The 4 year plan

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:59 am
  • Hawksfan76 wrote:well if pete carroll goes 7-9 for a third straight year then what improvements has he really made? we basically have a whole new team that is still mediocore. the whole league is getting better so yes are team is better than 2 years ago but so is the rest of the league. we need to take a bigger leap to get to the top. we need that elite quarterback plain and simple.


    And what if we don't get him? What if it's not Russ or Flynn? What if we draft a guy next year and he sucks?
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 13946
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:00 am
  • Hawksfan76 wrote:well if pete carroll goes 7-9 for a third straight year then what improvements has he really made? we basically have a whole new team that is still mediocore. the whole league is getting better so yes are team is better than 2 years ago but so is the rest of the league. we need to take a bigger leap to get to the top. we need that elite quarterback plain and simple.


    The whole league is getting better? So everyone will have a winning record? How might I ask does that work?
    Last edited by CANHawk on Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
    So you're admitting I'm a celeb...
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11192
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:01 am
  • Zebulon Dak wrote:
    Hawksfan76 wrote:well if pete carroll goes 7-9 for a third straight year then what improvements has he really made? we basically have a whole new team that is still mediocore. the whole league is getting better so yes are team is better than 2 years ago but so is the rest of the league. we need to take a bigger leap to get to the top. we need that elite quarterback plain and simple.


    And what if we don't get him? What if it's not Russ or Flynn? What if we draft a guy next year and he sucks?



    then we will remain a mediocore team.
    Image
    GO HAWKS!!!!
    User avatar
    Hawksfan76
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 48
    Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 9:34 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:01 am
  • Hawksfan76 wrote:
    Zebulon Dak wrote:
    Hawksfan76 wrote:well if pete carroll goes 7-9 for a third straight year then what improvements has he really made? we basically have a whole new team that is still mediocore. the whole league is getting better so yes are team is better than 2 years ago but so is the rest of the league. we need to take a bigger leap to get to the top. we need that elite quarterback plain and simple.


    And what if we don't get him? What if it's not Russ or Flynn? What if we draft a guy next year and he sucks?



    then we will remain a mediocore team.


    Right. Then what?
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 13946
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:04 am
  • CANHawk wrote:
    Hawksfan76 wrote:well if pete carroll goes 7-9 for a third straight year then what improvements has he really made? we basically have a whole new team that is still mediocore. the whole league is getting better so yes are team is better than 2 years ago but so is the rest of the league. we need to take a bigger leap to get to the top. we need that elite quarterback plain and simple.


    The whole league is getting better? So everyone will have a winning record? How does how might I ask does that work?


    no they won't obviously but all the teams seem to be getting better and more competitive across the board so it all comes down to whether or not we have a quarterback to take us to the next level. i like the rest of our team but it comes down to the quarterback and maybe a bigtime receiver. whether it's wilson or flynn that can do this for us who knows but i feel that's where we stand between greatness and where we are now.
    Image
    GO HAWKS!!!!
    User avatar
    Hawksfan76
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 48
    Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 9:34 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:10 am
  • Hawksfan76 wrote:
    CANHawk wrote:
    Hawksfan76 wrote:well if pete carroll goes 7-9 for a third straight year then what improvements has he really made? we basically have a whole new team that is still mediocore. the whole league is getting better so yes are team is better than 2 years ago but so is the rest of the league. we need to take a bigger leap to get to the top. we need that elite quarterback plain and simple.


    The whole league is getting better? So everyone will have a winning record? How does how might I ask does that work?


    no they won't obviously but all the teams seem to be getting better and more competitive across the board so it all comes down to whether or not we have a quarterback to take us to the next level. i like the rest of our team but it comes down to the quarterback and maybe a bigtime receiver. whether it's wilson or flynn that can do this for us who knows but i feel that's where we stand between greatness and where we are now.


    Oh, like the 0-4 Saints and the 1-3 Lions, right?
    So you're admitting I'm a celeb...
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11192
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:11 am
  • then we will remain a mediocore team.

    Right. Then what?


    then who knows, new coaches. different direction. same old seahawks finishing middle of the pack.
    Last edited by Hawksfan76 on Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:13 am, edited 2 times in total.
    Image
    GO HAWKS!!!!
    User avatar
    Hawksfan76
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 48
    Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 9:34 am
    Location: Idaho


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:11 am
  • To further my point above....I've said for the last year that Pete Carroll's future employment in the NFL is almost completely dependent on him finding the right QB for this team and I stand by that assertation. Because of the rules of the game nowdays favoring the passing game so completely I don't think you are SB caliber without the at least a top 10 QB.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 10756
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:11 am
  • Too busy to type out what I really want to say now, but...

    ...what Can said, and what Montana agreed with.

    That is all.
    "God bless America, and God bless the Seattle Seahawks" - Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    HoustonHawk82
    * NET Mechanic *
     
    Posts: 5740
    Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 11:51 am
    Location: is not important, when you're good.


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:41 am
  • sorry Kearly, but pointing out what a great job they've done building this team isn't addressing the valid concerns people are having right now. No one is unhappy with their ability to build a team. We all Trust Pete and John when it comes to building this team. There are valid concerns, however, when it comes to playcalling (onsides kick anyone? 3rd and 2?). You can go back two years and see WTF? moments in Pete's playcalling which he later - admirably I might add - took the blame for.

