Geno Is a Bridge, Nothing More

Ozzy

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,327
Reaction score
3,859
I LOVE Schottenheimer.

Part of the reason I turned on Russ is because they had it figured out. They found his perfect calling. We needed to keep the offense running through the ground game and then use Russell's innate strength in the deep game to deliver the knockout blows. 2018's playoff game was a failure where we took it too far on the ground, and 2019 we had it figured out and would've been in the NFCCG if we had sustained just one less injury to the RB core.

When Russ and/or Mark Rodgers started the pressure campaign to go Let Russ Cook on the world, I was out. When Russ wouldn't stand for a heavy rushing attack and wanted it to run through him on offense, that's when I couldn't go back to him. He NEEDS that rushing attack to move the chains, keep the offense on schedule, and mitigate all of his functional flaws as a game manager.

I get that he wanted to be the best ever, truly I do, but I just couldn't look past his refusal to embrace what allowed him to flourish. I think the divorce had to happen as soon as that precipice was reached, and I didn't like how disingenuous his camp was with the "I'm not requesting a trade, but here's the teams I'd accept a trade to" public announcement and then the circus the next year where he maintained his "Seahawk for life" outward comments while trying to orchestrate the firing of the front office behind the scenes. This could largely be his agent, but it really had me on the absolute "trade his ass. rip off the bandaid" train. Seahawks FO isn't totally clean in the matter, but their PR was mainly defensive and his camps was mainly offensive in my estimation.

I don't like disingenuous behavior from franchise icons. I don't like it from anyone. I like real ones. Heart-on-sleeve dudes. That's personal preference I guess, but he rubbed me as a fan the wrong way.

Part of why I took great delight in his failure was the vindication it provided to the franchise and the validation it provided to my own thoughts on who Russell is as a player. If someone wants him for the vet min and he'll actually accept a Schottenheimer-esque offensive vision, he can still be very very good. Not good as in the 2023 Broncos where he had some fun stats and moments but was still overall dysfunctional in terms of consistently moving the offense, but good as in the 2018/2019 version of Russ that had him on the Mount Rushmore of NFL quarterbacks.

If the Steelers can improve their rushing efficiency a bit, he could be a bit dangerous there. I think Pickens would probably be a challenging personality fit with Russ, but that aside, it's a good fit.

All good stuff. The Schott situation was always strange to me because they seemed like a perfect marriage. The general narrative is Russ wanted him gone. I’m still not convinced that’s true? There are reports that Russ and Schott did weekly bible studies, families were close etc even after he was gone. I don’t know what happened and maybe Russ did push for him to go but it just seems odd. And in regards to let Russ cook stuff I still think we might be getting a weird view of it all. I think it’s possible if we could let this play out like a court case more evidence would come out that at the least would blur the lines. I think it’s all been put on Russ and we’ve just accepted it as fact when it’s in reality a little more nuanced. But I fully admit the current narrative could easily be true too and I’m a little biased because like you early Russ is my all time favorite player.
 

rigelian

Active member
Joined
May 2, 2009
Messages
516
Reaction score
91
Russell peaked in 2020 at 32......Geno peaked in 2022 at 31.

That's the point.
Not much of a point. There's not enough information there to determined whether he peaked or not. Just two years. If Geno plays lights out next year.... I can't draw any conclusions at this point. For example, I think Geno had a much more consistent offensive line in 2022 than 2024.
 
OP
OP
Fade

Fade

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
5,454
Reaction score
2,988
Location
Truth Ray
I agree that we've really lowered the bar for qb play over the last few years, and I find it incredibly frustrating. We had a top nfl qb here for years, and we know what a really good qb looks like. Knowing that, what good does it do for the team to see Geno win 8 or 9 games and maybe make the playoffs and get bounced, if he's not going to be here long term? That sets us backwards, not forward. We have the giant red reset button sitting before us. JS already pressed it with the coaching changes. I hope he presses it again for a qb change, instead of just staring at it for another year. The status quo just seems pointless and a counterproductive, complete waste of time to me. If you're not moving forward, you're moving backwards, because the rest of the league is moving forward at warp speed. But what do I know. I'm just a fan on the internet.

Yep, this is where I am at myself.

I was hoping that if I stitched Geno's 2 best stretches together we could see something resembling a top 10 QB. He is just okay, unfortunately. He's not going to be the reason why you lose, but he isn't going to take you to a championship either.

I'd like to think they view Geno as the plan B (insurance.) And they have a guy they are targeting in the draft. And that's why they remain so non-committal , having not come out and said Geno is the guy. They are always bringing up Drew Lock, competition, etc. Whenever JS & MM are asked if Geno is their starter.

But Geno will frustratingly keep the Seahawks in the middle which will continue to hamper them from getting their franchise QB. I have 4 QBs going in the first 14 picks at the very least, could be 5.

Trying to win and rebuild at the same time is very hard. You have to pick a lane, and Geno represents neither.
 

xray

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2018
Messages
9,562
Reaction score
1,629
Location
AZ
Nine pages on the Geno bridge ?
 

Jville

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
13,335
Reaction score
1,721
Not much of a point. There's not enough information there to determined whether he peaked or not. Just two years. If Geno plays lights out next year.... I can't draw any conclusions at this point. For example, I think Geno had a much more consistent offensive line in 2022 than 2024.

Indeed,

Geno enjoyed a much better week to week continuity out of the offensive line in 2022 than in 2023. Having injury issues at both tackle spots and uncertainty inside shrunk the 2023 play book. 2022 saw a more predictable game to game blocking game.

