Bruce Irvin

[RiverDog]

I'm not sure if anyone else noticed or not, but Bruce Irvin was nearly absent in the SB. Even though Irvin got the start, Malcolm Smith, now SB MVP, was getting the bulk of the playing time. Out of 69 defensive plays, Irvin got just 17 snaps, or 25% of the total available. Smith exactly twice that amount at 34. Indeed, most of Irvin's snaps came at defensive end. In the NFC Championship game vs. the Niners, he saw 23 snaps, or 42% of the total. Earlier in the year, he was receiving 60-70% of the available defensive snaps.

So what's the plan for Irvin? Are they giving up on him as the "spinner"? With Clemmons and his big salary a possible cap casualty, will they try Irvin at Leo again? Or will he return to his rookie roll as a pass rushing specialist? Or will he even be on the team?

[monkey]

I noticed, it was something I hoped I would see. I like Irvin fine, but Smith is better in pass coverage so it only made sense he got the bulk of the plays.

My guess, (and I could be WAY off) is that the position switch worked, but probably not well enough to keep him at LB with Clemons leaving. I would guess that he moves back to the leo. It is, after all, what he was originally drafted for, and I think he has a much bigger impact there.

I'm looking at his time as a LB not so much as an audition for the job there, (though obviously that was a big part of it!), but more as a teaching tool on tackling, how to play against the run, and how to play pass defense. I think Pete was using it to make him a more well rounded player, while he waits out Clemons time here.
Again, that's just a guess though.

In other words, I think had he been dominant as LB'er he would stay there, but since he really wasn't, he'll get moved back to the position he was drafted to play and chalk this whole switch up to a learning experience..

[RiverDog]

I noticed, it was something I hoped I would see. I like Irvin fine, but Smith is better in pass coverage so it only made sense he got the bulk of the plays.

My guess, (and I could be WAY off) is that the position switch worked, but probably not well enough to keep him at LB with Clemons leaving. I would guess that he moves back to the leo. It is, after all, what he was originally drafted for, and I think he has a much bigger impact there.

I'm looking at his time as a LB not so much as an audition for the job there, (though obviously that was a big part of it!), but more as a teaching tool on tackling, how to play against the run, and how to play pass defense. I think Pete was using it to make him a more well rounded player, while he waits out Clemons time here.
Again, that's just a guess though.

In other words, I think had he been dominant as LB'er he would stay there, but since he really wasn't, he'll get moved back to the position he was drafted to play and chalk this whole switch up to a learning experience..

With Clem coming off major knee surgery, I would have thought that had they felt Irvin was going to be our future Leo, that they would have worked him there this season.

[Seahawks4Ever]

With so many unrestricted FA's to sign Bruce Irvin WILL be a casualty. But face it, he WAS a monumental REACH and IS a HUGE BUST. Our #1 defense was essentially playing with 10 men on the field when ever Irvin was in the line up.

The Seahawks just can't afford to wait and see if Irvin might someday develop, face the TRUTH Pete, you BLEW IT with this guy and move on.

[savvyman]

As the Season grew longer the number of plays where Irvin was on the field each week grew shorter.

It is safe to say that Malcom Smith has moved past Irvin on the Linebacking depth charts.

If Clem does not return next year - then expect Irvin to see more time at the Leo - However he will be pushed by O'Brien Schofield (who got major minutes in the SuperBowl) and Benson Mayowa.

[HumanCockroach]

You guys crack me up. Smith has played in a Carroll defense for 7+ years, LOL. Also by diminishing Irvins ability, you diminish Smiths accomplishments. Only in Seattle do we call players a "bust" after 20 something games....

FYI, Irvin was NOT a starter in the SB, though he DID play significant minutes, O'brien Schofield did as well, though he is a FA. Did anyone stop to think maybe it was the opponent, not the play of Irvin that placed Smith ( a better pass defender) on the field, or that it is strange that Obrien barely played a down during the last two thirds of the season, but logged significant minutes in the SB?

Nah, it is straight to "bust" or not good enough.... LMAO.

[RiverDog]

You guys crack me up. Smith has played in a Carroll defense for 7+ years, LOL. Also by diminishing Irvins ability, you diminish Smiths accomplishments. Only in Seattle do we call players a "bust" after 20 something games....

FYI, Irvin was NOT a starter in the SB, though he DID play significant minutes, O'brien Schofield did as well, though he is a FA. Did anyone stop to think maybe it was the opponent, not the play of Irvin that placed Smith ( a better pass defender) on the field, or that it is strange that Obrien barely played a down during the last two thirds of the season, but logged significant minutes in the SB?

