Seahawks QB1 (34th best qb in the league???)

[SoulfishHawk]

Great points Twisted. Shoot, we all deal with it in our own way. The one that drives nuts is when someone tells you that you're "fine as long as they just make the playoffs"
Telling someone ELSE how they actually feel, when you don't know them? Meh

 

[hawkfan68]

I think the mistake that occurred was not seriously considering drafting QBs and developing them while Russ was still here. Bringing in guys like Trevone Boykin and Alex McGough is not doing enough to help shore up the position for the future. They do have an eye for talent as PC/JS are the ones who discovered Wilson in the first place. I think PC/JS would look at this differently moving forward but having a huge hole could have been avoided if they had placed priority on the QB position.

Players are human and get complacent. Early Russ was competing for a job and not only becoming a starter. The later years Russ may have become complacent because there wasn't any real threat to position. He knew he was always QB1. No one to push him to be better.

 

[fullquartpress]

I think Drew Lock is better than #34.
Low shotgun snaps are the real problem, currently.

 

[BlueTalon]

if you think its going to get better with either one of these slapdicks I have news for you. Were in "suck for a high draft pick mode" and Im fine with that. Its obvious. This looks just like the Tarvaris season. 4 or 5 wins should net us a nice solid QB.

Depends on what you mean by "better." The team culture already is better. The W/L record probably won't be this year, but moving on from Russ was inevitable at some point, and the W/L record would probably always have worse no matter when that happened. But...
A. I think we will do better this year with our "slapdicks" than you think, and
B. It will have a lot to do with Pete, who is not "past his expiry date" as some here claim.

 

[jammerhawk]

Great points Twisted. Shoot, we all deal with it in our own way. The one that drives nuts is when someone tells you that you're "fine as long as they just make the playoffs"
Telling someone ELSE how they actually feel, when you don't know them? Meh

Or alternatively they grumble about not advancing past the 1st or 2nd round in the playoffs. Just in case it isn't understood in fact it is hard to even make the playoffs.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

8 of 10 years was a pretty damn good run, and a couple SB trips. But because I'm not throwing puppies, I'm somehow "satisfied"
Losing is never satisfying. But not acknowledging we've had it pretty good is odd. But whatever, doesn't matter. To each his/her own.

 

[scutterhawk]

Misplaced optimism is probably just as indictable as pessimism. Especially when you consider how we have been trending for half a decade. (and how integral a key player was to our success when you also know that player is no longer here).
As for the rest, it is completely inbounds to respect & admire the program builder Carrol WAS while having little confidence in his ability to do that anymore.

I don't begrudge the optimism. I don't understand the conclusions. But understand the need for it sometimes.

It still feels odd to call out the pessimism when this team has been on an inexorable slide for the past half-decade, and we literally just witnessed what the team looks like without Russ last year (when he was injured).
Now the defense, just by math, HAS to be better. But a new scheme and system means growing pains. It won't be fixed immediately, maybe not even improved initially.

But I am confident that Carroll will do better than terrible. He has a knack at keeping things just above .500 - probably even with me at QB he would do that. So even with Lock or Geno (shudder), it is possible.

Yep, I KNOW what 'Hard Times' are, and not JUST with my Seahawks...BUT I'M NOT A QUITTER, and I don't HANG WITH QUITTERS.
It's a waste of time trying to understand why they give up so easily...Was once married to a pessimistic ANCHOR........W-A-S......I am NOW Celebrating 44 years of harmony, & our 36th year ANIVERSARY >>>>TODAY!!!!<<<< August 9th......HOORAY FOR ME & MY GOOD FORTUNE!!!!!!

 

[Death]

Call me crazy but I want us to win every damn game that we play. Obviously not realistic, but as a fan that is what you should want. I don't believe in 'tanking' just to get a good draft pick(Especially next year as I don't think the QB's coming out are all that amazing jmo but that's another thread altogether).

Lock, Geno, whoever is out there hopefully shuts up naysayers around the league and we have a good season. If we do have a terrible one and draft in top 3 picks, well ok. But if we perform better and have an outside top 10 pick, we will cross that bridge when we get to it.

