Update: After working out 4, Seahawks to sign Brady Quinn

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13

  • Who can hand off to beast mode the best?

    Being able to take a knee, also important.
    User avatar
    Coug_Hawk08
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2957
    Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:26 am


  • No thanks to Leinart and Brady Quinn either. I'd honestly rather roll with Portis at that point.

    Seneca, MAYBE. Although I'll never really forgive him for running out of bounds and taking the minus yardage instead of just tossing the ball out of bounds. Unforgivable in the NFL but I still have a soft spot for the guy.

    Thigpen would be my favorite out of the group but that's based on nothing except for the fact that I thought he played okay with Kansas City when he got the chance. Don't know how much I'd trust him as the backup, although hopefully the backup never has to play.

    Josh Portis for clipboard holder!
    Talkin Seahawks All Day, All Night @ my blog Seafense! http://seafense.blogspot.com/
    User avatar
    NYCoug
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1417
    Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:45 pm


  • This is all well and good, but I hope that these workouts and the Portis signing aren't indicating that Seattle has no interest in EJ Manuel or Matt Scott. I really want one of those two guys in the draft.

    Probably, it's just Schneider doing his due diligence on these guys.
    "If given the opportunity without fear of incarceration, I would honestly beat the living **** out of Jerry Rice."

    --Internet tough guy HawkWow being a MAN on the internet
    User avatar
    Smelly McUgly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3754
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:30 pm
    Location: God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwest


  • Of that group i'd go: 1. Thigpen 2. Seneca 3. Brady 4. Leinart
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18609
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • Smelly McUgly wrote:This is all well and good, but I hope that these workouts and the Portis signing aren't indicating that Seattle has no interest in EJ Manuel or Matt Scott. I really want one of those two guys in the draft.

    Probably, it's just Schneider doing his due diligence on these guys.

    I figure it's this.

    However, under the rules of ComPete, they might just be setting up a QB competition. :twisted:

    J/K, really. Backup QB is important, but not critical IMHO. Probably any of those guys would suffice.
    Talent can get you to the playoffs.
    It takes character to win when you get there.

    SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
    User avatar
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 10239
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


  • I would go first with the one that could best help RW in the film room breaking down other teams defenses. From there it would then be which could manage the game best in a run-oriented offense since none of those guys should be pass first options.

    I'm not sure who I would pick, but those would be my parameters.
    Last edited by kf3339 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1401
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


  • Out of that list I'd say Thigpen or Seneca. With that said, I'm more concerned about getting a quality nickle corner and getting a decent kicker than I am about backup QB. I'd be perfectly fine using a 5th round pick on a backup QB and let him and Portis compete.
    NorthwestSportsFan
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 193
    Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 8:35 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • Every available QB will get a look or at least be linked to Seattle who may then just draft a guy. It's all good and not unexpected as JS keeps the talking heads talking, while rolling over all the rocks.
    Until we develop a pass rush that will cause opposing teams to be forced to scheme to defend it we will never be able to completely take the final step. That was done and the final step was taken.

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions at last after 38 seasons.

    What a special magical year!
    jammerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1890
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:13 pm


  • Report: Seahawks to throw crap against the wall and see what sticks.
    I am Godzilla, you are Japan!
    User avatar
    Recon_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2096
    Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:01 pm
    Location: Vancouver, Wa


  • Coug_Hawk08 wrote:Being able to take a knee, also important.



    Winner.
    Image

    Les "The Radish" Norton - Ambassador/Grandfather of .NET, gone too soon but will never be forgotten. RIP
    User avatar
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 8192
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:58 am
    Location: Just 6 miles from Richard Sherman!


  • No, no, no, and no.
    nategreat
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1344
    Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 11:36 am


  • jammerhawk wrote:Every available QB will get a look or at least be linked to Seattle who may then just draft a guy. It's all good and not unexpected as JS keeps the talking heads talking, while rolling over all the rocks.

    Why "may then?" Why not both?. We're talking wa-a-a-ay pre camp here. Starting camp with 4 QBs is hardly unheard of. In fact, I think it's common. We have two now. Sign a FA and draft a rook.

    :229031_shrug:
    Talent can get you to the playoffs.
    It takes character to win when you get there.

    SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
    User avatar
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 10239
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


  • I'd be OK with bringing Seneca back. I agree with NYCoug, he drove me nuts by running the ball out of bounds for a loss of yards. And let's not forget he has a learning disability of some sort. That said, he did a good job taking over for an injured Matt in 2008 I believe, and he is a great athlete. I wouldn't have a problem with him coming in as a backup the same way I wouldn't have a problem with T-Jack coming in as a backup.
    49ers webzone: Win or lose, i hope you injure Sherman. Like a serious career ending injury. I don't want him to get paid.
    49ers webzone: noise should not be the overwhelming reason a team is favored. they need to spray noise-damping foam onto the ceiling of that place.
    User avatar
    BlueTalon
    * NET Curmudgeon *
    * NET Curmudgeon *
     
    Posts: 7444
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:06 am
    Location: Eastern Washington


  • I wouldn't get excited about any of those. With a list like that I would expect to look like the Bears or Colts without their starting QB.

    Where did Cassel end up?
    Last edited by CALIHAWK1 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9294
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • Statistically, approximately 1/6 of NFL teams will have to rely on their backup QB at some point next season, an even smaller percentage for a lengthy stretch of the season. Unless you have a crystal ball and can 100% guarantee that we will not be part of that percentage, we should take the search for a backup QB seriously. With the roster we're sitting on, to NOT have a "backup plan" (pun intended) would be galactically unforgivable. Aliens would come down and crap on PC/JS.

    Is Portis ready to ditch the training wheels and play big-boy football? Has Wallace officially forgiven Wilson for being the QB he (Wallace) believed he could be coming out of Iowa St? Do any of us remember that Thigpen couldn't beat out Tavaris Jackson for a job in Minnesota under our current OC Darrell Bevell? Can Leinart stay out of a hot tub long enough to maintain the ruse that he still considers himself a football player?

    Wallace is the only one of interest to me, with the stipulation that perhaps our coaching staff would actually curtail an offense to Wallace's strengths and abilities, meaning we'd see something different than Wallace's starting opportunities in 2008 & 2009, where frankly, he was unimpressive.

    Holding a clipboard and taking a knee is the best case scenario. Worst case, we're sitting on a title contending roster and get caught with our pants down when the unexpected (yet predictable) occurs.

    ____________________________________________________________________________
    "When I became a man I put away childish things. Including the desire to be very grown up."
    ~C.S. Lewis
    User avatar
    HagFaithful
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 169
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:10 am


  • 1. Thigpen
    2. Quinn
    3. Leinart
    4. Wallace
    User avatar
    ErikG803
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 978
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:53 pm


  • All these people saying 'NO' to all of these guys...

    You do realise we're holding a backup QB work out don't you?

    One of these guys probably gets signed and wins the opportunity to compete with Portis and a rookie to be the backup during camp.

    We're not looking for a franchise quarterback here. We're looking for a guy who can pull off a cap & clipboard combo.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8067
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • BlueTalon wrote:I'd be OK with bringing Seneca back. I agree with NYCoug, he drove me nuts by running the ball out of bounds for a loss of yards. And let's not forget he has a learning disability of some sort. That said, he did a good job taking over for an injured Matt in 2008 I believe, and he is a great athlete. I wouldn't have a problem with him coming in as a backup the same way I wouldn't have a problem with T-Jack coming in as a backup.

    Wasn't it T-Jack in 2011 that ran out of bounds and losing a bunch of yards on a 4th down also?
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3645
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • Isn't Grossman available
    warden
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1953
    Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 2:31 pm


  • ErikG803 wrote:1. Thigpen
    2. Quinn
    3. Leinart
    4. Wallace


    After going to U-Tube and watching highlights of Wallace?
    1. Seneca Wallace
    2.thigpen
    3. Quinn



    4. Leinart
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3645
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • scutterhawk wrote:
    ErikG803 wrote:1. Thigpen
    2. Quinn
    3. Leinart
    4. Wallace


    After going to U-Tube and watching highlights of Wallace?
    1. Seneca Wallace
    2.thigpen
    3. Quinn



    4. Leinart


    Good call :th2thumbs: None of those guys can compete with Seneca when it comes to the read-option except for maybe Thigpen. But Wallace has a much better completion percentage and TD/INT ratio. I would prefer Seneca as you can also put him in the backfield ala Percy Harvin, albeit a bit slower and less elusive, it would still make defenses think. "Is DangeRuss going to run it, throw it, hand it off, what about when Seneca gets it, will he run it, throw it back to Russell, or maybe short toss to BeastMode? Who the hell knows? :waah:
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8723
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • I'd rather draft a young prospect, God forbid something happen but a rookie did ok last year. Seneca does not excite me, 34 years old and never proven he can be a starter. If he could have been he would have.
    Last edited by garrylt4 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    garrylt4
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 115
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 6:19 pm


  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:All these people saying 'NO' to all of these guys...

