Why not Walt??

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 13, 2017 7:17 pm
  • I've heard Walter Jones more than once say he'd love a shot to coach with his Hawks. When Cable got here he had more experienced linemen, a top 3 RB in Lynch, a top 3 running QB in Wilson, and even the highest paid line in 2013 when we rode the ponies into the ground. It worked well and his ZBS was churning up the yards while Wilson developed.
    Well that was then this is now. Running has dropped to bottom 1/3rd we have Graham, Wilson, Baldwin, Kearse, Lockett, and re emerged Richarson, and need to go to our strength. Cable is notoriously bad in pass blocking and always has been. The only bad reason I think Pete gives him one more year, is he took all his player cash and spent it, and cannot can Cable since Pete's hand is in it. Anyway, maybe they get destroyed one more year and we see Walt. That would be cool, even if he learned on the fly (but I obviously don't want to lose to see this either). Catch 22
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1326
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 13, 2017 7:26 pm
  • I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.
    Hollandhawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 206
    Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 3:53 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 13, 2017 7:33 pm
  • Any coach at this point is better than Cable.
    User avatar
    sdog1981
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 938
    Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 5:54 am


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 13, 2017 7:58 pm
  • I'd personally prefer he be Fant's mentor. Like every day. All offseason. Pushing trucks, watching film, working on technique. Dont know that he's a cerebral enough guy to be a great coach, after listening to his recent interviews. But, Tice.
    I'm fly
    I should be in the sky with birds
    User avatar
    Tical21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3649
    Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 13, 2017 8:16 pm
  • I would love to see him brought on in some sort of capacity. Why not? What do we have to lose?
    Why Not Us?
    User avatar
    Jerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1663
    Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:39 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 13, 2017 9:41 pm
  • The fact Walter has indicated interest begs the question why Pete wouldn't at least consider bringing him on as a consultant or advisor. I'm sure at a minimum the guys would love having him around during training camp.
    2017 Adopt a Rookie: Tedric Thompson
    User avatar
    West TX Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1066
    Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 8:24 am


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 13, 2017 9:52 pm
  • Pete would probably love Walt in as an advisor, in internship if you will, but I"m sure it would have to go through Cable and I'm afraid ego would not allow it. Lets say, the OL all of a sudden started to be the line Cable envisioned.. was it Walt's magical touch, or was it Cable, and Cable would not want to be 2nd guessed.
    User avatar
    Bobblehead
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1433
    Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:52 am


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 13, 2017 10:01 pm
  • Tical21 wrote:I'd personally prefer he be Fant's mentor. Like every day. All offseason. Pushing trucks, watching film, working on technique. Dont know that he's a cerebral enough guy to be a great coach, after listening to his recent interviews. But, Tice.

    It's an experiment worth trying. Do you disagree? (Referring to making Big Walt the OL coach, not mentoring Fant.)
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 30438
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Bothell, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 14, 2017 4:42 am
  • Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    Bingo!
    Naturally gifted athletes don't often make for naturally-gifted coaches. Walt was more of an introvert...not the engaging sort of personality that it usually takes to become a coach. Would love to have him come in as an assistant for a trial run to learn the ropes; however, I think that bringing him in to replace Cable while 'learning on the fly' is completely ridiculous. In fact, I'd be pissed at the organization for setting the best player to ever wear the Seahawks uni up for jeopardy. Good thing the FO and Carroll would never do that.

    All of that said, he's open to helping our OL in some fashion. l would Iove to see the org kick his tires. Ya never can tell, because Walt has already indicated that he would work for the Seahawks if asked, and with how driven he is, you know he'd put his heart and soul into it.
    User avatar
    HawKnPeppa
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4737
    Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:01 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 14, 2017 8:00 am
  • HawKnPeppa wrote:
    Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    Bingo!
    Naturally gifted athletes don't often make for naturally-gifted coaches. Walt was more of an introvert...not the engaging sort of personality that it usually takes to become a coach. Would love to have him come in as an assistant for a trial run to learn the ropes; however, I think that bringing him in to replace Cable while 'learning on the fly' is completely ridiculous. In fact, I'd be pissed at the organization for setting the best player to ever wear the Seahawks uni up for jeopardy. Good thing the FO and Carroll would never do that.

    All of that said, he's open to helping our OL in some fashion. l would Iove to see the org kick his tires. Ya never can tell, because Walt has already indicated that he would work for the Seahawks if asked, and with how driven he is, you know he'd put his heart and soul into it.


    Bringing him in as an assistant would be more ideal obviously, but the problem there is Brennan Carroll Pete's son holds that position since 2015. Doubt that works out too well. I also happen to trust that if Walt does have the desire to get into coaching, that he is knowledgeable and professional enough to pull it off. I actually don't care (to a point) who they bring in, but new blood and change is clearly needed IMO.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1326
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:07 am
  • West TX Hawk wrote:The fact Walter has indicated interest begs the question why Pete wouldn't at least consider bringing him on as a consultant or advisor. I'm sure at a minimum the guys would love having him around during training camp.


