I get what you're saying, Kyle. But I would ask you this: Pretend you're a Seahawk. If Matt gets pulled mid way through the season (presuming he's performing adequately) for no other reason than the team is out of contention and the coaches want to give Charlie a tryout, what does that do to the whole notion of "the best player at each position will start"? In my mind it would undercut that philosophy.

We did give up quite a bit for Chuck. The coaching staff must see something in him, otherwise they wouldn't have brought him in for the price we paid. If Matt isn't brought back next year, Whitehurst will have the whole year to prove himself as a legitimate NFL QB or confirm his previous position on the SD depth chart. Regardless, I think next offseason, we'll be getting a QB whether CW is the guy or not.

_________________

He went to the pro bowl in 2007. So that was three years ago. In 2008, he missed 3/4 of the season because of a bad back. Hard to consider his play awful that year because he didn't play much. Last year, yes, he had an awful year. He also had a subpar (injury riddled) year in 2006 but bounced back in 2007 to have his best year of his career (numbers wise). The age is always an issue (can't turn back the clock). What can change and possibly help him is to devise a scheme that allows him to play to his strength and build the team around him. He hasn't had a consistent run game since 2005. Last year, it took a long time to establish a running game, by then the season was all but over. Even with Forsett or Jones, neither of those guys scared defenses like SA did in his prime or even Ricky Watters before him. The OL with no run attack has added pressure to Matt. Matt does an excellent job at managing the game, reading defenses, and accurate short-mid range passes. He get's in trouble when he feels he needs to take the team on his shoulders and then starts to force the action. That's what happened last year. The coaches, scheme (lack thereof), may have factored into a lot of what went wrong last year. Hopefully, he can turn it around. If not, Whitehurst, Teel, Reilly or someone else will take over. NFL is also an acronym for "Not For Long". SA experienced it and if Matt doesn't improve, he will too. With that said, I like Matt and in the right scheme with right players around him can do well. He's intelligent but one has to create plays and offense that use his strengths. The coaches couldn't do that last year. Maybe Bates/PC can. We'll see.

I'd trade Hasselbeck if there were an offer on the table, and I think it's better for our long-term future if Whitehurst starts (even if it results in a few less wins this season), but at the very least, there needs to be an open and honest QB battle. I don't like that it seems to be a "Hasselbeck's job to lose" situation. Forget what they've done in the past; whoever shows in camp/preseason that they can run the offense more effectively starts the year.

So you think Matt Hasselbeck has MVP type ability? I just want to make sure i read that correctly.

He has had some good seasons, been our best QB ever. But i wouldnt go so far as to say that he is MVP quality.

Not by a long shot.

_________________

Matt's the leader of this franchise and is the glue that will hold things together on offense as all the pieces come together, that alone is enough to have him inserted as the starter for a team that will have a learning curve. As far as injurys go when you have a seive for a line I don't care who is back there they will get beat up, Matts toughness in itself going thru that is an example of competitiveness and never say die menatality, something the rest of the team will follow by example and take on as the identity of the team.

He's not old really, a lot of QB's if they stay in the system are very good thru their mid 30's. Farve, Gannon, Warner, Plunkett, Jourgenson, are just a few examples, Doug Williams also that played at a high level. Matts asked to manage the games and make smart decisions, he gets in trouble when he tries to put the team on his back and do more. Thats just his desire to win and try to compensate for others.

Whitehurst being a direct line to mentor and learn from Matt will only benefit, he will get reps, he will be the QB in waiting presumably. He will have time to learn the system, earn the respect of the team and learn to lead. This will help him greatly if Matt goes down, or is not brought back next year.

Only thing I see possible at this point is Minnesota making a trade for him if Farve does not come back, and they will pay for him. Why because he's a winner, knows the system, is not goint to be a one year wonder and a problem, and with that team can get them where they want to go.

Farve has not cleaned out his locker in Minnesota yet so thats a reach, but if there was anyplace Matt would end up this late that would be it.

_________________


To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question................Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
Used to be an Alumni till they pulled a USC on me...
.Net official Clueless, Dumbass, Douche, Simpleton, CensoredTard , and Idiot.

Pete Carroll said from the beginning - you get your QB and you build around him. So far, this appears to be happening. Improved O-line, improved running game, and more options at receiver. PC is putting Hass in a position to succeed. Ruskell and company obviously didn't do that.

SO, with the improved O-line, better run support, more options at receiver, AND competition from CW, Matt is poised for a comeback year. He's going to battle, and he's not going to go away quietly. If he loses the job, then clearly, CW is our best bet at QB.

But given the current circumstances, I don't think he'll lose this battle. We've seen the spazzlebeck when he's hurt or has no protection, but we've also seen the Hasslebeck-led, 4th-quarter, 2-minute offense comeback for the win.

