Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

TE Position

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:09 am
  • www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 2750
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:23 am
  • Blocking ...... I like the sound of that word.

    A good word with which to reset the offense.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 7218
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:31 am
  • Was Dickson cut or is he a ufa?
    User avatar
    UK_Seahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2585
    Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:08 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:36 am
  • getnasty wrote:Sign Tyler Eifert to a incentive heavy contract, also would mind Brent Celek on the cheap, he's old but reliable and a great blocker.


    Eifert resigned with Cincy.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 16851
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:51 am
  • So Dickson and Mingo huh? Amazeballs
    User avatar
    King Dog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1538
    Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:13 pm
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:55 am
  • If this is true....then so much for "getting younger" being the reason for this re-boot.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4271
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:03 am
  • UK_Seahawk wrote:Was Dickson cut or is he a ufa?


    UFA.
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 2750
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:06 am
  • Seymour wrote:If this is true....then so much for "getting younger" being the reason for this re-boot.

    It's interesting. Maybe they think vannett is not the guy which means yet again another draft bust by this fo or maybe Dickson just becomes the run blocker.
    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions 2014.02.02 Seahawks 43 Broncos 8
    User avatar
    Cyrus12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5631
    Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:20 am
    Location: BC Canada


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:08 am
  • Seymour wrote:If this is true....then so much for "getting younger" being the reason for this re-boot.


    Nobody has said anything about getting younger on offense?
    www.hawk-talk.com

    Image

    Richard Sherman wrote:People look forward to writing us off. Our demise was greatly overstated.
    User avatar
    original poster
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 2750
    Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:55 am


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:13 am

Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:15 am
  • Jville wrote:


    Bidding war? lol. Better not be a bidding war.
    User avatar
    King Dog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1538
    Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:13 pm
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:16 am
  • original poster wrote:
    Seymour wrote:If this is true....then so much for "getting younger" being the reason for this re-boot.


    Nobody has said anything about getting younger on offense?


    No idea what you are saying. Nobody is a big word, of course people are saying that. Graham was 31.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4271
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:23 am
  • King Dog wrote:So Dickson and Mingo huh? Amazeballs



    Great contribution...
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 13338
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:24 am
  • Uncle Si wrote:
    King Dog wrote:So Dickson and Mingo huh? Amazeballs



    Great contribution...


    Thank you.....
    User avatar
    King Dog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1538
    Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:13 pm
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:31 am
  • original poster wrote:
    UK_Seahawk wrote:Was Dickson cut or is he a ufa?


    UFA.


    Be interesting to see the numbers, I would hazard a guess it wont impact the comp picks too much.
    User avatar
    UK_Seahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2585
    Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:08 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:35 am
  • Sounds like it's a done deal

    Ian Rapoport

    Verified account

    @RapSheet
    58s58 seconds ago
    More Ian Rapoport Retweeted Mike Garafolo
    It’s 3 years with a max value of $14M, source said. He gets the first year fully guaranteed.
    User avatar
    King Dog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1538
    Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:13 pm
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:38 am
  • Dickson's kind an interesting TE, hasn't really had the chance to be the #1 TE being in Carolina with Olsen.

    But good blocker, athletic, and can get some separation. So I'd be fine with him on a 3-4M a year deal, which is probably where he's gonna slot into after ASJ signed for 5M a year.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13402
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:38 am
  • User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4271
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:41 am
  • If we didn't pay over $3M PS then I'm fine with this. He has never earned much more than 2M per season...so we will see.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4271
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:41 am

Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:44 am
  • Used to be a highly athletic pass catching TE coming out of Oregon at 6'4 250. Has learned to be a good blocker over the years, but has also been the 2nd TE due to Greg Olson. I remember the Ravens having high hopes for him some years ago, but he got banged up on a short contract. This is a solid TE.