    Because we can't have anyone coming in and undermining the O-line genius Cable. :sarcasm_on:
    "Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast!"
    User avatar
    Ace_Rimmer
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 617
    Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 7:59 am
    Location: Vancouver, BC


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:45 pm
  • Walter Jones was the best LT ever to play the game, not just because of his physical skills.

    He was also technically correct with foot and hand placement, and clearly knew leverage and how to predict and prepare for the oppositions attack.

    If just SOME of that can come across, it would be worth it.

    As of now he is not yet a coach (read: experienced in breaking it all down for others), but he'd be an incredible asset to bring in as an assistant, and have him focus on one-on-one skills sharpening while he continues to build up the knowledge needed to coach vs perform.
    User avatar
    ChiefHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 479
    Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:08 am
    Location: Your Mom's Single Wide trailer


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 14, 2017 3:10 pm
  • Anybody else heard the saying, "Too many cooks in the kitchen spoils the broth?"
    Proud Member of the .Net Old Farts Society
    Bigpumpkin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6573
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:13 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA USA


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 14, 2017 3:21 pm
  • Bigpumpkin wrote:Anybody else heard the saying, "Too many cooks in the kitchen spoils the broth?"


    But if the broth is already spoiled, what can it hurt?
    User avatar
    nash72
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 832
    Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:33 am


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 14, 2017 3:41 pm
  • nash72 wrote:
    Bigpumpkin wrote:Anybody else heard the saying, "Too many cooks in the kitchen spoils the broth?"


    But if the broth is already spoiled, what can it hurt?


    You gotta point there!!! ;)
    Proud Member of the .Net Old Farts Society
    Bigpumpkin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6573
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:13 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA USA


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 14, 2017 10:51 pm
  • RolandDeschain wrote:
    Tical21 wrote:I'd personally prefer he be Fant's mentor. Like every day. All offseason. Pushing trucks, watching film, working on technique. Dont know that he's a cerebral enough guy to be a great coach, after listening to his recent interviews. But, Tice.

    It's an experiment worth trying. Do you disagree? (Referring to making Big Walt the OL coach, not mentoring Fant.)

    I'd prefer high school, college, or assistant line coach first, but wouldn't freak out if he was given the job. Can't hurt at this point.
    I'm fly
    I should be in the sky with birds
    User avatar
    Tical21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3649
    Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Wed Feb 15, 2017 1:12 pm
  • Bigpumpkin wrote:Anybody else heard the saying, "Too many cooks in the kitchen spoils the broth?"

    A lousy cook can mess up the broth pretty quick too.
    Cable's good at Coaching a Run First O-Line, but he is lacking in Coaching both run & Pass-Pro.
    Walter Jones = LT TECHNIQUE genius....That IS something that can be Coached, and who better to HELP Cable in the Pass-Pro transition, AND with his HOF understanding of how to get the LT & LG to work in unison, like how he and Steve Hutchinson did.
    Oh and, Big Walt & Hutchinson were also outstanding at doing BOTH Push for the Run game, and Pass Protection.

    Ex RB Stump Mitchell = RB Coach?
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:17 am
  • West TX Hawk wrote: I'm sure at a minimum the guys would love having him around during training camp.


    I'm sure they would, but he wouldn't show up.
    User avatar
    Seanhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4595
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:04 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:05 am
  • Seanhawk wrote:
    West TX Hawk wrote: I'm sure at a minimum the guys would love having him around during training camp.


    I'm sure they would, but he wouldn't show up.


    No need to be "at the minimum" as coaches/advisory salary does not count towards any cap.
    User avatar
    crosfam
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 333
    Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:45 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sat Feb 25, 2017 12:13 pm
  • crosfam wrote:
    Seanhawk wrote:
    West TX Hawk wrote: I'm sure at a minimum the guys would love having him around during training camp.


    I'm sure they would, but he wouldn't show up.


    No need to be "at the minimum" as coaches/advisory salary does not count towards any cap.


    My post was a "Walt never shows up to training camp" joke, his was a comment about the guys would love having him around at the very least. You interpreted them as being about salary...very strange.
    User avatar
    Seanhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4595
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:04 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:18 pm
  • Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    I don't know about Big Walt specifically, but THAT is a very valid point. Now that Spring Training has started (and I know a lot of us are Mariners fans), let me put it a different way. Why is it that guys like Scott Servais and Edgar Martinez make good coaches ... but not former superstars like Ken Griffey, Jr.? The answer of course is exactly what you're saying -- with the Griffeys of the world (and that may the case with Walter Jones too), everything just came so darned natural. Holmgren himself has said of Walt that he had the feet of a dancer -- very naturally talented athlete. With guys who aren't as naturally gifted and have to work incredibly hard just to stay in the game, they really had to focus on doing all the little things like proper technique, conditioning, and endless hours of film study (both examining their own game and that of their opponent). They had to constantly break down what they do and to think about it -- step by step -- piece by piece. And that's what makes those guys great coaches because they can then analyze their players in the same way and communicate to them where they see the mistakes and how they can improve.

