Report: Geno told he will be retained in 2024

[bigcc]

I know what it is...... Nobody cares as long as it works.

Then what the **** was your point

 

[Appyhawk]

Then who will you blame for Geno's losses?

Blame the supporting cast, the exact opposite of what happens in Chicago.

 

[morgulon1]

What I've learned from the NFL over the years and especially with the Seahawks, anything is possible. Before Russ, I thought Flynn was going to be our QB for at least a few years down the road, but BANG...suddenly....a new dawn and well, the rest is history. My guess, anything can happen all the way up through training camps. I'm not a Geno fan, nor am I a Geno hater. IF the Seahawks decide to roll with Geno come August/September, then I'll enjoy the ride and gripe or cheer like any other fan around. If not Geno, I'll wait in anticipation of the next generational QB whoever that may be. Basically...I'm just going to enjoy the ride and let the chips fall wherever they may. But...if I have learned anything over the course of my life as a Seahawks fan is....I don't know jack, which is my only surety of being a true Seahawks fan.

True .

The other point being that Seattle could draft a QB and not be in any better shape than having G Smith. Taking a QB early is the biggest of gambles.

I hope either Geno Smith or Drew Lock can emerge and play well at least through this upcoming season.

 

[keasley45]

So like any sane person expect more of the same 8-9/9-8 mediocrity at some point you have to take a risk and start drafting quarterbacks already. You can't keep doing the same thing and expect different results that's the very definition of insanity.

Geno is a known quantity and we know his ceiling he's good enough to keep us treading water but not good to make us a serious contender unless we suddenly became the 1985 Bears or similar.

We didnt finish better than 9-8 because Geno held us back. We underperformed mostly because of coaching and defense. Doing the same thing over and over again would be walking into 2024 without prioritizing the o-line, d-line and LB - the absolute week spots on the team over the last 2 years. Drafting a QB to start him isnt going to help, unless feeling better because we have a shiny new toy that we can 'call' QBOTF to make the 8-9 season he'd bring us feel better is the goal.

 

[Titus Pullo]

We didnt finish better than 9-8 because Geno held us back. We underperformed mostly because of coaching and defense. Doing the same thing over and over again would be walking into 2024 without prioritizing the o-line, d-line and LB - the absolute week spots on the team over the last 2 years. Drafting a QB to start him isnt going to help, unless feeling better because we have a shiny new toy that we can 'call' QBOTF to make the 8-9 season he'd bring us feel better is the goal.

A shiny new toy that we can call QOTF and another 8-9 season would be great!

 

[WarHawks]

At least a shiny new toy would [ideally] have a high ceiling.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Looks like only 25% want to keep him and start him.

So, the majority want him for a backup next season.

If he wasn't a cap hit, I'm sure those numbers change quite a bit.

Just face it, you are in the minority.

You're really stretching here if you think the majority of the fanbase wants Geno kept as a backup on his contract.

The obvious implications is that Geno would start or at the very least compete with a drafted rookie. FFS, that's the option I CHOSE in the poll too.

 

[Maelstrom787]

It's going to hard to watch another boring season of Geno.

No one's forcing you. You've dipped before.

 

[Maelstrom787]

I know what it is...... Nobody cares as long as it works.

It's starting to become clear why you avoid actual detailed football discussion in favor of surface level narratives.

The dude can't even mention *the base defense of the team*?

Nobody cares? As it turns out, plenty of actual football fans DO care about the specifics of the game they're spending time watching!

 

[Maelstrom787]

So like any sane person expect more of the same 8-9/9-8 mediocrity at some point you have to take a risk and start drafting quarterbacks already. You can't keep doing the same thing and expect different results that's the very definition of insanity.

Geno is a known quantity and we know his ceiling he's good enough to keep us treading water but not good to make us a serious contender unless we suddenly became the 1985 Bears or similar.

That's not the definition of insanity.

Something more akin to insanity would be disregarding the other 52 players and entire coaching staff of the organization in favor of pinning the overall result of the team on a single player, quarterback or not.

The run game was used less than almost any other. The defense was bottom-3. The kicking game was nothing special. So how was the team over .500 for 2 years running despite being legitimately awful in most regards outside of the QB?

The overall record is not just a quarterback stat. There is mountains of context involved.

 

[keasley45]

A shiny new toy that we can call QOTF and another 8-9 season would be great!

VS 10-7 or 11-6 with an improved defense and o-line?

We finished 9-8 with one of the worst defenses and o-lines in the league. Thats fact. Everything else being equal, how many games better are we if our D is top 15 and our o-line top 12? 2 games better seems entirely doable.

'calling' your QB the BQOTF and him actually BEING one are 2 different things. especially when dedicating critical draft capital to acquire him when the areas of your team that actually brought you losses and will again this year dont see the attention they need.

 

[DarkVictory23]

That's not the definition of insanity.

Something more akin to insanity would be disregarding the other 52 players and entire coaching staff of the organization in favor of pinning the overall result of the team on a single player, quarterback or not.

