Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization

A collection of NET's best and most memorable threads. Predictions, debates, laughs, and X's & O's. Rating: PG to NC-17
  • If the Seahawks did get a third in return then that totally changes my opinion on the trade. Wait and see I guess till everything is final...
    Image Image
    User avatar
    AF_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2134
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
    Location: Marysville, WA


  • warner28 wrote:sure he was tendered with a 3rd rounder, does not mean SD wouldn't have matched an offer that gave them a 3rd only.


    This is the key - had SD matched, and there's no saying they wouldn't - we'd have squat right now. At least our FO got the guy they wanted.

    As the details are firmed up on the deal, still having a 2nd this year and still having a 3rd next year isn't too shabby for getting the guy the organization showed the most interest in. Had SD matched the offer, we would have been in a much more uncomfortable position come draft day.
    Last edited by nsport on Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Image
    User avatar
    nsport
    * NET Sports Handicapper *
     
    Posts: 1470
    Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:13 am


  • ludakrishna wrote:Per the ESPN Ticker. This is what we gave up.

    Seattle - 2010 2nd round pick AND 2011 3rd

    for

    San Diego - 2010 2nd round pick, 2010 3rd round pick, Charlie Whitehurst

    This doesn't seem all that bad.


    If that is true I change my opinion and say it was a decent trade, not great, but not bad either.
    User avatar
    razor150
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1854
    Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:22 am


  • I'm watching ESPNews right now, but not seeing anything on the bottomline about this trade either way.

    Really hoping that report about getting back a 2010 3rd is accurate, but that one report is all I'm hearing that from at this time. Anyone know what pick that would be in the 3rd this year?
    User avatar
    Joshoeuh
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 145
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:53 pm
    Location: Pikeville, KY


  • why do we want this guy? hes barely taken any regular season snaps at all if any
    Image
    User avatar
    Minne
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1118
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 2:30 pm
    Location: Camano Island


  • ha....its amazing what happens when you go for a beer on st, patties day.
    Last edited by Largent80 on Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    The new Santa Clara stadium name?..........Dungaree Dump
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 25083
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Good Boy !!!!!!!


  • Is that beer "rave green"?
    Image
    User avatar
    nsport
    * NET Sports Handicapper *
     
    Posts: 1470
    Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:13 am


  • Largent80 wrote:ha....its amazing what happens when you go for a beer on st, patties day.


    Its green, but Rave green?.....maybe
    Last edited by Largent80 on Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    The new Santa Clara stadium name?..........Dungaree Dump
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 25083
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Good Boy !!!!!!!


  • Well now on ESPN News side bar (not seeing anything on the scroller) it says we swapped 2nd rounders and WE get the Chargers 2011 3rd rounder...so basically I don't think they know what's really going on. I really hope we get their 3rd rounder this year though. It would make this a bit more palatable.
    Zeppe
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 12
    Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 2:37 pm


  • my bar today was putting food coloring in beer. lol
    Image
    User avatar
    Minne
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1118
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 2:30 pm
    Location: Camano Island


  • Zeppe wrote:Well now on ESPN News side bar (not seeing anything on the scroller) it says we swapped 2nd rounders and WE get the Chargers 2011 3rd rounder...so basically I don't think they know what's really going on. I really hope we get their 3rd rounder this year though. It would make this a bit more palatable.



    Even if we get their 3rd this year, it's a high price to pay for a guy who hasn't thrown a pass in the NFL let alone a 3rd string QB. Carroll is either a genius or moron -- I guess we'll only know this time next year.
    Northhawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 216
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:34 am


  • 49thHawk wrote:
    Zeppe wrote:Well now on ESPN News side bar (not seeing anything on the scroller) it says we swapped 2nd rounders and WE get the Chargers 2011 3rd rounder...so basically I don't think they know what's really going on. I really hope we get their 3rd rounder this year though. It would make this a bit more palatable.



    Even if we get their 3rd this year, it's a high price to pay for a guy who hasn't thrown a pass in the NFL let alone a 3rd string QB. Carroll is either a genius or moron -- I guess we'll only know this time next year.


    I'll take that deal over the originally announced one ANYDAY! I really hope the Seahawks got a third in return, especially if they didn't give up their third from next year...
    Image Image
    User avatar
    AF_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2134
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
    Location: Marysville, WA


  • Chapow wrote:Hey PC/JS, you're doing it wrong! Make trades then smoke crack!!