    You do realise we're holding a backup QB work out don't you?

    One of these guys probably gets signed and wins the opportunity to compete with Portis and a rookie to be the backup during camp.

    We're not looking for a franchise quarterback here. We're looking for a guy who can pull off a cap & clipboard combo.


    Curtis Painter was supposed to hold a clipboard and then Peyton got hurt and Polian got fired.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9294
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • garrylt4 wrote:I'd rather draft a young prospect, God forbid something happen but a rookie did ok last year. Seneca does not excite me, 34 years old and never proven he can be a starter. If he could have he would have.


    He's 32, and we're not looking for a starter.

    People who say they're not "excited" about any of these guys are being ridiculous. Who gets excited about backup QB signings? Fans of bad teams with lousy starters... that's who. We aren't in that position if you haven't noticed.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3928
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • garrylt4 wrote:I'd rather draft a young prospect, God forbid something happen but a rookie did ok last year. Seneca does not excite me, 34 years old and never proven he can be a starter. If he could have been he would have.


    That would be great but this is not the year of the QB via the draft. But I'm sure Pete will do all of the above, there is a reason he is bringing these guys in it is most likely that the odds of finding our best back up will not favor a QB from the 2013 draft. But rest assured, we will draft a prospect, and he will have every shot at becoming the 2nd in charge.

    edit: The argument here is not rookie vs veteran but rather which of these veterans would you prefer?
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8723
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • sutz wrote:
    jammerhawk wrote:Every available QB will get a look or at least be linked to Seattle who may then just draft a guy. It's all good and not unexpected as JS keeps the talking heads talking, while rolling over all the rocks.

    Why "may then?" Why not both?. We're talking wa-a-a-ay pre camp here. Starting camp with 4 QBs is hardly unheard of. In fact, I think it's common. We have two now. Sign a FA and draft a rook.

    :229031_shrug:


    Bingo.
    "The life you lose may be your own" - Drunk dude at the bar
    User avatar
    loafoftatupu
    I'M JIMMY!
     
    Posts: 5886
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Auburn, WA


  • I don't think we are just adding a vet. I am sure the #3 will be a young draftee , FE or maybe even Portis

    I would lean towards Wallace myself. He moves well has a good arm and we even hade him play a bit as a wide.
    User avatar
    Happypuppy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1890
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm


  • Then its thigpen. Still no thanks to Seneca even at 32
    User avatar
    garrylt4
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 115
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 6:19 pm


  • All of these players suck so i really don't care.
    User avatar
    General Manager
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2260
    Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:04 pm


  • None of the above please.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image

    Proud member of the 38 club
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11848
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    theENGLISHseahawk wrote:All these people saying 'NO' to all of these guys...

    You do realise we're holding a backup QB work out don't you?

    One of these guys probably gets signed and wins the opportunity to compete with Portis and a rookie to be the backup during camp.

    We're not looking for a franchise quarterback here. We're looking for a guy who can pull off a cap & clipboard combo.


    Curtis Painter was supposed to hold a clipboard and then Peyton got hurt and Polian got fired.



    Is Russell Wilson a 36-year-old with a bad neck?

    It's a redundant comparison. I could just as easily point at Graham Harrell and say... "Oh look, Green Bay didn't need him."

    People need to stop getting their panties in a twist about the backup role.

    hawksfansinceday1 wrote:None of the above please.


    What would you propose then?

    Not even have a veteran backup competing in camp? Because this is what's available.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8067
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • scutterhawk wrote:
    BlueTalon wrote:I'd be OK with bringing Seneca back. I agree with NYCoug, he drove me nuts by running the ball out of bounds for a loss of yards. And let's not forget he has a learning disability of some sort. That said, he did a good job taking over for an injured Matt in 2008 I believe, and he is a great athlete. I wouldn't have a problem with him coming in as a backup the same way I wouldn't have a problem with T-Jack coming in as a backup.

    Wasn't it T-Jack in 2011 that ran out of bounds and losing a bunch of yards on a 4th down also?


