Why Ryan Tannehill Makes Sense for the Seahawks
by SeattleAztec on Jan 2, 2012 9:11 AM PST
Email
Print
Many in this years draft will be marveling at Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III if he decides to go pro. The two have been electrifying this year and show strong signs of being able to translate that to the NFL. However, these types of players always go top-5 and surely the Seahawks would not trade draft spots for one guy. Here's a couple reasons why: the Seahawks value the quarterback position less with a strong running game and they are establishing themselves as a team who builds through the draft. With that said, the next, and still very good option, is Ryan Tannehill. Here's why he will be a good quarterback and why it makes sense that the Seahawks would pick him.
Ryan Tannehill isn't merely a wide receiver turned quarterback. He went to Texas A&M as a quarterback, but didn't win the job as a freshman. With his athleticism and willingness to do what's best for the team, he moved to wide receiver and became the Aggies leading receiver for his first two seasons. That's actually pretty impressive in itself. But in his junior season he became the backup quarterback as his coach saw him becoming the starter next season and wanted to develop him. Well, the Aggies struggled under then-quarterback Jerrod Johnson and Tannehill stepped in, leading them to six straight victories.
Tannehill has proven to be an athletic quarterback with a good arm, though he needs to improve his decision making. He is very accurate and puts good zip on the ball in short to intermediate throws, and has fairly decent deep ball accuracy (difficult to tell because he doesn't throw a lot of them, which is most likely a result of running a west coast offense). He certainly has good arm strength and can put good touch on the ball for the deep throw though. Like stated before, Tannehill needs improvement on his decision making when reading defenses and deciding where to throw, which would certainly come with more experience at the position.
What is most striking about Tannehill is what he does when the play breaks down. He has good pocket awareness and keeps his eyes down field when getting away. But when there's nothing there, boy can he run. He is like a faster version of Aaron Rodgers when it comes to running the ball (which is a very underrated part of Rodgers game).
Tannehill definitely has the size and intangibles to do it as well. Standing at 6'4" 220, he could put on some weight to help improve his durability, though he has already proven to be very durable in college. He's also been an All-Big 12 First Team Academic three years in a row, showing he's a sharp kid.
Enough about the kid though, here's why it would make sense the Seahawks would draft him. Starting with Pete Carroll and Darrell Bevell's desire to have a mobile quarterback with a big arm. Darrell Bevell also runs a west coast offense, keep that in mind. Tannehill is an answer to all of that. Looking at Tannehill, he's played under Mike Sherman's pro style west coast offense the past four years. That's right, the same Mike Sherman who coached the Packers from 2000-2005 and had Darrell Bevell coaching under him on offense for all those years... Oh and John Schneider was there for most of Sherman's run as well. Seems to be an interesting connection there. Tannehill would be going to a very similar offense that he ran in college, which is great because that's exactly what he needs with little experience at the position.
With the connection the Seahawks have to Tannehill, this pick just seems so logical. And if you give him some time to develop, I think he's a very solid quarterback for the Seahawks in the years to come.
Please, before you respond to this telling me what you think about the kid, watch some film of him below, and try to break it down. I'm tired of people just repeating what they read in scouting reports. I've read it all before and he looks more promising watching him than reading about him.
DK edit: Thanks to DraftBreakdown for the excellent videos, JPDraftJedi,Mari0clp, JMPasq, and more for putting them together.
192 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Rob Staton has talked about him quite a bit and has compiled some video of Tannehill.
Tannehill vs Baylor.
Tannehill vs Oklahoma St.
Tannehill vs SMU.
Tannehill vs Kansas
Staton isn’t high on him and I tend to agree. He’s something like a less athletic, more raw Jake Locker. The thing I disagree with SeattleAztec on is his accuracy, he doesn’t have consistent accuracy and he’ll have throws that just get away from him. He’s a very interesting prospect but he’s a pretty huge project, he’s not a first round pick in my mind.
by Nate Dogg on Jan 1, 2012 5:28 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
It seems like I'm watching the same play over and over.
The only time he passed over the middle was after OK ST intercepted his staple sideline comeback a couple of times.
Perhaps that’s just the offense they’re running, but I get the feeling NFL DBs will thrive on those kinds of passes.
i dont think you watched the entire clips. he passed down the middle a bunch of times
apart from bad decision making and trying to force things in too much. i really like him. he can fix those things. he’s strong powerful, seems to be aware of his surrounding, athletic, and calm. he can make throws across the body with some good force. he needs to pack on some more weight and develop more zip, i know he can.
he’s not worth a first round pick especially where we are drafting and our needs.
lb – depth, de – immediate, dt – depth, cb – nickle (healthy!), and this depends on if we sign marshawn and red. i think if we can sign a lb/de hybrid player we have to go for him.
our lb and de are both old and vulnerable to injury. we have bunch of question marks and young players
i would sign tannehill in the 2nd round hands down. he can extend plays. if you watched the seahawks the qb’s and rb’s who extended the plays killed us this season.
tannehill has that ability and has the right coaching staff to coach him up on what passes not to make. i dont know if he’s deep pass are suspect when you consider he’s pretty good at passing across the body or on the move 25-30 yd passes. i really like that he doesn’t delve on mistakes and he’s a fighter. there was alot of dropped passes by the wr’s.
There were not a lot of passes down the middle that weren't go routes.
And a good portion of the passes to the middle were incomplete. Very few crosses that weren’t TE/RB outlets.
His staple pass was the sideline comeback route – WR gets the DB to turn on a fake Go and comes back to a timed pass. That says “doesn’t read through progressions” to me.
Here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXDEzCf3C7Y
First INT is a communication break down between him and the receiver. Second one he tried forcing it in there. But overall, he looked very
cont..
he looked accurate against the LSU defense and can definitely zip it in there.
Toolsy project. Kinda prefer Davis over Tannehill.
Don't be an idiot. If an idiot would do that, then don't do it. Muahahahaaha back on twitter
Tannehill definitely has potential.
I’m just not sure the difference is big enough that I’d want the Hawks to spend a first round pick on him rather than a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a guy like Foles or Cousins.
Is anyone saying Tannehill will go in the first?
I’m thinking he goes on Saturday, but I guess somebody could reach.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
I'd be surprised...
If only two QBs go first roun someone(s) is going to sneak up the draft board.
by Seahawcla on Jan 1, 2012 7:06 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
He's in the top 5 in QBs,possibly top 3 if Jones keeps falling.
Could go early 2nd but I doubt he is on the board when the Hawks make their 2nd pick.
Foles
Foles is terrible. He is immobile which instantly takes him off our draft board. He has terrible accuracy. The only thing he has going for him is solid arm strength.
by TheClaymore on Jan 2, 2012 1:42 PM PST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Cousins fits this offense MUCH better
As in, Foles doesn’t fit it at all. And I’m not a big fan of Cousins either.
by Matt Erickson on Jan 2, 2012 6:20 PM PST up reply actions
Did anyone watch last years draft?
Not many expected Jake Locker going 8th and Christian Ponder 12th last year, but they did. If last years draft was an indication of anything it’s that teams are willing to pull the trigger if they think they’re getting their guy. And with rookie pay salaries declining tremendously it sort of makes sense. But, I would still like a situation where the Seahawks could trade down later in the first and get another draft pick. And regarding his accuracy, maybe I put too much weight into it, but I liked what I saw against LSU in last years Cotton Bowl. He was fitting it in some tight windows against that tough LSU defense. He did have a couple bad turnovers too!
