#6 Sam Howell

[SeaWolv]

IMO Geno needs to win the spot if it’s a tie I would make Howell the starter there is no sense starting the older guy when he is 10 years older. You would also have a vet as a backup in case of injury

They're going to obviously go with whoever they think gives them the best chance to win. Whoever that is will likely have a short leash if it was a close battle in training camp. This staff isn't beholden to Geno like the previous was, so I doubt he gets any deferential treatment. I think the job is truly up for grabs but I think Geno has the inside track.

 

[JayhawkMike]

They're going to obviously go with whoever they think gives them the best chance to win. Whoever that is will likely have a short leash if it was a close battle in training camp. This staff isn't beholden to Geno like the previous was, so I doubt he gets any deferential treatment. I think the job is truly up for grabs but I think Geno has the inside track.

I want them to go with whoever gives them the best chance of winning in 2-3 years. That’s why I think any Geno snap is a wasted snap IF Howell is the long term solution. If he’s not then it doesn’t matter and, in my opinion, the team failed this offseason in not getting the biggest issue settled.

 

[SeaWolv]

I want them to go with whoever gives them the best chance of winning in 2-3 years. That’s why I think any Geno snap is a wasted snap IF Howell is the long term solution. If he’s not then it doesn’t matter and, in my opinion, the team failed this offseason in not getting the biggest issue settled.

We as fans have the luxury of long term thinking like this. The shelf life for an NFL coach is very short, sometimes not even a full season, in the fickle NFL. I don't think MM can afford to make a decision right now based on what might happen in 2-3 years. I think he has to worry more about how to keep his job for next season and the one after that. If he can hit his goals in that time frame then it may afford him the opportunity to think in 2-3 year windows, but right now as a brand new head coach he's gotta think about what he has to do to win now.

 

[Jegpeg]

For 2023, Seahawks were right in the middle in passing attempts per game.

We were 6th in passing percent last year so rather above average (but the commanders were miles ahead of everyone else) in 2022 we were pretty average at 13th.

 

[Jegpeg]

They're going to obviously go with whoever they think gives them the best chance to win. Whoever that is will likely have a short leash if it was a close battle in training camp. This staff isn't beholden to Geno like the previous was, so I doubt he gets any deferential treatment. I think the job is truly up for grabs but I think Geno has the inside track.

I am not even sure the 0revious staff was beholden to Geno, pre season and when Geno was injured Lock did nothing to suggest he was better than Geno, if he had I would expect Lock to have remained starter. The new staff have just decided to move on from Lock and sign a new back up who if they outplay Geno will get the starting roll.

 

[SeaWolv]

I am not even sure the 0revious staff was beholden to Geno, pre season and when Geno was injured Lock did nothing to suggest he was better than Geno, if he had I would expect Lock to have remained starter. The new staff have just decided to move on from Lock and sign a new back up who if they outplay Geno will get the starting roll.

When a front office makes a trade (signing) for someone there is an inherent desire to make sure that decision is given every opportunity to be successful and sometimes that can go too far. I'm not saying that happened here I'm just saying that probably has less of a chance of happening now than it did before PC left.

 

[Jegpeg]

Technically we did not trade for Geno, but the same can be true for free agent signings
However JS / PC did not show any of that when they signed Matt Flynn on a fairly expensive (at the time) contract to be the starter only to dump him for Wilson who was supposed to be the back up and maybe start 2 or 3 years down the road.

 

[SeaWolv]

Technically we did not trade for Geno, but the same can be true for free agent signings
However JS / PC did not show any of that when they signed Matt Flynn on a fairly expensive (at the time) contract to be the starter only to dump him for Wilson who was supposed to be the back up and maybe start 2 or 3 years down the road.

You honestly don't think PC's affinity with Geno had anything to do with his career in Seattle:

https://www.seahawks.com/news/why-geno-smith-is-one-of-pete-carroll-s-all-time-favorite-guys#:~:text=Smith%20didn't%20end%20up,a%20free%20agent%20in%202019.

It's not something that happens with every player but it does happen.

 

[Bear-Hawk]

Yes, but the percentage of snaps that were pass plays was 5th highest in the league, which is a more accurate indicator of their overall "pass happiness."

Good point. Except for KC & Mahomes, most of the teams that threw over 60% were losers. 55/45 pass/rush ratio seems about right.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Good point. Except for KC & Mahomes, most of the teams that threw over 60% were losers. 55/45 pass/rush ratio seems about right.

Yep. I'm looking for true balance. Take some pressure off Geno and the OL. He can dice with his arm, but we need to open up those opportunities by being multi-dimensional. We've got a talented 1-2 punch in the backfield and our offseason acquisitions have hinted that we're looking to pound the rock better than we have been.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

And eat up more Time of Possession, will change everything, imo.

