The Replacement
by abender20 on Feb 11, 2009 8:29 AM PST
in Seahawks News & Rumors
Email
PrintOne of the ongoing tug-o-wars throughout most of the FG threads this offseason regards the health of Matt Hasselbeck and whether the Hawks need to draft a long term replacement. In an interview with Mitch Levy, Mora talks about Hasselbeck and the QB position. For those of you arguing that Hasselbeck is just fine and that a pick spent on a QB would be a waste, prepare to taste mudpit:
“He’s seen upteen specialists. And he’s worked very, very hard on rehabilitation of the back. But once again, Mitch, as you said, there’s an uncertainty, especially as you get up there in age and you’re dealing with a back injury. There’s just certain things that you can’t predict. Right now all indications are that he’s going to be fine. But that could change. So what’s important for us as an organization is as we go through the draft and as we go through free agency, is to not just say, ‘Matt’s going to be fine. Oh, Matt’s going to be OK. We can ignore that position.’ I don’t think that’s the thing to do.”
Mora went on to say the team will not necessarily look at free agency, but will look at the draft in terms of finding an heir apparent for Hasselbeck when his career is over to groom as the future starting quarterback of the franchise.
Read that again. Coaches are seldom candid about injuries, opting for nebulous responses over cold hard truth, but Mora lets on quite clearly that there are concerns organizationally over Hasselbeck's health going forward. If Mora and Ruskell are on the same page, the Seahawks will be drafting a quarterback in 2009.
57 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Wow, that was a bomb.
I haven’t been paying much attention to the QBs in this draft, especially once Bradford and McCoy dropped out, but I sure as hell will now.
If the coaches see something in Stafford or Sanchez that they like, I’m all for drafting them. But I hope their concern for the QB position isn’t so great that they see the #4 pick as their only real chance to get a great QB (Flacco and Rodgers say hello).
Please not Sanchez at #4
… who are the later round sleepers we should know about??
I had the same feeling when I read that yesterday.
And with Matt saying, at the super bowl, that he has yet to be cleared to work, a rather bleak picture is painted. (Of course I’m a bit of a reactionary) But despite that I still find it hard to believe that they take a QB in the first 2 rounds, for good or ill.
Say hello to Sanchez
Hope you are a good quarterback, man, because you will be earning bank in roughly 2-3 months.
"Why is it every time I need to get somewhere, we get waylaid by jackassery?" - Dr. Venture
Many have said that Ruskell will never draft Sanchez that high and I agree.
1 year wonder, left early, some character red flags. I just don’t see it happening.
Sanchez's character concerns are shaky at best
He was accused of a “he said she said” sexual assualt two years before he became the starter at USC. The case was dropped for total lack of evidence, and the incident happened in Sanchez’ room.
Sanchez is a 1 year wonder but that’s because he’s only had 1 year as the starter. He had a maximum of 1 year remaining eligibility, and when he saw Bradford and Tebow essentially declare for the 2010 draft, he made the easiest decision of his life by declaring this year, since he’d have almost no chance of going this high next year even if he played light’s out.
I hate USC, but Sanchez’s talent and smooth passing skills are undeniable. He was rated the #1 QB in America coming out of High School (link to wiki), and at USC I was really struck by how amazingly accurate and polished he was, especially in his 1st full season as a starter. He is about as close as you can get to Sam Bradford in this draft class, and I for one would be thrilled to see the Seahawks pick him (assuming Crabtree isn’t there).
I'm not going to read too much into this.
Pre-draft statements can mean almost anything. Are we enticing teams to trade into the #4 if they want that QB, furthering the idea the 1.04 is on the block? Who knows. We had the same concerns about Matt three months ago that we had now. Mora making a statement doesn’t necessarily realign our draft plans.
That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if we did draft a QB early, and I would trust our FO in doing so, as well. At least QBs are an exciting pick, which is fun for fans. I couldn’t stand the anticlimax of another Chris Spencer, though I understood the pick at the time. The long-term need is there. Maybe even the short-term need. That didn’t change because Mora made another statement about Hasselbeck.
Good point
the possibility of us taking any possible position is conducive for possible trades or just throwing off our opponents’ FOs.
I would hardly be excited if we drafted a QB early.
In fact, I would be disappointed.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Feb 11, 2009 11:06 AM PST up reply actions
Seneca Wallace, bye bye?
What seems most telling about this statement is Mora’s admission that QB is a position that cannot be ignored. Obviously it’s telling because it casts doubt on Matty’s health going into the 2009 season, but it’s also telling because it suggests that whatever the ’Hawks long-term QB future is, it does not include Seneca Wallace.
Wallace has publicly stated that he believes he’s a starter-quality QB. John has maintained for some time that he is not. Mora’s statement seems to me that he’s leaning more towards John’s assessment than Seneca’s.
I’ve stated before that I’m leery of drafting a QB as our future starter because our franchise history with QBs we’ve drafted is not very good (though now I wonder how often a franchise drafts its star QB). But it certainly is an area that needs to be addressed, so here’s hoping we buck historical trends.
