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.
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.
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........
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.
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.
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.
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.
JohnnyB wrote:He hasn't lost anything from his best years.
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
kidhawk wrote:Whitehurst is not now, never has been, and never will be the answer at qb..
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.
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.
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
kidhawk wrote: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.
Largent80 wrote: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?
JohnnyB wrote: Matt is a great QB right now and probably will be for three or four more years, plenty of time to develop the team around him.
Trrrroy wrote:JohnnyB wrote: Matt is a great QB right now and probably will be for three or four more years, plenty of time to develop the team around him.
Not in this offense. Matt is a terrible fit. Matt may (a huge may), be able to have a decent two or three more years left in a offense like Holmy's were arm strength isn't necessary.
And do you really think that Carroll and Schnieder plan on developing this very young offense around a 35 year old Hass, who is a terrible fit for Bate's system? I sure don't, and if they did, I'm pretty sure Matt's contract would have been extended by now. Why risk letting him hit free agency when you already know he's the guy you want behind center for the next four years?
First off, can the hatred crap. This isn't an emotional analysis, it's not about hate.JohnnyB wrote:Largent80 wrote: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?
In the Broncos game Hasselbeck threw numerous strong and accurate passes. Why completely ignore those, as if they simply didn't happen? Why focus in on soft touch passes that were left short, ignoring his obvious attempt to loft a ball over defenders which requires a touch pass instead of putting heat on it? "Lessee, he left it short. Umm...His arm is gone! His arm it gone!" Why completely forget the Pro Bowl level performance a mere seven days earlier during which he was close to as accurate and consistent as it gets in the NFL, again with plenty of zip on the ball when required?
Why do all of you take your hatred of losing out on the easiest target instead of looking objectively at what is actually going on? Matt is a great QB right now and probably will be for three or four more years, plenty of time to develop the team around him.
JohnnyB wrote:You say he's "a terrible fit" yet you provide no reason.
SalishHawkFan wrote:First off, can the hatred crap. This isn't an emotional analysis, it's not about hate.JohnnyB wrote:Largent80 wrote: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?
In the Broncos game Hasselbeck threw numerous strong and accurate passes. Why completely ignore those, as if they simply didn't happen? Why focus in on soft touch passes that were left short, ignoring his obvious attempt to loft a ball over defenders which requires a touch pass instead of putting heat on it? "Lessee, he left it short. Umm...His arm is gone! His arm it gone!" Why completely forget the Pro Bowl level performance a mere seven days earlier during which he was close to as accurate and consistent as it gets in the NFL, again with plenty of zip on the ball when required?
Why do all of you take your hatred of losing out on the easiest target instead of looking objectively at what is actually going on? Matt is a great QB right now and probably will be for three or four more years, plenty of time to develop the team around him.
Second, I like how you say we should look objectively at what is actually going on and in the next breathe say Matt is a great QB right now.
Great QB's don't throw 13 INTs in 5 games. If he keeps this pace up, he'll throw 40 INTs in one season. NO QB has ever done that. You know why? He gets BENCHED.
Trrrroy wrote:JohnnyB wrote:You say he's "a terrible fit" yet you provide no reason.
He's a terrible fit because he has a terrible arm. Bates offense is catered to guys with good arms. All the QB's brought in this year had good arms. Cutler, who Bates called the plays for in Denver had a good arm. Besides, If Hass who they want to mold thier QB's after, they would have picked up a guys a lot more like him, and a lot less like Whitehurst and Losman.
muxpux wrote:you guys do realize that without Andrews' holding penalty, the pick on the opening drive never happens, and who knows how the game goes after that.
just checking.
muxpux wrote:you guys do realize that without Andrews' holding penalty, the pick on the opening drive never happens, and who knows how the game goes after that.
just checking.
warner28 wrote:muxpux wrote:you guys do realize that without Andrews' holding penalty, the pick on the opening drive never happens, and who knows how the game goes after that.
just checking.
This is one of my favorites.
So because someone else did something dumb (and it was Locklear that held not Andrews) the veteran captain of the team is excused when he makes an even bigger blunder (and that int is much worse than the hold)?
I just don't get that line of reasoning.
Matt should be the calming force that keeps the offense going after a penalty, that is what captains do, not throw a joke of a ball for a pick on the next play.
JohnnyB wrote:This is a huge myth totally unsupported by what we can all see in every game.
What Bates requires is *accuracy.* Hasselbeck has that in spades.
JohnnyB wrote:This is a huge myth totally unsupported by what we can all see in every game.
What Bates requires is *accuracy.* Hasselbeck has that in spades.
MontanaHawk05 wrote:JohnnyB wrote:This is a huge myth totally unsupported by what we can all see in every game.
If you're talking about distance, I must point out that "throwing deep" doesn't just mean being able to get the ball 50 yards downfield. We've seen Hasselbeck do that, and I've seen high school girls do it too. Throwing deep is the ability to get the ball downfield quickly and powerfully in such a way that it doesn't float for an hour and give DB's time to react to it.
A "deep ball" is not the hanging-for-a-million-years, off-the-top-of-the-TV-screen, pretty-pretty-beautiful-happy-flower-children rainbow pass that Matt usually throws, the kind that requires a WR to completely beat coverage or else the DB will turn around, idly pick his nose, and then casually pull the ball out of the air. A real deep ball is the freakin' BULLET that Drew Brees throws that slices between double coverage and that doesn't need a ton of height because DB's don't even have time to see it coming. THAT'S a damn deep ball. And by that definition, Matt has never thrown a deep ball in his life.What Bates requires is *accuracy.* Hasselbeck has that in spades.
He used to have that in spades, sure. But it's getting worse and worse as time goes on. He's missing Carlson like a disease now, and I'm noticing that WR's are having to go UP for more and more of his passes, instead of them coming straight to the numbers on their jerseys.
Trrrroy wrote:JohnnyB wrote:This is a huge myth totally unsupported by what we can all see in every game.
C'mon Johnny, even the staunchest Hass supporters recognize that he has a weak arm. If you don't believe me, look at tape of Hass throwing a 50 yard pass, then look at any other QB with a legit arm do that same pass, be it Whitehurst, Losman, Flacco, either one of the Manning bros, Brees.... heck, even Seneca had a better deep pass.
He's a terrible fit because he has a terrible arm.
Donk70 wrote:His passes lacked zip and he underthrew alot. I question his going deep on 4th and 2.
It is currently Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:52 am