    Sure Big Walt worked hard, but he had a lot of natural talent -- but I'm not sure he ever truly had to put in THAT much work of having to really intentionally break things down step by step and do tons of film study just to survive. I could be completely, totally wrong here (and will fully admit it if I am), but that was always my sense of Walt during those years he was here and I followed him. As far as him becoming the Offensive Line coach -- I'm not so sure about that.

    Now bring him in as a consultant during mini-camps and training camp? Absolutely. I think that would potentially be a great idea. One thing's for sure, improving the Offensive Line is absolute Priority #1 this offseason. I think you explore every possible option in looking to make that happen. I think all options should be on the table, including bringing in Big Walt in a consultant's role in working with Fant. I don't see how it could hurt.
    User avatar
    Hawkscanner
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 1704
    Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 7:28 am
    Location: Middle of Nowhere, Washington


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Feb 26, 2017 4:47 am
  • HawKnPeppa wrote:
    Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    Bingo!
    Naturally gifted athletes don't often make for naturally-gifted coaches. Walt was more of an introvert...not the engaging sort of personality that it usually takes to become a coach. Would love to have him come in as an assistant for a trial run to learn the ropes; however, I think that bringing him in to replace Cable while 'learning on the fly' is completely ridiculous. In fact, I'd be pissed at the organization for setting the best player to ever wear the Seahawks uni up for jeopardy. Good thing the FO and Carroll would never do that.


    Good players don't always make good coaches, and poor players sometimes make great coaches.

    There are HOF players that were complete disasters as coaches, such as Mike Singletary and Bart Starr, and coaches that never played a snap in the NFL that turned out to be HOF-quality coaches, Belichick and our own Pete Carroll being two modern day examples. Walt's playing resume should rank well down the list of desirable attributes for coaching candidates. The only thing his HOF status gives him that other candidates don't have is that in the player's eyes, anything Walt says has a certain credibility to it.
    User avatar
    RiverDog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1582
    Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:58 am
    Location: Kennewick, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Feb 26, 2017 9:50 am
  • RiverDog wrote:
    HawKnPeppa wrote:
    Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    Bingo!
    Naturally gifted athletes don't often make for naturally-gifted coaches. Walt was more of an introvert...not the engaging sort of personality that it usually takes to become a coach. Would love to have him come in as an assistant for a trial run to learn the ropes; however, I think that bringing him in to replace Cable while 'learning on the fly' is completely ridiculous. In fact, I'd be pissed at the organization for setting the best player to ever wear the Seahawks uni up for jeopardy. Good thing the FO and Carroll would never do that.


    Good players don't always make good coaches, and poor players sometimes make great coaches.

    There are HOF players that were complete disasters as coaches, such as Mike Singletary and Bart Starr, and coaches that never played a snap in the NFL that turned out to be HOF-quality coaches, Belichick and our own Pete Carroll being two modern day examples. Walt's playing resume should rank well down the list of desirable attributes for coaching candidates. The only thing his HOF status gives him that other candidates don't have is that in the player's eyes, anything Walt says has a certain credibility to it.


    That's a broad brush analysis; Singletary & Starr were Head Coaches, that were out of their expertise element, whereas Walt was aiming to be Position Specific Coach, HUGE DIFFERENCE.
    I believe Big Walt would be able to RELATE to the O-LINE.
    As far as him being an "Introvert", I really doubt that they'd be asking him to sing on stage, or anything or anything of the like, eh? :lol: he WASN'T asking to take over Cable's job.
    What I don't understand, is why is it that some of y'all believe that he would fail?, until he's been given the chance, I don't believe that any of US can really know the answer.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Feb 26, 2017 10:13 am
  • scutterhawk wrote:
    RiverDog wrote:
    HawKnPeppa wrote:
    Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    Bingo!
    Naturally gifted athletes don't often make for naturally-gifted coaches. Walt was more of an introvert...not the engaging sort of personality that it usually takes to become a coach. Would love to have him come in as an assistant for a trial run to learn the ropes; however, I think that bringing him in to replace Cable while 'learning on the fly' is completely ridiculous. In fact, I'd be pissed at the organization for setting the best player to ever wear the Seahawks uni up for jeopardy. Good thing the FO and Carroll would never do that.


    Good players don't always make good coaches, and poor players sometimes make great coaches.

    There are HOF players that were complete disasters as coaches, such as Mike Singletary and Bart Starr, and coaches that never played a snap in the NFL that turned out to be HOF-quality coaches, Belichick and our own Pete Carroll being two modern day examples. Walt's playing resume should rank well down the list of desirable attributes for coaching candidates. The only thing his HOF status gives him that other candidates don't have is that in the player's eyes, anything Walt says has a certain credibility to it.


    That's a broad brush analysis; Singletary & Starr were Head Coaches, that were out of their expertise element, whereas Walt was aiming to be Position Specific Coach, HUGE DIFFERENCE.
    I believe Big Walt would be able to RELATE to the O-LINE.
    As far as him being an "Introvert", I really doubt that they'd be asking him to sing on stage, or anything or anything of the like, eh? :lol: he WASN'T asking to take over Cable's job.
    What I don't understand, is why is it that some of y'all believe that he would fail?, until he's been given the chance, I don't believe that any of US can really know the answer.


