| Author |
Message |
|
Jville
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:27 pm |
|
| * NET Alumni * |
 |
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:49 pm Posts: 1866
|
Well ...... Seattle has had a much better day than San Francisco. Looks like they have lost their general manager which could really upset their draft >>> viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12756
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
SeaTown81
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:01 pm |
|
| * NET Alumni * |
 |
 |
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am Posts: 4046 Location: Seattle, WA
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
rjdriver
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:23 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:11 am Posts: 590 Location: Utah
|
You guys checked out the Chargers forums for the hell of it? Kind of interesting, got on http://www.bolttalk.net/forums/showthread.php?t=21809 and was checking out SD's forums. In a nut shell; Started out with posts like this: "I seriously doubt a 3rd round tender would be gotten for Charlie. I mean seriously we just traded a former pro-bowl CB in Cromartie for a 3rd round tender. The thought of a guy who has taken a handful of snaps at the pro level after 4 years, doesn't really add up to getting a 3rd rounder for him. Not saying some desperate team wouldn't just saying it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY." and "I would gladly give him up for a 3rd. I din't think that it will happen though." and "Maybe we get a fifth or sixth rounder. Maybe a fourth next year." Most current posts looks like this: "Suck on that all you AJ doubters."" and "A.J. SMITH IS GOD !!!!!! ALL WHO DOUBT WILL BE CAST DOWN INTO THE BOWELS OF THE FORUM POSTERS SHOULD GET ON THEIR KNEES !!!" And....wait for it..... "HAHAHAHAHA OMG Its a great feeling to come home after a long day and see that AJ moved us up 20 spots in the 2nd, and got us an extra 3rd next year for a guy who has never thrown a pass in the NFL." Enough said. What does it mean? Nothing of course....I just wish ONE of our threads could share even a resemblance to theirs. First Seneca, then Tapp, Now this.... God, I hope my frustrations are unfounded.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
prelag
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:34 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm Posts: 571 Location: Las Vegas, NV
|
rjdriver wrote: You guys checked out the Chargers forums for the hell of it? Kind of interesting, got on http://www.bolttalk.net/forums/showthread.php?t=21809 and was checking out SD's forums. In a nut shell; Started out with posts like this: "I seriously doubt a 3rd round tender would be gotten for Charlie. I mean seriously we just traded a former pro-bowl CB in Cromartie for a 3rd round tender. The thought of a guy who has taken a handful of snaps at the pro level after 4 years, doesn't really add up to getting a 3rd rounder for him. Not saying some desperate team wouldn't just saying it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY." and "I would gladly give him up for a 3rd. I din't think that it will happen though." and "Maybe we get a fifth or sixth rounder. Maybe a fourth next year." Most current posts looks like this: "Suck on that all you AJ doubters."" and "A.J. SMITH IS GOD !!!!!! ALL WHO DOUBT WILL BE CAST DOWN INTO THE BOWELS OF THE FORUM POSTERS SHOULD GET ON THEIR KNEES !!!" And....wait for it..... "HAHAHAHAHA OMG Its a great feeling to come home after a long day and see that AJ moved us up 20 spots in the 2nd, and got us an extra 3rd next year for a guy who has never thrown a pass in the NFL." Enough said. What does it mean? Nothing of course....I just wish ONE of our threads could share even a resemblance to theirs. First Seneca, then Tapp, Now this.... God, I hope my frustrations are unfounded. It's not. Only the sheep on this forum are out sugar coating the deal. I would be partying if I was a Chargers fan as well. It was a total coupe by their GM.
_________________ My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid. http://www.seahawknation.net
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
six sigma
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:54 pm |
|
| NET Rookie |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 11:03 pm Posts: 159 Location: Longview
|
|
It's only natural for the SD fans to be stoked; they flat-out didn't need the guy. They have a stud at starting QB and a more than capable #2 still on the roster. I don't believe those comments are an indictment of Whitehurst's abilities.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
volsunghawk
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:33 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am Posts: 6169 Location: Surrounded by Elway, Tebow, and Manning jerseys
|
prelag wrote: volsunghawk wrote: No, by my logic, we shouldn't get all worked up over spending a late 2nd/early 3rd round on a prospective starting QB just because he has no NFL regular season experience precisely because teams do it all the time. And they often do it with higher stakes, spending earlier picks and more guaranteed money.