    This also doesn't mean that Vannett is out of the running to earn a starting spot. Along with Darboh and Moore, Vannett was getting on the field more and more even with a healthy Jimmy and Luke.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4144
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:58 am
  • Now that's done, I wouldn't be opposed to giving Niklas a 1 year deal and see if he can beat out any of the other 3. Wide open competition.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4144
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:54 am
  • If Duane Brown locks down LT long term and George Fant fully recover from his ACL. Is there a chance they try him at TE?
    Glasgow Seahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1164
    Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 3:57 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:05 am
  • Cyrus12 wrote:
    Seymour wrote:If this is true....then so much for "getting younger" being the reason for this re-boot.

    It's interesting. Maybe they think vannett is not the guy which means yet again another draft bust by this fo or maybe Dickson just becomes the run blocker.


    I leaning toward Dickson just being solid depth. Vannett is still young and learning he could still take off. All the depth players they sign aren't going to be 25 years and younger.. you can still get younger as a team on average
    “How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live.”

    - Henry David Thoreau
    User avatar
    bbsplitter
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 616
    Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:39 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:21 am
  • bbsplitter wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:
    Seymour wrote:If this is true....then so much for "getting younger" being the reason for this re-boot.

    It's interesting. Maybe they think vannett is not the guy which means yet again another draft bust by this fo or maybe Dickson just becomes the run blocker.


    I leaning toward Dickson just being solid depth. Vannett is still young and learning he could still take off. All the depth players they sign aren't going to be 25 years and younger.. you can still get younger as a team on average

    I wouldn't rule out Vannett starting. The argument is that he hasn't done anything yet, but we had 10 mil in Jimmy and another 5 invested in Willson. Yet, Vannett was getting on the field.

    I'd still like to get somebody like Troy Niklas in there to compete with the other 3 and maybe a couple udfa or late rounders and let it all vet itself.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4144
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:27 am
  • vin.couve12 wrote:
    bbsplitter wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:
    Seymour wrote:If this is true....then so much for "getting younger" being the reason for this re-boot.

    It's interesting. Maybe they think vannett is not the guy which means yet again another draft bust by this fo or maybe Dickson just becomes the run blocker.


    I leaning toward Dickson just being solid depth. Vannett is still young and learning he could still take off. All the depth players they sign aren't going to be 25 years and younger.. you can still get younger as a team on average

    I wouldn't rule out Vannett starting. The argument is that he hasn't done anything yet, but we had 10 mil in Jimmy and another 5 invested in Willson. Yet, Vannett was getting on the field.

    I'd still like to get somebody like Troy Niklas in there to compete with the other 3 and maybe a couple udfa or late rounders and let it all vet itself.


    Wrong on Willson. We paid him $1.8M last season, and prob. could have had him for close to that again this year. The way we use the TE here, I was all for that myself.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4271
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:59 am
  • So it's now Nick Vannett and Ed Dickson at tight end along with an interesting year two project in Tyrone Swoopes ..... all at a more reasonable cap cost. Seems like a good beginning to a restart.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 7218
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:07 am
  • Seymour wrote:
    vin.couve12 wrote:
    bbsplitter wrote:
    Cyrus12 wrote:It's interesting. Maybe they think vannett is not the guy which means yet again another draft bust by this fo or maybe Dickson just becomes the run blocker.


    I leaning toward Dickson just being solid depth. Vannett is still young and learning he could still take off. All the depth players they sign aren't going to be 25 years and younger.. you can still get younger as a team on average

    I wouldn't rule out Vannett starting. The argument is that he hasn't done anything yet, but we had 10 mil in Jimmy and another 5 invested in Willson. Yet, Vannett was getting on the field.

    I'd still like to get somebody like Troy Niklas in there to compete with the other 3 and maybe a couple udfa or late rounders and let it all vet itself.


    Wrong on Willson. We paid him $1.8M last season, and prob. could have had him for close to that again this year. The way we use the TE here, I was all for that myself.

    Well maybe he'll be back then.
    User avatar
    vin.couve12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4144
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 10:19 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:07 am
  • Jville wrote:So it's now Nick Vannett and Ed Dickson at tight end along with an interesting year two project in Tyrone Swoopes ..... all at a more reasonable cap cost. Seems like a good beginning to a restart.


