A Look at Green Bay QB Matt Flynn, Part IV
DK edit: re-posted form January 11th.
A Look at Green Bay QB Matt Flynn: part I, part II, part III.
So, including this part, I've now written about 8623 words on Flynn. That's a little much, and if you joined us not for analysis and musings but just for clear-cut conclusions, feel free to skip to the end. I won't mind.
As Jacob Stevens pointed out in his own excellent writeups, it's impossible to watch the Packers play and not be impressed by their scheming and wide receivers. Hark back to my week II writeup, where even rookie Randall Cobb (their version of Golden Tate) just jumped out at you on tape. This game was without the best Packers receiver, Greg Jennings, but even without him their receiving group (including all pass-catchers) looks better than ours ever has this season.
Doesn't that just set off some mental bells? You can never really separate quarterback and receiver play, especially not on such a small sample. Should we really see Flynn excelling as an indictment on Rodgers, as some have joked? Not really. Rodgers is so far beyond Flynn, and such a significantly more complete quarterback, the comparison just seems silly, but they do share certain skills, Flynn can match Rodgers' accuracy on short throws, and he is equally skilled in timing, isolating matchups and throwing wide receivers open. Sure, it helps both quarterbacks that the Packers receivers are so good at creating separation, but you still need a quarterback who can identify and exploit these matchups, or even create them with the right audible or correctly placed ball, which is something Flynn and Rodgers can do, but someone like Tarvaris Jackson can not.
2-5-GB 25 (6:01) M.Flynn pass short left to J.Nelson to GB 39 for 14 yards (A.Smith).
The tight end motions in pre-snap, leaving the Packers with three extra blockers in a max protect scheme, two receivers on the outside. Flynn has a ton of time, checks both his reads, and gets a very easy completion to Nelson. As mentioned, this is an important part of analyzing this game: even without Jennings, the Packers wide receiver group is probably still better than ours, and are a joy to watch in their ability to create separation, physically dominate, and how well-coached they are in concentration as hands receivers. See below: Smith is tightly covering Nelson initially, but Nelson shakes, reverses and frees himself up.
2-7-GB 42 (4:41) M.Flynn pass deep middle to J.Nelson for 58 yards, TOUCHDOWN [N.Fairley].
The preceding play, they ran out of the 12 set, and they go back to it here. Flynn motions out tight end Tom Crabtree to the right, and tight end DJ Williams in prior to the snap, to account for Cliff Avril in a wide 9 on the offensive right. The Lions shift slightly to the underside in response. Flynn fakes the handoff and the linebackers and safety bite pretty hard. The other safety drops back but does very slowly.
Flynn takes a lot of time to wind up on any deep throw, and you can tell he has to kind of put his entire weight behind the ball to push it out, but this one is as well-thrown a deep ball as I've ever seen from him. Houston has good initial coverage on Nelson but expects him to break outside, and the moment Nelson moves to the inside you can tell Houston panics and just tries to keep up with the wide receiver stride for stride. He still gets a hand on the ball, but Nelson secures the ball very well and runs it in from the 18, simply outmuscling the cornerback.
That's 40 yards of air, and from an arm strength standpoint the best throw I have seen Flynn make. Fairley hits Flynn right after the throw. Another display of poise from the young quarterback.
3-6-GB 24 (:28) (Shotgun) M.Flynn sacked at GB 16 for -8 yards (N.Suh).
This one is not pretty (Suh sacks often aren't). The Lions blitz five while playing pretty tight man coverage on the four Packers receivers. Suh is singled up on the left guard (Evan Dietrich-Smith, the Packers had pulled a chunk of their starting offensive line by this point) and pretty much has him beat from the snap, powering through the B-gap. Flynn pats, pats, pats, and despite staring at Suh's side, does not attempt to roll out. Suh does the champion belt/discount double check to celebrate, Dietrich-Smith is flagged for holding
3-8-DET 35 (8:18) (Shotgun) M.Flynn pass short middle to D.Driver for 35 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
This drive looked dead earlier on a sack that was called back on a defensive holding penalty (a very Lions thing to occur), and now the Lions are playing it very close looking for a big stop. They sell-out the blitz, rushing six, while the safeties are playing it close to the first down marker, with no one in high coverage. Packers are in three wide, with Driver in the slot and no one in man coverage on him. This is a lack of adjustment from the Lions, who are overloading the blitz on the offensive left. The safety looks to pick up Driver, but he is giving him too much of a cushion, and Finley runs into the same zone to further confuse coverage. In fact, Finley seems to think he's being thrown the ball, and Driver cuts the ball's path, like a corner intercepting it. More likely a bit of confusion than clever play design, but it works.
