QUOTE: “Courage, it would seem, is nothing less than the power to overcome danger, misfortune, fear, injustice, while continuing to affirm inwardly that life with all its sorrows is good; that everything is meaningful even if in a sense beyond our understanding; and that there is always tomorrow.” -- Dorothy Thompson
The change happening today in Seattle shouldn’t surprise anyone. Tim Ruskell’s resignation as team president and general manager is something that many in the NFL thought would happen when he wasn’t offered a contract extension at the beginning of the season. We are now on the Mike Holmgren watched, as I reported in October. Ruskell entered the 2009 draft as a “lame duck” with his focus solely on improving the team right now. His vision was impaired because of his lame-duck status, which forced him to pick a linebacker in the first round instead of protecting the future of the franchise.
Linebacker Aaron Curry is a fine player, but with continued questions about the health of Matt Hasselbeck, the Seahawks should have prepared for his eventual replacement. They have a ton of money invested in linebacker and wide receiver, two positions in my mind that never determined the outcome of games. Yes, I know you need good linebackers, and yes, I know you need great receivers, but both positions can be found as the draft progresses. Had the Seahawks not liked Mark Sanchez as the eventual replacement for Hasselbeck, they surely could have used an offensive lineman because their line is a mess. This team had many areas of concern, but because Ruskell was all about “now,” he focused on the one player who could make an immediate impact — or so he thought.
Before coming to Seattle, Ruskell spent one year in Atlanta as assistant GM and 17 in Tampa, where he won a Super Bowl around a defense that was dominating and had linebackers who could fly to the ball. His philosophy centered on finding quality character players who would embrace the team concept. But the problem with centering your philosophy on “character players” often lies in the definition of character. It’s too broad, so there are times when a good player with good football character is passed over. After all, the players being evaluated for the draft are young men, and young men make mistakes. One youthful mistake shouldn’t label someone a character problem — depending on the degree of the mistake. The other problem when considering character comes when scouts, who might not like a player, label him a problem to enhance their case against picking him. Don’t think this doesn’t happen — it does, all the time.
As a team builder from the Tony Dungy system, Ruskell wanted a team that could resemble the Bucs on and off the field with fast players who loved to play the game. However, much like the case with Bill Belichick disciples, there needs to be a modification of the Dungy system in order to adapt to the current standards of the NFL. No team is running the Tampa 2 scheme with success. In fact, even the Colts have changed as the league has caught up with the nuances of the defense. Yes, teams run Tampa 2, but it’s not a bread-and-butter defense right now — especially if teams do not have a dominating defensive line, which is a requirement to make the system successful.
Having the Dungy principles is a great starting point, but creating your own brand based on how the league has changed is what everyone must do. Former Detroit Lions coach Rod Marinelli wanted to create the same culture in Detroit and brought the “character-first mantra” with him, but just having great kids is not a guarantee to winning — it takes talent. The Lions had a locker room full of nice kids, but they were bad players. So, as is the case with most everything, there has to be balance.
Upon his arrival in Seattle, Ruskell had a very difficult job in terms of the politics of the building. He was replacing a man (Holmgren) who had his general manager duties removed but was still the head coach. So any attack of the team’s personnel by Ruskell could draw the ire of Holmgren. Any change of protocol was an indirect slap at the Holmgren regime — not intentionally, although clearly implied. The first year was blissful as the Seahawks went to the Super Bowl, and everything on the outside looked great. But winning can often create more problems than losing.
Their relationship became further damaged by the Steve Hutchinson incident in 2006. When Holmgren left for the NFL combine in Indy that year, he thought the organization had agreed to place the highest franchise tag on Hutchinson. But when he landed, he learned it had placed the lowest franchise tender on the All-Pro guard, allowing teams to bid but also giving the Seahawks the right to match. We all know how this story ends – the Seahawks let the seven-day deadline pass after the Vikings offered a seven-year, $49-million offer sheet. The result of the incident damaged the relationship of these two men beyond repair.
Jim Mora was later hired by Ruskell to be Holmgren’s eventually successor, but Ruskell was not rewarded with a new contract. So he had to know then that he was on borrowed time, and the only thing that could save him was the Seahawks getting off to a very fast start.
Now Ruskell is leaving, and there’s a very good possibility that Holmgren could be headed back to Seattle to take over as the “football” man in the building and help Mora rebuild the team. The Seahawks will change their procurement philosophy based on the new hire.
It’s going to be a crazy offseason in the NFL.
Follow me on Twitter: michaelombardi
To read about the NFL stars not suffering through a sophomore slump, check out this article from Bleacher Report.
