Who is JS referring to here?

themunn":227saht3 said:

DavidSeven":227saht3 said:

JS says in the same statement that he didn't repeat his mistakes. You're saying his "mistake" was acquiring a back-up QB with the hope that he could emulate Hasselbeck's success as a back-up turned starter. He signed Tarvaris Jackson (back-up) the very next year and Matt Flynn (back-up) the year after that. So, it still doesn't work IMO.

White might be a fit for the second player referenced.

Click to expand...

The difference is he didn't spend heavy draft capital to pick up either of those players

Click to expand...

That's semantics, man. He invested cap space and a $10 million guarantee on Flynn (not saying that was a mistake). That's a risk he wouldn't take if he thought it was a mistake to attempt to turn back-up QBs into franchise QBs. I'm sure he views Whitehurst as a mistake, but not because he once looked at him and immediately thought of Hasselbeck's success as a former back-up. I doubt he looks at players in such simplistic terms.

The player he's referencing probably had some physical qualities that were similar to a guy he had, but just didn't have enough heart to excel the same way. E.J. Wilson is a good example since he had a Mebane-like physique and was also talked about as being used as the big DE in our base D like Red. Obviously, he wasn't as good as either of those players.

BigMeach":1y4b6uxo said:

I think it's a little overly critical of Moffitt. If it wasn't for him being so goofy I don't think you guys would be on him as much. He got hurt in 2011 and the injury is one that can take time. Knee injuries are no joke especially for big guys, I should know. He played last year but he wasn't fully healed, a big part of why Sweezy would get the start is because of Moffitt's knee.

He was also a 3rd round pick, let's not act like he was a 1st rounder. Carpenter is the one who barely see's the field and he was a 1st rounder. If Carpenter was goofy on camera then maybe it'd be all about him... I just think it's a little overboard. If Moffitt sucks in his third year then I will be the first to admit he does, but a lot of players take a couple years to hit their stride in the NFL, especially when they have an injury.

Click to expand...

Well said. We wouldn't give a rat's ass about Moffitt acting goofy for the cameras if he was productive and kicked ass on the field. It's one thing to have that fire inside, and another thing for your body to cooperate, especially at the NFL level. Neither one has any real relationship to mugging for the camera. The team and the players often do not tell us the real story about a player's injuries and their impact. However, Moffitt may not be as athletic as some other O-linemen, and when his body is refusing to cooperate, he has less margin for error to work with.

The poster child for this would be... Lofa Tatupu. When healthy, we know what he did. When his body broke down and wouldn't cooperate, he couldn't do it at the NFL level. Lofa wasn't the fastest guy to begin with (4.8 40), and was on the smallish side. But oh, what a heart, and what a player when healthy!

There are a number personalities that have been successful at the NFL level that don't fit the media-driven stereotype of how a player "should" act and think. Eli Manning comes to mind. Then there are those that take the stereotype, and improve on it. Russell Wilson comes to mind. <sarcasm> Except he's too short to be successful as an NFL quarterback so regardless of all his other qualities, let's pass. And the draft pundits are always right, and the Seattle front office should get Mel Kiper's blessing before announcing their picks.</sarcasm>

Personally, I'm rooting for Moffitt. But what I expect, 50-50 chance, is that he will get narrowly beaten out by a combination of more athletic O-Linemen, and the Seahawks will release him in final cuts. Also, 50-50 chance Moffitt sticks around, and the Seahawks use the practice squad to stash raw O-line projects no other team would likely pick up. If Moffitt does get released, I bet there will be at least 10 other teams on the phone to him within minutes.

olyfan63":16mbfy7l said:

Well said. We wouldn't give a rat's ass about Moffitt acting goofy for the cameras if he was productive and kicked ass on the field

Click to expand...

Which he hasn't been. How long is the shelf life for his injuury as an excuse?

He'll be watching Sweezy starting ahead of him this season, me thinks.

Boy I don't know Greg, Sweezy has been perfectly awful so far. My money is on the big goofball. I dont think sweezy will ever pan out.

Keep in mind, it's hard to always get it right from a personnel standpoint when we look at things through a fan's perspective. We don't see all the other stuff going on; practices, film room, etc.

There were a ton of people that labelled Unger a draft bust. On this very site. He played out of position his first year (although he did play some Guard at OR...also some LT too) but "that was no excuse". In this informational age, we all want results NOW, and these guys are competing against the very best of their craft.

I'm with Meach. I won't give up on Moffit quite yet.....besides, Sweezy beat him out because he has a bit more fire on the field, he (sometimes) drive blocks a bit better, and he gets to the 2nd level a ton better.....see the cut block in that SF game against Willis. Moffit is WAY better in pass protection, he's schematically smarter (in regards to blitz pickup where Sweezy was terrible) and he's more polished. All of which is expected because it's Sweezy's first year.

