Who does Seattle pick at #5? (Poll)

With the Fifth pick in the 2023 NFL draft the Seattle Seahawks select....

  • Bryce Young

  • CJ Stroud

  • Will Anderson Jr

  • Will Levis

  • Jalen Carter

  • Myles Murphy

  • Tyree Wilson

  • Bryan Bresee

  • Other player

  • None. They trade out


Results are only viewable after voting.

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,806
Reaction score
1,759
Can he? Yes.

Can you depend on him to? No.

Draft another RB in the 3rd-6th round to develop and spell Walker as insurance. If you want to bring Penny back on a cheap prove it deal? Sure. But you can't depend on him to stay healthy.
Yep, Genos' play could benefit a bunch with an upgrade @ Center, Guard and bring in another RB, and then go Heavy on the Defense with the rest.
 

Mick063

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
1,674
Reaction score
1,405
I'm glad you find that funny Mick. Are you satisfied with our Center and our Guards? I sure the hell am not even CLOSE to satisfied. They need to build in the trenches.
Both sides of the line.
No I just noticed that every time I make a post, you add a laugh emote. I'm just emulating what you are doing. I can, however, reference you to a very, very recent post of mine calling for the team to draft a center/guard hybrid so obviously, the emote I added to your post has nothing to do with that.

I know it seems childish, but it appears that I have to get on your level for meaningful dialog and laughing emotes appears to be your default mode of communication so I'll give it a whirl. I guess your post complaining about it demonstrates that it may be working.
 
Last edited:

Sun Tzu

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2016
Messages
602
Reaction score
712
Location
Corvallis
No I just noticed that every time I make a post, you add a laugh emote. I'm just emulating what you are doing. I can, however, reference you to a very, very recent post of mine calling for the team to draft a center/guard hybrid so obviously, the emote I added to your post has nothing to do with that.

I know it seems childish, but it appears that I have to get on your level for meaningful dialog and laughing emotes appears to be your default mode of communication so I'll give it a whirl. I guess your post complaining about it demonstrates that it may be working.
If soulfish is laughing every time you make a post, be proud of what you've posted. Soulfish's laugh emojis serve as a valuable public service to the board. If you're in a hurry and don't have time to read every post, skim through and read everything soulfish laughed at. Nine times out of ten the most insightful posts are laughed at by soulfish.
 
Last edited:

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,468
Reaction score
1,240
Location
Bothell
Sounds like you and Mick don't believe Penny can do a job for us.
What's the over/under on how many games Penny will play? Less than half a season I imagine.

I don't have a problem with rotating Penny and Walker to keep both fresh and healthy, but they are the same type of first down back. Speed and agility to make defenders miss and lots of time bouncing around looking for an opportunity to get into open space and pick up a huge gain. It's a valuable role, but one of three roles that we need alongside a short yardage back and a third down back.

In my view, trying to fit Walker into a short yardage back role out of necessity last season looked ugly, much like trying to take an expensive street car off-road. Then when it comes to third down backs, Homer is a UFA and Dallas is on the final year of his rookie deal.

Two draft prospects I've had my eye on for quite a while now are Zach Charbonnet and Kenny McIntosh. Both are physical downhill power backs who also caught a fair number of passes in college and could be potential answers to both our power back and third down back need. There's also a chance one of them may be available later on day 2 as this is a strong RB class and there are a lot of first down/pass catching RBs that teams will likely be selecting first.
 

SchadenfreudeHawk

Active member
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
231
Reaction score
47
Everyone keeps saying this, but it's not true.

Extending Geno doesn't preclude us from drafting a QB. These are not mutually exclusive things. If Pete and John fall in love with a QB in the draft? They've got the most draft capital they've ever had to get him.
We were talking about the #5 pick. There is very little chance we re-sign Geno and take a QB at 5. Last year's 5th pick overall had a contract of 4 years/31 million. You don't pay that much for a backup QB. The only way that you could use a 5th pick on a QB and re-sign Geno is if we franchise Geno. That would still end up allocating a HUGE amount to the QB position. Geno and a late-round developmental pick? Sure. Geno and the 5th? That would only make sense if the team didn't have any other holes to fill.
 

nwHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
3,799
Reaction score
1,202
Zach Charbonnet could be our version of AJ Dillion.

Another running back I would strongly consider is another Zach, Zach Evans. He’s a one cut runner who is a former 5 star recruit out of high school. Decisive, strong and plenty of juice.

 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
We were talking about the #5 pick. There is very little chance we re-sign Geno and take a QB at 5. Last year's 5th pick overall had a contract of 4 years/31 million. You don't pay that much for a backup QB. The only way that you could use a 5th pick on a QB and re-sign Geno is if we franchise Geno. That would still end up allocating a HUGE amount to the QB position. Geno and a late-round developmental pick? Sure. Geno and the 5th? That would only make sense if the team didn't have any other holes to fill.