    He didn't run out of bounds, he threw it out of bounds on the last play of the game down less than a TD, when at the very least he could of chucked it to the end zone for a slim chance at a victory. I'm SO glad those days are behind us...
    User avatar
    PlinytheCenter
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2845
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:47 pm
    Location: In Bruges


  • You guys realize that a "great" backup doesn't usually stay on the team for that long, right? If a backup excels at his job, then eventually another team will want him and then we begin the cycle again.
    Image
    "I'm not the type to let a sleeping giant lie. I wake up the giant, slap him around, make him mad and beat him to the ground. I talk a big game because I carry a big stick." --- All-Pro Stanford Graduate
    User avatar
    Hawken-Dazs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 600
    Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 5:50 pm


  • garrylt4 wrote:I'd rather draft a young prospect, God forbid something happen but a rookie did ok last year. Seneca does not excite me, 34 years old and never proven he can be a starter. If he could have been he would have.

    Well hell, if we're just throwing numbers out there willy-nilly, then why not say Seneca's 54 years old, and was only good enough to be a backup in a non-fitting WCO.
    Truth is, he is a gamer, who keeps his wheels oiled up (stays in shape), he isn't all beat up, (at age 32) doesn't have the WCO down pat, and never did, THAT is the reason that he wasn't ever considered for being the "Starter".
    Wallace does have the tendency to play with a style that better matches the system that RW is playing.
    Too bad that the NFL came up with a system about 6 years too late for Wallace's skillset.
    No, he's not as fast anymore, but he vying for the Seahawks QB BACKUP position.
    All this teeter-tottering over this issue will be ironed out by Bevel, Schneider, and Carroll, and I'm sure they are considering all their candidates, and will make the right choices, and whoever gets the nod, will still have to "Compete"
    Even if they sign one of these guys, I think they just MIGHT be looking to draft a QB also.
    PS. Seneca still throws an accurate ball, has a nice touch on his passes, and is a great route runner with good hands, and if he can still jump like he did while with the Seahawks? well, let's just say that with all the variables that he brings, that Pete won't overlook what he can mean for trick plays either.
    Last edited by scutterhawk on Sun Apr 07, 2013 2:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3645
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    theENGLISHseahawk wrote:All these people saying 'NO' to all of these guys...

    You do realise we're holding a backup QB work out don't you?

    One of these guys probably gets signed and wins the opportunity to compete with Portis and a rookie to be the backup during camp.

    We're not looking for a franchise quarterback here. We're looking for a guy who can pull off a cap & clipboard combo.


    Curtis Painter was supposed to hold a clipboard and then Peyton got hurt and Polian got fired.



    Is Russell Wilson a 36-year-old with a bad neck?

    It's a redundant comparison. I could just as easily point at Graham Harrell and say... "Oh look, Green Bay didn't need him."

    People need to stop getting their panties in a twist about the backup role.

    hawksfansinceday1 wrote:None of the above please.


    What would you propose then?

    Not even have a veteran backup competing in camp? Because this is what's available.



    Is Jay Cutler?
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9294
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
    CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    theENGLISHseahawk wrote:All these people saying 'NO' to all of these guys...

    You do realise we're holding a backup QB work out don't you?

    One of these guys probably gets signed and wins the opportunity to compete with Portis and a rookie to be the backup during camp.

    We're not looking for a franchise quarterback here. We're looking for a guy who can pull off a cap & clipboard combo.


    Curtis Painter was supposed to hold a clipboard and then Peyton got hurt and Polian got fired.



    Is Russell Wilson a 36-year-old with a bad neck?

    It's a redundant comparison. I could just as easily point at Graham Harrell and say... "Oh look, Green Bay didn't need him."

    People need to stop getting their panties in a twist about the backup role.

    hawksfansinceday1 wrote:None of the above please.


    What would you propose then?

    Not even have a veteran backup competing in camp? Because this is what's available.

