Seahawks Sign LB Michael Wilhoite

[Josea16]

Brock Coyle could make plays.

Michael Wilhoite looks like he can make plays -though the preseason everyone looks better.

Looks a bit bigger and buffer than Coyle. Maybe he breaks out with a better supporting cast.

It's cool, dude he's at least average. Camp competition is a good thing and the bar to being even a backup in most positions is pretty high. Just be better then average. Be quantifiable good in actual NFL games, not that hard right guys?

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

Wilhoite is classic Kacyvenski as a versatile hard-working over-achiever. However, he will give everything he's got even if its average at best but will be a player the coaching staff can trust mentally speaking.

I don't think you'd want him as a full-time starter but as a back-up he will do just fine.

I still think the Seahawks will transition Clark into the Bruce Irvin role as it seems the most logical explanation in adding a third D-Line coach in Clint Hurtt whose NFL experience specialized in OLB.

So I think Wilhote will be the hedge at MLB and insurance as a traditional SLB... if they can't find a rookie to step up.

 

[hawknation2017]

Not a good player, but he's at least better than Brock Coyle (or Arthur Brown). He could make the roster if they don't find a rookie backup MLB they like better.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

MW will add much needed depth, it's a great signing if he isnt expected to start 12 games. He was never supposed to be a starter for us an Michael plays really well in spot duty. Everyone knows what he is. He's not a top end LB but a very solid guy for depth. He struggled for us when he was asked to do more than his talent allowed. He will be fine for you guys

 

[Josea16]

MW will add much needed depth, it's a great signing if he isnt expected to start 12 games. He was never supposed to be a starter for us an Michael plays really well in spot duty. Everyone knows what he is. He's not a top end LB but a very solid guy for depth. He struggled for us when he was asked to do more than his talent allowed. He will be fine for you guys

Pretty much my top expectation. Camp fodder. You better believe we will draft someone to at least make him play his top end if he wants to back up someone in our reloaded back end.

 

[Popeyejones]

Yeah, he's not awful. Fine as a depth guy. He's not good enough to do much but not bad enough to get in the way. He doesn't have any upside, meaning he's perfectly fine as a placeholder low-second string or high-third string player at his position if there's not a guy with upside you can put there.

Signing Wilhoite over Hodges -- particularly in the Hawks' scheme -- is perplexing to me, though.

 

[hawknation2017]

Yeah, he's not awful. Fine as a depth guy. He's not good enough to do much but not bad enough to get in the way. He doesn't have any upside, meaning he's perfectly fine as a placeholder low-second string or high-third string player at his position if there's not a guy with upside you can put there.

Signing Wilhoite over Hodges -- particularly in the Hawks' scheme -- is perplexing to me, though.

They didn't sign Wilhoite over Hodges. Each would play a different position in our scheme. Wilhoite is a Mike and Hodges would likely play Sam or Will LB. Hodges wanted more money than the Seahawks would offer him during his visit. They could still sign Hodges if he is willing to take less.

 

[vin.couve12]

Curious as to how many of you judge "talent?" Are you talking physical ability? Football IQ? A measure of both?

I'm not necessarily a proponent or a detractor of this move, but you're talking about a player who is a better athlete than KJ Wright in every way. So when you say things like overachiever, camp fodder, etc., what are you really referring to?

I'm seriously lacking your perspective here. Is it just because it represents an unknown or what?

 

[vin.couve12]

For the record, I'd really rather have Coyle because I know Norton loved him and we literally tried to find ways to get him on the field last year, IR with designation to return the previous year, and is a pretty damn good athlete overall.

Also, the SLB position is going to average about 30% of snaps with a ceiling of 40%. We're not going to invest heavily in that position with money in particular. We'll have a competition there, which of course, Wilhoite may not be a part of. If he's just competing for backup MLB that's fine, but the SLB position is easily the least intensive LB position to play.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

Over-achiever is more or less a person who might not be as naturally gifted physically or mentally, and those players tend to put in the time and hard work in maximizing their talent and skill.

An over- achiever while used often as a limitation to a players potential i.e. low ceiling, I don't see it that way. I see guys who will compete with everything they got and earn their place with hard-work and resolve.

