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
  • 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: 987
    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: 9343
    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: 10391
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


  • The 3 Stooges. Oop's (4)
    The new Santa Clara stadium name?..........Dungaree Dump
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 25054
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Yes, that is a Bacon Wrapped Turkey


  • 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: 3027
    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: 3027
    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: 4081
    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: 9343
    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: 4081
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • DavidSeven wrote:
    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.



    It is what it is. I didn't say Super Bowl caliber. I said Jackson caliber. Quinn, Lienart and Wallace arent that. You point out that that Thigpen was higher on t he depth chart last year yet the coach that made that decision was fired, Jackson was resigned and Thigpen was let go, so what does that really mean?
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9343
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • Smelly McUgly wrote: If so, there is only one spot left on this team at QB.

    Come September, yes. Now? Not so fast. Russ, one-of-the-above FA, Portis, and draftee enter camp. Three men (maybe only two) come out with a job. You can't argue now using September-post final cutdown-logic.

    Many teams go into camp with 4 QB.
    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: 10391
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Monroe, WA


  • I think Wallace is a definite upgrade to Jackson, He played ok when asked to fill in, pretty close to around 500 for us and that was with a far inferior team to what Jackson had last year. He's no starter but in a simple system with good weapons surrounding him and a stingy defense I think he would do decent if needed.

    If you weren't around when Wallace was here you should o watch his highlights. He's got some skills just not the workaholic student of the game like Wilson.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3027
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


  • 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.

    Oh hell no,,,, Jackson couldn't beat out Flynn last Year, and Portis has already been re-signed, +, the Seahawks are bringing in a bunch of QB's for tryouts for RW's back-up.
    IF, T-Jack were all that, they'd have kept him last Year, and let Portis walk.
    Just because I don't prefer Jackson over those others, doesn't mean that I don't admire his toughness, and desire to fight through adversities.
    I just don't believe that he's a TD machine, and he took way too long to decide when to get rid of the ball, so long in fact, that he was sacked way more than he should have been.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3786
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • scutterhawk 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.

    Oh hell no,,,, Jackson couldn't beat out Flynn last Year, and Portis has already been re-signed, +, the Seahawks are bringing in a bunch of QB's for tryouts for RW's back-up.
    IF, T-Jack were all that, they'd have kept him last Year, and let Portis walk.
    Just because I don't prefer Jackson over those others, doesn't mean that I don't admire his toughness, and desire to fight through adversities.
    I just don't believe that he's a TD machine, and he took way too long to decide when to get rid of the ball, so long in fact, that he was sacked way more than he should have been.[/quote]


    So who of the 4 named back ups mentioned would you take over Jackson?
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9343
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • scutterhawk wrote:Oh hell no,,,, Jackson couldn't beat out Flynn last Year, and Portis has already been re-signed, +, the Seahawks are bringing in a bunch of QB's for tryouts for RW's back-up.
    IF, T-Jack were all that, they'd have kept him last Year, and let Portis walk.
    Just because I don't prefer Jackson over those others, doesn't mean that I don't admire his toughness, and desire to fight through adversities.
    I just don't believe that he's a TD machine, and he took way too long to decide when to get rid of the ball, so long in fact, that he was sacked way more than he should have been.

    They were not going to pay TJack his salary + Flynn's, especially with Russell proving himself so early on. Flynn's guaranteed money meant TJack was gone from the get go.
    User avatar
    pinksheets
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2836
    Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:47 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • if this is REALLY as big a deal as people are making it.
    lets trade up in the draft and get Geno, he'd be a good back up behind RW...
    *sarcasm off*
    NOW
    i know back up qb is important.
    But this offense....not too hard to get the ball to Harvin, Tate, or Rice, Dont feel like that? Give it to lynch...not confident to hand it off or throw deep, Mr. Miller will find his way to the ball around the middle or the sidelines.
    With this team, i think just a capable QB could keep them going.
    so i dont think there is necessarily as wrong choice.
    Find the most capable, make them be handcuffed to RW watching game film. and let them enjoy the ride.
    Shadyhawk182
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 352
    Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 12:57 am