    ^This. There is no reason not to give him the chance to see if he can relate and teach up our OT's. To not use his experience and passion to me is a major problem with our current coaching staff.
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2316
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Feb 26, 2017 10:41 am
  • RiverDog wrote:
    HawKnPeppa wrote:
    Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    Bingo!
    Naturally gifted athletes don't often make for naturally-gifted coaches. Walt was more of an introvert...not the engaging sort of personality that it usually takes to become a coach. Would love to have him come in as an assistant for a trial run to learn the ropes; however, I think that bringing him in to replace Cable while 'learning on the fly' is completely ridiculous. In fact, I'd be pissed at the organization for setting the best player to ever wear the Seahawks uni up for jeopardy. Good thing the FO and Carroll would never do that.


    Good players don't always make good coaches, and poor players sometimes make great coaches.

    There are HOF players that were complete disasters as coaches, such as Mike Singletary and Bart Starr, and coaches that never played a snap in the NFL that turned out to be HOF-quality coaches, Belichick and our own Pete Carroll being two modern day examples. Walt's playing resume should rank well down the list of desirable attributes for coaching candidates. The only thing his HOF status gives him that other candidates don't have is that in the player's eyes, anything Walt says has a certain credibility to it.


    Singletary also worked his way up as a position coach and excelled enough to get head coaching interviews. Getting interviews could possibly be due to the Rooney rule, but the point is no one is suggesting Walt be the head coach.
    User avatar
    Seanhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4595
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:04 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Feb 26, 2017 12:05 pm
  • scutterhawk wrote:That's a broad brush analysis; Singletary & Starr were Head Coaches, that were out of their expertise element, whereas Walt was aiming to be Position Specific Coach, HUGE DIFFERENCE.
    I believe Big Walt would be able to RELATE to the O-LINE.
    As far as him being an "Introvert", I really doubt that they'd be asking him to sing on stage, or anything or anything of the like, eh? :lol: he WASN'T asking to take over Cable's job.
    What I don't understand, is why is it that some of y'all believe that he would fail?, until he's been given the chance, I don't believe that any of US can really know the answer.


    I agree, which is why I qualified my statement as saying "doesn't always". I never said that he would fail, either. My point was that playing experience ranks down a ways on the checklist of desirable coaching attributes.

    Singletary and Jim Zorn are good examples of coaches that almost certainly got advanced due to their status as former players. Neither was a coordinator or a college HC before being given the head coaching reins, which almost never happens. IMO Zorn got put in the worst possible situation and never really had a chance with that flaky owner he had to work for, so perhaps he isn't the greatest example, but for him, it pretty much ruined his chances of getting another head coaching job. Singletary gave me the impression that he just wasn't very smart. He'd get asked a fairly complicated question, would find it difficult to give an articulate response, then get frustrated and take it out on some poor reporter.

    As far as Walt specifically goes, none of us know him well enough to tell whether or not he'd make a good coach. Some people just aren't cut out to be teachers and some are. I'm positive that we'd give him serious consideration if he expressed interest and I trust in Pete's judgment as to his coaching ability.
    User avatar
    RiverDog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1582
    Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:58 am
    Location: Kennewick, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Feb 26, 2017 5:23 pm
  • RiverDog wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:That's a broad brush analysis; Singletary & Starr were Head Coaches, that were out of their expertise element, whereas Walt was aiming to be Position Specific Coach, HUGE DIFFERENCE.
    I believe Big Walt would be able to RELATE to the O-LINE.
    As far as him being an "Introvert", I really doubt that they'd be asking him to sing on stage, or anything or anything of the like, eh? :lol: he WASN'T asking to take over Cable's job.
    What I don't understand, is why is it that some of y'all believe that he would fail?, until he's been given the chance, I don't believe that any of US can really know the answer.


    I agree, which is why I qualified my statement as saying "doesn't always". I never said that he would fail, either. My point was that playing experience ranks down a ways on the checklist of desirable coaching attributes.

    Singletary and Jim Zorn are good examples of coaches that almost certainly got advanced due to their status as former players. Neither was a coordinator or a college HC before being given the head coaching reins, which almost never happens. IMO Zorn got put in the worst possible situation and never really had a chance with that flaky owner he had to work for, so perhaps he isn't the greatest example, but for him, it pretty much ruined his chances of getting another head coaching job. Singletary gave me the impression that he just wasn't very smart. He'd get asked a fairly complicated question, would find it difficult to give an articulate response, then get frustrated and take it out on some poor reporter.

    As far as Walt specifically goes, none of us know him well enough to tell whether or not he'd make a good coach. Some people just aren't cut out to be teachers and some are. I'm positive that we'd give him serious consideration if he expressed interest and I trust in Pete's judgment as to his coaching ability.


