More than 6 WR?

[Anthony!]

Obviously, I meant Bates who is 6'1, 220.

Norwood is big enough, yeah, if you're comparing him to Sidney Rice. They are pretty much carbon copies in terms of size and ability. But what Norwood is not, is a big body.(whether he plays big or not) nor does he possess the strength a big WR would have.

But again If your arguing that Norwood fills the "Rice" role in the Offense, and as Chris alluded to that the Seahawks were searching for a big "WR" until they signed Rice, my point still stands. If you're saying Norwood fits the bill as a "big" WR then why does the 6th WR automatically have to be a big WR (like according to Anthony!)

Because it doesn't, it won't, and the most logical outcome is that it will go to the best reciever regardless of stature and that's only if the Seahawks carry 6 WRs.

I'm not saying any of you are necessarily wrong but that the competition is just much broader than what some of you are trying to paint it... in that player "X" has an advantage because of size. That's what I'm really arguing.

so short answer yes Norwood can fill the big role and no that does not mean we would not like another big WR given Harvin is under 6 foot as well as Baldwin, and Richardson is barely 6 foot. Like I said unless one of the smaller guys just dazzles Height will matter.

 

[chris98251]

Well documented by whom...the FANS? I can't remember PC/JS ever stating they absolutely must have a big WR. They've more or less cut those guys in the last 2 years or let them walk away: 6-5 BMW, 6-4 Durham, 6-1 Obomanu, 6-1 Harper, 6-5 Williams, and 6-3 Rice.

And drafting a big WR didn't seem like a priority in a draft full of them.

So to me height doesn't take the precedent over actual ability.

Beside a lot of you guys are still underrating Luke Willson, who is probably the best WR on team over 6'1.

And now that McCoy likely won't play, you're looking at one of the athletic receiving TEs making the roster who more or less are "BIG WRs"

Cooper Helfet, Rashaun Allen, and presumably Morrell Presley (since he's been practicing at TE).

Pete has said they are looking for certain body types for different positions, he has been trying to find someone to be Sidney Rice before Sidney Rice, He got Sidney Rice and he has been hurt, he is looking for his replacement. The whole mantra of this team is bigger and faster, has been since day one. It is Known.

Still hasn't stopped those them from cutting those guys and moving on going with talent over height.

I'm not saying they aren't looking for those types of players, all I'm saying is they aren't going single out WRs for the 6th spot based on their prototype... the best WRs will make the team.

I never said it did, looking for a guy that can run as fast catch as good and get open that has more physical bulk, muscle and durability to take a hit is just that, looking. If they have guys that don't measure up in stature that do the things that help the team win they of course will take him.

We seen the Sonics try to fill the Center position for years with big guys that just could not cut it and were moved out by smaller Power Forwards basically because the were not able to run, pass defend, rebound or shoot as well as the smaller guy. Idiots that ran the front office kept signing unproven guys to big contracts and killed the ability to keep more talented players. Thank God we are not selling the farm to find our WR the same way.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

I think we are in one of thos situations where we kind of misunderstood each other, are are more or less arguing for the same thing.

The Big WR comment was more or less referring to the last 2 years, than the whole of PC/JS tenure. It hasn't been much of priority with Wilson at QB.

They cut Rice, took a flyer on Chris Mathews and they entered the draft, and it still didn't seem like a priority, and we can argue that Norwood is a big WR (on this team he is because he's taller and bigger than most) but when I think of big WR I'm thinking 6'3, 215... big bodied and powerful... which Norwood is not.

As I clarified in other post I'm not saying Seahawks aren't looking for those types, I'm just saying, what you kind of just said, stature doesn't take the precedent over ability. Those guys werent kept because they couldn't cut it.

And that's what I've been trying to convey to Anthony! Height doesn't hold an advantage, the best WRs will make the team regardless of stature.

Last year Stephen Williams didn't make the team just because he was 6-5, he made the team because he competed and was better than Chris Harper, who played poorly in the pre-season.

