Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Snacks to Packers.

The Original Seattle Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute for Seahawks Talk, News, Rumors, Trades, and Analytics. LANGUAGE: PG-13
Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:36 pm


  • jmahon316
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 688
    Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:59 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:37 pm
  • jmahon316 wrote:

    Wrong forum this dude stopped being a seahawk when he cried about not being active.
    JPatera76
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1444
    Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 12:32 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:40 pm
  • Interesting that Pete said Snacks was "done" playing.

    And then he goes to Green Bay...
    Weird
    Jerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3763
    Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 8:39 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:42 pm
  • That's not good that kind pisses me off...

    LTH
    LTH
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 1325
    Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:58 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:45 pm
  • Made his choice. Next
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 17142
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:46 pm
  • Lol jesus what a douchebag.....does this guy think he's gonna get anymore playing time with a Pro Bowl NT like Kenny Clark playing in front of him? :roll: :roll: :roll:
    Last edited by Polk738 on Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Polk738
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 534
    Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 7:04 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:46 pm
  • Just about exactly what I expected. GB tried to get him off our PS earlier, soon after he signed with us. But he turned them down at that time.
    Appyhawk
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 2015
    Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 8:43 pm
    Location: Ranch in Flint Hills of Kansas, formerly NW Montana.


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:52 pm
  • He’s been claimed by the Packers, has he said he is willing to play for them yet?
    Sounds like he’d have just as hard of a time seeing the field with them as he did here.
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 33426
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:04 pm
  • just knew that would happen.
    Cyrus12
    Silver Supporter
    Silver Supporter
     
    Posts: 10937
    Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 11:20 am
    Location: BC Canada


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:18 pm
  • He said on Twitter he made it clear he wasn’t going to play but would be okay with a team he doesn’t mind playing for.

    This adds to my conspiracy that he’s ring chasing, and with the Packers being the NFC favorite as of late with Rodgers playing great, he thinks that’s his best chance.

    Can’t wait to beat the Packers
    Scorpion05
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1545
    Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:05 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:24 pm
  • That was nice of us to help the best team in the conference for no reason.
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 6392
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:42 pm
    Location: Grand Rapids, MI


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:33 pm


  • KitsapGuy
    * NET Staff *
     
    Posts: 7524
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:09 pm
    Location: Kitsap County


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 5:20 pm
  • Not really a surprise. If he can't beat out Brian Mone, can't imagine he'd have much of an impact for the Packers, other than a rotational body at NT, which is what he was here. Maybe he'll be #2 rotational body at NT for Packers, and be active on game day, and get snaps.

    I can't blame Snacks. Being inactive and getting no snaps would feel like a slap in the face.

    What do our All-22 football people think, was Snacks truly #3 Nose Tackle for the Seahawks, of course behind JReed, but also behind Mone? Or did Snacks get a "raw deal" when he deserved BBQ?

    Put another, catchier way... did we do the right thing by holding onto our Mone and cutting out the Snacks?
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3847
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:03 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:15 pm
  • Greenbay probably got him for intel reasons...I knew he was going to the Packers...They shouldn't have released him made him play out.
    rcaido
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1510
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 9:47 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:30 pm
  • The Seahawks aren't a Bengals-style front office. They accommodate requests as well as they can and that's a huge part of why it's a desirable location for players. Players want to play in Seattle.

    Snacks is gonna retire soon and doesn't wanna spend his last games inactive. He's put together a few elite run defending performances and wants to go where he's needed - and the Packers need run defense. I find it hard to hold that against him, unlike some people who act like he's killed their pets and burned their houses down.
    Maelstrom787
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4461
    Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:38 pm
    Location: Delaware


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:06 pm
  • I don't blame the Hawks for playing Mone over Harrison; Mone is better at this stage, younger, fitter and one of the highest graded defensive players on the team per PFF. Mone as DT3 is obvious.

    I also don't blame Harrison for wanting to be active at this stage of his career. If he thinks there are opportunities to get playing time elsewhere it makes sense that he would respectfully ask for that opportunity. Nothing beats playing, and when it's gone it's gone forever, and he is probably coming to terms with that.

    Seemed cordial and just from both sides.
    KinesProf
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:05 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:43 pm
  • He doesnt care about playing time at this point. He's chasing a ring and Green Bay gives him the best chance in the NFC.
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1904
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 11:19 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:16 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:He doesnt care about playing time at this point.


