I'm watching the new 30 For 30, "Elway to Marino", and at one point they talk about how close Seattle was to trading with Baltimore for the #1 pick and taking Elway. Elway even comments how he would've enjoyed playing in Seattle. So, imagine this really happened. Tell us what you think would've happened with the team and the NFL.

Wow I never heard that before. I knew we were closing to signing Warren Moon before he went to Houston, but Elway? Wow!

Elway/Seahawks may have actually won Superbowls earlier in his career when the Seahawks defense was still stout. QB was the most fluid position for the Seahawks. Krieg's junk yard dog demeanor won a few games but his soap dish and erratic play cost the team in games as well. Elway in 83 on the Seahawks, maybe Denver wins instead of Seattle or Miami. But 85 and beyond, with a still effective Largent, Warner return and JL Williams and others, sure would have loved to see that squad.

Man, what a thought.

drdiags wrote:Elway/Seahawks may have actually won Superbowls earlier in his career when the Seahawks defense was still stout. QB was the most fluid position for the Seahawks. Krieg's junk yard dog demeanor won a few games but his soap dish and erratic play cost the team in games as well. Elway in 83 on the Seahawks, maybe Denver wins instead of Seattle or Miami. But 85 and beyond, with a still effective Largent, Warner return and JL Williams and others, sure would have loved to see that squad.

Man, what a thought.

Seattle wouldn't have had Warner if they made the trade for Elway.

Um, same results? No SB wins? *awaits hammering*

he'd still only be the 2nd best QB in Seahawks history after Russell Wilson

SeatownJay wrote:Seattle wouldn't have had Warner if they made the trade for Elway.

Yeah, I just realized that watching the show and remembering Warner went #3 overall.

Beeker49 wrote:Um, same results? No SB wins? *awaits hammering*

I have to agree with this. Mr. Ed was such an arrogant SOB I doubt the team would have played for him.

And Chuck Knox????? well just think about it.

Funny how one player could've changed an entire franchise.

Radish could be right.

Or, the team could've played to Elway's strengths and brought a winning culture to the team. It could turn a franchise that has been borderline irrelavent outside of the PNW to a team with a nationwide fan base and storied (if shorter) winning history.

Lots of possibilities.

The Boz would have ended up looking pretty silly now wouldn't he.

Had he been a Hawk, he wouldn't have ended up one of my all-time most disliked players. But he didn't and he is.

Beeker49 wrote:Um, same results? No SB wins? *awaits hammering*

Go post this crap in the shack.

RolandDeschain wrote:

Beeker49 wrote:Um, same results? No SB wins? *awaits hammering*

Go post this crap in the shack.

I second this thought. I thought it was pretty clear that smack is okay, just keep it in the Shack. There is a bathroom for a purpose, you don't come into someone's house and just take a dump in the living room. Or do you?

You may not be a bad guy Beeker but was the shot necessary? I guess a wolf just cannot hide its intentions. Smack shack my good man, smack shack.

RolandDeschain wrote:

Beeker49 wrote:Um, same results? No SB wins? *awaits hammering*

Go post this crap in the shack.

The way it's stated is obviously asking for it, that being said there are ownership and FO reasons more than QB reasons that kept Seattle from winning championships so it's not entirely off base to assume that Elway wouldn't have been able to overcome them.

That being said Elway is a top-5 all time great QB. So who knows? we had to sit through mirer, mcgwire, etc.

drdiags wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:

Beeker49 wrote:Um, same results? No SB wins? *awaits hammering*

Go post this crap in the shack.

I second this thought. I thought it was pretty clear that smack is okay, just keep it in the Shack. There is a bathroom for a purpose, you don't come into someone's house and just take a dump in the living room. Or do you?

You may not be a bad guy Beeker but was the shot necessary? I guess a wolf just cannot hide its intentions. Smack shack my good man, smack shack.

I think you're all out of line. A question was posed and he gave his opinion like the rest of you did. Its not really smack. He & I were dumb enough to think that everyone's opinion counts the same here.

I pretty much said the same thing just a few posts above and no one got their pantys in a twist. I think that Mr. Ed ran the team in Denver, (notice they feel off the face of the earth after he retired), and he never would have gotten that same coach cooperation here.