Nah, it is straight to "bust" or not good enough.... LMAO.

Significant minutes? He was in for just 23 plays. Denver ran 64. That's 36%. Against a completely different opponent in San Francisco in the prior game, he played just 42% of the snaps, way down from the 60-70% he saw earlier in the season. I don't think it's the opponent. It seems clear to me that our brain trust is losing confidence in him.

http://blog.thenewstribune.com/seahawks ... more-22764

Secondly, Irvin's long suit is supposed to be pass defense, or more specifically, rushing the passer. That was the justification for burning a #15 overall draft choice on him two years ago. Now our 7th round draft pick is suddenly a better option for passing downs than our top half of the first round draft pick. Please tell me why I should not be concerned.

[NorthHawk]

They claim that when they draft someone they do so even if they have to change the Defense to fit the draftees unique skills.
Perhaps this one got away from them in that possibly changing the Defense for Irvin would lessen its effectiveness.
It doesn't mean that they won't use him more regularly in the future, rather they haven't quite fit his abilities into the existing group.
On the other hand he could be a bust. We'll see how it all works out in the coming years.

[savvyman]

I would not assess Irvin as a Bust at this moment in time.

Nor would I assess Irvin as a Success either (especially for a 15th pick)

I would assess Irvin as a 'Work in Progress" at this moment in time.

[HumanCockroach]

When I see players drafted in the first round that year out performing him, I'll become concerned, since NONE of them ( including those you professed better choices) have done so, I refuse to call the guy a bust. He has played, and played well in stretches, he is inconsistent, and far from polished ( something that was discussed numerous times both during and after the draft).

The truth of the matter is, some people didn't like the pick, will never like the pick, and will continue to claim him a bust because they didn't like the pick ( of course refusing to acknowledge that in that draft no one taken in the first round on the defensive side of the ball,has played better, more consistently or produced the result has).

Just skip the "concern" stance RD, every one on this board KNOWS how you feel about the guy, AND the selection, so trying to sound objective is silly. You aren't, haven't been, and no matter what the guy does, you never will be. You don't like him, didn't like the pick, etc, we GET IT and HAVE since the day they drafted him, you aren't bringing anything new to the table.

[RiverDog]

When I see players drafted in the first round that year out performing him, I'll become concerned, since NONE of them ( including those you professed better choices) have done so, I refuse to call the guy a bust. He has played, and played well in stretches, he is inconsistent, and far from polished ( something that was discussed numerous times both during and after the draft).

The truth of the matter is, some people didn't like the pick, will never like the pick, and will continue to claim him a bust because they didn't like the pick ( of course refusing to acknowledge that in that draft no one taken in the first round on the defensive side of the ball,has played better, more consistently or produced the result has).

Just skip the "concern" stance RD, every one on this board KNOWS how you feel about the guy, AND the selection, so trying to sound objective is silly. You aren't, haven't been, and no matter what the guy does, you never will be. You don't like him, didn't like the pick, etc, we GET IT and HAVE since the day they drafted him, you aren't bringing anything new to the table.

Sure, I didn't like the Irvin pick. I didn't like the Carpenter pick, either. Is that to prevent me from starting a thread or asking an honest question? What would you suggest I talk about?

I'm not bringing anything 'new' to the table? Would you call the fact that Irvin saw just 23 snaps in the SB old news?

Surely you can come up with a better response than attacking the messenger rather than the message.

[monkey]

Wow this thread got way off track.
I never said that he's a bust, nor even hinted at it. I completely disagree!
The guy was drafted because of a very unique skill set, due to his speed and athleticism, nothing about those qualities has changed at all!
He's still wicked fast, and very valuable when used mostly as a pass rusher.
He led all rookies in sacks year one, then was asked to switch to LB in just his second season, and people are labeling him a BUST?
Come on...
He'll be starting just his third season and so far he's had a very big impact year one, and been at least passable in his very first season after switching positions.

In fact I'd argue that Irvin was absolutely instrumental, vital even, in the NFC championship game.
First half Kaepernick was running all over us, getting big time yardage and generally being a giant pain. Second half, the whole run game was reduced to nothing, and the Seahawks came back from down 10-0 outscoring the Niners 23-7 the rest of the way.
How?
All they did was have Irvin spy Kaepernick. That was it, just that simple adjustment, and Kaepernick's ability to use his feet was virtually, completely removed, and he was forced to throw, which is clearly something he's not very good at!

Irvin as the spy in that game completely changed the momentum, because of his unreal speed.
Remember Pete is looking for players who have something special about them that he can use. Irvin has that, it's his speed and athleticism. So even if he's not an every down LB, or DE, Pete wanted him for those reasons, and nothing about that has changed.