 

[keasley45]

Misplaced optimism is probably just as indictable as pessimism. Especially when you consider how we have been trending for half a decade. (and how integral a key player was to our success when you also know that player is no longer here).
As for the rest, it is completely inbounds to respect & admire the program builder Carrol WAS while having little confidence in his ability to do that anymore.

I don't begrudge the optimism. I don't understand the conclusions. But understand the need for it sometimes.

It still feels odd to call out the pessimism when this team has been on an inexorable slide for the past half-decade, and we literally just witnessed what the team looks like without Russ last year (when he was injured).
Now the defense, just by math, HAS to be better. But a new scheme and system means growing pains. It won't be fixed immediately, maybe not even improved initially.

But I am confident that Carroll will do better than terrible. He has a knack at keeping things just above .500 - probably even with me at QB he would do that. So even with Lock or Geno (shudder), it is possible.

Who exactly is the arbiter of whether optimism or pessimism is blind?

Seems any reasonable discussion or even evidence that we might actually be good this year rather than awful, is before it even begins, rooted in a biased opinion of Russ, and by proxy, a biased opinion of our coach, FO and its ability to build a winning team.

That unwillingness to entertain the reality that Russ was a (not) insignificant portion of the problem or the facts that support it (or to assign enough weight to them to actual sway opinion)... inevitably establishes a base point for ones reasoning. And doing so... well, that's deciding to take a position regardless of the available evidence.

And the fallout, from where i sit is that so deep is that root, that even simple assessments of talent are polluted by that bias and the drumbeat that 'we suck at drafting '. In turn, that base negative perception ( and admittedly, truth for a few years between 2014 and 2019) trumps real, current reality that since 2019, we've added 14 starters / contributors to our roster.

And failures to entertain that fact, sets the table for a perception that the 'rebuild' only really began when we lost Russ. Removing the bias, the reset for our 'future' roster started in 2020... arguably 2019.

So if you think Russ carried us for the last 5 years, then everything we were was polished by him - Strategy, outcomes, talent.

If you can entertain the fact that he was in good part, culpable, despite his vast talent, then the roster, its potential, and the reality that the team we've been building now for 3 or 4 years, is better than 'advertised' by the media and those who believe Russ WAS Seattle, is anything buy far-fetched.

I can go position by position down this roster, unbiased and make a solid reasonable argument that our overall talent is actually VERY good. Not homerism. Analysis.

It's the same assessment that's slowly beginning to creep into the spin by media types that aren't simply just parroting the BS narrative that this team is hapless and hopeless with Pete at the reigns, but minus Russ. It's just lazy reporting... glamming on one or two names, crafting a narrative about who we are based on those players, and ignoring anyone and anything else about the team.

We will absolutely only go as far as our OC is able to scheme us this year. But the notion that we aren't going to be good... I'd argue that that's just defeatist negativity, based on a blanket assessment that our QB was great and made the team, the coach, and was the reason we ever had success. It potentially lacks any depth of analysis, whether of players, position groups, overall strategy, coaching etc. It potentially glosses over any other possible reason for our past struggles and future prospects that don't align with a singular view.

So no, I don't see optimism for 2022 as blind. There's enough concrete evidence, whether looking back several years at where we've faltered and why, looking at the present and the 14 starters / significant contributors we've added to the roster since 2019. Or looking at the future and by all accounts what looks to be a very solid crop of young, progressive coaches and coordinators to lead the whole deal, ample cap space, draft capital and talent for all but those who haven't been paying attention, or arent willing to see.

 

[keasley45]

As to the qb situation.. neither player has ever had a supporting cast on both sides of the ball like the one they have here. That's a fact. Lock won 5 games with a dead head coaching staff and mediocre roster. Geno won 8 games his rookie year, again, with a NY Jets roster.

And let's not forget that journeyman, eternal backup, Tarvaris Jackson, won 7 games with a patched together roster full of up starts and has been.

