Frank Clark to KC for a 1st and a 2nd!!

[Sgt. Largent]

We will never know about how the McDowell pick would have worked out as a football player, situation being what it was he was dumb for doing what he did. Can't blame John and Pete for that, unfortunate.

You can't, I can.

Given that attitude, if you go buy a brand new car for $40K and it was rated the most unreliable car on consumer reports....and the car blows up...it's not your fault?

"not my fault" = nothing to learn or change. Making the same mistakes again and again = insanity.

What was the difference in the McDowell pick and the Clark or Irvin picks?

All had question marks. That's where the value Pete and John covet comes from, off the charts physical traits, but questionable emotional or immaturity issues to make top 15 prospects fall to the bottom of the first round, or early 2nd.

Some of you guys are amazing hindsight GM's. "We only want the draft picks with questionable pasts or work ethic IF they work out OK!..........no more of the ones that don't work out."

No difference, except McDowell was scouted as pretty much a brainless risk on top of the other concerns.
ALL were playing Russian roulette with a 3 round revolver.

You want to get burned once every 3 top picks then keep it up. :irishdrinkers:

All picks you can get burned, there is no perfect formula.

You're gonna give me a 2/3rd's chance of drafting a game changer at the bottom of the first round or top of the 2nd? Sign me up.

You're cherrypicking in hindsight, that's not being honest to the conversation. So all I ask is start criticizing the Clark and Irvin picks, cause they're exactly the same. Be consistent.

 

[knownone]

You can't, I can.

Given that attitude, if you go buy a brand new car for $40K and it was rated the most unreliable car on consumer reports....and the car blows up...it's not your fault?

"not my fault" = nothing to learn or change. Making the same mistakes again and again = insanity.

I can return the car since it has a warranty, hard to do that with a guy that has a brain injury, really bad analogy. That and yes he had question marks, so did Irvin, so did Clark, if Malik had go into a car accident and been injured and could not play I guess you would have the same position then.

Should not have been driving, should not have been on that road, should have known better then to be in a car at that time of the day etc.

I agree with everything you’ve said.

The knocks against McDowell coming out the draft were about his work ethic and leadership ability. I don’t understand how that in any way correlates to the accident that he was involved in.

Wrong!

“Worst interview we did,” one NFL team told Eric Edholm.

“Awful interview. Awful,” another reportedly said.

I need that light on more often, and he didn’t like it when we asked him about that.”

https://thespun.com/big-ten/michigan-state/malik-mcdowell-terrrible-interviews-combine/4?amp=1

Care to explain how a bad interview correlates to an ATV accident?

 

[Seymour]

You can't, I can.

Given that attitude, if you go buy a brand new car for $40K and it was rated the most unreliable car on consumer reports....and the car blows up...it's not your fault?

"not my fault" = nothing to learn or change. Making the same mistakes again and again = insanity.

What was the difference in the McDowell pick and the Clark or Irvin picks?

All had question marks. That's where the value Pete and John covet comes from, off the charts physical traits, but questionable emotional or immaturity issues to make top 15 prospects fall to the bottom of the first round, or early 2nd.

Some of you guys are amazing hindsight GM's. "We only want the draft picks with questionable pasts or work ethic IF they work out OK!..........no more of the ones that don't work out."

No difference, except McDowell was scouted as pretty much a brainless risk on top of the other concerns.
ALL were playing Russian roulette with a 3 round revolver.

You want to get burned once every 3 top picks then keep it up. :irishdrinkers:

So as long as they work out it's ok, but if you don't take a chance you don't get a Irvin or a Clark, for that matter Sherman, or Kam, or a too short Earl. Or the risk they took with Lynch being such a problem. You have to weigh risk for reward and like all gambles sometimes you lose, Harvin and Graham cost us more then McDowell, 1st rounder and Unger and a lot of money and little or marginal performance.

What a load of crap!
Wagner was a 2nd!!!
You want Clark over Wagner??
Irvin was a reach and we well would have done better there also!! He make the pro bowl I missed? :roll:

 

[chris98251]

So he isn't a leader, big deal and didn't interview well, he also played out of position and had issues with the staff. There was a lot going on there that you didn't include.

