Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Watch Out For Cowboys UDFA Tim Benford

Seven Pass Attempts with Charlie Whitehurst

Not everyone can grow up to become a franchise quarterback.

One day soon the Seahawks will have a real quarterback controversy and we as community can truly rip each other apart. I'm looking forward to it. Until then, the struggle of bad versus probably bad will have to suffice.

Charlie Whitehurst attempted 23 passes. Most failed. Some failed because of Whitehurst. Some failed because of teammates. Over the next two days, we will look at every attempt and attempt to explain what happened and why. We'll also do quarter by quarter overviews of the rest of the team, starting tomorrow and running through Friday.

Let's dig in.

The Seahawks passed the ball on seven of their first nine attempts. The Giants like the Raiders before them were crowding the line, and though Whitehurst is physically capable of pushing New York back, he didn't.

2-12-SEA 14 (14:19) 6-C.Whitehurst pass short left to 11-D.Butler to SEA 11 for -3 yards (26-A.Rolle).

Seahawks set: WR (left (Deon Butler)), 2 WRs (right), TE (left), RB.

Giants are in a 4-2 nickel with Antrel Rolle walked up to the line.

Seahawks keep in six blockers. Whitehurst takes a three step drop and fires before Butler is out of his break. It's pretty good if not perfect timing. Terrell Thomas closes on Butler and arrives early, chest bumping him but not blatantly interfering. It disrupts Butler and he juggles and juggles and finally catches the ball near the line of scrimmage. John Carlson blocks Thomas and Butler attempts to loop wide towards the left sideline and break up field. Rolle catches him and hip slams him to the turf for a loss of three.

The timing isn't bad. The pass is accurate. The receiver bobbles the ball in part because of minor interference, and then everything goes to hell. A stat is a stat, but the outcome isn't really on Whitehurst.

3-15-SEA 11 (13:32) 6-C.Whitehurst pass incomplete short middle to 17-M.Williams (24-T.Thomas).

Jeremy Bates scripts his first 15 plays and so that produces this play call that's more or less hopeless and enacted provided even less than that.

Seahawks set: 2 WR (left (with Mike Williams wide), WR (right), TE (right), RB.

Giants: 4-2 nickel.

Whitehurst takes a three step drop, pats and throws at Williams. Williams is running a slant against Thomas and from the press and through the route, Thomas wins. Williams is inside, but Thomas is in front, and when Williams attempts to catch the pass -- which is accurate -- his left arm gets caught under Thomas's helmet. The pass falls incomplete.

Punt.

1-10-SEA 29 (10:44) 6-C.Whitehurst pass short right to 11-D.Butler to SEA 30 for 1 yard (59-M.Boley).

This is Whitehurst's first regular season completion. Congratulations! It's pretty garbage.

Seahawks set: TE (left), I (right), 2 WRs (right).

Giants: 4-3

Butler motions in creating a bunch on the right with Williams. Snap. Seahawks run a hard play action left, but the fake isn't sold particularly well. It works though. The line stretches left and the Giant front seven follows, except for two players. Justin Tuck shadows Whitehurst right but is blocked out by Carlson. He arrives from fullback to land the block.

Michael Boley is all over Butler. Butler runs a whip route and jogs his release outside. It's not entirely clear why he jogs. Whitehurst locks on to him but doesn't throw right away. It's not entirely clear why he hesitates. If Butler is running faster, Whitehurst can zip it to him and he should be able to burn Boley. If Butler is jogging, Whitehurst either needs to continue running up field and draw the linebacker or scramble; or he needs to get it to Butler before Boley is all over him.

Neither happens and when Whitehurst finally does throw it to Butler, Boley is there to wrap and tackle him after a gain of one. Strange execution to a well designed play.

2-9-SEA 30 (9:55) 6-C.Whitehurst pass incomplete short right to 11-D.Butler.

So close.

Seahawks: 2 TEs (left), TE (right), WR (right), Rb

Giants: 4-3

Looks like the Giants release into "Sky" coverage. Which, thank you very much Smart Football, looks like this.

Cover3_medium

Butler runs into the space between strong safety Kenny Phillips and corner Corey Webster. Whitehurst reads middle, looks left, sort of stares him down, pats the football and throws high over Phillips. Butler jumps, extends his arms and it's painfully close, but the pass continues just past his outstretched hands out of bounds and incomplete.