You also have to remember that 7 teams drafted a "QBOTF" last year so that's 7 less teams doing so this year.
The QB market is decent for trades and free agents. There’s a lot of teams with a QB they see as “QBOTF” or franchise QB now. And in the 2nd round, two teams ahead of Seattle wont be drafting a QB in the 2nd because they already did in the first.
I will not be surprised if only 2 QBs go in the first round.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 2, 2012 10:21 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I would be very surprised if Jones declares.
And if he does, I doubt he’s taken in the first. He’s very raw and won’t adapt well at all to the NFL if he leaves college now.
by Matt Erickson on Jan 2, 2012 6:21 PM PST up reply actions
I would be ok with Tannehill.....
I’ve watched him quit a few times and would be OK with him as a second round pick. However, I do see him as a project and like the FO to address our piss-poor QB situation NOW.
How do you propose we do that, exactly?
There’s only two top shelf QB’s in the draft and they look like they’re out of reach. There’s Matt Flynn in free agency… and that’s it there.
It’s not like franchise QB’s are just out there waiting to be picked up.
Matt Flynn
I just watched Flynn put up record numbers against a playoff team fighting to stay away from New Orleans in its girst-round game. T-Jack couldn’t put up those numbers against a high school team. Sign Flynn, draft a young QB in the first three rounds to compete with Portis as QB in waiting and let T-Jack play out his contract as our backup.
Flynn cannot be worse than Jackson. T-Jack is simply not capable of carving up any NFL defense the way Flynn did yesterday. Flynn shouldn’t cost as much as Kolb due to fewer starts and a much smaller body of work. But I’d certainly be willing to gamble some of Paul Allen’s money to find out how good he is.
No team is going to sign Matt Flynn and then draft a QB in the first 3 rounds.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 2, 2012 10:23 AM PST up reply actions
Why not?
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 10:28 AM PST up reply actions
The Seahawks will need a backup......
The Seahawks will need a #2 QB after 2012. I can’t see CW still in the mix, and I doubt Jackson would stay after being replaced.
Well, in this scenario where they sign Matt Flynn, Jackson really doesn't have a choice.
He signed on a reasonable salary next season, so the Hawks have no reason to cut him. If he wants to sit at home like Carson Palmer, then let him do it.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 2, 2012 10:38 AM PST up reply actions
Jackson stays foe @(
I didn’t state that clearly…..my bad. What I’d like to see is the FO sign Matt Flynn as #1, draft Tannehill in round 2 as a #3 for 2012, and let Jackson be #2 for the remaining year of his contract while Port is mans the practice squad.
In 2013, we have Flynn as incumbent starter, and a competition between Tannehill and Portis for #2 & #3. If Flynn falters, the other two will have some experience and be able to challenge if necessary.
II think Matt Flynn is going to get paid.
Any team that signs him should want to use a 2nd round pick on a player that’s going to help Matt Flynn, or help the team now. Give him less of a chance to falter, not insurance if he does.
A 2nd round pick is a pretty valuable pick. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a team signing a franchise QB and then drafting one in the first 3 rounds. Matt Flynn is only 26, so he’s not being signed as a 2-3 year starter.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 2, 2012 10:48 AM PST up reply actions
I hope he gets paid by the Seahawks
A second round pick is far less than what we would have to give to move up for Luck or Griffin. I’d do it if for no other reason than never having to be in a QB situation like we had this year.
The Packers drafted Brian Brohm in the second round in 2008
Of course, Rodgers hadn’t proven himself yet, but I would guess they more or less knew what they had.
Not being willing to spend a 2nd round pick after taking a fairly unsure shot like Flynn/Cassel/Kolb is risk-averse thinking, and while it’s a move that can make sense at times, it shouldn’t be seen as a rule to live by, not if the right player falls to you in the 2nd (or 3rd, eh Patriots?)
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think they knew.
I think they were probably pretty assured they had a capable starter. I don’t think they knew they’d get this.
Head of catering.
Flynn should be in the 4 year $30 million range.
Nobody should really be considering giving him 10 or 12 a year with the amount he’s played so he should be looking at a 8 mill a year starter range contract.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
that's rediculous can someone put some game tape of this guy
he came into a game with an impressive oline, some quality wr’s, te, etc. the nfl hasn’t found out about his weaknesses and i am sure even without watching game tape he has some major flaws that the nfl can take advantage of after watching his play for a couple games.
there’s a reason why he was drafted in the 7th round. just because he’s a qb coming out of ne or gb doesn’t mean they are good
It goes both ways.
He came into a game with half his starting offense on the bench and he was playing against a top 10 pass defense. He put up ridiculous numbers and out-dueled Stafford in a shootout. He didn’t win by managing the game. He won by putting up better single-game stats than Rodgers has put up all season (imo).
by GasolineSnuggie on Jan 2, 2012 10:03 PM PST up reply actions
Lions a top 10 pass defense?
I thought their secondary sucked?
Wow, FO has them fourth for pass defense. The Alphonso Smith effect?
http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
The Hawks are drafting at 11 or 12.
That is a decent starting position in which to go after one of the two studs this year. I think RG3 is well within reach.
by brugg on Jan 2, 2012 10:09 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Jacksonville will be a good spot to trade up to.
Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. - Al Swearengen
not a chance
Jacksonville is our competition to get RG3, Gabbart worst QB rating/completion percentage. Yes a rookie, but horrible, new ownership there will want a poster boy QB, Gabbart is not it.
New ownership, not a new GM
Every reason to think they’re getting Gabbert some weapons to keep trying
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 6:01 PM PST up reply actions
Gabbert did suck a whole lot, though.
I could see it going either way.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
Did Jacksonville not have the worst WR corps in the NFL though?
I don’t know how good they are at pass blocking, and I talked a lot of shit about Gabbert throughout the year, but to his credit his numbers improved a little bit as the season went on and he had nothing to work with outside of MJD.
I think they should draft Blackmon, see what Gabbert can do with at least one good option.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 3, 2012 2:37 PM PST up reply actions
I won't say it's never justified to draft a key player very high
and give up after a year, directly drafting his replacement, but the circumstances have to be right. His play was apparently that bad this year — I haven’t watched — but I don’t think the circumstance makes it a realistic option. I don’t know that RG3 is a good enough prospect to make them not pass on him.
Assuming more or less comparable performance & development in Missouri for Gabbert this year, had he not declared, he’d at least be rivaling RG3 as the 2nd QB in this draft, and it would be a situation where Gabbert would be the “incumbent” and Griffin the challenger, as it were, being a late riser with this year’s performance. Gabbert was projected to have been a top round 1st rounder, for 2012, before declaring early.
Jacksonville taking a QB is not outside the range of possibility, but it’s absolutely not something that should be expected nor anticipated.
Head of catering.
Not to bogart the thread... but the fact that this FO had Gabbert so highly rated (#1 QB?) scares me.
In between him, Charlie, and Jackson, ugh.
#1 according to Staton
Staton also was pretty wrong about what QBs we were looking at in the off-season, particularly Carson Palmer. I think his source might be a little iffy.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 3, 2012 2:21 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think he's been shown wrong on the Palmer thing, am I wrong?
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
His claim was that a trade was already in place
Here. Considering it didn’t materialize even though we apparently initially agreed to a straight-up 1st rounder, I think that’s as close you can get to being shown wrong when a move you predict doesn’t happen.