From there, it's Driver versus slow safeties (maybe I'm just too used to watching Earl Thomas). You can see another receiver signal touchdown as Driver cuts at the 25-yard line, it's just that obvious a done deal.
1-10-GB 48 (1:56) (Shotgun) M.Flynn pass incomplete short middle to J.Nelson (B.McDonald).
I think "situational awareness" (knowing what plays to make in which situation) is a very important aspect of quarterback play, and it's never more on display than in the two minute drive. Flynn has one of them at the end of each half, and in both he maintains his composure very well and gets the offense back on the line quick when needed. He is allowed to still work the middle as the Packers have enough time or timeouts, and the drives result in a 47-yard FG attempt (and miss) and this drive, which ends in a touchdown.
That said, he is bailed out by the Lions defense back-to-back on this second 2-minute drill: a Suh encroachment gives them a free first down on a 3rd and 3, and the throw following it should have been picked off. Packers in four wide, Flynn reads Driver and Nelson. Driver trips which frees up his man, but this is a really bad decision anyway, a throw into double coverage towards Nelson. McDonald almost has it, but ends up tipping towards Wright, who also gets a hand on it. Blame it on overconfidence, this is one of the worst decision I've seen from Flynn, and should have been a pick.
3-4-DET 46 (1:25) (Shotgun) M.Flynn pass deep right to J.Jones pushed ob at DET 6 for 40 yards (C.Houston).
Packers are in four wide, the Lions in a Tampa-2. Thom Brennaman (and boy, did he and Billick have a good night of it) goes "uh-oh" as Flynn winds up to throw, and it's immediately clear why: the slot receivers locked the linebackers and safeties to the inside of the field, and neither safety is close to the isolated matchup of Houston on Jones running a go on the sideline. Flynn steps up, winds up and lofts it, hitting Jones in stride. This is another good deep ball.
But just look at the way Flynn has to wind up.
That's a whole lot of wind up, and a lot of weight behind it. Thanks to BN's Sander, I just happened to be watching Josh Freeman yesterday. At times, Freeman will plant, and with absolutely no windup just shortarm the throw at his receiver. It looks ridiculous, but he actually throws it with great velocity. Flynn will never be able to do that. He needs a long windup and has to put all his weight behind the ball to push it this far. His mechanics are decent, but that does require perfect timing, and still his success depends on the isolation of the deep matchup.
---
Conclusions
When I look at quarterbacks, especially on the NFL level, I follow the Greg Cosell school of thinking when it comes to elements of play I focus on. These are pre/post-snap reading, arm strength/precision and pocket presence. These are broad, inclusive concepts (reading includes decision making, presence includes pocket movement), and not the only things I look at, but it does primarily determine how highly I regard a quarterback. My notes for Matt Flynn:
- Pre/post-snap reading: This is Matt Flynn's main strength. Several of his quick throws make me think he correctly identified isolated matchups pre-snap, and you can often see him making adjustments on protection schemes or calling an audible. His post-snap reading and decision making are good, including identifying when receivers are open and where to place the ball, but is also very mechanical. You can usually see him go through his progressions steadily, but he rarely does so quickly, and he occasionally misses open matchups. It's a strength in that he does do post-snap progression steadily and often identifies the right matchup, but he rarely releases the ball quickly, especially if his pre-determined read isn't there. That is a significant weakness for a WCO-style passer, but it's also a matter of experience in real games. Besides, it's hard to determine if this is a real problem or if his above-average sack number stems from playing teams that rushed him very efficiently. Another concern is he seems to have a blind spot for reading safeties and over coverage in general, and often releases when saferties are in perfect positioning in over coverage, or releases long balls which give safeties plenty of time to make a play.
- Arm strength/precision: As the debate surrounding Flynn will get more hysterical this off-season, more ridiculous opinions will surface, and you will probably start hearing "he does not have an NFL arm" (or alternately, this kind of stupidity). That's not true, he does. His accuracy as a short-to-middle-range passer is very consistent, and good. He doesn't regularly throw with great zip, but it's not awful either. But he does not have the arm to consistently throw a good deep ball. Both his placement and speed on deep balls are pretty awful, and he definitely lacks the cannon a lot of NFL front offices (including ours) are looking for. That said, his arm strength and technique appear to have improved over the time I scouted (preseason 2010 to W17 2011) and in spite of commonly held beliefs, arm strength can improve over the years. It's not something I would bank on improving much more, though.
- Pocket presence: Pocket presence is a lot of things. It's the ability not just to predict and sense pressure, but also how you respond to it, whether or not you know when to take care of the ball, and how well you move around inside the pocket. Seahawks fans have become very familiar with it because of how bad Tarvaris' pocket presence is. As a concept, it is best exemplified by Tom Brady, who probably has the best pocket presence/feet of any QB in history, at his peak - he's been a little jittery since his injury.
