NFC West: Eric Wicks

NFL Nation: 4 Downs -- NFC West

April, 10, 2014
Apr 10
Catch us if you can.

That’s a message the Seattle Seahawks could send out to the rest of the NFC West.

It is also something the San Francisco 49ers might say to the Arizona Cardinals and the St. Louis Rams. But the Cardinals and Rams might have a statement of their own: We’re coming for you.

By almost everyone’s estimation, the NFC West is the best division in the NFL. It includes a Super Bowl champion in Seattle along with a team in San Francisco that, arguably, came up one play short of reaching its second consecutive Super Bowl.

It also includes a team in Arizona that won 10 games, one of which was a victory at Seattle -- the Seahawks' only home loss in 2013. And there's a team in St. Louis that won two of its last three games to finish 7-9 while playing most of the season without starting quarterback Sam Bradford.

So the question heading into 2014 is whether the Cardinals and Rams are in position to catch the Seahawks and 49ers. Have Arizona and St. Louis closed the gap on what might be the NFL’s two best teams?

The Cardinals have been active in free agency, signing cornerback Antonio Cromartie, offensive tackle Jared Veldheer, tight end John Carlson, receiver/kick returner Ted Ginn, running back Jonathan Dwyer and offensive lineman Ted Larsen.

Clearly, the competition in this division keeps getting better.

The four writers who cover the division for’s NFL Nation -- Terry Blount in Seattle, Bill Williamson in San Francisco, Josh Weinfuss in Arizona and Nick Wagoner in St. Louis -- take a look at where things stand in the NFC West on four key topics. We also polled our Twitter followers to find how they viewed the issues.

First Down

The Cardinals have made significant moves in free agency. The Rams, aside from keeping Rodger Saffold, have mostly stood pat. Which is closer to the playoffs?

Terry Blount: This is a no-brainer for me. The Cardinals are a team on the rise with one of the NFL's best coaches in Bruce Arians. He took a 5-11 team and transformed it to 10-6 in one season. He was 9-3 at Indianapolis in 2012 while filling in for Chuck Pagano. Arizona was 7-2 in its last nine games and won three of the last four, with the only loss being 23-20 to the 49ers in the season finale. The Cardinals could become a serious challenger to the two-team stronghold of Seattle and San Francisco. However, I do believe the Rams will have a winning season if they can hold their own in the division games.

Nick Wagoner: It's hard to evaluate this without seeing what happens in the draft, especially with the Rams having two premium picks. Even then it would be unfair to judge right away. Still, I have to go with the Cardinals. They were trending up at the end of the season and patched a big hole with offensive tackle Jared Veldheer. Losing Karlos Dansby was a blow, but adding cornerback Antonio Cromartie to a talented stable at the position makes them better. The Rams, meanwhile, are clearly counting on a whole lot of in-house improvement and a big draft. Keeping Saffold was important (and lucky), but it seems risky to pin all hopes on a leap to the playoffs on a group of young players all making a jump at the same time.

Josh Weinfuss: Arizona is the easy answer, and that's not because I cover them. The Cardinals were 10-6 last season and the first team kept out of the postseason. All the Cardinals have done this offseason is fix deficiencies and plug holes. Their offensive line got markedly better with the addition of left tackle Jared Veldheer. Their wide receiver corps and kick return game were solidified with Ted Ginn, and they now have one of the best cornerback tandems in the league with Antonio Cromartie coming on board. General manager Steve Keim looked at what went wrong in 2013 and went to work on fixes. It should put the Cardinals over the playoff hump.

Bill Williamson: It has to be Arizona. The Cardinals were so close to making the playoffs last season. They would have likely been dangerous in the postseason too. I like the way this franchise is shaping up. It seems like it is well run and well coached. The roster is also getting deep. Carson Palmer will have to be replaced sooner or later, but the Cardinals are on to something. The Rams certainly have some nice pieces and are probably the best fourth-place team in the NFL, but they aren't close to matching what Arizona has going for it.

Second Down

The Seahawks and 49ers played for the NFC title in January. Any reason to believe either won't return to the postseason?

Blount: They were the two best teams in the NFL last season, and there's no legitimate reason to think they won't be among the best in 2014. Seattle has lost 10 players who were on the Super Bowl roster, but other than wide receiver Golden Tate, none of them were on the team's priority list to keep. The 49ers move into a shiny new stadium. The only question for San Francisco is the precarious relationship between coach Jim Harbaugh and team executives. Who knows what the future holds there, but it shouldn't matter on game day.

