OG Pitts and TE Baker out this week

Hasselbeck will practice Tuesday. Will he play? "We'll find out in the next day or so," Carroll said.
"Both guys are getting ready to start," Carroll said of Hasselbeck and Whitehurst.

over 1 year ago Thomas Beekers 13 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

OG Pitts always looks like a rap name to me

by jhmg16 on Jan 3, 2011 2:47 PM PST reply actions

Awesome.

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die, anymore than it ceases to be serious when people laugh." - George Bernard Shaw

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 3, 2011 3:18 PM PST up reply actions

All day on the radio every host is cupping Matt's balls

going on and on how he has to get the start. It pisses me off because he’s a liability, and turnover machine. Charlie showed he can manage the game and not gift wrap it for the other team.

I don’t want to see him suit up for another Seahawks game again. Sure he’s got some good games left in him, but for the last three years they’ve been about 1 good for every 4 catastrophic performances. Each followed up by a presser about how he knows better than to do that shit.

by hazbro24 on Jan 3, 2011 2:56 PM PST reply actions

I agree.

listening to the radio today it has seemed strange to me how there hasn’t even been a discussion going on, it just assumed Matt should start. That being said I understand the point, that protecting the ball and avoiding mistakes may not be enough against the Saints and while I think Charlie may be the better option week to week I can see an argument for Matt having a better chance of putting together a huge game. Still I think there should at least be a discussion, not just an assumption that its Matt’s game.

by wetzelcoal on Jan 3, 2011 3:10 PM PST up reply actions

Completly agree.

By starting Matt you’re basically rolling the dice that he has one of his 1 out of 4 good games. I think the chances are a lot higher that Charlie can manage the game and keep us in it.

We’re not going to re-sign him. Let’s move on now.

Most of the Radio guys are clowns. Or every one wants to stay on the star players good side for access/interviews.

by BigWalt on Jan 3, 2011 3:18 PM PST up reply actions

I keep thinking of the Patriots

Drew Bledsoe was the starter, went down with injury. They put in their untested sixth-round-pick backup, guy by the name of Tom Brady. First game was ok, second game was pretty bad (his QB rating was 58.7). But his third start, something clicked and the guy threw for 364 yards and 2 TD’s, led the team to an overtime win. His 4th start was even better, QB rating over 148. The rest is obvious history.

Not that Charlie is comparable to Tom Brady, but if he starts this weekend, it will be his third start. You never know, right?

by NinjaHawk on Jan 3, 2011 3:15 PM PST reply actions

You're right. He isn't.

He was picked earlier in the draft.

Seriously though, he isn’t because Brady got 3 straight starts, Charlie’s gotten a hodgepodge of random and mostly unprepared or overmatched opportunities this year.

He should have been starting from at worst, week 12 on. It’s a shame it’s come to this, where there is no longer a “right or wrong” move, as any move is poison now, you simply pick which kind.

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die, anymore than it ceases to be serious when people laugh." - George Bernard Shaw

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 3, 2011 3:21 PM PST up reply actions

How do you practice two QB's, each with their own playbook?

Expect some confusion from our line and receivers Sunday.

by Brandon8 on Jan 3, 2011 3:17 PM PST reply actions

more then usual?

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

by Hancock.Brett on Jan 3, 2011 3:21 PM PST up reply actions

I'm on the fence

I’d be firmly in the Whitehurst camp if Hass hadn’t had such a good game against NO in NO. A decent argument could be made for either guy as the one who gives us the best chance to win. Note that comment is contingent on Matt being basically at 100% health or as close to it as possible. Gimpy Hasselbeck is an interception machine.

by Keasley on Jan 3, 2011 3:20 PM PST reply actions

Hasselbeck is an intetception machine.

No need to qualify it with his injuries or age. He turns the ball over way to much, takes way too many chances even when he plays “well”.

Listen to me

by sadface on Jan 3, 2011 3:31 PM PST via mobile up reply actions

Ungh

Really, Pete? After watching Whitehurst play yesterday, compared to Matt’s last few games, it seems the only thing Matt does better than Whitehurst is go through his progressions under pressure. Yesterday, it seemed that the first time Charlie would feel pressure, he’d pull the ball down and look to run. The upside is that Charlie is actually capable of running (but you MUST slide, Charlie), but it’d be nice to see him stick around in the pocket just a touch longer.

On the other hand, Charlie was much better at completing the swing-out passes to the backs which seemed pretty successful. Charlie was also able to run the ball effectively. And he appeared at least as proficient at the medium-to-deep passes when those were attempted. Charlie’s also better able to hand the ball off without the contortions Matt has to go through to do that with his wrist injury.

I can understand Pete wanting to soften the blow for Matt and his many fans. Also makes sense not to tip his hand to the Saints until he has to. I hope that’s what he’s doing. Trying to prep two QBs with entirely different skillsets and, as we saw yesterday, completely different playbooks, is a recipe for disaster. Better to help prep Charlie to expand those plays he’s comfortable with and so show the Saints something new on Saturday.

Also, the best case scenario for a Charlie start on Saturday is the Hawks win, Charlie plays well, and the Hawks have a legitimate option at starting QB for next year. Perhaps the Hawks don’t need to draft a QB early. That is a much higher upside than the best case scenario for Matt, in which the Hawks also win, Matt plays well, and we go into next season knowing we have an old, injury-prone QB who occasionally plays well but whose skills are in decline. We already know that.

Worst case scenario with both QBs is the same. We leave the game knowing the Hawks need to address QB in a big way.

So, Pete, let’s roll the dice a bit and see just what Charlie can do for us. He got us to the playoffs, is showing improvement, and, unlike Matt, has the potential to be a valuable contributor to this team for years to come.