    But the biggest concern is the choice of starting Wilson now. Maybe he'll one day be that QB we've all been waiting for. But a rookie has a lot to learn and it's best for him to sit out a year or two and get acclimated to the speed and technicality of the NFL. Flynn already did that. Flynn comes from a team known for producing good QB's. Flynn already proved he can play in a regular season game with success. Wilson should never have won the job. Pete should have KNOWN better. By giving Wilson the job Pete basically said this year was expendable. We'll take what we can get. But Pete overlooked two critical things no head coach should ever overlook: A rookie can get overwhelmed, shell shocked and develop bad habits if thrown into the fire before he's ready. Wilson needed to acclimate. He's already shown signs that he's regressing, just as you yourself pointed out. The other thing is that it takes time even for a guy who is ready to start, aka Flynn, to learn how to play efficiently day in and day out. Look at Hass. Sat out two years, got the starting job, sucked (150 yds per game sound familiar?) and got benched. Then, his second time around he took off.

    It takes time even for QB's who've been in the NFL a while to develop.

    Wilson should have been on the bench, learning, from the get go. Flynn should have been out there getting his hands dirty from the get go. That way, Flynn develops into a quality QB much sooner and Wilson, who's developmental track was always bound to be longer than Flynn's, can get valuable experience without costing the team games.

    Instead, Pete bypassed Flynn and put Wilson on the fast track. It was a mistake. Mistakes about who your starting QB should be are deadly in the NFL. Not just to the team, but to the coaches credibility. Combine that with craptastic playcalling in crucial moments and there aren't many who will retain faith in Pete no matter how fantastic he is at building a good team. Pete needs to let Flynn play. If Flynn can't cut it, worst thing that happens is he would have given Wilson time to regather himself, learn on the sidelines and have a fire lit underneath him to get better and reclaim his team. If Flynn succeeds, nobody cares anymore that Pete made a bad judgement call because he corrected it. If Flynn fails, everyone sees that Pete's judgement was correct and it was just a matter of him not really having ANY QB that was ready, but at least he now can go back to Wilson knowing that he left no stone unturned.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4486
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:48 am
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:sorry Kearly, but pointing out what a great job they've done building this team isn't addressing the valid concerns people are having right now. No one is unhappy with their ability to build a team. We all Trust Pete and John when it comes to building this team. There are valid concerns, however, when it comes to playcalling (onsides kick anyone? 3rd and 2?). You can go back two years and see WTF? moments in Pete's playcalling which he later - admirably I might add - took the blame for.

    But the biggest concern is the choice of starting Wilson now. Maybe he'll one day be that QB we've all been waiting for. But a rookie has a lot to learn and it's best for him to sit out a year or two and get acclimated to the speed and technicality of the NFL. Flynn already did that. Flynn comes from a team known for producing good QB's. Flynn already proved he can play in a regular season game with success. Wilson should never have won the job. Pete should have KNOWN better. By giving Wilson the job Pete basically said this year was expendable. We'll take what we can get. But Pete overlooked two critical things no head coach should ever overlook: A rookie can get overwhelmed, shell shocked and develop bad habits if thrown into the fire before he's ready. Wilson needed to acclimate. He's already shown signs that he's regressing, just as you yourself pointed out. The other thing is that it takes time even for a guy who is ready to start, aka Flynn, to learn how to play efficiently day in and day out. Look at Hass. Sat out two years, got the starting job, sucked (150 yds per game sound familiar?) and got benched. Then, his second time around he took off.

    It takes time even for QB's who've been in the NFL a while to develop.

    Wilson should have been on the bench, learning, from the get go. Flynn should have been out there getting his hands dirty from the get go. That way, Flynn develops into a quality QB much sooner and Wilson, who's developmental track was always bound to be longer than Flynn's, can get valuable experience without costing the team games.

    Instead, Pete bypassed Flynn and put Wilson on the fast track. It was a mistake. Mistakes about who your starting QB should be are deadly in the NFL. Not just to the team, but to the coaches credibility. Combine that with craptastic playcalling in crucial moments and there aren't many who will retain faith in Pete no matter how fantastic he is at building a good team. Pete needs to let Flynn play. If Flynn can't cut it, worst thing that happens is he would have given Wilson time to regather himself, learn on the sidelines and have a fire lit underneath him to get better and reclaim his team. If Flynn succeeds, nobody cares anymore that Pete made a bad judgement call because he corrected it. If Flynn fails, everyone sees that Pete's judgement was correct and it was just a matter of him not really having ANY QB that was ready, but at least he now can go back to Wilson knowing that he left no stone unturned.


    All your rhetoric boils down to the oldest and least true argument in the NFL. We aren't winning because the backup is being squandered on the bench. The idea that the backup needs to start so we can see what we got is tired, and bullshit to the core. It automatically assumes that the coach/staff has not seen enough in camp, practice, and preseason to make the right decision.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10541
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:52 am
  • Scottemojo wrote:All your rhetoric boils down to the oldest and least true argument in the NFL. We aren't winning because the backup is being squandered on the bench. The idea that the backup needs to start so we can see what we got is tired, and bullshit to the core. It automatically assumes that the coach/staff has not seen enough in camp, practice, and preseason to make the right decision.