Wilhoite is a quality signing. And he comes in as a player that you know exactly what he is, there's little learning curve, theres little development, you don't have to coach him up. Obviously, there is scheme and chemistry obstacles but that doesnt seem like an uphill battle.

Wilhoite is basically to the LBer corps, as what Tony McDaniel was to the DTs last year. You put him in a position that plays to his strengths and you'll get a really solid player.

 

[bighawk]

I like this signing. He plays hard and is a special team standout. He could be a starter unless they draft someone relatively high. He is better than Coyle in my eyes. I dont know what some of you guys saw in him.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Wilhoite is basically to the LBer corps, as what Tony McDaniel was to the DTs last year. You put him in a position that plays to his strengths and you'll get a really solid player.

This is as good as you can ask for in a backup player. Basically a low-grade starter for a role on special teams and second string work. And if that's what he brings to the Seahawks, then it's a solid signing.

 

[Popeyejones]

Yeah, he's not awful. Fine as a depth guy. He's not good enough to do much but not bad enough to get in the way. He doesn't have any upside, meaning he's perfectly fine as a placeholder low-second string or high-third string player at his position if there's not a guy with upside you can put there.

Signing Wilhoite over Hodges -- particularly in the Hawks' scheme -- is perplexing to me, though.

They didn't sign Wilhoite over Hodges. Each would play a different position in our scheme. Wilhoite is a Mike and Hodges would likely play Sam or Will LB. Hodges wanted more money than the Seahawks would offer him during his visit. They could still sign Hodges if he is willing to take less.

Link to Hodges wanting more money than the Hawks were offering?

WIlhoite, IMO, is an imperfect fit for the Mike or Will in the Hawks defense.

Hodges is a good fit for the Mike (he best projects as a poor man's Wagner IMO), but could also be worth a look for Sam (the only weak link in the Hawks LB corp).

 

[sutz]

Don't the Seahawks spend a lot of time in a 4-2-5 defense, which would mean this signing is kind of ho-hum, nice, now let's move on?

Seems to me that I read somewhere that we use a lot of 2LB sets, whether that is in nickel, or in heavy sets like a 5-2-4.

 

[hawknation2017]

WIlhoite, IMO, is an imperfect fit for the Mike or Will in the Hawks defense.

Hodges is a good fit for the Mike (he best projects as a poor man's Wagner IMO), but could also be worth a look for Sam (the only weak link in the Hawks LB corp).

Interesting, maybe I'm wrong then. Being a Niner fan, you would have more knowledge of those players than I do. I think of Wilhoite as a (very) poor man's Lofa Tatupu, with much worse instincts, who is better playing north-south. But I have a hard time imagining him playing in space on the weakside or holding the edge on the strongside or covering a TE, due to his lack of length.

I remember Hodges played SLB in college in a 4-3 scheme. And I think he played some on the outside with the Vikings before transitioning inside with the 49ers. He appears to have the length and experience as a Sam to keep containment and cover a TE. But it's probably too late now, as the team moved on after Hodges' visit and decided to sign Terence Garvin (who has a lot of the same characteristics as Hodges).

 

[massari]

How is this 31 year old guy not making the vet minimum?

Should have an extra $1M in cap room but instead choose to pay him $1.55M?

Not nearly as baffling as the Cary Williams signing, but still.

 

[sdog1981]

How did this get brought back up?

 

[Josea16]

How is this 31 year old guy not making the vet minimum?

Should have an extra $1M in cap room but instead choose to pay him $1.55M?

Not nearly as baffling as the Cary Williams signing, but still.

Who cares? He's obviously at least league average if not far better. Chill out about other people's money already. As it is expect a 2 linebacker look almost always so this is a nonissue. This draft told everyone we're going to try a 4-2-5 as our base defense. Too many big ballhawk safeties picked to assume something else.

 

[massari]

He's obviously at least league average if not far better. .

He is? Michael Wilhoite? Not sure if serious.

Just curious why they'd decide to give an aging guy who's far below average against the run+pass anything but the vet minimum. It's only $1.55M, but these small amounts all add up.

PFF - "Wilhoite was one of the worst run stoppers in the league on limited snaps last year, and is below average in coverage"

 

[MontanaHawk05]

The guy in this video getting juked out of his shoes by Rawls and then outrun to the end zone like a crippled mule?

That's Wilhoite.