If the season is lost, that philosophy isn't doing us any good anyways. Tell everyone that they are competing for their jobs next year and go with youth. Tell the players you want to mix it up to see if different combination of players will win more games (my favorite, it shows that the coaching staff isn't just keeping the status quo, they're trying new things to win). Hell, shelve Matt with an injury (cause you know by the halfway mark something or another will be bothering him) and use that as your excuse. Any of those work. Let's be honest - coaches make plenty of mistakes evaluating players - Chuck Darby vs Mebane, JJ vs Forsett (JJ vs anyone?), Kelly Herndon vs Kelly Jennings, etc. (Yes, they're not this coaching staff, but we see backups outperforming the initial starters all the time on lots of teams) Letting a young guy play may not even make the team worse, it could prove beneficial.

I'd rather give myself an improved chance of making the playoffs in 2011 than possibly an improved chance of winning meaningless games (and I don't buy momentum, I haven't heard one person here talk about how we have to fight the negative momentum of last year, why should positive momentum exist but not negative? Besides, every player says "it's 0-0 right now" when it's time to start the season) in 2010.

Waiting until after 2011 to make a decision on a QB would be a big mistake. Matt will almost assuredly be gone and Whitehurst's contract will be up. Whoever we bring in will be under a ton of pressure to start right away, and likely it'd be a rookie QB. QBs who start as rookies tend to fail at a higher rate than those who spend a year or two learning things, and the ones who succeed usually do so with a great running attack (Pitt with Big Ben, Baltimore with Flacco, Atlanta with Ryan). Even with a great running attack, I still believe it'd be smarter to pick your QB in 2010 and let him learn the ropes - because a rookie QB with a great running attack might make the playoffs by protecting the QB, but if the QB is capable of helping the offense (as opposed to not screwing the offense) it could really improve the team.

Taking a QB in 2010 without seeing Whitehurst in a game would be almost as big an error. While it may not screw things up like starting a rookie QB, it would be a poor use of resources. I'd much rather have a realistic idea of what Whitehurst brings to the table than go into the draft blind. Maybe Whitehurst is actually a darn good QB, and you just took a QB in the first round because you let Matt go 16 (well, that's unlikely... 13?) games. You can't go just off practice either, IMO. Some guys practice at a different level than they play, not due to effort or anything but practice does not simulate an actual game.

_________________
Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.

My comment was refering to SBXL and had the Seahawks been allowed to play (thus the anything near normal circumstances) we would have won and Matt would have definatley been the super bowl MVP.

I will say, if Matt comes in healthy and a few things go right, like Mike Williams provides a Jurevicous type reciever and Tate/Housh,Branch and Butler perform well and not only run the right routes, but finish them, along with better pass protection and a decent running game, If Matt perfrormed at the level he did in 05 or 06, I wouldn't be suprised.

It may sound like alot, but IMO, it should be expected including the defense playing well enough to keep average teams from running the score up on us.

Matt has proven he can perform with a half way decent WR core and an average level defense, he did it in 06 when Holmgren announced to the NFL, we're gonna throw the ball, and throw the ball we did. That year was also a year with a below average running game (thus the, we're gonna throw the ball) and no above average recievers.

The only question is, how much does he still have? 34 is not ancient for a QB and many QB's have made stellar comebacks past that age.

_________________
Quoting Montanahawk05:
the foremost reason, by a long margin, of Seattle's continued struggles the last three years is Matt Hasselbeck. Hass's arm strength has declined to the vanishing point. [b]They're stacking the line and jumping routes because they don't respect Hasselbeck's arm.

I have a feeling we'll see Whitehurst in "real" action this coming season whether it be him beating out Matt for the #1 job, Matt getting injured, garbage time, etc. Regardless of whether Whitehurst turns out to be nothing, a hidden super star, or something in between; IMO we need another QB, especially if Matt is not re-signed.

_________________

Man, you guys are crazy!

Matt is only two seasons removed from a Pro Bowl season (his third). One of those seasons he was injured for most of the season (like everyone else on the offence that year) and the other he was stuck in a stupid system run by that moron Greg Knapp. Last year he tried (and failed) to put the team on his back because everyone and everything else about that offence was awful.

Give him a decent system, decent targets, a running game to draw attention away from him, keep him upright and Matt will LIGHT IT UP. So long as he isn't thrust into a position where he feels he has to play "gunslinger" to make something happen, Matt is a great QB. I predict he wins the comeback player of the year, or is at least part of the conversation.

CW was brought in to be a capable back up (ie: not Seneca) and a fire under Matt's ass.

_________________
My milkshake brings all the turtles to the yard.... damn right... and men's room Drakkar... damn right... and men's room Drakkar.

