Seattle Seahawks: Recent NFL FA/Trade Acquisitions for a QB
Let's talk about the Seahawks quarterback situation!
(single gunshot)
It would be an understatement to say that talking about what the Hawks should do with the quarterback position turns fans into bickering neighbors and can sometimes lead to flame wars. It would be an overstatement to say that it turns us into flesh-eating zombies, picking apart each others corpses for morsels of brain and innards. But the latter would certainly be more interesting.
What most of us can agree on: Tarvaris Jackson is not the quarterback of the future. Not all of us can agree on that, but I think the fair majority would say that T-Jack is more Mr. Right Now than he is Mr. Right. I do think that Jackson is plenty good enough to serve as a 2012 stopgap should Seattle decide to draft their QBOTF this year. But if he shows any semblance of developing into great quarterback beyond that, it would be quite a surprise to me.
There is the crowd that wants to draft a QB, no matter the cost, and Field Gulls has and will continue to address those options.
Then there is the crowd that says the future resides somewhere on the free agent or trade market. Is it going to be Matt Flynn? Peyton Manning? I hear Charlie Whitehurst is a free agent.
By now you may have picked up on the fact that when I write articles like this, I try to give you just the facts, ma'am. I rarely make bold declarations one way or the other, mostly because I'm doing research that will help us all get a better understanding of what history tells us. History is fascinating, telling, and holds very little doubt.
History is to accuracy as I am to self-loathing; absolute.
So what can recent history tell us about teams that found their quarterback on the free agent or trade market as opposed to the draft? How many of them won a Super Bowl because of it?
Let's take a look....
Brett Favre - NYJ/MIN
When Favre finally parted ways with the Packers, it was the New York Jets that first took a crack at seeing if those Wranglers had any fight left in them in 2008. They started the season 3-3, but won five straight games in the middle of the year, including a 34-31 OT win at New England. However, Favre was awful down the stretch (reportedly because of an injury that the Jets didn't disclose) and New York lost four of their last five to miss the playoffs. The greatest impact Favre made in New York wasn't what he did on the field, but what he did on the phone.
Favre's next stop was in Minnesota (a place that also wasn't satisfied with Tarvaris) and he had possibly the greatest season of his career in 2009, throwing 33 touchdowns against an un-Favrelike 7 interceptions, leading the Vikings to a 10-1 start. They finished 12-4, but blew out the Cowboys in the divisional round. They lost an OT heart-breaker to the Saints in the NFC Championship. The next season would be a forgettable one.
Success Level - Some. The Jets were nearly playoff contenders, but collapsed down the stretch. The Vikings had one uber-successful season, but 2010 was terrible and they found their QBOTF Christian Ponder in the following draft.
Much more after the jump..
Chad Pennington - MIA
On a much smaller scale, but related to the Favre situation, is Pennington. He left New York when Favre entered, and the Dolphins snatched him up to be a part of the Wildcat. Pennington was accurate, as he always was, and the Dolphins won the AFC East over the Jets and Patriots at 11-5. However, they lost to the Ravens in the first round of the playoffs and Pennington was Mr. Injury again in 2009.
Mr. Injury is the sequel I wrote to the Ellen DeGeneres smash hit, Mr. Wrong. Remember when Ellen was an actress?
Success Level - Some. Nobody expected much out of the low-key acquisition, but it panned out for one season.
Steve McNair - BAL
When McNair left the Titans and asked to be traded to the Ravens in 2006, it was only two years after he shared co-MVP honors with Manning and he was "only" 33 years old. Baltimore won a franchise record 13 games in the regular season, while McNair was good (not spectacular) and lost in the divisional round to the Colts, 16-5.
The next season would be his last. He only made 6 starts, throwing 2 touchdowns against 6 interceptions, and the Ravens went 5-11.