    I agree, more variety and chances for success at a lower cap hit
    “How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live.”

    - Henry David Thoreau
    User avatar
    bbsplitter
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 616
    Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:39 pm


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:20 am
  • Do we have detains on the Dickson contract? Sounds like it’s perhaps more of a 1 year deal where we overpaid for his services but didn’t lock ourselves into something long term. This gives us the ability to keep him at 4.5 ish mill if he balls or if Vannett tanks. And if Vannett looks good and Dickson doesn’t do much we can pretty much walk away. That would be ideal because it gives us a chance to evaluate Vannett after being behind graham. There’s one positive to losing some vets is we get to see what the young guys got.
    Kinger95
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 58
    Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:52 am


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:26 am
  • [quote="Glasgow Seahawk"]If Duane Brown locks down LT long term and George Fant fully recover from his ACL. Is there a chance they try him at TE?[/q]

    Fant's up to 322 pounds now, so I don't think so.
    User avatar
    King Dog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1538
    Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 11:13 pm
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


Re: TE Position
Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:36 am
  • King Dog wrote:
    Glasgow Seahawk wrote:If Duane Brown locks down LT long term and George Fant fully recover from his ACL. Is there a chance they try him at TE?[/q]

    Fant's up to 322 pounds now, so I don't think so.


    I would love to see that
    “How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live.”

    - Henry David Thoreau
    User avatar
    bbsplitter
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 616
    Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:39 pm


Re: TE Position
Sun Mar 18, 2018 6:59 am
  • Of the guys left in FA, Wonder if they'd take a look at adding another one of these guys to go with Dickson, Vannett, Swoopes:

    Levine Toilolo
    Troy Niklas
    Brent Celek
    Gary Barnidge

    Or maybe to a lesser extent Eric Ebron or Julius Thomas.
    Last edited by massari on Sun Mar 18, 2018 7:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
    massari
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1205
    Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 5:58 am


Re: TE Position
Sun Mar 18, 2018 7:13 am
  • Having a TE that can catch and actually block will be interesting. Having an OC that knows how to actually incorporate a TE into the regular O will be welcome.
    Until we develop a pass rush that will cause opposing teams to be forced to scheme to defend it we will never be able to consistently take the final step. The interior rush needs improvement. The OLine clearly still needs work.

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions at last after 38 seasons. Awesome!!!
    jammerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4821
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 pm


Re: TE Position
Sun Mar 18, 2018 11:21 am
  • In my mind, Jimmy Graham proved his assertion that he views himself as a physical jumbo receiver. Early reports out of Green Bay point to the understanding that Graham will be used as such with the Packers. Jimmy Graham never quite fit Pete's offense in large part because he didn't develop into the blocker and well rounded tight end envisioned. Jimmy was an obvious tell out in that offense. That tell disappears with Jimmy's departure as long as they insist on well rounded and versatile tight ends over specialists (be they a big receiver or 6th lineman).

    If Pete has a vulnerable weakness, I would think it a tendency to collect specialists at the expense of a sufficient number of versatile and well rounded players that instill a degree of uncertainty in the minds of opponents as to the actual play intentions. It is one thing to keep offenses simple but self defeating to telegraph intentions with too many rotating specialists.

    If Pete's wants to feature an explosive receiver in his offense, it seems to me that the wide receiver group is far more appropriate and manageable spot.

    I'm looking forward to a reset at the tight end position and the return of versatility. Less tell more surprise is both fun and productive.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 7218
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


Re: TE Position
Sun Mar 18, 2018 3:21 pm
  • Jville wrote:Jimmy Graham never quite fit Pete's offense in large part because he didn't develop into the blocker and well rounded tight end envisioned. Jimmy was an obvious tell out in that offense. That tell disappears with Jimmy's departure as long as they insist on well rounded and versatile tight ends over specialists (be they a big receiver or 6th lineman).


