drrew wrote:Johnson is a pretty good two down DT, not going to make many splash plays, but he can definitely hold his own at the line of scrimmage and create space for Bobby to make plays behind him.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:Seems like a steal.

Also, OP: formerly, not formally.

RCATES wrote:Anyone still questioning whether Seattle is doing a "full on rebuild" after yet another lackluster FA signing should have their head checked. Hawks are simply trying to fill back-up roster spots for the least amount possible. Hawks will finish no better then 7-9 this year. Book it.

TwistedHusky wrote:Is this a run stop DT or can he rush the passer?

iigakusei wrote:

RCATES wrote:Anyone still questioning whether Seattle is doing a "full on rebuild" after yet another lackluster FA signing should have their head checked. Hawks are simply trying to fill back-up roster spots for the least amount possible. Hawks will finish no better then 7-9 this year. Book it.

Any actual thoughts on Tom Johnson? I know you seem to be a glass almost empty type of guy, but he is actually a pretty good player.

RCATES wrote:

iigakusei wrote:

RCATES wrote:Anyone still questioning whether Seattle is doing a "full on rebuild" after yet another lackluster FA signing should have their head checked. Hawks are simply trying to fill back-up roster spots for the least amount possible. Hawks will finish no better then 7-9 this year. Book it.

Any actual thoughts on Tom Johnson? I know you seem to be a glass almost empty type of guy, but he is actually a pretty good player.

I don't doubt that he's a quality back-up for added depth. Just pointing out the obvious that we aren't making much of a attempt to sign difference makers (Suh, Richardson, Wilkerson etc.) thus pointing to a rebuild.

RCATES wrote:Anyone still questioning whether Seattle is doing a "full on rebuild" after yet another lackluster FA signing should have their head checked. Hawks are simply trying to fill back-up roster spots for the least amount possible. Hawks will finish no better then 7-9 this year. Book it.

RCATES wrote:Anyone still questioning whether Seattle is doing a "full on rebuild" after yet another lackluster FA signing should have their head checked.

Hawkscanner wrote:I was listening to Brock and Salk's conversation on this heading in to work this morning. I tend to agree with Brock's take -- on paper, this appears to be a solid signing. He equated him (in this defense) to a Tony McDaniel ... or Alan Branch in terms of what he'll give you. He's a veteran who knows what he can do ... and what he can't. He's not flashy -- just solid across the board. A space eater DT. Given the price ... that's not a bad thing whatsoever. We need a guy like this.

Personally, I also agree that I think that this pretty much definitely signals that Ndamukong Suh isn't coming to Seattle. I'd say that given the current reports and rumors that he's likely to sign elsewhere. And frankly, I honestly don't know if that's such a bad thing. I've followed the NFL most of my life ... and I'd say more times than not, these high priced FA signings fall short of expectations. Be honest in considering Sheldon Richardson for a second. Now, we all know what he CAN do. We've seen the highlights and the dominant force that he CAN be ... BUT, was he truly dominant (a game changing) kind of player last year? He most certainly flashed that dominance at times ... but I don't know that I can honestly say he was Cortez Kennedy circa 1992. That's not who I saw. Same argument can potentially be made in Suh's case. You're talking about a guy who's 31 years old. He's good (don't get me wrong) -- I just don't know if he's been a great player the last couple of years. Is he honestly worth the $12+ Million he's going to command? On paper maybe -- there's a chance he can be that dominant force ... BUT history says that more times than not, older veterans who are signed to big deals like this fail to fully live up to the contract.

In the end (stepping back and taking a look at the bigger picture), I think I agree with the direction that I see Schneider and the Hawks currently taking. When this team was at its most dominant ... it was built primarily with talent through the draft. You supplement with guys that you buy low on ... but for the most part, build this thing back up through the draft, UDFA diamonds in the rough, and young talent. That's how we built that Super Bowl team and that's the direction I see us getting back to once again.

Good for Schneider and the Hawks for bucking the trend and going this route. On paper, I like the Tom Johnson signing. You need a lunch pail kind of veteran like this both to take his share of reps ... and also to be an example to younger players. I'm excited for the upcoming draft and to see exactly what this roster looks like heading into Minicamp.

original poster wrote:

TwistedHusky wrote:Is this a run stop DT or can he rush the passer?

From what I've read he can rush, but expect him to be good, not great.

Couple of sacks a season type guy.

