Does Macdonald keep Geno?

[Parallax]

bigcc, appreciated your write up on how Geno's contract was structured. Overall though, I think you're too hung up on the cap. The point of cap space is to be used to get players.

Yes, if our plan was to field last year's team next year exactly as their contracts are currently structured, we'd be in trouble. But we don't want to do that, so we aren't really.


The bolded is what I find absolutely crazy. What in the world do you mean you are you tired of giving Geno chances? What chances? Dude has a winning record as a Seahawks starter, was just outside of being a top 5 QB last year, took us to the playoffs his first chance, on the verge of the playoffs on his second, and did so with what level of support this season? This is such a weird take.

Also, where does this 'rumor' about Pete not giving Drew a chance come from? Who is saying that?

Drew was a backup in 2021, just like Geno. Geno was a good backup in 2021. Drew was a bad backup in 2021. Unless we were absolutely planning on tanking (which neither John or Pete indicated they thought we were doing), why would anyone have been dead set on starting Drew Lock?

I think your take is weird. You can twist stats to make Geno seem like a good QB but he's not. It's meaningless to say he took us to the playoffs because the NFL made the ridiculous decision to let in a 7th team. We so clearly did not belong and proved it in the opening round. With Saint Geno under center.

I'm not saying the guy sucks but he's just adequate. Mediocre is the word that best applies to him and our team. Not horrible but not good. Caught in the middle, accomplishing nothing, with no chance of getting better until we face up to the fact that we're not on the verge of winning anything meaningful and take the steps necessary to get there. Geno was not it and never would be.

Unless you're satisfied with mediocrity, then sure. Go for it. But I'm not and I didn't like being forced to take that ride. Year after year of mediocrity with Pete Carroll.

The first year we had Lock, he didn't get a chance. Carroll set Geno up as the starter from the beginning while claiming he was going to have a competition. He was lying. This last season, with Geno firmly established as the starter, he let Lock play in the pre-season and he looked good. His chemistry with Metcalf was way better than Geno's. Made no difference.

 

[bigcc]

People say this all the time. Smart people whom I respect, such as you. But I don't see it. Never once did I think it was smart to go with Geno. He at times surprised me with a good performance or two. But he was not consistent and his limitations were clear. He was the definition of low ceiling, high floor. Lock was high ceiling, low floor. I'd have much preferred the latter because I was in patient franchise building mode rather than brainless "win now always" mode, which pretty much equals "mediocrity today, mediocrity tomorrow, mediocrity forevah!!!!"

I fully agreed with you, until after the first year. Geno isn't why we've struggled the last two years (though he didn't help at times). Locks ceiling has never, and won't be any time soon as good as geno's been the last two years.

Geno didn't play for 5 years before he figured it out. Lock played last year and was horrendous.

For some reason I thought lock was still on his rookie contract, if geno's gone I'd sign him for 1/4 again, but that's to compete and help the rookie out. I've certainly been wrong before, but I really, really don't see why people think he can be the guy of the future.

 

[bigcc]

I think your take is weird. You can twist stats to make Geno seem like a good QB but he's not. It's meaningless to say he took us to the playoffs because the NFL made the ridiculous decision to let in a 7th team. We so clearly did not belong and proved it in the opening round. With Saint Geno under center.

I'm not saying the guy sucks but he's just adequate. Mediocre is the word that best applies to him and our team. Not horrible but not good. Caught in the middle, accomplishing nothing, with no chance of getting better until we face up to the fact that we're not on the verge of winning anything meaningful and take the steps necessary to get there. Geno was not it and never would be.

Unless you're satisfied with mediocrity, then sure. Go for it. But I'm not and I didn't like being forced to take that ride. Year after year of mediocrity with Pete Carroll.

The first year we had Lock, he didn't get a chance. Carroll set Geno up as the starter from the beginning while claiming he was going to have a competition. He was lying. This last season, with Geno firmly established as the starter, he let Lock play in the pre-season and he looked good. His chemistry with Metcalf was way better than Geno's. Made no difference.

Using preseason as an arguing point for starting against the comeback player of the year is beneath you.

Also, geno had been here 2 years..... As a backup....

I'm not sure why you're convinced that carroll rigged the outcome lol, somehow I doubt he'd built blind loyalty to geno in the three games he had played here going 1-2.