@Thom Ferris
You're confirming Mike's point. James Harrison was undrafted. Mike's point is that difference makers are more easily found at LB and WR in mid to later rounds, while others (say, DL and QB) tend to be found closer to the top.
Hmm, I think LBs are only difference makers when you have a better than average pass rush or secondary (Seattle has neither, as far as I can tell). And the point about finding quality WRs seems to be that I am wrestling with - because I think there are a lot of WRs that have quality potential, but don't necessarily exhibit on the field. Whether it's crisp route-running, willingness to go over the middle, reading coverages, adept at audibles, beating bump-n-run, and downfield blocking, being adept at these traits seem to only exist in a handful of WRs.
Mike, no mention of the passing of a great longtime coach and man in the NFL, Foge Fazio? His charm and personality and caring for players coaches and staff alike should be celebrated today.
Knowing Lombardi, I think he would consider James Harrison a pass rusher, not a "linebacker".
Seattle's money in invested in linebackers, not pass rushers. Big difference.
@Terry
You're right. I should have read the rest of what he wrote. But I stopped after what seemed like a very strong and questionable statement:
"They have a ton of money invested in linebacker and wide receiver, two positions in my mind that never determined the outcome of games"
deljzc is probably right about Harrison too. Definitely a pash rusher more than a LB.
It seems Ruskell thought he could save money/cap room by putting the lowest franchise tender on Hutchinson, which is fine. That’s the decision making all GM’s make. I’m sure Ruskell had every intention of mating any offer Hutchinson received. However, that is when Minnesota “Cheated” by putting a poison pill in Hutchinson’s contract making the whole system of matchable tenders meaningless. Minnesota’s contract to Hutchinson had a clause that required Hutchinson to be the team’s highest paid offensive lineman. Since Seattle had Walter Jones on their team, they could not pay all-pro left tackle money to an all-pro guard. Granted, if Raskell would have used the highest franchise tag, Minnesota wouldn’t have had the chance to “Cheat”. But Holmgren can’t blame Ruskell for something unforeseeable like that.
Just to hammer the point home, MINNESOTA CHEATED!!!
@jwert-
"Cheating" is a very different thing than taking advantage of a loophole. Minnesota did not break any rules- granted, after their maneuver, a new guideline was put in place, but Minnesota played within the rules. The best part of all of this was Seattle's "revenge" by pulling the same trick with Nate Burleson. The bottom line is that Ruskell made one of the all time bonehead personnel moves, and then compounded the problem by poison pilling one of our players and drastically overpaying him.
Well,
I know that Holmgren has hardly left Seattle as he has a weekly show on KJR where he discusses the Seahawks. I think that the Seahawks may have no choice but to rebuild. The Cardinals and 49ers are only going to improve so Seattle has no option but to do likewise. Holmgren is a good football man and he belongs in the game. Keep up the good work Lombardi and of course GO BRONCOS!!!
Ruskell definitely has made some poor decisions over the last 5 years...
A couple things I'm thinking of: In a 3-4 format, linebacker corps are more valuable. An elite outside edge rusher is worth quite a bit especially if they have good coverage skills...I dont' think Curry wouldn't have been a bad pick for a team running this style of defense. From a Hawks perspective, he does not fit because they can't generate a pass rush.
Recent hyped FA signings have been Housh, Kearney, and J. Jones. Kearney had one good year, but is older and banged up...Jones, isn't an impact back, and Housh is older and someone they didn't need.
The biggest blunder was O-Line...he should have been looking at getting younger and really botched on Hutch. Also, he made a huge blunder signing Alexander to the huge deal...He penned way to much away to an aging running back.
I don't see the error in passing over Sanchez...they have Matt and he's still got some good years left if they can protect him.
@jwert-
"Cheating" is a very different thing than taking advantage of a loophole. Minnesota did not break any rules- granted, after their maneuver, a new guideline was put in place, but Minnesota played within the rules. The best part of all of this was Seattle's "revenge" by pulling the same trick with Nate Burleson. The bottom line is that Ruskell made one of the all time bonehead personnel moves, and then compounded the problem by poison pilling one of our players and drastically overpaying him.
"Sorry, coach, while you were gone, I kinda' sorta', um, lost your hall of fame left tackle."
"No team is running the Tampa 2 scheme with success"...I missed this on the first read. This is semi true...and I think it has to do with athletic tight ends and a shift in rules to encourage scoring. However...and I know I'll get ripped by a few...but the Vikings have a pretty good Tampa 2 package. They do get exposed over the middle from time to time, but with the amount of sacks created, the ability to stop the run, and the emergence of Cedric Griffin as a cover guy...they've been dominant enough for me to feel comfortable with the scheme.