MontanaHawk05 wrote:

original poster wrote:

TwistedHusky wrote:Is this a run stop DT or can he rush the passer?

From what I've read he can rush, but expect him to be good, not great.

Couple of sacks a season type guy.

Averaged 4 a year with the Vikings.

We went to the SB with some DT named Clinton McDonald whose quiet work only got noticed after the fact.

iigakusei wrote:

RCATES wrote:Anyone still questioning whether Seattle is doing a "full on rebuild" after yet another lackluster FA signing should have their head checked. Hawks are simply trying to fill back-up roster spots for the least amount possible. Hawks will finish no better then 7-9 this year. Book it.

Any actual thoughts on Tom Johnson? I know you seem to be a glass almost empty type of guy, but he is actually a pretty good player.

original poster wrote:For what it's worth -

He had more pressures than Sheldon last season (23 vs 16)

He had more sacks than Sheldon last season

He costs roughly a quarter of Sheldon this year (seems to be a $2.1M base)

Hawkscanner wrote:

original poster wrote:For what it's worth -

He had more pressures than Sheldon last season (23 vs 16)

He had more sacks than Sheldon last season

He costs roughly a quarter of Sheldon this year (seems to be a $2.1M base)

Great stats ... and a great reminder for us all that in the right system and the right situation, a seemingly average player on paper can be highly productive. Scheme and how a given player is used coupled with a player's "want to" can have huge effects. The one thing that I keep hearing associated with Tom Johnson is that this guy brings it every single down he's out there. He's a hard working, give 100% kind of player. I for one am excited to see what his addition will mean for this D-Line moving forward.

Hawkscanner wrote:

original poster wrote:For what it's worth -

He had more pressures than Sheldon last season (23 vs 16)

He had more sacks than Sheldon last season

He costs roughly a quarter of Sheldon this year (seems to be a $2.1M base)

Great stats ... and a great reminder for us all that in the right system and the right situation, a seemingly average player on paper can be highly productive. Scheme and how a given player is used coupled with a player's "want to" can have huge effects. The one thing that I keep hearing associated with Tom Johnson is that this guy brings it every single down he's out there. He's a hard working, give 100% kind of player. I for one am excited to see what his addition will mean for this D-Line moving forward.

original poster wrote:For what it's worth -

He had more pressures than Sheldon last season (23 vs 16)

He had more sacks than Sheldon last season

He costs roughly a quarter of Sheldon this year (seems to be a $2.1M base)

RCATES wrote:

iigakusei wrote:

RCATES wrote:Anyone still questioning whether Seattle is doing a "full on rebuild" after yet another lackluster FA signing should have their head checked. Hawks are simply trying to fill back-up roster spots for the least amount possible. Hawks will finish no better then 7-9 this year. Book it.

Any actual thoughts on Tom Johnson? I know you seem to be a glass almost empty type of guy, but he is actually a pretty good player.

I don't doubt that he's a quality back-up for added depth. Just pointing out the obvious that we aren't making much of a attempt to sign difference makers (Suh, Richardson, Wilkerson etc.) thus pointing to a rebuild.

Seanhawk wrote:

iigakusei wrote:

RCATES wrote:<gloom and despair>

Any actual thoughts on Tom Johnson? I know you seem to be a glass almost empty type of guy, but he is actually a pretty good player.

Glass almost empty? That's a glass half full outlook on his personality.

Johnson was a key cog in the Vikings defense shutting down opposing offenses in 2017, registering a total of 31 QB pressures and 22 total defensive stops.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/p ... ree-agency

hawknation2018 wrote:

Johnson was a key cog in the Vikings defense shutting down opposing offenses in 2017, registering a total of 31 QB pressures and 22 total defensive stops.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/p ... ree-agency

For comparison, Sheldon Richardson had 36 pressures last season.

GeekHawk wrote:

Seanhawk wrote:

iigakusei wrote:

RCATES wrote:<gloom and despair>

Any actual thoughts on Tom Johnson? I know you seem to be a glass almost empty type of guy, but he is actually a pretty good player.

Glass almost empty? That's a glass half full outlook on his personality.

The optimist sees the glass as half full. The pessimist sees the glass as half empty. The engineer sees the glass as not optimally sized for the volume of the contents.

Cyrus12 wrote:Camp body. Guessing a few more signings like this to fill the roster a bit

Cyrus12 wrote:Camp body. Guessing a few more signings like this to fill the roster a bit