It’s what happens with sources regardless. Most of the leaked information out there is strategically leaked.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 3, 2012 4:53 PM PST up reply actions
Who would use a little-known Brit to make a "strategic leak"?
Those kinds of things go throw guys like Schefter or La Canfora.
It’s much more likely that there was discussion but it just may not have been as finalized as Rob (or his source) thought. Changing circumstances (an extended lockout or Dalton looking better in camp) or a change in feelings (Mike Brown deciding to be a dick or Pete deciding we couldn’t get a Palmer-lead offense together in time) might have led to the deal being shelved.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 4, 2012 12:38 PM PST up reply actions
Regardless. Not very reliable.
The how or why is secondary.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 4, 2012 3:25 PM PST up reply actions
Is there a reason to think he was wrong about Palmer?
Seems like the price changed quite a bit as his situation went downhill.
by Nate Dogg on Jan 3, 2012 2:45 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
Most of the league liked Gabbert pretty good.
They just didn’t think he was a top-three kind of QB prospect. He was understood to be raw, which makes cutting Garrard & starting Gabbert so quickly an indicator of personnel mismanagement by Jacksonville, but he was a rather complete and clean QB prospect.
I don’t think it’s worrisome that he was their top QB. I dunno how Jacksonville is using him or developing him, but him failing as a rookie there doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have developed into something good here.
Head of catering.
Yeah, he might have rated #1 on some boards in terms of ceiling, but nothing I heard about him suggested he should be starting by week three.
I have a feeling that there was something up with Garrard that justified him being released (maybe I’m missing something, but why wasn’t he signed by someone else?) but they totally seemed to mis-manage Gabbert. Now what choice do they have, seems like if they bench him now, it will look like they are already throwing the towel in, so they’ll probably get him some help and give it another go.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 3, 2012 2:40 PM PST up reply actions
Garrard's back was messed up.
He might have sucked it up to play for his team, but when a couple other teams tried to sign him and he said he couldn’t play.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Gabbert's stock shot up once Luck went back to school.
Everybody went in panic mode when it came to the QB class. It was a weird, weird draft with weird, weird circumstances.
We'll all have a better idea in a few weeks
when we’ll see if Indy picks up Manning’s option.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Some good trade partners higher up too
Bucs and Jax, specifically.
This off-season isn’t that bad, opportunity-wise.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 10:28 AM PST up reply actions
He will be gone in the middle of round 1
QB’s are the coin of the realm in the NFL. He has the arm for the deep ball and has more experience than RG3 working under center. In my mind, that is a huge advantage. You can see him come off primary receivers to a secondary target. He hits the deep out consistently and runs like a deer. At 6-4, 220 he has the size one needs in the NFL to survive. I prefer him to RG3 because of his measureables and experience in the WCO.
You have to ask, how much better will the Seahawks be if they use all of their draft picks themselves and hit on a QBOTF. We could go after Flynn in FA, draft Tannehill and keep TJ. That solidifies the QB position pretty well with young QB’s that could subsequently be traded for picks as they develop.
Who's going to draft him?
The QB needy teams all pick top ten, and then us and maybe the Chiefs. I don’t see him going that high. And I don’t see a team behind us dropping a first on a QB.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Times have changed
The new rookie salary cap means it isn’t necessary to devote $10 million per year to a rookie QB and force him to start immediately. They now make $2 to $5 million per year. Teams can now select a QB and afford to keep him on the bench for a couple years. The number of teams that will select a QB like Tannehill just increased tremendously. Do to the high number of injuries (see Peyton Manning) a team cannot afford to have a bare cupboard of QB talent behind an overpaid starter.
I understand times have changed,
but some of the things you’ve been predicting the last couple days seem a bit over reaching.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
The pendulum has not swung that far.
Just because teams now find 1st rounders affordable doesn’t mean they’re going to stockpile them. Those picks are valuable and teams already committed to a QB are going to first look to address other needs.
umm no
teams that spend entire drafts picking qb’s will have a pretty crappy or inconsistent team. you need a team not a qb to win superbowls.
stop reading professionals blogs and making it your own
we won with a running game and setting it up for play action. it obviously works. seattle, arizona, sf. yes we all know arizona and seattle arent going to the playoffs but i guarantee that most teams are glad we are not. we are dangerous especially now.
with the 1st rd you look for immediate impact players that hopefully fulfill the need of the team. if that guard from stanford is available where we draft we need to draft him. trade what’s his face and be set for in the oline for years to come, barring no injury. we shoot for qb’s later in the round or a fa. there seems to be some potential jackson replacement starters in the fa.
someone please post up the fa’s for next year or potential fa
Meant for Patches Pal I assume?
Also, shift. My friend, it will make people respect you more as a poster. I guarantee it.
by MT Olson on Jan 2, 2012 10:58 PM PST up reply actions 4 recs
I agree with Tannehill being the best option of the second tier QBs
Much better than Jones or Foles from a talent/fit standpoint. He’s not my absolutely preferred option, but I definitely wouldn’t complain if he’s what we go with high in the 2nd. Still, realize that does mean another year of TJ, and against the teams we’re facing that’ll be a big losing season. I’m ok with that though.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 10:30 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Tannehill with development could be a beast
has the arm, progression skills (doesn’t seem to have much of a problem checking down quickly), and legs to stretch plays. Really big, too, I love that size. Could be a real gem.
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 2, 2012 12:30 PM PST up reply actions
I am of the position
that the Seahawks should not trade up to go after Luck or RG3 this season, but should instead go BPA at positions of need like DE, LB, RB, and grab someone like Tannehill or Moore in rounds 4, 5, or 6.
I don’t think Tannehill will be a top tier QB ever, but at a value pick, he’s worth a shot.
Then, go out and pay Matt Flynn unless GB takes a chance by franchising him. Cut Jackson and Whitehurst, and have at em in 2012.
Franchising Flynn
If GB tags Flynn, he’d be making as much or more than Rodgers. Can’t see that being a viable option.
They would franchise him with the intention of trading him and the team acquiring him would work out a contract extension that wouldn't necessarily make him the average of the top 5.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 2, 2012 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
Seems like that wouldn't be too bad of a scenario. Just think of the connections between GB and Sea.
I could see Green Bay preferring Flynn going to Seattle.
by twocolorcrayon on Jan 2, 2012 1:11 PM PST up reply actions
Didn't the Patriots Franchise-tag Matt Cassell?
The idea being not to keep him and pay him all that money…. rather, the team assumes that someone else is willing to pay that much and thrown in a draft pick to trade as well.
Yeah, they did
And it’s not a bad move as long as you don’t need the tag for anything else. It’s not like you need to ask for a 1st rounder, you can settle for a 2nd and still get good value where there was none, as the Pats did.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
Under the new CBA, can a team still withdraw the tag like Ruskell did
with Hill? Or did that get changed?
by twocolorcrayon on Jan 2, 2012 1:14 PM PST up reply actions
You can, but not after the player signed his tender
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 1:20 PM PST up reply actions
FA is before the draft.
Manning will have a home, as will Flynn before the draft. Who needs what will be much clearer then.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Halfway through March, IIRC.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
dont have to cut Whitehurst
I disagree, I’d prefer trying to trade up to get RG3 if price is right… 2 first round picks a 3rd and 5th. What? Too much? He is exactly what JS and PC have said they want. If the price for RG3 goes much more than that, we could be in a great position to trade back. I agree with drafting a position player and not settling for Tannehill.