    But the backup has more exper... er... he's more mobile and can esca... er... he's been in Carroll's system longe... er... he's got a stronger ar... er... he's three inches taller, damnit!
    World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.
    User avatar
    Seahawk Sailor
    * .NET Navy Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 18155
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
    Location: The beautiful PNW


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:54 am
  • It DOES assume the staff didn't make the right decision. Making the decision to start a rookie QB in his first year is almost invariably the WRONG decision if you have ANYONE capable of starting instead. Look at Peytons first year. Look at any elite QB's rookie year when he was thrown into the fire. The teams that do that HAVE to do that. Choice isn't an option. They picked so high in the draft because they already sucked and needed a QB.

    But when you've got THREE QB's, one with extensive experience - albeit he'd never improve past mediocre - one with excellent credentials and potential who'd already shown he can succeed in the NFL and one who's a wet behind the ears QB you took in the third round, you're making a mistake to start him.

    The results of that mistake are so obvious that even Kearly sees it despite how hyped up he's been about Wilson. The guy is regressing.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4486
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:55 am
  • Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?
    User avatar
    iigakusei
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 850
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 6:14 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:56 am
  • Scottemojo wrote:
    SalishHawkFan wrote:sorry Kearly, but pointing out what a great job they've done building this team isn't addressing the valid concerns people are having right now. No one is unhappy with their ability to build a team. We all Trust Pete and John when it comes to building this team. There are valid concerns, however, when it comes to playcalling (onsides kick anyone? 3rd and 2?). You can go back two years and see WTF? moments in Pete's playcalling which he later - admirably I might add - took the blame for.

    But the biggest concern is the choice of starting Wilson now. Maybe he'll one day be that QB we've all been waiting for. But a rookie has a lot to learn and it's best for him to sit out a year or two and get acclimated to the speed and technicality of the NFL. Flynn already did that. Flynn comes from a team known for producing good QB's. Flynn already proved he can play in a regular season game with success. Wilson should never have won the job. Pete should have KNOWN better. By giving Wilson the job Pete basically said this year was expendable. We'll take what we can get. But Pete overlooked two critical things no head coach should ever overlook: A rookie can get overwhelmed, shell shocked and develop bad habits if thrown into the fire before he's ready. Wilson needed to acclimate. He's already shown signs that he's regressing, just as you yourself pointed out. The other thing is that it takes time even for a guy who is ready to start, aka Flynn, to learn how to play efficiently day in and day out. Look at Hass. Sat out two years, got the starting job, sucked (150 yds per game sound familiar?) and got benched. Then, his second time around he took off.

    It takes time even for QB's who've been in the NFL a while to develop.

    Wilson should have been on the bench, learning, from the get go. Flynn should have been out there getting his hands dirty from the get go. That way, Flynn develops into a quality QB much sooner and Wilson, who's developmental track was always bound to be longer than Flynn's, can get valuable experience without costing the team games.

    Instead, Pete bypassed Flynn and put Wilson on the fast track. It was a mistake. Mistakes about who your starting QB should be are deadly in the NFL. Not just to the team, but to the coaches credibility. Combine that with craptastic playcalling in crucial moments and there aren't many who will retain faith in Pete no matter how fantastic he is at building a good team. Pete needs to let Flynn play. If Flynn can't cut it, worst thing that happens is he would have given Wilson time to regather himself, learn on the sidelines and have a fire lit underneath him to get better and reclaim his team. If Flynn succeeds, nobody cares anymore that Pete made a bad judgement call because he corrected it. If Flynn fails, everyone sees that Pete's judgement was correct and it was just a matter of him not really having ANY QB that was ready, but at least he now can go back to Wilson knowing that he left no stone unturned.


    All your rhetoric boils down to the oldest and least true argument in the NFL. We aren't winning because the backup is being squandered on the bench. The idea that the backup needs to start so we can see what we got is tired, and bullshit to the core. It automatically assumes that the coach/staff has not seen enough in camp, practice, and preseason to make the right decision.


    Or the starter is on the bench, and the backup is the mistake starter. Just depends on how you wish to look at things. Who is to say which is right or wrong at this point?

    It is what it is.
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1373
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:00 pm
  • iigakusei wrote:Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1373
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:02 pm
  • Thanks for another great read kearly. I agree pretty much on every point.

    I'm trying my best not to be dissapointed in this offense right now. Life is short afterall and every year our offense blows chunks is another year of seahawk fandom we never get back but.... I still firmly believe that they are building this team in the right direction and I'm loving the players that are in place for the most part.

    I will add though, that if the offense doesn't show a gradual improvement over the course of this year, and a much larger improvement next, that Carroll and company need to be on the hot seat if not fired out right by then.

    If they can show improvement week by week this year, I can still be "all in".
    User avatar
    bellingerga
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5309
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:28 pm
    Location: Beaverton, Oregon


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:02 pm
  • kf3339 wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.


    Is that you, Michael Lombardi? If so, please say why Flynn is the better option, not just "HOLY SHORT QUARTERBACK, BATMAN!"
    World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.
    User avatar
    Seahawk Sailor
    * .NET Navy Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 18155
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
    Location: The beautiful PNW


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:07 pm
  • Whitehurst is not Flynn. I was the only person on this board who was outraged at what we gave up to get Whitehurst. Everyone was so giddy about P&J's first draft that I got ripped into left and right for criticizing that move. Whitehurst had done NOTHING to make anyone think he'd ever amount to anything.

    Flynn is not Whitehurst. Flynn HAS done things to show he can succeed in the NFL, just ask Bart Starr, Bret Favre and Aaron Rodgers. He set records none of them hold. All Flynn didn't do was show up early enough and leave late enough to get on Petes good side, then he was asked to play too conservatively in the two first preseason games. Wilsons style was always going to look great in the preseason where he's not up against anything but vanilla defenses. But when the training wheels went on, Flynn didn't shine.

