Objective look at Hasselbeck

A collection of NET's best and most memorable threads. Predictions, debates, laughs, and X's & O's. Rating: PG to NC-17
Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:37 pm
  • warner28 wrote:
    Zowert wrote:
    No matter what I say you're going to do your best to discredit Hass. You love to argue.

    Your point was that Hass did nothing special in the game against the 49ers....... NOTHING? Really? It was his rushing TD that gave the Hawks momentum. He was responsible for 21 points in that game.



    I gave him credit for that game, I believe the defense did more than him in San Francisco but I gave him credit for that game, he played a good game.

    It was not a Pro Bowl performance IMO, I stand by that. But if you want to say it was a great performance and he won the game last week, fine. You win.

    Think what you want to think about me with regards to Hass but no one is singling him out.

    I am much more interested in your claim that we are singling him out because that is BS and you know it.


    So now you're giving him credit, after you said he did nothing special.

    It was a great performance, everyone thought so. Not just me.
    ~ The Stache'
    User avatar
    Zowert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1990
    Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:29 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:38 pm
  • warner28 wrote:Because Thurmond is a ROOKIE day 2 draft pick whom made 1 mistake in his 2nd game of his career, Matt on the otherhand is a veteran who is the CAPTAIN of the team and made multiple mistakes today.

    Is that a double standard? Probably but a fair one.

    When Thurmond is in his 10th year as a Seahawk and a team captain and fumbles a punt return I expect a thread about it.


    Regardless if he's a rookie, he's still an NFL player and he should be able to catch an F'n ball!!!! Its not like he got burned by a pro bowl receiver on a difficult route. All he had to do was catch a ball. You want to talk about 7th graders, I know a couple JV middle school football players that have never dropped a punt return.
    Last edited by Zowert on Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    ~ The Stache'
    User avatar
    Zowert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1990
    Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:29 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:40 pm
  • Game two in a one and one season while you are tied for first place in the division is not the time to panic
    warden
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1953
    Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 2:31 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:43 pm
  • Zowert wrote:
    warner28 wrote:
    Zowert wrote:
    No matter what I say you're going to do your best to discredit Hass. You love to argue.

    Your point was that Hass did nothing special in the game against the 49ers....... NOTHING? Really? It was his rushing TD that gave the Hawks momentum. He was responsible for 21 points in that game.



    I gave him credit for that game, I believe the defense did more than him in San Francisco but I gave him credit for that game, he played a good game.

    It was not a Pro Bowl performance IMO, I stand by that. But if you want to say it was a great performance and he won the game last week, fine. You win.

    Think what you want to think about me with regards to Hass but no one is singling him out.

    I am much more interested in your claim that we are singling him out because that is BS and you know it.


    So now you're giving him credit, after you said he did nothing special.

    It was a great performance, everyone thought so. Not just me.


    It wasn't special, it was good, not special.

    If others thought it was great or special, fine, I thought it was good and gave him credit for as much last week.

    I am done with this line of debate. We aren't singling him out anymore than he deserves, he is the QB, veteran, and captain. He deserves to be criticized for today and how he has played in recent history overall.
    MARTYREDwarner
     


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:44 pm
  • Trrrroy wrote:
    Zowert wrote:Your point was that Hass did nothing special in the game against the 49ers....... NOTHING? Really? It was his rushing TD that gave the Hawks momentum. He was responsible for 21 points in that game.


    Hmm, so when Hass does good he gets credit, but when he sucks its the team's fault. I smell a double standard.


    No, I wasn't praising his performance today. I said he had a bad game. But the entire team had a bad game.

    There should be a thread that says "Objective look at the Seahawks" not "Hasselbeck".

    I'm not trying to be a homer, or a jerk.. I just wish we would stand behind our QB instead of throwing him under the bus all the time.
    Last edited by Zowert on Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    ~ The Stache'
    User avatar
    Zowert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1990
    Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:29 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:45 pm
  • Zowert wrote:
    warner28 wrote:Because Thurmond is a ROOKIE day 2 draft pick whom made 1 mistake in his 2nd game of his career, Matt on the otherhand is a veteran who is the CAPTAIN of the team and made multiple mistakes today.

    Is that a double standard? Probably but a fair one.

