Field Gulls Podcast: On Being a Fan
It's a week late and more than a little naval gazing, but it's a podcast. Here's that ominous black box again.
30 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This is exactly the way I feel
When we were winning at Arizona everyone at the bar was giving me a ton of shit for freaking out after were forced to kick field goals red zone possession after red zone possession. Everyone was all like, “Would you rather be losing? Jeez.”
You could get DJ Hackett with a 5th Round pick.
I don’t see them stuck with Hasselbeck. I mean you make a good point and it’s a point I made earlier this year. This team would have been better having been forced to start whitehurst through injury. I know, I’m classless because I’m clearly cheering for injury as I was accused of, but an injury would have ended any of the speculation and let the coaching staff off the hook.
However, You could resign Matt and load the position with a young guy from the draft, while still pumping young talent out of the draft and snagging high value cheap talents that do key things like Raheem Brock and Brandon Stokely.
by Joshua Kasparek on Dec 10, 2010 6:15 PM PST reply actions
I feel your passion in a lot of what you said too. It was one of the best podcasts you've done.
I fear one thing from this front office John and that is the Ruskell big splash free agent. We know how this stuff unwraps when signings like T.J. Hushmandzadeh goes down. This is when delusion is rampant and we’re all screwed. If the hawks stay away from that I’ll be more patient. If they resign Matt I won’t feel stuck like I would if they went out and spent 50 million for 7 years on some established star.
If they do that can you teach me how to drink so I don’t remember things?
by Joshua Kasparek on Dec 10, 2010 6:29 PM PST up reply actions
Good podcast
I agree with your sentiments. No matter how you try to sugar-coat it, the Seahawks are a bad team right now. Even if we do make the playoffs, who cares? I am sure some people will justify the inconsequential playoff run by saying “Good teams make the playoffs. The Seahawks made the playoffs. Therefore, they are a good team”. We aren’t going to beat the Eagles, Packers, Falcons, or Saints of the league. I’d rather field a good team with a chance of making a playoff run, than a bad team sputtering in mediocrity with glimpses of hope that are actually just a product of our terrible division.
With that said, I like what Pete Carroll has done thus far. And I think that John Schneider knows that in order to build a great football team, you need good young talent that can enter their prime at around the same time. Schneider has a good eye for talent. I think in 2-3 years we can become a competent team again. Hopefully sooner than later.
My last point brings up what you talked about John, what is the point of watching if you know you aren’t going to win championships for years to come? I think that not only is it the fact that people can be emotionally(and geographically) tied with a team, but also people don’t want to be the band wagoner fan. They think that in order to to be a true fan you must not only cherish the good times, but also stick around and endure the suffering of the rebuilding years. For the most part, I agree with that. I take pride in being a Seahawks fan because it means I am not like that guy who just suddenly started wearing Red Sox clothing after 2004. “What? I’ve always been a fan!”. The Seahawks are and will always be my team.
Related story: During my senior year in high school(earlier this year), I was talking with my friend Lauren at lunch. She was cute, I had a little crush on her, but I digress. We were talking about sports, and she said she liked football. So, I asked, which NFL team is your favorite? She replied “The Patriots”. To which I then asked, do you only like the Patriots because you think Tom Brady is good looking? She laughed and said “A little bit, yeah”. She then asked me my favorite, and I said the Seahawks. She laughed and said “why do you like them? They are terrible!”. I wanted to explain what fandom is, but I realized it would be to no avail.
I want the Seahawks to be the juggernaut that everyone hates. I want them to be the team who can put up 45 points on you just because they want to. I want the Seahawks, my Seahawks, to be great again.
by Pessimistic Optimist on Dec 10, 2010 7:03 PM PST reply actions
you are the best named user for a sports forum on the internet.
I’d like to be that team everyone hates or at least that everyone knows can beat them any given sunday and get filthy in a shootout. I mean, even when the Seahawks were rising through 2002 to their 2005 peak, you knew you were in an offensive sluggfest no matter how good your defense was.
by Joshua Kasparek on Dec 10, 2010 7:13 PM PST up reply actions
My hope is they build to become contenders for the throne every year
We’ve had runs where we were considered favorites to stomp all over the division, and this year shows that we can potentially make it to the post-season in a rebuilding year, but we won’t really “arrive” until we’re a threat to win the Super Bowl every year. So yeah, basically I hope we become the next Colts or Patriots. As much as I’m certain Pete wants to put the pieces together to win as much as he can right now, I think he’s wise enough to realize his team is too fundamentally flawed for the time being to try to make a 1 year run. Drafting and developing talent takes time. Years. Even then it’s far from an exact science or even remotely guaranteed to succeed. But I like our chances with Schneider in the FO. I have faith we’ll get there. I just don’t expect to “arrive” within the next few years. In the mean time, I kinda dig that we have enough exciting components to look forward to watching every week. Didn’t really have all that many the last couple of years.