    Lots of great players don't shine during preseason and kick butt during the regular season. They even had a show on it on Sportscenter one time.

    No, Pete chose Wilson because Pete's "unconventional wisdom" and all the grief he took for picking him and Pete's inability to move past his college football years (onsides kicks, fancy plays that only work in college, etc.) blinded him to the fact that Wilson would not have the same success in the regular season. Pete has too much college 'rah rah" in him to get past how exciting Wilson looked vs vanilla defenses and second stringers to realize that Flynn might not look as flashy, but he's got the skillset to start in the NFL right NOW.

    For the record: I'd rather see Wilson succeed. I was never very hyped on Flynn. His passes are wobbly, he doesn't have a strong arm. And I think the Seahawks can still make the playoffs despite Wilson's learning curve holding them back.

    But Wilson shouldn't be thrust into the fire so soon. He's just not ready and he'll regress. He might never realize his potential BECAUSE he's starting now. Flynn IS ready. Flynn should have started all along.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4486
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:09 pm
  • kf3339 wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.


    I guess that is why there was so much demand for him in the off-season? That Detroit game was a one-off - of that I am positive. Look, I think Flynn is a good QB, but I trust the coaches that see these guys every day in practice to make the right decision.
    User avatar
    iigakusei
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 850
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 6:14 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:12 pm
  • kf3339 wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.

    31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10541
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:17 pm
  • Scottemojo wrote:
    kf3339 wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.

    31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?

    One knew they were drafting Luck. One was trying to grab RG3. One grabbed Tannehill. A couple were in the hunt for Mr. Manning. One in Florida didn't offer him as good a deal as we did. The rest already had QB's they were going with. Who would have grabbed Flynn besides Miami that didn't already have someone lined up? You aren't going to dump a QB with experience in your system for an untested FA. The Niners would have snatched up Manning, but dump Smith for Flynn? No way.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4486
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:20 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:
    kf3339 wrote:
    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.

    31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?

    One knew they were drafting Luck. One was trying to grab RG3. One grabbed Tannehill. A couple were in the hunt for Mr. Manning. One in Florida didn't offer him as good a deal as we did. The rest already had QB's they were going with. Who would have grabbed Flynn besides Miami that didn't already have someone lined up? You aren't going to dump a QB with experience in your system for an untested FA. The Niners would have snatched up Manning, but dump Smith for Flynn? No way.


    But Smith's never thrown for 6 TDs and 480 yards!!!!11!!11!!1
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7901
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:23 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:Flynn HAS done things to show he can succeed in the NFL, just ask Bart Starr, Bret Favre and Aaron Rodgers. He set records none of them hold.


    So have Damon Huard, Charlie Batch, Paul Justin (who!?), Todd Collins, Billy Volek, and Chad Pennington. Can I ask them?
    World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.
    User avatar
    Seahawk Sailor
    * .NET Navy Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 18155
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
    Location: The beautiful PNW


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:29 pm
  • iigakusei wrote:Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    People keep saying this. If Carroll and Schneider thought Flynn wasn't very good, then why'd they sign him and give him 10 million?

    To me Flynn is a Hasselbeck type QB, not Hall of Fame material, but a serviceable QB that you can win with, and even go to the Superbowl with if all other parts of the team excel. He can read defenses, he's smart, and he can make enough plays during the course of a game to win.

    But we'll never find out cause he's holding a clipboard while we throw for 120 yards a game cause we're starting a rookie QB.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2748
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:30 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    People keep saying this. If Carroll and Schneider thought Flynn wasn't very good, then why'd they sign him and give him 10 million?

    To me Flynn is a Hasselbeck type QB, not Hall of Fame material, but a serviceable QB that you can win with, and even go to the Superbowl with if all other parts of the team excel. He can read defenses, he's smart, and he can make enough plays during the course of a game to win.

    But we'll never find out cause he's holding a clipboard while we throw for 120 yards a game cause we're starting a rookie QB.

    This.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4486
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:40 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    People keep saying this. If Carroll and Schneider thought Flynn wasn't very good, then why'd they sign him and give him 10 million?

    To me Flynn is a Hasselbeck type QB, not Hall of Fame material, but a serviceable QB that you can win with, and even go to the Superbowl with if all other parts of the team excel. He can read defenses, he's smart, and he can make enough plays during the course of a game to win.

    But we'll never find out cause he's holding a clipboard while we throw for 120 yards a game cause we're starting a rookie QB.


    Because that's what it cost to get him in the door and see what he looks like in our system. Same as Charlie. Anything less and he was a Dolphin. Turns out once he was in our door and in our system, he wasn't all that impressive, but at least they took the chance. They paid the money to turn over the rock and see what was there.

    If anything I think they deserve some credit for not going out of their way to pound the round peg into the square hole simply because they paid the round peg a bunch of dough. Hey, I too wanted Flynn to start while Russell sat on the bench taking "mental reps" and developing behind the scenes too (preferably as #3 on the depth chart behind Tarvaris if I had MY way), but Flynn didn't win the competition so he's the one on the bench. Tarvaris apparently shit the bed altogether so he isn't even here anymore.