Chukarhawk":35lqs1j3 said:

Boy I don't know Greg, Sweezy has been perfectly awful so far. My money is on the big goofball. I dont think sweezy will ever pan out.

Click to expand...

Agreed - pick your poison. But it's telling that the coaches even gave Sweezy a chance. A 7th round rookie DT conversion project took snaps from a 3rd round draft pick with experience under his belt.

I'm not writing off Moffitt yet. I'm just being honest in stating he has not been great as of yet.

theseahawkguy":8hf0ieys said:

Maybe Aaron Curry.

Click to expand...

sarcasm? :34853_doh:

Chukarhawk":16kfk7jg said:

Boy I don't know Greg, Sweezy has been perfectly awful so far. My money is on the big goofball. I dont think sweezy will ever pan out.

Click to expand...

Wow, premature don't you think? To give up on Sweezy after just 1 season? Ridiculous, the dude's had less than a year on the OL and all of a sudden were saying he can't make it. That's crazy talk.

I don't understand why fans on here are so quick to judge a player. It's quite infuriating. I remember just a few years back we were having this exact same discussion with Unger. Alot on here were saying, "He's too weak" "We should have kept Spencer" totally disregarding the most obvious fact that players DO improve especially between year's 1-3.

Sweezy wasn't horrible. He was extremely inconsisent, but to say he was an unmitigated disaster is a stretch. Give the guy a chance for Pete's sake. It same silliness when people question weather Bruce Irvin can be a starter for us. WE should expect to see significant improvements from ALL our 2nd year players now that they have a year under their belts.

jlwaters1":1m2nf2r0 said:

Give the guy a chance for Pete's sake

Click to expand...

I see what you did there...

jlwaters1":32indvtw said:

Chukarhawk":32indvtw said:

Boy I don't know Greg, Sweezy has been perfectly awful so far. My money is on the big goofball. I dont think sweezy will ever pan out.

Click to expand...

Wow, premature don't you think? To give up on Sweezy after just 1 season? Ridiculous, the dude's had less than a year on the OL and all of a sudden were saying he can't make it. That's crazy talk.

I don't understand why fans on here are so quick to judge a player. It's quite infuriating. I remember just a few years back we were having this exact same discussion with Unger. Alot on here were saying, "He's too weak" "We should have kept Spencer" totally disregarding the most obvious fact that players DO improve especially between year's 1-3.

Sweezy wasn't horrible. He was extremely inconsisent, but to say he was an unmitigated disaster is a stretch. Give the guy a chance for Pete's sake. It same silliness when people question weather Bruce Irvin can be a starter for us. WE should expect to see significant improvements from ALL our 2nd year players now that they have a year under their belts.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. Many times when you're just patient, you get guys like Unger, Okung, and Tate who really start to come into their own in their 2nd or 3rd year.

That first one has to be Whitehurst. He was just so toolsy in a Rodgers way, but God he sucked. I just can't think of anyone else who fits the bill. Legree to et is possible but that takes a huge leap of faith and lapse in judgement.

Ej Wilson sounds right for the second one. Productive player in college who was a clear mistake.

I thought that Sweezy was inexperienced, but he looked excellent when he "got it." He had burst off the line, would latch on to the insides of his opponents' pads instead of the outside, and was good at getting into the second level on running plays when he needed to.

I like the guy and I think he fairly easily beats out Moffitt, not because Moffitt is terrible, but because Sweezy is legit.

Oh, in reference to the draft, EJ Wilson is a good bet. As is that Georgia wideout.

My biggest takeaway here is just how impressive it is that John and Pete expect to hit on mid round picks. It's so cool. Under Ruskell/Holmgren, it was so much more of a crapshoot. You could always count on a fullback that would hardly see the field.

Player 1 is CW or Durham. Player 2 is BMW?

Draft aside. Whitehurst was the single worst move the management has made. I have to believe he looked at his on field skill set and thought that would translate to a competitive fire on the field. I'm not sure what Whitehurst was missing, but something was certainly missing..

lukerguy":uifl4njo said:

Draft aside. Whitehurst was the single worst move the management has made. I have to believe he looked at his on field skill set and thought that would translate to a competitive fire on the field. I'm not sure what Whitehurst was missing, but something was certainly missing..

Click to expand...

I wouldn't call Whitehurst a mistake as much as a low risk move that didn't work out. My guess is that both PC and JS thought Cobb was/is a better QB option than Whitehurst, but the cost of being wrong was much higher with Cobb. While I wouldn't call what the team gave up to sign Whitehurst trivial, it certainly didn't impact the team long term the way the Cobb signing impacted Arizona.