    When Thurmond is in his 10th year as a Seahawk and a team captain and fumbles a punt return I expect a thread about it.


    Regardless if he's a rookie, he's still an NFL player and he should be able to catch an F'n ball!!!! Its not like he got burned by a pro bowl receiver on a difficult route. All he had to do was catch a ball. You want to talk about 7th graders, I know a couple JV middle school football players that have never dropped a punt return.



    Then start a thread about Thurmond.

    I have no expectations for Walter (and never claimed I did) so when a guy I have no expectations for fails to deliver I am not going to waste my time on it.

    If it bothered you that much, start a thread, bet it gets to 3 pages really quick because Thurmond did screw up, just did not surprise me when he did.

    I have expectations for Matt and Curry so those are the one's I talk about (and notice I started neither thread about them either, just responded to others posts).
    MARTYREDwarner
     


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:48 pm
  • warner28 wrote:
    Zowert wrote:
    warner28 wrote:Because Thurmond is a ROOKIE day 2 draft pick whom made 1 mistake in his 2nd game of his career, Matt on the otherhand is a veteran who is the CAPTAIN of the team and made multiple mistakes today.

    Is that a double standard? Probably but a fair one.

    When Thurmond is in his 10th year as a Seahawk and a team captain and fumbles a punt return I expect a thread about it.


    Regardless if he's a rookie, he's still an NFL player and he should be able to catch an F'n ball!!!! Its not like he got burned by a pro bowl receiver on a difficult route. All he had to do was catch a ball. You want to talk about 7th graders, I know a couple JV middle school football players that have never dropped a punt return.



    Then start a thread about Thurmond.

    I have no expectations for Walter (and never claimed I did) so when a guy I have no expectations for fails to deliver I am not going to waste my time on it.

    If it bothered you that much, start a thread, bet it gets to 3 pages really quick because Thurmond did screw up, just did not surprise me when he did.

    I have expectations for Matt and Curry so those are the one's I talk about (and notice I started neither thread about them either, just responded to others posts).


    I respect your opinion and give credit to your arguments.

    I'm just bothered by the lack of support Hass gets. When he has a good game, no one really cares. But when he plays badly, people come out of the woodwork just to trash on him. I feel like this would be the case for ANYONE under center. There is no more loyalty. QB's arent human beings, no, they're professional athletes who should never make mistakes and have an off night.
    Last edited by Zowert on Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    ~ The Stache'
    User avatar
    Zowert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1990
    Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:29 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:48 pm
  • Zowart,

    If you actually look around this board, find the thread I started, you will notice something, the one I started was positive and optimistic about this season.


    Even my first post in this thread was far from an attack of Matt, Matt is an average NFL QB and I expect him to play like today often and like last week often, neither is good enough to win in the playoffs IMO, I want a QB that can win in the playoffs, Matt ain't that guy anymore IMO.
    MARTYREDwarner
     


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:51 pm
  • IMO I wish "stash" would give it a rest. history told the tale in all other aspects of life, why should hawks football be any different?
    like others have said, I'm a hassle fan, but not one with blind faith in his future play.

    I hate to say it but I too would like to find out what we have in cbj before we beat this horse and gloss over looking for the magical draft pick. btw if you think it's Locker you're not sober.

    really like the guy but, no, I just think this team needs new blood behind center.
    cknoxxhawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 474
    Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:05 am


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:51 pm
  • warner28 wrote:Zowart,

    If you actually look around this board, find the thread I started, you will notice something, the one I started was positive and optimistic about this season.


    Even my first post in this thread was far from an attack of Matt, Matt is an average NFL QB and I expect him to play like today often and like last week often, neither is good enough to win in the playoffs IMO, I want a QB that can win in the playoffs, Matt ain't that guy anymore IMO.


    Zowert, with an E. Honest mistake.
    ~ The Stache'
    User avatar
    Zowert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1990
    Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:29 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:58 pm
  • cknoxxhawk wrote:IMO I wish "stash" would give it a rest. history told the tale in all other aspects of life, why should hawks football be any different?
    like others have said, I'm a hassle fan, but not one with blind faith in his future play.

    I hate to say it but I too would like to find out what we have in cbj before we beat this horse and gloss over looking for the magical draft pick. btw if you think it's Locker you're not sober.

    really like the guy but, no, I just think this team needs new blood behind center.


