Winning with Seneca Wallace Part 3: Punchline
Seattle adds an offensive tackle and transforms its offensive line. It adds a superstar rusher and pairs him with Julius Jones and Justin Forsett in a three-headed hell dog of a rush attack. Cerberus if you will. It takes all pressure off Seneca Wallace. It attempts to make him a franchise quarterback by reducing the standards for franchise quarterback to almost nothing. The Seneca Plan is executed and aided by impeccable scouting and tremendous dumb luck. The Seahawks add a return ace and cybernetic punter. Its defense clicks and coalesces into a rampaging monster. The Seneca Hawks are built and ready to storm the NFL.
They back their way into the playoffs and get blown out in the Wild Card round. When they can't get ahead early, they lose. When injuries run in and weaken the defense or rushing attack, they lose. When Seneca's unruly style meets his 30 year old body, they lose Seneca and slip out of contention. They become the Bears, the Titans, the Vikings or the Jaguars; they tease, they lose, they don't lose enough to rebuild and the franchise is mired in boring mediocrity.
Seattle cannot afford the Seneca Wallace Plan. It's as flawed as the thinking that landed them Brian Russell. This is a quarterback's league and that fact becomes more entrenched each passing season. Seattle has a talent on the out and it needs a talent on the in. Tim Ruskell has backed himself into an unenviable position. He has pressed his quarterback resources to exhaustion and failed to restock.
The Seneca Wallace bluff revealed, what can Seattle do? Free agency is thin. Seattle could sign Jason Campbell or Kellen Clemens and attempt to develop a young, but not yet prime quarterback prospect. It could patch with a reclamation project like Daunte Culpepper or David Carr. I can hear your heart beating with anticipation. It could draft a talent and hope he develops quickly. Or Seattle could attempt to do what Mike Holmgren did and trade for a promising looking quarterback talent stuck behind an entrenched veteran. Vetting that list is a lengthy process, but before we cannibalize too much of the offseason, let's brainstorm names to target.
Erik Ainge: Ainge was suspended for steroid use and that put a black mark on an already fringe prospect. I've always liked Ainge from a pure prospect standpoint. He was a four-year starter on a rather miserable Vols team that improved steadily from his freshman season. Ainge is 6'6" and a pure pocket passer. He was once considered a very good college prospect after shredding the PNW at Glencoe. Ainge is heavy with intangible red flags, but those flags may have little substance.
Brady Quinn: Quinn is a sack machine and well on his way to full bust status. His raw passing stats don't look bad, but he still has the sheen of quarterback prospect and that could make him expensive. There's little reason to think he'll shake the sacks that have plagued him for his entire career. Seattle could acquire him but they'll pay too much for a prospect never as good as many, including myself, thought he was.
Kevin Kolb: Kolb would have been a fine and dandy addition until he knuckle-slapped Kansas City and put himself into Matt Schaub country. Houston exchanged two second-round picks for Schaub and moved down two places in the first round. That is a lot to give for an unproven prospect, but it has worked for the Texans as Schaub has proven capable of top-ten production. Schaub has a slightly better scouting profile than Kolb, but never attained Kolb's regular season heights before being traded. It might take up to or even including one of Seattle's first round picks to swing a deal with Philadelphia, but it might just be worth it.
Brian Brohm: Brohm has faded as fast as any elite quarterback prospect in recent memory. He isn't controversial or speculated over. Brohm is buried. He was compared to Drew Brees by NFL Draft Scout and looked like Brees in college, completing a high percentage of throws and carrying a Louisville offense almost bereft of pro talent. The best receiver he played with was Harry Douglas, now a Falcon. The only other notable pro talent is Michael Bush and Bush missed most of Brohm's career.
Brohm sits on Green Bay's practice squad. Seattle could acquire Brohm simply by signing him to their 53 man roster. He could displace Mike Gibson, Mansfield Wrotto, rarely used and practice squad eligible Cameron Morrah or even Mike Teel. I try not to stump for everything I believe, but this one confounds me. Unless Brohm hides razor blades in Halloween apples, no team with a quarterback need should think twice about adding him and figuring out his potential for themselves.
And that is about it. Seattle could inquire about Jim Sorgi, but Sorgi is already 28. Quarterback is the most essential single position perhaps in all of sport. A great one like Peyton Manning can make his team a perennial contender. Teams that lack a quarterback must conceive farfetched plans that lead from failure to postponed failure. This need is overdue and my tenuous faith in Tim Ruskell is tested each offseason he ignores it. It is time Seattle becomes aggressive about finding the successor to Matt Hasselbeck, because no one wants to see the Seneca Wallace Plan enacted.