Earl Thomas = God-send
Great podcast
You honestly echoed a lot of my concerns for this team at this point. I think we’re a few years away from meaningful football, but I do think we have the right front office to get us there.
1. I hate being a fan too.
2. I don’t think they will re-sign Hasselbeck. They signed Whitehurst to a 2 year deal, but they didn’t give Matt an extension. They have said all along that Matt is their guy, but no extension. I think they traded for Whitehurst because he was better than any QB they could get from the 3rd round of this draft. You take Whitehurst instead because he has been in the NFL and has the physical tools you are looking for. If Hasselbeck gets hurt, you have a guy to step in, but not as a future starter unless he does amazing. I think they took Whitehurst to be the backup and transition phase QB and are counting on drafting one early in 2011.
Hasselbeck hadn’t played well for the last two years, was injured and is up there in football years. Seneca was not a very good QB nor did he possess the physical tools required for the offense that was going to be used. The top 4 QB’s taken were 1. Sam Bradford 25 Tim Tebow 48 Jimmy Clausen 85 Colt McCoy.
There was no way we were getting Bradford, and Tebow was overrated by McDaniels, so Instead of Whitehurst we could have picked Clausen or McCoy. If those options weren’t good enough to be franchise QB’s why take them? You don’t. You let the aging franchise QB play out his last year, sign a veteran backup with upside as injury insurance, and you wait until 2011 and you use your top 15 pick on a deeper QB class.
At least that is what I would do…
I love this format, becuase I feel like I was able to better understand some of your sentiments that have had me confused.
I feel like a have a better grasp on a few things, mainly your views on statistical analysis and the concerns that you have with making the playoffs as a bad team. I know that all of us here at Field Gulls want the same thing, a damn good team that is a legitimate contender, and I still don’t think that making the playoffs necessarily means PC and JS will be tricked into thinking they have the makings of a true contender, but I do see why you are worried that that could happen.
by Woodinville_12thMan on Dec 11, 2010 12:43 AM PST reply actions
I think the Hawks are hugely overachieving this year and its very possible they'll have a worse record next year
I mean without our awesome special teams, and relatively weak schedule, I could easily see us being 2-10. I’m so desperate to see us win a game where we flat out kick a good teams ass, when we don’t win because the other team is a mess and hands us the game. We’re probably at least 2 drafts away in my view from being a contender, and that would be if we didn’t fuck up any picks. Step 1 get a QB. Pete has showed at time this year the ability to get more out of less. I can’t wait to see what he can do with real talent
My main issue with not keeping Hasselbeck...
…is that, mediocre or no, it’s not very easy to get a good QB. I think you’re right that it’s obvious that Hass is not a good QB right now either but things can still get a lot, lot worse. I’d go so far as to say that if you look at those teams that scuffle year in and year out, it’s often because they can’t find a quarterback worth his weight in rice cakes. Detroit had the Joey Heisman debacle. The Seahawks in the 90s had Kelly Stouffer and then Rick Mirer that they had to work through before finding guys who at least wouldn’t actively hurt them. You’ve got the 9ers with Alex Smith, the Texans with David Carr, the Bills with JP Losman. A lot of that is probably due to not-great QBs looking even worse because of bad supporting casts but those guys definitely didn’t help.
That, I think, is what kind of dismays me about this. Not that Hasselbeck is still awesome or whatever, but that we’re facing cutting ties with the third really solid QB in this team’s 34 year history and we don’t have anything right now on the horizon to replace him. Does Mike Williams stick around and/or stay in shape if nobody can get the ball to him? Do the issues with the line get better or worse with a QB less experienced at handling the pass rush?
I guess that’s why they hired Pete Carroll, but it’s not going to be easy. I know I sound a little like a broken record here but that’s also why I was hoping they’d pick up Matt Leinart when Arizona cut him; not because he was going to immediately replace Hasselbeck but because Carroll presumably knows how to make him look good.
You seem to be the only one not eager to see Hasselbeck's sunset ride. I am scared too.
But if you only fly when there are guarantees you won’t be flying much. Be brave Johnny Slick.
by Joshua Kasparek on Dec 11, 2010 12:50 PM PST up reply actions
I think there are a lot of others who feel like Matt could be back
I could see them keeping him until someone beats him out for the job.
by Big E-Z on Dec 11, 2010 4:37 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
What kind of compensatory pick would we get for Matt?
Does anybody know how that works. Do starting QBs have significant value or is based on their next contract?
You don't get comp picks for losing specific players.
The NFL compares the value of all the free agents you lost in a given year with all the free agents you sign, and then awards a single pick based on that “ratio.” Also. we only get comp picks for players lost/gain from the previous offseason; for the upcoming draft the NFL will consider the loss of Nate Burleson and Cory Redding (so Matt’s hypothetical “comp pick” wouldn’t be awarded until the 2012 Draft).