DE, LB, RB, WR and CB.
Whitehurst is a FA this year
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 2, 2012 6:13 PM PST up reply actions
OK that's it. This Flynn game vs. Detroit is my next deep tape study. I'll post a writeup.
Might take the better part of this month, though. Anyway plenty of time for the draft.
Head of catering.
Tannehill's connection to Schneider and the old GB crew isn't really a reason
for them to draft him, it’s just a reason for them to know whether he’s worth picking up or not. If they pick him or don’t pick him, given those connections, the odds are good that they made that decision because of the connection, but the presence of the connection itself doesn’t necessarily make them more likely to pick him.
I feel if it came to a sitatuation where they tagged Flynn in some fashion, and it came to teams
calling them for trades, they’d take Schneider’s calls first. It seems like there’s still a lot of good connections and soft spots between the two even though they’re both competitors in the same conference.
by twocolorcrayon on Jan 2, 2012 1:15 PM PST up reply actions
True but
I think the connection will have some weight in their decision and if anything be a positive to help him. In general, I think teams see it as a positive when a QB runs a pro style offense in college and run it well.
So here's my question
Which teams might take a QB in the first two rounds? If we assume that 3 QBs will be taken in the first round ahead of us (Luck, Griffin, Jones), is there a team behind us that will take one? Is there another team ahead of us that would pass in the first round but consider it in the second?
From my count we have…
Ahead of us in round one:
Colts (they take Luck regardless of Manning’s neck and 2012 prospects)
Browns
Redskins
Dolphins
Chiefs (if they win the coin toss)
After us in round one (although I doubt any of them draft QB in round one):
Cards
Jets
49ers
Might take a QB before our round two pick:
Any team from the first list that didn’t take one except the Colts (CLE, WAS, MIA, KC)
Vikings (maybe they roll with Webb as the backup?)
Jaguars (not sold on Gabbert, even though the brass is behind him)
Bills (not sold on Fitzpatrick’s long term viability in Buffalo)
Even if we assume 3 QBs will be taken ahead of us in round 1, there isn’t a guarantee we will even get one of the top 6 QBs on the board. One of these teams will get Matt Flynn and one will likely sign Kyle Orton, but there still seems to be a lot of teams in need.
Because of this, I think we really should be pushing for Flynn or to trade up. Since Schneider doesn’t usually trade up (at least, not in the first) it seems like we have one choice outside taking a project and rolling with Tarvaris in 2012.
Don't see the Jets picking a QB in first day
Either established FA or Sanchez gets another year. Same for Cards, and 49ers already have Colin.
So, there’s not actually that many QB-needy teams that don’t already have a significant investment.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 11:15 AM PST up reply actions
Do we know what our rd 2 pick is yet?
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 2, 2012 12:30 PM PST up reply actions
Depends on the coinflip
If we pick 11th in rd1, we pick 12th in rd2, and vice versa.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
Ah
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 2, 2012 1:56 PM PST up reply actions
You guys are working with last years CBA
In the past teams waited for round 2 to select a project / backup QB. QB’s in round 1 were expensive. Now they are relatively cheap. Starting with pick 11 the player selected will be paid the average of the salaries for players 10 thru 25 in the league at their position. All of the franchise QB’s are out of the average. A QB at 11 will cost about the same as Whitehurst. Accordingly,the demand for backup QB’s in the middle of round 1 will be tremendous. This new economic dynamic will also affect the value of Matt Flynn. He will not get franchise QB money. He will have to earn it.
No, this part doesnt have to do with the CBA.
Most teams don’t have the luxury to say “Oh, well, let’s skip this much better player and get a backup QB” in the first round. You have to have a need. There’s not nearly as much need this year.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 2, 2012 11:31 AM PST up reply actions
QBs in round 1 weren't expensive at all
Only top 10 players were prohibitively expensive, the payment spike tailed of quickly after that. Josh Freeman’s rookie contract at mid-1st round was 5 years, 26 mil with 10 mil guaranteed. Cam Newton’s contract is more expensive than that.
Also, you are misreading the CBA, the whole “average wage” thing is in regards to the 5th-year option teams can pick up, not to the rookie wage scale.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 11:41 AM PST up reply actions
Last year was uncapped and had no CBA
Last year at draft time the CBA had not been decided. The picks were subsequently paid under the newly negotiated CBA. Locker was drafted 8th and got only $12 million over four years. This is a huge reduction from Freeman who got $36 million and was drafted 17th in 2009. The effect of the CBA was to reduce the salaries of first round QB’s and other picks by about half. The teams now know it and will draft accordingly by taking more risk on first round QB’s in the draft. They no longer need fear a first round QB, holding out for more money or becoming a budget buster like JaMarcus Russell.
The Seahawks cannot afford to wait until round 2 for a QB because all of those teams ahead of them who might want a QB will have two shots before the Seahawks are on the clock a second time. The best QB’s will be long gone.
Yeah, I know the CBA has reduced money involved
But you are misreading the previous situation if you think the entire first round was prohibitively expensive. Freeman’s 5 million a year and 2 million guaranteed is really very little, it’s just even less now. You’re expecting too much if you think it’ll shift reasoning in a dramatic way for anything except the top of the 1st round.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 1:05 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think we know enough to say it will / won't shift reasoning
I know the CBA wasn’t set in place until after the draft, but I think it’s safe to say teams knew rookie salaries were going down and thus could get players at a cheaper price. But, we haven’t even had a draft with the new CBA in place to say how money will affect decisions. While it may not for coaches, don’t forget that everything in the business world revolves around money. And the NFL is still a business.
Right, this is true
But people are making some wild assumptions on what it will or won’t change, without factoring in how little the rookie wage scale changes for most of the draft.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 3:19 PM PST up reply actions
Pick 11
I might add that pick eleven is going to be like pick 1. There will be alot of demand to trade up to 11 because you suddenly get a quality player at a cheaper price than the guy in the top 10 selections. .
It's not
He misunderstood the CBA rules on rookie payments.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 12:07 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe not totally...
OK, so it’s not like #11 pick was getting a ton of guaranteed money like the first overall was in years past, but rookies pay-scales are still going down. I mean look at someone like Michael Crabtree a few years ago. He was the #10 pick and held out of training camp (and even part of the season if I remember right) because he couldn’t get the contract he wanted. That’s the type of thing I don’t think we’ll see anymore because the pay-scales are more set. That’s why those picks could have more value.
No, he's right about that
There just isn’t a huge barrier between the top 10 and the 11th pick. They’re a scale downwards for the entire top draft, the only big difference between 10 and 11 is in the 5th-year option. It’s not a super-valued pick because of that.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 2:56 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe I'm just being optimistic
But I feel like rookie QBs are beginning to start sooner than before. I know Cam Newton is a special player, but doesn’t his success in his rookie year give any hope that more rookies can do it? I mean, a lot of people questioned him because he ran a spread offense and people weren’t sure if he could run a pro style offense and he ended up throwing for over 400 yards his first two games and has been solid all year. And with Pete Carroll’s ability to get value out of player he picks (KJ Wright, 4th rd and Richard Sherman, 5th rd have both been solid starters in their first year).