The run game was used less than almost any other. The defense was bottom-3. The kicking game was nothing special. So how was the team over .500 for 2 years running despite being legitimately awful in most regards outside of the QB?

The overall record is not just a quarterback stat. There is mountains of context involved.

This is the other thing that I think people just gloss over: Teams who suck are more likely to keep sucking and teams who are ok to good are more likely to be able to make a jump up.

Over the last decade, teams making a first, non-consecutive Super Bowl appearance had an average record of 9-8* the previous season.

Over the last 6 years, teams who had 6 or less wins were about 75% to have a losing record the following season.

---

On one hand, this feels somewhat obvious: a team finishing with 6 or less wins probably has a lot of issues and one good draft isn't going to fix that. A team with 8 or 9 wins often is only a piece or two (or a bad bounce or two) away from being a much better team.

But for some reason people still think the key to a successful 'rebuild' is to dump every player you have who makes any kind of money and tank for a high draft choice.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

This is the other thing that I think people just gloss over: Teams who suck are more likely to keep sucking and teams who are ok to good are more likely to be able to make a jump up.

Over the last decade, teams making a first, non-consecutive Super Bowl appearance had an average record of 9-8* the previous season.

Over the last 6 years, teams who had 6 or less wins were about 75% to have a losing record the following season.

---

On one hand, this feels somewhat obvious: a team finishing with 6 or less wins probably has a lot of issues and one good draft isn't going to fix that. A team with 8 or 9 wins often is only a piece or two (or a bad bounce or two) away from being a much better team.

But for some reason people still think the key to a successful 'rebuild' is to dump every player you have who makes any kind of money and tank for a high draft choice.

Please do it worked for the Rams and 49ers many times among several other teams.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

That's not the definition of insanity.

Something more akin to insanity would be disregarding the other 52 players and entire coaching staff of the organization in favor of pinning the overall result of the team on a single player, quarterback or not.

The run game was used less than almost any other. The defense was bottom-3. The kicking game was nothing special. So how was the team over .500 for 2 years running despite being legitimately awful in most regards outside of the QB?

The overall record is not just a quarterback stat. There is mountains of context involved.

Keep hoping your correct. You aren't but whatever.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

I'm over you Geno Cult ignorant people enjoy your mediocrity.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Draft a ******* quarterback JS you know have a staff that will actually ******* give you a real OL/DL just trust them and go get a quarterback that might have to sit a year or two because until then we aren't passing the 49ers or Rams

 

[sutz]

Geez, MizGal, take a valium, smoke a doob.

 

[DarkVictory23]

Please do it worked for the Rams and 49ers many times among several other teams.

So, I see this is kind of the first post in a multi-post outburst, but I'm going to try and respond anyway: Are you saying that "dump every player you have who makes any kind of money and tank for a high draft choice" is what you want them to do that has worked for the "Rams and 49ers" many times?

Because that's not quite true. For one, the Rams didn't 'tank into a high draft pick' for Goff. They traded up for him after having a 7-9 season. They were crappy his first year and didn't even benefit from it because they traded away their first round draft pick to get him.

And even though they went to a Super Bowl with Mr. Goff, the Rams were so happy with him that they traded him away a mere 2 seasons later for a guy who is older than (and has played worse over the last 2 seasons) than Geno Smith, whom you seem to hate. And the Rams literally only won 1 extra game than the Seahawks this year. (If Puka Nacua didn't get a phantom PI for tripping over his own feet, we go 10-7 and go to the playoffs instead of them.)

If you're referring to the 49ers, I think you are forgetting how many years straight they were terrible after 2013. By the time they drafted Trey Lance (which ended up being a mistake, anyway) they had been terrible for most of a decade. Is this what you want the Seahawks to do? Suck for 7 years?
Reminder: Niners still haven't won a Super Bowl and they've gone all-in on this current roster.


Obviously, there are exceptions to these rules, but MOST teams that full-on stink just keep stinking. Teams with 6 or less wins don't actually turn it around just by virtue of having a good draft pick. Yes, the Niners did have that rare turnaround, but most crappy teams are much more like the Jets, Giants, Jaguars, and Panthers. Each of those guys are on like, what? Their 3rd or 4th rebuild now in just the last 5 or 6 years?

 

[SonicHawk]

I hope a cure for cerebral palsy suddenly comes but if you never draft quarterbacks you get to pay a ******* backup scrub 30 million a year. I wish I were black and a man with real athletic talent and a tiny dick.
I don't like hating people but JS is testing me over this Geno bullshit.

Damn girl tell us how you really feel

 

[morgulon1]

I hope a cure for cerebral palsy suddenly comes but if you never draft quarterbacks you get to pay a ******* backup scrub 30 million a year. I wish I were black and a man with real athletic talent and a tiny dick.
I don't like hating people but JS is testing me over this Geno bullshit.

Why do you wish you had a tiny dick ?