Appears to me what is happening here is some of you will tolerate a Ninnir fan as long as he says something you don't agree with or can't logically argue with then cry foul. Lets all grow up.

Mommy-mommy, the man hurted my eyes, please kick him out.

The Radish wrote:Lets all grow up.

It's not so much what he said, it's how he said it. It's a clear trolling/baiting post, and you guys regularly move threads to the shack for the same thing.

I guess Radish has a new BFF that isn't a Seahawks fan.

The Radish wrote:
I think you're all out of line. A question was posed and he gave his opinion like the rest of you did. Its not really smack. He & I were dumb enough to think that everyone's opinion counts the same here.

I pretty much said the same thing just a few posts above and no one got their pantys in a twist. I think that Mr. Ed ran the team in Denver, (notice they feel off the face of the earth after he retired), and he never would have gotten that same coach cooperation here.

Appears to me what is happening here is some of you will tolerate a Ninnir fan as long as he says something you don't agree with or can't logically argue with then cry foul. Lets all grow up.

Mommy-mommy, the man hurted my eyes, please kick him out.

I understand tolerance but I understand snarky as well. This was something that could have just been passed on. Let's also cut down on the childish references Les. I would not disrespect you as a man. Please return the favor. Carry on my good man. Understood your point. Understand mine please. I don't expect flowers but some decorum is expected.

Lets not turn into EXTREMEFORESKINS over here where we lose our S every time we read something we don't like.

Hawknballs wrote:Lets not turn into EXTREMEFORESKINS over here where we lose our S every time we read something we don't like.

Is that what happened? I think it is setting clear boundaries to clear any confusion going forward. You may think otherwise but if you don't know what the ground rules are whose fault is that?

Everyone step back a bit please. James you are one of our most valuable members and I'm sorry this came up in this way. Same with you Roland.

Please be aware the moderator board has had long conversations wanting to find some closure in our supposed battle with ninnir fans. The reason its been so quiet is we stopped allowing new member from there way last winter!

We decided since its not during the season and lots of people from various teams are interested in talking draft it would be a good time to try and start over.

When Beeker applied for membership he and I exchanged several frank emails about what he could expect and what he could do himself. We've been reading his posts and he seems to be working pretty hard on getting along. He can't be all bad when he told me something about the Ray-Duh fans. I mentioned we knew about them cause we used to be in the AFC. He said "you can change divisions but you can't change geography". lol How can you not like that?

So will we have fits and starts? Sure. But the first one is for all of us to not be quite so thin skinned. I don't think he meant it as snarky. Maybe because as I've stated twice I agree with him. I just worded my reasons.

So sorry if I browned some ears. I hope you all know that my interest here is the site. And the site isn't complete unless we can have some conversations with our biggest division rival.

If they get out of line, they're gone. I don't know if any of you know that we warn fans of all other teams that we do not allow smack talk on our main forums. But that has to be by both sides. And there has to be some allowances for what each of us call smack.

I know sometimes some of you don't believe this but I always have your back. Well except I try to not get behind pehawk cause it seems to me he backs up. lol

Beeker49 wrote:Um, same results? No SB wins? *awaits hammering*

Bwhahaha!

Good one, dude. Really. Laughed out loud here. I appreciate what you did there.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program:

It's all good. I see it as Beeker just joking around with his new buds but some not feeling he is part of the in crowd yet. I get that. I wasn't that pissed about his comment but did want to take a chance to make sure he and we understood we are trying to be a more productive football conversationalist and not a one-upmanship.

This was a what-if scenario and a fun topic for those who followed this team for a long time. Beekers could have passed on it. He chose to have a little fun. No harm but you know as well as I do when the bullets start to fly, having a reasonable judgement of when to take it there for a little fun versus devolving the forum into locked/moved topics is going to be based on what we establish now with our newly invited/joined members.

I support you guys and will not speak up again on matters that are controlled by you guys. I will just keep my mouth shut. But I know there will be those who are going to react bitterly to fans they think have crossed a line. I say just make it worth the angst. Or we can grow up and not call for our mommies all the time. I will try getting weaned ... smile.