I guess we will have to wait for free agency to play out before we can really decide all of this. I have to say I was very impressed by Flynn’s numbers against Detroit and I’ve always seen him as a solid QB. He could be a nice option in FA. And if Pete’s actions in getting a QB for his team have been an indication for things to come, he won’t go through the draft and pick up guys who have already been in the league. But, I see this as something that may change this year after not having a consistent starter at QB. He may think it’s time for the draft.
I think it gives hope, but probably doesn't change the 'sit and learn' dynamic that's been in place for years now
Tannehill looks like a good pocket passer qb who will need a fair amt of time to adjust to the speed of the NFL. Unlike Newton, who is so athletically gifted that he can simply make that transition in one year with only a few bumps along the way.
Flynn is a good option if GB doesn’t shoot his price waaay up, I think. However, if the FO believes that they can get a qb like Tannehill for less than Flynn in a later round (2 onwards) then they should do that instead.
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 2, 2012 12:33 PM PST up reply actions
Flynn is a free agent
Unless you mean if he’s franchised, which I’m not sure is all that likely.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, that was the situation I was referring to
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 2, 2012 1:55 PM PST up reply actions
You lost me at "needs to improve his decision-making".
Some of Tannehill’s decisions as shown in Rob Staton’s video library are on par with 2009 Hasselbeck. That doesn’t scream Carroll/Schneider.
http://17power.blogspot.com
You think they expect veteran decision-making ability from a rookie pick?
That would be worrisome. Decision-making is coachable, at least to an extent.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 2, 2012 1:42 PM PST up reply actions
Especially since he only played QB in college for a year and some change
The talent is there. We just might have to go through another year of Tarvaris
I like his athleticism and his arm strength
But I don’t like how he has a tendency to stare down his receivers. If we trade back in the first to around the 20th pick then I would be okay with him there
How about pass rusher in the 1st then him in the 2nd?
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 2, 2012 1:56 PM PST up reply actions
I would love that
I really do think the Sehawks need a beast pass rusher with the #11 pick and there definitely will be players there available there that could provide that. But, I just don’t see Tannehill falling to the 2nd round. Again, if last years draft taught us anything it’s that teams are willing to pull the trigger early if they think they’re getting their guy. Did anyone expect Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder to go 8, 10, and 12 respectively? I bet most people didn’t see all of them going early but they did.
You might love it
But this is a terrible year to want a pass rusher, it will be a poor value pick at 11 for a pass rusher. We would be reaching weak yeat at DL. I like the kid from Illinois but not that high. Coples is not a pass rusher and that is about it.
Flynn is going to get paid Kolb/Schaub money, I’d rather go after Luck or RG. We are not going to be anything better then mediocre-good until we land a QB that can lead this team successfully.
by Seahawcla on Jan 2, 2012 3:27 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Ehhhh
How do you consider this a terrible year for pass rushers? Have you really looked at all of them? I think it could be a good one and I think after the combine we’ll see their stock go up. You didn’t mention Nick Perry, Melvin Ingram, or Courtney Upshaw just to name a few. There really isn’t ever much hype about them like there are for QBs, but they end up going high. I think we could see a player like Aldon Smith or JJ Watt at #11 and they have proved worth the pick.
All are currently slated
Lower then our pick, reaches currently although times change. Not impressed with Perry at all, not sold on the other two. I like Jones out of Georgia if he declares.
Poor year for pass rushers none in the top ten alone projected backs that up.
by Seahawcla on Jan 2, 2012 4:25 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I would've loved Jarvis Jones
But he already said he’s headed back to school
by Matt Erickson on Jan 2, 2012 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
Whitney Mercilus is your Illinois DE
I wouldn’t think he’s a stretch at 11, I’d much rather take Mercilus at 11 than Tannehill. There is another name at DE that if you want to trade back in the first round to get between 20-25, Vinny Curry (don’t worry no relation) out of Marshall, 6’ 5" 263lbs. 72 tackles, 21 for loss, 11 sacks, 6 forced fumbles and 3 blocked kicks… some project him as a 3-4 OLB, but could be used as a pass rushing DE in a 4-3. Melvin Ingram South Carolina is another pass rushing DE that would be there around the same 20-25.
If we keep 11 or 12, I’d take Mercilus in a heartbeat.
I don't understand how he is mentioned as a possible 1st rounder and A Davis isn't even mentioned
I see a lot more risk with Tannehill and not that much more ceiling. Am I missing something?
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
Austin Davis from Southern Miss?
Tannehill at least has the measureables you’d like to see in a starting quarterback standing 6’4" 220 with a strong arm. I haven’t seen much of Davis, but he looks a little undersized and doesn’t have that great of an arm. I also question whether his success has been due to the offense he’s been running, and with Tannehill you know he ran a pro-style one.
From watching the videos,
Tannehill has an arm. His mobility is great, and I liked his pocket presence for the most part. Moving up in the pocket and looking down field.
His throwing motion seems a bit weird. Anyone else notice?
by Neonjerseysplease on Jan 2, 2012 3:39 PM PST reply actions
Ryan Swope looks really good as well.
by Neonjerseysplease on Jan 2, 2012 3:46 PM PST up reply actions
His throwing motion does seem a little different
Sort of a 3/4 motion that’s a little cleaner than Phillip River’s motion. I think it could definitely be refined in the NFL. Who knows though, it could be a beneficial. If you watch the great QBs, they’ll actually alter their throwing motion a little bit depending on the throw, how the pocket is set up, where defenders are in coverage, if they’re moving, etc.
yeah i noticed that too
and the way his body is positioned makes his throws erratic. one play its accurate the next its not. but when he seems to throw in a more conventional manner it seems more accurate
I have no problem with Seattle mortgaging the future for Luck.
Though, I believe the most beneficial scenario for Seattle is them getting Flynn for ~4 years, $30 million in free agency and drafting BPA in the first few rounds; this is simply because Flynn has shown his potential and the cost is not prohibitive (++++++ draft pick saved since they wouldn’t need a QB).
So far, PCJS have hit on their draft picks (Okung, Thomas, Tate, Chancellor in 2010 and Wright, Sherman, Baldwin in 2011 – maybe WT3 and Carpenter/Moffitt down the road), so it seems safe to assume that Seattle will come out of future drafts with at least a couple starters. Yes, I’m counting Baldwin as a draft pick. My point here, is that, due to PCJS having shown their ability to get late round studs, I’m not worried about trading a 1st or 2nd rounder for a potentially franchised Matt Flynn, or even four 1st rounders for the #1 pick and Luck.
This team can survive mortgaging the future and the reward/risk ratio relative to such a trade is awesomely in Seattle’s favor in such scenarios since they are only a QB away from contention. I find that such a trade is really unlikely to happen though. (And I am a little more concerned about trading up for RG3 – simply because he is less refined of a prospect than Luck, though I wouldn’t mind giving away this 1st and 2013’s 1st for a #5 RG3 selection.)
by GasolineSnuggie on Jan 2, 2012 10:46 PM PST reply actions
Difficult to tell
While I think PC / JS value having a high number of draft picks, I think of things like the CW and Marshawn Lynch trades where we gave up draft picks to acquire them. I don’t know if those trades indicate they’re willing to wheel and deal draft picks or if it was only to get players they liked and established in the NFL (well I don’t know that CW was established…)
It will also be interesting to see if the Bill Polian firing has any affect on Peyton Manning’s future with the Colts. Either Irsay wants a coach who can quickly put a team together around Manning to take a few more shots at the SB or he trades him away and takes Luck with the 1st pick. I just absolutely cannot see both of them on the same team with how NFL ready Luck is and how established Peyton Manning is.