    Jason Campbell, but sadly it's too late for that. Colt McCoy is better than any of those guys too IMO. But again, too late (and it bugs me that the Whiners beat us to him). I also proposed Matt Moore before Miami re-signed him. In fact he was my first choice. I get that this is the backup we're discussing and if Russ stays healthy it's irrelevant but I would like to have seen a more proactive approach to trading Flynn and getting a better option for the backup in sooner. Since that didn't happen, at this point I am more interested in a rookie that's ready for the role than these other guys. If I absolutely MUST choose from that list, it would be Thigpen.
    Last edited by hawksfansinceday1 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 4:05 pm, edited 3 times in total.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image

    Proud member of the 38 club
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11848
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • I would gladly take T-Jack over any of these clowns. Too bad he isn't available right now.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9294
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • No matter who Seattle picks at backup, nobody's going to be able to get anywhere near mitigating Russell Wilson's importance to this offense. If he goes down, we're hosed, to a much greater degree than most teams. The backup QB will simply be the guy who hands off to Lynch while it happens, so frankly this isn't worth getting worried about for me.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11325
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • CALIHAWK1 wrote:I would gladly take T-Jack over any of these clowns. Too bad he isn't available right now.

    T-Jack wasn't even in consideration, and for a good reason.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3645
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • Smelly McUgly wrote:This is all well and good, but I hope that these workouts and the Portis signing aren't indicating that Seattle has no interest in EJ Manuel or Matt Scott. I really want one of those two guys in the draft.

    Probably, it's just Schneider doing his due diligence on these guys.


    No, I'd say that there is a high likelihood that one of those 4 IS going to be Wilson's back-up this year. That's not to say that Seattle isn't going to draft E.J. Manuel or Matt Scott either. I believe they are and that once Flynn was traded that finding a quarterback with a similar skillset to Wilson just shot up to #1 on the draft priority list. It's just that you really, honestly and truly don't want a rookie as your back-up for this Seahawks team this year.

    In general, Rookie QB's who are drafted out of the top 10 picks of the 1st Round simply aren't ready to step in and lead an NFL team. They just aren't. Their heads are usually swimming due to the complexities of the offense they are still learning ... getting used to the speed of the NFL ... learning what to do (and what not to) in certain situations, etc. What we saw out of Russell Wilson last season speaks to just how special of a player he truly is. Guys drafted outside of the top 10 in the 1st Round (in general) just don't step in and do what Russell did. Joe Montana (drafted in the 3rd Round in 1980), Brett Favre (drafted in the 2nd Round in 1991), and even Tom Brady (drafted in the 6th Round in 2000) -- NONE of those guys started in their rookie year. Generally, rookie QB's just aren't ready until 2 or 3 years down the road.

    When you're looking for a back-up QB ... I'd say that ideally you're looking for a guy who can keep the ship together and moving in the right direction in case the unthinkable happens ... and your starting QB goes down for an extended period of time (say 4 to 6 games). If I'm the Seahawks, I just don't see anyone in this year's rookie class who I can say definitively, "Yep. He can be the man" in case Wilson goes down. And I'd say that a lot of teams certainly have that opinion, as we've seen how they've been scrounging for whatever viable back-up options they can find.

    Personally, I'm thinking that Manuel and Scott are the two the Hawks are targeting ... and if Scott is still there in the 3rd Round when the Hawks select that he will be the choice there (the most likely scenario IMO). I'm looking at the re-signing of Portis as competition for the 3rd QB spot for whomever the Hawks end up with in this year's draft. Just my take.
    User avatar
    Hawkscanner
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 981
    Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 7:28 am


  • scutterhawk wrote:
    CALIHAWK1 wrote:I would gladly take T-Jack over any of these clowns. Too bad he isn't available right now.

    T-Jack wasn't even in consideration, and for a good reason.



    You are blinded by unjust biased. Look at the records of those in consideration compared to T-Jack. Then ask teammates what they think.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9294
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • Seneca Wallace was woefully mis-cast in Holmgren's more pure version of the WCO. He's actually more suited to our current offense IMHO. Mobile, strong armed, he has the physical tools. Mentally, well, that's why he'll be competing for the backup slot if he is signed.

    Hey, it's not that we don't take this search seriously, it's that it's nice to actually not be worried about who starts next year.

    Funny, after all those seasons with people complaining about QB threads, here we have another one, about the #2-3 slots. :laugh:
    Talent can get you to the playoffs.
    It takes character to win when you get there.

    SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
    User avatar
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 10239
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


  • The 3 Stooges. Oop's (4)
    Image

    R.I.P. Brother Les
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24265
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Freddy's favorite song?....Dream On


  • CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:
    CALIHAWK1 wrote:I would gladly take T-Jack over any of these clowns. Too bad he isn't available right now.

    T-Jack wasn't even in consideration, and for a good reason.



    You are blinded by unjust biased. Look at the records of those in consideration compared to T-Jack. Then ask teammates what they think.



