What happens if Drew Lock is decent?

[Jville]

The only people that think the problem with the Seahawks progressing was the QB are the same people that think Carroll can still be effective.

(ie wishful fans in Seattle)

You have to be wishful to overlook that Carroll isn't even good at the stuff he was good at in the past. Which leaves you with precious few strengths and a whole lot of weaknesses.

Even so, Carroll has a system that works on under .500 teams and he will likely use that. So we will be closer to bang average than terrible. But average QBs cannot make up for Carroll's deficiencies, and he won't have a great QB to win games against better teams despite Carroll's deficiencies.

Very few more come from behind wins. And we saw in how Pete used Geno, he still plans to try to keep the game close - those will just turn into losses against the better teams.

So your issue really boils down to an continuing and ongoing disapproval of Pete Carroll. It over shadows everything else.

And that's the long and short of it?

 

[TwistedHusky]

Not at all Jville.

I've stated twice in this thread that I think Carroll will keep us from being terrible by using his ability to beat below .500 teams regularly.

But on the same issue, you have people like Sun Tzu and other posters almost seemingly to imply that somehow we will get better results with this other QB because Carroll can somehow improve him.

And the counter is you need the QB to make up for Carroll, Carroll isn't going to make up for the QB. That is ridiculous.

Those come from behind games we used to win just become losses.

The bigger problem is that staying at .500 keeps Carroll here and makes it so much more difficult to get a good QB to replace our (if that) average QB.

Making it a worst-case scenario because it takes longer to fix, and you have much few opportunity to do so.


If JS finds a super-QB for the next decade, we have to be in a position to get him. Teams at .500 aren't even that focused on removing their QB. They try to fill holes to somehow get better instead. It rarely works - and even when it does, it rarely lasts.

 

[Jville]

Not at all Jville.

I've stated twice in this thread that I think Carroll will keep us from being terrible by using his ability to beat below .500 teams regularly.

But on the same issue, you have people like Sun Tzu and other posters almost seemingly to imply that somehow we will get better results with this other QB because Carroll can somehow improve him.

And the counter is you need the QB to make up for Carroll, Carroll isn't going to make up for the QB. That is ridiculous.

Those come from behind games we used to win just become losses.

The bigger problem is that staying at .500 keeps Carroll here and makes it so much more difficult to get a good QB to replace our (if that) average QB.

Making it a worst-case scenario because it takes longer to fix, and you have much few opportunity to do so.


If JS finds a super-QB for the next decade, we have to be in a position to get him. Teams at .500 aren't even that focused on removing their QB. They try to fill holes to somehow get better instead. It rarely works - and even when it does, it rarely lasts.

Isn't quarterback development the responsibility of Shane Waldron and Dave Canales? Along with proven oversight from Carl Smith who was so successful with the development of Russell Wilson and the guy down in Houston? That's a good collection of support for the quarterback room.

I see a lot of dynamic upside for the upcoming campaign.

 

[FrodosFinger]

Lock already is decent. You got to be pretty ignorant and narrow minded to ignore the fact that he’s young and has a great arm and mobility and never had continuity with the Broncos nightmare front office and coaching carousel. Imagine Lock with Walker, DK, Fant, Lockett, Melton and Swain. 10 wins guaranteed

 

[TwistedHusky]

With Carroll and this QB? You think that equals 10 wins? in this division?
That is tremendously optimistic. Unlikely but optimistic.

And it feels like the gist of this thread should be that 'decent' isn't good enough. If anything, it makes things worse over time because we get stuck with little improvement.

The Browns got smart and replaced a 'decent' QB with an exceptional one. Not sure Carroll has the capacity to make the kind of realization anymore though.

But nothing wrong with unbridled baseless optimism so long as you don't make your plans on that.

 

[TwilightError]

I dont believe Tannehill-type-good is enough to win a super bowl. It's risky to have decent quarterback. Niners with Garappolo are good but not SB winners good. That is where I think Lock's ceiling is.

 

[FrodosFinger]

With Carroll and this QB? You think that equals 10 wins? in this division?
That is tremendously optimistic. Unlikely but optimistic.

And it feels like the gist of this thread should be that 'decent' isn't good enough. If anything, it makes things worse over time because we get stuck with little improvement.

The Browns got smart and replaced a 'decent' QB with an exceptional one. Not sure Carroll has the capacity to make the kind of realization anymore though.

But nothing wrong with unbridled baseless optimism so long as you don't make your plans on that.

No it isn’t that. Ever since we made the trade I’ve heard nothing but hate and slander towards Lock and the guy has done nothing but exude class. He’s more physically gifted than most want to admit. I think he’s going to thrive with the amount of high end weapons this team has and a better, more quarterback friendly scheme

 

[Scout]

Lock is capable if he takes in coaching because he is still young. And if Lock shows he is average as a starter than the team may still choose to draft a QB anyways because the team may not want to hand him a big contract.

The reason why the team is in such a mess is because cap mismanagement is a big part of it. When a QB takes up that much cap space it makes building a roster hard. Drafting well is the remedy to providing that cap relief in building a roster when a QB takes up so much cap space. But it was a perfect storm for the Hawks with a QB taking up a huge chunk of the cap, drafts that did not pan out, and trading way picks for veteran stop gaps being in win now mode that chipped away at building cheap depth/starters for the future.

Going back to basics of team building is key. The team comes first now and not a single QB. Whether it is Geno or Lock starting in 2022 that doesn't mean the team will not draft a QB in 2023. They might change how big of a priority it is in 2023 but that doesn't change the new trajectory of team building. The focus will now shift back to the defense and continued improvement of the run game.

 

[Ruminator]

I hope Lock supplants Geno, assuming Geno is considered to be our starting QB for now, as that would mean Lock is "decent" enough to win a few games (as much as I would prefer a higher draft pick in 2023). However, no matter how well Lock plays this season, if I were the FO, I would not let anything derail my commitment to drafting a highly touted QB in the 2023 draft since if Lock turns out to have more than a "decent" year, I'd be leery that it could just be a one-year wonder, e.g., Rick Mirer. After that, if the Seahawks end up having two stellar QBs, they could always trade one for future draft picks.

 

[Lagartixa]

JS has drafted exactly one QB in 12 years, and half the league wanted that guy. That's not enough of a sample size to be "the known".

The whole league let Wilson fall to pick #75, so I wouldn't say "half the league wanted that guy." Andy Reid also thought it was worth risking a third-round pick on Wilson, but nobody in the league thought it was worth picking Wilson in the first 74 picks.

Additionally, when rumors have come out about Schneider being interested in QBs, those QBs (Mahomes and Josh Allen) turned out to be really, really good. And both were picked well below where they'd be picked now, with the benefit of hindsight.

Also, you called that one QB "overrated" later on in the same post.

A QB can be both excellent and overrated. Wilson was by far the best QB the Seahawks have ever had, but he is overrated too, and he wants too much of the salary cap for himself for a team to be able to build effectively around him. Mind you, I don't think he should reduce his salary demands. He should get every cent he can get. I'm just glad the Seahawks aren't stuck trying to build around a player who will want something in the neighborhood of 20% of the cap for himself.

 

[Lagartixa]

No it isn’t that. Ever since we made the trade I’ve heard nothing but hate and slander towards Lock and the guy has done nothing but exude class. He’s more physically gifted than most want to admit. I think he’s going to thrive with the amount of high end weapons this team has and a better, more quarterback friendly scheme

Meh... Mike Glennon is physically gifted too.

If Lock has a decent 2022 [EDITED BECAUSE I HAD WRITTEN "2020"], I hope the Seahawks do the right thing and still draft a potential QB of the future.

 

[nwHawk]

As long as 'decent' doesnt dissuade the FO from taking our QB of the future in the first round next year...

That, in my opinion is the risk. HE plays just well enough that Pete and John think we're 'good'.

In many ways I'd rather he either be Lock of 2021, or go nuts and pull a Josh Allen type turnaround. Being in between those two... not so sure it's a great thing.

I do. It see this happening. Teammates criticized our last QB for being over sensitive and I can see JS pulling the trigger on a potential stud QB without hesitation now. Lesson learned.

 

[nwHawk]

Lock having a great year might be the worst possible outcome. It will mean a lower pick in the first that will take a much bigger package to move into range to get a top QB pick. PC/JS may think they're set and take a mid round flier as a developmental guy. Even a great year from him could only be worth a first round exit, his best won't be enough for anything more.

Disagree. He’s 25. If he turns out to be a steal, how’s that bad?

 

[keasley45]

I do. It see this happening. Teammates criticized our last QB for being over sensitive and I can see JS pulling the trigger on a potential stud QB without hesitation now. Lesson learned.

Hopefully you're right

 

[Sgt. Largent]

"Decent" doesn't usually get you far in the playoffs. Just ask the Titans.

If Lock is decent, it means maybe a 8-9 win season, instead of a 6-7 win season. That's it. Doesn't preclude you from continuing to look for your next franchise QB in the draft or via free agency/trade.

 

[Rat]

"Decent" doesn't usually get you far in the playoffs. Just ask the Titans.

You mean the team that was in the AFC title game just two years ago?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

You mean the team that was in the AFC title game just two years ago?

Yep, same team that got bounced in the first game of the playoffs last year.

 

[TwistedHusky]

There is a reason QBs get paid what 1/3 of the team makes. Because that is what they are worth.

People who build teams know this. No QB. No chance.

Whether Locke or Lock or whateverhisname is happens to be a good person is not relevant. Wilson certainly looks like an insufferable pr*ck. But he wins games and kept us a top team in the NFL for almost 10 years.

Lots of players changed during that time, the entire LOB, our DL, our DL, some of our LB, even our RB. We still stayed a top team. Because the QB is what mattered. Lock isn't going to make any kind of positive difference to matter.
He can be servicable. He might even be 'good'. That won't be good enough though.

And trotting out Carroll as the example of why we don't need Lock to be good is interesting. Lock has to overcome Carroll. (That isn't happening btw.)

I am sure it feels good to think you can build the team up and still have a chance. But there isn't one until we get a top-tier QB.

Yes the Titans made it farther in the playoffs once with a favorable matchup. The 49ers made it to the SB with Jimmy G.
We don't have a roster the quality of the Titans, nor do we have a coach the caliber of what the 49ers have. Hell, the Eagles won a SB with a backup. That doesn't mean you don't need a starting QB and can just roll with your backup.
(Which is ironic because Lock looks more like backup quality than starter, so maybe we are trying to roll with a backup?)

The NFL built itself so the QB matters most. More than a full other 1/4 of the team. So long as those guys are average - you end up a top tier team with a top tier QB. If the QB did not matter most, they would not get paid like they do. QB is actually the most pivotal/important position in all sports. It affects W/Ls more than any other. It determines team success over time. Nothing else comes close.

 

[FrodosFinger]

There is a reason QBs get paid what 1/3 of the team makes. Because that is what they are worth.

People who build teams know this. No QB. No chance.

Whether Locke or Lock or whateverhisname is happens to be a good person is not relevant. Wilson certainly looks like an insufferable pr*ck. But he wins games and kept us a top team in the NFL for almost 10 years.

Lots of players changed during that time, the entire LOB, our DL, our DL, some of our LB, even our RB. We still stayed a top team. Because the QB is what mattered. Lock isn't going to make any kind of positive difference to matter.
He can be servicable. He might even be 'good'. That won't be good enough though.

And trotting out Carroll as the example of why we don't need Lock to be good is interesting. Lock has to overcome Carroll. (That isn't happening btw.)

I am sure it feels good to think you can build the team up and still have a chance. But there isn't one until we get a top-tier QB.

Yes the Titans made it farther in the playoffs once with a favorable matchup. The 49ers made it to the SB with Jimmy G.
We don't have a roster the quality of the Titans, nor do we have a coach the caliber of what the 49ers have. Hell, the Eagles won a SB with a backup. That doesn't mean you don't need a starting QB and can just roll with your backup.
(Which is ironic because Lock looks more like backup quality than starter, so maybe we are trying to roll with a backup?)

The NFL built itself so the QB matters most. More than a full other 1/4 of the team. So long as those guys are average - you end up a top tier team with a top tier QB. If the QB did not matter most, they would not get paid like they do. QB is actually the most pivotal/important position in all sports. It affects W/Ls more than any other. It determines team success over time. Nothing else comes close.

When will you accept the fact that Wilson started sucking badly and was carried by the defense and running game much of his career? And his salary with no production was a waste of cap space. You'll see once you stop clinging to Wilson. He's gone and didn't want to be here. Besides the Hawks already have a much nicer roster than last year. Amazing what freed up cap space can afford isn't it?

 

[jammerhawk]

Your anti-Pete bias is strong here.

It is what it is. You have your views and could be correct. However, you are unwilling to accept that anyone else's view has any legitimacy. In fact you don't respond fairly to the question posed by the thread which is what if Drew Lock is decent? That appears to be based upon the reality you don't think he is. That's OK but it isn't the view of the FO. Many might agree with you but is that view actually right?

Frankly I just don't buy your position as being correct. If Lock is a decent QB, providing the rest of the team is improved but particularly the D then the team is better and not just entirely dependent upon what was proving to be self centred QB play from Wilson as he wanted to play his style of O.

Pete has apparently in an unspoken way opted for a 2 year or longer rebuild of the team and has declined adding from what appeared to be a sub standard QB group. That is what it is and it doesn't mean the team will not be competitive this season. Will they be elite? Probably not but they could just be more than many acknowledge.