    And that's just the way it is. Coach weighed this and debated this much more that anyone here and coach figured that the rookie gave us the best chance to win; knowing full well that rookies will struggle and that rookies can be maddeningly inconsistent. That still speaks volumes to me, regardless of how much y'all think y'all know.
    So you're admitting I'm a celeb...
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11192
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:50 pm
  • Seahawk Sailor wrote:
    kf3339 wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.


    Is that you, Michael Lombardi? If so, please say why Flynn is the better option, not just "HOLY SHORT QUARTERBACK, BATMAN!"


    Simple, in those two games he showed himself to be able to read defenses, make adjustments at the line and most importantly move the offense and score points. Would it happen if he starts for us in regular games? I don't know. But I see no reason not to find out. Remember, Hass was sat down by Holmgren. He probably learned more at that point than continuing to play and get worse.
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1373
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:52 pm
  • CANHawk wrote:And that's just the way it is. Coach weighed this and debated this much more that anyone here and coach figured that the rookie gave us the best chance to win; knowing full well that rookies will struggle and that rookies can be maddeningly inconsistent. That still speaks volumes to me, regardless of how much y'all think y'all know.


    I don't think that Schneider and Carroll thought before the season started that Wilson gave us the best chance to win in 2012.

    I think they thought that Wilson has a huge upside, and that he's our QB of the future, therefore start him and hope that our defense and running game would keep us in games long enough for Wilson to develop quickly due to how smart he is and how hard he works.

    The problem with this mentality is that it can take years for Wilson to develop. So yeah the upside is that in 2-3 years we might be good enough to compete for a Superbowl. The downside is we're banking on our defense and running game to still be dominant years from now.

    IMO this is the NFL, you play to win NOW, not in 2-3 years. The players and fans deserve the BEST product on the field now.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2748
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:55 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:It DOES assume the staff didn't make the right decision. Making the decision to start a rookie QB in his first year is almost invariably the WRONG decision if you have ANYONE capable of starting instead. Look at Peytons first year. Look at any elite QB's rookie year when he was thrown into the fire. The teams that do that HAVE to do that. Choice isn't an option. They picked so high in the draft because they already sucked and needed a QB.

    But when you've got THREE QB's, one with extensive experience - albeit he'd never improve past mediocre - one with excellent credentials and potential who'd already shown he can succeed in the NFL and one who's a wet behind the ears QB you took in the third round, you're making a mistake to start him.

    The results of that mistake are so obvious that even Kearly sees it despite how hyped up he's been about Wilson. The guy is regressing.


    Starting a rookie is a gamble. But this was a move not entered into lightly, and made based on the player's potential being much higher than the next guy(Flynn) with a full understanding that the road would be bumpy. And I do not care one bit about all Flynn's years in the NFL, he had precisely as many wins as Charlie Whitehurst before coming here. 132 NFL throws is not a seasoned veteran with pelts on the wall, and the fact that he didn't wreck the Ferrari when he got to drive it against the Lions last year does not mean he can drive the Checker Marathon here in Seattle. Flynn is barely more than a rookie himself.

    Last year, Pete made a point of saying that you don't really know what a QB can do until he has over 30 starts in the NFL. He said this in defense of Tarvaris, who passed the 30 start milestone during the 2011 season. Well, this preseason, what did Pete say about Tarvaris? We know what we have in Tarvaris. He really does believe that it takes two full seasons to know what you have. Of course, really crappy QBs andwer taht question a lot faster, see Charlie Whitehurst.

    Think about that. Flynn had exactly a 2 start advantage on Wilson, which is now gone, by the benchmark we KNOW Pete uses.

    Saying that the game in Detroit should decide if Flynn starts here is dumb beyond the pale, and as dumb as saying Wilson should start because he had the highest Lewin index score ever recorded. With a two game difference in real NFL start experience, pretending that Flynn is some kind of veteran who should have been handed the starter job is a bullshit premise based, not on knowledge of what you know, but a reaction to what you have seen and don't like. Anything has to be better than this is no way to choose your starter.

    That said, I don't know if Wilson is going to be very good. I just know he won the job by doing things right both on and off the field. I know that he has made mistakes, but I also know that the flashes of talent from him are there, while he is a tick or two off on making plays, he has not been fooled be defenses as many times in 4 games as Romo got fooled by in just one game last night. Even the 3 picks on Sunday, did even one of them come from him being fooled by a defense? Nope. Not one.

    I heard, and said, both of those same tired arguments with Charlie, We need to see what we have on the bench, and nothing can be worse than what we are seeing on the field right now. I was wrong. I have no real reason to assume that Pete has lost his judgement in this area in the meantime.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10541
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:57 pm
  • Scottemojo wrote:
    kf3339 wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.

    31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?


    By your token then, 32 GM's passed not once but twice on Wilson in the draft. Many had QB needs but chose NOT to pick him, including us. How do you explain that? In addition at least 10 GM's passed on him before we took him in the 3rd round. Many still had QB issues but still chose to pass. Why? Just because he was too short? It couldn't be anything else?

    I don't know and neither do you!
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1373
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:01 pm
  • kf3339 wrote:Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.

    Big numbers over a 2 game sample can be very inflated and misleading when you have several fluky plays like a RB taking a screen from behind the LOS for an 80 yard TD, a WR getting 10 yards beyond the secondary for an easy TD bomb, and WRs taking short slants through the secondary for huge gains. Those aren't plays that are likely to be repeated and don't have much predictive value for the QB's future performance.