 

[Maelstrom787]

I would like to see us be able to draft a QB we like this year, and then another one next year (who I already picked out two years ago). I think Geno has shown us the best he has. Lock has shown some good and some not so good, which IMO makes the two of them on par. Geno is better in some cases, and Lock is better in some situations. If I'm going the lose one of them them Geno is that one. Especially if that means we keep Williams.

I've only got a couple of reasons why I think Geno could show even more than he has.

1. We've never seen Geno start in a situation where he had anything other than a bottom-3 defense losing us the time of possession battle every game, and that's a quarterback killer. The degree of difficulty becomes so much higher in every facet when we can't feed off of the defense. See the Dallas game where we didn't punt a single time and scored 35 behind a statistically near-perfect performance from Geno with zero sacks, despite facing an absurd 54% pressure rate from the Dallas defense, and still lost. It's just so damn hard to overcome. Pat Mahomes couldn't even overcome it (or the type of pressure Geno faced) against the Bucs a couple years back.

2. Geno improved several fundamental facets of his game markedly in 2023. The ball was coming out faster despite chaos around him, and his pocket navigation became a legitimate strength after being his absolute biggest weakness when he initially came in for us in 2021. He has developed on the fly after the better part of a decade on the bench. The overall performance dipped, but on a fundamental tape level, his method of operation improved down the stretch and I believe he's a better quarterback now than he initially was in 2022. His play down the second half of the year started backing that up.


This is why I think it isn't a big stretch to say that we may not have seen his best yet. If Macdonald comes in and tightens up the defense and a new offensive coordinator gets our running game a bit more stable and competent, I think we could be in for a legitimate surprise.

That said, yes. If (and ONLY if) a quarterback is there that John truly believes can be our next guy, we gotta take him. I agree wholeheartedly. Geno is a two year plan MAX (as in, his current contract length) unless he goes crazy this year. Then he might buy a third year if we're actual contenders with him, but his age is the limit here. He'd be 36 at that point.

At any point, if a rookie is there that our staff BELIEVES in, he's gotta be the pick. Just has to be.

 

[DarkVictory23]

I think your take is weird. You can twist stats to make Geno seem like a good QB but he's not. It's meaningless to say he took us to the playoffs because the NFL made the ridiculous decision to let in a 7th team. We so clearly did not belong and proved it in the opening round. With Saint Geno under center.

I'm not saying the guy sucks but he's just adequate. Mediocre is the word that best applies to him and our team. Not horrible but not good. Caught in the middle, accomplishing nothing, with no chance of getting better until we face up to the fact that we're not on the verge of winning anything meaningful and take the steps necessary to get there. Geno was not it and never would be.

Unless you're satisfied with mediocrity, then sure. Go for it. But I'm not and I didn't like being forced to take that ride. Year after year of mediocrity with Pete Carroll.

The first year we had Lock, he didn't get a chance. Carroll set Geno up as the starter from the beginning while claiming he was going to have a competition. He was lying. This last season, with Geno firmly established as the starter, he let Lock play in the pre-season and he looked good. His chemistry with Metcalf was way better than Geno's. Made no difference.

Here you go again talking this nonsense about Pete giving Drew no chance and even go so far as calling Pete a liar for heaven's sake, but also not explaining why you post it as fact. You haven't backed it up.

And I am not 'twist(ing)' stats to make Geno look good. I'm using stats to accurately describe his play and compare it against other players. I mean, it seems your preference is that I just describe what Geno did in vaguely emotional terms?

In 2022, Geno went to a Pro Bowl, was top 10 or better in basically every single passing stat you can think of (well, outside of sack rate), and won more games than he lost. He was GOOD. This year, he was an above average starter, went to another Pro Bowl, set the NFL record for go-ahead TD passes in the 4th or OT, playing for a team that overall was below average against one of the toughest schedules in the league.

Geno has been a good to above average starter for us. Drew was a below average backup. The last season he had in Denver, Drew was also a below average backup. But you are 'tired' of giving Geno chances and assume Drew has not been given 'real' chances based on a narrative about what Pete did that you have provided no evidence for.

I'm sorry Geno has been good and Drew has been bad for whatever reason it is that you don't like this fact.

 

[Parallax]

I fully agreed with you, until after the first year. Geno isn't why we've struggled the last two years (though he didn't help at times). Locks ceiling has never, and won't be any time soon as good as geno's been the last two years.