The first QB I thought of when looking a Tannehill's motion was Dan Marino
A short compact wind up with his elbow by his ear. here is a link to Marino’s next to last game. Not that I think Tannehill will be as good as Marino but his throwing motion is very similar. Some of you might remember this game and building.
I like Tannehill in the 2nd.
I prefer Berefict in the 1st, even perhaps trading back a few spots and collecting another 3rd or 4th. I think Berefict is going to be real good. Plus Pete loves those Pac 10/12 players.
by FisteeFisterer on Jan 3, 2012 12:14 AM PST via mobile reply actions
You mean Burfict?
The guy’s got anger issues that could spoil what appears to be a really close and young locker room. Besides that, I just don’t see Pete Carroll trying to get another player who will add a couple personal foul penalties a game to our already highly penalized team. Vontaze plays like a savage, but isn’t the type of pass rusher I think we would go after if we don’t go QB first round.
Burfict committed to USC before he was academically unable to qualify
Pete loved him some undisciplined fiery line backers in college, witness Rey “I own the police” Maualuaga.
To improve, they should try to become the musical southern cal of the west. - bRuins Nation poster on the Stanford band.
Pete and co. have put themselves in a really tricky situation with QB's.
They’ve brought in “their guy” in Jackson, who has been mediocre to OK but the fan base is decidedly not on his side. Whomever is brought in next year will be the popular choice to start, unless he’s a very low round pick. This is where it gets so tricky for Pete, and pretty much forces him to make a big move for RG3. If he takes a Tannehill or someone in the second, people will be screaming for him to start no matter what happens, and it’s pretty much assured that said QB will not be ready to start because he’ll be “developmental”.
But if Pete and Schneider go the late-round angle, and Jackson starts and plays the whole year, and the team struggles or doesn’t improve, the fanbase will also be angry.
I’m betting Pete is really pissed that Barkley isn’t coming out.
Flynn would get around that problem.
by Nate Dogg on Jan 3, 2012 2:24 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
Not sure yet, but he's should definitely be considered as a solution for the QB spot.
Him being a free agent makes him very interesting. If you do a write up on him let me know and I can try to make some gifs you can use if you’d like.
by Nate Dogg on Jan 3, 2012 2:41 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
Det's defense isn't bad, either, at least top half depending on how you look at it
Flynn shredded them. Like the Shredder.
FYI that’s Flynn there…a bit squished….also, anyone else think he looks a lot like Matt Damon? How cool would it be to have Jason Bourne as your QB, huh?
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 3, 2012 2:58 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think Pete Carroll really gives a shit what we think.
Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or fucking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. - Al Swearengen
by Lo Pann on Jan 3, 2012 11:19 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
How is Jackson "their guy"?
They’ve invested less in him than they have Whitehurst and he’s a FA after the season. To make an analogy: he’s not Pete’s crush, he’s not a future wife, he’s just the last QB available when the bar closes.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 4, 2012 12:42 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
How do you know this?
I’d say that the circumstances support my contention than yours.
a) they chose Jackson, not someone else
b) Jackson played for Bevell in Minnesota, and Bevell clearly liked him
c) they didn’t pay him more because, well, no one else would
I don’t see any evidence at all to suggest that he’s not this team’s “crush”, other than the fact that we can all see: that he’s not very good. But that’s assuming that this FO knows something about quarterbacks, and when you factor in a third for Charlie and the (supposed) interest in Gabbert as our #1 QB on the board, I don’t see any evidence that they do yet.
To be clear, I’m not saying that Pete’s in love with Jackson and that he’s our long term starter. I just see absolutely no evidence otherwise.
You're ignoring some of the most important facts before us
in order to support some of fantasy that Pete and John are incompetent or somehow don’t understand how football works.
(1) We barely paid TJ anything. $5M/year is what we’re paying Charlie and about 30-40% of what starting QBs make.
(2) TJ is signed to a very short-term deal. If he was going to be the QBotF, we’d have locked him up for 5-6 years. Guys like Kolb and Fitzpatrick and Vick (as uneven as they are) don’t go for 2-year deals.
(3) We didn’t spend any draft or trade capital on him (unlike Charlie), so we don’t have that much investment in him.
(4) If we weren’t able to get the QBotF last yeart makes sense that we’d go for a stopgap familiar with the system that could take a hit or two. TJ fits this profile exactly.
TJ looks like a duck, talks like a duck, swims like a duck and craps like a duck. I can’t prove, definitively, that he’s a duck, but he’s probably not a frog.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 4, 2012 1:36 PM PST up reply actions
To be fair, Pete hasn't shown us that he knows how football works yet.
1) We didn’t have to pay TJ anything. Nobody else was willing to pay more, clearly. Why would we pay more than he should get?
2) Yes, he’s signed to a short-term deal. Again, no one else wanted him, so why give him the contract?
3) I’m not sure how much the degree of investment has to do with anything. See 1 and 2
4) Sure, it makes sense. But again, Pete and co. haven’t done things the traditional way at all, so who knows?
I guess the overall point I’m making is that we can’t make any assumptions that because Jackson isn’t very good and isn’t paid very much, he’s not here potentially for the long haul. I’m going to be worried about the quarterback position on this team until the exact moment a quality quarterback takes the field.
Well to be fair.
Winning a lot as a coach shows you know football.
Now winning in the NFL is a different deal.
So what’s your deal?
I dont know but Its clear Tarvaris was brought in to run the show this year, they gave him a second year incase he was phenominal. Until a QB comes in and takes it from him, i dont see him going anywhere. That could happen this year, or in three years or in ten.
Pete has won a lot... in college.
His record in the NFL is not particularly good.
Yup, but winning in college
still means you know football!
That's true.
I’ll be more specific next time. Maybe even mention the year the NFL football is being played, which stadium, maybe which moon sign.
You're stretching.
The picture you’re painting is pretty much the worst case scenario. There are legitimate questions about the Q/PMs ability to find quality quarterbacks, but to think that ineptitude is so deep rooted that they expect TJack to be the long-term answer seems pretty unfounded.
by Nate Dogg on Jan 4, 2012 7:28 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
Oh yeah I'm stretching.
How many years have we been waiting for someone to bring in a decent quarterback, rambled on about “surely the FO knows about this”, and then seen nothing happen?
I almost want to say “TITS OR GTFO”, er, “QB OR GTFO”. It’s frustrating.
What time frame are you talking about?
Are you complaining about this particular FO not replacing Hasselbeck with a QBotF this year or complaining about a previous FO or just angry at the world because we don’t have a Brady or a Rodgers?
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 4, 2012 11:23 PM PST up reply actions
It's a little of both.
If that’s okay with you.
I'm not saying you should think they can find the QBoTF.
I’m saying that thinking they want Tarvaris to be here for the long haul is a stretch. I don’t see any reason to think that’s the case.
by Nate Dogg on Jan 4, 2012 11:27 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
And I don't see a whole lot of reason NOT to think it's a distinct possibility.
It’s not so much that I think they really want Tavaris here as the Seahawks’ future QB. But I will argue that they don’t value the position as much as a lot of other FO’s do, and they’re more willing to take their chances with a game manager type quarterback.
You are both right.
There has been no ringing endorsement or condemnation of Tarvaris from the FO.