[RiverDog]

Who said Irvin was a bust? It wasn't me.

I'm just wondering what his role is on this team as we go forward. His playing time has undeniably been reduced in the past few games and the LB experiment seems to have ended, either due to his not being productive or Smith's out playing him. Does he go back to being a pass rushing specialist like he was as a rookie? Does he go to Leo when Clem is done? Or am I wrong in that the LB or "spinner" experiment isn't really over?

[HumanCockroach]

So did Reds, maybe I should start a thread questioning his value as well?

No it wasn't you that called him a "bust", however starting a thread 6 days after this team ( of which Irvin WAS a starter for the bulk of the season) wins the biggest game in Seattle sports history, to question a player that hasn't even played two seasons yet, that you for what ever reason can't accept, is slightly uncouth.

I didn't "attack the poster" hoss, I called it like it is. You didn't like the pick, you don't like the player, and regardless of what he does in the future, you will question him or the pick, or whatever because of it, so NO you are bringing nothing "new" to the table.

I know how much you like Red ( hell we all do) but look at that list a little more closely, Red played as much as Irvin and LESS than Schofield, you ready to make the same claims about him? Nope, why?

Smith deserved to be on the field. As I pointed out he has played in this system for 7 + years AT LB, Irvin? 14 games.

Anytime you feel the urge to give us that list of players more productive from that draft, feel free......

[RiverDog]

So did Reds, maybe I should start a thread questioning his value as well?

No it wasn't you that called him a "bust", however starting a thread 6 days after this team ( of which Irvin WAS a starter for the bulk of the season) wins the biggest game in Seattle sports history, to question a player that hasn't even played two seasons yet, that you for what ever reason can't accept, is slightly uncouth.

I didn't "attack the poster" hoss, I called it like it is. You didn't like the pick, you don't like the player, and regardless of what he does in the future, you will question him or the pick, or whatever because of it, so NO you are bringing nothing "new" to the table.

I know how much you like Red ( hell we all do) but look at that list a little more closely, Red played as much as Irvin and LESS than Schofield, you ready to make the same claims about him? Nope, why?

Smith deserved to be on the field. As I pointed out he has played in this system for 7 + years AT LB, Irvin? 14 games.

Anytime you feel the urge to give us that list of players more productive from that draft, feel free......

So now I'm Hoss, huh? Still not attacking the poster? Then what's with the nickname? If you're not attacking the poster, you're damn sure diverting the thread. The topic isn't about me, it's about Irvin.

The 'name someone out of that draft that was more productive' is the same defense a lot of us, myself included, used to defend Aaron Curry. I had to be dragged kicking and screaming before I admitted Curry was a bust, and that was one of my best retorts. Besides, I wouldn't want to be comparing Irvin's 2013 production to anyone if that's your way of justifying the pick.

[HumanCockroach]

So did Reds, maybe I should start a thread questioning his value as well?

No it wasn't you that called him a "bust", however starting a thread 6 days after this team ( of which Irvin WAS a starter for the bulk of the season) wins the biggest game in Seattle sports history, to question a player that hasn't even played two seasons yet, that you for what ever reason can't accept, is slightly uncouth.

I didn't "attack the poster" hoss, I called it like it is. You didn't like the pick, you don't like the player, and regardless of what he does in the future, you will question him or the pick, or whatever because of it, so NO you are bringing nothing "new" to the table.

I know how much you like Red ( hell we all do) but look at that list a little more closely, Red played as much as Irvin and LESS than Schofield, you ready to make the same claims about him? Nope, why?

Smith deserved to be on the field. As I pointed out he has played in this system for 7 + years AT LB, Irvin? 14 games.

Anytime you feel the urge to give us that list of players more productive from that draft, feel free......

So now I'm Hoss, huh? Still not attacking the poster? Then what's with the nickname? If you're not attacking the poster, you're damn sure diverting the thread. The topic isn't about me, it's about Irvin.

The 'name someone out of that draft that was more productive' is the same defense a lot of us, myself included, used to defend Aaron Curry. I had to be dragged kicking and screaming before I admitted Curry was a bust, and that was one of my best retorts. Besides, I wouldn't want to be comparing Irvin's 2013 production to anyone if that's your way of justifying the pick.

LOL. "Hoss" offends you? I do apologise, I call many of my best friends, and my son hoss from time to time, so no I was NOT attacking the poster. As for the list of players, give me 17 better defensive players taken between pick 15 and 32 in the first round and I will agree it was a bad pick, hell give me ONE, and I'll admit it, but that guy simply does not exist. In Curry's case there were NUMEROUS first and second round picks that out performed him, so CONTEXT matters ( ie who was available and who was picked). People complaining about that pick to this day ( 2 years later) have NOT been able to provide that name.