  • Regardless who they swoop up, this team is screwed if Wilson goes down (if it's for the season) Hopefully they can get someone who can win a couple games if he goes out for a few weeks.
    60 percent of the time..........it works........every time
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3134
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Might get lucky with a
    n undrafted free agent? that's my pick. Then we can trade him to the Chiefs in three years when Andy Reid gets fired and they bring in a new staff.
    Image
    Cassius Marsh is my 2014 Adopt a Pro Bowl Rookie
    User avatar
    Atradees
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2583
    Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:22 pm
    Location: South of Heaven


  • Wallace is the best of the 4. Thigpen is the most interesting (which isn't saying much). Leinart has no drive, even Joey Harrington thinks Matt Leinart is a quitter who's too eager to be a career backup (I'm joking). But I think I'd rather have Leinart over Brady Quinn. Quinn was abysmal last season, and if not for an extreme fluke game against Carolina, he would have finished with numbers worse than Ryan Lindley, and Lindley was historically bad. Like Curtis Painter, Brady Quinn is the kind of backup you want if you are hoping for a #1 pick (which hey KC, mission accomplished!).
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11403
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • 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. 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:


    To the idea of going in to the season (a season as a serious Super Bowl contender) with a rookie as your back-up I'd say, "be careful what you wish for."

    Kirk Cousins saw all of 3 regular season games. He went ...

    5 for 9 passes ... 111 yards ... 1 TD ... 2 INT's ... against the Falcons (Lost 17-24)
    2 for 2 passes ... 26 yards ... 1 TD ... against the Ravens (Redskins Won 31-28 in OT)
    26 for 37 passes ... 329 yards ... 2 TD ... 1 INT ... against the Browns (Won 38-21)

    but against us (the Hawks) in the playoffs he went ...

    3 for 10 passes ... 31 yards ... 0 TD ... 0 INT's (Lost 14-24)

    In other words, his team went 1-2 in games he saw any real significant time in ... and really he's the exception to the rule. Rookie QB's (in general) tend to lose far more games than they win.

    I was going to say that a Russell Wilson comes along once every 20 years or so ... but that really and truly isn't accurate. In fact, it's more accurate to say that someone like him has never come along and did what he did ...

    Best Seasons by a Rookie QB All Time (Sorted by TD’s Thrown) [Final 2012 Stats]
    NameYearCompAttComp%YardsTD’sINT’sQB Rating
    1. Russell Wilson201225239364.1%3,1182610100.0
    1. Peyton Manning199832557556.7%3,739262871.2
    2. Cam Newton201131051760.0%4,051211784.5
    3. Andrew Luck201233962754.1%4,374231876.5
    4. Robert Griffin III 201224937566.4%3,100205104.1
    5. Dan Marino198317329658.4%2,21020696.0
    6. Andy Dalton201130051658.1%3,398201380.4
    7. Tom Brady2001*26441363.9%2,84318 1286.5
    8. Sam Bradford201035459060.0%3,512181576.5
    9. Ben Roethlisberger200419629566.4%2,621171198.1
    10. Matt Ryan200826543461.1%3,440161187.7
    11. Joe Montana1980*17627364.5%1,79515987.8
    12. Joe Flacco200825742860.0%2,971141280.3
    13. Brandon Weeden 201229751757.4%3,385141772.6
    14. Ryan Tannehill201228248458.3%3,294121376.1
    15. Warren Moon1984*25945057.6%3,338121476.9
    16. Rick Mirer199327448656.4%2,833121767.0
    17. Charlie Batch199817330357.1%2,17811683.5
    18. Troy Aikman198915529352.9%1,74991855.7
    19. John Elway198312325947.5%1,66371454.9


    *Montana started 1 game in 1979, so while he wasn’t technically a rookie, 1980 was his first season as a starter. Same thing goes for Tom Brady, as he started 1 game in 2000. Warren Moon technically was a rookie by NFL standards, but he had played 6 seasons in the CFL and powered the Edmonton Eskimos to 5 Grey Cup victories.