0 recs |
35 comments
|
Comments
Well, if we're going to rank them in order of preference I'd put it like this:
1. Kolb (similar system, has played well in a few games, for our 2nd 1st rounder).
2. Campbell (Free agent, doesn’t cost us a 1st round pick)
3. Quinn (It would cost us our 2nd first rounder because of his name)
4. Brohm (I’d probably put this in front of Quinn because he costs nothing, but it’s just baffling that no one has claimed him)
5. Sage Rosenfels (No clue how much he’d cost)
6. Tarvaris Jackson (same as above)
7. Kellen Clemens
8. Sorgi
9. Isaiah Stanback
9. Marques Tuiasasopo
9.Cody Pickett
Don’t want any part of Daunte or Carr.
by LantermanC on Nov 5, 2009 4:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I would shoot myself in the face
if this douche-bag became a Seahawk.

by somethingwitty on Nov 5, 2009 7:35 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It would (and could) be the Rick Mirer trade in reverse.
Quinn = Mirer = No thank you.
by Misfit74 on Nov 5, 2009 7:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Seahawks need to have a monopoly on Myoplex QBs.
by LantermanC on Nov 5, 2009 8:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
he looks like one of those douche cocks on Tool Academy.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 6, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not a good list of names
Kolb is the only player that I think would be worth investing in, but he’d be expensive and therefore risky. If Kolb would cost the team a 1st rounder- I’d rather bundle that first rounder with the Seahawks 1st rounder and trade it for Bradford and take the home-run swing this front office has consistently lacked.
Campbell isn’t terrible but he just isn’t good enough. If he’s cheap, he could be an excellent backup, but I’d hate to see the Seahawks commit 3 years to a Jason Campbell experiment.
I’m no expert on Brohm, but it does seem weird that he’s on a practice squad in the first place (how many QB’s does GB carry?) GB already has Rodgers, so they don’t need a 2nd franchise QB. Still, why wouldn’t they trade Brohm? And why would they put him on the PS where he has no roster protection? And why has nobody claimed him? It really feels like we lack some information on this. GM’s must know something we do not.
by kearly on Nov 5, 2009 5:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
you might be on to something there.
I know Ruskell knows who’s out there. Brohm must not be on his Radar otherwise he would be here already.
I think Ruskell is going to draft a QB. He always comes up with a draft day surprise, Curry being the exception.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 6, 2009 10:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Whew
I’m all for just about anything other than Wallace. I would love to see what Wallace brings outside of QB capabilities. Do we really know anything about Wallace other than his speed, QB pocket pressence (or lack thereof), and big arm?
I vote for Kolb. Schooled by Reid, good arm, decent size. A late round 1st is perfect risk.
To be honest, I don’t care who it is, I just want to see Seattle make a move to find out what they can be. If it is to be Hasselbeck, then extend him.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 5, 2009 5:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
No!
No more 1st rounders! I want to see us draft SOMEBODY useful in the 1st this decade!
by rex92 on Nov 6, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here, here
just plain common sense. I’m with you.
Although I’m not opposed to trading both our first rounders to move up for a QB, should it be warranted. Although even that may not be enough. Clausen will be first overall, and for good reason.
by jacobstevens on Nov 6, 2009 11:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've seen Brohm play twice in preseason with the Packers.
And he’s looked absolutely awful. I can’t remember the guy ahead of him on the depth chart, but that guy played pretty well and the moment Brohm came in it was Sack/inaccurate Throw City.
It sounds silly, but I’d almost rather try my hand at Teel.
by djafrot on Nov 5, 2009 5:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not silly at all
Teel left a nice impression. If things good bad, I wouldn’t mind getting a better idea of his capabilities.
Also, I like what I saw from Josh Johnson at Tampa. Maybe a 4th and a 5th for him?
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 5, 2009 5:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree about Teel
I don’t know enough about Josh Johnson to comment on him.
Here comes my film study list. I have a lot to do this weekend.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 6, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dante Culpepper has actually made significant strides...
Admittedly he isn’t the guy that shredded the league in purple, but he’s also not the guy that has wandered hopelessly around the league the past couple years.
He did this season what he set out to do. Re-enter the league with a renewed commitment and prove he belonged. Guy was back in shape and has looked good, or at least pretty solid, in limited time. He did lead the Lions to having a 4th quarter drive to defeat the Steelers this year in his only? start.
