Originally Posted by espnhatesthe49ers
Arizona has Fitzgerald and Denver has Eddie Royal to stretch the field. They have the Ying and the Yang. There's nothing wrong with possession receivers when they're complimented by someone who can get deep.
You're going to have 90 million dollars tied up in 2 strictly possession receivers. Have fun with that.
You guys have completely forgotten what made you guys a powerhouse. Rather than beefing the line and reestablishing a running attack you're very, very poorly attempting to create a dynamic receiving core, and obviously you guys have no clue how to do that. Evidence by Nate Burleson, Deion Branch, and now pairing up 2 guys with little ability to stretch the field.
I don't think that Ruskell has forgotten what made this team successful. Getting to the opposing team's quarterback with a fast, small defense, and controlling the clock and maintaining long drives on offense. The game's we won this last year were games were we had more than 4 sacks, except for maybe one we loss.
Everyone is just speculating about Crabtree and all of this talk about bringing in a player to play immediately automatically makes everyone look at Crabtree. However, the Seahawks have taken extensive looks at Chris Wells. He would make an instant impact, probably a larger one than Crabtree, since RB's don't have near the learning curve that WR's do.
Also, when Patrick Kerney went down, we lost all semblance of a pass rush. They may intrigued by someone like Brian Orakpo or Everrette Brown (who I think is better than Orakpo), to come in as the long term replacement to Kerney.
Ruskell is also known to reach for players. He may decide to shock everyone and take the other Ohio State prospect that fits us, Malcolm Jenkins. I've been so absorbed lately with Crabtree, Curry, & Sanchez, I completely went away from looking at Ruskell's tendencies.
Also, several people are trying to quote Ruskell as saying lately, something along the lines of the Seahawks will not take a quarterback @ 4. I listened to his press conference yesterday. He said (as close to possible as I can get),
Originally Posted by Tim Ruskell
[on players sitting out for a year]That's a given if you take a QB and you have a QB, that's just the way it has to be. At any of those other positions though, you have to have a plan. When is he gonna get on the field, who's he gonna beat out, and how quickly is that gonna happen. And you have to know that, and you wanna have everyone adhere to that plan. We've been burned by that in the pass when we didn't discuss the plan for the player, and he's kinda languished on the bench and he never got his shot. And the guys there ended up being okay, and that's how you get a bust. Let's hear the plan, and if it's not good enough, then that's probably not the guy.
Asked if they could afford to sit a QB for two years, Ruskell replied
Sure, we wouldn't be the first ones to do that.
Matt Hasselbeck has also said that, if the Seahawks brought in a quarterback, that he would have to sit for a couple of years. Perhaps the Seahawks have already told him that they planned to take Sanchez. I dunno, there's really so many just little things you can go back and look at and kinda get clues about how much subterfuge the Seahawks are actually participating in.
If they do not manage to convince other team's that they are going to take Sanchez, and other team's believe they can get him @ 8, the Hawks may decide to take him just to prove they aren't bluffing. Maybe forcing someone like Washington to make a trade for him. Perhaps drafting Chris Wells at 13 and then doing a swap?
EDIT: Here's the press conference
from 710 ESPN. The actual press conference starts a little after the 21 minute mark. There is a lot of quotes that I'd like to put up, but there are a lot of em, and I'm kinda tired right now, so I'll probably throw them in the draft discussion thread tomorrow.