Geno didn't play for 5 years before he figured it out. Lock played last year and was horrendous.

For some reason I thought lock was still on his rookie contract, if geno's gone I'd sign him for 1/4 again, but that's to compete and help the rookie out. I've certainly been wrong before, but I really, really don't see why people think he can be the guy of the future.

He's got an usually good arm and excellent mobility. What he lacks is gridiron smarts, which is the worst thing to lack as a QB. By no means do I consider Lock a lock to ever be good. His flaw is one we've seen many times. A QB with tools that exceed his noodle. Brady was the opposite and while I think it recency bias that many people call him "the GOAT", he's certainly the best of his era.

Lock has been, to date, something of the anti-Brady. A guy with an arm that Brady would have killed for, with an ability to scramble that would have made Brady weep. Good height and size. Just nowhere near the ability to make split second decisions. But there have been moments when it seemed like maybe he could. Maybe with the right coaching. Maybe.

 

[Parallax]

Using preseason as an arguing point for starting against the comeback player of the year is beneath you.

Also, geno had been here 2 years..... As a backup....

I'm not sure why you're convinced that carroll rigged the outcome lol, somehow I doubt he'd built blind loyalty to geno in the three games he had played here going 1-2.

Seemed obvious to me that he wasn't going to give Lock a real chance. From day one. Never made sense but it was there in his behavior. Perhaps because as an old coach he wasn't interested in taking chances. He was in a place in his career where, for some reason, he just wanted to keep coaching. I don't know if there was some win record he was hoping to get to. Who knows.

I've always thought Geno had the higher ceiling and I don't think it beneath anyone to look at pre-season stats. One can't take them at face value. One has to consider the competition and the situation, sure. Much of that is beyond me. But he made a lot of great throws, his timing was on and his accuracy was fine. It was only when dumped into games without preparation that he looked bad.

Again, I'm not predicting he'll ever be good. Just that he has tools and there was no reason to not give it a shot. Unless you value losing in the Wildcard round over not making the playoffs. Personally, I do not.

 

[chris98251]

Once again I think everyone is missing something, Pete, Waldron had lots of motion and used the whole field initially, Geno flourished, yes it was a brief glimpse, we went back to no motion predictable, not using the seam for the TE's and not using crossing patterns, predictable runs. Add that he would not change how the O lines scheme was, Geno I think was playing not to make mistakes not playing aggressively and using the whole playbook of Waldron because he wasn't allowed to. Waldron was brought in to install the Rams type offense, does any of us think what we seen here was a Ram offense, or a Offense we had pretty much seen for 14 years.

Why I think giving him the chance under a new regime to play more freely will give us a real vision of what he can do along with the rest of the offense. We went and got Graham, Fant, Miller, all pass catching TE's, yet they were never used to their strengths but converted to blockers more then pass catchers.

 

[Parallax]

Once again I think everyone is missing something, Pete, Waldron had lots of motion and used the whole field initially, Geno flourished, yes it was a brief glimpse, we went back to no motion predictable, not using the seam for the TE's and not using crossing patterns, predictable runs. Add that he would not change how the O lines scheme was, Geno I think was playing not to make mistakes not playing aggressively and using the whole playbook of Waldron because he wasn't allowed to. Waldron was brought in to install the Rams type offense, does any of us think what we seen here was a Ram offense, or a Offense we had pretty much seen for 14 years.

Why I think giving him the chance under a new regime to play more freely will give us a real vision of what he can do along with the rest of the offense. We went and got Graham, Fant, Miller, all pass catching TE's, yet they were never used to their strengths but converted to blockers more then pass catchers.

The play calling was definitely predictable and atrocious. I've wondered how much of that was Waldron and how much was Carroll. I honestly don't know.

My sense is that no clearly good OC was going to come here because there was concern that Carroll would straight jacket things, as happened when Canales let Russ cook. Clearly, Pete shut that down. Will be interesting to see what happens in Chicago. Waldron got a job very quickly but it didn't seem like Schneider was at all concerned about trying to keep him. So clearly different opinions.

Typically, Pete promoted from within. I don't have the sense he cared all that much who was in any role because he wasn't a master delegater. More the control freak. Rather than having great people around himself and giving them autonomy, he stubbornly insisted things be done his way. Waldron was the exception and it was to placate Russ. To keep him from demanding the trade he eventually demanded.