Matt Flynn has a good feel for pass rush, and shows excellent poise in the pocket, by which I mean he is not likely to panic and bail when the pass rush is coming home. His footwork inside the pocket isn't very good, and he fails to step up into the pocket too often, but that is something you expect to see more with a veteran anyway, and something that can reasonable be expected to improve with more real game time. - Other: There are elements that I consider less important or can't scout off tape, but that can be huge depending on your scheme, one of the biggest being situational awareness (Flynn keeps a cool head, but there's not enough drives to conclude anything here), or the ability to throw on the run (Flynn is pretty good at this), the ability to tuck the ball and run if there's nothing open (Flynn is an above-average runner, but is primarily a very good decision maker as a runner), locker room leadership (not something I can measure) and Mattitude (Flynn has very good Mattitude). There's probably more to discuss, but I think I've covered the main points.
Matt Flynn is definitely worth a look for NFL front offices. He reminds me of a young Matt Hasselbeck in many ways, though not necessarily of Hasselbeck at his peak. But like Hasselbeck, he looks like a guy who can certainly excel, but he does need the right system (and talent around him) to do so. The obvious system to point to here is the classic West Coast Offense, and the most obvious team the Cleveland Browns. If not the Browns, then one of the teams raiding the Packers FO/coaching staff, possibly the Miami Dolphins.
What about the Seahawks? Well, I'm not great at trying to predict what this FO will do, so hopefully Scott Enyeart or Rob Staton will pick up some indications later. If I just had to analyze from the barebones, I kind of agree with Rob Staton's initial take: Our front office likes players with athletic upside at every position, including quarterback. And our system calls for a plus-strength arm and plus-speed legs, neither of which Flynn possesses. That said, by comparison Kolb was a very bad fit for our offense, whereas Flynn is a pretty good, but perhaps not ideal fit.
Personally, assuming he won't cost any picks and won't get a contract anywhere close to Kolb's, I could definitely live with our front office adding Flynn, especially since Schneider has much more familiarity with him than we'll ever have. Honestly, after scouting him out, I don't see how any NFL front office could give him a Kolb-level contract, and if the Packers franchise him I don't see them getting a first round pick for him - even the lower of the two Cleveland first rounders would be asking too much. That said, the reality is teams like the Browns are quite likely to outbid us either with money or picks as the situation will warrant, and I do not really think that is a bidding war our front office would be that interested in diving into. I don't think he fits that well with the kind of free agents we've seen our front office add, or with the model of quarterback we've seen in every addition they've made.
76 comments
|
8 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Oo
Mattitude. That’s going to be my word of the day.
Excellent post. I could read these all day long!
Live work and breathe like an optimist.
All credit for "Mattitude" goes to Suburban Shocker
I could not resist following up on his gag.
Let’s define it however we want. I’ll define it as “that quality of play that makes Pete Carroll point to his balls on the sideline”.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 1:08 PM PST up reply actions
That picture of Pete
is so bloody awesome.
"Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"
"GET OFF ME!"
by Miskatonic Fighting Cephalopods on Mar 20, 2012 8:06 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Fantastic series Toh-Maz!
I can’t believe I read 8623 words of Matt Flynn break down. I freakin’ HATE detailed break down. But it was too important not to look at, given the possibilities of seeing him out there and talked about all off season.
I think I want him here for the right price, even though I would prefer a cannon armed future HoFer. My understanding though, is that those guys don’t grow on trees, haha!
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 1:09 PM PST reply actions
Hmm. Considering Stanford's mascot is a tree, and Elway and Luck are Stanford... maybe they do grow on trees???
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 1:10 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
This seems really spot on.
I’m probably higher on Flynn and would advocate being a little more aggressive in getting him, but you’ve done an excellent break down of his abilities and you’ve probably got a good feel for the FOs interest level in him.
Probably not though.
I’ve not been very good at figuring what this FO will do, beyond figuring what does or does not fit into our system. I’m hoping Scott or someone else can provide some insight later this offseason.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
Well, I think that you're right that he doesn't seem to fit what they've looked for at the position specifically or their players in general.
But Schneider is familiar with him and close to people with even better information than he has, so who knows. I’m hopeful it’ll happen, because I feel pretty sure that they won’t be trading up for Griffin, but I don’t really have any expectations of their interest.
C'mon, people, chop chop!
Don’t go all quiet on me again. There must be something in here you disagree with! Or especially agree with! I wanna hear. Reasons to get Flynn. Reasons to leave Flynn. How much better Flynn is than Colt McCoy.
Keep it moving!