    :pukeface: :pukeface: :pukeface:


    If we get a 2010 3rd round pick out of this deal then I retract 2 of the 3 pukeface emoticons.
    Marshawn Lynch wrote:yeah
    User avatar
    Chapow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1319
    Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:38 pm


  • 49thHawk wrote:
    Zeppe wrote:Well now on ESPN News side bar (not seeing anything on the scroller) it says we swapped 2nd rounders and WE get the Chargers 2011 3rd rounder...so basically I don't think they know what's really going on. I really hope we get their 3rd rounder this year though. It would make this a bit more palatable.



    Even if we get their 3rd this year, it's a high price to pay for a guy who hasn't thrown a pass in the NFL let alone a 3rd string QB. Carroll is either a genius or moron -- I guess we'll only know this time next year.


    You know what's an even higher price to pay? A high first rounder and a $70 million contract. :mrgreen:
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8329
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    49thHawk wrote:
    Zeppe wrote:Well now on ESPN News side bar (not seeing anything on the scroller) it says we swapped 2nd rounders and WE get the Chargers 2011 3rd rounder...so basically I don't think they know what's really going on. I really hope we get their 3rd rounder this year though. It would make this a bit more palatable.



    Even if we get their 3rd this year, it's a high price to pay for a guy who hasn't thrown a pass in the NFL let alone a 3rd string QB. Carroll is either a genius or moron -- I guess we'll only know this time next year.


    You know what's an even higher price to pay? A high first rounder and a $70 million contract. :mrgreen:


    Absolutely! you guys think we paid alot for Curry, how about a QB taken 2 picks earlier in the draft a year later.
    User avatar
    DrinkinTheLimerade
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 105
    Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:52 am
    Location: Seattle


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    49thHawk wrote:
    Zeppe wrote:Well now on ESPN News side bar (not seeing anything on the scroller) it says we swapped 2nd rounders and WE get the Chargers 2011 3rd rounder...so basically I don't think they know what's really going on. I really hope we get their 3rd rounder this year though. It would make this a bit more palatable.



    Even if we get their 3rd this year, it's a high price to pay for a guy who hasn't thrown a pass in the NFL let alone a 3rd string QB. Carroll is either a genius or moron -- I guess we'll only know this time next year.


    You know what's an even higher price to pay? A high first rounder and a $70 million contract. :mrgreen:

    This.
    User avatar
    LAMike1
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 178
    Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:22 am
    Location: Southern California


  • ludakrishna wrote:Per the ESPN Ticker. This is what we gave up.

    Seattle - 2010 2nd round pick AND 2011 3rd

    for

    San Diego - 2010 2nd round pick, 2010 3rd round pick, Charlie Whitehurst

    This doesn't seem all that bad.


    If we did get there third then that makes this deal a lot better. Please let it be true!
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 11266
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • I'm not buying into any of the 3rd round stuff until I see it. Nobody online is reporting this. Not often that the ESPN ticker scoops all the internet reporters.

    If it were to be the case, that definitely changes my thoughts on the trade. Still is a risky deal as Whitehurst is still entirely unproven. But it wouldn't be nearly as big a screw job trade.

    But like I said. I'll believe it when I see it. Already got my hopes up with that stupid Julius Jones rumor earlier today. Fool me once...
    User avatar
    SeaTown81
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 4648
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • Blitzer88 wrote:
    ludakrishna wrote:Per the ESPN Ticker. This is what we gave up.

    Seattle - 2010 2nd round pick AND 2011 3rd

    for

    San Diego - 2010 2nd round pick, 2010 3rd round pick, Charlie Whitehurst

    This doesn't seem all that bad.


    If we did get there third then that makes this deal a lot better. Please let it be true!


    I don't buy this for a second. Remove Whitehurst, and that's still a trade that's pretty fair value.
    Remembering rookies will play like rookies, since 2012.
    User avatar
    JerHawk81
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1460
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:13 am
    Location: Portland, OR


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    49thHawk wrote:
    Zeppe wrote:Well now on ESPN News side bar (not seeing anything on the scroller) it says we swapped 2nd rounders and WE get the Chargers 2011 3rd rounder...so basically I don't think they know what's really going on. I really hope we get their 3rd rounder this year though. It would make this a bit more palatable.



    Even if we get their 3rd this year, it's a high price to pay for a guy who hasn't thrown a pass in the NFL let alone a 3rd string QB. Carroll is either a genius or moron -- I guess we'll only know this time next year.


