Perception

[Bill Swerski]

He missed the bulk of training camp recovering from arthroscopic surgery he had in March 2006. He was held out of practice and put on the injury list throughout the first half of the season.

He had his career high in TD receptions, but not anywhere near receptions or yardage totals. He hasn't played a full season since 2004.

 

 

I think those factors, the dropped passes, and the fact that Holmgren rode SA heavily in '05 lowered D-Jax's fantasy value significantly. When healthy, he's on approximately the same tier as Reggie Wayne.

[bushwacked]

Regarding the stats, I'll admit that Jackson's numbers are much better than I thought they would be in comparison. While I don't think he can be considered top 5 material, I'll have to rethink my position about putting him in the top 10.

 

 

 

My whole contention was the he could be top 5 purely from a numbers standpoint. I don't think any GM would put him in the "Top 5 WRs to build a team around" category. Djax is always one of my favorite players to target in a re-draft league because he is consistently undervalued (he was leading the NFC in TD's before he hurt his piggy).

[bushwacked]

Sehawks intend to shop Jackson

[godtomsatan]

Sehawks intend to shop Jackson

 

 

21? Care to chime in?

[Seahawks21]

I'd like to know where this started, since neither Ruskell or Holmgren have said anything. Either way, I think it would be a horrible decision. The west-coast offense needs a #1 receiver, Jackson is the only one talented enough to pull it off. I'd be a lot more worried if there was some kind of quote from somebody in the Hawks front office.

[ebartender]

I'd like to know where this started, since neither Ruskell or Holmgren have said anything. Either way, I think it would be a horrible decision. The west-coast offense needs a #1 receiver, Jackson is the only one talented enough to pull it off. I'd be a lot more worried if there was some kind of quote from somebody in the Hawks front office.

 

 

I thought the WCO was based on spreading the ball around? The Eagles had a #1 WR one year. They did pretty well without a #1 WR. Yes, when Owens was here the offense was better but the made it to the NFC championship game multiple times with average WRs.

[Seahawks21]

The WCO is a very much based on the dexterity of the QB. Since there are so many quick throws, you lose rhythm when the QB has to look to the weak side. The ball is spread to the rest of the receivers very equally, but that quick timing with Hass's right hand receiver is almost always the starting point to any play. I don't necessarily think Deion Branch is horrible, I just don't think this is the right offense for him. He can't get off the ball clean enough to get open on the slant. We need Darrell.

[godtomsatan]

The media is picking up on our threads here at the Huddle.

[Seahawks21]

The media is picking up on our threads here at the Huddle.

 

 

There still hasn't been any kind of source to go with any of this . The most we have gotten so far is "an unnamed NFL source". By now somebody would have said something about it, an agent, another team, Ruskell, Holmgren, someone!!!

 

UPDATE: I read this in the paper this morning, I believe the Seattle Times, sorry for not having a specific source. Either way, Jackson was in town this weekend at Seahawks HQ talking to coaches and staff about his recovery from I believe a foot injury. This is a bit odd because he is usually the one guy that is not around at all during the offseason. I don't know if it is progress towards anything specific, but it can't be a bad thing.

[Bill Swerski]

I thought the WCO was based on spreading the ball around? The Eagles had a #1 WR one year. They did pretty well without a #1 WR. Yes, when Owens was here the offense was better but the made it to the NFC championship game multiple times with average WRs.

 

 

Branch is a #1 WR - just ask the Patriots. But he doesn't have the size to be a possession receiver AND the speed to be a deep threat like Jackson. That said, he doesn't drop nearly as many passes.

 

While it's entirely possible that he's around for another year, I'd be surprised if D-Jax weren't dealt this summer.

[charty]

The media is picking up on our threads here at the Huddle.

 

 

This Boston Globe writer (from link above) wasn't picking up threads from the Huddle, he was plagiarizing a Seattle writer. Borges was suspended for 2 months.

