Matt Hasselbeck: franchise quarterback or a game manager?

[BirdsCommaAngry]

Semantics.

 

[AlphaOmega]

Matt Hasselbeck was the Seahawks starting QB for 10 years, from 2001 2010. To me, that's a franchise QB. Else why would a franchise keep a starting QB for 10 years for?

He struggled in his first year and the beginning of the second year (2002). But the last 10 games of 2002 was awesome for Seahawks fans. Matt had some of the best games of his career during that time. Het set Seahawks 1 game passing yard record against the Niners in that year. I got to watch that game on TV. It was so FUN. I was a fan of Hasselbeck ever since Mike Holmgren traded for him prior to the 2001 season. I never understand why, even though Matt was light out for the last 10 games of 2002 when the Seahawks went 6-4, Holmgren never unleashed the offense until 2005 like he did during that time frame. Matt could very well be the gunslinger of a QB. My guess was probably because of the emergence of Shaun Alexander and the running game that Matt never got to be in the pass, pass, pass offense.

He put up some very respectable numbers and was highly regarded as a capable QB during the Seahawks' strings of playoffs runs (2003-2007). It was just that Holmgren, his great offensive mind and all, never seem to get Matt his much needed receivers outside of DJack and Bobby E. Koren Robinson, other than his sophomore season with 1200 receiving yards, was a 1st round bust. Jeremy Stevens was a 1st round bust. Dion Branch didn't work out. Nate Burleson didn't quite work out either. After Alexander declined, Holmgren never got another capable running back.

Because of the last two years with Russell Wilson, we Seahawks fans are going to be forever spoiled at the QB position. Matt H. was never as efficient as RW3. With all said and done, I fully believe that Matt Hasselbeck will be in the Seahawks' Ring of Honor. While Russell Wilson is great/elite, got the Seahawks their first Lombardi Trophy, and much better than Hassellbeck ever was, his career is still to young. Wilson has such an awesome start that he will soon surpass Hasselbeck as the Hawks' greatest QB.

I always have respect and fond memories of Matthew Hasselbeck.

 

[SuperFreak]

Game manager.

 

[WestcoastSteve]

If you're willing to call Hass a franchise QB, then you would have to say the same thing about Matt Schaub (before he imploded this year).

Not saying that's wrong. Just seems weird to me.

Yeah I feel like I would call him a great QB (like Matt Ryan) he was never a top 5 QB IMO but we all loved him. I don't think he was ever going to take the team to the next-level although to be fair he wasn't blessed with as good of a defense as they are now.

 

[themunn]

the drops

remember the drops


That's the only thing that separated Hass from the best

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

Maybe he was our franchise game-manager!

 

[MORGULON]

Im happy to hear the love on here. Hasselbeck is one of my all time favorites. He was a hell of a qb, one of the best for a while.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

All quarterbacks are game managers it's a useless term. Hasselbeck was no where near a franchise quarterback because he was replaceable unlike a Brees, Brady, Manning, or Rodgers etc. He was good to very good at times but made horrible decisions at the worst times just like Krieg the quarterback he most closely resembles in my opinion.

 

[SeatownJay]

I'm surprised TABS hasn't chimed in on this thread yet, the subject matter is right in his wheelhouse.

Hasselbeck was Seattle's franchise quarterback during the oughts.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Game manager....Alex Smith is who I would compare him to. Decent qb, but he won't win you the Super Bowl. With that said, he is the 2nd best qb in franchise history.

Thats ridiculous. He was clearly good enough to win us our first Super Bowl, he was not the reason we lost.


Im not sure when "game manager" became a pejorative. Joe Montana prided himself on being a game manager.

Hass was a QB that deserves a spot in the Hall of Very Good. He wasnt in the class of Brady, Manning.. but he was very good. As time goes by it really seems Seattle fans are losing appreciation of what the Holmgren era Seahawks accomplished and did. Youd get the impression now it was just the Walter Jones show.. Alexander was only average, Hass was "decent".. How many play off berths in a row? How many division crowns? Our first Super Bowl.

Those guys were good.

Amen! Surprising the number of people who seem to believe there are the Brady/Manning/Brees/Rodgers/Wilson type elite quarterbacks, and then a bunch of mediocre, adequate game managers. That '05 team seems in retrospect to be viewed by many as a one-shot wonder that managed to luck its way into a Super Bowl and not be good enough to win it. Heh. Hardly. Those guys were good for a solid stretch, and probably should have won that Super Bowl. They were damned good. Efficient. Precise. A juggernaut of an offense. But the teams surrounding them were just about as good, and Hasselbeck was a large reason why. For quite a number of years, he was in the top half of passers in the league. For me, if you have top-half talent, you've found your franchise player; if you have bottom half talent, you're either borderline or are still looking for your franchise player.