Butler is 5'11, has 31" arms and posted a 34.5" vertical at the 2009 NFL Combine, for the record.

3-9-SEA 30 (9:50) (Shotgun) 6-C.Whitehurst pass incomplete deep right to 11-D.Butler.

Empty backfield.

Seahawks: WR (left), WR (right (No. 1 receiver Deon Butler), Trips (Right) that Brandon Stokley motions out of and into the left slot.

Giants are showing blitz and do blitz, first seven and then six. One Giant starts blitz and then opts into coverage but it's way late. The Seahawks retain seven blockers. Whitehurst tosses it long towards Butler running up the right sideline. Butler is matched against Webster, and it's interesting. He seems to get stuck behind Webster even though Webster does not press or initiate contact, and though Butler has superior speed (4.38 v. 4.51), he doesn't create any separation until the very end of the play. The ball flies long, incomplete.

Punt.

2-8-SEA 23 (5:10) 6-C.Whitehurst pass short middle to 86-C.Baker to SEA 30 for 7 yards (54-J.Goff).

Aaay it's a good play.

Seahawks: WR (left), TE (right), 2 WRs (right (Carlson in the right slot)), Rb

Giants: 4-3

Giants release into a cover 2. Whitehurst reads that, waits until Chris Baker gets a little depth and zips it to him for seven before Jonathan Goff can arrive and tackle.

3-1-SEA 30 (4:34) 6-C.Whitehurst pass incomplete deep left to 86-C.Baker. after lateral from 33 Washington

The trick play. Not much to write about this. Whitehurst has Baker wide open underneath and Williams single covered down field, but seems to panic under the pressure of Rocky Bernard and throws it to neither Baker nor Williams but somewhere in between.

One thing I will add is, this play started at a pitch left to Leon Washington. He sells it and the Seahawks line sells it and it's dead on arrival. Washington would have struggled to avoid losing yards. So, if you're curious why Seattle didn't run it, this is probably why. The run wasn't working. This run, at least the pitch, would not have worked.

Comment 77 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Butler has a 34" vert?

For the record, 40" is “ups”, 34" is pretty weak. Like when I was a sophmore in high school and dunked for the first time weak.

Hope that Stokely can teach him about the slot machine because he shouldn’t be on any sideline routs with his height, vert, & alligator arms.

by hazbro24 on Nov 8, 2010 5:34 PM PST reply actions  

umm... whatever you say man

34" is definitely not bad… A football vert is different than a basketball vert by the way. In football its from a stand and you aren’t allowed to move your feet before your jump while in basketball you have one foot planted and pivot into your jump, adding a few inches.

by Mpjohns3 on Nov 8, 2010 8:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Also...

An average person’s wingspan (fingertip to fingertip) is roughly the same as their height. So with 31" arms, unless he measures less than 9 inches shoulder to shoulder he has longer than average arms, for the record…

by Mpjohns3 on Nov 8, 2010 9:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Hmm.

Not to call you out, hazbro, but I was a well above average jumper who played college hoops and my vert was never more than 33— which was much better than most. Enough to dunk over guys, get rebound dunks, etc. I WISH my “weak” vert was only 34, and most would wish to have what I had.

Calling a 34 inch verticle weak IS weak. Nate Robinson, who is one of the best leapers in the NBA, as we all know, is only at 43.5. 9 inches less than Nate, while a high school sophomore, and you call that weak? I assume you must have been one of the greatest leapers to ever play in the state of Washington then. (Assuming you are from WA).

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 9, 2010 1:29 PM PST up reply actions  

Why you gotta call me out bro?

Maybe we did measure the leaps wrong in basketball, because you know we can’t even measure how tall we are (real height + shoes + 2 inches = listed height).

I know I wasn’t the best jumper in the gym, but I hit my head on the backboard more than a few times and had more than a couple of straight up two handers with a guy on my back.

But hey, I expected pro athletes to be a step above a guy that washed out in the pro-am leagues.

by hazbro24 on Nov 9, 2010 6:02 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't think that his vertical is "pretty weak."

Good enough is more like it. Dez Bryant only posted a 38" vertical, and no one is saying that his leaping ability is average. But I agree that his combo of average height, average arm length and decent leaping ability do not make him an ideal candidate for deep routes. Does he remind anyone else of Eddie Royal though? Remember what Jeremy Bates did with Eddie Royal?

by Cannonater on Nov 8, 2010 8:48 PM PST up reply actions  

4" is a big difference, and Dez is much bigger so that makes him an up top threat.