Much of the Darrell Jackson section of Borges' article linked above was ripped off from the following article by Mike Sando --->

Edited March 6, 2007 by charty

[godtomsatan]

This Boston Globe writer (from link above) wasn't picking up threads from the Huddle, he was plagiarizing a Seattle writer. Borges was suspended for 2 months.

Much of the Darrell Jackson section of Borges' article linked above was ripped off from the following article by Mike Sando --->

 

 

Oh poor you.....

[Seahawks21]

Branch is a #1 WR - just ask the Patriots. But he doesn't have the size to be a possession receiver AND the speed to be a deep threat like Jackson. That said, he doesn't drop nearly as many passes.

 

While it's entirely possible that he's around for another year, I'd be surprised if D-Jax weren't dealt this summer.

 

Branch may be a #1 receiver with Tom Brady behind the wheel and no other talent to speak of beside him, but will most likely never be one again. He also dropped plenty upon plenty of passes this season, many of those being of the not-so-difficult variety.

[Bill Swerski]

Branch may be a #1 receiver with Tom Brady behind the wheel and no other talent to speak of beside him, but will most likely never be one again. He also dropped plenty upon plenty of passes this season, many of those being of the not-so-difficult variety.

 

 

While there's no question that playing with Brady certainly helped Branch, the monster games that he had against very good defenses in the playoffs speak for themselves. And while I agree that he's not as good as D-Jax, he didn't have much time to learn the playbook, become familiar with the system, and establish chemistry with Hasselbeck last year. Fighting for playing time with DJ, Burleson, and Engram didn't help, either. I'd give him another season before proclaiming that he's not a #1.

Edited March 6, 2007 by Bill Swerski

[Seahawks21]

While there's no question that playing with Brady certainly helped Branch, the monster games that he had against very good defenses in the playoffs speak for themselves. And while I agree that he's not as good as D-Jax, he didn't have much time to learn the playbook, become familiar with the system, and establish chemistry with Hasselbeck last year. Fighting for playing time with DJ, Burleson, and Engram didn't help, either. I'd give him another season before proclaiming that he's not a #1.

 

Branch never competed for playing time. He was given the benefit of the doubt and spent more time on the field than any other receiver. I do not doubt that Branch will be better this season, but there are still a few things about him that most likely will never change. He just gets no early seperation. Because of this, every slant Hasselbeck tried to throw him had to be forced into a tiny little zone, and most were broken up. I really don't think his strenghts are suited for this offense. We'll see, but IMO he should be our #4 WR.

[bushwacked]

Because of this, every slant Hasselbeck tried to throw him had to be forced into a tiny little zone, and most were broken up. I really don't think his strenghts are suited for this offense. We'll see, but IMO he should be our #4 WR.

 

 

John Clayton told me that Branch plays big for his small size and has a high center of gravity.

[Bill Swerski]

Branch never competed for playing time. He was given the benefit of the doubt and spent more time on the field than any other receiver. I do not doubt that Branch will be better this season, but there are still a few things about him that most likely will never change. He just gets no early seperation. Because of this, every slant Hasselbeck tried to throw him had to be forced into a tiny little zone, and most were broken up. I really don't think his strenghts are suited for this offense. We'll see, but IMO he should be our #4 WR.

 

 

It seems to me that it'd make more sense to alter the offense, rather than move Branch to #4 on the depth chart. Of course he's not going to excel at quick slants... he's freaking 5'9". That's what Burleson is for.

[Seahawks21]

It seems to me that it'd make more sense to alter the offense, rather than move Branch to #4 on the depth chart. Of course he's not going to excel at quick slants... he's freaking 5'9". That's what Burleson is for.

 

While it may make sense, the offense will not be altered unless we get a new head coach.

[Bill Swerski]

While it may make sense, the offense will not be altered unless we get a new head coach.