    Well you're right. I just have a soft spot for Hass because I see him around Kirkland all the time, he use to stop by the Bank of Washington (I use to work there) and do his personal banking. He's a really nice dude and even remembered me by name (or at least I think he did, and wasn't just reading my name tag). Hass would sign footballs, jerseys and random crap for me when he came in.

    So yeah, I'm just a homer. I hate seeing a genuinely great guy get trashed on by the fans. I feel like he's been limited by his weapons and protection over the last couple years.

    But.. He's 35 years old. I know he's not in the future for us, just wish the 'haters' would lay off and let him do his thing.
    ~ The Stache'
    User avatar
    Zowert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1990
    Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:29 pm
    Location: Seattle


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:05 pm
  • Mjolnir wrote:There is something to say about QB/WR familiarness in a different offensive scheme.

    Hass hasn't really developed a chemistry with this receiving core....and with Carlson, both Hass and John are in new offensive schemes. The pre-season just wasn't enought time to develop the chemistry...and hell...with the front office continually changing things, it didn't help things any (NOT that I am complaining....I think the FO did what they needed to do...huge kudos to them for having the cojones to do it).

    I think the "long" reads are basically Hass not comfortable with the WR's and their pattern running. He just doesn't seem confident in them, even though they appear to be catching almost anything catchable that is thrown their way.

    This is just my opinion, and what I think I'm observing. I think after the 4th game (I know, I know.....we shouldn't have to wait that long) we should see some improvement.



    I agree with the 4th game comment, and that's where it ends for me. The OP said it best and I agree 100 percent.We get on here and talk about "schemes" Matt being comfortable etc.

    He's a QB in the NFL, he SHOULD be comfortable with his receivers by now.They run a pre determined route...he's supposed to get the ball to them.Nothing more, nothing less.Just like when you were in the backyard as a kid.And Mr Carlson? 3 years in the pros isn't enough for those two to get it together somewhat?Matt was unable to make the throws today and that makes me a sad panda.I would be willing to bet that Whitehurst is in the very near plans and its not because I'm suicidal over the donkeys slapping us around.We had our chances to be in that game.3 turnovers against a good team that dosent lose at home very often will make for a very long day.what I'm saying is Pete Carroll is going to have to find out what he has in CBJ before the end of this season so he can "win forever", because Matt Hasselbeck isn't going to be here.
    User avatar
    morgulon1
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3524
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 10:07 am
    Location: Spokane, Wa


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:10 pm
  • imnKOgnito wrote:
    kidhawk wrote:If you want to look objectively at hasselbeck, you have to do the same with Whitehurst and from what I've seen he's not the answer today, tomorrow, next year or ever. We wasted a pick on him and we'll still be looking for our qb of the future next year and the year after until someone figures this out. Hasselbeck is our only option at winning now.


    How do you know this about Whitehurst without ever seeing him in a regular season situation? If you want to compare Whitehurst with Hasselbeck you put them under center with the same
    supporting cast. That's not something that's been done to this point.


    1000% true. the "confirmed guesstimates" are ridiculous. we know nothing about cw, and that's the only truth I'm afraid. we need to, it's a new hawks era and we need to keep building. there's no Hass hate, just realistic hawk matters.
    cknoxxhawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 474
    Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:05 am


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:13 pm
  • My two cents - my problem with Hass today wasn't so much that he had a bad game - everyone has them.

    It is that his glaring problems that will not go away were at the forefront.

    Two of the biggest problems today were:

    His arm is poor. It not only cost us interceptions but other completions. Yes he has great touch, but at this stage of the game - he can't make all the throws. This is why guys can sit on routes because many of the deeper throws hang and allow time for the safety to break it up. It is either this or he frankly underthrows the receiver. The pick to Dawkins was exactly this.

    He is a veteran but he has always had a penchant for making frantic decisions or Favre-esque cowboy-like decisions. 4th and 2 corner endzone to Deion Branch is a perfect example. Maybe Bates called that - but I doubt it.

    He is like Jeff Garcia. A winner for the most part but isn't a total package.