    I for one would love to see Big Walt have a go at it, as at this juncture, some of the young guns on the O-Line could maybe use some inside info from a 'Been There Done That' expert, heck, maybe just a couple of insider tips would help them realize their potential.
    As it stands right now, I don't see the Seahawks Coaching staff getting the most out of these greenhorns.
    Sometimes the "Trial By Fire" gig can do more harm than good.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:54 pm
  • Why not, they gave Lofa a chance to coach, Pete should give Walt a chance, I mean we couldn't do worse.
    Image
    User avatar
    theincrediblesok
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1514
    Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 1:05 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Feb 26, 2017 11:17 pm
  • Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    Easy and naturally? He worked his ass off. Yes he was gifted with outstanding physical traits, but he kept himself motivated and in shape during the off-season. Pushing Escalades? This tenacity is what he could bring to the team. I'm all for bringing him aboard.
    User avatar
    PlinytheCenter
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3305
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:47 pm
    Location: In Bruges


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 27, 2017 12:37 pm
  • PlinytheCenter wrote:
    Hollandhawk wrote:I don't know about Walt. Yes Walt had great work ethic, but he was also one of the physically gifted athletes in history. It might be hard to be able to teach things when they came to him so easy and naturally.


    Easy and naturally? He worked his ass off. Yes he was gifted with outstanding physical traits, but he kept himself motivated and in shape during the off-season. Pushing Escalades? This tenacity is what he could bring to the team. I'm all for bringing him aboard.


    ^^Exactly^^
    I'm having difficulties with understanding where some of the negativities from some folks in here have sprouted from.
    IF there's a down side to bringing him on board, I'm not seeing it.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Mon Feb 27, 2017 12:49 pm
  • If this were an idea of the Hawks AI would be excited but it isn't so........ MEH.
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 34838
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 28, 2017 2:57 am
  • PlinytheCenter wrote:Easy and naturally? He worked his ass off. Yes he was gifted with outstanding physical traits, but he kept himself motivated and in shape during the off-season. Pushing Escalades? This tenacity is what he could bring to the team. I'm all for bringing him aboard.


    I'm not dissing Walt's work ethic, but there's no denying that he had pure natural athletic ability. How many times was he able to miss the entire training camp due to a holdout then come in without any practice at all and right from the first whistle of the first game of the regular season, play at an HOF level? I don't care how good your work ethic is, that kind of performance can't be taught and can't be acquired by endless days at Gold's Gym. His physical traits were perfectly aligned to play left tackle in the NFL.

    I'm not against bringing him in and if Pete thinks he can bring something to the table, then I'll applaud the hire. But the concerns others have expressed about HOF athletes like Walt expecting others to perform at the same level they were accustomed to is a legitimate concern. If Walt were ever to express serious interest....and to this point all we're doing is engaging in pure speculation about his desires....the number one question to be answered is can he coach?
    User avatar
    RiverDog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1582
    Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:58 am
    Location: Kennewick, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:06 am
  • RiverDog wrote:.... But the concerns others have expressed about HOF athletes like Walt expecting others to perform at the same level they were accustomed to is a legitimate concern....


    Legitimate to you maybe. I think Walt knows he is a hall of famer, and most people will never achieve that level of play. But maybe you are right, and Walt is just a completely out of touch idiot and thinks anyone can do it. :roll:
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1326
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:13 am
  • RiverDog wrote:
    PlinytheCenter wrote:Easy and naturally? He worked his ass off. Yes he was gifted with outstanding physical traits, but he kept himself motivated and in shape during the off-season. Pushing Escalades? This tenacity is what he could bring to the team. I'm all for bringing him aboard.



    I'm not against bringing him in and if Pete thinks he can bring something to the table, then I'll applaud the hire. But the concerns others have expressed about HOF athletes like Walt expecting others to perform at the same level they were accustomed to is a legitimate concern. If Walt were ever to express serious interest....and to this point all we're doing is engaging in pure speculation about his desires....the number one question to be answered is can he coach?


    If that is our biggest concern about hiring a potential coach then we are in good shape. Ask yourself this of almost any position. Would you want Steve Largent a receivers coach? Would you want Kenny Easley to be a safeties coach? Yes to all of the above. They have at minimum EARNED the right to be given a chance. Unless they have done something egregiously bad then like others have said what is the downside?
    User avatar
    Year of The Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 923
    Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:18 am


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:24 am
  • RiverDog wrote:..... If Walt were ever to express serious interest....and to this point all we're doing is engaging in pure speculation about his desires....


    Sorry wrong again. Did you read my initial post? Maybe this will help you "see the light".

    http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/walter-jones-tweets-interest-in-seahawks-ol-job/

    For now, Jones will have to admire from the sideline and give the occasional tip. He confirmed an early story that he'd been working with undrafted rookie starter at left tackle, George Fant and he also said center Justin Britt and right guard Germain Ifedi impressed him.




    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1326
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:28 am
  • Largent80 wrote:If this were an idea of the Hawks AI would be excited but it isn't so........ MEH.