For the past two offseasons we have heard that Matt (if healthy) will light it up and win the comeback player of the year award. Even if we assume that he is 100% healthy, he still can't make all the throws. He had trouble with some of the deeper outs and flies with Holmgren here and he will have even more trouble in Bates' system. It hurst to say it because I'm a huge MH fan, but even if Matt is 100% healthy, he still isn't good enough for this system, imo.

Hmm so did a guy named Montana, or Dave Kreig, or Bob Greise, Matt can throw the ball adequetly down field, I mean you could have Joe Gilliam, J Russell, Ryan Leaf and others if ya just want to chuck it down field but then you have to worry about game management, and making the right decisions.

Besides most of the games receivers make their yards on RAC. Home run balls happen but you can't base an offense on them specifically.

I'll take Matt thank you very much.

_________________


To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question................Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
Used to be an Alumni till they pulled a USC on me...
.Net official Clueless, Dumbass, Douche, Simpleton, CensoredTard , and Idiot.

This is the best reason I've seen so far for getting rid of Hasselbeck. Why would you build around a QB who is only going to be here for one year at most?

It really is too bad we can't get anything for him in trade. With the way our FO handled the draft, we may have plucked another starter if we could have got a 4th round pick for him.

I say we just make him the #2 man and let him play out his contract. No need to release him, as I'm not sold on Teel as a primary backup.

We need to see what we have in Charlie. We really haven't given up much to get him...if he ends up a capable #2 we've paid about right, if he ends up starter quality, we've stolen him. But we really need to find out if we have to draft Mallet or Luck next year.

I'm pretty sure the equivalent of a 3rd and a 4th is pretty steep for adequate backup. I mean, we gave up Seneca (who can't possibly be considered less than a capable #2) for, what, a 2011 7th? 2011 6th?

_________________
Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.

Me neither. At least not on a team level, especially with the overhaul of a typical offseason. Individual momentum? Sure, in some cases. But that just lends itself even more to giving Whitehurst meaningful reps this year instead of having him carry a clipboard in favor of an on-the-outs 35 year old (in Sept.) QB.



Not to mention the Raiders acquired a superior prospect in Jason Campbell for a 2012 conditional 4th rounder that they will only have to pay if Campbell leads his team to the playoffs or makes a pro-bowl.

_________________

"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

On topic:

I think the chance to trade Hass has come and gone. Holmgren offered the Hawks one of his 3rd rounders, but Seattle turned it down. Since then, he's added 3 QBs, including Jake Delhomme who is basically Hasselbeck-lite and on a similar contract. Not a lot of other teams could make use of Hasselbeck, who would need a great OL and a precision offense. The only other reasonably possible suitor is Minnesota if Favre actually retires and leaves the Vikings holding the bag (don't count on it).

Hass will remain a Seahawk and the way things are going, he will start as long as he is physically able to. Seattle has an outside shot at winning the division so this isn't a completely idiotic idea, but I'd rather start Whitehurst, even if it means blowing a chance for an 8-8 playoff berth. Without getting into the draft implications (which would be significant) of such a scenario, I just think that for the sake of not wasting a big investment, Seattle needs to get Whitehurst some real reps. I can easily imagine a scenario where Seattle passes on Ryan Mallett or Jake Locker next year because they still want to see more from Whitehurst, and they have a DE/WR that they rate as highly. That would be a fatal mistake.

As such, starting Hasselbeck this year could lead to a domino effect that damages the team long term at the QB position, (especially if he plays well enough to get an extension). We can look back and see how trading a future 3rd last year for Butler may very well have cost the team the ability to draft Clausen at #40 (since not having that 3rd this year complicated the CW deal).

I've accepted that Hass will be the starter, but if I was running this team, he wouldn't be. Of course, I'll root for him like I always do, but I will root harder for Whitehurst this preseason.

_________________

"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

Kearly,

Where does that 3rd round offer come from? Heard it a few times but never seen a source. Hard for me to believe it. If true and they turned it down, I want both fired immediately.

I think that Pete Carroll and John Schneider should be fired and Matt should take over as GM/Head Coach. John Schneider could be the team mascot and Pete Carroll can join the cheerleaders.

Woooo!! Go Seahawks!

_________________
Joe Vellano, DT, 6'1", 300lbs, 61 tkls 14 TFL, 6 sacks" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc_yzeVi-eU, Mike Catapano 6'4" 271
QB Jordan Rodgers 6'1" 212# 2539 Yards, 60% completion 15td/5int

I think you are wrong there. Obviously some people do consider Seneca to be less than a capable #2 QB. Probably most of the league.

_________________

Or, the price of a #2 is pretty darn low... That was my intent in bringing up Seneca...

_________________
Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.