So believing that with the best wr duo in the league, arguably the most exciting backfield in the league, a talented and capable TE group, revamped o-line, and a defense that looks to be brimming with talent and coaches to run the whole thing... well, like I said, neither Geno, Lock or Tavaris in their best years had anything close to what our roster has. So even assuming they are no better than what they've shown at their best... tickling .500 or crossing it isn't homerism.

And in the end, the offense will rise or fall based on how well our OC can scheme (novell idea...), and not on the ceiling of whichever qb wins the competition.

 

[toffee]

Thank you Twisted! Your post was very well articulated and undoubtedly heartfelt.

Believe me many of us here get it, and the need to vent but truthfully this is entertainment and it is at times frustrating to watch entertainment as are as hardcore fans highly invested in the team and it’s outcome. It certain though isn’t always negative.

Just because the past few seasons have been less than happy in outcome with what looked to be inevitable playoff failures the recent changes offer new sense of direction, which may bring different venting going forward.

I’m curiously optimistic about the season I don’t expect much but I hope to watch a fresh young team that has a sold sense of positive direction.

same here,

 

[LionBacker]

Times like these, I break out Second Season football and let Dave Kreig remind me of happier days — like when Largent smoked Mike Harden…

 

[GemCity]

Slapdicks and Eeyore quotes in the same thread. Why am I just reading this? Lmao…

Oh, not like I have something fruitful to add here but, I’m under the impression that our QB room stinks and don’t really have room for “optimism”. I wouldn’t call it pessimistic but, realistic.

I’m excited though…loved the draft and already wondering who PC and JS are eyeballing to take over at QB.

Happy we didn’t draft one…happy we didn’t grab Baker although I think he may do well in Carolina’s system.

4-13 or 13-4, excited regardless!!

 

[Fade]

As to the qb situation.. neither player has ever had a supporting cast on both sides of the ball like the one they have here. That's a fact. Lock won 5 games with a dead head coaching staff and mediocre roster. Geno won 8 games his rookie year, again, with a NY Jets roster.

And let's not forget that journeyman, eternal backup, Tarvaris Jackson, won 7 games with a patched together roster full of up starts and has been.

So believing that with the best wr duo in the league, arguably the most exciting backfield in the league, a talented and capable TE group, revamped o-line, and a defense that looks to be brimming with talent and coaches to run the whole thing... well, like I said, neither Geno, Lock or Tavaris in their best years had anything close to what our roster has. So even assuming they are no better than what they've shown at their best... tickling .500 or crossing it isn't homerism.

And in the end, the offense will rise or fall based on how well our OC can scheme (novell idea...), and not on the ceiling of whichever qb wins the competition.

If it was about the supporting cast and not the QB, the going rate wouldn't be $50M a year for one. Teams wouldn't trade multiple first rd picks to move up in drafts to take prospects who are literally crap shoots. They'd just go with a TJack, Geno type and call it good. Teams do not build that way, including the Seahawks. TJack was a stop gap, and so is Geno. The draft stunk this year at QB, circumstances are the only reason Geno is the starter, he won't be next year.

 

[keasley45]

If it was about the supporting cast and not the QB, the going rate wouldn't be $50M a year for one. Teams wouldn't trade multiple first rd picks to move up in drafts to take prospects who are literally crap shoots. They'd just go with a TJack, Geno type and call it good. Teams do not build that way, including the Seahawks. TJack was a stop gap, and so is Geno. The draft stunk this year at QB, circumstances are the only reason Geno is the starter, he won't be next year.

Or they'd go with a Garopolo (superbowl appearances), make due with a Foles (superbowl) for a season, roll with a Carr ( solid player whonhas never had a supporting cast), or a Tannehill. And with Tannehill, if you use his poor game against the Bengals in the playoffs last year, I'll point to 1 for 14 with 3 ints in our game against the Pack in the NFC Championship game.

And let us not forget that it was absolutely about our supporting cast when we won our superbowl.

