Pete Carroll Wants A Game Manager At QB? You Bet

to describe a guy who can exploit match ups. I like that. I get that.

The problem I have with the “game manager” tag, though, is that there are games when you don’t have a choice about throwing it 40 times. However, like you said, Pete uses the words differently than the typical fan. I think he really means a guy who is careful with the ball. Some of the elite QBs are careful with the ball, which makes them game managers.

Truth is, though, reading too much into what Pete says is silly. He spends a lot of words in interviews trying to inflate his currently average players with optimism and confidence. I am fine with that, but I don’t read too much into the tea leaves. Like you said, if Pete could get his hands on a franchise quarterback right now he would do it in a heartbeat. Even if his game plan was not to throw it 40 times per game. A lot of his current interviews really sound like he is trying to verbally give Jackson some confidence.

This ain’t your daddy’s NFL, the rules favor passing. It is better to have a QB who can sling it and not need him, than it is to need a QB who can do that and not have him.

I’m quite sure a strong arm, accuracy, and all the rest figure in there too. Look at the T.E. & W.R. corp, the investment in the O-line & some nice R.B.s . Hell yes he wants guy that can put those guy to work. Me too.

Until this brand new line has time to come together it is going to be a lot of scrambling and running for his life. We really haven’t gotten a chance to see what this offense can or can’t do under Tarvaris as he has had not time and barely played with the first team WRs. He is mobile as hell which is big upgrade. He has a strong arm on him and he is young, again, big upgrade. Bevell better than Bates, upgrade. Rice upgrade. TE upgraded. Cornerbacks hopefully upgraded by size and talent over the always beaten Jennings.

It could be a rough year for us, but then again, it is the NFL and that means 8-8 or 9-7 is not inconceivable and winning the division and going to the playoffs again.

The O-line need time and time will tell.

To me a game manager is a QB who is efficient. He makes the most of the talent around him, the scheme in place for him, and the team across from him on gameday. So if he throws it 15 times a game or 50, it shouldn’t matter because consistency should be his strong suit. He would have the team in position to win with his play. A lot of the pass attempts variation could be due to how your defense is playing, personnel injuries, and weather conditions. Favre or Marino would throw even in a hurricane whereas game managers would not as much (ignoring other factors intentionally). Dilfer was not a game manager, he was along for the ride (and to handoff to Jamal Lewis).

I think the problem with the concept of managing a game is that it evokes the emotion of watching so-called “game managers” play. A game manager in the modern vernacular is another phrase for “quarterback who is winning, but we can’t really explain why, because, dodge-ram-it, he kinda sucks most of the time.”

Game management in the Carrollian sense (copyright me 2011) is more along the lines of “Guy who won’t lose you the game, and won’t often be asked to win you the game.” It’s what Bill Belichick expects of all of his players — “do your job.” If Jackson or Whitehurst can distribute the ball, set up the run, make plays with his feet, and, above all, protect the pigskin, he will be “doing his job.” Part of that, though, will also be finding Mike Williams in single coverage 30 yards downfield, hitting Tate in stride for Harvinian affect, etc etc. 5-yard dink and dunk down the field is more “Captain Checkdown” than "Game Manager.’

Great article, Scott!

…you’re going to need a hell of a lot more from your own quarterback than “just don’t lose us the game”. The modern NFL is a scoring race as much as it is a chess match these days.

We want a guy that manages the offense really well, and can keep us moving and get us into the best plays, that allows whole team to function

By Manager he means that he wants a guy who’s smart enough to read the defense and make the right call at the line. If you can do that and play within your physical limitations you will be successful.

I think Hasselbeck was pretty good at the managing part but not so good about playing within his limitations. The biggest knock on Matt was that he would get frustrated and just throw it up there.

I think that Colt McCoy is going to be successful because he is this type of QB despite his limitations. Super competitive, smart and he doesn’t force throws he can’t make.

Yes, Peyton Manning makes a crappy Colts team look good, and yes an elite pass rusher makes an otherwise ordinary front 7 look more fearsome. But having a lot of above average players at every position is another way to win, and it looks like that’s what they are trying to do. When a “good” QB comes along, they will get one I think. When I see what the Cards gave up for Kolb, I am happy we didn’t put our eggs in that basket. I’d rather we keep getting better and wait for the right opportunity.

…play 4 down football. I know I’m a broken record on this, but a QB who gives you 5 YPA and a rushing game which averages you 3.7 is fine if you’re taking all 4 downs to gain yardage. Run on 3rd and 4 knowing you can run again on 4th and 1. Try to air it out on 2nd and 2 knowing that if you miss you get 2 chances, not 1, for short yardage goodness. And so on.