Have a good day. And Beeker. Good one. Ha ha ...

I agree with the Niner.

Just cause he says he would have enjoyed playing here doesn't mean anything. It's called being diplomatic. Hell he took a lot of flack for what he did to Indy.

1. He's an unlikeable jerk.

2. He's looks like a Bronco, literally.

3. He'd be running the team now. Instead of PC/JS/Allen, we'd have the fools that drafted Tebow.

4. He had to juice up with PEDs just to win his Superbowls. And the NFL wouldn't have waited to ban Elway's Creatine until after his retirement if he played for the Seahawks.

We're lucky we have Wilson. I have a feeling he'll prove that 37 years was worth the wait.

drdiags wrote:You may not be a bad guy Beeker but was the shot necessary? I guess a wolf just cannot hide its intentions. Smack shack my good man, smack shack.

It's more of a shot at Elway than it is at Seattle anyway. big game choker, the Peyton Manning of the 80s/90s.
Sure he finally got his ring(s) (as did Peyton), but way less than he should have considering the team he had.

Just watched it.. I can't believe how freaking stupid Irsay was..

And why did we pass on Dickerson for Warner again?

Oh well.

Lady Talon wrote:I agree with the Niner.

Just cause he says he would have enjoyed playing here doesn't mean anything. It's called being diplomatic. Hell he took a lot of flack for what he did to Indy.

1. He's an unlikeable jerk.

2. He's looks like a Bronco, literally.

3. He'd be running the team now. Instead of PC/JS/Allen, we'd have the fools that drafted Tebow.

4. He had to juice up with PEDs just to win his Superbowls. And the NFL wouldn't have waited to ban Elway's Creatine until after his retirement if he played for the Seahawks.

We're lucky we have Wilson. I have a feeling he'll prove that 37 years was worth the wait.

What?

All of these statements are ridiculous. Especially 3 and 4.

I think a dose of self honesty is in order here. I read the Niner post without looking at who posted it and thought nothing of it. When people jumped on him, I went back and looked and saw it was a Niner fan. Then I found myself agreeing that the post was snarky, but not until I knew it was a Niner fan that posted it.

Radish is right. It wasn't offensive. I didn't think it was offensive. When I saw it was a Niner fan I was offended. Let's face it, had it not been a Niner fan saying it, no one would have gave two tits on a rats behind. It wasn't offensive in and of itself and we should let that one go due to the nature of the OP's question.

Hasselbeck wrote:

Lady Talon wrote:I agree with the Niner.

Just cause he says he would have enjoyed playing here doesn't mean anything. It's called being diplomatic. Hell he took a lot of flack for what he did to Indy.

1. He's an unlikeable jerk.

2. He's looks like a Bronco, literally.

3. He'd be running the team now. Instead of PC/JS/Allen, we'd have the fools that drafted Tebow.

4. He had to juice up with PEDs just to win his Superbowls. And the NFL wouldn't have waited to ban Elway's Creatine until after his retirement if he played for the Seahawks.

We're lucky we have Wilson. I have a feeling he'll prove that 37 years was worth the wait.

What?

All of these statements are ridiculous. Especially 3 and 4.

3 maybe. But #4, I remember very well the Creatine controversy. Players were calling it to be banned even before Elway became it's poster child. Only took 2 years of Super Bowl wins and a retirement before the NFL finally got around to banning it.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/24/sports/pro-football-notebook-nfl-is-uneasy-about-diet-supplements-use.html

Lady Talon wrote:

Hasselbeck wrote:

Lady Talon wrote:I agree with the Niner.

Just cause he says he would have enjoyed playing here doesn't mean anything. It's called being diplomatic. Hell he took a lot of flack for what he did to Indy.

1. He's an unlikeable jerk.

2. He's looks like a Bronco, literally.

3. He'd be running the team now. Instead of PC/JS/Allen, we'd have the fools that drafted Tebow.

4. He had to juice up with PEDs just to win his Superbowls. And the NFL wouldn't have waited to ban Elway's Creatine until after his retirement if he played for the Seahawks.