    For one, I have to see if CBJ can get experience and play or if we need another option at QB. We are young and have some of the pieces. Hass is NOT a long-term answer.
    Driver of the PC/JS Super Bowl wagon since 2010
    Image
    Sherman looks like a ballet master in grand jeté –
    a trash-talking, dreadlocked Baryshnikov suspended
    impossibly above the turf – pro football's paean to
    wanton human destruction slips into the sublime.
    User avatar
    TDOTSEAHAWK
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2962
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:16 pm
    Location: Hamilton


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:16 pm
  • Some people need to chill out and realize that they arent going to change certain peoples mind on some topics and move on...
    Image
    User avatar
    AbsolutNET
    * NET X's & O's Guru *
     
    Posts: 8798
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:24 am
    Location: PNW


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:17 pm
  • I agree. Hass will not be here next year. CBJ will have to play to see if we draft QB or not. We are rebuilding, not gunning for a deep playoff run.
    "We have to focus with every challenge we get. The bigger, the better. The more hyped, the better. We keep doing what we're doing. Tough matchups on the road, high-profile games - we want that, we feed off that, we should be able to develop the discipline to deal with that." Pete Carroll
    User avatar
    Hawkfish
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 735
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:12 pm
    Location: Monroe, WA


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:49 pm
  • I have said that Hass will be replaced before mid season..I stand by it. CW could have done everything that Hass did (good) today. Look, I love me some Hass, he was a good QB and will always be an even better person IMHO.

    BUT alas...its time to move on. Bench Hass, get CW in there. Hass is a team player and he'll be a good "coach" to CW and a viable back up in case Chuck goes down.

    Time to pass the torch, go with youth and start the growing pains.
    Yes, I'm a midwest Seahawks fan..... NO, I'm not going to explain why to you.
    User avatar
    Daytomann
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2322
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:39 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:06 pm
  • the first interception should never have been thrown because two plays before there should have been a rushing td by forsett...those two bungled o-line moves prior to the pick weren't his fault and the hold, which did nothing to change the outcome of the play, brought that td back..i do peg the 2nd and 3rd one on him--on the last one i really don't hold too much anger because they were pretty much forced to pass pass pass and so that is usually a disaster waiting to happen to any team that far down with that little time left.
    User avatar
    niveky
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 459
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 9:58 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:06 pm
  • Something i was thinking about today....

    Have we ever won a road game against a good team with Hasselbeck as our QB?
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9712
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:20 pm
  • 2003: Beat the favored SF team at the end of 2003, to make the playoffs.
    2004: The Saints and Bucs were supposed to be good opponents early in 2004, and Seattle won both of those. They beat the the 8-8 Vikings and the 11-5 Falcons on the road that year too.
    2005: Won 5 straight road games, but none of them finished with a winning record.
    2006: Beat one team with a winning record on the road. Denver.
    2007: Terrible season for playing on the road. Did beat Philly though, who finished 8-8. Philly didn't have McNabb though.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11233
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:25 pm
  • So it has been since 2004 that Hasselbeck has won a significant road game?
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9712
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:26 pm
  • kearly wrote:2003: Beat the favored SF team at the end of 2003, to make the playoffs.
    2004: The Saints and Bucs were supposed to be good opponents early in 2004, and Seattle won both of those. They beat the the 8-8 Vikings and the 11-5 Falcons on the road that year too.
    2005: Won 5 straight road games, but none of them finished with a winning record.
    2006: Beat one team with a winning record on the road. Denver.
    2007: Terrible season for playing on the road. Did beat Philly though, who finished 8-8. Philly didn't have McNabb though.


    My goodness kearly. How many gigabytes of information do you have on the Seahawks. You are all over it. LOL
    User avatar
    Jville
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 3640
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:27 pm
  • niveky wrote:the first interception should never have been thrown because two plays before there should have been a rushing td by forsett...those two bungled o-line moves prior to the pick weren't his fault and the hold, which did nothing to change the outcome of the play, brought that td back..i do peg the 2nd and 3rd one on him--on the last one i really don't hold too much anger because they were pretty much forced to pass pass pass and so that is usually a disaster waiting to happen to any team that far down with that little time left.



    First off, this does not excuse Matt for throwing a ball he should not have thrown and its a silly argument to make.

    Second, Locklear's hold is what sprung Forsett for the TD.
    MARTYREDwarner
     


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:29 pm
  • cknoxxhawk wrote:I hate to say it but I too would like to find out what we have in cbj before we beat this horse and gloss over looking for the magical draft pick. btw if you think it's Locker you're not sober........