    Been waiting all week for your well thought out opinion of what Walter Jones had SAID........MEH is your best?
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Wed Mar 01, 2017 4:28 am
  • Year of The Hawk wrote:If that is our biggest concern about hiring a potential coach then we are in good shape. Ask yourself this of almost any position. Would you want Steve Largent a receivers coach? Would you want Kenny Easley to be a safeties coach? Yes to all of the above. They have at minimum EARNED the right to be given a chance. Unless they have done something egregiously bad then like others have said what is the downside?


    Maybe, maybe not.

    Largent and Easley have an immense amount of knowledge about the game and their specific positions, at least as the game and their positions were played 25-30 years ago. Perhaps they've stayed in touch or could get up to speed quite quickly, but that's a pretty big assumption and something that should be vetted out in an interview. You don't ask a doctor to jump back into the profession after 30 years w/o practicing.

    My point is that knowledge is only part of the equation. The other is a natural ability to teach. A case in point is Peyton Manning, perhaps one of the smartest, knowledgeable, and talented players to have ever played the game. But my understanding is that he doesn't have a lot of patience when it comes to mentoring younger players, and if that's true, he probably wouldn't make a very good coach.

    My understanding about Largent from when he played is that he was always willing to help younger players, so my instincts tell me that he'd probably make a pretty good coach if he chose to get into that field, but that wasn't his calling.
    User avatar
    RiverDog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1582
    Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:58 am
    Location: Kennewick, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:50 am
  • I think a player that was a freak physically such as Jones has a harder time teaching, his natural abilities made him elite, he also studied a lot which is a professional habit that can be taught, but technique and the ability to just be faster and stronger you can't teach.

    Largent was a over achiever that practiced and executed his route running to where he was as sharp as a razor, having the work ethic to rise above physical limitations with technique and setting up an opponent and reading them is something he would be able to bring to the table others can learn from.

    I think Easley would also fall into the Walt category.

    I also think it's why fringe players end up being such good coaches, they get to a level of success and push the limitations of what gifts they had physically, once in the NFL if on a team that has a great physically gifted and smart or multiples of that type the smarts don't over come the physical limitations anymore. They get cut and may come back to the league as a coach of some type.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 20831
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Why not Walt??
Thu Mar 02, 2017 6:42 am
  • All of this talk of Walters superhuman physical ability ignores the near perfection he displayed technically in the position.

    THAT is what he can teach.

    Yes, he had as good or better physical traits than anyone ever to play the position, but physical traits do not give you the technical correctness he displayed, the focus on mission (in fact, many with high physical talents had LOWER drive because they didn't need it...)

    "Starting in each of his 180 games in Seattle, the Seahawks attempted more than 5,500 passes with Jones on the field, while Jones gave up a total of only 23 quarterback sacks, and was penalized for holding just nine times."

    That does not come from only physically beating his opposition, it comes from timing, drive, concentration, foot work, balance, hand work, AND physical domination.

    Walter Jones beat opponents before he ever took the field with preparedness, determination, and confidence.

    Walter Jones with his technical drive and skill with only average physical skills would still have been a dominating force on the O line for years.

    Walter Jones with only his physical skills would have been ok for three or four years, and would not be in the Hall on the first ballot.
    User avatar
    ChiefHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 479
    Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:08 am
    Location: Your Mom's Single Wide trailer


Re: Why not Walt??
Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:37 am
  • ChiefHawk wrote:All of this talk of Walters superhuman physical ability ignores the near perfection he displayed technically in the position.

    THAT is what he can teach.


    Yes, he had as good or better physical traits than anyone ever to play the position, but physical traits do not give you the technical correctness he displayed, the focus on mission (in fact, many with high physical talents had LOWER drive because they didn't need it...)

    "Starting in each of his 180 games in Seattle, the Seahawks attempted more than 5,500 passes with Jones on the field, while Jones gave up a total of only 23 quarterback sacks, and was penalized for holding just nine times."

    That does not come from only physically beating his opposition, it comes from timing, drive, concentration, foot work, balance, hand work, AND physical domination.

    Walter Jones beat opponents before he ever took the field with preparedness, determination, and confidence.

    Walter Jones with his technical drive and skill with only average physical skills would still have been a dominating force on the O line for years.

    Walter Jones with only his physical skills would have been ok for three or four years, and would not be in the Hall on the first ballot.


    No one has suggested that he doesn't have a very good knowledge base. What has been debated is whether or not he can teach that knowledge to other players. Speaking for myself, I don't know whether he can or can't.
    User avatar
    RiverDog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1582
    Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:58 am
    Location: Kennewick, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:53 am
  • RiverDog wrote:
    ChiefHawk wrote:All of this talk of Walters superhuman physical ability ignores the near perfection he displayed technically in the position.

    THAT is what he can teach.


    Yes, he had as good or better physical traits than anyone ever to play the position, but physical traits do not give you the technical correctness he displayed, the focus on mission (in fact, many with high physical talents had LOWER drive because they didn't need it...)

    "Starting in each of his 180 games in Seattle, the Seahawks attempted more than 5,500 passes with Jones on the field, while Jones gave up a total of only 23 quarterback sacks, and was penalized for holding just nine times."

    That does not come from only physically beating his opposition, it comes from timing, drive, concentration, foot work, balance, hand work, AND physical domination.