We're lucky we have Wilson. I have a feeling he'll prove that 37 years was worth the wait.

What?

All of these statements are ridiculous. Especially 3 and 4.

3 maybe. But #4, I remember very well the Creatine controversy. Players were calling it to be banned even before Elway became it's poster child. Only took 2 years of Super Bowl wins and a retirement before the NFL finally got around to banning it.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/24/sports/pro-football-notebook-nfl-is-uneasy-about-diet-supplements-use.html

Not to nitpick but, creatine is not a banned substance by the NFL. And really it shouldn't be, as that's as common a supplement now as a basic whey protein powder or multi vitamins. Of course there really isn't a policy with HGH either.

But yes 1 and 2 are ridiculous - Elway would have probably been beloved in Seattle, it's easy to say otherwise now because he basically owned the Seahawks for the better part of his career while playing for a hated division foe. However, it's like Richard Sherman.. you can't tell me he'd be downright hated by Seahawk fans if he played for San Francisco or something. Instead he's one of the most liked players on the team.

And John Elway hated Tebow as a QB.. clearly.. after all he couldn't wait to dump him last year. Another bold assumption is that he would be calling any form of shots on this team right now. And even then, he hasn't been the worst GM - but of course signing Peyton Manning could make any personnel guy look great.

I just think it's a major stretch to assume any of these things. Just like its kind of funny to assume Elway wouldn't have won a Super Bowl in Seattle. After all - just eight months after the '83 draft, they were a game away from the Super Bowl with Dave Krieg under center.. not like the team needed a whole lot of pieces to be a bonafide threat to win a title.

I think much of our views of Elway are deeply colored by the Seahawks-Broncos rivalry. We all learned to hate him because he was a great player on a rival team that regularly schooled us. If he were a Seahawk, he'd have gone down as one of our favorite players ever. Period.

And to say no way, Seahawks don't win a Super Bowl with Elway instead of who we had as quarterbacks during his tenure in the league is pretty ridiculous. We had some very good years in the mid- to late-80s, some of which are lamented as the biggest should'a-would'a-could'a seasons ever.

1984 could have been a whole lot different. Instead of finishing a game behind the Elway-led Broncos, the Elway-led Seahawks could have cruised to a pretty impressive season that year.

1985 could have looked a whole lot different than the win-two-lose-two debacle of that season, were we to have had Elway in his third year in the league.

1986 if I remember right was the year we slumped in the middle of the season, but at the end of the season were tearing through teams like a hot knife through butter. Think Elway could have helped make the playoffs instead of going 10-6 and missing out?

And the early nineties could have looked a whole lot different than they did. Instead of the nightmare of what happened with B... B... uh, yea, him, and the possibility of moving to L.A., maybe an Elway-led team coming off a Super Bowl a few years earlier might have made a bigger difference and a quicker recovery from those years.

So count me in as one who thinks it isn't unlikely at all we'd have won at least one with him on the team.

Elway's arrogance came to light last off-season when he said this:

http://www.faniq.com/blog/John-Elway-sa ... Blog-53482

I'm not sure most of our opinions on Elway are without merit, Sailor.

The original horse toothed jackass would not have lasted long enough to win SBs. Drafted in '83, he didn't do much until '86 and no SBs until '97. Plus he was an interception machine...not a good fit for Ground Chuck

Look y'all ... it really wasn't meant to be "snarky'. Yes, I worded it poorly, and I'll try NOT to do so in the future. I appreciate the feedback, in fact. I know y'all have had issues with Niner fans here, and I'm doing my best to NOT be one of "them". Hey, I honestly liked the Hawks when they were AFCW. I'm probably one of the few non-Hawks fans that knew they were ORIGINALLY in the NFCW in 1977 as well. I'll take my lumps when I"m being a smartass, dam right I will. And as long as the Hawks beat the Lambs and Cardinulls twice a year each, that makes me a happy man.

In the end - this shit is gonna be good for a LONG time.

RolandDeschain wrote:Elway's arrogance came to light last off-season when he said this:

http://www.faniq.com/blog/John-Elway-sa ... Blog-53482

I'm not sure most of our opinions on Elway are without merit, Sailor.

Not disagreeing with the OP on Elway but I have no beef with what he said. Mannings "in the conversation" but realistically he has 1 ring. That position is defined by winning. Stats define WR's, RB's and DE's. Stats get QB's an honorable mention.

It's a team game. You can't judge based solely on rings. Truly elite QBs can carry through the regular season, but you can't carry very far in the postseason. It's not Marino's fault that his GM and HC didn't build a great team for him to steamroll through Super Bowls with, as an example.

Super Bowl rings are overrated when evaluating one player. They're not overrated at all when evaluating teams.

I disagree. QBing is like starting pitching. Not to mention his stats from Indy's lone SB win he was horrible that post season.

Hasselbeck wrote:

Lady Talon wrote:3 maybe. But #4, I remember very well the Creatine controversy. Players were calling it to be banned even before Elway became it's poster child. Only took 2 years of Super Bowl wins and a retirement before the NFL finally got around to banning it.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/24/sports/pro-football-notebook-nfl-is-uneasy-about-diet-supplements-use.html

Not to nitpick but, creatine is not a banned substance by the NFL. And really it shouldn't be, as that's as common a supplement now as a basic whey protein powder or multi vitamins. Of course there really isn't a policy with HGH either.

But yes 1 and 2 are ridiculous - Elway would have probably been beloved in Seattle, it's easy to say otherwise now because he basically owned the Seahawks for the better part of his career while playing for a hated division foe. However, it's like Richard Sherman.. you can't tell me he'd be downright hated by Seahawk fans if he played for San Francisco or something. Instead he's one of the most liked players on the team.

And John Elway hated Tebow as a QB.. clearly.. after all he couldn't wait to dump him last year. Another bold assumption is that he would be calling any form of shots on this team right now. And even then, he hasn't been the worst GM - but of course signing Peyton Manning could make any personnel guy look great.

I just think it's a major stretch to assume any of these things. Just like its kind of funny to assume Elway wouldn't have won a Super Bowl in Seattle. After all - just eight months after the '83 draft, they were a game away from the Super Bowl with Dave Krieg under center.. not like the team needed a whole lot of pieces to be a bonafide threat to win a title.

Creatine ITSELF is not banned, but thats splitting hairs because the tests were enhanced so the ingredients inside of it will get you suspended.

It is the player's responsibility to make sure that they don't put anything that'll red flag them in there bodies. Always has been.

RolandDeschain wrote:It's a team game. You can't judge based solely on rings. Truly elite QBs can carry through the regular season, but you can't carry very far in the postseason. It's not Marino's fault that his GM and HC didn't build a great team for him to steamroll through Super Bowls with, as an example.

Super Bowl rings are overrated when evaluating one player. They're not overrated at all when evaluating teams.

Agree Roland, there are 52 other players, coaches, front office people, literally a building full of people that support and contribute to the organizations winning or losing.

It's an unfair criteria.

Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien and Brad Johnson would be in the conversation as being as good as Peyton if it were a true measuring stick.

Hasselbeck wrote:Just watched it.. I can't believe how freaking stupid Irsay was..

And why did we pass on Dickerson for Warner again?

Oh well.

Could be he was that electric and good, could be Chuck Knox is from Pennsylvania also....

Elway would have garnered us National attention and Elway would have put us in the highlight reels every week, IF.

Chuck Knox ever met a QB he trusted, Knox did not like Zorn's scrambling or his improvazation, why he was gone so quick, injury also but I read that somewhere at some time, Kreig was a workman and did what he was told a lot. Hand the ball to the RB and Fullback and complete the passes I let you throw. Elway would have needed to also have some receivers that could catch the ball, McCullum and Largent were here but neither were guys that busted a defense deep. Daryl Turner dropped as many as he caught.

He would have seen his best days under Flores and Erickson really if he lasted that long here, Behring probably would have traded him.

We would have won at least one Super Bowl, and I would argue anyone who listened that he was the greatest of all time.

I would wear his jersey in the South end zone and name one of my children after him.

I would have an autographed photo of that ugly, ass, reverse-centaur over my fireplace.