@Nate,
I agree, what MN did was not cheating following the letter of the law. But in the spirit of the NFL rules, they defiantly did something wrong. Like many of today’s CEO’s, I think Mr. Wilf failed his ethics class in college. In the long run, making decisions without regard to any principals is no way to run a company or a team.
Had Seattle not lost Hutchinson or given Burleson that ridiculous contract (in an ill-advised retaliation), Ruskell may not have had to resign (although he did make other errors).
Why would the owner of the Seahawks hire Holmgren to be the GM (football guy,etc) for the Hawks ,when he was the one who fired him from that job because of poor performance? Remember,it wasn't that long ago that holmgren was stripped of his GM duties and only left with his head coaching duties,because Holmgren was a failure as GM and not a very good player personnel guy and talent evaluator. Great HC,bad GM!
That is why the Niners would not consider hiring him as anything other than a HC (although Holmgren wants to come back to the Niners and even has a home in the Santa Cruz hills nearby),and the Niners certainly don't need another HC now,not with singletary cemented in that job for years to come !
As a Niner's fan I hope they keep Jim Mora as HC and hire Holmgren as GM,that would ensure that the Niners get a couple easy wins every years in their divison. I hope they don't get a real GM,that goes out and hires a real HC(like Gruden or Cowher etc).
Letting Hutchinson go was a really bad move that cost the team tremendously. Their running game hasn't been the same since then, and from everything I read guys like Hutchinson not only win their matchups but also completely improve the overall attitude and aggression of the entire offensive line.
I am thinking Mr. Lombardi would be a great man for the job at Seattle!
I think that the Hutch incident was one of the worst moves ever made by a GM. We had the best LG in the league and one of the best linemen ever and he let him go. And then he set up an awful vendetta overpaying for Burleson. Referring to Holmgren I'm a bit skeptical about his ability as GM since his first tenure as GM/HC was pitying. Probably he wasn't able to handle both positions and he ended up doing both badly (once reliaeved from the GM duties, the great HC we all know, was back and the team played much, much better football). Let's hope he learnt from his mistakes and with the opportunity to focus only to one position he's going to help rebuild a great Seahawks team.
No, they picked Aaron Curry because he is a better football player. Don't muddle it Mr. Lombardi, the reason they picked Aaron Curry was because he is a better player, and if you think otherwise, your just wrong, (not in the business to compare a Seahawk Rookie LB vs a Jets Rookie QB) the Seahawks have a quality QB and if you look in the future there are a plenty of opportunities in this years draft to pick up a QB and the Seahawks will have two draft picks in the first round, so stop covering the Seahawks and pretend you know what your talking about like Charles Davis and Dick Stockton, FOX commentators who continually butcher facts and figures to a somewhat a "National" audience. I would rather you not cover the team then to send out these half truths.
Couple of minor facts that doesn't change the meat of the story. Ruskell was replacing Bob Whitsett and Bob Ferguson (VP of Football operations and General Manager respectively). Holmgren had been stripped of his GM position by the Seahawks after the '02 Season. Secondly, though everyone may know of the Vikings' poison pill, you are coloring the coversation by making it sound as though the Seahawks went ho-hum on the Hutch deal. They tried getting a Special arbitrator to overrule the language in the Vikings contract and piror to that had re-structured Walter Jones to try to work around said language. The NFL 11th hour settlement of the CBA took the financial handicap off teams leading up to the FA period. Hindsight, they should have allowed the clubs to redo their FA strategy when this new money came free.
But fine points on the Tampa 2 and the Curry selection.
The bottom line is that Ruskell made one of the all time bonehead personnel moves, and then compounded the problem.
Thank you for information.
A list of thank yous and a final...
Even if you called me an idiot,...
Their success will depend on QB...
Titans coach wants Chris Johnson...
Now is the QB’s chance to show...
Dec 03, 2009
10:49 AM
LB and WR never determine the outcome of games? I think your point, Lombardi, is that there are fewer legitmiate difference makers in the NFL at LB and WR than at QB and, I don't know, defensive end? Safety? But don't forget what happened in February with James Harrison, Larry Fitzgerald and Santonio Holmes with the outcome of the SuperBowl at stake. Yes, a QB needs to get the ball to the WR, and the DL needs to keep bodies off the LBs, but to so minimize the impact of LB and WR as you did at the beginning of your article is a stretch.