 

[Fuzzman55]

The guy carried us in 2007, I know that much. There were times I thought he was a top 5 QB. Stick that in your sliding scale!

 

[Anthony!]

Matt Hasselbeck was the Seahawks starting QB for 10 years, from 2001 2010. To me, that's a franchise QB. Else why would a franchise keep a starting QB for 10 years for?

He struggled in his first year and the beginning of the second year (2002). But the last 10 games of 2002 was awesome for Seahawks fans. Matt had some of the best games of his career during that time. Het set Seahawks 1 game passing yard record against the Niners in that year. I got to watch that game on TV. It was so FUN. I was a fan of Hasselbeck ever since Mike Holmgren traded for him prior to the 2001 season. I never understand why, even though Matt was light out for the last 10 games of 2002 when the Seahawks went 6-4, Holmgren never unleashed the offense until 2005 like he did during that time frame. Matt could very well be the gunslinger of a QB. My guess was probably because of the emergence of Shaun Alexander and the running game that Matt never got to be in the pass, pass, pass offense.

He put up some very respectable numbers and was highly regarded as a capable QB during the Seahawks' strings of playoffs runs (2003-2007). It was just that Holmgren, his great offensive mind and all, never seem to get Matt his much needed receivers outside of DJack and Bobby E. Koren Robinson, other than his sophomore season with 1200 receiving yards, was a 1st round bust. Jeremy Stevens was a 1st round bust. Dion Branch didn't work out. Nate Burleson didn't quite work out either. After Alexander declined, Holmgren never got another capable running back.

Because of the last two years with Russell Wilson, we Seahawks fans are going to be forever spoiled at the QB position. Matt H. was never as efficient as RW3. With all said and done, I fully believe that Matt Hasselbeck will be in the Seahawks' Ring of Honor. While Russell Wilson is great/elite, got the Seahawks their first Lombardi Trophy, and much better than Hassellbeck ever was, his career is still to young. Wilson has such an awesome start that he will soon surpass Hasselbeck as the Hawks' greatest QB.

I always have respect and fond memories of Matthew Hasselbeck.

ahh you keep him because there is no one better available. For me he was not a franchise QB. Slightly better than game manager, no even close to RW.

 

[onanygivensunday]

Can't wait until he gets a media job, and I hope he isn't bitter about how he left Seattle.

My recollection is the Hawks extended him an offer for a 2-year contract before the old CBA expired.

He did not accept it... for whatever reason.

When the new CBA was voted on and adopted by the players, the Hawks rescinded their offer. He missed his opportunity to stay a Seattle Seahawk.

Seems to me that Matt had his chance and he decided that their offer wasn't good enough.

Matt shouldn't be bitter... except that the team went in a different direction.

 

[drdiags]

Matt said in some of the recent interviews during the SB that he had gotten over the anger. There was some pain there. Just as when MRob was cut and then brought back. MRob had to work through it before deciding to come back. Ultra-competitive folks cannot accept being told they cannot help a team they sweated and bleed for.

It is like busting your hump for a company, being loyal and being told the company is downsizing and you have to go. Intellectually you know these things happen, but until they hit you, you never know how you would react emotionally. There is a little bit of bitterness you have to work through.

We will see with Matt. I hope he doesn't go the route of Trent Dilfer or others, but he still has an easy way with people so he would be a good analyst. He may not be a Seattle homer but personally, I am not looking for that from an analyst. Just be fair and back up your assertions on why a team is good, bad or indifferent.

 

[onanygivensunday]

I'll add that I believe that Matt wasn't what I consider to be a true franchise QB.

He was very good one year (2005)... and he was pretty good for a number of other years.

Truth is, he just made too many bone-headed mistakes... something Russell is not afflicted with... thank god!

FWIW, even though Shaun won the league MVP in '05, I believe that Matt was the Hawks MVP that year.

Without Matt, the Hawks never make it to the SB.

 

[THE TABS]

I'm surprised TABS hasn't chimed in on this thread yet, the subject matter is right in his wheelhouse.

Ask, and you shall receive. :lol:

Matt Hasselbeck was a classic "system" quarterback, and a slightly above-average one on his very best day. Everything around him had to be perfect for him to function right, and even when he played a great game, sometimes it still wasn't enough.

Look at the Colts-Chiefs playoff game earlier. Alex Smith had the better team around him, and played a near-perfect game, but he missed two or three throws that ultimately cost the Chiefs the game. Andrew Luck threw four interceptions, but still managed to engineer the come from behind win. That's what separates the "franchise" guy from the "system" guy. The system guy is dependent, whereas with the franchise guy, the system is dependent on him.