Wagoner: Aside from some debilitating injuries, it's hard to see how either team has taken a major step back. The Seahawks have lost some good players in free agency, but even those players seemingly already had replacements in place. Nobody does a better job of developing talent than Seattle. The Seahawks still have holes to patch on the offensive line and losing receiver Golden Tate is a blow, so there could be some hope the offense will regress. But the defense makes it all go, and it doesn't look like it's going to lose any of its most prized components. As for the Niners, they are the more likely of the two to take a step back, but it's hard to see them taking enough of one to fall out of the postseason. For most of their key free-agent losses they were able to quickly come up with a replacement as good or better than the player lost, and retaining Anquan Boldin says they are looking to make another run at the Super Bowl. Plus, they will have a fully healthy Michael Crabtree ready for the season. Until proven otherwise, these two teams remain the class of the NFC and probably the NFL.

Weinfuss: The only reason either of them won't make the playoffs in 2014 is because the Cardinals or Rams will take their place. The gap between the top and bottom of the NFC West has closed significantly this offseason, making the West much like the Southeastern Conference in college football; everybody will beat up on each other. It's likely the West, if it's anything like last season, can see three teams in the playoffs -- its champion and the two wild cards. If one of the teams between Seattle and San Francisco were not to make it, it's tough, but I think Seattle might slip. The Seahawks lost a significant part of their defensive line and will be going through a Super Bowl hangover. That's risky to deal with and still make the playoffs. On the other hand, San Francisco will be hungry from losing to Seattle in the NFC Championship Game.

Williamson: I believe these are the two best teams in the NFL. So it's difficult to fathom that either team won't find its way into the playoffs, barring major injuries. Arizona, though, could create an issue for the Seahawks and 49ers. The Cardinals are going to win a lot of games, so both Seattle and San Francisco have to be careful or things could get tricky. In the end, I can see all three teams making the playoffs. This is the reason this division is so intriguing and so fun: Every game is critical. There is just not much room for error. Look at the 49ers last year. They went 12-4, but a 1-2 start hamstrung them. They could never fully recover despite having a great overall regular season. The same intensity will be a factor in 2014 in the NFC West.

Third Down

Will Rams quarterback Sam Bradford come back strong from an ACL injury, and what effect will he have on St. Louis having its coveted breakthrough year?

Blount: I think Bradford will be fine as far as the ACL goes, but this is a make-or-break year for him in my view. Bradford was playing pretty well before his injury last year, but the verdict still is out whether he can be an elite quarterback. He enters this season with the best supporting cast he's ever had, but playing in this division with teams that emphasize physical defensive play makes it difficult to show improvement.

Wagoner: All indications from the Rams are that Bradford's rehab is coming along well and he's on schedule to make his return in plenty of time for the start of the regular season. He apparently had a clean tear of the ACL, but he has been rehabbing for a handful of months and should resume throwing soon. Bradford's healthy return means everything to the Rams' chances in 2014. Believe it or not, this is his fifth season in the NFL and, much like the team, this is the time to make some noise. The Rams attempted to open up the offense in the first quarter of 2013 with Bradford to miserable results. They switched to a more run-oriented attack in Week 5 and the offense performed better. Bradford also played better as the run game opened up play-action opportunities in the passing game. It will be interesting to see if the Rams choose to go a bit more balanced with Bradford at the controls or if they continue at the same run-heavy pace they played with backup Kellen Clemens. Either way, Bradford's contract has two years left on it. If he wants a lucrative extension, this is the time to prove he's worth it.

Weinfuss: Short answer, yes, Bradford will come back strong. Just look at how he started in 2013. He was on pace for a massive year statistically before he got hurt. If he can pick up where he left off, Bradford will return with a bang and show he's still one of the better quarterbacks in the league. As we've seen, a top-tier quarterback can be the difference between sitting idle in the standings and having a breakthrough year. With the talent that surrounds the Rams, with tight end Jared Cook, running back Zac Stacy and wide receivers Tavon Austin, Chris Givens and Austin Pettis, among others, Bradford may singlehandedly help close the gap between the Rams and the top of the NFC West.

Williamson: I have to be honest: I'm not a big Sam Bradford guy. I think he's just OK. Just OK doesn't cut it in this division, especially considering the defenses he has to play six times a season in the NFC West. He's serviceable, but he's not the answer. Given the state of this division, I cannot envision a scenario where Bradford is the reason the Rams become the class of the NFC West. I think they can get by with Bradford for the short term, but the Rams are going to have to start thinking about the future at this position much earlier than expected when Bradford was the No. 1 overall pick of the 2010 draft.

Fourth Down

If you had to start a team with either Seahawks QB Russell Wilson or 49ers QB Colin Kaepernick, whom would you choose?