I am NOT derailing this thread, I am, and have been talking about Irvin in EVERY post, just because you don't like how I am talking about him( ie positively) doesn't mean I am not. Let's not pretend that this wasn't a thread started to create a negative response to him ( you have to go a post into it, a couple posts to see the "bust" word thrown out) ok? We all know what you think of him, which is exactly what I pointed out.

I do apologise to referencing you as "hoss" or. "Friend" wasn't my intent to insult you by calling you that.

[HumanCockroach]

Just so you know the "name" I called you...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hoss

[HumanCockroach]

Sorry double post.

[Eaglehawk]

(As he grabs his bag of popcorn to get ready for round 2).

[obiken]

With so many unrestricted FA's to sign Bruce Irvin WILL be a casualty. But face it, he WAS a monumental REACH and IS a HUGE BUST. Our #1 defense was essentially playing with 10 men on the field when ever Irvin was in the line up.

The Seahawks just can't afford to wait and see if Irvin might someday develop, face the TRUTH Pete, you BLEW IT with this guy and move on.

This guy was a 1st round draft pick, sorry I think he is bust. And this is what I tried to tell ASHF and got run off the PI forum for being a malcontent. But I was right darn it. This guy was a major reach and one of Pete's biggest mistakes. Dump him.
obi

[HumanCockroach]

3rd in defensive rookie of the year, rookie leader in sacks ( with the same amount as the sack leader this season on this team) a position change, less than two seasons of playing at the nfl level, and performing better than any other defensive pass rusher in that draft to this point. Yep bust.

LMFAO.

[Zorn76]

This next draft is mostly about the OL. I think we bring in 3 legit candidates to challenge for starting positions (both guards and RT, maybe even depth for Okung).

After that, I think we go after a pass rushing specialist or another burner at WR.

As for Irvin, I'm not sure how much more we'll learn about the guy. For the most part, I think he's just another example of being a what you see is what you get type of player. Some plays made here and there, but nothing exceptional or spectacular.

[RiverDog]

LOL. "Hoss" offends you? I do apologise, I call many of my best friends, and my son hoss from time to time, so no I was NOT attacking the poster. As for the list of players, give me 17 better defensive players taken between pick 15 and 32 in the first round and I will agree it was a bad pick, hell give me ONE, and I'll admit it, but that guy simply does not exist. In Curry's case there were NUMEROUS first and second round picks that out performed him, so CONTEXT matters ( ie who was available and who was picked). People complaining about that pick to this day ( 2 years later) have NOT been able to provide that name.

I am NOT derailing this thread, I am, and have been talking about Irvin in EVERY post, just because you don't like how I am talking about him( ie positively) doesn't mean I am not. Let's not pretend that this wasn't a thread started to create a negative response to him ( you have to go a post into it, a couple posts to see the "bust" word thrown out) ok? We all know what you think of him, which is exactly what I pointed out.

I do apologise to referencing you as "hoss" or. "Friend" wasn't my intent to insult you by calling you that.

The use of the term "Hoss" per se didn't offend me. What I objected to was your sarcasm. You're trying to personalize this thread and make it about me rather than the thread topic. Your speaking for others by saying "we all know what you think of him", and is an attempt to turn this thread into some sort of referendum on my opinion, so please, stop it.

What I think about Irvin isn't important. What IS important is what our coaches think of him, and quite frankly, we're getting mixed signals from them to say the least. At first, plans were to eventually use him at Leo. He played one game there, in the playoffs vs. Atlanta in place of the injured Clemons, and played poorly. Yea, I know, it was just one game, but they had an opportunity with Clemons coming off major knee surgery to start working him in on a rotation and instead, they they took him off the LOS and put him in this "spinner" role that seemed ideal for a player like him. However, that plan seems to have changed, too, as he was being taken out on a lot of 3rd down plays and those that he was in on he was dropping back into coverage a lot, more like a conventional OLB. Now his playing time is being reduced and they've even started using him at DE again.

I'm not calling him a bust. But I do think that he has yet to fulfill the expectations that are incumbent on a player that was a top half of the first round pick. He's been with us for two full years, and he's yet to settle into a role.

[Hawktawk]

It seems like Clemons bounced around the NFL trying to find his role much as Irvin has here. I still remember him sacking RGIII and helping send Seattle to the next game last year, also absolutely terrorizing Aaron Rodgers in the Golden Hail Mary game. I see lots of times he gets a whisker from the QB. Mario Williams was labeled a bust for a couple of years too, Bruce Smith even took some ragging. Its early, we are the champs, developing a guy like Irvin is a good problem to have. You cant coach 4.4 speed he will come around.