Mostly all the condemnation is from the fans, because they all want an Elite QB, and it must be right now or they will revolt.
Tarvaris is an average QB, Does he have upside? Yes, his physical skills are amazing. His mental skills no so great. This is not a knock on his intellegence.
Tarvaris is a big physical QB, with a rail gun for an arm. He often escapes sack attempts using brute strength, he has the mobility that PC craves. His accuracy actually isnt that bad from a physical stand point.
His problem is he doesnt see the recievers getting open before they do. He doesnt see where he should lead receivers. He “Half-reads” the defense. He knows what should be open, but doesnt understand when.
Many people believe that somehow after 19 years of footbal (pop warner statrts at 5 here.) a person is completely capable of changing and learning, but after 24 years things have been so ingrained they cant possibly change.
Here is the thing, This situation really is completely different than Tarvaris’ first situation. It really could go either way. PC might be willing to take an established Average QB instead of reaching for a potential bust. He could also go out and make a block buster trade for a conceivable QB of the future.
Dude, use common sense
Honestly, who would you rather have had come in for QB last year? Kolb? He’s been unhealthy all year and not spectacular other than that. Palmer? The guy has been hurt, just mehh, and in my mind not right for the locker room after he “retired” in Cincinnati. Keep Hasselbeck? In my mind, he would have done better than T-Jack did this year in Seattle. But, he was still hurt some this year and wasn’t able to keep Tennessee in the playoffs. Maybe a 1 or 2 game improvement, but we still miss the playoffs and he again offers nothing for the future.
’
The only real opportunity we had this year to improve our QB situation this year would’ve been to draft Andy Dalton and I know he wasn’t high enough on many people’s boards to be thought of a QBOTF, especially at #25 when improving our line situation seemed more likely. Why he went second round…
Now in comes Tavaris Jackson for 2 years at basically back-up money. Unless we make a bold move up in the draft last year, there wasn’t really an option to get a QB that we could consider “elite” status and invest in heavily. IMO, that’s great management because we didn’t reach or make any rash decisions that might set us back another year or two in this process of finding another QB. No, Pete Carroll knows the QB position is important, and that’s why he’s being especially smart and careful in trying to find one for the future. Don’t you think he’s realized he won 2 NC’s with his college great QBs Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart and not Booty or Sanchez. That’s why he’s going to make sure he gets the absolutely right guy when the opportunity presents itself.
Here we go with the "rash decisions" argument, and the "what would you have done" argument.
Meanwhile, the Seahawks continue to lose games. It’s not my job to find ways for the Seahawks to win, or find ways for them to find a halfway decent quarterback. It’s Pete’s and John’s, and until that happens, I feel free to point out that neither of them have had great success in the NFL (though at least John’s had significant experience in a great system), and that this whole “benefit of the doubt” bullshit is just that… bullshit.
I don’t think that Pete and John honestly think that Jackson’s a long term starter, no. But I’d argue that they’re a hell of a lot more willing to hang with Jackson until every other piece of the team is set other than quarterback. It’s a risky gamble, in my opinion. It may very well work, but if it does, we can’t say that we had any evidence at all that it would. And if it does, they’re very brave and very smart.
Other teams have done it...
The Ravens had a really good overall team for years after their Super Bowl without a long term solution until Joe Flacco. Now they’re an elite team…
The Bears were sorta in disarray for a while at QB while they had a fantastic team as a whole (as evident by Rex Grossman being able to get them to a Super Bowl one year…) Then Jay Cutler came along and when he plays they’re a great team
Now, they haven’t won any championships, but its soon and they’re definitely contenders every year now.
That’s why I’m saying have some patience. It’s frustrating now, yes. But the strategy of building a good team and putting the right QB on it creates the best situation for the most pivotal position on the team.
I wish people would quit bringing up the Ravens.
That’s probably the best long term defense in the history of the NFL. Their coaching staff on the D side is amazing, and their drafting immaculate.
I’m not saying we can’t do that… but do you think we will?
I'm not saying we'll be exactly like the Ravens
But clearly we’re following their model. Build an elite defense (very close to that, I see it accomplished by next season) so you don’t put so much pressure on the QB to win games. Simple as that.
I agree that we're following a defense-first, run-first motto.
Pete says it quite frequently.
The key point is that said motto doesn’t work as well in today’s NFL. Excuse the cliche, but the NFL is a passing league. I’m sure you can succeed with it, but it just seems like you’re taking the tougher route just because you can.
But that’s another argument altogether.
in some ways it is harder, in others its easier
such as finding players for your system.
Also since most teams will game plan to stop the pass, their personel may not be as adept at stopping the run.
Obviously elite players are Elite, but its the “System Players” that are key because they are cheap.
Obviously the Ravens defense is completely different than ours, but both stop the run, and play hard agressive defense, and that has translated into effectiveness.
Clearly we see things differently
And you’re a hard mind to change, even when presented clear evidence. Shit, the 49ers became an elite team this following that model under Jim Harbaugh despite a game manager QB Alex Smith. And do you want to give me some evidence of teams building with a QB first and being successful with it before you just keep making statements? I seem to be the only one doing it. But here I’ll help you: the Falcons with Matt Ryan and the Lions with Matt Stafford are the two most recent examples I can think of that’ve had success. WHEN, IN THE LAST 2 YEARS UNDER PC/JS, HAVE WE EVER HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DRAFT OR ACQUIRE A QB OF THAT TALENT LEVEL? We HAVEN’T! You’re basically just arguing that the Seahawks should’ve had a better draft position to get a QBOTF. Keep living in fantasy land. And for that matter, look at a team who drafter a QB of that talent but didn’t have a team around him: The Rams with Sam Bradford. He’s a super talented QB who I think will have a great career, but obviously he won’t until he gets a good supporting cast around him.
I don’t think you understand, I would love to have a pass-first team and be like the Patriots or Packers. But, welcome to reality, we don’t have Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers. And no, we haven’t had the opportunity to get a QB with that caliber of talent in the last two free agencies OR in free agency. So until we think we can get one in our position, lets not reach and build a great team around it. JUST BE REAL.
by SeattleAztec on Jan 5, 2012 5:32 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe this will help
John Schneider uses the Three Little Pigs as a reference, maybe that elementary-style of story would be easier for you to understand:
"I always likened it to the ‘Three Little Pigs.’ You can build it with straw or sticks. Or you can work your tail off and know that you’re doing the right thing and kind of do it the old-fashioned way and have a big, strong, sturdy foundation. Then you can weather all the storms."
Whoa, easy man. Take a walk.
No need for condescension here, djafrot is perfectly intelligent.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
My bad
I sorta just wanted to introduce this quote in a clever way, but after reading it for the third time I see it was pretty harsh. Apologies.
I think I know what you mean.
For a while (and by “a while” I mean the entirety of my life) I’ve admired sharp, witty banter and at times endeavored to bring it around more in my own life. I know lots of guys like to quote movies and sitcoms but I would, say, take apart the dialogue on “Frasier” or some other acerbic show with a bit more assiduity than most.
…and I would bring into my daily conversations, with friends, witty (and frankly, bitchy) lines either pulled whole or in part from tv or movie dialogue, or more likely inspired by it but made my own in a particular way. And I thought, you know, here’s a great way to spice up my conversations, bring out more dry humor in my social groups, blah blah blah. But more often than not, it just has come out as harsh. I have felt like an inadvertent dick much of my life as a result of it. Cheers. Go Seahawks!