I'm nit saying Geno is the answer either. Again and I feel like a broken record. My push back is only on the notion that he's 'terrible' and that we have no talent on our roster and as a result, with Geno or Lock running point, we're somehow a 5 win team.

And I'd also point out that the window to capitalize on a quality signal caller is BEDORE you break the bank for him. Not after you mortgage your whole team.

 

[Fade]

What players did the Rams mortgage when they paid Goff, absorbed his massive dead money hit, and then paid Stafford? That team doesn't look very mortgaged from paying QBs. Can you point to any team in the NFL right now that's paying their QB big money where they mortgaged their whole team as you say?

You're even arguing the Seahawks are more talented than people realize.

But according to your logic, they mortgaged their whole team for Wilson all these years, so they shouldn't be very good.

Also gotta love the how well the OC can scheme comment. What happened to the scheme is fine it's the QBs fault, from last year. Man this site always delivers.

 

[JayhawkMike]

Everybody blames who they don’t like when things go wrong and credits who they do like when things go right.

 

[TwistedHusky]

The job of the HC is to put a plan together that works and that the players can execute. If the players cannot or do not execute it - it is the fault of the HC, not the player. Because the HC should not have put the player in that position anyway.

So if the QB could not produce given the gameplans by the OC, then HC is at fault for not making the OC put gameplans in place that the QB would be able to work with.
It makes no sense to plan things that won't work because the pieces cannot deliver the outcome, no matter how seemingly sound the plan is...if the pieces cannot be used to deliver it? Or likely won't deliver it? Then it is just a failed plan.

We call these things wishes.

Nobody cares about almost. You don't get points for plausibility. This is why being at the 1 and 'almost' winning the SB is still considered a colossal failure.

If you have a great QB but that QB can't do what the OC needs him to do, then the OC needs to ask him (or plan for him) to do something else.

The OC is responsible for the offense's success, not the QB. That OC is chosen by the HC to do this. The HC needs to delegate, then the OC needs to deliver. But the HC is culpable.

The HC is ALWAYS to blame. It is ALWAYS his fault. His responsibility. That is the job.

 

[keasley45]

Or they'd go with a Garopolo (superbowl appearances), make due with a Foles (superbowl) for a season, roll with a Carr ( solid player whonhas never had a supporting cast), or a Tannehill. And with Tannehill, if you use his poor game against the Bengals in the playoffs last year, I'll point to 1 for 14 with 3 ints in our game against the Pack in the NFC Championship game.

And let us not forget that it was absolutely about our supporting cast when we won our superbowl.

I'm nit saying Geno is the answer either. Again and I feel like a broken record. My push back is only on the notion that he's 'terrible' and that we have no talent on our roster and as a result, with Geno or Lock running point, we're somehow a 5 win team.

What players did the Rams mortgage when they paid Goff, absorbed his massive dead money hit, and then paid Stafford? That team doesn't look very mortgaged from paying QBs. Can you point to any team in the NFL right now that's paying their QB big money where they mortgaged their whole team as you say?

You're even arguing the Seahawks are more talented than people realize.

But according to your logic, they mortgaged their whole team for Wilson all these years, so they shouldn't be very good.

Also gotta love the how well the OC can scheme comment. What happened to the scheme is fine it's the QBs fault, from last year. Man this site always delivers.

So now youre ignoring my answer to your question and asking about the Rams. Ok. the Rams have been pretty creative in moving their money around. So much so that everyone in the league is amazed by it. Good on them

Name me all those many teams that have won multiple championships with QBS on max contracts... besides the Rams. And as far as the Rams go, Staffords contract pays him over the next 2 years, what Russ made in a single year. they wont be strapped until 2024, but they will be strapped. Have they bought a window where they can win? Sure. And if they dont cash in again this year, restructure / rebuild time which is my point.

The Seahawks were absolutley impacted by paying Wilson what they did, and let him go because they absolutely wouldn't have paid him again. Are you disputing that? I dint understand. It was pointed out endlessly by the media in 2012 that Seattle had struck gold by getting to the dance before having to pay their guy top dollar. WHy? because when you pay top dollar to a franchise guy, its hard to stay at the top.