    You know what's an even higher price to pay? A high first rounder and a $70 million contract. :mrgreen:


    Your right. We should just trade our 1st round picks away and go after some practice squad players -- they'll come cheap. Sorry not to be a jerk but just challenging the thinking that we shouldn't build the team through the draft.

    Also, the difference between Whitehurst and a draft pic is Whitehurst has been in the league for a few years and is still sitting at 3rd string and hasn't thrown as pass in the NFL. And we still paid a lot for him -- not 1st round dollars -- but still big bucks for a 3rd stringer.
    Northhawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 216
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:34 am


  • Just saw an insider report from John Clayton that states the Seahawks aren't impressed with the QB's in this draft. Don't have insider access but that was the title.
    Image Image
    User avatar
    AF_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2134
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
    Location: Marysville, WA


  • 49thHawk wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    You know what's an even higher price to pay? A high first rounder and a $70 million contract. :mrgreen:


    Your right. We should just trade our 1st round picks away and go after some practice squad players -- they'll come cheap. Sorry not to be a jerk but just challenging the thinking that we shouldn't build the team through the draft.

    Also, the difference between Whitehurst and a draft pic is Whitehurst has been in the league for a few years and is still sitting at 3rd string and hasn't thrown as pass in the NFL. And we still paid a lot for him -- not 1st round dollars -- but still big bucks for a 3rd stringer.


    At what point did I suggest we shouldn't build the team through the draft? If you need a QB, though, and the draft presents you with a load of crappy QB prospects, why not look elsewhere? And if we swing and miss on Whitehurst, then it's a hell of a lot cheaper to cut losses and move on afterward than it would be to have to lick the wounds we'd have gotten had we drafted Clausen and watched him turn into Rick Mirer.

    Whitehurst has been in the league for a few years, right. He's had the benefit of going through camps, learning from NFL coaches, including a guy known as a QB guru. Just because he's not ranked ahead of Rivers and Volek (who people here seem to criminally underrate as a way to dig at Whitehurst) doesn't mean there's no talent there.

    If you're concerned that we paid big bucks to a 3rd stringer, just wait around a bit. He'll be a starter soon enough. I don't get the philosophy that says it's okay, and even exciting, to blow massive tons of money on rookies because of what they did in college, yet turn around and blast spending smaller amounts on an NFL backup because he hasn't proven anything. Guess what? Neither has that college kid you want to give $40mil guaranteed to.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8329
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    If you're concerned that we paid big bucks to a 3rd stringer, just wait around a bit. He'll be a starter soon enough. I don't get the philosophy that says it's okay, and even exciting, to blow massive tons of money on rookies because of what they did in college, yet turn around and blast spending smaller amounts on an NFL backup because he hasn't proven anything. Guess what? Neither has that college kid you want to give $40mil guaranteed to.


    Freaking Spot on!
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9783
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • Right now we are the joke of the NFL!!! We gave up so much for a proven 3rd string guy. Flat out embarrassing! Please take the controls out of PC's hands...he has no clue what he is doing!

    I really hope I get to eat my words!
    Spokane
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 700
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:35 am


  • Spokane wrote:Right now we are the joke of the NFL!!! We gave up so much for a proven 3rd string guy. Flat out embarrassing! Please take the controls out of PC's hands...he has no clue what he is doing!

    I really hope I get to eat my words!


    THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!
    Image Image
    User avatar
    AF_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2134
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
    Location: Marysville, WA


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    49thHawk wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    You know what's an even higher price to pay? A high first rounder and a $70 million contract. :mrgreen:


    Your right. We should just trade our 1st round picks away and go after some practice squad players -- they'll come cheap. Sorry not to be a jerk but just challenging the thinking that we shouldn't build the team through the draft.

    Also, the difference between Whitehurst and a draft pic is Whitehurst has been in the league for a few years and is still sitting at 3rd string and hasn't thrown as pass in the NFL. And we still paid a lot for him -- not 1st round dollars -- but still big bucks for a 3rd stringer.


    At what point did I suggest we shouldn't build the team through the draft? If you need a QB, though, and the draft presents you with a load of crappy QB prospects, why not look elsewhere? And if we swing and miss on Whitehurst, then it's a hell of a lot cheaper to cut losses and move on afterward than it would be to have to lick the wounds we'd have gotten had we drafted Clausen and watched him turn into Rick Mirer.