Success Level - Some. It worked out for a year, but with that Ravens defense, maybe even Kyle Boller could have worked out. No offense to McNair though, who is obviously better than Boller. They acquired their QBOTF Joe Flacco in the following draft.
Matt Schaub - HOU
The first of the "backups traded to be starters" quarterbacks on this list, somewhat like the Flynn situation. The Texans gave up two 2nd round picks (and moved the Falcons up two spots in the first) to acquire Schaub and then signed him to a six-year, $48 million contract. (Atlanta used the picks on starting guard Justin Blalock and used the pick to move up in 2008 to draft tackle Sam Baker.)
Five years into the contract, the Texans are 32-32 when Schaub starts, he had an outstanding 2009 season (first and only career Pro Bowl) with a QB rating of 94 in his career in Houston with 92 touchdowns against 52 interceptions. People can say "but he has Andre Johnson and a running game blah blah blah" but first of all, he's a good quarterback and plenty of great wide receivers have shitty quarterbacks and second of all, don't use "blah blah blah" in your argument. I can't even tell what you're saying.
However, the Texans only just made the playoffs for the first time this year and that was partly thanks to the fact that Peyton missed the season. Schaub missed the last six games and the playoffs, the third time in five years that he missed significant time with injury.
Success Level - Some. Schaub is good. He was a good acquisition, but the first two years developed slowly and he's missed significant time with injuries.
Matt Hasselbeck - SEA/TEN
We know the story of Hasselbeck in Seattle, back when he was the "trade for a promising backup" kind of acquisition.
This past year he became the "sign a veteran stopgap" acquisition, and in many ways performed almost at the same level as Tarvaris did this season. Hasselbeck has the mind, experience, know-how to get him by in the NFL currently. Jackson has the arm, but without Matt's level of decision-making to get him by. In the end, they nearly came out with equal value.
Success Level - For Seattle, high. His acquisition by the Titans wasn't meant to be more than a 1 or 2 year courtship and they fell a game short of the playoffs.
Carson Palmer - OAK
The Raiders sent a first round 2012 draft pick, and a conditional 2nd round 2013 pick that becomes a first if the Raiders make the AFC Championship game next year. There were some fans in Seattle that wished the Hawks had acquired Palmer in the offseason last year, but the likely cost would have been at least as high as the Raiders paid, but more likely it would have been even expensiver. (Expensiver isn't a word, but when ZOMG makes the dictionary, I should be allowed to say expensiver.)
The issue here is that fans still want the Carson Palmer that was the Heisman winner and first overall pick. The one that completed 67.8% of his passes with 32 touchdowns in 2005 and led the Bengals to an 11-5 record. Ignoring the Palmer that had his knee blown out by Kimo von Oelhoffen, just one of many assaults by the 2005 Steelers.
During his last five seasons in Cincinnati, Palmer was good. Not great. Simply good. Over 68 starts: 62.2%, 234 yards/game, 104 TD/70 INT, 7 Y/A, 85.6 rating, and the Bengals went 29-39. He twice threw 20 interceptions during a season. Palmer is a step above a player like Tarvaris Jackson, but he's a step below the very good quarterbacks in this league.
Success Level - Low to Tragic, when you consider the 1st and 2nd round picks given up plus his contract. The Raiders lost 4 of their last 5 games and missed the playoffs. Palmer just turned 32 in December.
Kyle Orton - DEN
A rare situation here in which a team traded away it's franchise QB because of internal controversy, and elected to go with a less-talented, but potentially nicer guy in Kyle Orton. He had mild success during his two years in Denver.
Success Level - Whatever. He wasn't expected to do anything and he probably performed above expectation levels, however, Orton still isn't a good QB. He's a great backup quarterback, not a franchise guy.
Jason Campbell - OAK
Very similar to Orton, in that the Raiders just needed someone to get them by. The Raiders gave up a fourth round pick and named Campbell starter, before benching him in favor of Bruce Gradkowski in week three. He came back to start the last ten games of the year and played decently enough to be the starter in 2011, until an injury forced the Raiders to go out and get Palmer.