The fact that they managed to post the 2nd most players to the probowl in 2020 is a testament to the FO ability to find and retain talent.

And the fact that they've managed to retool the roster on the fly, to the point that they just need a signal caller again to be in legit contention... Also a testament to their ability.

You should loveabout and OC scheming success - you referenced Goff. You thiink the Rams got to the Superbowl with him because the dude is so uber talented? He was average before McVay got his hands on him. He flamed out when defenses figured out how to get to him. And he's been average since he went to Detroit. I dont understand what's in dispute.

Alex Smith was average before he got to KC, where he became an above agerage QB. m Vick was a below average passer before he got to Philly and played in the same system Smith did.

Tannehill was ... flashy but not worth keeping in Miami, but a completely different guy in Tennessee.

The going rate for a QB has and a franchise's willingness to pay it, has no correlation with the ability to field a team that can win multiple championships. You act as though you can essentially buy a championship by just dropping major coin on a top QB. Do you need a good to great player to contend? Absolutely. You also need top players at other skill positions. That's the reason teams like GB have one title, even though they have the best QB in the game. And its one of the reasons Brady has 117 - because he was always willing to take less to keep guys on the team that could win. If he'd taken a max contract - they couldn't have paid enough guys.

There's more than one way to win. Here, we get bogged down in these arguments based on allegiances to certain players. If you think Russ was the reason we won anything, and that he carried the team, then by default, the team HAD TO BE CARRIED. And so, talented teams dont have to be carried... unless maybe they have crap coaching, which is the other argument pro Russ guys make.

I dont like or dislike anyone on the team. Have no agenda. And i dont make statements like 'this team has no talent' without offering a reason why. Its cool if you wanna roll like that. I think they do have talent, and have posted why, position group by position group. Would love to hear where you think we 'suck' so badly. Sincerely.


But I get your position... i think. And I'm not tryng to put words in your mouth, so forgive me if i'm off. But for the most part it seems like you think:

We'll be terrible because Lock and Geno have never done anything, our coaches cant help them, and they're both backups and cannot possibly be more.

Our team has little talent, (maybe the exception being the players added in the 2022 draft?) and will need a few seasons, and a top 10 pick at QB to contend again.

The offense will be pretty bad, both because our QBS are terrible and our OC, questionable at best. And that even if the OC has potential, PC will meddle and eff things up.

Our defense wont be good enough to carry the team, because even if they have potential they're too young.

In a nutshell, we are in a several year rebuild that will likely fall flat with PC at the healm.

 

[keasley45]

If it was about the supporting cast and not the QB, the going rate wouldn't be $50M a year for one. Teams wouldn't trade multiple first rd picks to move up in drafts to take prospects who are literally crap shoots. They'd just go with a TJack, Geno type and call it good. Teams do not build that way, including the Seahawks. TJack was a stop gap, and so is Geno. The draft stunk this year at QB, circumstances are the only reason Geno is the starter, he won't be next year.

I didnt say it wasnt about the QB. You said that. i said that because of the supporting cast, that a QB can play better than if he has a poor supporting cast. And for certain, with better coaching, an underperforming player can play signifcantly better.

There's literally a saying in coaching circles in the NFL that a great OC can make a average QB look really good (Goff), and that a bad QB can get a good OC fired. I guess in the case of Denver and Lock, your position is Lock is just that bad. It ignores the possibility that in his first year, he had better coaching and looked better, but that's cool. its you're right to hold whatever opinion you want. If you were to ask Jim Nagy (because someone recently did in an interview) what he saw in Lock, he'd tell you that he thinks the guy's poor performance in Denver was a result of coaching and that he hasnt touched his ceiling, but that he will in Seattle. Jim Nagy was a scout for the Hawks and knows Lock well. But maybe he's just pipe dreaming too...

And i dont think Geno is our answer at QB long term. i just dont think we're a talentless, 5 win team with him under center.