HawkShack.com

I just saw this article from Sports Illustrated and wondered what you all thought of their rankings.
I pretty much agree with it, maybe move guys around a little. I also don't agree that Matt was a game manager.
I was a bit surprised they put Walt No. 1 versus Largent.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/ph ... ll-time/1/

I guess I might have flipped a couple guys there, but I think I agreed for the most part.
Hasselbeck wasn't exactly a game manager, but he didn't exactly carry the offense either, except for 07 when our run game hit the wall.
He was more game manager than not IMO, but I can see arguments both ways really.
I had less of a problem putting Walt at the top than putting Easely behind Green. I'd have flipped the two at least...in fact I'd have moved Green further down that list myself, not that Green wasn't awesome mind you!
I understand Walt being number one there, as he really was the single best Seahawks player we've ever had to date, BUT it's impossible to say he meant more to the team than Largent.
Seahawks aren't even a team if there's no Largent. He's the guy who put them on the map at all. IMO Largent is the "greatest" ever, not necessarily the most talented, or the best player, but he's the greatest, in the same way we think of Hall of Fame type greatness.
He'll always be my hero, my all time favorite player to ever play in the NFL. Well...I take that back, he might not "always" be my all time favorite, because we now have Russell Wilson!!!
Russell Wilson is our QB guys !!! He's ours and you can't have him!

I would have made Largent and Walt 1A and 1B. I would have figured out a way to get Mack Strong in there, but otherwise, I felt it was a fair representation.

Yeah, I might have flipped a couple like monkey said, but at that point, there's no wrong answer.

Thanks for the link.

Hass a game manager? That's a little dismissive. I see the Walt vs Largent thing though. Largent was an overachiever, a sneaky great receiver who was much more than the sum of his parts. Big Walt, well he was dominant, overpowering. I wish we had him going next Sunday in prime form, Hutch too. O line is the one area where 05's team was clearly superior. I think a few years in the future we may have some other guys on that top ten list though. I sure hope so.

There are a couple guys I would have liked to see on the list, Dave Brown, Curt Warner, Blair Bush, etc... but I have no problem with the ones selected, having to "many" is a hell of a lot better than not enough... LOL

You can add Chris Warren's name, too. And although his career took a huge nose dive, you have to throw in a few kudos for Lofa Tatupu.

HumanCockroach wrote:There are a couple guys I would have liked to see on the list, Dave Brown, Curt Warner, Blair Bush, etc... but I have no problem with the ones selected, having to "many" is a hell of a lot better than not enough... LOL

Yeppers, those guys were big time for us. There are a lot more too, like John L Williams for example. We've had a ton of really good pass rushers like Michael Sinclair even more guys in the secondary like Eugene Robinson, etc...

And someday, we are going to look back at right now, and call this the golden age, and say that there are several players from this current team who are top ten all time greatest.
Earl Thomas, Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, Marshawn Lynch, Russell Wilson just for starters.
Imagine how we are going to look back on this group ten, twenty years from now.

Man this is such a great time to be a Seahawks fan!!

EDIT: Yeah Riv, Lofa was, too briefly unfortunately,

RiverDog wrote:You can add Chris Warren's name, too. And although his career took a huge nose dive, you have to throw in a few kudos for Lofa Tatupu.

Was never a big fan of Warrens. He was productive for a few seasons no doubt, but if he was a "rop ten" kind of player, he would have been able to do better on the FA market than a backup position, even if it was behind Emmitt Smith. Warren went there because no other team was willing to make him a starter. Not bashing the guy, but IMHO his ranking amongst Seahawks backs bairly scratches the top ten ( Warner, Lynch, Alexander, Watters, John L., Mack Strong, Sherman Smith all rank ahead of him IMO).

I thought he was a "good" back, but "great" Seahawk? Not in my book...

Mack Strong belongs on that list.

rottweiler wrote:Mack Strong belongs on that list.

Good call.

Naturally, I'm biased, but so does Jim Zorn.

I understand that, statistically, he wasn't the best QB. But he did set the rookie record (at the time) for passing yds, and generally provided some hope for a franchise that was, itself, in its infancy. I certainly never felt that he was the reason why Seattle hadn't made the playoffs prior to 1983.

I don't agree with Hutchinson being on the list. I know he was awfully good at his position, and was a key component to the OL during his tenure here, but the circumstances under which he left are enough to substitute another, more deserving Seahawk, like Zorn (or Strong, for that matter).

Beyond the obvious ones like HOF'ers Tez, Largent, and future HOF'er Walt, it's pretty difficult to pick a Top 10. You can make good arguments and counter arguments for every single one once you get past the top 3.

That a pretty good list.

Yeah, I like some of the other names mentioned but we would need a top 20 for most of them. As one poster said, a few on the current roster may knock out some already on the list. Let's hope that is true. Beast to boot S.A., RW to boot Matt, and LOB to boot whomever.

Huck Futch! Drop his Benedict Arnold arse, move everyone behind him up one and give Jimmy Z or Mack the ten spot.

Other than that it's a fine list.

Zorn76 wrote:

rottweiler wrote:Mack Strong belongs on that list.

Good call.

Naturally, I'm biased, but so does Jim Zorn.

I understand that, statistically, he wasn't the best QB. But he did set the rookie record (at the time) for passing yds, and generally provided some hope for a franchise that was, itself, in its infancy. I certainly never felt that he was the reason why Seattle hadn't made the playoffs prior to 1983.

I don't agree with Hutchinson being on the list. I know he was awfully good at his position, and was a key component to the OL during his tenure here, but the circumstances under which he left are enough to substitute another, more deserving Seahawk, like Zorn (or Strong, for that matter).

Agreed. Hutch made his bed with the Vikings. Let him sleep in Minneapolis or St. Paul not Seattle. I don't want to have his name ever mentioned or associated with the Seahawks. If you say his name may you be consumed by 10000 red ants over 2 weeks.

It depends on your definition of the term "greatest". If it is based solely on performance, then Hutch's name belongs there. He was arguably the best player at his position and undoubtedly a critical part of what was up until this season, our one and only SB team. There's not too many names on that list that you can say that about.