38" is right around NBA ups @ 40, where 50 is jump out of the gym hops.

But, I think Butler has been a good receiver this year. I just don’t get the 15 yard fade routes where he doesn’t have a chance to get any separation and beat the guy with his speed.

by hazbro24 on Nov 9, 2010 6:57 AM PST up reply actions  

50 is false measurement ups.

I remember when it was said Mike Wilson had a 50 inch vert, and he was the greatest leaper I’d ever seen in college ball. (Played for Memphis in the 90’s.) He has the world record for dunking on the highest rim, 11’11".

Now is the part where you say, “But there are a lot of guys that have and could do that.” And I would say, "Really? Because if I COULD be in the guiness book (and wasn’t already making money/playing professionally in hoops), I’d probably want to make an officially measured attempt. Why not. Maybe take that legendary leaping ability and make some money off of it?

Good old Michael Jordan, who “could fly” was said to have a 42 inch vertical.

Nate Robinson, 43.5.

Not a whole lot of guys leap better than them, and yet I see guys all the time who claim to have verticals of that caliber. I would guess maybe 60% of the NBA actually can’t leap with Dez from a true vertical standpoint, though they may crush him in reach or height.

Everytime I hear of a guy claim to have more than a 40 inch vertical, honestly I immediately hear an alarm in my head that says “BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT!” Unless I see something particularly amazing out of the person. Remember, a true measurement is completely flat footed, jumping straight into the air.

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 9, 2010 1:41 PM PST up reply actions  

True. Taking a step can add quite a bit to a measurement (as said above by Mpjohns3)

A flatfoot jump is hard. Taking a single step is easier. Then with a run… Hell, I could almost hit my elbow on the rim (38" leap) with a run 20 years ago, and I’m barely over six feet and have slow-twitch muscle. My standing vertical (one step) was only around 28", and I could dunk better than most anyone at my high school, including two hands behind my head, throw off the backboard, etc.

A 34" flat-footed, no-step vertical is quite reasonable and not “weak” for a pro athlete.

As an aside, both Wilt Chamberlin and Dwight Howard also dunked on 12’ hoops.

by IslandHawk on Nov 9, 2010 2:10 PM PST up reply actions  

I think you sell yourself short.

28 inch verticals are not made by people who are “slow twitch”… you just probably didn’t have as much fast twitch as you would have liked!

But that’s a powerful jump, better than most, and fast twitch is explosive like that.

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 9, 2010 2:58 PM PST up reply actions  

The average vertical in the NBA is 28"

Just saying… 34" isn’t bad. And there are VERY few NBA players who actually have a vertical over 40

by Mpjohns3 on Nov 9, 2010 3:32 PM PST up reply actions  

I really hope we get to see more of Charlie this year.

He basically three two TDs against one of the best defenses in the league. Behind a patchwork line. With three days of practice.

He wasn’t a complete disaster, and that’s encouraging.

"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM

http://seahawksblog.wordpress.com

by Nick Andron on Nov 8, 2010 5:35 PM PST via mobile reply actions   2 recs

fully agree

and he didn’t sack himself the entire game.

From The Hawks Nest - Seahawks Podcast
http://www.http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/from-the-hawks-nest/id385227705

by Hancock.Brett on Nov 8, 2010 5:55 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

The guy's drop back was so quick, it was almost comical.

"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM

http://seahawksblog.wordpress.com

by Nick Andron on Nov 8, 2010 9:01 PM PST up reply actions  

I am resigned to the fact that PC will go with 'Beck unless Hass is injured

I’d love to see if Charlie improves over a few games, but he probably won’t get the chance.

by IslandHawk on Nov 8, 2010 7:05 PM PST reply actions  

The naysayers have convinced me.

No way is Charlie the future, one game proves that. Hell, these seven plays prove it. Let’s just cut him and wait for the draft, trade the farm for a top ten pick and draft a superstar. Hopefully, our new first-rounder doesn’t make any mistakes in HIS first game, that’ll prove that he’s not the future either. I mean, let’s be consistent here, right? We’ll just start a different guy each week until someone puts up all-star numbers, problem solved!

by NinjaHawk on Nov 8, 2010 8:28 PM PST via mobile reply actions   3 recs

I'd vote for you, in the General Election, in a heart beat.