 

[Seymour]

I can return the car since it has a warranty, hard to do that with a guy that has a brain injury, really bad analogy. That and yes he had question marks, so did Irvin, so did Clark, if Malik had go into a car accident and been injured and could not play I guess you would have the same position then.

Should not have been driving, should not have been on that road, should have known better then to be in a car at that time of the day etc.

I agree with everything you’ve said.

The knocks against McDowell coming out the draft were about his work ethic and leadership ability. I don’t understand how that in any way correlates to the accident that he was involved in.

Wrong!

“Worst interview we did,” one NFL team told Eric Edholm.

“Awful interview. Awful,” another reportedly said.

I need that light on more often, and he didn’t like it when we asked him about that.”

https://thespun.com/big-ten/michigan-state/malik-mcdowell-terrrible-interviews-combine/4?amp=1

Care to explain how a bad interview correlates to an ATV accident?

Sure!!

I'll keep it simple.

Stupid people do stupid shit!!

The End.

 

[chris98251]

I agree with everything you’ve said.

The knocks against McDowell coming out the draft were about his work ethic and leadership ability. I don’t understand how that in any way correlates to the accident that he was involved in.

Wrong!

“Worst interview we did,” one NFL team told Eric Edholm.

“Awful interview. Awful,” another reportedly said.

I need that light on more often, and he didn’t like it when we asked him about that.”

https://thespun.com/big-ten/michigan-state/malik-mcdowell-terrrible-interviews-combine/4?amp=1

Care to explain how a bad interview correlates to an ATV accident?

Sure!!

I'll keep it simple.

Stupid people do stupid shit!!

The End.

 

[Seymour]

^^^^^^^^^^ :lol: :lol: :lol:

Funny....but wrong.

Not going anywhere just yet. :snack:

 

[sutz]

Well, if he had a couple of bad interviews with a couple of teams, maybe he didn't want to play for those teams.

:dunno:

:twisted:

 

[Chapow]

You can't, I can.

Given that attitude, if you go buy a brand new car for $40K and it was rated the most unreliable car on consumer reports....and the car blows up...it's not your fault?

"not my fault" = nothing to learn or change. Making the same mistakes again and again = insanity.

I can return the car since it has a warranty, hard to do that with a guy that has a brain injury, really bad analogy. That and yes he had question marks, so did Irvin, so did Clark, if Malik had go into a car accident and been injured and could not play I guess you would have the same position then.

Should not have been driving, should not have been on that road, should have known better then to be in a car at that time of the day etc.

I agree with everything you’ve said.

The knocks against McDowell coming out the draft were about his work ethic and leadership ability. I don’t understand how that in any way correlates to the accident that he was involved in.

Wrong!

“Worst interview we did,” one NFL team told Eric Edholm.

“Awful interview. Awful,” another reportedly said.

I need that light on more often, and he didn’t like it when we asked him about that.”

https://thespun.com/big-ten/michigan-state/malik-mcdowell-terrrible-interviews-combine/4?amp=1

That article that you just provided essentially boiled down to, some of the people who interviewed McDowell at the combine didn't like that he got defensive when they questioned him about his "uneven play". Which in no way shape or form implies that they thought he was stupid. It implies that they didn't like his attitude in the interview.

It also said "most scouts agree the 6-foot-6, 295-pound pass rusher is a tremendous physical talent".

And this was supposed to be your damning evidence that Pete and John obviously should have known better than to use a second round pick on a guy with high first round talent that had some (correctable) issues?

 

[Seymour]

I can return the car since it has a warranty, hard to do that with a guy that has a brain injury, really bad analogy. That and yes he had question marks, so did Irvin, so did Clark, if Malik had go into a car accident and been injured and could not play I guess you would have the same position then.

Should not have been driving, should not have been on that road, should have known better then to be in a car at that time of the day etc.

I agree with everything you’ve said.