    How do you know that?
    KinesProf
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:05 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 1:28 am
  • So we groomed and prepped him back into game-shape to potentially help a rival seal our fate? Even if he doesn't see the field (which I have no doubt that he will, considering GB doesn't have the strongest D-line), he's armed with Seattle's playbook and all of our schemes :evil:

    Pete was misled into being kind and granting Harrison his wish, and now this could end up blowing up in his face. Damn you, Snacks! :evil:
    TypeSly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1054
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:54 pm


Re: Snacks to Packei rs.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:51 am
  • I wish him every success going forward but just not as a Packer. I hope he isn’t missed here.
    jammerhawk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 7572
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:13 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 6:40 am
  • KinesProf wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:He doesnt care about playing time at this point.


    How do you know that?


    Because he had a better chance getting playing time with Seattle. Kenny Clark is a beast in Green Bay. They also signed Anthony Rush. How many snaps is he going to get in GB when he couldnt even get any in Seattle?
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1904
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 11:19 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:23 am
  • TypeSly wrote:So we groomed and prepped him back into game-shape to potentially help a rival seal our fate? Even if he doesn't see the field (which I have no doubt that he will, considering GB doesn't have the strongest D-line), he's armed with Seattle's playbook and all of our schemes :evil:

    Pete was misled into being kind and granting Harrison his wish, and now this could end up blowing up in his face. Damn you, Snacks! :evil:


    Yeah, my first reaction was GB got him just for some inside info, the playbook, schemes, which players might be a little more nicked up than is publicly known, etc. It's more of an annoyance now, the coaches will install some changes if we play GB in the championship game, but it will suck up time better spent on other things.

    I'm not so sure Snacks will see much PT though, maybe a few situational plays, but his best days are well behind him, and there were some good reasons why our coaches didn't want him on the field.

    In the end, I think Pete was between a rock and a hard place here. You can't keep a player who is so vocal about wanting out. For whatever reason, the relationship went south, and it's unfortunate Snacks chose this path at the end of his career. It's cheap and classless, but that's just how some guys are built.
    Tusc2000
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 546
    Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 7:33 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:24 am
  • This reminds me of when Derrick Fisher wanted out from the Jazz and used his daughter’s illness as a reason he needed out of Utah. While all the best doctors for his daughter were on the East Coast, Fish instead signed with the Lakers (in the city without specialists for his daughter). Kittle did we know that Fish’s character issues wouldn’t stop at using his own child as an excuse.
    El Caliente
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 273
    Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 1:45 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:37 am
  • I think the idea of Snacks knowing our entire defensive scheme to use against us is overblown. We’re not that complicated on defense anyway. We’ll be fine
    Scorpion05
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1545
    Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:05 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:46 am
  • JUst some chat that I read today.

    been waiting on this...its a good fit as well

    Over the last 6 seasons Snacks is a better run defender than Kenny Clark...this is BIG

    our dline just got alot better

    snacks is a big depth charge...sweet

    These are not facts...they are fans opinions. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
    Seahawkfan80
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9872
    Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 1:20 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:37 am
  • Tusc2000 wrote:
    TypeSly wrote:So we groomed and prepped him back into game-shape to potentially help a rival seal our fate? Even if he doesn't see the field (which I have no doubt that he will, considering GB doesn't have the strongest D-line), he's armed with Seattle's playbook and all of our schemes :evil:

    Pete was misled into being kind and granting Harrison his wish, and now this could end up blowing up in his face. Damn you, Snacks! :evil:


    Yeah, my first reaction was GB got him just for some inside info, the playbook, schemes, which players might be a little more nicked up than is publicly known, etc. It's more of an annoyance now, the coaches will install some changes if we play GB in the championship game, but it will suck up time better spent on other things.

    I'm not so sure Snacks will see much PT though, maybe a few situational plays, but his best days are well behind him, and there were some good reasons why our coaches didn't want him on the field.

    In the end, I think Pete was between a rock and a hard place here. You can't keep a player who is so vocal about wanting out. For whatever reason, the relationship went south, and it's unfortunate Snacks chose this path at the end of his career. It's cheap and classless, but that's just how some guys are built.


    Well, at this point in the season there's no way a coaching staff can change the whole playbook or even a large amount of it, with how many plays NFL teams have. Only changes in terminology and tweaks in the formation can be expected. Rarely do situations like this happen where a player exchanges teams to a playoff opponent in the last week of season. Let's not forget that players in his situation spend much more time practicing than even starters do, so he should be very well versed in both the Defensive and Offensive schemes that the Seahawks employ.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't think this will play a major role in the outcome, but every little advantage counts when the two teams are so evenly matched. PT or not, do you really think the Packers claimed him for any other reason? They don't have a hole for him to fill, so I'm sure they will just sequester him to the film room in case they do have to face the Seahawks. This is a smart move on GB's part and maybe something Pete should have seen coming. I don't think the relationship soured and this is how Pete was misled. Honestly, I don't even think Snacks meant to mislead him. I think Pete felt bad, because it just turned out that every week, there was another body coming back that kept pushing him further back in the line-up.