Russell Wilson has validated everything I ever said about Hasselbeck. Every single excuse made for Hasselbeck over his career (not enough talent around him, needs time to learn system, refs screwed him, blah blah blah) never applied to Wilson. He took the bull by the horns, won his team over, and brought us our first championship, WHY? Because of the "it" factor, the true intangible that separates the franchise quarterbacks from the system quarterbacks. You either have it, or you don't, and if you don't have it, you'll never get it.

Just for the sake of argument, what would happen if you switch quarterbacks through time, Wilson on the '05 team, and '05 Hasselbeck on this team? With Wilson, the '05 Hawks CRUISE to a Super Bowl victory, just like this year, and this team wouldn't have gotten past .500. With the pass protections issues we had, and with Hasselbeck being as injury-prone as he was, he wouldn't have made it to October.

Yes, I know we had a special defense this season, and they deserved all the credit that they've been given, but make no mistake, Wilson drives this bus. Without him, we are the St. Louis Rams.

 

[Anthony!]

I'm surprised TABS hasn't chimed in on this thread yet, the subject matter is right in his wheelhouse.

Ask, and you shall receive. :lol:

Matt Hasselbeck was a classic "system" quarterback, and a slightly above-average one on his very best day. Everything around him had to be perfect for him to function right, and even when he played a great game, sometimes it still wasn't enough.

Look at the Colts-Chiefs playoff game earlier. Alex Smith had the better team around him, and played a near-perfect game, but he missed two or three throws that ultimately cost the Chiefs the game. Andrew Luck threw four interceptions, but still managed to engineer the come from behind win. That's what separates the "franchise" guy from the "system" guy. The system guy is dependent, whereas with the franchise guy, the system is dependent on him.

Russell Wilson has validated everything I ever said about Hasselbeck. Every single excuse made for Hasselbeck over his career (not enough talent around him, needs time to learn system, refs screwed him, blah blah blah) never applied to Wilson. He took the bull by the horns, won his team over, and brought us our first championship, WHY? Because of the "it" factor, the true intangible that separates the franchise quarterbacks from the system quarterbacks. You either have it, or you don't, and if you don't have it, you'll never get it.

Just for the sake of argument, what would happen if you switch quarterbacks through time, Wilson on the '05 team, and '05 Hasselbeck on this team? With Wilson, the '05 Hawks CRUISE to a Super Bowl victory, just like this year, and this team wouldn't have gotten past .500. With the pass protections issues we had, and with Hasselbeck being as injury-prone as he was, he wouldn't have made it to October.

Yes, I know we had a special defense this season, and they deserved all the credit that they've been given, but make no mistake, Wilson drives this bus. Without him, we are the St. Louis Rams.

Great post I totally agree.

 

[Anthony!]

I'll add that I believe that Matt wasn't what I consider to be a true franchise QB.

He was very good one year (2005)... and he was pretty good for a number of other years.

Truth is, he just made too many bone-headed mistakes... something Russell is not afflicted with... thank god!

FWIW, even though Shaun won the league MVP in '05, I believe that Matt was the Hawks MVP that year.

Without Matt, the Hawks never make it to the SB.

Hmm As much as to pains me to say this, not being a huge Alexander fan, But one could very very easily argue without Alexander we do not make it to the SB either. IN fact when both were here in Seattle, of the games were we did not have Hass but had Alexander versus had Hass but not Alexander we won way more with Alexander and not Hass then with Hass and not Alexander. Truth be told the correct arguement is without WJ we do not make the SB.

 

[HawkFan72]

Hass was a franchise QB, but he would turn into Spazzlebeck sometimes and make dumb decisions based on emotion. That's what held him back. And that's part of why we couldn't win Super Bowl XL. Once the frustration set in from the bad calls, it was over. Wilson shrugs that stuff off, Hasselbeck used to try to erase the bad calls by forcing the ball, leading to more frustration.

But when he was playing right, he was one of the best QBs in the league and he was our QB through some of the best years in Franchise history.

He's not a Hall of Famer or "elite", but he was our Franchise Quarterback. Just because we have a QB now who is better doesn't mean Hasselbeck wasn't really good.

 

[themunn]

I'll add that I believe that Matt wasn't what I consider to be a true franchise QB.

He was very good one year (2005)... and he was pretty good for a number of other years.

Truth is, he just made too many bone-headed mistakes... something Russell is not afflicted with... thank god!

FWIW, even though Shaun won the league MVP in '05, I believe that Matt was the Hawks MVP that year.

Without Matt, the Hawks never make it to the SB.

If he was 'very good' in 2005 with a league MVP rb who tallied over 1800 yards and 28 total Tds, what was he in 2007??

Hass' career is basically Tom Brady's 2013 season every year bar one or two - a great QB with an unreliable WR corps