    Technically, the record books will have Russell Wilson and Peyton Manning tied for most TD's. However, check out his interception numbers and the number of attempts it took him to get to 26 TD's. Fairly impressive body of work there by Wilson. That table also highlights just how special of a rookie QB class this truly is ... and just how much of a passing league this has become.

    Sure it SOUNDS good the idea of bringing in E.J. Manuel or Matt Scott to be Wilson's back-up ... but the reality of it is that IF (and I know it's a Big IF) Wilson goes down for any length of time a rookie will lose far more of those starts than a veteran would. In general, if given 6 starts, a rookie QB (given this Seahawks offense) probably wins only 2 or 3 of those.

    A veteran QB on the other hand (like a Thigpen for example) ... probably wins 4 of those [to say nothing of playoff football games].

    No amigo, I'm totally comfortable with the idea of a Manuel or Scott as our 3rd QB (with an eye on them being the back-up in a year or 2). As the back-up though? I'm feeling a lot more queesy about that idea.


    BTW what David Seven said regarding Camp Fodder contracts is exactly correct. I know a lot of people are all a-twitter over TE David Fells for example. The reality of that is that he MIGHT make the practice squad this year.
    User avatar
    Hawkscanner
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 987
    Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 7:28 am


  • warden wrote:Isn't Grossman available


    That suggestion is gross, man.

    I'd like Wallace out of that group. He is a proven back up QB. I would love EJ Manuel in the Draft but chances are we would have to use a 3rd round pick on him. If he fell to the fourth I would snatch him up in a heart beat. If we don't add through the Draft then I hope whoever we add through FA gets beat out by a much improved Portis in camp/preseason.
    Image

    Anyone want to make me a new signature? I've held out hope long enough.
    95% of the time I'm viewing here and/or posting is being done on a mobile device. Pardon any spelling, punctuation, or grammar mistakes.
    User avatar
    The Yugoslavian
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 879
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 9:45 am
    Location: Bellevue, WA


  • Keep in mind that backup QB(s) also have the role of playing the opposing team's starter against OUR starting defense.

    You know, in between decorating their clipboard and modelling headwear for the Pro Shop.

    ____________________________________________________________________________
    "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


  • Think about it from this perspective: Percy Harvin is good at compensating for a so so quarterback and Golden Tate is starting to 'get it' when it comes to bailing out his QB. With the weapons at their disposal, I think Bevell could water down the offense and still have a good chance to win. If you thought our O was beastly last year, wait till this group starts to click.
    "I cannot believe this............ I am stunned right now. This is now a rebuilding year for us. Our offense is crap now"

    Blitzer88 regarding trading Percy to the Jets
    User avatar
    HawKnPeppa
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2784
    Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:01 pm


  • Wallace, Lienart, Quinn, and Thigpen walk into a bar, and the bartender says...
    Image
    User avatar
    SNDavidson
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1442
    Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:22 pm


  • Korean Robinson beat you guys by three hours?
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3027
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


  • Not sure what's up with all the seneca wallace hate.

    The guy did what he could with the team deteriorating around him when he was here before.

    He'd be near the top of my list.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2878
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • If they wanted to pay for one of these players why didn't they sign them instead of Portis. Most of those so called QB's are going to want over a million dollars a year and none of them are worth it. Pass on all of them.
    User avatar
    General Manager
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2260
    Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 11:04 pm


  • Pickup Wallace and draft a guy.

    Four into camp - Wilson, Wallace, Portis, and Rookie.

    Can at least one before opening day.

    Rookie is the 'extra' here - not really needed.
    User avatar
    ChiefHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:08 am
    Location: Auburn, WA


  • sutz wrote: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:


    I agree with this. Watching Wallace replace Hass in Holmgren's last season was painful, and not Wallace's fault. Holmgren was so stubborn that he tried to make Wallace play the WCO just like Hass instead of being flexible and playing to his strengths.
    Machine-wrapped, with butter?