The knocks against McDowell coming out the draft were about his work ethic and leadership ability. I don’t understand how that in any way correlates to the accident that he was involved in.

Wrong!

“Worst interview we did,” one NFL team told Eric Edholm.

“Awful interview. Awful,” another reportedly said.

I need that light on more often, and he didn’t like it when we asked him about that.”

https://thespun.com/big-ten/michigan-state/malik-mcdowell-terrrible-interviews-combine/4?amp=1

That article that you just provided essentially boiled down to, some of the people who interviewed McDowell at the combine didn't like that he got defensive when they questioned him about his "uneven play". Which in no way shape or form implies that they thought he was stupid. It implies that they didn't like his attitude in the interview.

It also said "most scouts agree the 6-foot-6, 295-pound pass rusher is a tremendous physical talent".

And this was supposed to be your damning evidence that Pete and John obviously should have known better than to use a second round pick on a guy with high first round talent that had some (correctable) issues?

Nope. Just one of many reports that agreed. Combine that with his off the wall Lady cop slamming cussing video, the bar arguement he was thrown out of...and ya it gets more obvious.
Not pulling up all those links, look them up if you want.

I question it was a mistake and the "nothing we can do" BS.
If true, why did Schnieder say they have since changed their minimum draft requirements for future picks?
Obviously that is admission of error.

 

[knownone]

I agree with everything you’ve said.

The knocks against McDowell coming out the draft were about his work ethic and leadership ability. I don’t understand how that in any way correlates to the accident that he was involved in.

Wrong!

“Worst interview we did,” one NFL team told Eric Edholm.

“Awful interview. Awful,” another reportedly said.

I need that light on more often, and he didn’t like it when we asked him about that.”

https://thespun.com/big-ten/michigan-state/malik-mcdowell-terrrible-interviews-combine/4?amp=1

Care to explain how a bad interview correlates to an ATV accident?

Sure!!

I'll keep it simple.

Stupid people do stupid shit!!

The End.

Everything comes back to Wittgenstein's ruler.

"Unless you have confidence in the ruler's reliability, if you use a ruler to measure a table you may also be using the table to measure the ruler."

In other words, your opinion says more about you than the topic you are giving your opinion on.

 

[Chapow]

I agree with everything you’ve said.

The knocks against McDowell coming out the draft were about his work ethic and leadership ability. I don’t understand how that in any way correlates to the accident that he was involved in.

Wrong!

“Worst interview we did,” one NFL team told Eric Edholm.

“Awful interview. Awful,” another reportedly said.

I need that light on more often, and he didn’t like it when we asked him about that.”

https://thespun.com/big-ten/michigan-state/malik-mcdowell-terrrible-interviews-combine/4?amp=1

That article that you just provided essentially boiled down to, some of the people who interviewed McDowell at the combine didn't like that he got defensive when they questioned him about his "uneven play". Which in no way shape or form implies that they thought he was stupid. It implies that they didn't like his attitude in the interview.

It also said "most scouts agree the 6-foot-6, 295-pound pass rusher is a tremendous physical talent".

And this was supposed to be your damning evidence that Pete and John obviously should have known better than to use a second round pick on a guy with high first round talent that had some (correctable) issues?

Nope. Just one of many reports that agreed. Combine that with his off the wall Lady cop slamming cussing video, the bar arguement he was thrown out of...and ya it gets more obvious.
Not pulling up all those links, look them up if you want.

I question it was a mistake and the "nothing we can do" BS.
If true, why did Schnieder say they have since changed their minimum draft requirements for future picks?
Obviously that is admission of error.

Wait a second. Wasn't the lady cop cussing and bar argument thing the same incident? And didn't that happen after the draft and after his ATV accident? Like, well after? So how exactly were those things supposed to be indicators that Pete and John shouldn't draft the guy if they didn't happen until after he was already drafted?

BTW, just because someone has issues or makes bad choices doesn't mean they are stupid.

I think when people say there's nothing we can do, they are speaking in regards to a guy getting into a freak accident that left him unable to play football. Acting like they should have known something like that would happen is just wildly unreasonable.

