What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Seahawks may make a bid for RFA.... (1 Viewer)

RamTough

Footballguy
I believe Curtis has signed with the Rams, like a week ago.
He's a restricted free agent which is similar to the transition tag that Hutchinson from Seattle has. He is free to shop his services around but the Rams can match any offer he receives.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

softball

Footballguy
Seahawks resigned Peter Warrick yesterday. Curtis would be an interesting move, given that they have Warrick, Hacket, DJAX and Engram. All have played in the WCO, and Curtis would have to learn it.

 

BigTex

Don't mess with Texas
I believe Curtis has signed with the Rams, like a week ago.
He's a restricted free agent which is similar to the transition tag that Hutchinson from Seattle has. He is free to shop his services around but the Rams can match any offer he receives.
:thumbup:
 

Kleck

Footballguy
No, thanks.  :mellow:
still holding out hope for Burleson?
I'm good with neither of them. Hoping we will see lots more of DJ Hackett this year.Hackett = speed

Engram and Jackson start. Hackett plays the #3. Warrick as the #4. I also think we'll see Stevens having a larger role all season long.

Added note: I want them to spend the extra cap space (lots more than most are aware of) on a cornerback.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Traders2001

Footballguy
No, thanks.  :mellow:
still holding out hope for Burleson?
I'm good with neither of them. Hoping we will see lots more of DJ Hackett this year.Hackett = speed

Engram and Jackson start. Hackett plays the #3. Warrick as the #4. I also think we'll see Stevens having a larger role all season long.

Added note: I want them to spend the extra cap space (lots more than most are aware of) on a cornerback.
Curtis = More Speed then Hackett and he is a legit WR in the NFL Hackett has proven nothing so far.
 

Kleck

Footballguy
No, thanks.  :mellow:
still holding out hope for Burleson?
I'm good with neither of them. Hoping we will see lots more of DJ Hackett this year.Hackett = speed

Engram and Jackson start. Hackett plays the #3. Warrick as the #4. I also think we'll see Stevens having a larger role all season long.

Added note: I want them to spend the extra cap space (lots more than most are aware of) on a cornerback.
Curtis = More Speed then Hackett and he is a legit WR in the NFL Hackett has proven nothing so far.
I've seen plenty of Curtis. He struggles with the jam at the line of scrimmage. Further, Seattle needs a bit of size in their WR corps. Curtis doesn't fill that void.If you knock on Hackett is that you haven't seen him play, okay then. I understand that. It doesn't mean he can't play because you haven't seen it. The Seattle talent evaluators have seen plenty. Its their decision that will count, not yours or mine.

 

Big Score

Footballguy
No, thanks.  :mellow:
still holding out hope for Burleson?
I'm good with neither of them. Hoping we will see lots more of DJ Hackett this year.Hackett = speed

Engram and Jackson start. Hackett plays the #3. Warrick as the #4. I also think we'll see Stevens having a larger role all season long.

Added note: I want them to spend the extra cap space (lots more than most are aware of) on a cornerback.
Curtis = More Speed then Hackett and he is a legit WR in the NFL Hackett has proven nothing so far.
True, but Shick! is viewing it in the light that the drop off in going with Hackett ~ vs ~ signning Curtis, is more than balanced out by being able to take the money that it would cost the Seahawks to sign Curtis and instead use it to sign a good veteran CB.
 

Kleck

Footballguy
True, but Shick! is viewing it in the light that the drop off in going with Hackett ~ vs ~ signning Curtis, is more than balanced out by being able to take the money that it would cost the Seahawks to sign Curtis and instead use it to sign a good veteran CB.
True. I would much rather have a better starting cornerback. I mentioned that before. In the modern NFL its very tough to be great everywhere. I'm willing to settle for okay at the WR position. With Jackson, Engram, Hackett, and Warrick I think we're better than just okay. Not so much at CB starting Trufant and ???.
 

Traders2001

Footballguy
No, thanks.  :mellow:
still holding out hope for Burleson?
I'm good with neither of them. Hoping we will see lots more of DJ Hackett this year.Hackett = speed

Engram and Jackson start. Hackett plays the #3. Warrick as the #4. I also think we'll see Stevens having a larger role all season long.

Added note: I want them to spend the extra cap space (lots more than most are aware of) on a cornerback.
Curtis = More Speed then Hackett and he is a legit WR in the NFL Hackett has proven nothing so far.
I've seen plenty of Curtis. He struggles with the jam at the line of scrimmage. Further, Seattle needs a bit of size in their WR corps. Curtis doesn't fill that void.If you knock on Hackett is that you haven't seen him play, okay then. I understand that. It doesn't mean he can't play because you haven't seen it. The Seattle talent evaluators have seen plenty. Its their decision that will count, not yours or mine.
I did not say he could not play , but i like Curtis better .I saw Hackett play in a year or two he should be as good or better then Jackson.

 

DoctorDetroit

Chocolate Thunder
No, thanks.  :mellow:
still holding out hope for Burleson?
I'm good with neither of them. Hoping we will see lots more of DJ Hackett this year.Hackett = speed

Engram and Jackson start. Hackett plays the #3. Warrick as the #4. I also think we'll see Stevens having a larger role all season long.

Added note: I want them to spend the extra cap space (lots more than most are aware of) on a cornerback.
Curtis = More Speed then Hackett and he is a legit WR in the NFL Hackett has proven nothing so far.
I've seen plenty of Curtis. He struggles with the jam at the line of scrimmage. Further, Seattle needs a bit of size in their WR corps. Curtis doesn't fill that void.If you knock on Hackett is that you haven't seen him play, okay then. I understand that. It doesn't mean he can't play because you haven't seen it. The Seattle talent evaluators have seen plenty. Its their decision that will count, not yours or mine.
I did not say he could not play , but i like Curtis better .I saw Hackett play in a year or two he should be as good or better then Jackson.
What a second, why do you like Curtis better if Hackett should be as good or better than Jackson? Are you saying that Kevin Curtis is better than DJAX?
 

Donnybrook

Footballguy
Kevin Curtis is tendered at a higher level than Burleson. Seattle would have to give up a 1st round pick as compensation for Curtis.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top