 

 

Then it looks like Burleson will have to line up in Branch's place to catch those short slants. I'm sure that Holmgren has prepared for this, as somebody of Branch's stature isn't going to be wildly-successful catching short passes over the middle. Catching short slants is about position, not separation. Large possession WRs (Keyshawn, Mushin Muhammad, etc.) who can physically-dominate CBs at the line of scrimmage and shield them from the ball are best-suted for those types of routes. Branch isn't a possession receiver.

[Seahawks21]

Then it looks like Burleson will have to line up in Branch's place to catch those short slants. I'm sure that Holmgren has prepared for this, as somebody of Branch's stature isn't going to be wildly-successful catching short passes over the middle. Catching short slants is about position, not separation. Large possession WRs (Keyshawn, Mushin Muhammad, etc.) who can physically-dominate CBs at the line of scrimmage and shield them from the ball are best-suted for those types of routes. Branch isn't a possession receiver.

 

Coles, S. Moss, Ward & Smith all EXCEL on the slant route, as does Jackson, who isn't huge by any means. Furthermore, Holmgren does throw Branch on the sideline in the red zone in favor of Burleson, with very little success. How can you call a guy a #1 receiver if he has to be taken off the field when you need him most? Branch isn't a deep threat yet he isn't a possession receiver??

 

I won't go as far as to say that Branch is the 4th most talented of the Hawks receivers, just that DJax is a better fit as a 1, Hackett as a 2, and Engram out of the slot. With Burleson's value as a returner, I don't think it is out of the question that Branch could be watching a few games in street clothes this season.

[Bill Swerski]

Coles, S. Moss, Ward & Smith all EXCEL on the slant route, as does Jackson, who isn't huge by any means. Furthermore, Holmgren does throw Branch on the sideline in the red zone in favor of Burleson, with very little success. How can you call a guy a #1 receiver if he has to be taken off the field when you need him most? Branch isn't a deep threat yet he isn't a possession receiver??

 

I'm not saying that you have to be Michael Irvin or T.O. to be effective on the slant route, just that Branch's size doesn't help him at all. Branch is a decent deep threat and I've seen him catch plenty of slants in NE. I don't know why he's been relatively unsuccessful in that regard in SEA. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that he had little time to get comfortable in that offense and even less time to establish chemistry with Hasselbeck? I'd give him a full year in the system before ripping him to shreds and calling him a worthless POS.

 

I won't go as far as to say that Branch is the 4th most talented of the Hawks receivers, just that DJax is a better fit as a 1, Hackett as a 2, and Engram out of the slot. With Burleson's value as a returner, I don't think it is out of the question that Branch could be watching a few games in street clothes this season.

 

I seriously doubt that Holmgren will deactivate a guy that they signed to a $39 million deal and gave up a first-round pick for less than a year ago. They've obviously made a committment to the guy and Jackson (who I agree is the better player) is clearly the odd man out. They'll alter the offense to accomodate Branch before they deactivate him.

[Seahawks21]

I'm not saying that you have to be Michael Irvin or T.O. to be effective on the slant route, just that Branch's size doesn't help him at all. Branch is a decent deep threat and I've seen him catch plenty of slants in NE. I don't know why he's been relatively unsuccessful in that regard in SEA. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that he had little time to get comfortable in that offense and even less time to establish chemistry with Hasselbeck? I'd give him a full year in the system before ripping him to shreds and calling him a worthless POS.

I seriously doubt that Holmgren will deactivate a guy that they signed to a $39 million deal and gave up a first-round pick for less than a year ago. They've obviously made a committment to the guy and Jackson (who I agree is the better player) is clearly the odd man out. They'll alter the offense to accomodate Branch before they deactivate him.

 

The slant route has more to do with technique than anything else. The first part is that you have to turn the corner before you make your break. Deion Branch does not do this. In this aspect, it is his personal techique and failure to slip a jam that is causing the problem, and there isn't a darn thing Hasselbeck can do, no matter how comfortable they get together. I have not ripped him to shreds or called him a worthless POS, rather simply stated that he is not a #1 WR and does not fit into this team.