The use of tight ends also fell off 11% in 2023. I didn't see that coming.

Geno and the offensive coordinator had more personnel adjustments to deal with in 2023.
 

Maelstrom787

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
12,036
Reaction score
10,050
Location
Delaware
Yep, this is where I am at myself.

I was hoping that if I stitched Geno's 2 best stretches together we could see something resembling a top 10 QB. He is just okay, unfortunately. He's not going to be the reason why you lose, but he isn't going to take you to a championship either.

I'd like to think they view Geno as the plan B (insurance.) And they have a guy they are targeting in the draft. And that's why they remain so non-committal , having not come out and said Geno is the guy. They are always bringing up Drew Lock, competition, etc. Whenever JS & MM are asked if Geno is their starter.

But Geno will frustratingly keep the Seahawks in the middle which will continue to hamper them from getting their franchise QB. I have 4 QBs going in the first 14 picks at the very least, could be 5.

Trying to win and rebuild at the same time is very hard. You have to pick a lane, and Geno represents neither.
The 49ers kept Alex Smith before taking their swing in the draft and developing Kaepernick to replace him. They wanted to win while building.

The Chiefs kept Alex Smith before taking their swing in the draft and developing Mahomes to replace him. They wanted to win while building.

The Seahawks kept Hasselbeck when he was their best option in 2010. They took swings on stopgaps to keep the team competent and planned to continue doing so while Russell developed. They wanted to win while building.

The 49ers kept Garoppolo on after taking their swing in the draft on Lance and then lucking into Purdy. They wanted to win while building.

The Ravens kept Flacco on after drafting Jackson. They wanted to win while building.

The Packers took Love years before getting rid of Rodgers. They wanted to win while building. Before that, they took Rodgers and then kept Favre for years. They wanted to win while building.

The Eagles kept Wentz after taking Hurts. They wanted to win while building.

The Dolphins kept Fitzmagic after drafting Tua and he won the competition. They wanted to win while building.



Being bad is not a required prerequisite to success. You can remain competitive while building. In fact, keeping the team competitive while developing the new guy is almost objectively preferable to purposefully cutting your quarterback to make yourself worse and force an acquisition, and then force him into action.

So yeah, Geno IS a bridge. Sure. But why knock down the bridge? He's a damn good bridge by almost every objective and the majority of informed subjective metrics/analysis. The bridge isn't stopping a new guy from eventually taking over in a proficient manner, it's facilitating it!

I'd spend big on grabbing Maye. I'd be fine with moving up for Daniels. I'd be fine with grabbing a second-tier guy a little later (trade back, trade into the second round, etc.). I'd want them sitting behind Geno and developing safely while we try to compete in the meantime. Drop our QBOTF into the catbird seat after seasoning them a bit.
 
Last edited:

MizzouHawkGal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
13,477
Reaction score
846
Location
Kansas City, MO
The 49ers kept Alex Smith before taking their swing in the draft and developing Kaepernick to replace him. They wanted to win while building.

The Chiefs kept Alex Smith before taking their swing in the draft and developing Mahomes to replace him. They wanted to win while building.

The Seahawks kept Hasselbeck when he was their best option in 2010. They took swings on stopgaps to keep the team competent and planned to continue doing so while Russell developed. They wanted to win while building.

The 49ers kept Garoppolo on after taking their swing in the draft on Lance and then lucking into Purdy. They wanted to win while building.

The Ravens kept Flacco on after drafting Jackson. They wanted to win while building.

The Packers took Love years before getting rid of Rodgers. They wanted to win while building.

The Eagles kept Wentz after taking Hurts. They wanted to win while building.

The Dolphins kept Fitzmagic after drafting Tua and he won the competition. They wanted to win while building.



Being bad is not a required prerequisite to success. You can remain competitive while building. In fact, keeping the team competitive while developing the new guy is almost objectively preferable to purposefully cutting your quarterback to make yourself worse and force an acquisition, and then force him into action.

So yeah, Geno IS a bridge. Sure. But why knock down the bridge? He's a damn good bridge by almost every objective and the majority of informed subjective metrics/analysis. The bridge isn't stopping a new guy from eventually taking over in a proficient manner, it's facilitating it!

I'd spend big on grabbing Maye. I'd be fine with moving up for Daniels. I'd be fine with grabbing a second-tier guy a little later (trade back, trade into the second round, etc.). I'd want them sitting behind Geno and developing safely while we try to compete in the meantime. Drop our QBOTF into the catbird seat after seasoning them a bit.
Not going to happen given our lack of draft capital much better to see if you can grab someone like Rattler or maybe even Nix in the 2nd or lower rounds.
 

Maelstrom787

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
12,036
Reaction score
10,050
Location
Delaware
Not going to happen given our lack of draft capital much better to see if you can grab someone like Rattler or maybe even Nix in the 2nd or lower rounds.
We're only missing a second rounder in terms of needle-moving capital and have a pretty full slate in the future years.

That being said, I agree that it's fairly untenable and my point was that regardless of where we obtain the guy, there's obviously a lot of precedent indicating that easing the young quarterback in is better than throwing the weight of the team on him immediately as he attempts to acclimate to the NFL. The most obvious examples are Mahomes and Love benefitting from the extra developmental period that the incumbent bridge starters provided them.

Geno is not a roadblock to the success of a hypothetical quarterback of the future. If anything, Geno's presence is a positive for their career outlook as well as the team's outlook.
 
Top