[RiverDog]

It seems like Clemons bounced around the NFL trying to find his role much as Irvin has here. I still remember him sacking RGIII and helping send Seattle to the next game last year, also absolutely terrorizing Aaron Rodgers in the Golden Hail Mary game. I see lots of times he gets a whisker from the QB. Mario Williams was labeled a bust for a couple of years too, Bruce Smith even took some ragging. Its early, we are the champs, developing a guy like Irvin is a good problem to have. You cant coach 4.4 speed he will come around.

Irvin was shoot'in a cripple, literally, when he sacked RG3 to close out that game vs. the Skins. Outside of that one play, he hadn't done much of anything in the previous 6 games and was MIA in the Atlanta game that followed. The vast majority of those 8 sacks came early in the season, and once RT's began to figure out how one dimensional his pass rushing was, they simply locked him up and took him which ever direction he wanted to go. Opposing offenses didn't bother to double team or chip him, and instead trusted their tackles to handle him one-on-one. I don't know if our coaching staff saw things the same way I did or not, but they did decide to change the plan for him from what Pete told us. Now it looks as if they're back to the drawing board again.

I agree that it's early and that especially for a player like him with raw, undeveloped talent, there are late bloomers that take more than two seasons to find their place. But if his career were a game of H.O.R.S.E., his 'opponent' is on 'R.'

[Pain_Train]

If Clem is cut and Irvin is moved back into the DE rotation, we will see if he starts earning his 1st round pick.

He was drafted #15 because he was the best player in the draft at rushing the passer. Turned out he couldn't do that in the NFL because he was a 1 trick pony. Speed. He almost never successfully spun inside or bull rushed. People learned to just let him run around and push him back behind the QB and run himself out of the play. He was also a liability in the run game, most fully exposed in the Atlanta game. Almost every time they ran at him, he was washed out of the play by the OT that had 75 lbs on him.

I'm still hoping that he can add enough muscle to get up to about 260 and not lose much speed. If he does so and has also been coached up as a DE, this 3rd year could be his breakout year. I still think the biggest thing he hasn't learned is how to use his hands.

[NorthHawk]

A number of us wanted Fletcher Cox before the Hawks traded down. I think that's what has bothered some of us even if I'm willing to give Irvin some time to develop.
That pick might have given us better returns in the short run, but like some other posters have said, this team looks to modify the Defense to take advantage of a players special skill set so maybe they haven't quite worked it out yet. After all, they were playing great and winning, so why would they want to change anything?

The comment above about Irvin spying on Kapaernick is interesting. I didn't notice that, but if that's what they did, he will become even more valuable in the years to come.

[HumanCockroach]

Until Irvin can play a position CONSISTENTLY he will be thinking, not reacting, and anyone that has ever played or coached a game at ANY level, understands that a players ability does not become apparent UNTIL he can just play football. Irvin has played two different spots, in two years in the league, he wasn't a polished pass rusher when he was selected ( much the same way Sherman wasn't, Maxwell wasn't, Chancellor wasn't, Bryant wasn't, hell even Thomas wasn't, as was discussed by Carroll when he talked about sitting him down) to expect all pro, pro bowl numbers from a player like that right away is ignorance about how this game is played, and the level at which it is.

No player drafted has performed better from that first round, none and I seriously doubt the Seahawks coaches are concerned with the disappointment a few fans feel that he isn't the second coming of LT. Irvin did one thing well coming into the league, he will improve, and did better than anyone else in that draft, those ARE the facts of the matter no matter how some portray him.

[NorthHawk]

It's not a fact he will improve, but I like your enthusiasm.
They may have drafted him with the idea of rotating the DL for particular game situations so even if he ends up playing only 3rd and longs, he might get a lot of action with this Defense.
I still think part of it is they haven't yet figured out quite how to use his abilities. That and the learning curve from the jump to the NFL might take some time.

[Seahawks4Ever]

yes, I was the one who called him a bust. But I had to laugh every time HC brought up that Irvin led all rookies in QB sacks. Yes, as a rookie he did that. BUT< how many sacks did he have this year??? How many tackles??? Next to NOTHING on both counts. Pete said he was brought in to take Clemons spot one some day, BUT, he was moved because he couldn't do it. In fact, John and Pete had to bring in Avril, McDonald, and McDaniel because they could do the job BETTER.