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
Post-season drop-off, I suppose.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Jan 11, 2012 3:30 PM PST up reply actions
Eh, breakdowns never get a lot of comments
But you’d figure everyone wants to talk QB. But maybe they already shot their loads back in part I.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 3:47 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It's because these breakdowns are relatively factual
and there isn’t enough to disagree with you about (for good or bad). This is especially true when you’re describing events that we, ourselves, may not have seen or have access to. This isn’t necessarily a good or bad thing, it just means that it ends up being more “reference book” than “tabloid” and we have less things to squabble about.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 11, 2012 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Personally, I'm hesitant to sign him and hesitant not too.
I’ve heard some CRAZY glowing reviews of him, on sports radio among other places, but from some experts and people who have watched him a lot more than me. But a closer look (unsurprisingly) portrays him as very human. Do I think he can be good-to-great? Yes. Do I think he could bust? Maybe not terribly, but he most certainly could be unsuccessful. Look no closer than Ryan Fitzpatrick to see how wildly divergent opinions of a middle tier QB can be depending on a few hot or cold weeks, or Alex Smith to see how a player can be hated and appreciated at the exact same place based not entirely on his own doing.
And I don’t want either of those scenarios as my next “long term answer” at QB.
I also think he could struggle into mediocrity, never being better than around league average. Maybe 5 slots up the “rank the starters” scale from Tavaris, but still well below the top 5/game changers, and likely several slots below Big Ben, Romo, Schaub, and Rivers. And then I wonder, is that worth the cost? In some ways, we ran into a lucky situation by NOT failing to the point of drafting high and getting an expensive QB prospect. Because we don’t have a ton of cap space tied into a terrible (but young) QB. Why give up that (perhaps lucky?) resource to overpay for an untested FA vet simply because he’s the hot name at the present time?
But then, if you can get him for less than 7million a year, suddenly the cost doesn’t outweigh the potential upside, and he becomes far more worth it— even if he fails.
And I’ve got this weird dual vested interest (that you will want to punch me for— I have him locked up on a great contract in my fantasy keeper league). Because of that, I’m not sure I want him here. I try to avoid the Seahawks with my fantasy so I can be a cold blooded killer, but doesn’t always work.
I’m afraid my owning him will doom him as a Seahawk, so I’d almost rather he go somewhere else. I also don’t know if he is the ideal fit for our system. Does he NOT fit? Well, no. But he isn’t a perfect fit like I’d hope for.
So yeah, I’m just unsure. But now my stream of thought commentary is here for you to pick apart.
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 3:48 PM PST up reply actions
Ugh. "Hesitant not too"... I hate proofreading my header as grammatically incorrect.
I couldn’t even properly wrongly end my sentence with a preposition correctly, I butchered the preposition.
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
Dirt cheap QB's.
“In some ways, we ran into a lucky situation by NOT failing to the point of drafting high and getting an expensive QB prospect.”
I think Cam Newton’s deal was 4 years 22 million. 5.5 a season. Or 1.5 more than TJ.
Luck’s deal is expected to be around 5 for 26.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Luck's deal will also be a 4 year deal
All drafted rookies get 4 years, it’s in the CBA.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 4:49 PM PST up reply actions
I thought the 5th was an option year.
Or maybe that’s the we’re gonna franchise tag your ass year
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Correct. 5th-year option exists for Newton and will for Luck
But the option is not predictable in money since it’s based on the money made by players at the same position as the option is taken.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 4:52 PM PST up reply actions
I was primarily deferring to the pre-CBA years, when those picks were extraordinarily costly.
This comment is not so significant moving forward, I’m saying we got lucky we didn’t reach or trade up in the past few years ago on, say Sanchize or Bradford.
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 8:38 PM PST up reply actions
You hit a couple of nails right on the head
Two key points, in particular:
1. Flynn is not that significantly less a risk than a fairly experienced college starter. Just because he’s succeeded in the NFL on two occasions doesn’t guarantee he can replicate these results for a completely different team.
2. You have to factor in how much of an upgrade he is or isn’t. The Browns clearly should move on from Colt McCoy, and Flynn is functionally equivalent but much better. So plug-and-play, and move on. That’s why it makes sense for them. For us, he does jar into the system less well, and system-wise may not be significant enough an upgrade. He’s definitely an upgrade, but by how much?
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 4:58 PM PST up reply actions
He fits into the system less well when you compare him to Charlie and Tarvaris.
But if you look at the QBs Pete had at USC, he’s not that different. Leinart, Booty and Barkley are all more like Flynn than Jackson. I know it’s a mistake to assume that what Carroll did at USC is what he’s trying to do in Seattle, we’ve seen that fall on it’s face often, but at the very least there’s a precedent.
True, good point.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 5:38 PM PST up reply actions
QBs are hard to come by no matter what.