And right now not that this is your argument but since this is what really sparked the debate is that Lockette is not a lock, he's competing with about 3-4 more WR who have a legitamte chance in making the team if the Seahawks keep 6. And right now Mathews nor Presley have shown enough to automatically put them in the conversation just because they fit a certain prototype.

Not to mention Presley looks to be exclusively a TE now with McCoy being injury.

Again, not your argument, just clarifying what I'm truly arguing against.

 

[skater18000]

Wouldn't it just be wonderful if we could trade away Jermaine Kearse for at least a 5th round pick (note: Kearse is a FA this after this season)

Leaving us with:

1. Baldwin
2. Harvin
3. Norwood
4. Richardson
5. Bates
6. Lockette

 

[onanygivensunday]

Wouldn't it just be wonderful if we could trade away Jermaine Kearse for at least a 5th round pick (note: Kearse is a FA this after this season)

Leaving us with:

1. Baldwin
2. Harvin
3. Norwood
4. Richardson
5. Bates
6. Lockette

Not really.

Kearse has shown his value to this team.

Bates has not... and Lockette's value has been very limited to date.

I should add that with four (4) expected compensatory picks we will receive next year the value of another 5th round pick is pretty low.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

No, have to disagree with a Kearse trade.

Both Harvin and Baldwin have red flags whether its their size or injury history.

Both Richardson (shoulder) and Norwood (foot) are unproven and have nagging injury concerns at the moment.

Bates is all potential at this point and his ceiling to me looks like a bigger, stronger Doug Baldwin. The guy is just smooth, consistent, and clutch but he needs to translate his practice field success to the playing field.

Lockette is less potential but close to his average ceiling as a WR where he basically runs two routes where he has value: Cross and Go. But he also proved to be a good downfield blocker and an impact gunner, but that not necessarily the toughest jobs to replace.

Kearse just provides a certain insurance the other WRs don't, and, as of right now, he might be the best jump ball WR on the team and he has a knack of scoring and doing it in style. But I get the sentiment of a trade, he's an RFA and one has to question if he would be worth the 2nd round tender. But as of right now does he even have 5th round value to any team out there? I'm not sure but as quality insurance and all-around verstaile WR who excels on Special Teams he's worth more to us than a 5th round pick and relying on uncertainy to fill the depth.

 

[chris98251]

Kearse is a cheap resign, he was another lets see what you can do given a chance type player, he has been durable and everyone needs to get off the drop bad hands thing, he keeps getting better.

 

[Russ Willstrong]

Trading away Kearse for a fifth would be a poor decision as he is one of our more dependable receivers.
Lockett has been in the league longer but is less proven. He does not fight for the ball as well Norwood, Richardson or Kearse despite his physical measurements. If I must bet my money on the sixth wideout I might double down on Bates the former qb who has reshaped his physique and turning heads as a potential possession WR. There is something to be said about this guys grit, versatility and intelligence that fits right in with the Seahawks values and beliefs. His situation mirrors Sweezy in that they are ultra competitive athletes willing to do anything to get on the field.

 

[Tical21]

It would not surprise me at all if Kearse leads this team in receiving TD's. Russell trusts him more with the 50/50 balls than any other receivers we have. He is the only receiver that we throw the back shoulder fade to when covered. That guy is a difference maker for us.

 

[DavidSeven]

There's precisely zero chance that we keep seven WRs. I'm not even sure I'd bet on there being any more than five, which is the number we've gone with many times before. We got some interesting guys in the mix, but I don't see 6th-8th guys being special enough to justify making major compromises at other position groups.

Right now, I'd say Harvin, Baldwin, Kearse, and the two rookies are the only guys who have to be on the roster. Maybe you throw in one more guy as Harvin-insurance (e.g. whoever wins the Bates-Lockette-Walters competition), but I think that's far from a sure thing at this point.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

It would not surprise me at all if Kearse leads this team in receiving TD's. Russell trusts him more with the 50/50 balls than any other receivers we have. He is the only receiver that we throw the back shoulder fade to when covered. That guy is a difference maker for us.