With Wagner, Wright, and now Smith Irvin will NEVER crack the starting line up as a linebacker, NEVER!

I wanted us to draft Fletcher, sure, and we could have too but Pete goofed and traded down instead. Now we get to Irvin out shining Fletcher in their rookie seasons, but Fletcher had a very good season his second year, THIS YEAR, while Pete was reduced to looking for ways to some how get Irvin playing time with out him being a liability.

He is not the next Aaron Curry because Curry was doing better than Irvin is after two seasons. It was said Irvin had "upside". I say that is a myth, I say he has topped out and if some other team wants to make a "project" out of him I say let them have a go.

I remember posters like HC who said season after season that Aaron Curry wasn't a bust, that he was just about to "turn the corner". You know, I am sorry for you if you just don't realize as quick as some of us other posters who can see a wasted draft pick when they see one.

[HumanCockroach]

LOL. Did you run out of Wilson material so soon? Believe what you want, you aren't worth my time. Irvin will start, or at the very least contribute. Took Clemmons YEARS to adjust, it took Smith YEARS to contribute. Irvin may become a situational player, a quality backup, or a star, claiming you "know" at this point shows a serious lack of understanding of player development or judgement. Never said Curry was "about to turn a corner", I said he had all the physical tools to be a solid to very good LB ( which by the way he certainly did, though not the work ethic or instincts to do so). Irvin wasn't polished when he showed up, no one here disputed that, despite that he succeeded in his role, that was followed by a position change, after which he CONTINUED to start at a NEW position. Smith for all of his big play ability, couldn't get on the field until AFTER. Years of not being able to beat out players like Irvin, Wright, FARWELL and that is after YEARS in the system, and a lifetime of playing the position.

Claim whatever you want, the guy can play football, period. You are asking how many sacks he had, I ask how many did Smith have? Not many you say? What a shock, you have to actually rush the passer to get them. SMFH. You want a new boy to moan about, be my guest. I could care less.

[RiverDog]

No player drafted has performed better from that first round, none and I seriously doubt the Seahawks coaches are concerned with the disappointment a few fans feel that he isn't the second coming of LT. Irvin did one thing well coming into the league, he will improve, and did better than anyone else in that draft, those ARE the facts of the matter no matter how some portray him.

What the performance is of Irvin's draft mates is compared to his own is completely irrelevant to the topic. There's no telling how a player like Fletcher Cox would have performed in our system had we drafted him instead of Irvin. That's a lesson many of us learned when we were trying to defend the selection of Aaron Curry...remember the debate? Mark Sanchez, Jason Smith, Tyson Jackson, et al?

Stating that Irvin "will improve" is not a fact. That's an assumption, especially if the plan is putting him back on the DL. I think it's reasonable for fans to speculate that the Hawks coaching staff isn't completely satisfied with Irvin's progress. If they were, it's likely that they wouldn't be reducing the number of snaps he's receiving or be moving him from one position to another then back again unless they were doing it temporarily to cover for an injury.

But we'll see. What happens with Bruce Irvin will be one of the more intriguing aspects of this offseason.

[HumanCockroach]

No player drafted has performed better from that first round, none and I seriously doubt the Seahawks coaches are concerned with the disappointment a few fans feel that he isn't the second coming of LT. Irvin did one thing well coming into the league, he will improve, and did better than anyone else in that draft, those ARE the facts of the matter no matter how some portray him.

What the performance is of Irvin's draft mates is compared to his own is completely irrelevant to the topic. There's no telling how a player like Fletcher Cox would have performed in our system had we drafted him instead of Irvin. That's a lesson many of us learned when we were trying to defend the selection of Aaron Curry...remember the debate? Mark Sanchez, Jason Smith, Tyson Jackson, et al?

Stating that Irvin "will improve" is not a fact. That's an assumption, especially if the plan is putting him back on the DL. I think it's reasonable for fans to speculate that the Hawks coaching staff isn't completely satisfied with Irvin's progress. If they were, it's likely that they wouldn't be reducing the number of snaps he's receiving or be moving him from one position to another then back again unless they were doing it temporarily to cover for an injury.

But we'll see. What happens with Bruce Irvin will be one of the more intriguing aspects of this offseason.

No, the performance isn't irrelevant, because it provides CONTEXT something many here seem hell bent to ignore, as for the assumption that more reps and more practice will improve his ability to utilise his natural ability, well maybe just re read that and think about how silly that statement is. Also, think about WHAT you just said, trading back and not taking Cox, afforded the Seahawks the ability to draft someone in the third round that by all accounts would have been unavailable, so you guys are claiming that not drafting back, taking Cox, would have been a better move than trading back, taking Irvin and then having a HIGHER third to take Wilson.

