. His deep passes tend to loft, but I think that is more of a throwing technique thing than anything else. That can be corrected with coaching, and I don't consider that a big deal anyway.

I tust Charlie Weis did a good job with Clausen, after all Weis is the main factor in devloping Tom Brady into a HOF player. He may not have been a good college coach, but he is great at devloping talent as evidanced by all the success that the Pats had with Brady and only average talent surrounding him during his tenure there.

...
written by cts, February 03, 2010

Average talent surrounding him? You don't win 4 SB's with average talent. Not that it matters to the conversation really.

I don't buy the whole sitting behing Booty argument because Booty was a great college QB with a good career. He just didn't translate well to the NFL and he's still developing. Let's not forget that USC has produced a long line of good QB's in the past decade and if him being a backup is your only knock then what do you have to say about Matt Cassell? He never started and look what he did at NE and is now getting straight up PAID in KC. Just saying your reasoning is flawed. And for the record, everyone on here knows what I think about Sanchez, or at least as being thrown to the wolves too early.

...
written by omar little, February 03, 2010

Dude, Cassel inherited a team that went 18-1 the previous season. He was in the PERFECT situation to succeed. Look how hes doing in KC right now. Thats not even a fair point to make, lets see how he does in KC before we start acting like he is a great player.

...
written by cts, February 03, 2010

I'm really not arguing for or against him in terms of how good he is. I actually think he is overrated. I was pointing out that he went from never starting to being a solid playoff QB to full time starter in the NFL.

I don't even really know why I allowed this to turn into a discussion because I don't like Sanchez and I think Clausen is just as overrated. For Clausen to make it in the NFL he needs to sit for a couple years minimum and a benchwarming project pick isn't worth a #6 pick. At best, he's worth talking up to use as trade bait in the instance that Berry, Haden or McCoy doesn't drop to us...

I think Stafford is/was a solid pick and I see Bradford on that level, but not with a 1st after he had a season ending career. I truely think that will shorten his career.

...
written by Teebone, February 03, 2010

Give Teel a chance,I feel he will do well in the nfl and especially in the Pete system.mora and knapp should have given us some looks at him at the end of the year.I think we should run hard at FA to plug at least a couple of holes.Only then will we see where we are at for the draft.

...
written by cts, February 03, 2010

I'm not saying cut Teel, but I think he is a few years away at the least. I'm not advocating drafting Clausen or Bradford, but there are a few quality mid-round QB's, true mid-rounders not this "lets reach in the 6th round to grab Teel" when he would have been there in the 7th or as an UFA, that are better prospects than Teel in my opinion.