    Either way, this situation sucks for everyone except the Packers.
    Last edited by TypeSly on Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
    TypeSly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1054
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:54 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:37 am
  • Scorpion05 wrote:I think the idea of Snacks knowing our entire defensive scheme to use against us is overblown. We’re not that complicated on defense anyway. We’ll be fine


    There's probably some advantage to being able to pick his brain, and sometimes that's all a team needs to get even a minor edge. Erin is a guy who works hard for the cheap yards, like really working to catch 12 men on the field in a substitution. It doesn't make me panic, but I wouldn't be shocked if, in the case of the Hawks playing the packers, they get a couple of plays out of inside info from Snacks. My respect for him would rise if he refused to provide that to them.

    This kind of thing is exactly why teams don't like to release players during the season. The next NFL player who asks for a release midseason will probably have their team point at Snacks and the Seahawks. I'd love to see a rule giving the opposite conference priority for waiver claims or something like that. Businesses require non-compete clauses all the time, it would be good for both players and teams to not have to worry about other teams gaining an edge with a waiver claim.

    All that being said, I admit that I would take some slight additional satisfaction if the Seahawks were to beat the Packers in the NFC championship. Possible an unnoticeable amount of satisfaction given how dang excited I would be already. :)
    Torc
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 167
    Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 1:54 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 3:56 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    KinesProf wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:He doesnt care about playing time at this point.


    How do you know that?


    Because he had a better chance getting playing time with Seattle. Kenny Clark is a beast in Green Bay. They also signed Anthony Rush. How many snaps is he going to get in GB when he couldnt even get any in Seattle?


    You're still claiming to know what he is thinking, again, I ask, how do you know? It's okay to admit that you don't have access to his inner most thoughts.

    He didn't ask out until he was a healthy scratch. Healthy scratch=zero playing time. So, if he's active in Green Bay, that's more playing time than not being active at all.

    And Rush was released in order to make room for him, so that point doesn't stand either.
    KinesProf
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 276
    Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:05 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 4:01 pm
  • KinesProf wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    KinesProf wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:He doesnt care about playing time at this point.


    How do you know that?


    Because he had a better chance getting playing time with Seattle. Kenny Clark is a beast in Green Bay. They also signed Anthony Rush. How many snaps is he going to get in GB when he couldnt even get any in Seattle?


    You're still claiming to know what he is thinking, again, I ask, how do you know? It's okay to admit that you don't have access to his inner most thoughts.

    He didn't ask out until he was a healthy scratch. Healthy scratch=zero playing time. So, if he's active in Green Bay, that's more playing time than not being active at all.

    And Rush was released in order to make room for him, so that point doesn't stand either.


    So Should we bring back Rush????


    Maybe we should bring back a lot of color Rush too...I love the action green. I got a lot of that color all over now. LOL
    Seahawkfan80
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9872
    Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 1:20 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:29 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:He doesnt care about playing time at this point. He's chasing a ring and Green Bay gives him the best chance in the NFC.



    Then why did he quit when he wasn't on the active roster?

    And after this weekend, Seattle could very well be the 1, with Green Bay being the 3.
    Hawkpower
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2824
    Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:53 am
    Location: Phoenix az


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:36 pm
  • I'm not sure why people assume Snacks won't get snaps in Green Bay. He's almost certainly going to be rotating in to take snaps away from rotational run-stuffer Tyler Lancaster, who plays about 40% of their snaps. He has a much clearer fit in Green Bay, and specifically addresses a weakness. He's going to be on the field WITH Clark at times, who is moved around to 3 or 5 technique in many pass rush situations.
    Maelstrom787
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4461
    Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:38 pm
    Location: Delaware


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Fri Jan 01, 2021 2:10 pm
  • olyfan63 wrote:Not really a surprise. If he can't beat out Brian Mone, can't imagine he'd have much of an impact for the Packers, other than a rotational body at NT, which is what he was here. Maybe he'll be #2 rotational body at NT for Packers, and be active on game day, and get snaps.

    I can't blame Snacks. Being inactive and getting no snaps would feel like a slap in the face.