Blount: You must be kidding. Give me Wilson every time, every day in every situation. Yes, Kaepernick is 5 inches taller than Wilson. Is there really anyone left who thinks Wilson's lack of height matters? Wilson also is at his best in pressure situations. He lives for it. And he is a more polished person on the field, and off it, than Kaepernick. That's not an observation. It's a fact. But this isn't a rip on Kaepernick. You would be hard-pressed to find any 25-year-old as polished as Wilson. The 49ers can win a Super Bowl with Kaepernick, and probably will soon. But if I'm starting a team, whether it is in football or almost any other life endeavor, I'll take Wilson without a doubt.

Wagoner: Wilson. For those of us covering other teams in the division, it's hard not to admire what he brings to the table. He presents himself as the consummate professional, and even opponents praise him for his work habits, intelligence and ability. He's already got the Super Bowl ring, and it's easy to see how he could add a few more. He's not all the way there in terms of his potential either, and it's probably safe to assume he's just going to keep getting better as his career goes along. That's nothing against Kaepernick, who is a unique talent in his own right, but there aren't many young quarterbacks in the league worth choosing over Wilson.

Weinfuss: Russell Wilson would be my pick, mainly because of his poise and maturity behind center. Colin Kaepernick is undoubtedly talented, but I get the sense he still has a lot of growing to do as a quarterback. He's tough to bring down, especially in the open field, but when he's pressured in the pocket, Kaepernick seems to panic and I wouldn't want that in a quarterback. I also think Wilson, despite his physical stature, is built to last. He's heady enough to stay out of harm's way, and his poise in the huddle will go a long way in leading a team.

Williamson: I'd take Kaepernick. I know it's a tough sell right now, since Wilson's team has beaten Kaepernick and the 49ers three of the past four times they've met, including the NFC title game, and the fact that Wilson has won a Super Bowl. I respect the value of Super Bowl wins and believe quarterback is the most critical position in sports. I'm sure I will smell like a homer with the Kaepernick pick. But moving forward, I just think Kaepernick has a higher ceiling. I think he can take over games more than Wilson can at a higher rate. Players built like Kaepernick and as athletic as Kaepernick just don't exist. He is special. He works extremely hard at his craft and is well coached. I'd take him, and I wouldn't look back. This isn't a knock on Wilson. He is proven and is going to be great. But if I'm starting a team, I'm taking Kaepernick, and I bet more general managers would agree than would disagree.


Posted by's Mike Sando

The Seahawks re-signed long snapper Tim Lindsey at the expense of defensive back Eric Wicks, a seemingly minor move with significantly broader implications.

Every team faces injury problems during camp, but the Seahawks are worse off than any team in the division. Punter Ryan Plackemeier is practicing on a limited basis, but his surgically repaired pectoral has not yet been ready for games.

The team still hasn't declared a winner between kickers Olindo Mare and Brandon Coutu, so both remain on the roster. Lindsey was re-signed because the team's only other snapper, Tyler Schmitt, is out with back trouble. A back injury already forced the team's reserve short snapper, guard Chris Gray, into retirement.

What it means: Seattle is carrying six specialists, tied with New Orleans and Tennessee for the league high. The Seahawks are carrying only eight linebackers, 12 defensive backs and four tight ends. Each of those figures is tied for the league low. Only six teams are carrying fewer running backs than Seattle (the Seahawks have six, and one of them, starting fullback Leonard Weaver, is resting a strained hamstring).

How has this happened? Bad luck with injuries, for starters. The Seahawks also bear some of the responsibility. They weren't able to re-sign kicker Josh Brown, leading to the Coutu-Mare race.

They had a perfectly good snapper in J.P. Darche, but they didn't want him back in free agency. Years ago, they let durable punter Jeff Feagles leave in free agency to save a few hundred thousand dollars. Feagles has subsequently set the NFL record for consecutive games played, collecting a Super Bowl ring along the way.

Mailbag: Assessing young receivers

August, 5, 2008

Posted by's Mike Sando

Matt from Seattle writes: Sando, after hitting up the Rams camp who looks to step into the big hole Isaac Bruce leaves behind? Also I heard Logan Payne broke a rib during the scrimmage do you know his time table? thanks

Mike Sando: Drew Bennett probably fills the spot on the Rams' depth chart, but I don't see anyone immediately filling the void Bruce leaves. Al Saunders did address the receivers a bit in an interview I posted this morning.

As for broken ribs, they hurt for a long time and that's just the way it goes (easy for me to say). None of the young receivers in Seattle's camp can afford to miss an extended period. Now is the time to hit stride. That's what Ben Obomanu is doing.

