MacDonald riding with Geno

[BirdsCommaAngry]

Anyone remember if the pre-2005 fan pushback on Hasselbeck was close to what Geno gets?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Well, since Matt was actually a winner, who actually won big games and had the IT factor in big games.......no.

 

[DarkVictory23]

I get what your saying, but how does anybody "know" what the results would be? The odds are against it, but I would be fine throwing a rookie out there to the wolves.

Of course nobody knows, but tanking is about intention, not knowing for sure. Heck, Sam Howell could get bit by a radioactive spider this offseason, and all of a sudden be the most unstoppable player of all-time... or he could quit playing football altogether to go fight crime in New York City.

The problem here is, since Geno got the starting job, we've created QB controversy after QB controversy to a degree that is frankly unbelievable when you view it in context of how Geno's actually played for us.

Snap rated from 2021, the season when Geno stepped in for Russ and Pete actually thought "Hey, we might actually be able to win with this guy", Geno is ranked 13th for Success Rate, just below Lamar Jackson and above Jordan Love, Justin Herbert, Trevor Lawrence, Baker Mayfield, Jalen Hurts, Sam Darnold, and CJ Stroud.
He's 13th in Passer Rating, above Josh Allen, Matthew Stafford, Jordan Love, CJ Stroud, Baker Mayfield, Sam Darnold, and Trevor Lawrence.
He's been one of the top 5 most accurate passers in the league (and tied for 1st for bad throw rate with Joe Burrow).

In comparison, if Drew Lock and Sam Howell had enough snaps to qualify for these rankings (they don't), they'd be 30th and 29th in success rate, 30th and 29th in passer rating, 33rd and 29th (of 32) in accuracy.

I get Geno's old, but when you look at these numbers, it feels like a bad joke that we've recycled the idea that we 'need to see what we have' with Drew Lock or Sam Howell or whoever else for 3 straight years. There has never been anything close to the barest whiff of a notion that either of those guys have looked close to being better than Geno in training camp, and yet we've had 3 years of fans thinking somebody has executed a dastardly plot to hold back two guys who haven't looked remotely on the same level as Geno over the last 4 seasons.

Nobody is thinking Justin Herbert or Baker Mayfield or Jordan Love or CJ Stroud need to go. We have 'what if' posts every other week about guys like Sam Darnold and Trevor Lawrence.

Should we extend Geno? Heck, I don't know. I don't know what he expects money wise, and I don't know how John Schneider thinks about the draft, I don't even know if Macdonald has some inside info on injuries or whatever. But can we stop manufacturing a QB controversy that wouldn't apply to literally a dozen other QBs in this league?

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

Well, since Matt was actually a winner, who actually won big games and had the IT factor in big games.......no.

Again, I'm asking about Hasselbeck pre-2005. After we had him for a few years and got to see some highs and lows without a great season yet. Before, during, and right after "We want the ball and we're going to score" and a slightly above .500 record as a starter. Fans weren't clamoring for Dilfer? Demanding we draft a QB round 1 or sign the most significant FA QB? Were we saying we had bigger problems than Hasselbeck?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Oh there def. were some Dilfer chants, especially when they played over at Husky Stadium.

 

[Ozzy]

Anyone remember if the pre-2005 fan pushback on Hasselbeck was close to what Geno gets?

I don't think it was but Hasselbeck was better for a longer stretch of time so I don't think the two are comparable. Also Matty wasn't 35 either and when he was the moved on from him.

 

[James in PA]

OK, I found the perfect compromise to all this Geno back-and-forth. Let Geno hang around one more year if you cannot find an obvious upgrade. Hire Fraley as the OC. Become the most run-heavy team in the history of the league. Allow Geno to have only 10 throws max per game. Win-win.

You're welcome.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Of course nobody knows, but tanking is about intention, not knowing for sure. Heck, Sam Howell could get bit by a radioactive spider this offseason, and all of a sudden be the most unstoppable player of all-time... or he could quit playing football altogether to go fight crime in New York City.

The problem here is, since Geno got the starting job, we've created QB controversy after QB controversy to a degree that is frankly unbelievable when you view it in context of how Geno's actually played for us.

Snap rated from 2021, the season when Geno stepped in for Russ and Pete actually thought "Hey, we might actually be able to win with this guy", Geno is ranked 13th for Success Rate, just below Lamar Jackson and above Jordan Love, Justin Herbert, Trevor Lawrence, Baker Mayfield, Jalen Hurts, Sam Darnold, and CJ Stroud.
He's 13th in Passer Rating, above Josh Allen, Matthew Stafford, Jordan Love, CJ Stroud, Baker Mayfield, Sam Darnold, and Trevor Lawrence.
He's been one of the top 5 most accurate passers in the league (and tied for 1st for bad throw rate with Joe Burrow).

