http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/seahawks/2011354742_hawk16.html

Grant's agent tweeted:



So I'm assuming he's been contacted already.

The guy can hit hard and gets interceptions. He is a better version of Ryan Clark, and I think the FO will work hard to pick him up. He's listed at SS but He played FS while in Jacksonville. Has anybody heard anything else on this?

_________________

wont hurt to bring him in for a workout. we need FS help and Ireland always talks about turning over every rock.

_________________

Some stats:

Over the last 3 years while with Seattle, he has averaged 63 tackles a season while picking up 1.5 sacks and 7 ints. This while I believe he was playing SS.

Prior to that, in 3 years of playing FS for Jacksonville, he averaged 78 tackles and garnered 8 ints and 1 FF.

For a career, he averages 71 tackles, 1/2 sack and almost 3 ints per year. As you compare his production last year to his career average, you can say he's still going strong.

I'd say it's worth doing for sure, even if we draft a young guy to groom in case the ones we have don't have our confidence.

For the record, Wilson had 93 tackles, 1 sack, 0 ints or FF last year, but for a career averages 97 tackles, 2 ints and 1 FF per year. Of course, the systems are different that they've been playing in so it's hard to know how to compare the tackle totals.

What do I want to search for in order to read up on different fundamental defense systems? Why a hard-hitting FS is preferred in X system as opposed to a fast ball hawk in system Y? Going to start playing this game myself at november latest and I've only really been a fan for 9-12 months so I need to learn a lot still ;)

_________________
-
A Dane lost on the internet, crashed here
-

i dont see why not who else do we have...not thinking we are gonna go after atogwe and sharper

i would rather sign sharper and draft a young buck to mold into place, but that's easier said than done.

id be interested, so long as he can still be a true FREE safety

Motor city, we are not looking for a FS. I too would rather have a guy like Ed Reed (maybe not his caliber, but just that type of player), with YB being the true in-the-box SS. That's why a lot of people want Earl Thomas I think.

But that's not what BP and Ireland are looking for. They're looking for a Gibril Wilson type of player, (at least what he was supposed to be). A guy who can be versatile in the back end; be good enough in coverage to play FS, but be a good enough tackler to play near the LOS.

I don't know much about Grant. Obviously I've heard his name before being that he's a big time player, but I can't really comment on him that much.

Oh really...

_________________

I think it would be a good signing my question though is he really a FS or a SS? I know he has played some corner in the past but I really think we need a FS, and not another Gibril Wilson type playing out of position.

BTW, I agree I like the idea of Grant a lot more than I did Ryan Clark.

Yep. Phins Rock sits in on meetings when they discuss what they want.

_________________

Why? He's a year older and has never hit 80 or more tackles in a season. Plus he's played every game which could mean he's wearing down...he played on a defense that gave up 24 points a game, including a stretch where they gave up 27 or more points in 7 of 9 games. And that's in a division that includes the Rams and Niners, neither score happy teams.

Clark played in a 3-4 defense, played on a defense that was ranked number one and won a Super Bowl.

At the very least, they are equal players, but there is nothing that warrants Grant being better than Clark.

_________________

I still say go with Earl Thomas. 63 Tackles, 8 Ints, 8 PD and a FF...to go with 2 defensive TDs (including a 92 yd).
Keep in mind he missed a game (@Wyoming).

i wonder how much it would take to move up and nab eric berry...lol

a good FS is a rare breed and can play in any system

The book on GRANT is that he is 31, plays smart, covers well, takes good angles, and hits hard. He has 27 or so INTs over the course of his career, so he averages 3/year. He has played in CAROLINA and J'VILLE before SEATTLE, if I remember correctly, and those 2 previous teams had VERY solid "D"s. The apparent reason why SEATTLE cut him was that he was scheduled to make $17.5 Million over the next 3 years.

How much he wants now, is anybody's guess. But there's no State or local income taxes in Florida, so that would tend to help us. He looks like a pretty big upgrade over G WILSON. (Then again, DONALD DUCK would be an upgrade over G WILSON!!!)

What you say is true, but I am not sure how much of a difference it is to safeties in corners whether they play in a 3-4 or 4-3.

