Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ    Contact Us  Your donations are greatly appreciated! Donate  Chat Room

Board index » NET NATION COMMUNITY CENTER » [ THE ARCHIVES ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 380 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:13 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 2065
Location: Marysville, WA
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:15 pm 
* NET Sports Handicapper *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:13 am
Posts: 1408
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.

_________________
Image


Last edited by nsport on Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:16 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 1805
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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:19 pm 
NET Rookie
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:53 pm
Posts: 143
Location: Pikeville, KY
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?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:20 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 2:30 pm
Posts: 1117
Location: Camano Island
why do we want this guy? hes barely taken any regular season snaps at all if any

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:22 pm 
NET Ring Of Honor
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
Posts: 21124
Location: NFL WORLD CHAMPIONS 2013-2014
ha....its amazing what happens when you go for a beer on st, patties day.

_________________
Image


Last edited by Largent80 on Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:24 pm 
* NET Sports Handicapper *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:13 am
Posts: 1408
Is that beer "rave green"?

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:26 pm 
NET Ring Of Honor
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
Posts: 21124
Location: NFL WORLD CHAMPIONS 2013-2014
Largent80 wrote:
ha....its amazing what happens when you go for a beer on st, patties day.


Its green, but Rave green?.....maybe

_________________
Image


Last edited by Largent80 on Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:31 pm 
NET Bench Warmer
Offline

Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 2:37 pm
Posts: 12
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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:32 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 2:30 pm
Posts: 1117
Location: Camano Island
my bar today was putting food coloring in beer. lol

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:34 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:34 am
Posts: 190
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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:36 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 2065
Location: Marysville, WA
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:37 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:38 pm
Posts: 1225
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.

_________________
Football Outsiders wrote:
The Seahawks have a third-and-long defensive DVOA of -102.1%. Seriously, when Seattle knows you have to pass, you are completely terribly, violently screwed.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:44 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7716
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:45 pm 
NET Rookie
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:52 am
Posts: 105
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:


Absolutely! you guys think we paid alot for Curry, how about a QB taken 2 picks earlier in the draft a year later.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:46 pm 
* NET Sage *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:22 am
Posts: 165
Location: Southern California
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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:47 pm 
* NET Eeyore *
User avatar
Online

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
Posts: 10520
Location: Pasco, WA
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:57 pm 
* NET Alumni *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am
Posts: 4588
Location: Seattle, 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...

_________________
http://twitter.com/EJZ206


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:02 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:13 am
Posts: 1459
Location: Portland, OR
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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:08 pm 
NET Rookie
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:34 am
Posts: 190
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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:11 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 2065
Location: Marysville, WA
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:22 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7716
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:24 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8836
Location: Granite Falls, WA
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:27 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:35 am
Posts: 700
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!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:27 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 2065
Location: Marysville, WA
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:28 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Las Vegas, NV
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:28 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:51 am
Posts: 2409
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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:28 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:30 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:36 pm
Posts: 1609
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.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:31 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8836
Location: Granite Falls, WA
Spokane wrote:
We can suger coat this all day...its a bad move!


THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:31 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm
Posts: 2065
Location: Marysville, 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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:32 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Las Vegas, NV
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:33 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:34 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Las Vegas, NV
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:35 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7716
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:37 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:38 pm
Posts: 775
Quote:
"Whitehurst is a 3rd string QB until proven otherwise."


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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:37 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7716
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:37 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Las Vegas, NV
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:41 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 375
Location: Vancouver, WA
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:42 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Mojambo wrote:
Quote:
"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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:45 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7716
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:47 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:28 am
Posts: 375
Location: Vancouver, WA
prelag wrote:
Mojambo wrote:
Quote:
"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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:50 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Las Vegas, NV
I
Quote:
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:54 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
Posts: 7716
Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
prelag wrote:
I
Quote:
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:57 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:27 pm
Posts: 849
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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:57 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
Posts: 571
Location: Las Vegas, NV
volsunghawk wrote:
prelag wrote:
I
Quote:
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:00 pm 
NET Veteran
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm
Posts: 571
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:01 pm 
NET Veteran
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 12:38 pm
Posts: 775
"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.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:02 pm 
* Capt'n Dom *
* Capt'n Dom *
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8836
Location: Granite Falls, WA
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


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:03 pm 
NET Starter
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:02 am
Posts: 326
Location: Evanston, WY
Doesn't Clausen lack ideal arm strength for Bates' offense? I thought that was Whitehurst's appeal for this coaching staff.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 380 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Board index » NET NATION COMMUNITY CENTER » [ THE ARCHIVES ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.