Let’s put it this way: it’s still a lottery ticket, but it comes without spending a draft pick.
Flynn’s somewhere in between Ponder or Dalton and Colt McCoy, now, as a prospect. He’s demonstrated he can grasp and command an offense, and has good quick decision-making skills. Those are some things that some QBs can fail at. If he were in the draft now he’d be a high 2nd round pick, probably.
He’s ready now & so is our team. We’d still have all our picks to keep developing a strong team. I really think there’s no reason not to try to sign him. If he goes to Cleveland instead it’s not a big deal.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Jan 12, 2012 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Fair enough.
Of course, you aren’t implying to overpay for him. Which is a different dynamic altogether. Cost is an issue with a risk or low ceiling player like he may very well turn into.
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 13, 2012 2:32 PM PST up reply actions
Appreciate the work...
but seriously, I don’t know that Flynn’s ceiling is much above what Jason Campbell is right now. Add to that, Campbell seems like a far more obvious fit for Seattle’s offense and may well cost less (especially if GB franchises Flynn).
I’ve said all along that Flynn makes perfect sense for CLE. He is a fit in terms of skill set and in terms of the system that groomed him. It’s easy to overdue the parallels between Flynn and Matt Hasselbeck, but you can’t ignore them.
I’m not predicting the FO will sign Campbell. It’s just that Flynn doesn’t feel like a Carroll/Schneider plan. He’s not a scheme fit. Nor does he have some singular compelling feature that makes you re-think things like Red Bryant.
What does feel like a Carroll/Schneider plan is inking Jason Campbell to what is effectively a 2-year deal with an option to (ostensibly) compete with TJax and then identifying a developmental QB in the draft (e.g., Harnish, Lindley, Austin Davis, etc.) to groom alongside Portis.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
"To groom alongside Portis..."
Does this mean you advocate having FOUR QB’s on the roster next year?
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 4:24 PM PST up reply actions
5 QB wild bandito package
4 QB’s wide with MRob at fullback. Marshawn under center.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Poorly worded
What I had in mind was a draftee to groom that will compete with Portis.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Signing Campbell seems pointless.
Yes he could provide some competition to tjax but your essentially getting the same damn quarterback as we already have. Campbell sucks and so does tjax. That solves no problem whatsoever. Flynn would be an upgrade but agreeing with Beeks, he is really similar to Hasslesack and not gonna be the type of Qb our FO wants. I am on the “trade the house for RGIII” wagon. We have a decent team. With a game changer at Qb we are talking playoffs baby!!!!
by Savage Seahawk fan on Jan 11, 2012 5:05 PM PST via iPhone app up reply actions
Campbell and Jackson have similar (enough) tools
but Campbell is clearly better. I don’t know that the upgrade we need over Jackson has to be enormous.
Jackson does basically what we want, but he simply doesn’t make enough plays. He leaves a lot of throws on the field. Campbell hits a greater proportion.
We can be on the trade for RG3 bandwagon all we want. I am on that bandwagon myself. But signing Campbell to a reasonable deal doesn’t preclude doing just that. Like Jackson, he’s a stopgap. He’s just a better one.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
Cambell would also fit another need.
He would give us two quality (cheap) similar QB’s both of whom could start and be better/more successful than 10+ starters in the league at any given time. It would be like Charlie could have been, but with actual teeth.
This would allow us to truly develop a QB in the 3rd slot. And Tavaris likely wont move on at the end of the year if Campbell is better. He will be happy to have gotten an honest shot and will take a backup role for a team/coaching staff/program he likes, knowing it is his best (only?) option.
And of course, having a 1st and 2nd QB locked up for around 10million a year total, maybe less? It would allow us to allocate more resources to building the team in other positions until that fabled and epic QBOTF can be found.
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 8:43 PM PST up reply actions
Did you mean,
right now you don’t know if Flynn’s ceiling is much higher than Campbell?
Or, you don’t know if Flynn’s ceiling is much higher than Campbell’s, at the moment?
To me ceiling is not a dynamic thing that changes over time. It’s ultimately a static unknown, and initially an educated guess, that becomes more known over time. Two things change over time, the player’s development and more certainty in our assessment of the player (through more information and a recognition of the time elapsing, which slowly closes the window on likely improvement).
That’s how I see it. You might’ve meant the former, though.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Jan 12, 2012 1:24 PM PST up reply actions
Ok, well I've been mulling this over and haven't really put it out there.
But maybe this is as good a place as any. Field Gulls has been saying for a while that Seattle has to find the QBoTF, but I think this year may be very make or break. I’m almost of the opinion that Seattle has to either sign Flynn or trade up for Griffin.