I like Grant better because I was thoroughly unimpressed with Ryan Clark and the Pittsburgh secondary once Polmalu went down last year. I think that Grant is a comparable player who will demand much less to play. I never bought into Clark being a big name FA with his health issues, spotty play, and age. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that Grant is a big name either but I think he is a better value and probably the better player.

Well that was a big help.

_________________
-
A Dane lost on the internet, crashed here
-

But you were impressed with Seattle's secondary?

_________________

Grant stays healthy and get turnovers, clark does not.

_________________

Health duely noted, but when he plays Clark is just as good as Grant, if not better.

_________________

...Not to mention that Clark has experience in a 34 D, while Grant does not.

I wasn't impressed with either secondary and that is exactly why I think that the Clark is over-hyped.

I don't think the front 7 scheme is all that significant when it comes to the secondary.

_________________

You weren't impressed with either, which is why Clark is over-hyped....but how does that make Grant a better option?

_________________

I did not think so either, until I saw an interview with Rex Ryan the other day talking about it. Depending on what 34 scheme you do run, it's not just the front 7, but your coverage schemes as well, and the differences can be huge.

Plus, with the way we are looking at FS's, and the types of FS's we're looking at, you can tell there are certain types of S's that fit our scheme. I don't know if Grant fits the bill or not, but Clark playing in a scheme similar to ours, and having played for a guy named Dick Labeau, couldn't hurt his transition to our D.

Because Clark was thought of as one of the top FA safeties out there and Grant is kind of an after thought. Clark to me was not worth the money he was looking for so why not take a chance on a player with a better track record who costs less money?

That's defensive scheme, not front 7 alignment. The terms 4-3 and 3-4 do not apply to the secondary...it's the whole scheme that matters. A Tampa 2 defense is a 4-3 defense but far different than a Jim Johnson 4-3 defense. Both require different safeties...Brian Dawkins fits well into Jim's 4-3 because he's physical and fast, blitzing is top priority...in a Tampa 2, he wouldn't be as effective because you want your safeties to cover and lay the wood deep.
A Ron Rivera 3-4 is different because they run a lot of Cover 3, the free safety is going to play deep middle. A Dick Labeau 3-4 will blitz the free, maybe put him in the box and send the strong back...man coverage is usual so you want a guy that can play physical. A Rex Ryan 3-4 needs a roamer...an Ed Reed or Kerry Rhoades. With Mike Nolan? I'm not really sure.

_________________

That's interesting because Rex Ryan was switching between a 34 and a 43 all season long. I didn't see him rotating his safeties to do so.

_________________

So you agree they are the same player, and should be paid the same. Clark wasn't offered much to play in Miami which is why he left and resigned with PItt.

_________________

Stop it, you don't know what type of FS Miami is looking for. Rolle and Clark are two different "styles." One came from a blitz happy 3-4 and the other came from a conservative (at least no safety blitzes) 4-3.

_________________

I don't remember the Jets switching to the 43 at any point. I remember them still running the 34 against us in NY, and that was after Jenkins went down.

In any case, IDK man, I don't know the X's and O's like you, or like iowa, or really anybody on these boards probably, but according to that interview, it appears that the S's should reflect your front 7 allignment.

BTW, iowa, like I was saying, depending on which 34 scheme you run, your coverages are going to be different. Not saying there is one scheme for 43 teams, and another for 34 teams, and that's it. Just saying that the difference can be pretty significant.

That doesn't mean it didn't happen. There was an article the other day about how both Ryan and Bellicheck were doing this throughout the season.

And if know ANYTHING about Rex Ryan you know he doesn't just run one front all the time. He will run a 34, 43, 52, 33, or 46 throughout a game.

_________________

Has anyone heard if Miami is still going to play that quarters coverage they said they were introducing last year? If so I thought the FS and the SS basically played the same position?

I haven't heard anything about that...if they wanted to introduce it from last year, I'd think it was because they couldn't stop anything from going deep on them. If they can get a decent free safety and olb, I wouldn't think that'd be a problem this coming season.

_________________

yeah, the free and strong have the same responsibility in quarters coverage or cover 4. Not a defense you can run or should run if you want to stop anybody.