SalishHawkFan wrote:I think a dose of self honesty is in order here. I read the Niner post without looking at who posted it and thought nothing of it. When people jumped on him, I went back and looked and saw it was a Niner fan. Then I found myself agreeing that the post was snarky, but not until I knew it was a Niner fan that posted it.

Radish is right. It wasn't offensive. I didn't think it was offensive. When I saw it was a Niner fan I was offended. Let's face it, had it not been a Niner fan saying it, no one would have gave two tits on a rats behind. It wasn't offensive in and of itself and we should let that one go due to the nature of the OP's question.

100% agreement. Many of us like to overreact, and are a little sensitive when it comes to fans of other teams, especially the Whiners. And that is understandable. But I don't think Beeker's post was even close to being out of line.

Beeker49 wrote:Look y'all ... it really wasn't meant to be "snarky'. Yes, I worded it poorly, and I'll try NOT to do so in the future. I appreciate the feedback, in fact. I know y'all have had issues with Niner fans here, and I'm doing my best to NOT be one of "them". Hey, I honestly liked the Hawks when they were AFCW. I'm probably one of the few non-Hawks fans that knew they were ORIGINALLY in the NFCW in 1977 as well. I'll take my lumps when I"m being a smartass, dam right I will. And as long as the Hawks beat the Lambs and Cardinulls twice a year each, that makes me a happy man.

In the end - this shit is gonna be good for a LONG time.

I'm sure you're a terrific guy, but...

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/1 ... ds/page11/

I question your motives.

E.C. Laloosh wrote:

Beeker49 wrote:Look y'all ... it really wasn't meant to be "snarky'. Yes, I worded it poorly, and I'll try NOT to do so in the future. I appreciate the feedback, in fact. I know y'all have had issues with Niner fans here, and I'm doing my best to NOT be one of "them". Hey, I honestly liked the Hawks when they were AFCW. I'm probably one of the few non-Hawks fans that knew they were ORIGINALLY in the NFCW in 1977 as well. I'll take my lumps when I"m being a smartass, dam right I will. And as long as the Hawks beat the Lambs and Cardinulls twice a year each, that makes me a happy man.

In the end - this shit is gonna be good for a LONG time.

I'm sure you're a terrific guy, but...

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/1 ... ds/page11/

I question your motives.

We can throw Young2Rice in the "questionable motives" category as well.

And people wonder why we hesitate to approve niner fans. Troll our board and go back to report about it.

Anyone saying that Elway wouldn't have immediately won and gel'd with the Seahawks is really showing their ignorance

Also he wasn't being diplomatic. He's FROM Gig Harbor, Wife is from Tacoma, his whole family is in the Northwest

He would have no problem playing here

Call it trolling all you want. Ban me. I'll still enjoy being on the 49ers boards.

And have a nice day.

E.C. Laloosh wrote:

Beeker49 wrote:Look y'all ... it really wasn't meant to be "snarky'. Yes, I worded it poorly, and I'll try NOT to do so in the future. I appreciate the feedback, in fact. I know y'all have had issues with Niner fans here, and I'm doing my best to NOT be one of "them". Hey, I honestly liked the Hawks when they were AFCW. I'm probably one of the few non-Hawks fans that knew they were ORIGINALLY in the NFCW in 1977 as well. I'll take my lumps when I"m being a smartass, dam right I will. And as long as the Hawks beat the Lambs and Cardinulls twice a year each, that makes me a happy man.

In the end - this shit is gonna be good for a LONG time.

I'm sure you're a terrific guy, but...

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl/1 ... ds/page11/

I question your motives.

Nice to see you trolling the WZ and reporting back HERE.

See how that double standard works?

WZ is a toilet. Just like Candlestick park.

peachesenregalia wrote:WZ is a toilet. Just like Candlestick park.

Funny. Y'all should probably just go ahead and ban my account now, before I actually type something that WILL get me banned.

Beeker49 wrote:

peachesenregalia wrote:WZ is a toilet. Just like Candlestick park.

Funny. Y'all should probably just go ahead and ban my account now, before I actually type something that WILL get me banned.

Will it be something about your youporn account?