    Yes, machine-wrapped, WITH BUTTER
    User avatar
    cdallan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 900
    Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:08 am
    Location: Scotland


  • The more I think about it, I'm coming around to the Wallace idea. Basing some of it on Kearly's review of Quinn. Wallace is not a world beater but I don't think any of the current choices are either so in that regard he is likely the best option and with this team surrounding him I think he could do pretty well if needed. Also Bevell I suspect would do a better job than Holmgren did in play calling to his strengths and Wilson would likely be a very good influence on him also and he would know his role as the back up and fit in comfortably. He is a good locker room guy also.
    The Lion has no interest in the opinion of the sheep.
    RichNhansom
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3027
    Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 7:26 am


  • Wallace is also visiting Oakland this weekend. Teams are still interseted, so I don't think he's necessarily washed up. If he's somewhere close to the same guy he was in Seattle, then this is a no-brainer. He always gave this team a shot when it needed him to come in. And those were much, much worse teams and a system that wasn't suited for him.

    But regardless, NFL teams usually bring four QBs into camp. Just because we bring a vet QB in to compete, it doesn't mean he's going to stick. Very high possibility that the FA QB ends up as QB3 (behind a rookie) or cut. Hopefully, folks won't have a meltdown when one of these four guys is inevitably signed.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4081
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • I think Wallace could do very well in our present offense scheme. I remember him doing very good throws outside of the pocket. I would take him over Lienart, Quinn or Thigpen.
    User avatar
    HawkEye
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 273
    Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:16 pm


  • They all stink. Why are they available?....Well, because they stink.

    Least stinky of those mentioned is Wallace. The rest are compost material.
    The new Santa Clara stadium name?..........Dungaree Dump
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 25054
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Yes, that is a Bacon Wrapped Turkey


  • Wallace/Thigpen are my first choice.

    Save us from Leinart or Quinn.
    hawk45
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 5485
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


  • Hmm.. I guess he won't be playing here this year

    @ProFootballTalk: Seneca Wallace to work out for the Raiders http://wp.me/p14QSB-88ot
    User avatar
    Happypuppy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1911
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm


  • Happypuppy wrote:Hmm.. I guess he won't be playing here this year

    @ProFootballTalk: Seneca Wallace to work out for the Raiders http://wp.me/p14QSB-88ot


    The visit with the Raiders was scheduled before the Seattle workout took place. Was reported last week. Don't really think it means he's been ruled out.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4081
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • I'm not sure how anyone can argue Kirk Cousins saw 'significant time' in the game versus Seattle in the playoffs.

    In fact I'd argue his contribution with just two passes against Baltimore was much more meaningful. Those two passes were vital. That game was over. He made two huge plays (TD score, then two point conversion) in the dying stages to take it to over time. Then a big kick return won it straight away in OT.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8171
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


  • Ed Werder‏@Edwerderespn10m
    Sounding like Seahawks were most impressed with Brady Quinn at yesterday's 4-QB tryout and will pursue signing to be Russell Wilson's backup
    User avatar
    cacksman
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 582
    Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:17 am


  • cacksman wrote:Ed Werder‏@Edwerderespn10m
    Sounding like Seahawks were most impressed with Brady Quinn at yesterday's 4-QB tryout and will pursue signing to be Russell Wilson's backup

    Oh God PLEASE no!!! IMO,the worst of the four. Please let this be false.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    ImageImage

    Proud member of the 38 club
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12809
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • cacksman wrote:Ed Werder‏@Edwerderespn10m
    Sounding like Seahawks were most impressed with Brady Quinn at yesterday's 4-QB tryout and will pursue signing to be Russell Wilson's backup


    Heard this as well from a different person, but same news. Signs currently pointing towards Quinn.

    It's just a backup position and he does have NFL experience, so at least we wouldn't be sitting with a rookie back there or someone with no NFL game experience like Portis.