Re: John's points on "being a grind" and frustrations...
I think John makes an excellent point, and as a fan I would not look forward to going back to the situation of late 80s, which would seem to epitomize the concerns that the team becomes plug and play but never moves forward. Those Seahawks teams were competitive, but not good enough to be exciting, and were exactly what John describes: a grind….
by largent's revenge hit on Dec 11, 2010 4:33 PM PST reply actions
It's too late
At this point, even if the Seahawks lost all their games and finished 6-10, it really wouldn’t be THAT big of a difference (draft pick-wise) to beating the Niners and Rams, and making the playoffs at 8-8. If we could somehow go back in time and arrange things so we could go 3-13 or 4-12, then we could talk about possessing a draft pick high enough to (almost) guarantee getting one of the top QB’s.
But that ship has sailed. Maybe if we lost to the Panthers last week and lost out the rest of the season, a 5-11 record would have gotten us close enough where Luck, Newton or Mallett might have slipped to us….there are enough teams in the league right now that (a.) have a worse record than us and (b.) very likely need a young QB next season, that hoping for a perfect QB to fall to us is next to impossible.
It’s not enough to hope this team loses out to get a better draft pick (which is an impression I got from John’s podcast); we would need other QB-starved teams like the Titans and the Browns and the Dolphins and, yes, even the 49ers to finish ahead of us, to make the tanking really worth it.
So if there is little reason to lose out….HOW ABOUT WE FUCKING WIN THIS FUCKING DIVISION! GO SEAHAWKS!!!!!!!
There are 13 teams with worse records.
It’s entirely feasible that we could lose out and wind up in the top 10 picks in the draft, vs drafting 21st by winning the division.
That said, I’m not in favor of tanking the season for better draft position. I don’t think that’s the best way to go. I do feel that this is not a playoff caliber team, though, and I hope that we at least put a strong showing in if we do make it. I don’t want the Hawks to be a shitty team that gets in by default and gets their asses handed to them once there, which I think is likely.
by splintrdmind on Dec 11, 2010 6:32 PM PST up reply actions
But of the teams most likely to draft in the Top 10, only the Lions are certain NOT to draft a quarterback
And maybe the Broncos….although Denver could hire a new GM who totally revamps that roster. 3 QBs could conceivably be gone within the first 5 picks, so there might not really be a big difference between drafting at #10 and #21, when it comes to QBs.
All in all, I’d rather the Seahawks make the playoffs than don’t; in reality, the difference in draft picks would be fairly inconsequential.
I can't believe people are hoping to lose so we can get good draft picks.
that’s crazy talk.
"God bless....God."
Semper Fi'
Pain don't hurt...
I don't think John hopes that.
I think he wants the Seahawks to have an attitude appropriate to their true talent level. In that same vein, I support the idea that winning and losing isn’t everything because I felt kinda good about the Seahawks after the New Orleans game. And the wins against Arizona didn’t really excite me as much as they could have.
This wooden soul of mine, it cannot ever climb from places it has fallen: In between where light can shine. It never falls in line, it barely has a spine, like branches severed from the vine. Like it was faulty by design.
I remember you discussing parts of this at an earlier time and I agree and have thought about it often.
I would rather suffer for a year or two and land some elite talent through the draft rather than a potential playoff run of fool’s gold. And, if you say ‘re-sign Matt Hasselbeck’ again: POW! Right in the kisser.
That said does it take multiple seasons of bottom-feeding to build a franchise into a contender (again)?
I"m not sure we should retain any defensive coaches. Perhaps a lack of talent shades my view on that.
Enjoyed the podcast.
...
Interesting podcast, and I agree in the broad brush strokes
Maybe I shouldn’t compare Schneider/Carroll to Ruskell, but I felt “win now and eff the future” was the Ruskell front office modus operandi. To be fair, he wasn’t brought to town to build for the future.
On the other hand, I’ve never felt that with this front office despite the “win forever” Tony Robbins sloganeering. I think their rhetoric about winning and being competitive on day 1 is pretty boilerplate NFL front office hoo hah.
In practice though, I’m not sure that “win now” is Schneider’s and Carroll’s collective blind spot as much as it may be commitment to their scheme. They part ways with guys who don’t fit the scheme with impunity it feels like. So it’s true that Seattle is playing a ton of established veterans™ but that’s what you get in the market for replacement level talent. Seattle has probably done as good a job as any front office in finding guys from that pool who are young enough to have upside.
Seattle may have a buttload of old, replacement level talent but it’s really not committed to any of it for any length of time. They haven’t extended anyone other than Whitehurst and Heater—to very short extensions—and haven’t even put out feelers about re-signing Hass as far as I know. Put it this way, I’ll be worried if these guys start making noises about extending Clemons.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by 
