Examples of teams that have given up as much or more then we have for a 3rd string QB, in our case, one with no game experience I might add. Hell, has there been a team this year to use anything higher then a 3rd on a FA QB? Also, how is the #40 a late second? Its an early 2nd. Early enough to draft a stud RB or safety. You keep calling Whitehurst a 3rd-string QB, but rookies in the draft are NO string QBs until they're brought in. They haven't even proven they can make an NFL roster. The total value of the picks traded for Whitehurst is worth a late 2nd/early 3rd. It's not like we just tossed our 2nd round pick away. We got #60 in return, which is a late 2nd. Combine that with the 2011 3rd, and the value comes out to around the 2nd round/3rd round border. And by the way, you can still get "stud" players at the end of the 2nd, just as easily as you can get a bust early in the 1st.
_________________ Okay, so maybe that pass rush is still an issue. Lather, rinse, repeat.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Fuzzman55
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:44 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 3:10 pm Posts: 1357
|
|
The Hawks overpaid. Very few would dispute that. But the FO obviously identified QB as a need and weren't satisfied with any of the guys in the draft. Seeing all the question marks covering their grades I can easily agree with Carroll and company. There just isn't anyone there to get excited about, especially for a 1st round pick. So the question becomes, should they ignore the hole and wait until next year, or try to fill it with the guy they like the most and can get.
The FO obviously likes Whitehurst, and I haven't seen enough yet to judge their evaluation skills one way or another. As I said is a previous thread, this move will go along ways in defining this regime. But those who want to call Whitehurst a bum are not giving the move a fair shake. Let's see what he looks like in a Hawks uniform before condemning the pickup.
_________________ Tall men come down to my height when I hit 'em in the body.
Jack Dempsey
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
prelag
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:05 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm Posts: 571 Location: Las Vegas, NV
|
volsunghawk wrote: prelag wrote: volsunghawk wrote: No, by my logic, we shouldn't get all worked up over spending a late 2nd/early 3rd round on a prospective starting QB just because he has no NFL regular season experience precisely because teams do it all the time. And they often do it with higher stakes, spending earlier picks and more guaranteed money.
Examples of teams that have given up as much or more then we have for a 3rd string QB, in our case, one with no game experience I might add. Hell, has there been a team this year to use anything higher then a 3rd on a FA QB? Also, how is the #40 a late second? Its an early 2nd. Early enough to draft a stud RB or safety. You keep calling Whitehurst a 3rd-string QB, but rookies in the draft are NO string QBs until they're brought in. They haven't even proven they can make an NFL roster. The total value of the picks traded for Whitehurst is worth a late 2nd/early 3rd. It's not like we just tossed our 2nd round pick away. We got #60 in return, which is a late 2nd. Combine that with the 2011 3rd, and the value comes out to around the 2nd round/3rd round border. And by the way, you can still get "stud" players at the end of the 2nd, just as easily as you can get a bust early in the 1st. Thats all fine and dandy, but you avoided my question. Post some QB's that have gone for 2nd round picks in the past 5 years.
_________________ My hair is a banshee, your argument is invalid. http://www.seahawknation.net
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
dentonmorganjay
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:12 am |
|
| NET Bench Warmer |
 |
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:42 pm Posts: 2
|
|
I say we bring back Alexander anyone else notice that we didnt start losing till we booted him out the door. And how come LT can have a few injured seasons and he still gets picked up and Shaun didnt. I really hope Carrol can right the ship but I already miss the Holmgren era and its only been one season. Seattle fell too hard too fast.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
kearly
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:08 am |
|
| * Mr Random Thought * |
 |
 |
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am Posts: 7230
|
|
Great post RJDriver. I was looking for some Chargers fans reaction. That is priceless.
_________________  "I believe there’s merit to the idea that once something in life becomes conventional, it’s no longer the safest path to success." -Matt Waldman "If everyone's thinking alike, no one's thinking." -Bill Walsh
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
glasgow seahawks
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:50 am |
|
| NET Starter |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 1:01 pm Posts: 325
|
|
I have a feeling he could be the equivalent to hass. What had hass done under the shadow of farve before we brought him to Seattle? I have a feeling whitehurst could do the same job and susrpise a lot of people. Guy has simply been playing behind one of the elite backs in the league...and had to move to get the opportunity to show what he could do. I wish we had not given up the number 40....but i still feel he could be a bargain.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Seanhawk
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:59 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:04 pm Posts: 1343
|
Bigpumpkin wrote: A reincarnation if I've ever seen one!! Wait...Barry Gibb is dead? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
SeaTown81
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:22 am |
|
| * NET Alumni * |
 |
 |
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:35 am Posts: 4046 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Schefter retweeted this from some random user: Quote: Yeah, Whitehurst will be 28yo at the start of season! He's older then Aaron Rodgers also! The Hawks are taking a beating on this deal from everyone all around. It really isn't helping me be more positive about it.