    Oh man, how much coin did Locker cost himself yesterday. Really brutal. He may not even go first round at this rate. Agree with you on CBJ too.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image

    Proud member of the 38 club
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11855
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:43 pm
  • Its not that Hass is obsessed with those plays, those were the cards he was delt. Hass isnt necessarily allowed to call audibles like he used to under Holmgren. He gets the play calls and tries to execute them, that's all he can do. Most of the completions Hass made were up the middle anyway, so I dont know what youre talking about.[/quote]

    I'm talking about the fact that the majority of Matt's throws are to the sidelines on either swing passes or fade routes. I don't know what game you were watching today, but the one I saw today had him constantly challenging Brian Dawkins for some reason.
    [/quote]

    His TD pass, was up the middle. Two of his Branch passes, up the middle. 4/5 of Carlson's receptions were up the middle and William's sole catch, was towards the middle.[/quote]

    Nope. Not even close to reality. http://sports-ak.espn.go.com/nfl/playby ... =300919007

    Check out how many "middle" passes there were. Like I said earlier - he seems to have a problem throwing over the middle. everything is short right, short left, deep right, deep left. There were no slants, crossing patterns, picks etc. Either a swing pass in the flat or fade route...
    My Tapatalk for Ipad is bigger than yours. Size matters.
    User avatar
    MeanBlueGreen
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1153
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:56 pm
    Location: Redwood City, California


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:08 pm
  • Matt did exactly what Alex Smith did last week. Kill momentum and not putting his team in a position to win. His arm strength is suspect and love him or hate him that is a big liability in today's NFL. That is the unbiased truth. We will not amount to anything in this rebuilding effort if we continue to utilize a QB in regression. I am not a Matt hater at all but I am ready for the next iteration of our franchise QB. Its time!
    Image
    User avatar
    rastahawk
    * Just Chillin' *
     
    Posts: 1053
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:51 am
    Location: Los Angeles


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:29 pm
  • Mjolnir wrote:There is something to say about QB/WR familiarness in a different offensive scheme.

    Hass hasn't really developed a chemistry with this receiving core....and with Carlson, both Hass and John are in new offensive schemes. The pre-season just wasn't enought time to develop the chemistry...and hell...with the front office continually changing things, it didn't help things any (NOT that I am complaining....I think the FO did what they needed to do...huge kudos to them for having the cojones to do it).

    I think the "long" reads are basically Hass not comfortable with the WR's and their pattern running. He just doesn't seem confident in them, even though they appear to be catching almost anything catchable that is thrown their way.

    This is just my opinion, and what I think I'm observing. I think after the 4th game (I know, I know.....we shouldn't have to wait that long) we should see some improvement.

    How muchtime does a Franchise QB need to mesh with his receivers, gottdammit, this is getting to be all too a familiar repeat with Matt??, he gets rattled way to easy, and his focus has deminished substantially, TIME to move on Pete, time to start working for the future of his offense, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it, well, It's BROKE Pete, time to check out the future, and if it isn't CW?, let's find the answer.
    He's a seasoned Vet gotdammit, he shouldn't need more time to get on the same page with his receivers, I mean, Dave frikken Krieg adapted a hell of a lot quicker to his newbie receivers, and he was'nt blessed with as good an O-line as Hasselbeck, I mean C'mon!, Jones, Hutchinson, Robbie Tobeck, Alexander, and even Locklear etc.,it's time to take this joker off his pedistal.

    Hasselbeck is being touted with being the best QB the Seahawks has ever had, you keep on sellin, but, I ain't buyin'.

    I mean pound for pound, "Mud Bone" was by far the better adaptor, had better arm too.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3646
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:16 am
  • Had time to throw ? Yes. Has good WR's and TE's ? Yes. Is Healthy ? Yes. Still stinks with a weak arm and poor decisions YES YES YES Time to see what we have in Whitehurst we KNOW Matty stinks.
    User avatar
    SuperFreak
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 443
    Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:35 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Mon Sep 20, 2010 7:49 am
  • kearly wrote:2003: Beat the favored SF team at the end of 2003, to make the playoffs.
    2004: The Saints and Bucs were supposed to be good opponents early in 2004, and Seattle won both of those. They beat the the 8-8 Vikings and the 11-5 Falcons on the road that year too.
    2005: Won 5 straight road games, but none of them finished with a winning record.
    2006: Beat one team with a winning record on the road. Denver.
    2007: Terrible season for playing on the road. Did beat Philly though, who finished 8-8. Philly didn't have McNabb though.