That Super Bowl catch is the stuff of legend.

 

[hawkfan68]

It would not surprise me at all if Kearse leads this team in receiving TD's. Russell trusts him more with the 50/50 balls than any other receivers we have. He is the only receiver that we throw the back shoulder fade to when covered. That guy is a difference maker for us.

That Super Bowl catch is the stuff of legend.

That was a nice play but I believe his TD catch in the NFCCG was even better. That was the game changer right there.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Does anyone think there is a chance that we keep more than the expected 6 WR's? What position would you subtract depth from in order to carry the extra WR? Is there one WR that would make it worth it in your opinion?

I think it is possible, it depends the lock are Harvin 5'11", Kearse 6'1", Baldwin 5'10", Norwood 6'2", Richardson 6'0". After that it is between Lockette 6'2", Presley 6'4", Matthews 6'5", mainly I see height. As to were we might keep less, TE, FB, QB. Presley looks like he could play both TE and Wr so maybe there is your reason.

Not to burst your bubble but I don't think the Seahawks care one iota if a WR is tall or not. They'll choose the best players and the best WRs that work well with Wilson especially when things breakdown.

Obviously you have the first 5: Harvin, Baldwin, Kearse, Richardson, Norwood who will likely make it barring injury.

Then the 3 WRs competing for a 6th spot (if the keep one) is Lockette, Bates, and Walters.

Then the best of the rest are Arceto Clark and the rising Kevin Smith.

The Seahawks aren't simply going to keep Presley and Matthews just because they are tall WRs, they have to compete, they have have to earn it. And thus far both aren't even the top 10 of 14 WRs.

Dude it is well documented they have been looking for a big receiver for some time. Unless a smaller wr really blows the door off size will matter.

Pete said in an interview that his view on this exact subject has changed since he started coaching us. While it use to be the case, their current point of view is size in fact doesn't matter.

 

[ImTheScientist]

It would not surprise me at all if Kearse leads this team in receiving TD's.

I see little chance of that happening. Would you like to put some money/odds on it or just pride/internet bet between 12s?

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

No way we keep more than six receivers. We're not a team that lives and dies by the passing game, and so there are just too many other positions that are at least as valuable if not more so.

I also don't see us getting rid of Kearse. He is young and green still, but has shown the ability to go up and get contested balls and step up in big games and when it really counts. That's exactly the type of player we look for, and now that we have him, it would be nonsensical to get rid of him for a bit of potential we have no clue about.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

It would not surprise me at all if Kearse leads this team in receiving TD's. Russell trusts him more with the 50/50 balls than any other receivers we have. He is the only receiver that we throw the back shoulder fade to when covered. That guy is a difference maker for us.

That Super Bowl catch is the stuff of legend.

That was a nice play but I believe his TD catch in the NFCCG was even better. That was the game changer right there.

Not going to argue that. Point is we're not dumping Kearse.Tall is nice but clutch and grit are better....remember Largent?

 

[NewJerseyHawk]

Agree with Missou on Kearse, he will stick around beyond next year anyway.....I'd stash Norwood on PUP and go with Bates and Lockette.....if Harvin or Richardson light it up, we will be scoring a lot of points early, especially when the weather is still nice and we will need points against GB, SD, Denver etc.......if either gets nicked up, which they are likely to do since they are very small, then you have options to get Norwood healed and back later in the year....I think PUP means you sit 6 weeks/games, but I'd check that to be sure.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Welcome to. Net NJHawk.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Welcome to. Net NJHawk.

 

[NewJerseyHawk]

thanks Missou....i was around WAY back when....site looked different back when Holmgren took over....not sure if Aros is still around these days....most of my time was spent back racking my brain and trying to figure out how Seattle would make the playoffs.....now I'm thinking back to back or three-peat....!!