There’s good reason to think that Seattle won’t be in this good of a position to acquire a top tier QB for some time, and if they are in a similar position next year or the year after that it’ll be a different regime making that decision. I expect them to have a winning record next year and be a fringe playoff team, even with Tarvaris. They already have basically no shot at Barkley and if they do end up drafting around 20 they’ll be well out of any other top tier QB that emerges. If they decide to trade up from there, they’ll likely have to spend more to get in position for a player that isn’t likely to be significantly better than Griffin.
Free agency on the other hand is never a sure thing, we have no idea who may or may not be available. If Seattle wants to make a move on the next Hasselbeck/Schaub/Kolb it’ll very likely have to be through a trade, and there’s no guarantee that player would be a better gamble than Flynn is now as a free agent.
Of course it’s impossible to forcast exactly what next year will bring, and I’m sure the Q/PM have a better idea of what that will be than I do. But it seems likely that this is as good a shot as they’ll ever have. Flynn has a decent shot of becoming a Hasselbeck, sub-elite level quarterback. In my eyes he’s a better prospect than Kolb and much better than Cassell, the two most recent backup to starter stories. And as worrisome as it is to give a QB a huge payday on such limited starting experience, it’s pretty much the norm. Jake Delhomme, Matt Schaub, Kevin Kolb, Matt Hasselbeck, Matt Cassell, Aaron Rodgers, and Mark Brunell had all played in very few games when teams committed to them.
Ironically, Cassell might be a better fit in this offense.
What’s more, he might be available on the cheap, as there is talk KC is going to give him the door, though Romeo has put his support behind him. He makes smart decisions and does well hitting a physically talented WR. Replace Bowe with Rice and there you go. Might be the “Tavaris upgrade” available on a semi-discount with a longer track record.
Once again, I wouldn’t put him in “elite” category, but he did go for 27 TD’s and 7 Int’s just a season ago.
And… after I wrote that, I found several articles endorsing his return and Orton being cast loose yet again.
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 8:52 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Seconded.
I don’t think the risk level, or likelihood of payoff, of future prospects are significantly greater to justify putting it on hold another year. Because the talent of the team has developed to be ready now. A 2012 drafted QB that may take til the middle of his second year to start hitting his stride? Developed talent doesn’t wait. Age is constant, contracts end and injuries happen.
Putting it on hold this long has had plenty of justification. Lengthening the search timeframe is sort of another “proactive nonstop” method. You’re pulling from a greater talent pool, than to just take the best from what’s currently available at the time of snap shot. It just didn’t yield the kind of opportunity Indianapolis is once again blessed with. Those just don’t come up frequently enough to justify sacrificing everything else to chase that. It’s not a sound strategy based on the likelihood of finding a worthy, attainable prospect alone, without even considering that they’re still a prospect that carries risk.
So yeah, I’m strongly in favor of pursuing Flynn even though he holds more risk than Andy Dalton. It’s not because he’s a sure thing, it’s because it’s a much better & cheaper bet to take than we can realistically hope to come across anytime soon.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Jan 12, 2012 1:35 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Wow, great point on the windup, and awesome job illustrating it.
Head of catering.
by jacobstevens on Jan 11, 2012 3:30 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Seems like a big risk to take with someone with less than elite potential
It’ll be harder for him once teams get tape on him. Only two games started just isn’t enough.
If someone’s going to give him a big contract they’ll have to go off of more than two games, they’ll have to go off of inside info, behind the scenes, stuff we don’t know about. Like Hasselbeck, who had no experience when Holmgren traded for him. It’ll have to be that same type of deal, and who should know more about him than Schneider? So we go after him, or don’t, it has to be due to inside info. It’s a tough one to evaluate.
It's just cash though.
If they do end up having to swallow his contract it’s a lot less painful than it would’ve been if they’d traded for someone like Kolb. It’s definitely a big investment, but it doesn’t have to be a crippling one if it goes wrong.
Sure, if he was relativaly cheap
You pick up Flynn and draft RGIII
by B.B.Finnegan on Jan 11, 2012 4:48 PM PST up reply actions
Well as long as you're a backup QB
And your name happens to be Matt, you tend to succeed.
Matt Schaub (Vick’s backup), Matt Hasselbeck (Favre’s backup), and to some extent Matt Moore (Henne’s backup).
My logic is flawless and this means we need to sign Flynn.
Read my tweets or whatever - @SSReporters
Does this mean things do not bode well for Matt Ryan?
who does he think he is
by B.B.Finnegan on Jan 11, 2012 4:47 PM PST up reply actions
Matt Moore's powers only activate when he's the back up.
Back up in Carolina → Good.
Wins starting job from Clausen → Bad.
Takes over after Henne injury → Good.