 

[Seymour]

They are character indicators of the person Pete and John choose and that agrees with the other scouting reports.

Common sense....a lost talent.

It's not a freak accident when a freak gets into it. It's normal.

Kick it around. I'm done with McDouche.

Answer me the Schnieder question and I'll play more.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

Schnieder is a guy who can find potential HOF talent in the middle rounds. Now we can actually use a first rounder AND trade down to get multiple 3rd rounders (Russell Wlison). GOD WHAT A GREAT DAY. We could get somebody potentially as good as Clarke in a middle round, this year, and use the first round on another weapon for #3.

SCHNIEDER FINDS HALL OF FAME PLAYERS IN THE THIRD ROUND, YA'LL.

GO HAWKS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Like E.J. Wilson, Kris Durham, and Winston Guy? Those HoF players?

They got good value, but the draft is still a crapshoot. I would think Malik McDowell would have taught us that.

Not every draft pick's going to work out, especially later round picks.

Even with the duds, I'd guess Pete and John's success rate on 3rd-7th (and undrafted) is higher than just about any other team over their tenure here.

They took a sub-500 team and turned them into one of the best running teams/best defenses in NFL history--and won the big one. They have losers, of course, but on balance YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT--THEY KICK ASS

GO HAWKS!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[olyfan63]

What was the difference in the McDowell pick and the Clark or Irvin picks?

All had question marks. That's where the value Pete and John covet comes from, off the charts physical traits, but questionable emotional or immaturity issues to make top 15 prospects fall to the bottom of the first round, or early 2nd.

Some of you guys are amazing hindsight GM's. "We only want the draft picks with questionable pasts or work ethic IF they work out OK!..........no more of the ones that don't work out."

Key difference:
* There were NEVER *any* question marks about Clark or Irvin's work ethic or motor or desire, either in practice or game day.
* There were not questions about Clark or Irvin's teammate characteristics, and commitment to the team
* There were not questions about Clark's "leadership qualities", only about his judgment in girlfriends.

McDowell... takes plays off, questionable leadership qualities, questionable smarts = high risk, lower ceiling

As annoying and opinionated as Seymour can be at times (can't we all), he is SO RIGHT ON with all his comments on McDouche, er McDowell in this thread.

Care to explain how a bad interview correlates to an ATV accident?

Sure!!

I'll keep it simple.

Stupid people do stupid shit!!

The End.

And this was supposed to be your damning evidence[/color] that Pete and John obviously should have known better than to use a second round pick on a guy with high first round talent that had some (correctable) issues?

Nope. Just one of many reports that agreed. Combine that with his off the wall Lady cop slamming cussing video, the bar arguement he was thrown out of...and ya it gets more obvious.
Not pulling up all those links, look them up if you want.

I question it was a mistake and the "nothing we can do" BS.
If true, why did Schnieder say they have since changed their minimum draft requirements for future picks?
Obviously that is admission of error.

The evidence also shows Pete and John also changed the screening for mental health issues and personality disorders after the Percy Harvin experience. I've said numerous times that Percy Harvin checked a lot of boxes for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), in particular the sociopathic flavor of that disorder, an especially toxic brew. I also believe the Seahawks added a screening for BPD and the similar condition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) to their player evaluation process. I was happy to see they brought in WR Brandon Marshall, the only "out" BPD star athlete I know of; Marshall has dealt with his BPD issues, but unfortunately his football tank was on E when he got here.

Some NFL poster children checking many boxes for NPD would be Vince Young and Terrell Owens.

Anyway, McDowell wasn't just mental-health-questionable, he had rocks for brains, just not very bright overall, and poor emotional control.

Take a not-so-bright guy with questionable effort level like McDowell up against football-smart guys like Cliff Avril, Bobby Wagner, KJ Wright, ET, Sherman, Frank Clark, even Brandon Browner*, and the requirement of a Pete Carroll defense to have football-smart guys who do their job, EVERY PLAY, and does anyone else besides me see a problem here?