Personally, I am happy, very happy with how that draft worked out, and am not concerned with what the FO did, they have after all been hitting far more often than missing, and it afforded them the ability to draft the FRANCHISE QB you have all been clamoring for. Irvin is a good player, right now, where he goes from here is certainly up in the air, but I just don't have the arrogance to question this FO'S ability to judge and draft talent, especially on the heels of the MOST dominant SB performance in recent memory. Have at it fella's, I guess you guys know best. Lol

[savvyman]

kinda off topic but related to the that draft and just how good Schneider and team are.

The player the Seahawks FO had targeted with the 12th pick for the draft was Luke Kuechley - Luke was projected to be a mid first round pick. However Carolina took Luke with the 9th pick of the draft so then the Seahawks went to plan B and started to trade down for Irvin.

The FO has proven over and over to be excellent evaluators of talent.

[HumanCockroach]

After reviewing the draft, I was incorrect. The Wilson pick was not a product of the Philly trade, we received an extra 4th round pick, not a higher third.

[RiverDog]

No player drafted has performed better from that first round, none and I seriously doubt the Seahawks coaches are concerned with the disappointment a few fans feel that he isn't the second coming of LT. Irvin did one thing well coming into the league, he will improve, and did better than anyone else in that draft, those ARE the facts of the matter no matter how some portray him.

What the performance is of Irvin's draft mates is compared to his own is completely irrelevant to the topic. There's no telling how a player like Fletcher Cox would have performed in our system had we drafted him instead of Irvin. That's a lesson many of us learned when we were trying to defend the selection of Aaron Curry...remember the debate? Mark Sanchez, Jason Smith, Tyson Jackson, et al?

Stating that Irvin "will improve" is not a fact. That's an assumption, especially if the plan is putting him back on the DL. I think it's reasonable for fans to speculate that the Hawks coaching staff isn't completely satisfied with Irvin's progress. If they were, it's likely that they wouldn't be reducing the number of snaps he's receiving or be moving him from one position to another then back again unless they were doing it temporarily to cover for an injury.

But we'll see. What happens with Bruce Irvin will be one of the more intriguing aspects of this offseason.

No, the performance isn't irrelevant, because it provides CONTEXT something many here seem hell bent to ignore, as for the assumption that more reps and more practice will improve his ability to utilise his natural ability, well maybe just re read that and think about how silly that statement is. Also, think about WHAT you just said, trading back and not taking Cox, afforded the Seahawks the ability to draft someone in the third round that by all accounts would have been unavailable, so you guys are claiming that not drafting back, taking Cox, would have been a better move than trading back, taking Irvin and then having a HIGHER third to take Wilson.

Personally, I am happy, very happy with how that draft worked out, and am not concerned with what the FO did, they have after all been hitting far more often than missing, and it afforded them the ability to draft the FRANCHISE QB you have all been clamoring for. Irvin is a good player, right now, where he goes from here is certainly up in the air, but I just don't have the arrogance to question this FO'S ability to judge and draft talent, especially on the heels of the MOST dominant SB performance in recent memory. Have at it fella's, I guess you guys know best. Lol

I absolutely agree that Pete and John are wizards when it comes to evaluating talent, especially as it relates to the defensive side of the ball, and yes, winning the SB makes that point even more obvious. But their overall performance, of which any moron would admit is nothing short of superb, and our winning the Super Bowl should not exempt them from reasoned, fact based criticism on those rare occasions when they miss.... and every coach and GM misses from time to time. This may or may not be one of those occasions.

[HumanCockroach]

And I am of the thought that reasoned criticism can't be done until you KNOW what you have, at this point no matter how strongly people profess it, they don't KNOW what Irvin can or will become in the long term. I trust the FO to make that assessment far more than people that didn't like the pick, and have been questioning his ability before he ever put on the uniform. Call me jaded, or optimistic ( and that is something anyone who knows me would find hilarious), I JUST DON'T Believe in stating negative things about players in general, much less before I have the foggiest of what will or can happen. I also for some reason have the ability to grasp that not ever pick "hits" and that there will be players that never fulfill their ability, and as such, when a FO hits on far more than they miss, I don't get all twisted about a player not living up to his potential, along with it seems a unique ability to see that position switches and things of that sort delay that ability to be truly shown.

I'll wait until the book is finished before saying what the ending is, just something I do.