In comparison, if Drew Lock and Sam Howell had enough snaps to qualify for these rankings (they don't), they'd be 30th and 29th in success rate, 30th and 29th in passer rating, 33rd and 29th (of 32) in accuracy.

I get Geno's old, but when you look at these numbers, it feels like a bad joke that we've recycled the idea that we 'need to see what we have' with Drew Lock or Sam Howell or whoever else for 3 straight years. There has never been anything close to the barest whiff of a notion that either of those guys have looked close to being better than Geno in training camp, and yet we've had 3 years of fans thinking somebody has executed a dastardly plot to hold back two guys who haven't looked remotely on the same level as Geno over the last 4 seasons.

Nobody is thinking Justin Herbert or Baker Mayfield or Jordan Love or CJ Stroud need to go. We have 'what if' posts every other week about guys like Sam Darnold and Trevor Lawrence.

Should we extend Geno? Heck, I don't know. I don't know what he expects money wise, and I don't know how John Schneider thinks about the draft, I don't even know if Macdonald has some inside info on injuries or whatever. But can we stop manufacturing a QB controversy that wouldn't apply to literally a dozen other QBs in this league?

I agree with your post totally except I was never pushing for Lock or Howell to start. There is no controversy when it comes to that. I'm just saying if they bring in a rookie and let Geno walk, i'm totally fine with that. Chances are the rookie would be worse, but I don't care. We know what Geno is (some thinks he can win and take the team somewhere,,,,,I don't), but he's old. No other way to say that. We have 1 or 2 more years at the most with him, so let's not waste anymore time and try something else sooner than later.

 

[DarkVictory23]

Again, I'm asking about Hasselbeck pre-2005. After we had him for a few years and got to see some highs and lows without a great season yet. Before, during, and right after "We want the ball and we're going to score" and a slightly above .500 record as a starter. Fans weren't clamoring for Dilfer? Demanding we draft a QB round 1 or sign the most significant FA QB? Were we saying we had bigger problems than Hasselbeck?

The offseason before the 2005 season, most of the talk about Hasselbeck was about Matt re-signing, as the QB controversy had passed. (The controversy between whether he or Trent Dilfer should be the starter was in the seasons before.) But it is an interesting point of comparison because it shows just how fickle people can be (and how bad memories are).

First, just their raw numbers as Seahawks (Matt: 2001-2004, Geno: 2020-2024)


I mean, it doesn't look particularly close here--but raw numbers are deceiving when you are comparing across different eras, and in fact, relative to their peers, Geno and Matt were pretty similar. Across those years, Matt ranked approximately 15th (of 32) for passer rating and 11th in Success Rate. Geno also ranked 15th in passer rating and 13th in Success Rate.

And interestingly enough, relative to other teams, the Seahawks offense was actually approximately the 14th best offense across the 4 years Matt was the QB before SBXL and the last 3 years under Geno. (And Matt had the benefit of two HOFers guarding his blindside, a future HOF HC calling the plays, and a future league MVP in the backfield for all those seasons).

So why such difference in tenor?

I'm assuming it's a combination of a couple of things:
1) Fans do not like to change their opinions on things. Geno is a crappy backup who never should have replaced Russ, what he actually does after that doesn't matter because I've made up my mind. (I had a similar reaction to when the Seahawks didn't resign Matt, as he is my all-time favorite Seahawk.)
2) Despite the fact that Geno actually won more games and lost less across these comparable spans, the season results were different. Sure, we went 10-7 this year but we didn't make the playoffs. When we went 9-7 (and Matt actually went 7-7) in 2004, we won the division for the first time in 5 years. In other words, fans grade on a curve.

 

[toffee]

OK, I found the perfect compromise to all this Geno back-and-forth. Let Geno hang around one more year if you cannot find an obvious upgrade. Hire Fraley as the OC. Become the most run-heavy team in the history of the league. Allow Geno to have only 10 throws max per game. Win-win.

You're welcome.

Geno's agent will not be doing the job if he/she isn't on the phone with QB needy teams.

Schneider isn't likely to extend his contract, even if he was considering it, after a few visits to the dot net, Schneider wouldn't pull the trigger, with that, the one thing Geno craves more than anything else is off the table, and Geno knows that he will never be loved by the 12s in general and dot net experts in particular.

Why would he want to hand around with no love, and, no long-term contract?

Let's celebrate the dawn of "all he needs is more touch" era. Let's welcome our QB of the future Mr. SAM HOWELL.

 

[Ozzy]

Geno was 19-21st in passer rating this year so trending the wrong direction.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Team Geno also makes excuses on a curve. It goes both ways.