    What do our All-22 football people think, was Snacks truly #3 Nose Tackle for the Seahawks, of course behind JReed, but also behind Mone? Or did Snacks get a "raw deal" when he deserved BBQ?

    Put another, catchier way... did we do the right thing by holding onto our Mone and cutting out the Snacks?



    Except that he did better than Mone in 128 snaps than Mone in 8 games.

    ::Shrug:: It was a dumb move to not play him
    balakoth
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 228
    Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:41 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Fri Jan 01, 2021 4:52 pm
  • KinesProf wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    KinesProf wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:He doesnt care about playing time at this point.


    How do you know that?


    Because he had a better chance getting playing time with Seattle. Kenny Clark is a beast in Green Bay. They also signed Anthony Rush. How many snaps is he going to get in GB when he couldnt even get any in Seattle?


    You're still claiming to know what he is thinking, again, I ask, how do you know? It's okay to admit that you don't have access to his inner most thoughts.

    He didn't ask out until he was a healthy scratch. Healthy scratch=zero playing time. So, if he's active in Green Bay, that's more playing time than not being active at all.

    And Rush was released in order to make room for him, so that point doesn't stand either.


    Rush was released? Get him back for depth and to balance out whatever intel Snacks has.
    SantaClaraHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8070
    Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 11:17 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:45 pm
  • KinesProf wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:He doesnt care about playing time at this point.


    How do you know that?



    He appeared to have a waist circumference of at least 60". A person of that size has limited ability to move quickly.
    He was not able to properly play the position....and he knew it. He knew that the Packers wanted him in the past, so he had his agent "poke around" and see if he had a chance to play in GB.
    Bigpumpkin
    Gold Supporter
    Gold Supporter
     
    Posts: 7900
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:13 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA USA


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Fri Jan 01, 2021 6:19 pm
  • Bigpumpkin wrote:
    KinesProf wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:He doesnt care about playing time at this point.


    How do you know that?



    He appeared to have a waist circumference of at least 60". A person of that size has limited ability to move quickly.
    He was not able to properly play the position....and he knew it. He knew that the Packers wanted him in the past, so he had his agent "poke around" and see if he had a chance to play in GB.


    He played fine when he was in, and especially well in run defense. No pass rush upside, but no one expected that anyway. Nothing improper about his play after he started getting activated.
    Maelstrom787
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4461
    Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:38 pm
    Location: Delaware


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:52 pm
  • How much playing time did Snacks get today? I didnt watch their game.
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1904
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 11:19 am


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:57 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:How much playing time did Snacks get today? I didnt watch their game.


    I watched it. Don't recall seeing him on the field, never heard his name mentioned, and he's a blank on the stat line.
    renofox
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1442
    Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:20 pm
    Location: Reno, NV


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:12 pm
  • renofox wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:How much playing time did Snacks get today? I didnt watch their game.


    I watched it. Don't recall seeing him on the field, never heard his name mentioned, and he's a blank on the stat line.


    Covid protocol. Pretty sure he'll be suited up after their bye week.
    hoxrox
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1733
    Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:29 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Mon Jan 04, 2021 7:33 am
  • Pro football says 12 snaps for snacks. 16% of total snaps.

    From Packer chat.
    Seahawkfan80
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9872
    Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 1:20 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Mon Jan 04, 2021 11:07 am
  • Maelstrom787 wrote:I'm not sure why people assume Snacks won't get snaps in Green Bay. He's almost certainly going to be rotating in to take snaps away from rotational run-stuffer Tyler Lancaster, who plays about 40% of their snaps. He has a much clearer fit in Green Bay, and specifically addresses a weakness. He's going to be on the field WITH Clark at times, who is moved around to 3 or 5 technique in many pass rush situations.


    This.

    Snacks said he wanted to play. He was the #3 NT here and therefore a healthy scratch on game day. In GB he's the #2 NT and will get reps. He's doing exactly what he said he wanted to do.

    It's a good signing for GB since they haven't been able to stop the run, which sucks for us. But on the other hand, GB will still be done in 2 weeks (Bucs) while we're playing the Saints.
    Own The West
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 471
    Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 8:20 pm


Re: Snacks to Packers.
Mon Jan 04, 2021 11:15 am
  • The Packers paid him to reveal our secrets, of course. Might hurt us if we should meet them in the playoffs, which we probably will if we can beat the Rams. Which I'm not at all sure we will.
    ballard1951
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 107
    Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:48 am
    Location: Tromsø, Norway




It is currently Fri Mar 05, 2021 1:12 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ SEATTLE SEAHAWKS FOOTBALL ]




Information
  • Who is online