Miami better draft Griffin and wait for him to get hurt before they play Moore again.
How likely or unlikely is it
That the Packers franchise him? It seems like it would be a huge risk for them to do that but I am not that familiar with the process in this case because if they franchise him they are definitely going to trade him. Right? He would be commanding too high a salary to be a backup.
by bigtrain21 on Jan 11, 2012 4:47 PM PST via Android app reply actions
Reaaaally hard to predict
If they need it for Finley it’s kind of a no-brainer, since the TE tag is pretty cheap and Finley would be hard to let go (in my estimation). And I think realistically they won’t get much in trade if they franchise him, since franchising basically gives Flynn a minimum of 16-mil guaranteed to begin with which knocks the negotiating power of a team that picks him up as well. The Packers would be hoping for the pick the Browns got from the Falcons. If that’s the case, we should be out of it.
They’re not going to franchise and keep him.
If they don’t franchise him they still get a comp pick, and it should be a decent one.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 4:54 PM PST up reply actions
I've heard it could be up to a third-rounder.
That really, really mitigates the need to play the whole franchise-and-trade game.
Could be up to anything, theoretically
But a 3rd rounder sounds about right, and I think a 2nd rounder is what they’d get in trade, at best. I’ m not believing in the Browns giving up a 1st, and we certainly won’t. So yup.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 12, 2012 5:08 PM PST up reply actions
So, he doesn't have a big arm ....
Weak arm or not, Flynn damn-near completed more long passes in the Detroit game than T-Jack did all season.
So if they did franchise him
would they have a deal in place to trade him? Is that legal or the sort of thing that isn’t legal but everyone does it anyway?
by bigtrain21 on Jan 11, 2012 5:08 PM PST via Android app reply actions
I agree
But I could see it going down like that. Green Bay gets a pick although not two first rounds, Flynn gets his guaranteed money and a chance to be a starter, and the team that trades for him gets someone they would view as an upgrade at qb without having him be on the open market and able to sign with any team.
by bigtrain21 on Jan 11, 2012 5:21 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
Maybe.
I doubt that’s strictly legal, but I wouldn’t put something like that past a team and I doubt the NFL would get involved.
Yeah
and I don’t know either so that is why I am throwing scenarios out there. It just seems like a huge risk to franchise him without knowing you can move him for sure.
by bigtrain21 on Jan 11, 2012 5:29 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
Very good breakdown
I was wondering if any of our writers are going to breakdown any other free agent QB’s or is Flynn the only one worth going after? I hear Josh Johnsons name thrown around a lot.
Yeah, I may take a look.
Sander at Bucs Nation doesn’t see him as much of an upgrade over TJack and he would probably know a lot better than me having watched him in Tampa the last few years, but he still might be worth some analysis on.
Like who?
Danny likes Johnson and he might be worth a look. What other FA QBs spring to mind? Campbell? Henne? Young? Quinn? …Whitehurst?
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 11, 2012 6:17 PM PST up reply actions
Here is a list of this years free agent QB's
Chris Redman (ATL)
Derek Anderson (CAR)
Shaun Hill (DET)
Drew Stanton (DET)
Brady Quinn (DEN)
David Garrard (FA)
Luke McCown (JAC)
Chad Henne (MIA)
Sage Rosenfels (MIA)
David Carr (NYG)
Mark Brunell (NYJ)
Kevin O’Connell (NYJ)
Kyle Boller (OAK)
Vince Young (PHI)
Charlie Batch (PIT)
Dennis Dixon (PIT)
Byron Leftwich (PIT)
Charlie Whitehurst (SEA)
A.J. Feeley (STL)
Josh Johnson (TB)
Rex Grossman (WAS)
Richard Bartel (ARZ) – Restricted
Max Hall (ARZ) – Exclusive Rights
Tyler Palko (KC) – Restricted
Brian Hoyer (NE) – Restricted
Chase Daniel (NO) – Restricted
Not a great list but a few interesting players. I would like to see someones take on Dennis Dixon, Drew Stanton and Chase Daniel.
Also Kellen Clemons might be a free agent.
Weird.
For some reason, every time someone writes “Kellen Clemons” I read it as “Kellen Moore” and end up thinking, “Huh? I could have sworn he was just about to enter the draft- oh. I’m an idiot. Again.”
Long suffering, committed Seahawks/Packers fan
Well...
Tire kickers in my eyes: Brady Quinn, Chad Henne, Sage (as backup), David Carr (why not?), Dennis Dixon and Byron Leftwich (one for semi-youth, the other for the long ball), Josh Johnson, and maybe Drew Stanton.
Hmmm. I think Dennis Dixon will be given a look by Denver as Tebow’s backup. They need a poor man’s replica, he would be a less-runny-better-passy version.
