MHS831

my question is always, "Is this necessary or recreational?" It helps me choose my outfit.

MHS Theory: 32-year old Matthews is a veteran and they could cut him and see if there is interest to do him a solid--but to also let him know that a PS position was on the table. Crumedy (DT) being waived risked loosing a draft pick. The way I understand it, you can't put players on IR until after waivers have been cleared--something like that. So they cut Matthews and put him on the PS. Had they waived Crumedy and he got taken, then it would have been stupid knowing that the 32-year old Matthews was much less likely to be signed. This allowed the Panthers to have some wiggle room in the event another player came available. I am not sure that makes sense to me, but it did before I started writing. Maybe someone else can correct this or add to it.

report today says we have 4 openings. I am guessing Coker and Marsette Smith then 2 more dudes. My agent has not suggested to me that there is an interest, but sometimes that is for leverage. They are going to try to lowball me if they call. I can feel it. Sitting by the phone regardless.

I think that if it takes more than 2 years to develop into an NFL-caliber player the player is not worth the investment. If we rode undeveloped talent for longer than that, we become a farm team for the others. I get kinda pissed when we develop talent for 3 years then they have a contract year and demand top dollar. The window should cliose after two years. Move on. If another team wants your project, let them have it, but the NFL is about performance, not potential. What bothers me is this--we give the first and second rounders more time to develop that the day 3 and undrafted players. It should be the other way around. If you are a first rounder and you are not on the field as a starter by year two--especially if you decided to come out after 3 years in college--then I am going to have a talk with my GM and you. In my view, Legette has 1 year. Raym, on the other hand, might need 2.

Think about this: Is this offensive line.... LT Nijiman LG Zavala (2024 version) C Raym RG Kingston RT Christensen ....better than our average starting OL in 2023?

I think some these new additions (CB) have 4 weeks to prove themselves.

At the end of the day, are we better? OFFENSE OL: Yes. because we dumped Mays and got Kingston. Mason Brooks (not Anderson) is on the PS. This makes me feel that they are on the right track. I watched the OL carefully, and even though Anderson was getting the high PFF scores, I did state that Brooks seemed better. Apparently, they saw something too. TE: No. because we cut Matthews, but we have signed some PS TEs, including Matthews. RB: No change. WR: No. Losing Smith-Marsette and Coker while keeping Moore is not groovy. Analysis: The offense made some sacrifices to address weaknesses on defense. It looks as though "less is more" on offense, carrying 23 active players into game 1 vs. the defense which appears to have 27. DEFENSE DT: No change, really, but I was surprised to see Crumedy make the roster--they have 3 guys to play one spot, and there are times when they put Brown at DT to bring in an extra edge at DE on passing downs. I have to think they will allow Crumedy to be the fourth DE as well. T J Smith and Palmore on the PS played well at times during the preseason. DE: No change. Brown never comes off the field, and Ray and Robinson are part of the rotation. I have to believe that they feel a DT could play DE in a pinch. ILB: Yes. Rhattigan is mainly a special teamer, but Mike Jackson calls him a "dawg". He should be better than Wooten, who is on the PS. Three ILBs behind the veteran Thompson (30) and Jewell (29) is probably smart. CB: Yes. Not sure how it will unfold, but what I have read about all of these players, they were playing "lights out" and their former team's fans wanted them on the roster. The guys we cut? Not so much. They seem to have a type, and I really like the skills I have seen in brief glimpses at video. I doubt the four CBs we added will join the three starters we have, but there are situations that require a nickel and three corners. Sometimes you need a big nickel--but the main reason I think this is when asked during the press conference about being worried about the CB room, Canales replied quickly, "Not now!" The CB overkill probably cost Smith-Marsette or Coker a roster spot. S: I think Lonnie Johnson was brought in for his special teams abilities and versatility--he has played both CB and S. I wonder if this means Franklin or Jammie are gone when he heals. Are we better at Safety? Maybe slightly if Lonnie becomes a safety. Analysis: Corner was a train wreck--they know how fragile Horn is and their other starting CB is on IR. Mike Jackson is not a long-term answer at CB. Troy Hill is old. Having said that, they have made the roster lopsided toward the defense in order to create a competition. They new CBs have one thing in common--their teams did not want to part with them. Maybe they are throwing them against the wall to see who sticks, but we were certain to suck without this move....The special teamer at LB will impact the game more than Wooten would have. I also think the Sheriff could be a hidden gem. I watched some tape on him, and he holds the edge better than I figured and he has multiple pass moves. Solid depth, special teams abilities. Overall: We got better, but not on the surface. I believe if Canales was interested in winning 7 games this year, he would have brought in more veterans. Instead, he brought in players his staff can develop. In the past, veteran rentals kept our youth from developing, imo. These young players will get coached up and have opportunities--that is all you ask for. For example, if we brought in Stephen Gilmore, we would be filling a need, but denying an opportunity. If we signed KJ Henry, a player who has been given opportunities and has underperformed, is it possible that they see something special in Sheriff that might indicate a higher ceiling? Maybe he has made more of the opportunities he has been given than Henry? I don't know, but it was an odd decision and I am sure there was a reason. Bottom line? We filled a few depth issues and we gave ourselves a change to improve at CB. To me, this was like drafting 5-7 in the draft twice. Not going to make a huge difference, but their approach is healthy and should benefit the team in the long run. OLB/Edge: Yes. Sheriff is DE:

id rather have Coker or Smith-Marsette and one less CB--but I think they think they can use the PS like a bull pen. If they sign Coker tomorrow then I will feel better--

How often do your #6 and #7 WRs play? We can keep them on the PS.

How hard must it be to have been injured all camp and watch a rookie come in and snag the #1 TE job and then watch the team sign two free agents and six waiver claims.

I see that Pete Carroll optimism in him too.

Good work. Nobody said you had to have 25 roster spots for offense and 25 for defense--This seems to be the plan. I am happy with the cuts (except Coker) and I am very happy with the additions. We were heavy on defense with the waiver claims, but in the draft, we were very offensive. I think the problem in the past was they did not focus as much on developing players as they did winning meaningless games to save jobs. So we brought in aging depth to fill a spot. I feel that youth was prioritized today--perhaps financial, but we (perhaps for the first time) have a coaching staff dedicated to teaching and player development. These additions all flashed in the preseason and their fans / reporters really hoped they would clear waivers. Those are the kinds of players yuo need--have any of our cuts been claimed yet? I do not think so--except by us. Aside from youth and flashing during the preseason, these players probably fit the system better. I think of a new coach coming in like a person during the first year like cooking in someone else's house. Yes, you draft your guys and you sign the free agents you can afford, but you do not have all the ingredients you need. I am most excited about the OL and the new depth. This new addition Kingston is important because he is athletic and built like a guard. That allows for each member of the second unit to concentrate on one position--he will be the depth behind Hunt; Nijman behind Ekwonu; Zavala behind Lewis; Raym behind Corbett; and Christensen behind Moton. In the past, our reserves had to play 2-3 positions, and that is very difficult. We will see if this works. I was upset about CB depth during the preseason. I think we upgraded the depth and the numbers. I think Bartholomew will be groomed behind Hill at Nickel because he plays well at the LOS, and I think the others give Horn and either Jackson depth. Since we cannot send waived players to the PS, Smith-Wade could be headed to the PS. I also see a competition that may lead to two CBs getting cut when people start coming off PUP and IR.

Hard to say because Dane Jackson is on IR and Lonnie Johnson can play S. The best answer I have? 8

New Sheriff in Town--(I just made that up!) By Bob Condotta Seattle Times staff reporter So who is Jamie Sheriff? Well, until about a month ago, he was a beer delivery driver for Southern Beverages in Ridgeland, Miss. But then the Seahawks called the first week of August looking to add some pass-rushing depth in the wake of an injury to Joshua Onujiogu, officially signing him on Aug. 6. And Saturday following a 37-33 preseason win over the Cleveland Browns, there Sheriff was, standing at the same podium in the interview room at Lumen Field, where Pete Carroll, Russell Wilson, Bobby Wagner and so many others have stood, basking in the spotlight of a performance that might well assure him of staying in the NFL a while. “It’s a blessing,’’ said Sherriff, who emerged as maybe the biggest surprise of the Seahawks’ preseason, leading Seattle in sacks with three after getting two Saturday. “Because three weeks ago I didn’t know where I was going to be. I was at home delivering beers for a beer company. And when I got that call, I just made the most of my opportunity.” (some college video)

Morgan takes two LBs from Seahawks - his former outfit https://sports.yahoo.com/seahawks-lose-olb-jamie-sheriff-165054507.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall

I think Lonnie Johnson is a CB/S and he could be taken to play S. We now have 8 CBs on the roster if Lonnie Johnson is listed as a S. Franklin, Dane Jackson, Wonnum and Barno are still out. I imagine that some of these will be moved to the PS when that happens, but I am hoping these young players can grab a few spots.

RAYM made it!!

thought I would add the claimed players with this for some one-stop shopping:

I am shocked by that, but OLBs have types and skill sets--I think they wanted a situational pass rusher--just guessing.

you know what 4 corners make???? Don't you???? a square! or a rectangle. No point here.

I see him as a S, not a CB--not sure what he is, but his PFF ratings are decent.

He should be a PS addition, and there should be some openings at WR in 2025

did they or didn't they sign Isaac? After 12 pm it does not matter what they considered.

He said in a press conference after sighing with the Hawks: "Last week I was delivering beer."

All three would upgrade the bottom 3.