I think John Schneider mentioning that the Hawks have changed their minimum requirements for future draft picks speaks volumes. Like with the Harvin fiasco, Pete and John have acknowledged their preventable (in hindsight) mistake on McDowell and won't get fooled again by a super athlete with super-low-intelligence and poor emotional control, and I suspect, detectable-in-hindsight mental health issues that were apparent in McDowell once they stopped salivating over his athletic potential.

Of course, they'll make other mistakes instead. I just hope they don't go too far towards the Holmgren-Ruskell side of the scale by bringing in all a lot of high-character guys with no athletic talent.

* Mr. B. Browner and his football smarts cost the Seahawks their second Lombardi trophy; without Browner, there is no pick by Butler to deny the 'Hawks. Say what you want about Browner in his life outside of football, but in that moment, his football smarts and situational awareness shut down Wilson and the Seahawks.

 

[themunn]

So just so I'm clear, or someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but based on trades so far, we traded Frank Clark for:

37th pick
114th pick
118th pick
132nd pick
142nd pick

Plus a 2nd round pick next year?

That seems a pretty good haul, in particular since we also save ourselves a £105m contract too.

We also have the 124th pick in amongst all that too, so we've got some real ammo in the 4th round - they must see a lot of talent they think will still be available there.

Oh no wait, I've got confused, we traded our original pick and used the KC pick for our selection, though granted, since we had 29 and 30 it's kind of a wash as we could have traded either of those away.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

So just so I'm clear, or someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but based on trades so far, we traded Frank Clark for:

37th pick
114th pick
118th pick
132nd pick
142nd pick

Plus a 2nd round pick next year?

This would be incorrect. We traded Clark for

1.29 (2019)
2.?? (2020)

Also we traded back (lost draft stock) by relinquishing 3.84, and gaining 3.92

Clark is now turned into LJ Collier (pick acquired from KC)
Whatever we get in R2 next year
Whatever we get in R3.92 this year.

The other additional picks you list, all come from trades from our organic #21 overall.

 

[hawk45]

They are character indicators of the person Pete and John choose and that agrees with the other scouting reports.

Common sense....a lost talent.

It's not a freak accident when a freak gets into it. It's normal.

Kick it around. I'm done with McDouche.

Answer me the Schnieder question and I'll play more.

I share the frustration with how McDowell turned out, but here's my view:

If McDowell would have failed as a player because of bad attitude, low motor, bad teammate, poor leader, then I would have chalked that up as a data point that those college question marks translated to the NFL this time.

My biggest concerns with McDowell were actually on the field and locker room behavior, and that's NOT what bit him. Yes he wasn't the sharpest tool in the drawer and yes dull tools may exercise poor judgment off the field, but to me Irvin and Clark were far greater risks to exercise poor judgment off the field because they had non-trivial examples of doing so in the past.

Wouldn't you agree that if you took 2 players, one with a splashy off-the-field poor decision making and one with primarily on-the-field or locker room poor behavior, that player 1 is the one you'd be most likely to say "saw that coming" if they erred off the field?

In light of that, I don't see how this pick is significantly riskier in terms of propensity to ATV oneself out of a career than past picks of Irvin, Clark, Browner, etc. that they've been making for years.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

So just so I'm clear, or someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but based on trades so far, we traded Frank Clark for:

37th pick
114th pick
118th pick
132nd pick
142nd pick

Plus a 2nd round pick next year?

That seems a pretty good haul, in particular since we also save ourselves a £105m contract too.

We also have the 124th pick in amongst all that too, so we've got some real ammo in the 4th round - they must see a lot of talent they think will still be available there.

Oh no wait, I've got confused, we traded our original pick and used the KC pick for our selection, though granted, since we had 29 and 30 it's kind of a wash as we could have traded either of those away.

As of now. I can almost guarantee you we're trading down again at 37, and then probably trading back up into the back half of the 2nd round or early 3rd.

At this point in the draft player 40 can have the same draft grade as player 100 depending on what you're looking for.

Either way, John has turned the Clark pick into at least 3-4 picks to wheel and deal.