I’d also birth all of your children.

"Pass rushers enter the world of Okung but never leave." - JM

http://seahawksblog.wordpress.com

by Nick Andron on Nov 8, 2010 9:02 PM PST up reply actions  

Yaa...no.

Quarterback isnt even CLOSE to our biggest concern. All the QB talent in the world wont help if that talent is running for their lives. We need bodies in the trenches. Thats first and foremost. A good O-line can make an average QB look pretty good sometimes. Give me a few wide bodies in the first few rounds next year and Ill be happy. Ill suffer with clipboard for now. He does have some upsides.

by BIGSMOOTHH on Nov 9, 2010 4:49 AM PST up reply actions  

Agree

Look at Sanchez. He seems to look pretty good with his O-line.

by KidDanger on Nov 9, 2010 6:56 AM PST up reply actions  

12 TD, 20 INT as a rookie.

Pretty sweet numbers there.

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 9, 2010 1:46 PM PST up reply actions  

And a great QB can make a poor o-line look good.

Michael Robinson leads the Seahawks in completion percentage, yards-per-attempt, and QB rating.

by SSreporters on Nov 9, 2010 7:48 AM PST up reply actions  

See Manning, Peyton; Rodgers, Aaron.

Though both lines have improved— Peyton’s was terrible his first few years in the league, Aaron’s last year.

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 9, 2010 1:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, let's just draft an O-Line so it'll make Matt's terrible targets of John Carlson, Golden Tate, Mike Williams, Deon Butler, Brandon Stokley, Marshawn Lynch, and Justin Forsett look good.

Because those skill players are so terrible. It’s not like if Peyton Manning had this line and those receivers he’d run a top 10 offense. It’s the line! It’s always the line! And always the receivers! Matt is fine, because he’s played better when we have our O-Line at full strength, to the tune of one performance over 60% completions! Yeah, QB, the most important position on the field where we have a really bad starter and probably a really bad backup is not our biggest concern, you’re right. Look at all those teams that are winning without elite talent at QB now, like…uh…yeah….

by BrettJMiller on Nov 9, 2010 10:18 AM PST up reply actions   3 recs

Totally... QB's who arent immediate superstars their first game obviously suck

I mean… if you’re truly the QB of the future, it’ll be clear from the first snap of your career. Whitehurst’s? A hand off. The coaches clearly have no faith in him, they’re going to make him hand it off nearly half the time!
Look at bums like Peyton Manning and Troy Aikman, they didnt make their mediocre teams immediately win as rookies, and clearly, neither of them amounted to anything!
And I rec’d you for good sarcasm.

by Strictnine on Nov 9, 2010 9:41 AM PST up reply actions  

in denial

this team sucks, save your disection of whitehurst, simply put the team sucks and on par to be the new RAMS.

im getting sea-sick!

by Xabulba on Nov 8, 2010 10:12 PM PST reply actions  

Yea

This ass-clown grundle muncher should have been banned several threads ago.

by somethingwitty on Nov 8, 2010 10:46 PM PST up reply actions  

I may be obnoxious

And say some pretty stupid things, but damn it, I’ll never turn into a fair weather bastard that rips on the team in general. If you’re not up for having an intelligent discussion about how this team can win and succeed, get the f out.
SEA!

(okay, it’s late, and this is a slow thread, so..)

HAWKS!

by somethingwitty on Nov 8, 2010 10:50 PM PST up reply actions  

I think it's fair to give people the benfit of the doubt in most cases,

At least for a couple posts, and especially with how much sarcasm goes on around here. Obviously not this guy, but at least he used the subject line.

by skwid206 on Nov 9, 2010 9:02 AM PST up reply actions  

I think allowing multiple strikes is a good thing.

Field Gulls is welcoming to newcomers unless they prove themselves detrimental to the community.

by thebyron on Nov 9, 2010 1:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed.

And I get an a nice solid rebuke myself once in a while, which is generally fully deserved even to my own slanted perspective.