_________________ LET'S RALLY TO BUILD A NEW HOME FOR THE SEATTLE SUPERSONICS!SonicsArena.com | #SonicsArena Like on Facebook & follow on Twitter to show support! http://www.facebook.com/sonicsarenahttp://www.twitter.com/sonicsarena
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
JerHawk81
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:44 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:13 am Posts: 1399 Location: Portland, OR
|
SeaTown81 wrote: Schefter retweeted this from some random user: Quote: Yeah, Whitehurst will be 28yo at the start of season! He's older then Aaron Rodgers also! The Hawks are taking a beating on this deal from everyone all around. It really isn't helping me be more positive about it. Well, if it makes you feel any better, if he works out great, he's only under contract for 2 years and will be a URFA at 30. .... No - seriously - I need a drink.
_________________ Remembering rookies will play like rookies, since 2012.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Rat
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:47 am |
|
| * NET Cynic * |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:42 pm Posts: 3492 Location: St. Louis, MO
|
SeaTown81 wrote: The Hawks are taking a beating on this deal from everyone all around. It really isn't helping me be more positive about it. Yeah, pretty much every team board I've gone on since the news broke has had a "What the F are the Seahawks doing?" thread. I like the move, but I know if it was another team doing it, I'd probably be laughing. It's a very unusual acquisition, but that's what I like about it.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
AF_Hawk
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:50 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm Posts: 1336 Location: Marysville, WA
|
|
I see the same thing as you all, right now the Seahawks are getting laughed at. I guess those that complain the Seahawks aren't getting talked about got their wish, just not the way they wanted it...
_________________ 
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
theENGLISHseahawk
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:09 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am Posts: 6395
|
|
Just listened to the ESPN radio thing (it was the Kevin Calabro show but he wasn't there) - stunned about the negativity on there. Some guy said he was disappointed because #40 would've been a good spot for 'Tebow or McCoy' (LOVVVVVVVVVL)... the same guy says it's 'obvious' that Whitehurst was the second choice after Anderson (errr.... NO. That's why Arizona signed him after they lost out on CW). Another guy called him 'Shaun Whitehurst'. Another was basically screaming down the phone about value and talked about the big drop from 40-60... without ANY justification for his complaints. THERE'S NOT SUCH A BIG DROP OFF FROM 40-60!
The best case scenario far outweighs the worst case in this deal. So much negativity on that radio show.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Largent80
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:17 am |
|
| NET Pro Bowler |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm Posts: 16422 Location: SoCal
|
|
From 40 to 60, BIG DEAL, in the math I learned, that is 20 players. Chances are that we get an impact player there. Wasn't Hamlin taken in about that spot?
As for Whitehurst, its already been said, that there is something we don't know that the people that do this for a living DO know. Another thing is that With Seneca, it was a sense of dread with him starting, now, its simply an unknown.
And, guess what?....we still have BOTH 1st round picks !!!!!
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
theENGLISHseahawk
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:22 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am Posts: 6395
|
|
Oh my god - now JIM MORA is sticking his oar in. 'Matt Hasselbeck deserves better'. Maybe this is the states for you... but in England, when a coach gets fired he either gets another job or he just keeps his head down. He doesn't go on the radio talking about what his replacement is doing with a critical eye.
What a crock.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
AF_Hawk
|
Post subject: Re: Whitehurst vs. Draft QB of the Future Rationalization Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:24 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm Posts: 1336 Location: Marysville, WA
|
|
I'm trying to stay positive too guys, but the fact they the Seahawks gave up so much for someone we really don't know anything about is disappointing. However, I'd rather take a chance on Whitehurst with the contract they gave him then an expensive one that doesn't pan out. In this league, if your first round QB choice doesn't work out, you just screwed yourself for about 4-6 years.
_________________ 
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests |
| |
|
|
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
|
 |