The Big Prototypical #1 WR

WestcoastSteve

Active member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
0
John63":1q8elmib said:
Own The West":1q8elmib said:
I don't know that we'd want a Big Prototypical #1 WR. The only single point of failure we have on this team is Russell and that's kind of unavoidable.


You are kidding, You are saying Wilson is our single point of failure. LOL thanks for the laugh

678262893aa8372230262fb8742756335dc1b989b06769d184
 

WestcoastSteve

Active member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
0
SundayNiteBlackout":1zgqqo2f said:
Bigpumpkin":1zgqqo2f said:
KiwiHawk":1zgqqo2f said:
Put Baldwin on another team and he's a perennial pro-bowler and main target. But he understands his role in Seattle and does the best he possibly can at it.

If Baldwin plays his entire career in Seattle, I'd say that he makes the Ring of Honor.

I think you can pretty much book that. It remains to be seen if he burns his way out ala Earl Thomas though before that can happen. Dougie is pretty outspoken.

Doug is outspoken but you can't deny he's a team guy and he has never been one to undermine the coaches (Earl, Lynch * Sherman are a different story).
 

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
A few things on this.

#1 the big receivers don't win Superbowls.

#2 The Seahawks do not throw the ball enough to justify a Big Receiver.

#3 The Seahawks do a great job finding the underappreciated, overlooked WRs the play with a chip. I say that is the way to keep doing it.

The Seahawks & Patriots have this right. You want those scrappy smaller guys that are underpaid and pissed off. Not the divas that make all of the money and complain. They tried with Graham & Harvin, it just doesn't work with how the Hawks operate.

This upcoming draft though I would be more focused on adding defense. The offense will be fine going forward with some slight tweaks to the scheme. They are bringing pretty much everyone back on O next year outside of Mike Davis.
 
Top