    Unjust Biased would also be ignoring that Jackson was on two playoff caliber teams that were capable of winning games in spite of QB play. It is unfair and biased to only want to compare the win/loss record. Farve at an advanced age made pretty much the same Vikings team one of (if not the) best teams in football. Wilson as a rookie did pretty much the same. Based on that you could also ask how many games did Jackson cost the Vikings and Seahawks.

    It's not just about win/loss totals unless your going to count the should haves also.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3026
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


  • I'm not crazy about a guy that has lost his job to Jackson in both Minnesota and Buffalo.

    Leinart I think is a waste but Carroll did make him look pretty good once before.

    Wallace I think might be the best overall with obvious limitations but I am actually a little intrigued with the Quinn idea. He is still young enough that he could potentially be developed and with Wilson as a mentor and setting the example of what a real NFL QB looks like, if he was in our system which IMO is very QB freindly, there is a chance we could get him some respect and work him into a trade scenario. I haven't watched anough of his games to know how good or bad he really is but he has been in some pretty bad situations while trying to learn. If he is not shell shocked beyond repair I could see us maybe doing what we did with Jackson and getting some value out of him later. If they can do it with Jackson then anything is possible.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3026
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


  • Hawkscanner wrote:
    Personally, I'm thinking that Manuel and Scott are the two the Hawks are targeting ... and if Scott is still there in the 3rd Round when the Hawks select that he will be the choice there (the most likely scenario IMO). I'm looking at the re-signing of Portis as competition for the 3rd QB spot for whomever the Hawks end up with in this year's draft. Just my take.


    Good take on this whole thing. I would be inclined to agree with you except that Portis got a two-year deal. I don't know how it's structured, to be sure, but that indicates that the Seahawks have plans for him to at least some degree. If so, there is only one spot left on this team at QB. I would prefer rolling with Manuel or Scott over any of the guys listed in the subject line of this thread. Heck, Washington got Kirk Cousins coached up enough to do fine taking over for RGIII in limited duty.

    Of course, this is all conjecture pending the next few weeks, but I am desperate to talk Seahawk football and so this is my theory on the freaking QB2 position. :lol:
    "If given the opportunity without fear of incarceration, I would honestly beat the living **** out of Jerry Rice."

    --Internet tough guy HawkWow being a MAN on the internet
    User avatar
    Smelly McUgly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3754
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:30 pm
    Location: God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwest


  • Smelly McUgly wrote:Good take on this whole thing. I would be inclined to agree with you except that Portis got a two-year deal. I don't know how it's structured, to be sure, but that indicates that the Seahawks have plans for him to at least some degree. If so, there is only one spot left on this team at QB.


    A lot of camp fodder guys get two or three year deals. Doesn't mean much in the NFL where the non-guaranteed contracts are simply torn up if the player is cut. I don't think the length means anything for Portis one way or the other. He'll still have to compete for a roster spot.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3928
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • RichNhansom wrote:
    CALIHAWK1 wrote:
    scutterhawk wrote:[quote="CALIHAWK1"]I would gladly take T-Jack over any of these clowns. Too bad he isn't available right now.

    T-Jack wasn't even in consideration, and for a good reason.



    You are blinded by unjust biased. Look at the records of those in consideration compared to T-Jack. Then ask teammates what they think.



    Unjust Biased would also be ignoring that Jackson was on two playoff caliber teams that were capable of winning games in spite of QB play. It is unfair and biased to only want to compare the win/loss record. Farve at an advanced age made pretty much the same Vikings team one of (if not the) best teams in football. Wilson as a rookie did pretty much the same. Based on that you could also ask how many games did Jackson cost the Vikings and Seahawks.

    It's not just about win/loss totals unless your going to count the should haves also.[/quote]

    I won't take to this argument as we won't change each others opinions. Wallace, Lienart, Quinn and Thigpen are not Jacksons caliber but if you want to ignore the obvious that's on you.
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9294
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • CALIHAWK1 wrote:I won't take to this argument as we won't change each others opinions. Wallace, Lienart, Quinn and Thigpen are not Jacksons caliber but if you want to ignore the obvious that's on you.


    I don't really have anything against TJack, but he and Thigpen were on the same team last year and Thigpen was higher on the depth chart. That being said, I'd also probably rather have Jackson, but I just found the notion of "Jackson caliber" kind of funny. He was a third stringer last year and will likely be third string next year.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3928
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


Next


It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:26 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information