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 9, 2010 1:48 PM PST up reply actions  

According to quotes from Tom Coughlin,

Whitehurst didn’t fall victim to sacks because the Giants game plan wasn’t to pressure the QB with their pass rush,but to let him potentially beat himself with his inexperience/jitters. They held off on the blitzes and let Charlie do himself in. Self imposed pressure can be a killer. So much for the idea that the Hawks O-line held up and/or Charles was mobile enough to avoid the Giants D-line….

by BklynArtist10 on Nov 8, 2010 11:57 PM PST reply actions  

That

Sounds more like a “Hey we couldn’t pressure him, but he didn’t do to well anyways, so we will just say that was our plan” kind of comment.

by PhoneHomeET29 on Nov 9, 2010 12:41 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

yeah

I agree. I like whitehurst, think he has a lot of upside.

by Idahohawk on Nov 9, 2010 12:49 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

defensive game plan

was pretty vanilla by the giants. go look at how they played cutler, they didn’t dial up anywhere near the pressure schemes against us the way they did against the bears

by dt dt on Nov 10, 2010 11:18 AM PST up reply actions  

They were up 21 in the first, 35 at the half, the D-line was playing most of the game with their ears pinned back

And you always go after rookies, to scare the hell out of them. See: Seattle’s treatment of Max Hall.

Now I don’t know what Tom’s gameplan was, but i’m pretty sure it changed after the first quarter, to something more vanilla. Which may or may not say something about CW.

by B.B.Finnegan on Nov 9, 2010 7:41 AM PST up reply actions  

Last time I checked

Whitehurst is not a rookie.

by m_b on Nov 9, 2010 8:34 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm sorry

But five years in the league is much different than a rookie. His 28 years old for one – and he has been through numerous training camps.

by m_b on Nov 9, 2010 10:15 AM PST up reply actions  

Hass sat behind Favre for a while

…and then stunk in his first few games. CW is probably a career backup. But judging him facing the NYG D-line with a battered O-line in max protect and few WRs to target, in a single first game sample is a bit of a reach. Most QBs stink their first few NFL starts.

by IslandHawk on Nov 9, 2010 1:45 PM PST up reply actions  

Totally forgot about that.

Hass wasn’t a rookie either when we got him.

The difference here is that Charlie has to deal with the legend that is Matt, whereas Matt was fighting off, uh… Kitna? Dilfer? Not exactly the same level of competition.

by djafrot on Nov 9, 2010 1:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Dilfer has one more SB victory than Matt will ever have.

(Not that he’s as good a QB, just saying that’s something measureable and valued by some.)

Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.

by Tyler Jorgensen on Nov 9, 2010 1:52 PM PST up reply actions  

Right.

And I remember chants for “Dilfer! Dilfer!” when Matt wasn’t starting off very well. In fact, I think Matt only got his shot because Dilfer got hurt?

Ah, Seahawk fans. Are we so desperate for wins that lock on to any hint of past glory as a sign of future success?

by djafrot on Nov 9, 2010 1:57 PM PST up reply actions  

As far as I understand, the Giants were getting pressure throughout the year with just their front four

Sounds like a weak excuse by Coughlin (although clearly we were in or close-to max protect much of the game)

by IslandHawk on Nov 9, 2010 7:45 AM PST up reply actions  

That is the game I saw.

To suggest that we with our patchwork line held back the New York Giants that have been smashing quarterbacks all year is a little silly. They held the line, stuffed the run, and left it to Charlie to beat us.

by JDWork on Nov 9, 2010 12:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Anyone know

how many times Giants blitzed? Just curious.

by m_b on Nov 9, 2010 12:37 PM PST up reply actions  

blocking the Giants front four

is an accomplishment in and of itself. even without blitzes.

by Snuffleupagus on Nov 9, 2010 1:03 PM PST up reply actions  

I figured this is why the Giants pass rush was weak

If Matt had been in there, they would have been hammering him. But with a rookie, you let him beat himself. Charlie did for the most part.

I didn’t figure our offensive line was that good. I knew they were holding back to see if Charlie threw picks.

That’s why guys like Kelley and Brewer make me laugh. I don’t even bother reading their crap because they don’t know what they’re talking about. Game plan for Giants defense would have been much different for Matt. Matt most likely wouldn’t even have put up a TD or lasted the game.

by A. Simmons on Nov 9, 2010 12:53 AM PST reply actions  

How does that make sense?