Probably
Mora basically said ’It’s Matt or draft’. With that said …
Why not go with Seneca? He’s certainly not the type of QB to support a pass-heavy offense, but if Gnapp is a run-heavy OC, why not go with a QB that’s quite capable at short passing, taking care of the ball (evidenced by his stretch of throws w/o an INT at the end of last season) and especially running?
(I’ve only been into football about a year and a half, so please pardon my ignorance).
Wallace is a fumble machine and his low interception totals were mostly luck
Most importantly, he lacks the skills to continue his strong statistics, implying the latter are not indicative of his true talent level.
I find it odd you say it was luck.
Really, aside from that deep TD to Branch while getting drilled in the season finale, when was he throwing a bunch of misplaced balls that were lucky they weren’t intercepted? He seemed to do a good job identifying the easier, high percentage throws than he did in his 2006 stint.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Feb 11, 2009 6:33 PM PST up reply actions
I would add
That despite being a decent QB most of the time, Wallace just doesn’t seem to have the ability to score a lot of points. In 2008, the average NFL team scored just over 21 points a game. In 12 starts, Wallace has only led an offense to more than 21 points three times: 24 against STL in 2006, 28 in a loss to KC that same year, and 34 in the Singletary pants drop game of ’08.
I really can’t explain how a QB can be efficient without being productive. Hasselbeck, who played far worse than Wallace last year, Scored 30+ in two games. Whether its intangibles or red zone efficiency, I’ve long noticed that Hasselbeck seems to manage offenses well even on average days, whereas Wallace seems the opposite.
That really doesn't make sense
It assumes the quarterback is the person solely responsible for points being scored.
Mora has improved at Poker
He is trying to create a sense of urgency for teams behind them in the draft so that the Hawks can trade down. You have to make these other teams think the Hawks may be looking at the QB position. If they show no interest then other teams will bank on them passing. What if Stafford is available at pick#4? Well….its good news for the Hawks, as their pick becomes highly valuable.
Also- there is truth to what Mora says, so that only validates his comments.
I'm hoping this is the case...
…and it makes sense considering our draft position.
I've always suspected they'd draft a QB
IMO, their willingness to take a flier on Frye was strong evidence they were planning ahead for Matt’s eventual decline as early as 2 years ago.
But I’d still be shocked if they drafted one in the first 2 rounds. I’m probably guilty of reading into the comments what I want to hear … but IMO this indicates the whole “we’re looking for a mid-round project to groom while we have the chance” not the whole “we’re ready to jump on the next franchise QB this draft”
With regards to Frye,
They had Greene before anyways. I think every team has a young QB on their roster as a potential starter though.
True - and I guess that was more what I meant
Teams like to have developmental QB to groom – be it a draft pick like Greene, or a reclamation project like Frye. And even when Matt didn’t have all these questions surrounding him, the team was still adding those types of guys.
So IMO, for Mora to say that they’ll be looking around for an “heir apparent” isn’t really a bombshell, it’s more or less standard procedure.
Just how loaded
is next year’s QB class? I can’t help wondering if Seattle might pick up a late(ish) round QB this year, and if that QB doesn’t show immediate progress, they might grab a 1st round QB next year. I mean, there just seems to be so many QB’s available next year, at least 1 or 2 are going to slide. That lets Matt play out his final two years, and still gives the QB a year to learn (or this year’s QB two years to learn).
good point
John posted an article detailing how it might be prudent for Seattle to take a QB at #4 because QB success is directly connected to draft position.
But (as he’d surely note, and may have already), the quality of a given year’s draft class is a factor. Since Stafford is increasingly likely going to Detroit at #1, and unless Sanchez has one of those meteroic rises that flashy QB’s often do, this appears to be one of those stinky QB drafts.
This year’s pick of a QB at #4 may not be as good of a player as next year’s pick at, say, #18 or so (just guessing at where the Hawks may draft). There’s also the factor of cost.
What about the Hawks trading a mid-to-later round draft pick for someone else’s recently-drafted backup… i.e. Brian Brohm or John Beck?
Brohm maybe, but Beck will turn 28 before the season starts. His days of developing are far behind him.
I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE!!! I DRINK IT UP!!
Brohm
Brohm would be a good fit and surely GB is set w/ a fairly young, 1st year starter in Rodgers, making that idea very feasible. However, I personally would an heir with the arm capable of a passable, if not great deep ball. From what I know of Brohm, his skillset would be a good WCO fit, but I would welcome a change from Hasselbeck’s skillset in adding the deep ball to our offense. I think Brohm is very much like Hasselbeck in physical skill – both missing the long ball (which chicks dig, of course).
They apparently like Matt Flynn as a backup, too.
I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE!!! I DRINK IT UP!!
Yes, but it's directly related to the post.
Plus most of us were high on Brohm during last year’s draft.
Graham Harrell 4th round.