 

[olyfan63]

They are character indicators of the person Pete and John choose and that agrees with the other scouting reports.

Common sense....a lost talent.

It's not a freak accident when a freak gets into it. It's normal.

Kick it around. I'm done with McDouche.

Answer me the Schnieder question and I'll play more.

I share the frustration with how McDowell turned out, but here's my view:

If McDowell would have failed as a player because of bad attitude, low motor, bad teammate, poor leader, then I would have chalked that up as a data point that those college question marks translated to the NFL this time.

My biggest concerns with McDowell were actually on the field and locker room behavior, and that's NOT what bit him. Yes he wasn't the sharpest tool in the drawer and yes dull tools may exercise poor judgment off the field, but to me Irvin and Clark were far greater risks to exercise poor judgment off the field because they had non-trivial examples of doing so in the past.

Wouldn't you agree that if you took 2 players, one with a splashy off-the-field poor decision making and one with primarily on-the-field or locker room poor behavior, that player 1 is the one you'd be most likely to say "saw that coming" if they erred off the field?

In light of that, I don't see how this pick is significantly riskier in terms of propensity to ATV oneself out of a career than past picks of Irvin, Clark, Browner, etc. that they've been making for years.

McDowell was a much, much greater risk than Clark, and a bigger risk than Irvin.
The Seahawks investigated Clark thoroughly, and found that he was involved with a psycho-bitch girlfriend who was at the root of the situation, and a hysterical the-man-is-always-guilty media who are inclined to shoot the MAN first in any DV or assault or rape allegations and ask questions later. (Duke Lacrosse, anyone? UVA "gang rape" hoax? Tawana Brawley? There's plenty more...) I've observed that it's hard for people who haven't been on the wrong side of a false allegation by a Borderline or Narcissist to truly understand these situations, and recognize the patterns. Clark's "abused" girlfriend checked the personality disorder boxes, Borderline specifically. The usual media prostitutes simply took the story and uncritically ran with it because it fit a narrative they were pushing at that time.

Clark was not a risk, was never a risk, other than a media risk for the Seahawks at the time. I said it over and over after the pick and before Clark's rookie season. Clark punched Ifedi? Good, somone freakin' needed to, to wake Ifedi up. Don't doubt that Ifedi had a role in it. Also, Clark is a *smart* guy. Passionate and emotional at times, yes, which is an asset on the field, but also a smart guy. We got 3+ very good years out of Clark on the cheap, I say 3+ because he was a part-timer as a rookie. Thank you Frank, for excellent production while you were here, and being trade bait for draft picks to restock the Seahawks talent cupboard. The Seahawks hit the jackpot on you.

Irvin was less of a sure thing, and we got a couple good years out of him on his rookie deal. Clark is a smart guy, but that's not the first thing that I think of when it comes to Irvin. Irvin, however, had a rep as a super-hard-working, in practice and on the field, and a guy who persisted through numerous obstacles, some of his own making, and had shown a good degree of coachability. Irvin was a key factor in the 2013/14 NFCCG in containing Krapernick, and helping get us to the Superb Owl. So thank you Bruce for that.

McDowell? Huge difference. The Seahawks have gotten smarter and won't make this mistake on a player like you again. He's just not a very smart guy and doesn't think ahead. Everything about him screams "Entitlement!" and "Stupid!" rather than "Hard worker!" like was apparent with both Clark and Irvin. McDowell is much closer, character-wise, to Lawrence Phillips -- remember him? Than to actual NFL football players like Clark or Irvin. A million dollar body with a 10-cent brain.

For a refresher on Lawrence Phillips, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Phillips
In McDowell's defense, he would have probably only been a Lawrence Phillips "lite". We might have been looking at a situation akin to Adam "PacMan" Jones, physical talent on the field and a mess off it, (witness the LV female cop incident) and maybe only getting 2 years of actual play out of him on his rookie contract. Or maybe Father Flanagan Pete could have reclaimed his soul and gotten him on the path of righteousness. Due to McDowell's own stupidity, we will never know.