So I mentioned in this space earlier in the week that we’d have some Seahawks and NFL season preview stuff in today’s paper, so if you picked up a copy of the Herald or just looked on line, a quick apology that you couldn’t find that. Unfortunately some last-minute happenings cost us some space in the sports section, which meant pushing all that stuff back a day. So look for that tomorrow.
Anyway, in the meantime, there’s plenty of good Seahawks reading out there.
Eric Williams of the News Tribune went to Oakland during the offseason and caught up with Marshawn Lynch, getting a rare interview with the running back who doesn’t often like to grant them.
Seattle Times columnist Larry Stone has a nice piece on the Seahawks secondary that’s worth a read. I had one too ready for today’s paper, but you’ll have to read it tomorrow.
Speaking of the Seahawks’ secondary, Richard Sherman wrote another piece for TheMMQB.com, this one on what it was like to see teammate Michael Robinson released. It’s a very good piece that takes you behind the scenes of the tough business decisions in the game, though it is worth noting, and Sherman doesn’t get into this side of it, that Robinson’s cut was made in large part to free up money to sign young players whose rookie contracts are up in the next couple of years. Players like Sherman. But again, it’s well worth a read.
Grantland.com’s Bill Barnwell is the latest to pick the Seahawks to win the Super Bowl.
And speaking of high expectations, ESPN.com’s Terry Blount writes about how the Seahawks are handling all the attention.
Peter King looks at the read option and whether it’s here to stay or a fad. This story focuses on Washington and RGIII, but obviously it relates to the Seahawks, who sprinkle in elements of the read option in their offense.
And speaking of running quarterbacks, 49ers coach Jim Harbaugh is worried teams are going to take shots at his quarterback this year based on some comments from 49ers players.
To be honest, I’m surprised it’s taken this long for somebody to say, basically, “If they’re going to be running fakes, plays designed to fool us when it comes to who has the ball, we’re going to hit the quarterback every single play whether he has it or not.” Not that anyone is going to admit they’re trying to hurt a quarterback, but if teams are going to expose their most important player to contact, you’d better believe defenses would love to get shots in to try to discourage play callers from going back to the option plays over and over.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