    Walter Jones beat opponents before he ever took the field with preparedness, determination, and confidence.

    Walter Jones with his technical drive and skill with only average physical skills would still have been a dominating force on the O line for years.

    Walter Jones with only his physical skills would have been ok for three or four years, and would not be in the Hall on the first ballot.


    No one has suggested that he doesn't have a very good knowledge base. What has been debated is whether or not he can teach that knowledge to other players. Speaking for myself, I don't know whether he can or can't.


    No, when you and several others > used EXAMPLES of SOME Players that failed at being Head Coaches in the NFL<, that is an implication that you had SOME skepticisms.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:59 am
  • scutterhawk wrote:
    Largent80 wrote:If this were an idea of the Hawks AI would be excited but it isn't so........ MEH.

    Been waiting all week for your well thought out opinion of what Walter Jones had SAID........MEH is your best?


    Yeah...MEH. We have assembled a group of O-Linemen that were put in place to run ZBS which Jones knows squat about. The head coach wants to keep running that, and has his man in tow.

    If we make that switch right now, we take giant steps back if that is even possible, but yes it IS. Just look how bad the line was in 2015 then this years unit was WORSE. And that is still running the current system and coach, so to me it's more about the system and getting the right players to do it.

    I don't see Jones as a solution, but what I would do is bring him in to work with these dudes.
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 34838
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Fri Mar 03, 2017 6:42 pm
  • Largent80 wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    Largent80 wrote:If this were an idea of the Hawks AI would be excited but it isn't so........ MEH.

    Been waiting all week for your well thought out opinion of what Walter Jones had SAID........MEH is your best?


    Yeah...MEH. We have assembled a group of O-Linemen that were put in place to run ZBS which Jones knows squat about. The head coach wants to keep running that, and has his man in tow.

    If we make that switch right now, we take giant steps back if that is even possible, but yes it IS. Just look how bad the line was in 2015 then this years unit was WORSE. And that is still running the current system and coach, so to me it's more about the system and getting the right players to do it.

    I don't see Jones as a solution, but what I would do is bring him in to work with these dudes.


    There ya go, you answered your own cynicism Shitty in 2015, and even WORSE in 2016,,,MAYBE TEAMS HAVE FIGGURED OUT Cable's ZBS, and THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT WORKING LIKE IT USE TO.
    You really believe that Walter Jones doesn't COMPREHEND how a ZBS works? LOLOLOLOLOL....You're really reaching L-80....It's NOT rocket science, MEH? :roll: :lol: :lol: .
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sat Mar 04, 2017 12:10 am
  • scutterhawk wrote:
    Largent80 wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    Largent80 wrote:If this were an idea of the Hawks AI would be excited but it isn't so........ MEH.

    Been waiting all week for your well thought out opinion of what Walter Jones had SAID........MEH is your best?


    Yeah...MEH. We have assembled a group of O-Linemen that were put in place to run ZBS which Jones knows squat about. The head coach wants to keep running that, and has his man in tow.

    If we make that switch right now, we take giant steps back if that is even possible, but yes it IS. Just look how bad the line was in 2015 then this years unit was WORSE. And that is still running the current system and coach, so to me it's more about the system and getting the right players to do it.

    I don't see Jones as a solution, but what I would do is bring him in to work with these dudes.


    There ya go, you answered your own cynicism Shitty in 2015, and even WORSE in 2016,,,MAYBE TEAMS HAVE FIGGURED OUT Cable's ZBS, and THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT WORKING LIKE IT USE TO.
    You really believe that Walter Jones doesn't COMPREHEND how a ZBS works? LOLOLOLOLOL....You're really reaching L-80....It's NOT rocket science, MEH? :roll: :lol: :lol: .


    Appears to be based on the last two years of play and difficulty in Cable finding players that can do it, maybe we should draft from MIT.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 20831
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Why not Walt??
Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:01 am
  • scutterhawk wrote:
    RiverDog wrote:No one has suggested that he doesn't have a very good knowledge base. What has been debated is whether or not he can teach that knowledge to other players. Speaking for myself, I don't know whether he can or can't.


    No, when you and several others > used EXAMPLES of SOME Players that failed at being Head Coaches in the NFL<, that is an implication that you had SOME skepticisms.


    Of course, I have SOME skepticisms. Most objective people do. Only star struck homers are without at least some skepticism.

    But that skepticism includes every coaching candidate, not just former players and not just Walt. The point that was being made by myself and others was that the mere fact that a coaching candidate has on their resume a HOF playing career does not outweigh other aspects of their application. Whether or not Walt has attributes besides his playing experience that would qualify him as a coach is something none of us are fully aware of.

    Examples were given, just as they are in any good debate, to prove that the point being made has some merit. NFL head coaches are more recognizable and more easily researched, so their names tend to appear in examples more often than that of some position coach that coached a couple years before giving it up.
    User avatar
    RiverDog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1582
    Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:58 am
    Location: Kennewick, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Sat Mar 04, 2017 3:10 pm
  • RiverDog wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    RiverDog wrote:No one has suggested that he doesn't have a very good knowledge base. What has been debated is whether or not he can teach that knowledge to other players. Speaking for myself, I don't know whether he can or can't.