 

I make my second point only because Mike Holmgren states all the time that he does not like to have more than four active WR's for games. In the past, DJ Hackett was the odd man out unless there were injuries, which is why he was previously an unknown, even though he most likely deserved to be on the field. The plan probably was to make Jackson the odd man out, except this was derived from the thinking that Deion Branch was going to play a whole lot better than he has. That plan IMO is no longer an option. Assuming he stays, you can't deactivate Jackson. You can't deactivate the young up-and-comer who has been playing lights out in DJ Hackett. We already know how much the offense needs Bobby Engram, and Nate Burleson has become a real difference maker. Unless Holmgren plans on having five active receivers, I don't see how Deion stays active. With the exception of Engram, all figure to be making pretty good money, so I am not sure that would be a factor in determining importance.

[Bring Back Pat!!!]

The slant route has more to do with technique than anything else. The first part is that you have to turn the corner before you make your break. Deion Branch does not do this. In this aspect, it is his personal techique and failure to slip a jam that is causing the problem, and there isn't a darn thing Hasselbeck can do, no matter how comfortable they get together. I have not ripped him to shreds or called him a worthless POS, rather simply stated that he is not a #1 WR and does not fit into this team.

 

I make my second point only because Mike Holmgren states all the time that he does not like to have more than four active WR's for games. In the past, DJ Hackett was the odd man out unless there were injuries, which is why he was previously an unknown, even though he most likely deserved to be on the field. The plan probably was to make Jackson the odd man out, except this was derived from the thinking that Deion Branch was going to play a whole lot better than he has. That plan IMO is no longer an option. Assuming he stays, you can't deactivate Jackson. You can't deactivate the young up-and-comer who has been playing lights out in DJ Hackett. We already know how much the offense needs Bobby Engram, and Nate Burleson has become a real difference maker. Unless Holmgren plans on having five active receivers, I don't see how Deion stays active. With the exception of Engram, all figure to be making pretty good money, so I am not sure that would be a factor in determining importance.

 

 

Deion Branch caught plenty of slants in New England, and got off jams quite well. He also gets more separation down field than most any other wr I've seen in recent years. I used to watch Jerry Rice and wonder, "why can't someone cover him? How can he run a 10 yard in, and be open by 3 yards?" And there really is not a great explanation. Well, until Branch, I had never found another wr that got open like that. The Patriots love to throw seem routes and in routes down the field, and Branch routinely would be running free on those. I don't know what he does that is any different than any other wr, but I can tell you the guy knows how to get open.

 

He's coming from a non-west coast offense background. He didn't run any semblance of one at Louisville, and the Pat's don't run it either. It takes time. Chemistry isn't the right word. It's timing. The WC offense is all about timing. Timing on your patterns. Timing on your breaks. Timing on the QB's drop backs. If the WR is not running his routes 100% in time with where and when the QB wants him to be, it doesn't work. Give Branch a year. He was traded into the system last year. He didn't play the first two weeks of the season, and still managed 50+ catches in his first year in the system. He'll be fine with an off season to fully learn the timing and intricacies of a WC offense.

[Seahawks21]

Deion Branch caught plenty of slants in New England, and got off jams quite well. He also gets more separation down field than most any other wr I've seen in recent years. I used to watch Jerry Rice and wonder, "why can't someone cover him? How can he run a 10 yard in, and be open by 3 yards?" And there really is not a great explanation. Well, until Branch, I had never found another wr that got open like that. The Patriots love to throw seem routes and in routes down the field, and Branch routinely would be running free on those. I don't know what he does that is any different than any other wr, but I can tell you the guy knows how to get open.

 

 

 

Downright laughable.

[Bring Back Pat!!!]

Downright laughable.

 

 

I watched every game he ever played in a Patriots uniform, close to half in person. He got open with the Pat's in ways most wr's don't. Laugh if you want, but we'll be the ones reminding you of this thread during the season. Branch inactive? Talk about laughable.