    The 2004 Atlanta game was at Qwest. Last game of the year, it was a must win to take the West. Atlanta had the #2 seed locked up and played there backups most of the game. We almost had it go to OT if Isaiah Kascevinski doesn't stop a 2 point conversion attempt with no time left on the clock.
    Ballz
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 157
    Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 7:56 am


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Mon Sep 20, 2010 8:24 am
  • Either QB's - Mallett, Locker or Pounder, in that order should be 2011 first round Seahawks pick.
    <--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--> GO SEAHAWKS <--><--><--><--><--><--><--><--><-->
    User avatar
    CamanoIslandJQ
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 918
    Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:11 am
    Location: Camano Island, WA


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Mon Sep 20, 2010 10:18 am
  • Whoever our next QB is i want him to have a CANNON arm. its so demoralizing when we are down to know that we cant come back, since dink and dunk passes and the occational "deep" lob are the only throws hass can make :(
    Swedishhawkfan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1168
    Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 9:31 am


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:53 pm
  • Hideeho folks,
    I want to qualify my next statement with this...I've never been a Hasselbeck fan*. That being said...
    Even when healthy, Matthew goes into "Spazzelbeck" mode about twice a year...every year. And mostly, early in the year. So, he will probably have one more of these "stinkers" at some point this year. But, the rest of the year (when healthy) he's fairly consistent and productive. And a very good leader.
    So, I guess that I'll just ride out this speedbump and hope for the best. :snack:
    That is all,
    BillA

    *No, I'm not Tabs ;)
    Never use a quiet tool, when a loud one will do
    User avatar
    Bill Assumpcao
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 396
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 6:33 am
    Location: Port Angeles, WA


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Mon Sep 20, 2010 10:53 pm
  • endzorn wrote:Take your emotions and team loyalty out of this thread and tell me how far you think this team can go with Hasselbeck.

    He had plenty of time to throw the ball, but missed open receivers, threw behind guys who actually caught the ball and tossed some inexplicable interceptions.

    I love the guy, always will...but when I watch him play it is painfully obvious that he is not the answer. At some point we need to find out what we have in Whitehurst.


    Holy Shneikey, you guys need to just face the fact that you are fans, not football analysts. Hasselbeck did numerous great things in the game. Like all QBs do from time to time, he lost his accuracy for a few passes and combined with numerous other mistakes other players made, cost them the game, but his performance was nowhere close to any indication that he's done or is not the answer. In fact in his first two games, he's shown exactly and completely the opposite. He hasn't lost anything from his best years. He can lead a team to a championship and if he has enough horses around him, that's exactly what he will do. You heard it here first.
    "Unless you were in that meeting room and know what we're supposed to do, don't assume!" -T.J.H.
    User avatar
    JohnnyB
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 358
    Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 9:36 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:42 am
  • Hasselbeck has bad days just like the rest, even Drew Breeze was throwing poorly this week, same can be said for Farve...As for a big arm, sure it is nice for an occasional deep ball, but it does NOT guarantee success in a NFL QB obviously, just look to lets say J. Russel for an example...Hasselbeck is getting older, he is a few years out from retirement, he is a pro bowl QB that has taken our team to the highest level (Superbowl), he should be allowed to play until he wants to retire unless he really stinks it up for multiple games in a row showing he truly has lost the it factor, he has things NO unproven QB is going to have which are experience, leadership, knowledge of the game both offense and defense, he knows how to fake out defenders an not lead with his eye's, etc. If we are in it to be competitive and win now, he is our best and only real option available, if you think his few interceptions this year are bad, just imagine how many the unproven Whitehurst would have against starting defenses that will quickly realize he locks on to his targets and occasionally floats it out there with poor accuracy...I re-watched the Denver game, Bailey jumped a mile high to make that first pick, it was an amazing play on his part (wish we had that next to TRu), but we truly should not have been in that situation to start with (was not Hasselbeck's fault), as for the pick that happened near a wide open Carlson, Hasselbeck was under pressure and made a poor throw, that is life in the NFL, it happens, even Romo makes bad throws occasionally, they all do....I am not a Hasselover per se, I do respect his talent and what he has achieved for our team, dishonoring him would be equal to dishonoring Alexander of which our running game has still yet to recover from...Careful what you wish for as an emotionally driven fan, just imagine multiple years of NO passing attack to go along with no running game! :34853_doh:
    Seahawksfan10
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 361
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:12 am
    Location: Houston, Tx