That's the disconnect though.

Let's say the Geno talks go completely south and we don't resign him, that doesn't mean we're taking a QB at 5 either. It doesn't even mean the chances go up.

What matters is what Pete, John and our scouting department think of the QB's in this draft, and where they slot them. Also what matters is how confident Pete and John are with developing QB's to have success in our system, and as Pete's said multiple times this off season they're COMPLETELY confident in the system, with our without Geno.

I also disagree with your "we wouldn't draft a QB at 5 if we signed Geno" take. If Pete and John fall in love with Stroud, or Levis, etc? Then they absolutely would take him at 5, or drop down to 6 or 7 if they still think they could get their guy and pick up more picks.

IMO it's why whenever Geno signs, it'll be front loaded with options to cut him in year 2-3. For just this reason, if they draft a QB to develop behind Geno for a year or two.
 

Ozzy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,289
Reaction score
3,816
If you see a franchise QB at 5 that you love you almost have to draft him and signing Geno for me wouldn't change that at all. A lot of people thought KC was nuts to draft Mahomes with Alex Smith on the roster who was a very good QB and it worked out well. The best part about signing Geno is you don't have to force a QB. I lean towards not resigning Geno but I'm more open to it than I was a couple of weeks ago for sure.
 

JPatera76

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2015
Messages
6,261
Reaction score
4,666
We need another Michael Robinson.
Well we had/have Nick Bellore the problem i saw this year is... we didn't use a fullback or the FB position much... probably like 3 times, 2 of which Walker didn't follow and got a loss of yards where if on 1 of them if he followed would've been a sure TD.

He did remember it later on in a different game and when we used it he did follow the FB in for a TD.

I just haven't seen Seattle go to a formation or play that needs a FB or uses a FB like we did when Marshawn/m. rob was here. I see we've gone from a lot of FB/RB sets to RB/RB sets
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
If you see a franchise QB at 5 that you love you almost have to draft him and signing Geno for me wouldn't change that at all. A lot of people thought KC was nuts to draft Mahomes with Alex Smith on the roster who was a very good QB and it worked out well. The best part about signing Geno is you don't have to force a QB. I lean towards not resigning Geno but I'm more open to it than I was a couple of weeks ago for sure.


Thank you for saying what I was trying to say in much less words.

Again, not sure why fans think this is an either or discussion.

Look back through the last 10 years of drafts, desperate teams are the ones who take QB's high just because they think they have to. Ain't about that, it's about trusting your GM and scouts. If they say no thanks to Stroud or Levis? Then you move on.
 

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,468
Reaction score
1,240
Location
Bothell
Good conversation about the feasibility of both Geno and a QB at #5. I'm torn and not sure there's a right answer. The ability to trade picks complicates the issue somewhat. Trading allows market efficiency to encourage the use of resources at their most valuable locations. Of course the NFL trading market is not perfectly efficient.

In short, what I keep coming back to is the question of whether a player would have as much value on our team as elsewhere. If not, then in a perfect world that other team would be willing to trade us something higher than the value we would get from the pick in exchange for it.

A rookie QB who can play now is going to be inherently less valuable to us if we have Geno for multiple years than they will be to a team who needs a starter in 2023. On the other hand, a QB who needs to develop for a year or two on the bench may have the same value to both teams. So it definitely depends on how long Geno signs for and which prospect we are talking about.
 

WarHawks

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
1,796
Reaction score
1,384
I do also wonder if Pete's age factors in to the discussion. Perhaps he's not very keen on developing a rookie because he has a short window and wants to win now, although I definitely think it would be a mistake not to get a rookie to at least develop behind Geno. In a perfect world, we re-sign Geno, draft a rookie, and the rookie wins the starting job. That would mean the rookie is awesome and playing lights out, which is great for the team, and portends well for the future, a.k.a. 2012.
 

SchadenfreudeHawk

Active member
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
231
Reaction score
47
If you see a franchise QB at 5 that you love you almost have to draft him and signing Geno for me wouldn't change that at all. A lot of people thought KC was nuts to draft Mahomes with Alex Smith on the roster who was a very good QB and it worked out well. The best part about signing Geno is you don't have to force a QB. I lean towards not resigning Geno but I'm more open to it than I was a couple of weeks ago for sure.
KC re-signed Smith in 2014. They drafted Mahomes in 2014 when Smith had two years left on his contract. There is a world of difference between drafting your QB of the future while your current QB is on the backside of their contract and drafting your QB of the future at #5 the same year that you extend your current QB to a monster deal. Makes no sense.
 

SchadenfreudeHawk

Active member
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
231
Reaction score
47
That's the disconnect though.

Let's say the Geno talks go completely south and we don't resign him, that doesn't mean we're taking a QB at 5 either. It doesn't even mean the chances go up.