 

[toffee]

Pete is getting serious consideration by the Raiders, if he gets hired, the first move will be trading for Geno Smith.

geNOs, happy days are coming soon, get ready for the dawn of Sam Howell era, promised land is around the corner for y'all.

Raiders targeting former Seahawks coach Pete Carroll after missing out on Ben Johnson, per report

Las Vegas may be eyeing a more accomplished name now

www.cbssports.com

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Ok, brother, you made your point. While it's funny, no, it's not going to the be the Howell era.

 

[toffee]

Ok, brother, you made your point. While it's funny, no, it's not going to the be the Howell era.

Hey with geNO gone, a weak QB class, and drafting at #18. If not Howell, who else?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

You're guess is as good as mine. Wide variety of possibilities. Hopefully geDIOCRE gets sent packing.

 

[toffee]

You're guess is as good as mine. Wide variety of possibilities. Hopefully geDIOCRE gets sent packing.

got it, happy days mean no geNO, so long that geNO is gone.

 

[DarkVictory23]

I agree with your post totally except I was never pushing for Lock or Howell to start. There is no controversy when it comes to that. I'm just saying if they bring in a rookie and let Geno walk, i'm totally fine with that. Chances are the rookie would be worse, but I don't care. We know what Geno is (some thinks he can win and take the team somewhere,,,,,I don't), but he's old. No other way to say that. We have 1 or 2 more years at the most with him, so let's not waste anymore time and try something else sooner than later.

This is the crux of the issue, though: It's not a waste if you think he can take the team somewhere, and as you mentioned, some people do.

Matt Stafford was brought over to the Rams at 33, had only 1 Pro Bowl to his name, only went to the playoffs 3 times (and was 0-3 in that span) in 12 seasons--the most recent being 5 years before that, and replaced a 26-year-old #1 overall draft pick who had also gone to the playoffs 3 times in only 5 seasons and was 2-2 in the post season.

My primary view of this? In 2021, we had a top 10 defense, but not offense. In 2022-2023, we had the opposite issue. In 2024, we went back to top 10 defense but not offense. If you can marry a top 10 offense and defense together, you definitely can be a serious contender for a Conference Championship or beyond.

We've been dancing on the edge for 4 years now. If I were Coach Macdonald and John Schneider, there is no chance I would be thinking of 2025 as a 'rebuilding' year, I'd be intending to win. And if Macdonald is one of those people you talk about who thinks he can take the team somewhere (and as best as I can tell without being in the building, he does) than I don't particularly care if he's 34.

Barring injury, Goff still has a lot more NFL years left than Stafford. Does anyone think they regret hitching their boat to a much older QB?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

got it, happy days mean no geNO, so long that geNO is gone.

I won't be sad.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

The offseason before the 2005 season, most of the talk about Hasselbeck was about Matt re-signing, as the QB controversy had passed. (The controversy between whether he or Trent Dilfer should be the starter was in the seasons before.) But it is an interesting point of comparison because it shows just how fickle people can be (and how bad memories are).

First, just their raw numbers as Seahawks (Matt: 2001-2004, Geno: 2020-2024)
View attachment 69157

I mean, it doesn't look particularly close here--but raw numbers are deceiving when you are comparing across different eras, and in fact, relative to their peers, Geno and Matt were pretty similar. Across those years, Matt ranked approximately 15th (of 32) for passer rating and 11th in Success Rate. Geno also ranked 15th in passer rating and 13th in Success Rate.

And interestingly enough, relative to other teams, the Seahawks offense was actually approximately the 14th best offense across the 4 years Matt was the QB before SBXL and the last 3 years under Geno. (And Matt had the benefit of two HOFers guarding his blindside, a future HOF HC calling the plays, and a future league MVP in the backfield for all those seasons).

So why such difference in tenor?

I'm assuming it's a combination of a couple of things:
1) Fans do not like to change their opinions on things. Geno is a crappy backup who never should have replaced Russ, what he actually does after that doesn't matter because I've made up my mind. (I had a similar reaction to when the Seahawks didn't resign Matt, as he is my all-time favorite Seahawk.)
2) Despite the fact that Geno actually won more games and lost less across these comparable spans, the season results were different. Sure, we went 10-7 this year but we didn't make the playoffs. When we went 9-7 (and Matt actually went 7-7) in 2004, we won the division for the first time in 5 years. In other words, fans grade on a curve.

This is an insanely good post. Thank you.

A 3rd factor is probably the expectation set by the prior QBs. Despite similar production between Hass and Geno, Geno is a step down from prime Russel Wilson and Hasselbeck was a big step up from Kitna and co.

Either way, it's incredible how comparable Hass and Geno have been.