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
I think you are being extremely short sited about PC/JS vision for the team
Sure they are say defense-first, run-first, because that’s what they can do and build on right now. They are able to build up the defense and run game with the players that they can get their hands on right now. They won’t be able to build up the defense until they get an elite passer. That hasn’t been an option for them yet, so they are doing the best with what they got. If run was all they cared about ever then why would they have brought in Miller and Rice in the offseason? They are hoping that in the next year or so they will have an elite passer to throw to them. Those two were also given long term contracts as opposed to TJ, which should show you where their loyalties are. I agree, if run and D was their only vision it would be an incomplete vision, but its not.
they took turns pissing into the bitch's ocular cavities.
This way to the cafeteria!
I think that's what I was getting at
They’re building with what’s available for them, but the long-term goal is to have a balanced offensive attack.
I would urge anyone like djafrot who doesn’t like the direction the team is going to watch this end-of-the-year Pete Carroll press conference. It’s long, but if you’re that concerned you should watch it.
http://www.seahawks.com/videos-photos/videos/Carroll-Offseason-Press-Conference/2dc23d4e-31f9-4f50-9671-d24a7dfcab93
You realize that
we had 4-12 and 5-11 seasone before JS and PC came along?
Did you really think our team was that good that just a new coach could come in and they would suddenly be a winning team?
We were probably the most talent deprived team in the NFL. Literally we were behind the curve in every single position, except Linebacker.
Our QB was injury prone, our recieving corps was led by someone who i honestly dont think could make the team now, our RB situation was Julius Jones, nuff said. Our Oline was the worst in the league and old. Our Dline was young and ineffective, our secondary was terrible.
So your “still losing games” rederick is boring and tired.
You want results, PCJS has given you results in two short years. we have a top 10 defense. That alone is an amazing turn around. Even better is there is a lot more room for improvement too.
PC has given you a Epic Play off win.
He already has as many division championships as Chuck Knox (ring of honor)
Our run game that was pathetic after SA, is not strong again.
We have plenty of issues, a lot of room for improvement, but man, atleast give them the credit they deserve.
If the team was so bad, anything would be better.
I agree that the current system seems to be working… for now. We’re still not winning that many games, and to a great extent it’s because of the lack of a good quarterback.
I’m not saying their plan won’t work. I’m saying that I think it’s risky, that we could be mired in mediocrity for a very long time because we aren’t willing to take a risk on a quarterback. Could be.
And if it’s so “boring and old”, honestly, just don’t read it. There are a zillion other posts and threads on this blog about how awesome this team is, go read those.
Again im not saying Tarvaris is elite, or even top notch, he is average.
That is actually pretty good results considering he has been hit 149 times.
By way of comparison Brees was hit 74 times.
Tarvaris was hit once every 3 drop backs.
Brees once every 8.8 drop backs.
that is really close to three times as often. Somehow Tarvaris is suppose to rise above all of that crappy line play, that with penalties and pourus blocking has left him out to dry all season, fight through a torn pec that would have most people on IR, Lack of an effective run game for the first half of the season and overcome the “hasslebeck” stigma.
Were on the other end Rothlisberger fights through an ankle injury(his front foot not the driving foot)for one game and he is lauded for his toughness and called a true leader for his team.
Our offensive line is vastly improved from the garbage it was, but injuries and personel on the offensive line are definately a huge factor in the passing game.
I'd be curious to have a stopwatch on Brees and TJ
to see the average amount of time it takes to get the ball out. Brees is quick reads and quick release-he makes their line better.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Im not disputing that some portion of of the sacks are tarvaris and system issues.
but 149 hits on a QB is rediculous.
I guess it just gets filtered out because people dont like TJ.
It would also be interesting to break down those hits
on TJ by the first 8 games and the second 8 based on improved line play.
I’d wager that a third to half of those hits are on TJ holding the ball.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
I look forward to you doing that.
Also make sure you keep down and distance in perspective.
Its easier to get out a ball on 2nd and 2 than 3rd and 25.
Also make sure you follow the progression of the reads and when people are open. I have a feeling BMW isnt open much and is one of his first two reads…..a lot.
Remember when Carroll said it was imperitive to keep BWM in the game by passing to him, that is gonna be pretty important.
I've seen enough to know it's not worth the effort.
TJ is bad, Brees is awesome.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Agree with hazbro
to an extent. They still have 3 linemen going to the Super Bowl and that’s not just for keeping up Drew Brees. Obviously they have the best O-line in all of football. But yes, a big reason Brees gets hit less is because he gets the ball out a lot quicker.
EDIT EDIT EDIT
PRO BOWL not Super Bowl gosh dammit.
I wouldn't go so far to call the Saints the best line in football.
I wouldn’t base it on the popularity contest that the pro bowl is at least.
The Texans line is pretty good.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Ehhh
Not that I always listen to or put much weight into it myself, but for what it’s worth, the experts agree with me. I agree that the Pro Bowl is a popularity contest for the most part, but has less impact on O-line selections. It’s not a glorified position like WR or RB where even the common fan knows who the best ones in the league are by the gawdy stats they put up.
The Saints 74 combined QBhits+ sacks= league best
Texans are 86.
Saints 1.87 WPA,
Texans-0.62 WPA
Saints 54.6 EPA
Texans -34 EPA
Saints 4.4(3rd in NFL) Adjusted Sack Rate
Texans 7.3 ASR (22 in NFL)
Saints 4.95 ADJ Line Yards (rushing)
Texans 4.36 ALY
Houston is definately better than our line, but doesnt seem to be in same ball park with New Orleans.
Yeah, the Texans have the best offensive line
Pretty easily.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 6, 2012 8:54 AM PST up reply actions
Well...on the Calabro show right now, Flynn's the hot topic
and I must say, I am enamored.
Heresy grows from idleness.
Check out my story at Fanfiction.net
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7456440/1/Tide_of_War_Mass_Effect_Warhammer_Crossover
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 3, 2012 3:54 PM PST reply actions
Not tricky at all
PC and JS signed Jackson, because he was the better option based on the new OC coming in that knew his system and the short training camp due to lockout… the 2yrs $8M is nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Flynn will get Kevin Kolb money with likely the same kind of opt out that the Cardinals will likely use.
Try and get Flynn, if you cant get him, you try and move up to get RG3 or Luck, if you cant do that, trade back.
If you decide to keep the pick, you don’t ‘reach’ for a QB here. A lot of what Seattle decides to do is highly dependant on what happens with 3 key FAs: Lynch, Bryant & Hawthorne. If we resign all of them, go pass rushing DE: Mercelius (I mentioned above).
Montgomery
Watch out for Sam Montgomery of LSU in the title game. He’s creeping up on people’s boards and after watching film on him I’m very impressed.
Tannehill seemed very inacurate.
Most of teh big plays were made by the recievers where there were a lot of bad throws. I give him credit in that he seems athletic, and can run. On many of the go routes even when he recievers are wide open he under throws them. The out patterns and timing patterns seem timed decent, but the accuracy is definately off. Less toolsy than Portis. Someone will reach for him in the first, I hope its not us.
If it happens, we'll all have a good laugh, right?
Heresy grows from idleness.
Why get Matt Flynn?
"Also, for what it’s worth, if we get Flynn, New England and Detroit are on the schedule!" - SSreporters
by Corax --Nevermore-- on Jan 8, 2012 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Field Gulls
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