It could be that Waldron was simply not as creative as his mentor, Sean McVey. It could be that his hands were tied. I'm hoping we get someone truly dynamic in that role and hopefully Macdonald will give the guy freedom to operate. My sense is he will. The fact that they going after smart, young creative guys to serve in that role is a good sign.

 

[bigcc]

Seemed obvious to me that he wasn't going to give Lock a real chance. From day one. Never made sense but it was there in his behavior. Perhaps because as an old coach he wasn't interested in taking chances. He was in a place in his career where, for some reason, he just wanted to keep coaching. I don't know if there was some win record he was hoping to get to. Who knows.

I've always thought Geno had the higher ceiling and I don't think it beneath anyone to look at pre-season stats. One can't take them at face value. One has to consider the competition and the situation, sure. Much of that is beyond me. But he made a lot of great throws, his timing was on and his accuracy was fine. It was only when dumped into games without preparation that he looked bad.

Again, I'm not predicting he'll ever be good. Just that he has tools and there was no reason to not give it a shot. Unless you value losing in the Wildcard round over not making the playoffs. Personally, I do not.

From day one? Wasn't interested in taking chances?

Prior to day one, geno had thrown 9 touchdown passes the previous 7 years lol

Lock had 25/20 td/int before "day one" over 3 years

Geno had 34/37 over 9 "before day one"

Geno was 32, lock was 26, a younger qb with a better career and recent track record...

Sounds to me like he DID take the chance, and I honestly thought he was an idiot... AT THE TIME.

Also, even if carroll begrudgingly let lock be included in the trade (lol), why did Pete bring him back before this year if he is out to get him?

 

[WarHawks]

I'm in the draft two qb's camp also. Cut Geno and let the two rookies duke it out like Wilson/Flynn. It worked for us before, so it can work again. It's a transition year anyway, much like 2010-11. Yes, we have other needs, but there is no bigger need than the most important position on the team. MM even said they will build around the qb. He didn't say they will build around the trenches.

 

[Appyhawk]

I've only got a couple of reasons why I think Geno could show even more than he has.

1. We've never seen Geno start in a situation where he had anything other than a bottom-3 defense losing us the time of possession battle every game, and that's a quarterback killer. The degree of difficulty becomes so much higher in every facet when we can't feed off of the defense. See the Dallas game where we didn't punt a single time and scored 35 behind a statistically near-perfect performance from Geno with zero sacks, despite facing an absurd 54% pressure rate from the Dallas defense, and still lost. It's just so damn hard to overcome. Pat Mahomes couldn't even overcome it (or the type of pressure Geno faced) against the Bucs a couple years back.

2. Geno improved several fundamental facets of his game markedly in 2023. The ball was coming out faster despite chaos around him, and his pocket navigation became a legitimate strength after being his absolute biggest weakness when he initially came in for us in 2021. He has developed on the fly after the better part of a decade on the bench. The overall performance dipped, but on a fundamental tape level, his method of operation improved down the stretch and I believe he's a better quarterback now than he initially was in 2022. His play down the second half of the year started backing that up.


This is why I think it isn't a big stretch to say that we may not have seen his best yet. If Macdonald comes in and tightens up the defense and a new offensive coordinator gets our running game a bit more stable and competent, I think we could be in for a legitimate surprise.

That said, yes. If (and ONLY if) a quarterback is there that John truly believes can be our next guy, we gotta take him. I agree wholeheartedly. Geno is a two year plan MAX (as in, his current contract length) unless he goes crazy this year. Then he might buy a third year if we're actual contenders with him, but his age is the limit here. He'd be 36 at that point.

At any point, if a rookie is there that our staff BELIEVES in, he's gotta be the pick. Just has to be.

Age is no limitation to technical improvement. I'll give you, and Geno, that. So he might be able to get batter in that respect. But no amount of coaching and practice can teach a giraffe to run like a cheetah. His physical skills have reached a peak that is highly unlikely he can surpass. Another cog is his price tag.
With respect to Lock he throws on par with Geno but is a better runner and seems to adjust better to compressed field view in the redzone. He commands a much lower price at this point. To me that adds up to keeping Lock and cutting Geno loose while we cultivate our QBOF.