    SalishHawkFan wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?

    One knew they were drafting Luck. One was trying to grab RG3. One grabbed Tannehill. A couple were in the hunt for Mr. Manning. One in Florida didn't offer him as good a deal as we did. The rest already had QB's they were going with. Who would have grabbed Flynn besides Miami that didn't already have someone lined up? You aren't going to dump a QB with experience in your system for an untested FA. The Niners would have snatched up Manning, but dump Smith for Flynn? No way.

    Miami, Cleveland, Kansas City. Maybe Arizona. Maybe Jacksonville if they wanted someone other than Chad Henne or David Garrard to push their struggling young QB. It should tell you something that Flynn's OC in Green Bay got a head coaching job on a team with a gaping hole at QB and didn't want him. They hadn't drafted Tannehill during Flynn's free agency, and even if they knew they were going to, Tannehill was widely considered a project who had only played QB for a couple years. I have a hard time believing Philbin would have passed on Flynn if he thought he could be really good.

    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    People keep saying this. If Carroll and Schneider thought Flynn wasn't very good, then why'd they sign him and give him 10 million?

    To me Flynn is a Hasselbeck type QB, not Hall of Fame material, but a serviceable QB that you can win with, and even go to the Superbowl with if all other parts of the team excel. He can read defenses, he's smart, and he can make enough plays during the course of a game to win.

    But we'll never find out cause he's holding a clipboard while we throw for 120 yards a game cause we're starting a rookie QB.

    Maybe they thought he could be a decent bridge QB until they could get their QBOTF. He was signed to compete with Tarvaris Jackson before Wilson was drafted. If they didn't get a potential long-term QB in the draft, they might not have been comfortable with only Jackson and Portis at the position this year. The argument of "they gave him 10 million so they need to see what they have" is the same argument as "they gave up picks for Whitehurst so they need to start him in the regular season to see what they have." Couldn't it be possible that through camp and practices, they have already seen enough to know what that don't have?

    And I'm sorry, but calling Flynn a Hasselbeck type QB is absurd to me. Hasselbeck was a very good QB in his prime who carried a good offense in 2007 with no running game, no line, and one of the worst groups of receivers in the league. It's much more likely that Flynn is a Tyler Thigpen type QB than a Matt Hasselbeck type QB.
    jewhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 551
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:04 pm
  • jewhawk wrote:
    SalishHawkFan wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?

    One knew they were drafting Luck. One was trying to grab RG3. One grabbed Tannehill. A couple were in the hunt for Mr. Manning. One in Florida didn't offer him as good a deal as we did. The rest already had QB's they were going with. Who would have grabbed Flynn besides Miami that didn't already have someone lined up? You aren't going to dump a QB with experience in your system for an untested FA. The Niners would have snatched up Manning, but dump Smith for Flynn? No way.

    Miami, Cleveland, Kansas City. Maybe Arizona. Maybe Jacksonville if they wanted someone other than Chad Henne or David Garrard to push their struggling young QB. It should tell you something that Flynn's OC in Green Bay got a head coaching job on a team with a gaping hole at QB and didn't want him. They hadn't drafted Tannehill during Flynn's free agency, and even if they knew they were going to, Tannehill was widely considered a project who had only played QB for a couple years. I have a hard time believing Philbin would have passed on Flynn if he thought he could be really good.


    Yet they all passed over Wilson several times in the draft. So by your logic, Wilson must not have seemed too impressive either.
    Last edited by SalishHawkFan on Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4486
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:05 pm
  • iigakusei wrote:
    kf3339 wrote:
    iigakusei wrote:Do you not remember everyone saying the same thing about Whitehurst? Could it be possible that Flynn just isnt very good?


    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.


    I guess that is why there was so much demand for him in the off-season? That Detroit game was a one-off - of that I am positive. Look, I think Flynn is a good QB, but I trust the coaches that see these guys every day in practice to make the right decision.


    Yes, and it is going to be their ass on the line if they screwed up the QB position again. I'm not so sure Allen will allow a full 5 years for PC to keep experimenting with that position. Even he can see what is holding this team back from being a major force.
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1373
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:07 pm
  • kf3339 wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:
    kf3339 wrote:
    Then how do you explain the New Englund and Detroit games performance. You don't post results like that and put him in the same class as Whitehurst! Not at all.

    31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?


    By your token then, 32 GM's passed not once but twice on Wilson in the draft. Many had QB needs but chose NOT to pick him, including us. How do you explain that? In addition at least 10 GM's passed on him before we took him in the 3rd round. Many still had QB issues but still chose to pass. Why? Just because he was too short? It couldn't be anything else?

    I don't know and neither do you!

    I think it has been made pretty clear by very many NFL people that his height was the only reason he slipped. Who knows, it may turn out to be a very good reason. Wasn't it Kiper who said if he was taller he would be a top 10 pick? I never heard anyone disagree with that. So, yes, I do know that one.

    I want whoever starts to be awesome. Flynn/Wilson/Portis, I don't care. Difference is, I think our staff has earned some trust, and you do not. Forget who is waiting in the wings, this is at the heart of the disagreement on this board. I heard this same shit with Teel. People love the backups when they think the coach is stupid.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10541
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:13 pm
  • Scottemojo wrote: People love the backups when they think the coach is stupid.


    I don't love Flynn, I just would like to see if he's good or not before we start the Russell Wilson is the best QB ever experiment.

