Here we go again, another ridiculous NFL analyst on NFL.com is giving the Seattle Seahawks draft picks and Pete Carroll more ammunition to pack their guns with, this time Bucky Brooks is the best thing that’s happened to the Hawks’ ego lately.
I’m telling you that sly smile just can’t help but to creep across my face when these guys start talking. Despite general B+ grades throughout the community, Brooks throws a ‘C’ at the Hawks overall draft picks, one of only six teams in that category. Let’s take a look at what his reasoning was.
SEATTLE SEAHAWKS: Since the beginning of the Pete Carroll/John Schneider era, the Seahawks‘ draft classes have routinely earned initial low marks — and yet, their roster is regarded as one of the best in the NFL. Thus, observers should really reserve judgment until the team’s plan for each prospect is revealed. Looking at this year’s collection of rookie talent, I see a number of height-weight-speed athletes with ultra-competitive personalities. Receiver Paul Richardson (Round 2) is a blazer with exceptional straight-line speed and burst. He’s an unpolished route runner, but his ability to get past the defense on vertical routes could make him a legitimate home-run threat in the Seahawks‘ offense. Richardson and fourth-round selection Kevin Norwood give Seattle a pair of young pass catchers with tremendous potential. Fourth-round pick Cassius Marsh is an underrated pass rusher with the size and length to create problems off the edge. Overall, the Seahawks‘ class lacks sizzle, but Carroll and Co. will surely find a way to develop these new additions into key contributors down the road. GRADE: C
So…. emoticon :/
My absolute favorite part of that he doesn’t have a single critical thing to say about the picks and points out exactly why maybe, perhaps, he should re-evaluate his measuring stick for these picks when it comes to Seattle. He does in fact tell himself to reserve judgement, but like spitting into a 60 mph wind knowing you’ll be wiping it off your face, he does it anyway.
Honestly, there’s not much to “reveal” at this point Mr. Brooks. Personally I thought all of the Seahawks’ picks were cut-and-dried, filling specific roles and needs on this team, as well as forward-thinking pickups for guys that will desire large contracts in the near future via free agency (like for example getting Malcolm Smith‘s replacement in Kevin Pierre-Louis in the 4th round). This may actually be the least controversial draft the Hawks have put together under Pete and John.
I believe your “lack of sizzle” comes down to the fact that Paul Richardson wasn’t taken in the first round. Had he been taken at 32, I bet this grade woulda been higher for the “sizzle factor” you so desperately desire. Also, if you watch the tape, Richardson was one of the better route runners in all of college football, thus the separation factor in spite of his thinner frame and his 80-plus catches despite being on one of the worst teams in college football.
Not that Bucky is one of my favorites or anything. I dislike his articles on a regular basis, but this made me smile extra big folks. Obviously this draft was beyond solid for what the Seahawks’ needs were (I always thought this was more important when grading a teams’ draft accomplishments) and should never find itself falling below a B to the most critical degree.