Mark from Rochester, N.Y., writes: You have given us lots of first- and third-person accounts of how amazing Josh Morgan has been in the 49ers' training camp. You also go on the record as repeatedly telling your readers not to read too much into it. Is Morgan making these plays as a result of his great physical ability, or is he performing well because he has grasped the Mike Martz offense and is making all the right mental decisions? I think there is a huge difference between the two. The former is not unlike a scouting combine star, where the latter is good reason to get 49ers fans excited that could boom or bust either way about a possible draft-day steal like Marques Colston. Players' mental abilities are what separate NFL-quality backups from NFL-quality starters.

Mike Sando: That is a good question. The descriptions I've heard have dealt mostly with big plays, and that would suggest the physical part. According to Mike Martz, Morgan still makes some mistakes, but he is making progress. 

You are right about not reading too much into what rookie receivers do early in camp. In this case, the 49ers haven't been shy about praising him, and I want to pass that along. It's a little unusual because teams know rookies often fail to sustain fast starts. The 49ers sense otherwise with Morgan. They think they've found an impact player.

Colin from Seattle writes: Mike- I know LeCharles Bentley was released b/c he wanted a place to start but what do you think about him going to the seahawks with there recent injuries/retirement at center?

Mike Sando: Just a thought, but the Seahawks seem to have enough injured offensive linemen already. Putting Bentley and Floyd Womack on the same team might not be a good idea. Seriously, I haven't heard anything about Bentley and Seattle to this point. I think the Seahawks -- and a lot of teams -- would have interest in a healthy Bentley. But is he healthy?

Jim from Ellensburg, Wash., writes: Thanks for all the coverage, Mike. Us out in the unknown West really appreciate all of the well-covered updates that we go without during the year. I'm curious about the Seahawks this year. Every other post I read about them seems to be about the defense getting the jump on the offense in some way. I'm wondering, should I be this concerned about the offense, or that much more excited about the defense?

Mike Sando: You should be cautiously optimistic about an offense that could become more versatile given personnel changes at running back and tight end. You should be concerned about depth on the offensive line now that Chris Gray isn't there as a security blanket. You should be excited about the defense but also hopeful that Patrick Kerney can squeeze another mostly injury-free season from his 31-year-old body.

Michael from Mammoth Lakes, Calif., writes: First off I would like to say how great a job you are doing with your coverage of the NFC west. I'm stuck on the couch after surgery and I look forward to it daily. My question is in regard to the knee injury suffered by "big play babs." He plays an important role in the seahawks secondary and we would hate to have anything serious happen to him. what's the word?

Mike Sando: Thank you, sir. We are still awaiting word on MRI results for both players. Coach Mike Holmgren did not sound particularly concerned about those injuries. I was not out at practice today, but I'll check.

Jonathan from Seattle writes: Hey Mike, do you think Seattle will sign John Lynch? I think he would be a great addition to improve a shaky secondary.

Mike Sando: Lynch has a history with Seahawks president Tim Ruskell, but remember, Lynch is leaving Denver because he wants a shot at more playing time. Seattle appears pretty set at the position, despite your concerns.

I would also wonder about Lynch's neck situation. Here is what I wrote in 2004 about the Seahawks' interest in Lynch at that time: "The Seahawks considered former Tampa Bay starter John Lynch for the job, but concerns about a lingering neck injury complicated negotiations. Lynch subsequently signed with the Denver Broncos."

Lynch might have overplayed his hand here. He left the Broncos because he wanted more playing time. That's OK, but is there another team willing to let him play as much as the Broncos had planned? I'm not so sure.

Williambryan from Vancouver, Wash., writes: I noticed you have Eric Wicks listed as a linebacker on your roster analysis. Wasn't he signed as an undrafted safety out of WV? Has he been playing as a linebacker?

Mike Sando: I had him listed as a safety when they signed him, but the Seahawks are listing him as a linebacker on the roster I picked up from them Monday. That's what I used in putting together this roster analysis. It's an upset if he earns a roster spot.

DCHaines from Oshkosh, Wis., writes: Brett Favre will always be a Packer in my heart. This has become a power struggle with Ted Thompson flexing his might. If they trade Farve,I will no longer be a Packer fan. Let's do what is best for the team by keeping Favre! When Rogers starts losing games blame Thompson! Let the best man play. Rogers will be the future but not yet. There best chance this season is with Bret unless they just don't care. I hate to say it but if Brett goes to Minnesota I will be rooting for Favre and the Vikings!!!!!!

Mike Sando: The NFC North has apparently traded the Packers to the NFC West for unspecified mailbag considerations.