Subscribe to the Pioneer Press Contact TwinCities.com and the Pioneer Press Local shopping TwinCities.com home and real estate TwinCities.com cars TwinCities.com jobs TwinCities.com classifieds TwinCities.com home page TwinCities.com home page TwinCities.com news TwinCities.com sports TwinCities.com business TwinCities.com entertainment TwinCities.com life TwinCities.com travel




with Sean Jensen and Don Seeholzer

Stop back often because Sean and Don regularly posts updates to your comments. Leave your comments and questions by clicking on the comments link below each post.






Saturday, October 14, 2006

Interesting take on Hutchinson...

My friend Mike Sando of the Tacoma News Tribune had an interesting post on Steve Hutchinson on his blog.
Let me know what you think.

"Steve Hutchinson didn't want to leave Seattle so much as he wanted to go where he was wanted the most. The Vikings made it clear to him they wanted him more, and valued him more, than Seattle did (in his view). Not complicated."
"To say Hutchinson wanted out of Seattle would be like saying the Seahawks, in using the transition tag, wanted to get rid of him. Neither statement would be true. The Seahawks used the transition tag because they thought it would lead to a quick deal. Worst-case scenario, they figured they would get a shot at matching another team's offer. They did not think the Vikings and Hutchinson would enter into the kind of deal they entered into. However, that is the chance you take when you go the transition route."

On an aside, Deion Branch has supplanted former Viking Nate Burleson in the starting lineup.

3 Comments:

Blogger SotaSportsGuy said...

The Seahawks have no one to blame but themselves for losing Steve Hutchinson. They could've locked him up before the start of the season last year but they elected not to. Then they tried to save a couple of million dollars by placing the transition tag on him instead of the franchise tag, which would've effectively taken Hutch off the market. Hutchinson seems like a very proud guy and I'm sure felt very disrespected by the Seahawks.
A lot of the national media blamed the Vikings brass for the "poison pill" portion of his contract. It was actually Hutchinson's agent that insisted that the "Poison pill" clause be included in the contract.
The Seahawks retaliated by placing a ridiculous "poison pill" clause in Nate Burleson's contract.
I'm sure we'll hear a lot more about this leading up to the "Poison Pill Bowl" next week in Seattle.

10:38 PM  
Blogger swede700 said...

How is Sando, BTW? I used to live in Seattle, and always liked listening to his comments on the local radio station there...

In regards to Hutchinson, the Seahawks have a history of low-balling their offensive linemen. They did it to Walter Jones, and ended up franchising him several years in a row (I don't think he went to training camp for something like 4 or 5 years in a row), so it's not surprising that they did the same to Hutchinson. They placed a higher commodity on their skill position players (i.e. Hasselbeck and Alexander), more so than the offensive line, so they took a chance and lost. It's their loss.

Oh, and it's not a surprise that Branch surpassed Burleson in the lineup, I don't think they've used Burleson all that much since they signed him. I wonder if he regrets that move now?

11:32 PM  
Blogger Sean Jensen said...

Sando is a great guy. One of the beat writers I respect most.
The Seahawks do a great job of finding great offensive linemen. But they do have a hard time keeping them. That's partly their fault, and partly not. You can only spend so much money on that position. It would have been hard for them to pay top dollar to two linemen.
Oops, the Vikings did that anyways.

11:19 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home