[RiverDog]

And I am of the thought that reasoned criticism can't be done until you KNOW what you have, at this point no matter how strongly people profess it, they don't KNOW what Irvin can or will become in the long term. I trust the FO to make that assessment far more than people that didn't like the pick, and have been questioning his ability before he ever put on the uniform. Call me jaded, or optimistic ( and that is something anyone who knows me would find hilarious), I JUST DON'T Believe in stating negative things about players in general, much less before I have the foggiest of what will or can happen. I also for some reason have the ability to grasp that not ever pick "hits" and that there will be players that never fulfill their ability, and as such, when a FO hits on far more than they miss, I don't get all twisted about a player not living up to his potential, along with it seems a unique ability to see that position switches and things of that sort delay that ability to be truly shown.

I'll wait until the book is finished before saying what the ending is, just something I do.

Just where was it that I said the book was finished? My argument all along has been where does he/we go from here? Does he go back to being a DE pass rushing specialist like he was in his rookie year? Does he continue as an OLB/"spinner"? Does he go to Leo? Or something else?

[HumanCockroach]

You started reading the ending the moment you started calling it a bad pick ( or will you say you didn't). I'll wait to see how they story is written, I don't feel the need to say what it is or GUESS what it is. It will be what it is, when the story is finished I'll then realistically criticise whether it was a good, bad or indifferent story, not after chapter 2.

My guess would be he remains in the role he is currently in, the same role they used multiple players to fill. Someone that is long and athletic that can play as an outside pass rusher on the line, or as an outside backer. MAYBE Smith is the starter, maybe not, Carroll and co certainly have shown a willingness to players in and out of the lineup, and personally I am NOT convinced Smith has. "Locked" down the spot. He MAY have, and definitely goes into OTA's as the starter, doesn't mean he remains as such.

He played really well for 4 games, 4, and certainly was deserving of all the accolades heaped on him, but there is FAR more to the position than many believe there is, and claiming him a sure fire starter, or star at this point is as pointless as claiming Irvin a bust.

So as I said, I will wait...... nothing wrong with people questioning it, but I prefer more evidence than he didn't provide a pass rush against Atlanta and. He had reduced snaps at the end of the year in a new position. Just not enough there to get me concerned.

[RiverDog]

You started reading the ending the moment you started calling it a bad pick ( or will you say you didn't). I'll wait to see how they story is written, I don't feel the need to say what it is or GUESS what it is. It will be what it is, when the story is finished I'll then realistically criticise whether it was a good, bad or indifferent story, not after chapter 2.

My guess would be he remains in the role he is currently in, the same role they used multiple players to fill. Someone that is long and athletic that can play as an outside pass rusher on the line, or as an outside backer. MAYBE Smith is the starter, maybe not, Carroll and co certainly have shown a willingness to players in and out of the lineup, and personally I am NOT convinced Smith has. "Locked" down the spot. He MAY have, and definitely goes into OTA's as the starter, doesn't mean he remains as such.

He played really well for 4 games, 4, and certainly was deserving of all the accolades heaped on him, but there is FAR more to the position than many believe there is, and claiming him a sure fire starter, or star at this point is as pointless as claiming Irvin a bust.

So as I said, I will wait...... nothing wrong with people questioning it, but I prefer more evidence than he didn't provide a pass rush against Atlanta and. He had reduced snaps at the end of the year in a new position. Just not enough there to get me concerned.

The reason I didn't like the pick was that I didn't feel that a specialist was worth the #15 overall. IMO picks in the top half of the first round should be used for 3 down players, which includes running backs, unless they are really, really good, and Irvin didn't do anything at the previous level to suggest that he was that kind of unique talent. I was assured by many....not sure if you were one of them...that he was not drafted to be just a specialist, that his ultimate destination was Leo.

There was more to my 'evidence' than just the Atlanta game. As I noted, his productivity during the last part of the 2012 season was a fraction of what it was in the first half. In addition, I also mentioned that during that time, he was not being challenged by double teams or chips by running backs. Teams were handling him one-on-one. That's why I was so supportive of the move to OLB as it appeared to me that he was not going to make it at DE and the "spinner" position, as it was defined to me, appeared tailor made for Irvin. Now they've been cutting back on his snaps and it appears that they might be putting him back on the DL, which is why I'm concerned as I wasn't impressed with how he ended the season at that position in 2012.

If you're not concerned, that's fine by me, and you've done a good job at explaining why you're not. But please don't start twisting my statements to indicate that I think he's a bust or that I think the story is finished. We've had multiple discussions in this forum about other players that at one time or another were not living up to expectations, including James Carpenter, Percy Harvin, Golden Tate, etc. I don't see why we should wait until he's either selected to the Pro Bowl or cut from the team before we are allowed to have a good spirited discussion about his past performance or the challenges ahead of him.