    No, when you and several others > used EXAMPLES of SOME Players that failed at being Head Coaches in the NFL<, that is an implication that you had SOME skepticisms.


    Of course, I have SOME skepticisms. Most objective people do. Only star struck homers are without at least some skepticism.

    But that skepticism includes every coaching candidate, not just former players and not just Walt. The point that was being made by myself and others was that the mere fact that a coaching candidate has on their resume a HOF playing career does not outweigh other aspects of their application. Whether or not Walt has attributes besides his playing experience that would qualify him as a coach is something none of us are fully aware of.

    Examples were given, just as they are in any good debate, to prove that the point being made has some merit. NFL head coaches are more recognizable and more easily researched, so their names tend to appear in examples more often than that of some position coach that coached a couple years before giving it up.


    Objective? LOLOL, you're basing your skepticisms and arguments about Walter Jones on what you DON'T/CAN'T really KNOW.......You be trying to create in a VACCUUM.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Mar 05, 2017 11:37 am
  • scutterhawk wrote: Objective? LOLOL, you're basing your skepticisms and arguments about Walter Jones on what you DON'T/CAN'T really KNOW.......You be trying to create in a VACCUUM.


    And by that I assume you are basing your optimism and arguments about Walter Jones on what you DO KNOW?

    None of us know Walter Jones, at least not beyond what can be gleaned from a Google search...a point I've made on several occasions if you would have taken the time to read my entire comments.
    User avatar
    RiverDog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1582
    Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 5:58 am
    Location: Kennewick, WA


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Mar 05, 2017 12:00 pm
  • scutterhawk wrote:
    Largent80 wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    Largent80 wrote:If this were an idea of the Hawks AI would be excited but it isn't so........ MEH.

    Been waiting all week for your well thought out opinion of what Walter Jones had SAID........MEH is your best?


    Yeah...MEH. We have assembled a group of O-Linemen that were put in place to run ZBS which Jones knows squat about. The head coach wants to keep running that, and has his man in tow.

    If we make that switch right now, we take giant steps back if that is even possible, but yes it IS. Just look how bad the line was in 2015 then this years unit was WORSE. And that is still running the current system and coach, so to me it's more about the system and getting the right players to do it.

    I don't see Jones as a solution, but what I would do is bring him in to work with these dudes.


    There ya go, you answered your own cynicism Shitty in 2015, and even WORSE in 2016,,,MAYBE TEAMS HAVE FIGGURED OUT Cable's ZBS, and THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT WORKING LIKE IT USE TO.
    You really believe that Walter Jones doesn't COMPREHEND how a ZBS works? LOLOLOLOLOL....You're really reaching L-80....It's NOT rocket science, MEH? :roll: :lol: :lol: .


    Whatever, you are the one blowing a gasket over something that will never happen anyway...So roll your eyes and LOL off into the sunset Einstein.

    Here is an example of a great O-Lineman crashing and burning as a coach...Art Shell.

    Just because Jones mauled people(a one of a kind and once in a lifetime LT) doesn't mean he can polish a turd. We already have someone that CAN polish a turd in turning players that never played the position into "players".

    Walter Jones knows NOTHING about this system. He knows as much as you and I. He has never played in it, never coached it.
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 34838
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:07 pm
  • RiverDog wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote: Objective? LOLOL, you're basing your skepticisms and arguments about Walter Jones on what you DON'T/CAN'T really KNOW.......You be trying to create in a VACCUUM.


    And by that I assume you are basing your optimism and arguments about Walter Jones on what you DO KNOW?

    None of us know Walter Jones, at least not beyond what can be gleaned from a Google search...a point I've made on several occasions if you would have taken the time to read my entire comments.

    I read your "Entire Comments", and you I will OPENLY ADMIT that I DON'T KNOW if he'd be a perfect fit.
    What I DO KNOW, is that YOU DON'T KNOW, and neither does LARGENT80
    There's an old saying that pretty much fits here......"Look Before You Leap"
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Why not Walt??
Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:25 pm
  • Largent80 wrote:
    Whatever, you are the one blowing a gasket over something that will never happen anyway...So roll your eyes and LOL off into the sunset Einstein.

    Here is an example of a great O-Lineman crashing and burning as a coach...Art Shell.

    Just because Jones mauled people(a one of a kind and once in a lifetime LT) doesn't mean he can polish a turd. We already have someone that CAN polish a turd in turning players that never played the position into "players".

    Walter Jones knows NOTHING about this system. He knows as much as you and I. He has never played in it, never coached it.


    You're getting pissed about your own silliness :177692:
    So....it's YOUR contention that he's not cerebral enough to pick up on the ZBS concept??, what do you base this conjecture on "EINSTEIN"?????
    Also, Comparing Walter Jones to Art Shell, LOL, like they have EXACTLY the same mind-frame.....Keep reaching.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5911
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Next


It is currently Wed May 24, 2017 9:08 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online