FanBall.com wrote:Seahawks re-signed RT Sean Locklear to a five-year, $32 million contract. The deal includes $12 million in guarantees.
Locklear, 27 in May, didn't have his best season in 2007, but didn't miss a start and Seattle is right to lock him up now. He would've commanded guarantees in the $15 million range had he hit the market. The Seahawks still have to find an eventual successor for 34-year-old LT Walter Jones.
Again, it looks like the Seahawks are getting their O-line in order. Apparently the front office wasn't happy with the running game this past year and believes this is the tipping point for the team.
I would agree.
With this, Wahle and Trufant taken care of, we now need to seriously focus on our WR needs. I know the RB issue exists, but I think we're about to address this in the upcoming draft.
I'm scared about WR....they are saying the 'Hawks are going to let DJ Hackett test the FA market....
now lets say he signs somewhere else....Branch is out till NOV or later, so Burleson would be #1, Obomanu would be #2 and Engram #3.....now i dont think Burleson will ever be a #1 in our system, he is a great deep threat for speed at #2, but not a #1. Obomanu has shown flash, but i just dont think he's ready.....we are all worried about our running game, but right now i think we may have a bigger issue at WR, especially since we dont have a TE!!!!
Our main offense is passing and i really think the 'Hawks will be addressing it before the RB position and as of now i'd rather hold on to Alexander(yes i said it) and Morris and go out and sign or trade for some WR and TE help like Biju said....
1. They are letting him test free agency only. That doesn't mean they wouldn't necessarily match an offer. If I remember correctly Hackett has expressed a desire to come back to Seattle, and I don't think he'll necessarily sign with another team without informing Seattle of their offer and give them a chance to match. Of course, if you had asked me I would have said the same about Steve Hutchinson too. Regardless, I think our tactics are strange here. I understand what we're doing by letting other teams set the price for WRs. Hackett has some question around him too, as he was hurt twice for extended periods last year. He's shown he can be an extremely productive receiver, but health concerns may limit the amount of money a team will spend on him. So actually, we get two things: first, the exact price it would take to sign a WR who has injury history and flashes of greatness; second, his upside and the possible ability to become a premier #1 WR.
2. I truly believe the Charlie Frye move last season was extremely forward thinking. They groom him to be a solid backup for Hasselbeck and move Seneca Wallace to WR and strengthen our depth. This year, more than ever, they really need him in that arena to help cover for an injured Branch. Furthermore, I'm positive they have confidence in him at the position as they've put him in there under extreme circumstances.
We have issues at WR for sure, and losing Hackett could really hurt. But if that happens gaining Seneca Wallace in the space helps a bunch too, assuming he really can step into a WR3 role for us. It allows Engram to assume the WR1 role, Burleson to stretch out the defense, and Wallace to throw off the defense into a nickel (or dime if we're using Obomanu as well). In that defensive formation and with our revamped O-line we will hopefully be able to walk 5 yards with every run.
This is magnified if we get a pass catching TE. I've got my fingers crossed, as Crumpler is in town tonight.