    Hell, could be they both suck, but I don't like paying a guy 10 million, then benching him for an unproven 3rd round draft pick just because he WOW'd us all in three meaningless pre-season games against 2nd and 3rd string scrubs.

    All I care about is who gives us the best chance to beat the Carolina Panthers, and IMO that QB's name is Matthew Clayton Flynn.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2748
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:15 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:Yet they all passed over Wilson several times in the draft. So by your logic, Wilson must not have seemed too impressive either.

    Not really. There's a pretty big difference between signing a reasonably priced free agent and spending an early round draft pick on someone.
    jewhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 551
    Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 1:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:16 pm
  • Scottemojo wrote:I think it has been made pretty clear by very many NFL people that his height was the only reason he slipped. Who knows, it may turn out to be a very good reason. Wasn't it Kiper who said if he was taller he would be a top 10 pick? I never heard anyone disagree with that. So, yes, I do know that one.

    I want whoever starts to be awesome. Flynn/Wilson/Portis, I don't care. Difference is, I think our staff has earned some trust, and you do not. Forget who is waiting in the wings, this is at the heart of the disagreement on this board. I heard this same shit with Teel. People love the backups when they think the coach is stupid.

    You hit at the heart of why you and I are having a rare disagreement. I have TONS of trust in P&J to build a great defense, rushing attack, etc. But I've yet to see them make ONE move at QB that has panned out. The Whitehurst trade was terrible. TJack? Really? TJACK?!? Why let go Hass?

    And if you'd believe all the people who don't want to see Flynn start, he was a lousy pick too.

    Wilson might, MIGHT have potential - and I would love it if he acheives it - but I think it's a mistake to thrust him in there from the start. Flynn is an adequate QB and all we need is adequate to be a legitimate playoff contender.

    I've listened to the Mariners keep telling us for a decade now that we just need to be patient a couple more years. Sorry, but the Seahawks are an adequate QB away from being dominant NOW. I'm pretty sure Flynn is at least an adequate QB. I'm pretty sure Wilson won't be adequate for another year.

    I'm also seeing that my worst fears have come true: By throwing Wilson in too soon we may be wasting his potential. It happens to lots of QB's who had the misfortune of being thrust into the starting job year one. Some thrive (RG3), some don't. Wilson isn't thriving out there. He's getting worse. Even Kearly admits it. THAT, more than anything else, is why we should be starting Flynn.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4486
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:17 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote: People love the backups when they think the coach is stupid.


    I don't love Flynn, I just would like to see if he's good or not before we start the Russell Wilson is the best QB ever experiment.

    Hell, could be they both suck, but I don't like paying a guy 10 million, then benching him for an unproven 3rd round draft pick just because he WOW'd us all in three meaningless pre-season games against 2nd and 3rd string scrubs.

    All I care about is who gives us the best chance to beat the Carolina Panthers, and IMO that QB's name is Matthew Clayton Flynn.

    That is exactly what I was referring too. Coach has already seen it, your demands are because you think he is not as smart as you in these things.

    Besides, I was not aware you were paying Matt Flynn. Unless you are Paul Allen, then you can say whatever you want.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10541
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:18 pm
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:All I care about is who gives us the best chance to beat the Carolina Panthers, and IMO that QB's name is Matthew Clayton Flynn.


    And yet there is basically ZERO data to back that up.
    Image Image Tanzania¹² Image "ALERT THE LEGION!!!"
    User avatar
    Zebulon Dak
    * The Producer *
    * The Producer *
     
    Posts: 13946
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:57 pm
    Location: King In The North


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:21 pm
  • There's zero data to refute it too.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4486
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:25 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:I think it has been made pretty clear by very many NFL people that his height was the only reason he slipped. Who knows, it may turn out to be a very good reason. Wasn't it Kiper who said if he was taller he would be a top 10 pick? I never heard anyone disagree with that. So, yes, I do know that one.

    I want whoever starts to be awesome. Flynn/Wilson/Portis, I don't care. Difference is, I think our staff has earned some trust, and you do not. Forget who is waiting in the wings, this is at the heart of the disagreement on this board. I heard this same shit with Teel. People love the backups when they think the coach is stupid.

    You hit at the heart of why you and I are having a rare disagreement. I have TONS of trust in P&J to build a great defense, rushing attack, etc. But I've yet to see them make ONE move at QB that has panned out. The Whitehurst trade was terrible. TJack? Really? TJACK?!? Why let go Hass?

    And if you'd believe all the people who don't want to see Flynn start, he was a lousy pick too.

    Wilson might, MIGHT have potential - and I would love it if he acheives it - but I think it's a mistake to thrust him in there from the start. Flynn is an adequate QB and all we need is adequate to be a legitimate playoff contender.

    I've listened to the Mariners keep telling us for a decade now that we just need to be patient a couple more years. Sorry, but the Seahawks are an adequate QB away from being dominant NOW. I'm pretty sure Flynn is at least an adequate QB. I'm pretty sure Wilson won't be adequate for another year.

    I'm also seeing that my worst fears have come true: By throwing Wilson in too soon we may be wasting his potential. It happens to lots of QB's who had the misfortune of being thrust into the starting job year one. Some thrive (RG3), some don't. Wilson isn't thriving out there. He's getting worse. Even Kearly admits it. THAT, more than anything else, is why we should be starting Flynn.