"Now I'm tired of this s---. I'm sick and f------ tired of an 8-10 record. I'm f------ tired of losing to Purdue. I'm not here to f--- around this week. Now you may be, but I'm not." -- Bobby Knight, circa 1992
by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 11, 2012 8:59 PM PST up reply actions
Johnson, as already mentioned being interesting, but the only other player in there that I would actually consider a potential upgrade over T-Jack is a rejuvenated Vince Young.
And he looked pretty terrible in action this year.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Jan 12, 2012 1:33 PM PST up reply actions
Fill in the blank
I’ve read all four parts and am still not sure how to fill in the blank. I probably need it dumbed down a little.
Matt Flynn threw for 480 with 6 TDs and 1 INT against Detroit but is still probably not going to be a top tier NFL QB because _______.
Matt Flynn threw for 480 with 6 TDs and 1 INT against Detroit but is still probably not going to be a top tier NFL QB because _______
one start a star QB does not make, and there are signs (detailed in a few posts on this very site) that he may not have the requisite tools to be a top tier Quarterback.
One game can not possibly predict stardom
Even if it could, this was a matchup of one of the strongest receiving groups against one of the NFL’s weakest secondary, as the defense relies on a pass rush that is too easy for Flynn to beat. He faced such matchups in both his starts, but he won’t face the same kind of defense for the rest of his NFL career. Flynn has the tools to excel if the system fits him well, and with the Packers O he has a great system and very good familiarity with it. How easy will that be to replicate?
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 12, 2012 6:29 AM PST up reply actions
Great analysis as usual Beekers, not a whole lot to argue with.
My opinion is that you are correct in saying that Flynn needs the right system to truly flourish. I do not believe that it will be Seattle.
I get the feel that our WRs are built fast, I can easily see us putting 4 guys out there at the same time who can stretch the field (Rice, Tate, Butler, and Lockette) in order to take advantage of a QB who can send the ball 15-20+ yards downfield with solid accuracy and powerful zip. Our ground game is supposed to draw LBs and Safeties closer to the line so we can rocket balls over their heads and take advantage of one-on-one coverage or occasionally slide guys short as surprises (Baldwin, BMW).
I just can’t see Matt Flynn having the ability to do this on a consistent basis. He comes across as a high-level short-intermediate route passer who doesn’t make a whole lot of mistakes. He could succeed in our system, but I’m pretty sure he won’t. Which is a pity, I’d love to pick up our QBOTF without having to spend a high draft pick.
Long suffering, committed Seahawks/Packers fan
Keenum to Seattle in 2013!!!
Do a write up of Keenum.
Greg Cosell in the Shutdown Corner Podcast today
first, on talking about how good Eli Manning is, about 48 minutes in, insisted more strongly than I expected that receivers don’t make a QB, that it’s the other way around.
Then later on he speaks about Matt Flynn.
Cosell may be more speaking to the scenario of people thinking a QB would be good if he had better receiving options (the scenario he specifically mentions), and not necessarily to the scenario of an impressive QB performance being partially dismissed because the receivers are so good. I could see QBs being good ultimately on account only of themselves, not the receivers, yet at the same time, good QBs being great — relative to other very good or great QBs — on at least partial, or even almost equal account of the receivers as the QB himself. I am inclined to believe it, myself.
So I don’t know the extent to which Cosell believes the assertion he made applies to anything beyond “receivers don’t make a QB good.” I don’t know if he believes that Flynn’s game vs. Detroit wouldn’t be possible with a lesser QB, or if that offense dramatically inflated what he’d otherwise be capable of.
Doug Farrar asks of the applicability, specifically to Flynn, but Greg didn’t elaborate. What he did say about Flynn was, among other things, that he was very poised, in command in the pocket. Looks like he’s playing at a comfortable tempo. Not a guy who’s playing too fast.
Nothing more committal or projecting than that. Just wanted to share.
Head of catering.
Thanks, I only made it halfway through that podcast.
Not for any reason, mind.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
Thanks!
I’ve seen some notes of his, yeah. Poise, command of the pocket/offense, tempo are things Greg points to, and obviously I completely agree.
Formerly knows as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Jan 12, 2012 5:11 PM PST up reply actions
Thank you
for the in-depth write-up on Flynn. I sincerely enjoyed the read & learned quite a bit along the way.
We’re incredibly fortunate as Seahawks fans to have Field Gulls and it’s writers/analysts.
"Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"
"GET OFF ME!"
by Miskatonic Fighting Cephalopods on Mar 20, 2012 8:12 PM PDT via mobile reply actions

by 












