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:28 am
  • Matt Hasselbeck 2010 = Jake Delhomme 2009
    User avatar
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 3560
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:42 pm
    Location: St. Louis, MO


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:52 am
  • JohnnyB wrote:
    Holy Shneikey, you guys need to just face the fact that you are fans, not football analysts. Hasselbeck did numerous great things in the game. Like all QBs do from time to time, he lost his accuracy for a few passes and combined with numerous other mistakes other players made, cost them the game, but his performance was nowhere close to any indication that he's done or is not the answer. In fact in his first two games, he's shown exactly and completely the opposite. He hasn't lost anything from his best years. He can lead a team to a championship and if he has enough horses around him, that's exactly what he will do. You heard it here first.


    He hasn't lost ANYTHING from his best years...... Really? Have you seen his last six games? I'm still waiting for that great deep ball we have heard so much about from those with his poster on the ceiling above their bed.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:13 am
  • JohnnyB wrote:He hasn't lost anything from his best years.


    Yes, he has. He's lost Walter Jones, Steve Hutchinson, Mack Strong, Robbie Tobeck, Bobby Engram, and even Shaun Alexander.

    I don't see anyone who's replaced any of these folks that isn't a big downgrade.
    Jase
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 325
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:34 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:54 am
  • Swedishhawkfan wrote:Whoever our next QB is i want him to have a CANNON arm. its so demoralizing when we are down to know that we cant come back, since dink and dunk passes and the occational "deep" lob are the only throws hass can make :(


    Well then perhaps you should go play with Jemarcus Russell and his cannon arm....Hasselbeck has shown himself to be a pro bowl caliber quarterback who still gets props from the majority of NFL analysts. People on this board seem to run with how bad he is because he has a bad game from time to time or he can't carry the team on his back. This is a team effort and Hasselbeck has proven time and time again that when the team around him is playing well, he almost always follows suit. When we have a team not playing well he has difficulties. Anyone who thinks Whitehurst can win with the team we have needs to have their head examined
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 14045
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:01 am
  • And anyone who thinks Whitehurst would have outsucked Hass in Denver needs to take the Hass poster off the ceiling above their bed.
    Last edited by bestfightstory on Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:03 am
  • Whitehurst is not now, never has been, and never will be the answer at qb. Putting in Whitehurst says two things, one we aren't trying to win and two we are looking to actually lose so we can draft higher.
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 14045
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:11 am
  • kidhawk wrote:Whitehurst is not now, never has been, and never will be the answer at qb..


    The very same thing was once said about Favre, Warner, Brady and even Hasselbeck... And to hear some here tell it they are ALL Hall of Famers. Now I don't pretend to know the truth about Whitehurst (fortunately I have you to tell me). But I do know Hass has hurt more than helped this team with his play in the last year-at least-and I want to move on.
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:23 am
  • bestfightstory wrote:
    kidhawk wrote:Whitehurst is not now, never has been, and never will be the answer at qb..


    The very same thing was once said about Favre, Warner, Brady and even Hasselbeck... And to hear some here tell it they are ALL Hall of Famers. Now I don't pretend to know the truth about Whitehurst (fortunately I have you to tell me). But I do know Hass has hurt more than helped this team with his play in the last year-at least-and I want to move on.


    And thankfully we have PC as coach who knows better then you, of that I'm sure, and still knows that Hasselbeck is the best qb on this team and the only one to play if you are trying to win now.
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 14045
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:35 am
  • kidhawk wrote:
    bestfightstory wrote:
    kidhawk wrote:Whitehurst is not now, never has been, and never will be the answer at qb..