    Whitehurst has been in the league for a few years, right. He's had the benefit of going through camps, learning from NFL coaches, including a guy known as a QB guru. Just because he's not ranked ahead of Rivers and Volek (who people here seem to criminally underrate as a way to dig at Whitehurst) doesn't mean there's no talent there.

    If you're concerned that we paid big bucks to a 3rd stringer, just wait around a bit. He'll be a starter soon enough. I don't get the philosophy that says it's okay, and even exciting, to blow massive tons of money on rookies because of what they did in college, yet turn around and blast spending smaller amounts on an NFL backup because he hasn't proven anything. Guess what? Neither has that college kid you want to give $40mil guaranteed to.


    I like how you say that Whitehurst will be a starter soon enough, then in the same breath say that Clausen might become Rick Mirer.

    Seems like you are a bit biased.

    I think Whitehurst will be a backup and nothing more. Clausen has the potential to be a starter.

    Personally, I'd rather gamble on Clausen.
    My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid.

    http://www.seahawknation.net
    User avatar
    prelag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Las Vegas, NV


  • What I like about this also is, Whitehurst is 3-4 years ahead of Teel, whom we know nothing about, but I think this helps Matt also as he knew he had no problems with Seneca. Lets hope Charlie push's Matt and Teel push's Charlie. It is possible that in a couple years we could have a dynamic couple of QB's.
    seedhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2594
    Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:51 am


  • We can suger coat this all day...its a bad move!
    Spokane
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 700
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:35 am


  • In the end I think I'll take this over selecting Clausen. I liked Clausen, but admit I'm intrigued by Whitehurst and can't wait tp see how he does here. Plus who knows if Clausen would have been there anyways.

    I also think you can now spend one pick on the line and one on defense. McCoy would be great.
    Last edited by cesame on Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
    cesame
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1669
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:36 pm


  • Spokane wrote:We can suger coat this all day...its a bad move!


    THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9783
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • No one knows anything, let it play out and then we can judge. On the surface (initial reports of no 3rd rounder for the Hawks) I don't like it either, but for all we know we just got the next Joe Montana. WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING YET!
    Image Image
    User avatar
    AF_Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2134
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
    Location: Marysville, WA


  • Spokane wrote:We can suger coat this all day...its a bad move!


    Agreed. I don't know how losing 20 spots in the 2nd round for a 3rd string QB is a good move. I don't care how people try to sugar coat it, Whitehurst is a 3rd string QB until proven otherwise.
    My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid.

    http://www.seahawknation.net
    User avatar
    prelag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Las Vegas, NV


  • thats the problem, we don't know anything yet - outside of we lost some major draft pick ground.
    Spokane
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 700
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:35 am


  • Spokane wrote:thats the problem, we don't know anything yet - outside of we lost some major draft pick ground.


    We know the GM in Arizona is smarter the PC and Schneider combined.
    My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid.

    http://www.seahawknation.net
    User avatar
    prelag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Las Vegas, NV


  • prelag wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    At what point did I suggest we shouldn't build the team through the draft? If you need a QB, though, and the draft presents you with a load of crappy QB prospects, why not look elsewhere? And if we swing and miss on Whitehurst, then it's a hell of a lot cheaper to cut losses and move on afterward than it would be to have to lick the wounds we'd have gotten had we drafted Clausen and watched him turn into Rick Mirer.

    Whitehurst has been in the league for a few years, right. He's had the benefit of going through camps, learning from NFL coaches, including a guy known as a QB guru. Just because he's not ranked ahead of Rivers and Volek (who people here seem to criminally underrate as a way to dig at Whitehurst) doesn't mean there's no talent there.

    If you're concerned that we paid big bucks to a 3rd stringer, just wait around a bit. He'll be a starter soon enough. I don't get the philosophy that says it's okay, and even exciting, to blow massive tons of money on rookies because of what they did in college, yet turn around and blast spending smaller amounts on an NFL backup because he hasn't proven anything. Guess what? Neither has that college kid you want to give $40mil guaranteed to.


    I like how you say that Whitehurst will be a starter soon enough, then in the same breath say that Clausen might become Rick Mirer.

    Seems like you are a bit biased.

    I think Whitehurst will be a backup and nothing more. Clausen has the potential to be a starter.

    Personally, I'd rather gamble on Clausen.


    Seems like you are, as well. For the record, I don't like Clausen one itty bitty bit. And as I pointed out, if Whitehurst proves to be a bust, it's a lot easier to move on from the Whitehurst experiment than from a kid you gave 6 years and $70 million. I say Whitehurst will be a starter soon enough because Hasselbeck's contract is done in one year and he's not getting any younger. Plus, he has an injury history a mile long. Isn't that why we were looking for a QB in the first place? As of right now, the only damn thing we're talking about is potential. You're betting on a guy who's proven even less than Whitehurst has, at significantly higher stakes.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8329
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • "Whitehurst is a 3rd string QB until proven otherwise."


    By this same standard Clausen isn't even an NFL player.
    Mojambo
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 944
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:38 pm


  • prelag wrote:
    Spokane wrote:thats the problem, we don't know anything yet - outside of we lost some major draft pick ground.


    We know the GM in Arizona is smarter the PC and Schneider combined.


    Bull. Arizona signed Anderson because they lost out on Whitehurst. Not the other way around. Reports were that both teams had Whitehurst ranked higher than Anderson.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8329
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    prelag wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    At what point did I suggest we shouldn't build the team through the draft? If you need a QB, though, and the draft presents you with a load of crappy QB prospects, why not look elsewhere? And if we swing and miss on Whitehurst, then it's a hell of a lot cheaper to cut losses and move on afterward than it would be to have to lick the wounds we'd have gotten had we drafted Clausen and watched him turn into Rick Mirer.

    Whitehurst has been in the league for a few years, right. He's had the benefit of going through camps, learning from NFL coaches, including a guy known as a QB guru. Just because he's not ranked ahead of Rivers and Volek (who people here seem to criminally underrate as a way to dig at Whitehurst) doesn't mean there's no talent there.

    If you're concerned that we paid big bucks to a 3rd stringer, just wait around a bit. He'll be a starter soon enough. I don't get the philosophy that says it's okay, and even exciting, to blow massive tons of money on rookies because of what they did in college, yet turn around and blast spending smaller amounts on an NFL backup because he hasn't proven anything. Guess what? Neither has that college kid you want to give $40mil guaranteed to.


    I like how you say that Whitehurst will be a starter soon enough, then in the same breath say that Clausen might become Rick Mirer.

    Seems like you are a bit biased.

    I think Whitehurst will be a backup and nothing more. Clausen has the potential to be a starter.

    Personally, I'd rather gamble on Clausen.


    Seems like you are, as well. For the record, I don't like Clausen one itty bitty bit. And as I pointed out, if Whitehurst proves to be a bust, it's a lot easier to move on from the Whitehurst experiment than from a kid you gave 6 years and $70 million. I say Whitehurst will be a starter soon enough because Hasselbeck's contract is done in one year and he's not getting any younger. Plus, he has an injury history a mile long. Isn't that why we were looking for a QB in the first place? As of right now, the only damn thing we're talking about is potential. You're betting on a guy who's proven even less than Whitehurst has, at significantly higher stakes.


    How costly will it be if the Whitehurst experiment doesn't pan out? Will we become the Cleveland Browns forever intertwined in a QB carousal?
    My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid.

    http://www.seahawknation.net
    User avatar
    prelag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Las Vegas, NV


  • hawkfan68 wrote:
    Mckinja wrote:I don't think you can count either Smith or Leinart out yet. Smith is only 25 and made some strides last season. Leinart has been playing behind Warner his entire career. Both could still pan out.


    You can't count them out because they are still young. However, both Leinart and Smith had opportunities to grab the starting spot and failed to do so.



    Actually, Smith DID grab the starting spot from Hill in '09.
    Smith finished the season completing 60% of his passes for 2350 yds, 18 TDs against 12 INTs and an 81 QB rating. There is hope for the 25 yr old yet imho. A full offseason and training camp with V Davis, Crabtree, Morgan, Hill and Jones will help the young man as well I believe.

    This will also be his 1ST season of his Niner career he will have the same offensive coordinator for the following season.
    Image
    User avatar
    Ninerguy
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 375
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:28 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • Mojambo wrote:
    "Whitehurst is a 3rd string QB until proven otherwise."


    By this same standard Clausen isn't even an NFL player.


    Yeah, and Whitehursts ass hasn't even been warming the bench the past few seasons for the San Diego chargers. From what I heard today, the guy didn't even dress. That in itself says a lot.
    My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid.

    http://www.seahawknation.net
    User avatar
    prelag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Las Vegas, NV


  • prelag wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    Seems like you are, as well. For the record, I don't like Clausen one itty bitty bit. And as I pointed out, if Whitehurst proves to be a bust, it's a lot easier to move on from the Whitehurst experiment than from a kid you gave 6 years and $70 million. I say Whitehurst will be a starter soon enough because Hasselbeck's contract is done in one year and he's not getting any younger. Plus, he has an injury history a mile long. Isn't that why we were looking for a QB in the first place? As of right now, the only damn thing we're talking about is potential. You're betting on a guy who's proven even less than Whitehurst has, at significantly higher stakes.


    How costly will it be if the Whitehurst experiment doesn't pan out? Will we become the Cleveland Browns forever intertwined in a QB carousal?


    Oh, so Whitehurst not panning out leads to a Browns-type carousel, but Clausen not panning out doesn't?
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8329
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • prelag wrote:
    Mojambo wrote:
    "Whitehurst is a 3rd string QB until proven otherwise."


    By this same standard Clausen isn't even an NFL player.


    Yeah, and Whitehursts ass hasn't even been warming the bench the past few seasons for the San Diego chargers. From what I heard today, the guy didn't even dress. That in itself says a lot.


    I was listening to pat Kirwin/Tim ryan today on sirius radio and they broke this Whitehurst news. Kirwin didnt even think the Whitehurst was active for a single game in the last 3 seasons. He also wondered how the Kid could not beat out Billy Volek for at least the 2nd string job.
    Image
    User avatar
    Ninerguy
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 375
    Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:28 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


  • I
    was listening to pat Kirwin/Tim ryan today on sirius radio and they broke this Whitehurst news. Kirwin didnt even think the Whitehurst was active for a single game in the last 3 seasons. He also wondered how the Kid could not beat out Billy Volek for at least the 2nd string job.


    Further solidifies my argument. This guy hasn't played a real game since college.

    Yeah.... Yeah... He'll be better then Clausen.... :34853_doh:
    My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid.

    http://www.seahawknation.net
    User avatar
    prelag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Las Vegas, NV


  • prelag wrote:I
    was listening to pat Kirwin/Tim ryan today on sirius radio and they broke this Whitehurst news. Kirwin didnt even think the Whitehurst was active for a single game in the last 3 seasons. He also wondered how the Kid could not beat out Billy Volek for at least the 2nd string job.


    Further solidifies my argument. This guy hasn't played a real game since college.

    Neither has Clausen.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8329
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


  • The thing that Whitehurst has going is that he at least has been around the NFL and has practiced against a solid defense. Clausen has never seen anything of that caliber. I really like the move.
    User avatar
    PascoHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 849
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:27 pm


  • volsunghawk wrote:
    prelag wrote:I
    was listening to pat Kirwin/Tim ryan today on sirius radio and they broke this Whitehurst news. Kirwin didnt even think the Whitehurst was active for a single game in the last 3 seasons. He also wondered how the Kid could not beat out Billy Volek for at least the 2nd string job.


    Further solidifies my argument. This guy hasn't played a real game since college.

    Neither has Clausen.


    Clausen will be a starter for an NFL team before age 27. Care to disagree?
    My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid.

    http://www.seahawknation.net
    User avatar
    prelag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Las Vegas, NV


  • PascoHawk wrote:The thing that Whitehurst has going is that he at least has been around the NFL and has practiced against a solid defense. Clausen has never seen anything of that caliber. I really like the move.


    Yeah, Manning, Brady, Rivers, etc... had never seen anything of that caliber either. I am sure if any of them were coming out in this draft you would still like that move and use this same retarded argument.
    My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid.

    http://www.seahawknation.net
    User avatar
    prelag
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
    Location: Las Vegas, NV


  • "Clausen will be a starter for an NFL team before age 27. Care to disagree?"

    With the money he's going to be guaranteed, he'll have to be. Whether he's any good or not.
    Mojambo
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 944
    Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:38 pm


  • prelag wrote:
    PascoHawk wrote:The thing that Whitehurst has going is that he at least has been around the NFL and has practiced against a solid defense. Clausen has never seen anything of that caliber. I really like the move.


    Yeah, Manning, Brady, Rivers, etc... had never seen anything of that caliber either. I am sure if any of them were coming out in this draft you would still like that move and use this same retarded argument.


    Dude you need to chill before you have a heart attack.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9783
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • Doesn't Clausen lack ideal arm strength for Bates' offense? I thought that was Whitehurst's appeal for this coaching staff.
    User avatar
    BobcatHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 341
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:02 am
    Location: Evanston, WY


PreviousNext


It is currently Fri Nov 28, 2014 1:45 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE ARCHIVES ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests