As the Seahawks get busy trying to infuse some varsity talent into their JV offensive line and perhaps add a veteran running back, defensive tackle and safety — and then potentially address extensions for three stars — plenty of fans are wondering just how much of this they can afford.
The short answer: All of it.
The Seahawks were way too young on the offensive line in 2016, and they went through far too many running backs. Those were both major contributing factors to their failure to go beyond the divisional round for the second straight year.
Their solution: Bring in a bunch of flawed veteran linemen and backs.
They reportedly are going to sign Luke Joeckel, a former No. 2 overall draft pick who is coming off a bad knee injury. They also apparently are planning to host T.J. Lang, a 29-year-old guard coming off hip surgery; Jamaal Charles, an explosive back who can’t stay on the field; Eddie Lacy, a punishing runner who can’t control his weight; and Latavius Murray, a part-time player for Oakland.
These are the kind of guys the Hawks have to check out, because they don’t want to overspend on so-called first-tier free agents. But will any of them be worth even a discounted price?
Some fans still can’t get past the idea that fantasy football is not real football. So you get goofballs thinking the Seahawks need to spend a lot of money to hire a big-name running back — forgetting that the rusher has to have a line that can block for him and he has to stay healthy.
So, no, the Seahawks should not — and almost certainly will not — pursue one-time stars Adrian Peterson and Jamaal Charles. Just like they didn’t pursue DeMarco Murray last year.
The topic is relevant today because the Vikings declined to pick up Peterson’s 2017 option, and the Chiefs are cutting Charles — meaning two of the more productive backs of the last decade will now be available.
But Seattle would be stupid to pursue either.
Continue reading Don’t expect Hawks to pursue Peterson or Charles
It would have been nice for the Seahawks to win in Kansas City — if only for the Hawks to show they can beat a good team, something they haven’t done since they beat Denver in Week 3.
If the Hawks had been able to tackle better, convert a third or fourth down in the fourth quarter or perhaps get a call or two to go their way, they might have avoided falling three games behind streaking Arizona (9-1, with six straight wins) as the two prepare to meet for the first time this week in Seattle.
Continue reading Hawks need 5 wins; can they get healthy, stop the run, get some calls?
CHAWK TALK: Everything being said about the Seahawks 