 

[sutz]

And eat up more Time of Possession, will change everything, imo.

Yeah, a good clock eating offense is key to protecting the shiny new high tech defense and keeping it fresh.

 

[CelticWolf12]

This doesn't track. Seattle has been one of the pass-happiest teams in the league during Geno's tenure, both in overall pass rate as well as neutral situation passing.

This team hasn't deployed a conservative, run-heavy offense for almost half a decade now.

Pete's offense was super conservative. I don't believe I described it as "run-heavy". To argue otherwise is just nonsense. Seattle has had a predictable, bland, stale, slow to react offense for years now. My point was/is that Geno Smith was/is good at running that type of conservative game management, type of Peteball offense. Ryan Grubb's offense seems to be much more intricate with motion/movement, misdirection, quick reads, etc., which would seem to translate well in todays NFL. Who know if Geno can run this type of complex offense proficiently. Bottom line is that I am not counting Howell out as he is young, but has the physical tools to include a quick release, strong arm and mobility, to possibly be a very good NFL QB (the jury is still out). The biggest question I have is his mental ability and processing speed. Lastly, I would love to see Geno excel in this new Grubb offense, but that's certainly not a given.

Go Hawks

 

[flv2]

...The new staff have just decided to move on from Lock and sign a new back up who if they outplay Geno will get the starting roll.

Technically Lock moved on from the Seahawks. Both the Giants and the Seahawks were interested in signing him. I think Howell is of a similar overall quality to Lock, but Howell has more upside. From the Seahawks point of view it has worked out for the best.

 

[WarHawks]

If you want folks to read your posts, please, hit a couple of returns every slight shift in thought/focal point. You'd be amazed how much more inviting that makes things to read.

I'm guilty of this too from time to time.

What is it about posting on internet forums that makes it too easy to throw normal rules of grammar out the window, especially given that so many people will see it? Is it the anonymity? Interesting .

 

[WarHawks]

Technically Lock moved on from the Seahawks. Both the Giants and the Seahawks were interested in signing him. I think Howell is of a similar overall quality to Lock, but Howell has more upside. From the Seahawks point of view it has worked out for the best.

I'm not surprised Lock left. I don't think he saw much of a future here.

It is more likely than not we will still be looking for our franchise qb for the next few years, but it would be great if Howell could surprise everyone and become that. All he really has to do is cut his int's by half. If not, he's at least a decent backup. Will be fun to see how it shakes out. Go Hawks.

 

[toffee]

Howell sounded more like a Schneider than a Macdonald signing?

 

[Torc]

Howell sounded more like a Schneider than a Macdonald signing?

I suspect Grubb was consulted more than Macdonald. Macdonald has publicly said he's focused on the defense. I'm sure he was in the discussion but Grubb's opinion about how well Howell would fit in his offense would carry a lot of weight.

 

[Appyhawk]

In his own words SH said he will definitely compete for starter to the best of his ability, but understands the advantages Geno has for the spot and appreciates the opportunity to work on his weaknesses by LEARNING HOW TO PLAY SMARTER FOOTBALL.
The die is cast.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Pete's offense was super conservative. I don't believe I described it as "run-heavy". To argue otherwise is just nonsense. Seattle has had a predictable, bland, stale, slow to react offense for years now. My point was/is that Geno Smith was/is good at running that type of conservative game management, type of Peteball offense. Ryan Grubb's offense seems to be much more intricate with motion/movement, misdirection, quick reads, etc., which would seem to translate well in todays NFL. Who know if Geno can run this type of complex offense proficiently. Bottom line is that I am not counting Howell out as he is young, but has the physical tools to include a quick release, strong arm and mobility, to possibly be a very good NFL QB (the jury is still out). The biggest question I have is his mental ability and processing speed. Lastly, I would love to see Geno excel in this new Grubb offense, but that's certainly not a given.

Go Hawks

But... I still don't get how the offense was conservative.

Pass happy overall, pass happy in neutral situations, generally high in yards per attempt and intended air yards per attempt - none of this signals conservative play. The occasional conservative punt, maybe.

Love to see some facts here, because none of what I'm claiming above is "nonsense." Love to know what specifically, in schematic terms, was bland and/or stale. These generic criticisms don't pull much weight if we can't, on some deep level, explain what about the offense was bland and stale.

Also - what is prohibitively complex about Grubb's offense? Did Grubb not put his college quarterbacks in a position to succeed repeatedly? Was Geno not one of the most prolific passers to ever play college football?

I'd doubt Howell's ability to "get it" before I would Geno's. Geno was a much tighter pocket-based passer in college. Howell was mainly a vertical passer who'd scramble too early.


PS: On the motion point?



Yeah. I'm not sure we're grounding our criticisms or expectations in reality. That's all I'm getting at here.