I’m not saying he’s the perfect answer, but if we are looking at bridge QB’s to the “next”, he’s the one with far and away the most upside, and when he did have talented receivers, he put up some pretty astounding numbers. Guess what? We have talented receivers. I say we swing for the fences and sign him cheap, if it doesn’t work out, it doesn’t work out. Currently nothing else is working out…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 5, 2009 6:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Is Culpepper somebody you are willing to give a 5 year contract to?
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 5, 2009 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, at a mil a year, 1 mill up front.
Seriously though, I think he’s a perfect bridge to our next young QB, if we absolutely have to go get someone next year to play immediately, he’s better than Campbell…
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 5, 2009 6:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He's also months from 33 and offers no major advantages over Hasselbeck.
by John Morgan on Nov 5, 2009 7:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
I’m of the camp that thinks we get better on the line and keep Hass behind center and take our chances. I do want a young guy to mature into the spot, be it Teel or another young guy. But I still want Matt starting next year, not Campbell or a rookie or anyone else on this list.
However, I would think a double-vet lineup with Dante as our 2nd string would have some upside. He’s pretty much established that he is a 2nd stringer who can come in and do a good job. Under that scenario, if he doesn’t get a starting nod somewhere next year, wouldn’t he deem us an attractive destination, due to Matty’s questionable health status, where he would likely get some opportunity to play.
Also, he’s far more similar to Matt in skillset than is Seneca, so it wouldn’t be such a reworking of the offense if/when Matt goes down. Plus that could free us up to use Seneca in the vaunted Seacat, as an “X” factor for 10 snaps or so every game instead of worrying because we don’t have a backup other than him.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 5, 2009 7:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One thing is for sure
When we break in a new QB, and this is an inevitability, we will lose games because of QB mistakes. I would prefer to begin that losing and learning with a young defense, a supposidly young OL and RB, and do what we did from 02 to 06.
It is time to lose with vision, and win with great excitment for the coming future. It is time for something new.
It is what it is...
by kidder95 on Nov 5, 2009 7:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, and much of that starts with the trenches and QB.
Some of the trench-work has started (Unger on offense, LJack, etc. on defense), but as has been said: QB is the key position to restock and it hasn’t happened, yet. I’ll be shocked if we don’t draft a guy. A trade is possible. I really think QB will be addressed and I sincerely hope running back isn’t neglected again.
by Misfit74 on Nov 5, 2009 7:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Using that logic makes me question
whether or not Mora and Ruskell have that development in mind for Teel.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 6, 2009 10:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
no, he's aging
and if you look at Seattle’s History of signing veteran you will know why I say that.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 6, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
meant to reply to Kidder95
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 6, 2009 10:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting how people's views may have changed about Kolb.
When we discussed this awhile back, most hated the idea. Since that time, and, given a few games to be McNabb’s super-sub this year, Kolb put up some good numbers.
http://www.fieldgulls.com/2009/6/9/903699/trading-for-kevin-kolb
by Misfit74 on Nov 5, 2009 7:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I love the first response to that thread.
It feels…..right.
by Fear on Nov 6, 2009 12:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hilarious.
The only thing that could have been different in his response was instead using the word ‘horrible’.
by Misfit74 on Nov 6, 2009 1:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Now now
let’s not make fun of the dead.
by John Morgan on Nov 6, 2009 2:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Does that mean Fearless Frog got banned again?!?
More Curry stuff, or something else?
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 6, 2009 3:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't mind the Seneca Wallace approach
So long as it’s not Seneca Wallace. I like the idea of building up a support cast, good OL and RB, but only on the condition that we can’t find the stud QB this year, which is very possible if not likely. Building up the support cast would be great for whomever we find in the future no matter what. However, if there’s a way to get the all-pro QB in either this draft or the next, do whatever it takes to get him. Now, if only there was a way to know for sure. The worst thing would be giving up a lot for a bust.
by B.B.Finnegan on Nov 5, 2009 7:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
your a lone reed on the banks of a dried up riverbed.
because nobody else seems to think Wallace can get it done.
I ROCK out with my HAWK out, therefore I am....
by durteehawk on Nov 6, 2009 10:33 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
That's cool imagery for a metaphor.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
by whiskey chainsaw on Nov 6, 2009 10:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

by 


