I say draft Crabtree # 4 (you almost have to if Detroit can resist the temptation), and pick up Harrell 4th round (thankfully he played very poorly in the Sr. bowl, granted it was the first time all year he wasn’t in the shotgun)
I mean Brady, Cassell, who says you have to pick a future starter on the first day.
I think Harrell might have the right stuff to be a successful starter in the NFL. I know that there are definite questions with him, but I just have a hunch.
yea... thats what i told Belichick.
and maybe that later round pick would be better served on a Longsnapper, or punter.
or another Auburn Receiver.
No. I didn't say that.
How much is Cassel (undrafted) gonna make next year? Granted he doesn,t have a ring.
But would you rather have Cassel, or Sanchez?
I just think the odds of ; Harrell, or Stafford becoming successful starters in the NFL are about the same.
Have you seen Harrell in the Senior Bowl?
He looked plain awful.
Granted, that was only one game, but Harrell’s college resume just screams NFL bust. His college stats are only good because he’s from Leach’s infamous spread offense, which does not translate well to the NFL.
by aerozeppelin on Feb 12, 2009 3:48 PM PST up reply actions
Have you seen Harrell in the Senior Bowl?
He looked plain awful.
Granted, that was only one game, but Harrell’s college resume just screams NFL bust. His college stats are only good because he’s from Leach’s infamous spread offense, which does not translate well to the NFL.
by aerozeppelin on Feb 12, 2009 3:48 PM PST up reply actions
Hard to believe
When I heard Elizabeth was expecting next August, and did the math, I figured his back couldn’t be that bad…
I suspect Mora is being honest, with there still being some unknowns around his recovery, but April 25th is still a long way off, and his condition should be a lot clearer by then.
I have been a proponent of picking up a QB in this draft due to timing, regardless of whether he is healthy enough to start in ‘09. With the top 3 off the board in round 1, I think Graham Harrell could be a good 4th round value. I have to say though, that I saw an interview of him, and he sounds like he’s dumb as a post.
I’m also still very high on trading down in round 1 if possible, and picking up add’l 3rd and 4th round picks. Oakland at 7 so they can take Crab doesn’t seem far fetched. They’d have to give up at least their 3rd and maybe also 5th or 6th to be equitable.
The big question for me is whether T. Schmidt will get healthy, or do we have to spend another late pick on a long-snapper??? :) I know it’s dangerous to assume, but I’m assuming we’re set at kicker.
Elizabeth Hasselbeck is married to Matt's brother Tim.
Glib is only cute when it’s factually correct.
I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE!!! I DRINK IT UP!!
if Matt was married to Elizabeth I'd be lobbying for his release...
…she’s dumber than a load of bricks. Cute, though, at least when she was on Survivor.
I would poo my pants were we to get the Raiders' 3rd for moving down three spots.
Especially considering it doesn’t look like anyone outside of Crabtree is going to not be available at both 4 and 7. Except, I’m betting… Sanchez.
I find it fascinating that...
everyone thinks anyone we select at 4, or any other number for that matter, is safe. Luck, timing, injury, teamates, coaching… luck…
And I’ll admit I drool when I watch Sanchez throw the deep ball with precision after subtly sliding to avoid pressure… oh well…
It is what it is...
There's definitely safer and riskier picks
And it’s undeniable that a player who has only started one season is riskier than a player who has started multiple seasons.
And 'this' is why I am not ever a candidate for GM...
because my man crush for Sanchez only grows as I watch his film. His deep ball is equal to Stafford and Freeman’s. His accuracy seemingly better than both. But, being the effing non-stat geek I am (oxy-moron), it is his ‘presence’ that I treausre.
Everything about Sanchez screams Jim Plunkett… which is a bad omen for the team that drafts them… but man, let’s roll the dice.
Keyshawn Crabtree is very tantalizing… but if Arizona has proved anything, it has proved that quarterbacks determine championships (he also kills my first round pick theory… good luck repeating him and Brady… or Hasselbeck)
That said, I am unsure we as fans have patience we had with Matt. Few remember the monumental struggles he has overcome.
Best Case: We win the last superbowl before the 2011 strike.
Worst Case: We become the buffalo bills with Trent Edwards.
Lastly, I want praise for having formed complete sentences, and formed paragraphs appropriately… I’m wasted.
It is what it is...
I remember Matt's struggles
And Seattle fans weren’t that patient.
He was getting boo’d and the “DIL-FER” chants had started up by his 6th game. It wasn’t until Dilfer blew his achillies in ’02 and Matt stepped back in and had that 6 game tear to finish the year that most fans started to embrace him.
Just my opinion, of course … but Seahawk fans seem to be a particularly quick judging lot when it comes to newbies – unless they happen to be local boys (though I suppose that true of all fanbases, in general)
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
Related FanShots on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Report: Tebow sends cease and desist letter to maker of Jesus-y Jets T-shirts
- Joe McKnight says too much McDonald’s helped him gain 16 pounds in offseason
- Nick Mangold says goodbye to some chest hair on ‘Late Night with Jimmy Fallon’
- Saints will honor suspended Sean Payton with empty chairs
- Junior Seau’s home burglarized just days after his death