    The very same thing was once said about Favre, Warner, Brady and even Hasselbeck... And to hear some here tell it they are ALL Hall of Famers. Now I don't pretend to know the truth about Whitehurst (fortunately I have you to tell me). But I do know Hass has hurt more than helped this team with his play in the last year-at least-and I want to move on.


    And thankfully we have PC as coach who knows better then you, of that I'm sure, and still knows that Hasselbeck is the best qb on this team and the only one to play if you are trying to win now.

    Yep, coaches are never wrong.

    I don't know why we even went to Carroll in the first place since Jim Mora knows more than all of us.
    User avatar
    Rat
    * NET Cynic *
     
    Posts: 3560
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:42 pm
    Location: St. Louis, MO


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:40 am
  • Until Whitey gets time in real games, I can't beleive that any of US here have any idea of his worthyness as a starter. It's obvious that the coaches think Matt is better, and thats from his experience and reads.

    Matt had tremendous growing pains, and the same can be said for any QB.

    Even PC doesn't know what Whitey can really accomplish, because there is no record of it.

    I'm sure he feels he owes it to the fans and organization to "win now" and Matt is the best choice, To me if Hass can't get something good going by the Bye week, put Whitey in and lets take a look.
    Image

    R.I.P. Brother Les
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24268
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Freddy's favorite song?....Dream On


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:43 am
  • I don't think we'll see Whitehurst before the bye week, but not because of Matt's play. I have a feeling that Bates is still getting Whitehurst a little more comfortable with the playbook and that by about week 6 when he's had time to digest, they'll throw him into the fray and see what they have.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15453
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:46 am
  • What is it with all this "let's see what he's got" bs? We have a shot at the worst division in football. Now do we seem to be superbowl contenters? No we don't, but I'd argue, neither did Arizona the year they went. As long as we have a shot at the playoffs we best be playing the players that give us out best shot at winning. Whitehurst didn't show anything in the preseason to show me he was a better option than matt and it's not like he is a rookie, he's been practicing at an NFL level for 4 years now. Hasselbeck is the man until we have no shot at the playoffs. After that, I really don't care who starts
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 14045
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:53 am
  • It's not BS Kidhawk, we all know Matt is done here, most likely after this year.

    The NFL is all about passing, we have got to be thinking of the future as well as the present. I personally don't see this team, this year, as making any dent in a playoff run, and I would rather think long term.

    hell, we have Tate (rookie) Butler (year 2), Williams (basically an experienced rookie) to build with in the receiving corps. We have to be able to win on the road, and history has shown us it is not getting done now, so why not at least entertain the thought?
    Image

    R.I.P. Brother Les
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 24268
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: Freddy's favorite song?....Dream On


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:06 am
  • I wonder what the NFL record is for "most interceptions thrown in opening possession of consecutive games by a veteran starting NFL quarterback with Super Bowl experience and a team captain".....
    "Some people here have been groomed to accept mediocrity and lame ducks, I'm on board with the vibrato!" -SouthSoundHawk
    "BFS is kicking ass in here." -kearly (8/9/2013)
    User avatar
    bestfightstory
    * Glitter over Knives *
     
    Posts: 8511
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:13 pm


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:26 am
  • It is BS because football is a game of winning while you build. There is no reason why we can't succeed with a playoff berth in carroll's first season. Playing playoff games with the younger talent we have now is tenfold better for this team then getting Whitehurst reps on gameday. I am so glad the team isn't playing with the mentality some of the so-called fans have that it's ok to lose now as long as it means we'll win someday. I want to see my team competing at the highest level possible each and every week, that is what we pay to see. Putting in the second best qb on the team is not how you win games.
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 14045
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Objective look at Hasselbeck
Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:41 am
  • Hawk Strap wrote:
    zhawk wrote:i don't disagree that he had a horrible day.... i also don't expect him to have another game like that. it felt like he was trying to make up for his mistakes and just made it worse


    THAT is THE problem with Matt Hasselbeck


    I know I'm new here, but QFT. Hasselbeck plays as if he could just complete one of those lobs down the sideline, Al Harris' interception would be wiped off of the memory banks and he could be the hero on ESPN.
    User avatar
    Everett Hawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 100
    Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:27 am
    Location: Everett, WA


PreviousNext


It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:56 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE ARCHIVES ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests