I think the Coaches are correctly managing the situation with QBs currently on the roster

[Mike D in 332]

As mystified as I am regarding the current roster situation at QB, I think the Seahawks are taking the correct course of action. There are three QB's in this equation, although most of us fans only see two realistic options. Geno has experience in the system and the trust of some veterans. Drew is billed as having good to great physical tools. Jacob showed flashes of brilliance at Washington.
IMO, when you don't have a clear difference maker, you need to start your known quantity (Geno) initially to determine how to evaluate the rest of your roster. It's also helpful to give your veteran QB the first chance to succeed. This helps the rest of the roster feel good as they can earn their shot too. Roster competition needs to be authentic for it to be a successful tool. Therefore, if one of the younger guys starts to succeed, then we need to pivot in his direction; this is the best-case scenario.
I think the plan with Lock is to let him sit and learn the offense while someone else goes through the growing pains of a young roster with a scheme change. Simultaneously, they will be going through the roller coaster of an NFL season without the player that defined the franchise for most of the last decade; and mostly for being underestimated. So, early in the NFL year, we certainly appear to have potential and also the value that can be gained from being underestimated.
If we put Drew in as the starter to begin the season and he fails, then he is likely ruined. If we let Geno take us as far as he can, and when/if it is not working out, then we can always go to Drew. Maybe by then he will be experienced enough and talented enough to make our offense go.
Lastly, Jacob has shown some skills. He is a longshot at best, but late bloomers happen. I'm not saying it's going to work or not going to work. I'm saying it' a good way to manage the current QB situation.

 

[keasley45]

Agree, but I get the feeling they've told Drew that their plan is to turn the keys over to him . Why? Just the way he answered a few interview questions about how he feels about having to work with the 2's. There seemed to be a veiled certainty that he will get his shot. Just a matter of time.

Your point about letting Geno lose the spot is a good one as well. Smart money is on Lock if he can do it. He's younger and more talented. But like you said, how he steps into that spot is critical to building and securing his confidence. Smart to let him sit in the shadows while he learns and surrender the keys when he snatches them out of your hand instead of handing them to him.



It's just practice and should look effortless. And it does.

I still think Drew takes it before the start of the season. But if he doesn't I don't think it's a bad thing either.

 

[sutz]

I always had the feeling that Lock was a bit more than a 'throw in' in the Wilson deal. I think they saw something in his film study that made them think he has possibilities. Geno has experience, but his age is working against him a bit for him to be the QB of the future. With Lock still on his rookie deal, they basically have a cheap tryout year for him. I'm good with not bringing in a vet. There aren't any really impressive vets out there anyway.

 

[toffee]

All media 'experts' and us are just opining based on Geno and Lock's past performances, or lack of.

For Geno, he was starter for 2013 and 2014, two years. He has been a backup from 2015 to 2021, 6 years. In these 6 seasons, his only opportunity to start consecutive games was last year, for 3.5 games. He played well enough:

2021 Geno: 95 attempts, 68.4%, 702 yards, 5TD - 1 INT, rating 103, PFF 73.9.
2021 Jimmy: 441 attempts, 68.3%, 3806 yards, 20TD - 12 INT, rating 98.7, PFF 74.9

So the question for Geno would be: Can he play consistently at that level over a season? We shall see. If Geno could, we got ourself a QB in the similar caliber of Jimmy G, hey 2021 Jimmy took the 9ers to NFC championship.

 

[Ozzy]

If Geno wins the job then its going to be hard to not be critical of how they handled the QB situation unless they are truly tanking for next year and the good QB class. Lock has to win the job because he's much more talented and could pop. Geno is a 6 year journeyman. There is zero excuse for him being your guy unless you f-ed up somewhere or your tanking. The only other option is your delusional about your system being so good it doesn't matter who the QB is and I don't think that's the case.

 

[keasley45]

Don't agree with

If Geno wins the job then its going to be hard to not be critical of how they handled the QB situation unless they are truly tanking for next year and the good QB class. Lock has to win the job because he's much more talented and could pop. Geno is a 6 year journeyman. There is zero excuse for him being your guy unless you f-ed up somewhere or your tanking. The only other option is your delusional about your system being so good it doesn't matter who the QB is and I don't think that's the case.

That doesn't make sense. By that logic, they made the wrong decision in going with Russ over Flynn, because they were banking on Flynn being the guy and had the rookie as a backup flier.

If Geno wins and wins decisively, AND improves upon 68%, 5 to 1 td ratio then so be it. Like any other qb in league, let him start until he can't. Whether he's replaced by Lock, some rookie is 23 or whoever. If he wins and plays well, we win.

 

[jlwaters1]

Don't agree with

That doesn't make sense. By that logic, they made the wrong decision in going with Russ over Flynn, because they were banking on Flynn being the guy and had the rookie as a backup flier.

If Geno wins and wins decisively, AND improves upon 68%, 5 to 1 td ratio then so be it. Like any other qb in league, let him start until he can't. Whether he's replaced by Lock, some rookie is 23 or whoever. If he wins and plays well, we win.

I agree Lock has to earn the job. But he needs to be given a chance to play with the #1's. Geno is a known quantity his STATS from last year are a bit misleading. He's always struggled with consistency. Look at his game logs from last year. only 1 of the 4 games he played would be described at Good/Great and that was against the hapless Jags.

The other 3 games he had an average 63% comp% with a pedestrian 3-1 TD-INT ratio with 1 lost fumble at the worst possible time. he also took 13 sacks in those 4 games. Not winning football.

I'm hopeful that Lock will start game 1, if the competition is so close and Geno wins the job I think that's a bad indicator for Lock.

 

[keasley45]

I agree Lock has to earn the job. But he needs to be given a chance to play with the #1's. Geno is a known quantity his STATS from last year are a bit misleading. He's always struggled with consistency. Look at his game logs from last year. only 1 of the 4 games he played would be described at Good/Great and that was against the hapless Jags.

The other 3 games he had an average 63% comp% with a pedestrian 3-1 TD-INT ratio with 1 lost fumble at the worst possible time. he also took 13 sacks in those 4 games. Not winning football.

I'm hopeful that Lock will start game 1, if the competition is so close and Geno wins the job I think that's a bad indicator for Lock.

I don't know what Genos ceiling is either Shane and I can't remember who else it was stated pretty clearly that prior to the Jags game, the gameplanning for Geno's offense was extremely conservative as he wasn't going to be running what they typically did with Russ and that it wasn't until the Jags game that Shane and Geno were in sync. So we can discount that game if we want, or we can look at it as the result of OC and QB having time to learn eachother and get on the same page.

I for one, can't take an entire game and just toss it, when the same defense Geno was basically perfect against in terms of accuracy, distribution and decision making, manhandled the Bills the following week.

He took 13 sacks in games where the passing was conservative, his knowledge of the playbook was limited and you can rest assured he was told... take the sack if the play isn't there right away.

Again. Not saying he's the savior. Just that we aren't gonna know until he shows it when given the opportunity to play in this offense, on this team, in a tradition that is built on sound, successful football, and for coaches in that system who are 100% focused on making him successful. I didn't see anything in his play last year to say he can't be better than he's been, because I those limited opportunities, he already has been.

 

[keasley45]

Also REALLY wish he'd been given the start against Green Bay. As horrid as the qb play was that game, it was basically still a toss up going into the 4th qtr. Nobody can convince me that geno would have been worse that game with all the opportunities we missed through the air. Had he started and beat GB, I think our feelings about the guy would be completely different.

 

[Own The West]

In Lock's presser I was encouraged when he acknowledged that he needs to take better care of the football and not be as much of a "gunslinger". Specifically he talked about not forcing it down field when a check down is there, and not taking a sack waiting for something to open up and just throwing it away.

Avoiding negative plays and keeping the chains moving is all I would want from any quarterback. I hope he can make the jump.

As for playing with the ones or twos, if he carves up the 2s in preseason, he'll definitely get his chance to run with the 1s. That's how Russ jumped Flynn his rookie year.

 

[jlwaters1]

I don't know what Genos ceiling is either Shane and I can't remember who else it was stated pretty clearly that prior to the Jags game, the gameplanning for Geno's offense was extremely conservative as he wasn't going to be running what they typically did with Russ and that it wasn't until the Jags game that Shane and Geno were in sync. So we can discount that game if we want, or we can look at it as the result of OC and QB having time to learn eachother and get on the same page.

I for one, can't take an entire game and just toss it, when the same defense Geno was basically perfect against in terms of accuracy, distribution and decision making, manhandled the Bills the following week.

He took 13 sacks in games where the passing was conservative, his knowledge of the playbook was limited and you can rest assured he was told... take the sack if the play isn't there right away.

Again. Not saying he's the savior. Just that we aren't gonna know until he shows it when given the opportunity to play in this offense, on this team, in a tradition that is built on sound, successful football, and for coaches in that system who are 100% focused on making him successful. I didn't see anything in his play last year to say he can't be better than he's been, because I those limited opportunities, he already has been.

That's a fair point. I would agree to some extent.

 

[toffee]

I don't know what Genos ceiling is either Shane and I can't remember who else it was stated pretty clearly that prior to the Jags game, the gameplanning for Geno's offense was extremely conservative as he wasn't going to be running what they typically did with Russ and that it wasn't until the Jags game that Shane and Geno were in sync. So we can discount that game if we want, or we can look at it as the result of OC and QB having time to learn eachother and get on the same page.

I for one, can't take an entire game and just toss it, when the same defense Geno was basically perfect against in terms of accuracy, distribution and decision making, manhandled the Bills the following week.

He took 13 sacks in games where the passing was conservative, his knowledge of the playbook was limited and you can rest assured he was told... take the sack if the play isn't there right away.

Again. Not saying he's the savior. Just that we aren't gonna know until he shows it when given the opportunity to play in this offense, on this team, in a tradition that is built on sound, successful football, and for coaches in that system who are 100% focused on making him successful. I didn't see anything in his play last year to say he can't be better than he's been, because I those limited opportunities, he already has been.

My eyes told me that whole team, including the defense rallied around Geno, the points allowed were super low in those three games.

 

[hawkfan68]

Also REALLY wish he'd been given the start against Green Bay. As horrid as the qb play was that game, it was basically still a toss up going into the 4th qtr. Nobody can convince me that geno would have been worse that game with all the opportunities we missed through the air. Had he started and beat GB, I think our feelings about the guy would be completely different.

I don't believe the Seahawks would have fared better with Geno in there. I think the Seahawks would have struggled with Geno as they did with RW. Geno wouldn't have the injured thumb excuse either. You are underestimating the Packer D and overestimating Geno's skillset.

The Green Bay Packers finally have a dominant defense, and it makes them NFC favorites

“If I only had a defense” has been a mantra of many an elite NFL quarterback. It’s a mantra Green Bay Packers fans have been repeating ever since 2010. That is, until now.

www.pff.com

(I don't like PFF but I think they are correct with this info).

https://www.footballdb.com/stats/teamstat.html?group=D&cat=T

 

[toffee]

Also REALLY wish he'd been given the start against Green Bay. As horrid as the qb play was that game, it was basically still a toss up going into the 4th qtr. Nobody can convince me that geno would have been worse that game with all the opportunities we missed through the air. Had he started and beat GB, I think our feelings about the guy would be completely different.

Therefore, Wilson rushed back to deny Geno the opportunity to start, and Pete didn't do his job as the HC for not pulling Wilson at halftime.

 

[hawkfan68]

Therefore, Wilson rushed back to deny Geno the opportunity to start, and Pete didn't do his job as the HC for not pulling Wilson at halftime.

Carroll knew they had a better chance to win with Wilson rather Smith. That's why RW was playing and not any hokey reason you conjure up to make up to believe that Wilson forced Carroll's hand. If what you believe is in fact actual, then it's obvious Carroll isn't fit to coach the team. I believe PC wcould have benched RW at any time if he thought his play was hurting the team and if having Smith in there would give them a better chance to win. He chose not to.

 

[toffee]

I disagree. If Wilson is dictating how Carroll should manage the team, then the blame should lie with Carroll. Carroll knew they had a better chance to win with Wilson rather Smith. That's why RW was playing and not any hokey reason you conjure up to make up to believe that Wilson forced Carroll's hand. If what you believe is in fact actual, then it's obvious Carroll isn't fit to coach the team. Which I don't believe is the case, Carroll is too good of a coach to do that.

I do blame Carroll, behavior unbefitting of a head coach. did you even read the complete sentence?

 

[keasley45]

I don't believe the Seahawks would have fared better with Geno in there. I think the Seahawks would have struggled with Geno as they did with RW. Geno wouldn't have the injured thumb excuse either. You are underestimating the Packer D and overestimating Geno's skillset.

The Green Bay Packers finally have a dominant defense, and it makes them NFC favorites

“If I only had a defense” has been a mantra of many an elite NFL quarterback. It’s a mantra Green Bay Packers fans have been repeating ever since 2010. That is, until now.

www.pff.com

(I don't like PFF but I think they are correct with this info).

https://www.footballdb.com/stats/teamstat.html?group=D&cat=T

We didn't struggle because of GBs defense. There were multiple plays just left on the field. We struggled because he made really bad decision. I put together a thread that started to highlight just how bad it was and intended to do the entire game, but there were too many plays to clip. That game was literally amateur hour at the QB position.

And the single biggest reason we lost that game, even beyond the qb play, was the fact that we chose to throw the ball 40 plus times vs 11 runs... the entire game... in a game where we were never in a position to need to throw that much and would have benefited from leaning on the run. In fact, the running game was effective in its limited use. Throwing that much was entirely unnecessary, untirely unPete or unShane, and would never have happened had Russ not dictated it.

 

[hawkfan68]

I do blame Carroll, behavior unbefitting of a head coach. did you even read the complete sentence?

My apologies. I should have read it more carefully. A few on here are quick to blame RW for everything that is wrong with the team so I jumped the gun on your post a bit. I'm sorry.

While RW is not perfect he's better than any Seahawk QB last season and would be this season (currently if he was still here. That is a fact). Can he improve his game? sure. So can Tom Brady, Rodgers, Allen, Herbert, etc. Stafford was the QB for the team that won the SB yet he threw 17 INTs (most in the NFL). Everyone can always be better.

 

[keasley45]

Therefore, Wilson rushed back to deny Geno the opportunity to start, and Pete didn't do his job as the HC for not pulling Wilson at halftime.

Yup

 

[keasley45]

My apologies. I should have read it more carefully. A few on here are quick to blame RW for everything that is wrong with the team so I jumped the gun on your post a bit. I'm sorry.

While RW is not perfect he's better than any Seahawk QB last season and would be this season (currently if he was still here. That is a fact). Can he improve his game? sure. So can Tom Brady, Rodgers, Allen, Herbert, etc. Stafford was the QB for the team that won the SB yet he threw 17 INTs (most in the NFL). Everyone can always be better.

None of those qbs you mentioned have finished as poorly on 3rd down passing or passing success on known passing downs as Russel Wilson. They are who they are because they score TDs AND move the chains. Russ scored TDs but wasn't remotely close in terms of his own 3rd down ability as the others. That's a simple statistical fact.

Nor do any of those qbs have the holes that need to be schemed around that Russ does - requiring deep drops to survey the field - running basically his own specific style of offense, rather than one tailored to an opponent... reduced visibility in throwing lanes, reduced ability to hit plays close to the line of scrimmage (height).

And none of those qbs ever had pundits and analysts questioning their ability to make proper reads, or had a Single defensive strategy posed to them that they couldn't ultimately defeat ( Russ and 2 high coverages)

Russ was awesome. But he's a 1 off. For better AND for worse. Seems some around here only want to acknowledge the splash plays and comebacks, yet attribute zero responsibility for having to comeback in the first place to Russ and the things he couldn't do.