What matters is what Pete, John and our scouting department think of the QB's in this draft, and where they slot them. Also what matters is how confident Pete and John are with developing QB's to have success in our system, and as Pete's said multiple times this off season they're COMPLETELY confident in the system, with our without Geno.

I also disagree with your "we wouldn't draft a QB at 5 if we signed Geno" take. If Pete and John fall in love with Stroud, or Levis, etc? Then they absolutely would take him at 5, or drop down to 6 or 7 if they still think they could get their guy and pick up more picks.

IMO it's why whenever Geno signs, it'll be front loaded with options to cut him in year 2-3. For just this reason, if they draft a QB to develop behind Geno for a year or two.
Couple things here-

1). Geno is going for the bag. This is his one chance for a big contract. He won't sign a deal that is backloaded as he knows that he won't see that money. He will want a deal with significant money guaranteed. Also, we don't have the money to sign him to a front-loaded contract. We have 20 million in effective cap space. A frontloaded contract would be 50 million in the first season. You just aren't being honest with yourself about what his contract is going to look like.

2). It makes no sense philosophically to extend Geno and spend major draft capital on a QB. We are not a very good team right now. We had an easy schedule and limped into the playoffs. Our defense is horrible and we have holes all over our roster that we need to fill with not a lot of available cap space. Re-signing Geno is a "win now" kind of move. The only way that we could possibly "win now" is to use draft picks to fill the massive holes on our roster. It would be a waste to use that draft capital on a QB. If we want to win now, we try to add a player who will make an impact right away. If we are thinking longer-term, we draft a QB and maybe bring in a cheaper vet to start a year or two (Baker Mayfield or someone like him). Re-signing Geno and drafting a QB is trying to have our cake and eat it too. It's too cute by half.
 
Last edited:

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
29,397
Reaction score
9,847
Location
Sammamish, WA
Damn, Sun and Mick, you guys are pretty sensitive. Glad I'm in your thoughts. Lighten up, it's a message board. You guys are hilarious and I find much of what you say funny. Doesn't mean that I don't like some of the stuff you post.
Put me on ignore, simple.
 
Last edited:

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,806
Reaction score
1,759
I do also wonder if Pete's age factors in to the discussion. Perhaps he's not very keen on developing a rookie because he has a short window and wants to win now, although I definitely think it would be a mistake not to get a rookie to at least develop behind Geno. In a perfect world, we re-sign Geno, draft a rookie, and the rookie wins the starting job. That would mean the rookie is awesome and playing lights out, which is great for the team, and portends well for the future, a.k.a. 2012.
Realistically though? even "In a Perfect World" that's not a model that's easily duplicated, but I get where you're coming from, like getting another Russell Wilson type, "Lightning In a Bottle" QB again, what are the odds?
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,806
Reaction score
1,759
Couple things here-

1). Geno is going for the bag. This is his one chance for a big contract. He won't sign a deal that is backloaded as he knows that he won't see that money. He will want a deal with significant money guaranteed. Also, we don't have the money to sign him to a front-loaded contract. We have 20 million in effective cap space. A frontloaded contract would be 50 million in the first season. You just aren't being honest with yourself about what his contract is going to look like.

2). It makes no sense philosophically to extend Geno and spend major draft capital on a QB. We are not a very good team right now. We had an easy schedule and limped into the playoffs. Our defense is horrible and we have holes all over our roster that we need to fill with not a lot of available cap space. Re-signing Geno is a "win now" kind of move. The only way that we could possibly "win now" is to use draft picks to fill the massive holes on our roster. It would be a waste to use that draft capital on a QB. If we want to win now, we try to add a player who will make an impact right away. If we are thinking longer-term, we draft a QB and maybe bring in a cheaper vet to start a year or two (Baker Mayfield or someone like him). Re-signing Geno and drafting a QB is trying to have our cake and eat it too. It's too cute by half.
1). Going For the Bag"? He knows, or at least he SHOULD know that there are no guarantees that he's maybe going get a big contract HERE or anywhere else after just one season of sporadic production, sure he deserves a decent contract, but how many other teams are going to hand him "The Bag".
2). A LOT depends on WHERE they decide to Draft a QB, I'm pretty sure John would KNOW by now whether or not there are alternative Veteran QB's or some Draft prospect that can cut the mustard in our system should Geno insist on pricing himself out of Seattle.
 
Last edited:

WarHawks

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
1,796
Reaction score
1,384
Realistically though? even "In a Perfect World" that's not a model that's easily duplicated, but I get where you're coming from, like getting another Russell Wilson type, "Lightning In a Bottle" QB again, what are the odds?
Not great, but better than many if not most teams. JS was right about Russ, Mahomes and Allen, so I trust him.to make good decisions in that regard.
 
Top