To me, calling Whitehurst (or any other personnel move) a mistake implies that JP and JS had some expectations that Whitehurst would turn out to be our franchise QB. I doubt that this is the case. My seriously uninformed guess is that PC and JS felt it was important to add a veteran to the QB competition and Whitehurst represented (in their minds) the best combination of physical tools and low risk.

So much of building a roster is a numbers game. Some (most?) of your moves are not going to work out, but if you churn through enough players it won't matter. PC and JS play this game better than anyone.

I don't think Whitehurst was low risk. TJack and Flynn were low risk (just some cap space we didn't particularly need on a low-risk contract), Whitehurst cost a third round pick and a trade down in the 2nd that is worth a 3rd on the (outdated draft pick value chart - IMO more like a 4th). I bet the FO could've found a contributor with the draft ammo we wasted on Whitehurst.

Remember, Whitehurst wasn't just not the QBOTF, he was considerably inferior to a Tarvaris Jackson, a player who:
1.) Played most of the season with a torn pec
2.) Couldn't win Buffalo's backup QB job a year later.

Spot on Sno

Snohomie":14bvcj47 said:

I don't think Whitehurst was low risk. TJack and Flynn were low risk (just some cap space we didn't particularly need on a low-risk contract), Whitehurst cost a third round pick and a trade down in the 2nd that is worth a 3rd on the (outdated draft pick value chart - IMO more like a 4th). I bet the FO could've found a contributor with the draft ammo we wasted on Whitehurst.

Click to expand...

You're confusing cost with risk. Yes, there was a cost associated with giving Whitehurst a shot. And yes, the benefit the team received by signing Whitehurst did not justify that expense. However, the long term impact the signing had on the team's ability to build a competitive roster was quantifiable, very low, and limited to two years.

Compare the aftermath of the Whitehurst signing with that of the Cobb signing. The Whitehurst signing went about as bad is it could, yet it's sole current relevance is as a meaningless topic for a meaningless discussion on a meaningless discussion board. The Cobb signing ended up costing a bunch of people their job. This is what I mean by risk. PC and JS know going in that no matter how bad Whitehurst played, it wasn't going to cost anyone not named Whitehurst their job.

bsuhawk":3c3k4dfi said:

Snohomie":3c3k4dfi said:

I don't think Whitehurst was low risk. TJack and Flynn were low risk (just some cap space we didn't particularly need on a low-risk contract), Whitehurst cost a third round pick and a trade down in the 2nd that is worth a 3rd on the (outdated draft pick value chart - IMO more like a 4th). I bet the FO could've found a contributor with the draft ammo we wasted on Whitehurst.

Click to expand...

You're confusing cost with risk. Yes, there was a cost associated with giving Whitehurst a shot. And yes, the benefit the team received by signing Whitehurst did not justify that expense. However, the long term impact the signing had on the team's ability to build a competitive roster was quantifiable, very low, and limited to two years.

Compare the aftermath of the Whitehurst signing with that of the Cobb signing. The Whitehurst signing went about as bad is it could, yet it's sole current relevance is as a meaningless topic for a meaningless discussion on a meaningless discussion board. The Cobb signing ended up costing a bunch of people their job. This is what I mean by risk. PC and JS know going in that no matter how bad Whitehurst played, it wasn't going to cost anyone not named Whitehurst their job.

Click to expand...

No I don't think he is confusing anything. Anytime draft picks are involved, there is risk. The risk is that the player you are trading for will be more valuable than the draft picks you are surrendering. Anytime you sign a player to a contract with any guaranteed money, you have risk. The salary cap era means that finances are finite, and any space utilized for player "x" cannot be used to sign another player. Either way - trade or signing - involves a certain amount of risk.

Both Whitehurst and Kolb (I am assuming that is who you are meaning) were traded, AND both players signed extensions. Arizona gave up a ton to get Kolb - a second round pick + Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie - and signed him to a five year, $64 million dollar extension ($21 Million Guaranteed). Seattle gave up a third round pick, and swapped seconds - and signed Whitehurst to a two year, $8 million dollar extension. That is still a fairly substantial gamble on an unproven player - far less risk than Arizona took in the acquisition of Kolb.

The only reason that the Whitehurst trade is no longer relevant is because the Seahawks took a risk that paid off in drafting Russell Wilson. If we were entering year 4 of the PC/JS rebuild without a franchise QB (and they seemed rather underwhelmed by Flynn), the heat would ABSOLUTELY be turned up on the Pete and the front office. And most would be pointing to the Whitehurst trade as the first step in a long line of failed attempts to get a QB. I do think it is a relevant, but less relevant because of the success that the front office has experienced.