    That's on Pete then for not knowing or understanding the player he signed. Jimmy Graham never blocked a day in his life and Pete brought him and expected him to do that? Pete evaluates some players and knocks it out of the park with development, but other times, like with Jimmy, he whiffs so bad its mind boggling.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 607
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


Re: TE Position
Sun Mar 18, 2018 4:28 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    Jville wrote:Jimmy Graham never quite fit Pete's offense in large part because he didn't develop into the blocker and well rounded tight end envisioned. Jimmy was an obvious tell out in that offense. That tell disappears with Jimmy's departure as long as they insist on well rounded and versatile tight ends over specialists (be they a big receiver or 6th lineman).


    That's on Pete then for not knowing or understanding the player he signed. Jimmy Graham never blocked a day in his life and Pete brought him and expected him to do that? Pete evaluates some players and knocks it out of the park with development, but other times, like with Jimmy, he whiffs so bad its mind boggling.


    No need to point a finger of blame at any one person. Player development is a process. Both the player and the position coach committed to upgrading blocking skills. They were, no doubt, among those that were most disappointed by the results. They had no way of knowing until they tried. In Graham's case, those blocking skills simply didn't develop as envisioned.
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 7218
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


Re: TE Position
Sun Mar 18, 2018 4:53 pm
  • Jville wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    Jville wrote:Jimmy Graham never quite fit Pete's offense in large part because he didn't develop into the blocker and well rounded tight end envisioned. Jimmy was an obvious tell out in that offense. That tell disappears with Jimmy's departure as long as they insist on well rounded and versatile tight ends over specialists (be they a big receiver or 6th lineman).


    That's on Pete then for not knowing or understanding the player he signed. Jimmy Graham never blocked a day in his life and Pete brought him and expected him to do that? Pete evaluates some players and knocks it out of the park with development, but other times, like with Jimmy, he whiffs so bad its mind boggling.


    No need to point a finger of blame at any one person. Player development is a process. Both the player and the position coach committed to upgrading blocking skills. They were, no doubt, among those that were most disappointed by the results. They had no way of knowing until they tried. In Graham's case, those blocking skills simply didn't develop as envisioned.


    My point was, I cant believe they even tried. Its not like there wasn't a huge sample size with all the years he played in New Orleans. If they tried to make him a blocker due to how bad the Oline regressed, well that's on Pete too for keeping Cable around for so long. Jimmy Graham is not to blame for his time here in Seattle other than the lack of enthusiasm towards the end.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 607
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


Re: TE Position
Sun Mar 18, 2018 5:13 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    Jville wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    Jville wrote:Jimmy Graham never quite fit Pete's offense in large part because he didn't develop into the blocker and well rounded tight end envisioned. Jimmy was an obvious tell out in that offense. That tell disappears with Jimmy's departure as long as they insist on well rounded and versatile tight ends over specialists (be they a big receiver or 6th lineman).


    That's on Pete then for not knowing or understanding the player he signed. Jimmy Graham never blocked a day in his life and Pete brought him and expected him to do that? Pete evaluates some players and knocks it out of the park with development, but other times, like with Jimmy, he whiffs so bad its mind boggling.


    No need to point a finger of blame at any one person. Player development is a process. Both the player and the position coach committed to upgrading blocking skills. They were, no doubt, among those that were most disappointed by the results. They had no way of knowing until they tried. In Graham's case, those blocking skills simply didn't develop as envisioned.


    My point was, I cant believe they even tried. Its not like there wasn't a huge sample size with all the years he played in New Orleans. If they tried to make him a blocker due to how bad the Oline regressed, well that's on Pete too for keeping Cable around for so long. Jimmy Graham is not to blame for his time here in Seattle other than the lack of enthusiasm towards the end.


    I find dismissal thru individual blame to be useless in achieving understanding. Organizations live and die together ...... members don't function in isolation from one another.

    EDIT: Added some Jimmy Graham contract numbers for Aaron Rogers centered offense .......
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 7218
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


Previous


It is currently Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:49 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information