    I don't think I'd really mind this if it comes to fruition....Wilson starting with Quinn backing him up and Portis as the 3rd string
    Image

    :les: Check your PM's....We miss you :les:
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 14651
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • If he can still complete a handoff and a swing pass, he'll be fine.

    Honestly, I always felt Quinn was a better option than Colt McCoy. I trust whatever decision PC/JS make based on the workout. They're doing the right due diligence.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4081
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


Seahawks to sign Quinn today
Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:51 am
  • 12th Man Rising
    Apr 9th, 2013 at 12:35 pm by Keith Myers
    http://12thmanrising.com/2013/04/09/sea ... dium=email

    "It seems the Seahawks have made a decision following yesterday’s 4 QB tryout. USA Today’s Mike Garafolo is reporting that Brady Quinn will be signed to backup Russell Wilson."
    Last edited by Hawknight on Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
    Image
    Beer, Football, Family=A wonderful life.
    Hawknight
    * Class Act Hawk Fan *
     
    Posts: 990
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:38 pm
    Location: Hayward, California


Re: Seahawks to sign Quinn today
Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:55 am
  • Huh. Out of those 4 QB's who were supposed to work out with us, he's probably the guy I wanted least. Oh well, just a backup.
    Tru2RedNGold25 wrote:Us as Niners fan have every right to rep Niners all day everyday when we have the hardware to back it up do can u guys say that???


    2013 Adopt-a-rookie: #humblethug
    2014 Adopt-a-rookie: Kevin Norwood
    User avatar
    razgriz737
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1820
    Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:12 pm
    Location: Spokane/Seattle


Re: Seahawks to sign Quinn today
Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:56 am
  • If he can still complete a handoff and a swing pass, he'll be fine.

    Honestly, I always felt Quinn was a better option than Colt McCoy. I trust whatever decision PC/JS make based on the workout. They're doing the right due diligence.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4081
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


  • hawksfansinceday1 wrote:
    cacksman wrote:Ed Werder‏@Edwerderespn10m
    Sounding like Seahawks were most impressed with Brady Quinn at yesterday's 4-QB tryout and will pursue signing to be Russell Wilson's backup

    Oh God PLEASE no!!! IMO,the worst of the four. Please let this be false.


    Man, it's a backup position. And when you're talking about that particular group, is there really a lot of difference between the "best of the four" and the "worst of the four"?

    Given that none of them really have any career worth highlighting, why not make the judgment based on what they actually put in front of our coaching staff during the workout?

    Now, I'll admit that I don't really care about Quinn one way or another, but I will say that it would be interesting to see how he might respond with a team that had some talent. He's been with Cleveland, KC, and Denver. None of those are really teams known for roster building and talent with the possible exception of Denver, and Quinn never saw the field there. And honestly, that's what I would expect from him in Seattle... never seeing the field.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8325
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Seahawks to sign Quinn today
Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:00 pm
  • Somebody needs to carry Russell's bags and go to Home Depot to restock his collection of sticky notes. Quinn is just as qualified as any other.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18701
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


Re: Seahawks to sign Quinn today
Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:00 pm
  • ahh I hate cry baby quinn , hopefully his softness doesn't rub off on anyone.
    EastCoastHawksFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 893
    Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 7:15 pm


Re: Seahawks to sign Quinn today
Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:01 pm
  • I used to be absurdly high on Brady Quinn. I still think he could have been something special had be been drafted by almost anyone else.

    That being said, he hasn't done much in his career to show that the lofty expectations I had for him were warranted. Hopefully, our coaching staff can turn that light on in him.
    Last edited by Rat on Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 3592
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:42 pm
    Location: St. Louis, MO


Re: Seahawks to sign Quinn today
Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:02 pm
  • Definitely not the Mighty Quinn, more like the MEEK Quinn.
    The new Santa Clara stadium name?..........Dungaree Dump
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 25054
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Yes, that is a Bacon Wrapped Turkey


Next


It is currently Wed Nov 26, 2014 2:12 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online