If they like playing against Charlie, they’d love Zac even more.

by bewrong on Nov 9, 2010 1:10 AM PST up reply actions  

CW is like the hot cheerleader who shows a lot of leg, maybe even kisses you during a dance, but then leaves you to your own devices

I am so hoping that we get to see at least one more week of CW. There were so many glimmers of something there that I wat to see more.
I want to see him with Okung playing so we have TEs running routes.
I want to see our WRs play a little above their ability, not a little below their ability
I want us to have just a little bit of a running game so CW can run play action
If I get what I want, then maybe we have a chance to see if the tease tears it up or if he is just that a hot chick who will never actually put out.

by stufr on Nov 9, 2010 4:41 AM PST reply actions  

I concur

But i want to see him play in a game where the team is not behind 21-0 in the first quarter

by Built2Spill on Nov 9, 2010 6:02 AM PST up reply actions  

Everyone keeps trying to pin everything on one position or another

It’s strange to me, because I’m pretty sure most people would agree that we lack the “across the board” talent many top teams do. But yet each week everyone goes on about whether a QB change, a healthy O-line, or an elite DE (well, that talk died down when Red was in) would fix the team.

Folks, this is a rebuilding team. We’re going to need Schneider and Carroll to have two more 2010-style drafts before this team has the talent to succeed for a full season again strong teams. But the future looks good at least, as opposed to 2009 where I think everyone was a little worried that Mora lost the team and had more years on that contract.

by biju on Nov 9, 2010 10:27 AM PST reply actions  

Agreed, generally.

Not that finding a Peyton, Rodgers, or Brees is that easy… but nevertheless, we should at least give it a shot.

by djafrot on Nov 9, 2010 1:58 PM PST up reply actions  

I know it's nitpicking.

But Seneca started the Colts game last year. Either way though it’s the same answer.

by Hopefulmsfan on Nov 9, 2010 6:11 PM PST up reply actions  

The thing is, I no longer use the supporting cast excuse anymore.

If Phillip Rivers can score 30 points on the Texans in Houston without his top 3 WR and without Gates, and Peyton can score 30+ a game without Gonzalez, Collie, or Clark, then that shows that QB is the most important position in football. An elite QB can solve a lot of problems.

by Hopefulmsfan on Nov 9, 2010 6:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Hoodie (totally off subject)

…but in the photo. I noticed Hasselbeck and Romo wearing these Reebok gray camo hoodies, but can’t find them on the Reebok website. Anyone know where they can be purchased, if at all?? Thanks, Sammy

by EvilSammy on Nov 9, 2010 2:48 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SEA!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Einstein_www-txt2pic-com_small
On Pete Carroll and Previous QB Competitions
Einstein_www-txt2pic-com_small
A Fan's Reflection: Things I've Learned from a Casual 12th
Small
Seahawks Sacks: Statistical Analysis

Recent FanPosts

Small
Portland Seahawks Fans: Where You Be?
Small
Help Me Understand How Irvin Will be Used
Turbin_game_uni_small
Hand Size and Quarterbacks
Small
Should Seattle Go After Kellen Winslow?
Small
Football where the head is sacred
Horsey_small
What Doug Baldwin Had to Say About Seahawk QBs (or How DB Throws MF Under the Bus)
Retro_seattle_seahawks_by_mtspknwildcat_small
Dynasty League Fantasy Football
Small
Seahawks 2012 Active Roster Predictions
Marty_small
You should want Flynn to be our starter this year

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managing Editor/Lead Writer

Screen_shot_2012-05-04_at_10 Danny Kelly

Staff Writers/Editors

Screen_shot_2011-01-05_at_9 Scruffy Lefty

Small BrianL

Avatar_small Benne

Olympiabeer_small Tyler Jorgensen

Madhatter_small Thomas Beekers

Profilepic_small DJ C-Raig

897267_o_small Kenneth Arthur

Sbn_pic_small Jacson Bevens

Photo__1__small Charlie Todaro

Staff Writers

Small Joshua Kasparek

Photo_small Matt Erickson

Davis_small Davis Hsu

Profile2_small Rob Staton

208114_505637750968_23709013_30160241_9483_n_small Scott Enyeart

Elephant_pink_clothes_small Chris Sully

Seattle_seahawk_white_1600_reasonably_small_small Derek Stephens

Ace_small Ben Harbaugh

Bu_fb_2_small Daniel Hill

Rob_small Rob Davies