    I do not disagree with you that these guys have had a tough time getting their hands on the right QB. And yet, outside of Dalton, nobody ever says who they should have taken that is so much better. And Pete said he really liked Dalton, so even if he is not on this team, he was considered, which actually reflects well on their judgement. They also tried to get Peyton Manning to talk to them, so it isn't like they ignored his possibilities. They ignored Mallett, and that is looking like a decent decision too. Other than that, who could they have taken? Or signed? Kolb? Yeah, me neither.

    I don't think they are flawess, but who the hell is when it comes to evaluating NFL talent? I think they have earned the leeway to see this through.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10541
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:38 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:I think it has been made pretty clear by very many NFL people that his height was the only reason he slipped. Who knows, it may turn out to be a very good reason. Wasn't it Kiper who said if he was taller he would be a top 10 pick? I never heard anyone disagree with that. So, yes, I do know that one.

    I want whoever starts to be awesome. Flynn/Wilson/Portis, I don't care. Difference is, I think our staff has earned some trust, and you do not. Forget who is waiting in the wings, this is at the heart of the disagreement on this board. I heard this same shit with Teel. People love the backups when they think the coach is stupid.

    You hit at the heart of why you and I are having a rare disagreement. I have TONS of trust in P&J to build a great defense, rushing attack, etc. But I've yet to see them make ONE move at QB that has panned out. The Whitehurst trade was terrible. TJack? Really? TJACK?!? Why let go Hass?


    The answer to this question is so ridiculously easy that it amazes me people continue to ignore it.

    23 turnovers in 2010. 23 compared to 12 TD passes. For someone demanding 2-3 years in the 7 million dollar per year range. Tarvaris Jackson gave us better stats for half the price. (Even on the Titans, Hass still turned the ball over 18 times.)
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 14375
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:40 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:There's zero data to refute it too.


    The onus is on the one making the claim that Flynn is the best chance we have for a W at Carolina. And since you know that's just as likely to be false as true, you're equivocating here.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 14375
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:49 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:You hit at the heart of why you and I are having a rare disagreement. I have TONS of trust in P&J to build a great defense, rushing attack, etc. But I've yet to see them make ONE move at QB that has panned out. The Whitehurst trade was terrible. TJack? Really? TJACK?!? Why let go Hass?


    You want reasons we let Hass go? I'll give you twenty one million reasons.
    World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.
    User avatar
    Seahawk Sailor
    * .NET Navy Bad Ass *
     
    Posts: 18155
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
    Location: The beautiful PNW


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:51 pm
  • Zebulon Dak wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:All I care about is who gives us the best chance to beat the Carolina Panthers, and IMO that QB's name is Matthew Clayton Flynn.


    And yet there is basically ZERO data to back that up.


    But he used the middle name. Everyone's Mom knows using the middle name makes things more serious...

    Theretofore, I insist that Russell Carrington Wilson should remain the starter for the American football match against the Panthers of Carolina!

    And everyone knows that "Carrington" carries WAY more stroke than Clayton.
    So you're admitting I'm a celeb...
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11192
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:59 pm
  • bestfightstory wrote:kearly-you are a great writer.

    Sorry, though. Unlike you, I did not want to lose for draft position in 2010. And I felt rewarded and vindicated in that approach by the BeastQuake playoff victory.

    In 2011, I was not on board with you and 50% or more of this fanbase who wanted the Seattle Seahawks to 'Suck For Luck'. I was not comfortable with losing in the moment. I was not content with concrete failures today in exchange for the fantasy of successes tomorrow.

    In the same fashion. I am NOT comfortable with these unnecessary losses in 2012. In the preseason while others were picking sides i decided that whichever quarterback steps behind center would become saddled with my expectation that he do enough to lead this team to victories. I echo the words of Seahawk2K, above. This team is built to win and right now RW is holding it back.

    Already, after week 4, Seahawks fans are starting to talk about next year in glowing terms like some default coping mechanism against broken dreams.


    Not just 2013.. but FOUR years from now.

    I'm with you completely.. this team should be winning TODAY. Maybe we're ahead of schedule on this plan, but that's the nature of the beast.
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 4643
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:12 pm
  • SalishHawkFan wrote:There's zero data to refute it too.


    That's not even an argument.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11233
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:30 pm
  • Scottemojo wrote:31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?


    Are those the same 31 that passed on Wilson for 2 1/2 rounds at a far, far cheaper price?

    There...used your logic against you. 8)
    "Improvement" can come from who you play-
    User avatar
    Verndog
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1590
    Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 6:54 pm
    Location: Auburn, Wa


Re: The 4 year plan
Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:41 pm
  • Verndog wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:31 other GMs, some in desperate quarterback straights, saw those same two games and did not chase after Mr. Flynn. How do you explain that he was such a bargain after those two games?


    Are those the same 31 that passed on Wilson for 2 1/2 rounds at a far, far cheaper price?

    There...used your logic against you. 8)

    Not really. It is a pretty well established media factoid that Wilson would have been a first round pick if he was 3 inches taller. They may be right, maybe height will be his undoing as a QB.

    Why do you think nobody but us wanted Flynn, and then at a greatly reduced price? Certainly Manning was a hot commodity, and he could barely throw at the time. There were plenty of teams in the market for that upgrade, even teams that could not fit Manning under the cap without lots of restructuring/and or cuts. And Manning has never thrown for 480 yards and 6 touchdowns in just one game.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10541
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


PreviousNext


It is currently Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:17 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online