 

[WarHawks]

Age is no limitation to technical improvement. I'll give you, and Geno, that. So he might be able to get batter in that respect. But no amount of coaching and practice can teach a giraffe to run like a cheetah. His physical skills have reached a peak that is highly unlikely he can surpass. Another cog is his price tag.
With respect to Lock he throws on par with Geno but is a better runner and seems to adjust better to compressed field view in the redzone. He commands a much lower price at this point. To me that adds up to keeping Lock and cutting Geno loose while we cultivate our QBOF.

^Nailed it.

 

[Hawknight]

I guess if we don't want to pay him more money, I understand we have some deadlines coming up. I guess we'll all know here shortly in a week or two.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Age is no limitation to technical improvement. I'll give you, and Geno, that. So he might be able to get batter in that respect. But no amount of coaching and practice can teach a giraffe to run like a cheetah. His physical skills have reached a peak that is highly unlikely he can surpass. Another cog is his price tag.
With respect to Lock he throws on par with Geno but is a better runner and seems to adjust better to compressed field view in the redzone. He commands a much lower price at this point. To me that adds up to keeping Lock and cutting Geno loose while we cultivate our QBOF.

Drew's actually been a fairly paltry runner. Geno has averaged almost a full yard more per rush in 2022-2023 than Drew's career yards per rush. Geno's 2022 was double as productive on the ground as any of Lock's to this point. Volume contributes, but his efficiency is also markedly better.

I think people have this impression of Geno because he's more apt than Lock to stay in the pocket and navigate the scrum from within. This can be good or bad depending on your viewpoint and preferences, but his scrambles are undeniably more productive in the current scheme of things. Lock may be slightly faster as they stand currently, but Geno ran in the 4.5s coming out of WVU. Geno also keeps his eyes further downfield than Lock whilst escaping.

As for the arm, Lock probably wins by a hair in deep ball distance, but Geno's close to as accurate as they come based on most services that chart each pass. I don't think they're even comparable in the accuracy department.



I don't know. I see a lot of good that I feel is being outright discredited and dismissed because of popular narrative.

 

[chris98251]

I'm in the draft two qb's camp also. Cut Geno and let the two rookies duke it out like Wilson/Flynn. It worked for us before, so it can work again. It's a transition year anyway, much like 2010-11. Yes, we have other needs, but there is no bigger need than the most important position on the team. MM even said they will build around the qb. He didn't say they will build around the trenches.

Flynn was not a Rooke, he had never been a starter.

 

[keasley45]

I think your take is weird. You can twist stats to make Geno seem like a good QB but he's not. It's meaningless to say he took us to the playoffs because the NFL made the ridiculous decision to let in a 7th team. We so clearly did not belong and proved it in the opening round. With Saint Geno under center.

I'm not saying the guy sucks but he's just adequate. Mediocre is the word that best applies to him and our team. Not horrible but not good. Caught in the middle, accomplishing nothing, with no chance of getting better until we face up to the fact that we're not on the verge of winning anything meaningful and take the steps necessary to get there. Geno was not it and never would be.

Unless you're satisfied with mediocrity, then sure. Go for it. But I'm not and I didn't like being forced to take that ride. Year after year of mediocrity with Pete Carroll.

The first year we had Lock, he didn't get a chance. Carroll set Geno up as the starter from the beginning while claiming he was going to have a competition. He was lying. This last season, with Geno firmly established as the starter, he let Lock play in the pre-season and he looked good. His chemistry with Metcalf was way better than Geno's. Made no difference.

There are no stats to twist. The NFL metric for QBs that most folks now refer to because it encompasses a broad range of performance measurables puts Geno at 9th last year and 13th this year. All with league trailing offensive line, rushing attack, and defense.

That's just the fact of what his performance as a qb says he is.

And it's beyond logical to assume that if his defense gives him more opportunity, if his line blocks better (for him and the running game) and he has a backfield that becomes a legitimate threat in games, that he will be better, not worse.

 

[WarHawks]

Flynn was not a Rooke, he had never been a starter.

True. Basic concept applies though.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Flynn was not a Rooke, he had never been a starter.

Fun fact: Matt Flynn's Seattle average salary per year ranked higher among quarterbacks in 2012 than Geno's salary does among quarterbacks in 2024

EDIT: Nah I lied, I should've been looking at 2013. I can't find the full stats, but it's closer than you'd think.

 

[Ostatehawk]

Or trade for Trey Lance.

You shut your whore mouth.