Success Level - Mild. They didn't expect much. They didn't get much. However, the Raiders just started trading draft picks like they were candy, and draft picks are more valuable than candy if you are the GM of a football team. To most of us, we'd rather have candy. I don't know what I would personally do with a fourth round draft pick. Probably select the guy that was best at running my errands.
Matt Cassel - KC
He was a rare case of a backup that came in and performed well in a great situation. Mostly, backups are traded based on promise, and Cassel had 15 starts to show what he could do in New England. The Chiefs sent the #34 pick to the Pats for Cassel/Mike Vrabel, and signed him to a six-year, $62.7 million contract. They've already paid him $40.5 million for his services in three years.
Success Level - Low. You could make the argument that the Chiefs playoff run in 2010 is justification for acquiring Cassel, but in return I would make an argument that Cavemen was a better show than Darkwing Duck. There, now we've both made silly arguments. Cassel had a good season that year, with 27 touchdowns against 7 interceptions, but I guess you would call that the ultimate "game manager" situation (6.9 yards per attempt) during a ridiculously easy schedule before getting blown out in the first round of the playoffs. His first season there was not good. Last season was not good and he got hurt. And they've paid him a lot.
Trent Green - KC
Another story for the Chiefs acquiring a QB via trade came in 2001. Two years after winning a Super Bowl with the Rams, head coach Dick Vermeil took over the Chiefs and immediately traded for his former QB in St. Louis, Green. For the next 5 years, they worked together but failed to win a playoff game. Green had a few good seasons, but that was all.
Success Level - Decent. Green was good for awhile, but it failed to yield any playoff success.
Kurt Warner - NYG/ARI
Warner is still one of the most fascinating players to me. Not just because of his 1999 season, but also because of the five year stretch in the middle of his career when he was terrible again. Five years: 31 starts, 63.9% completions, 220 yards/game, 27 TD/30 INT, 82.1 rating, 7.2 Y/A, and a record of 8-23 as a starter. He never made more than 10 starts in any season during that stretch, and it included two years in St. Louis, one in New York, and two in Arizona. Injuries and benchings galore.
Ages 36-38? 42 starts with the Cardinals, 65.4% completions, 261 yards/game, 83 TD/45 INT, 7.5 Y/A, 93.6 rating and a 24-18 record as a starter with a near Super Bowl victory over the Steelers. Warner you odd, crazy, wild, magnificent bitch.
Success Level - Zero in New York. Some in Arizona until finally paying off unexpectedly in 2008.
Michael Vick - PHI
The Vick situation is another unique one in how to acquire a QB. In the "How to Acquire a QB Handbook," the chapter on "Find a QB that has been accused of either: Dogfighting, Arson, Identity Theft, Birdnapping, Embezzlement, or Unlicensed Fishing and then sign him with controversy and hope he pans out" is a short one. Vick had a stellar 2010 season, but a shakier 2011. He's still got the ability to play at an elite level.
Success Level - Fair. The Eagles issues in an 8-8 season last year didn't only reside in Vick playing below expectations. Long-term, he could still be a great answer for them in the next 3-4 years.
Vince Young - PHI
Quick note: Vince Young was terrible in limited action last year.
But here's this:
D'awwwww.
Rex Grossman - WAS
Don't find yourself in a situation where you have a QB competition between Rex Grossman and John Beck. That's like being on The Bachelorette and finding yourself having to choose between.... Rex Grossman and John Beck.
Donovan McNabb - WAS/MIN
The Redskins gave up a 2nd round pick and a conditional 3rd/4th to acquire McNabb. It seemed like it could be a good deal at the time, if Washington could squeeze the last remaining life out of him. On October 31st, Mike Shanahan benched him in favor of Grossman during a game against the Lions. On November 15th, they gave him a new contract worth $78 million. Of course, this is the NFL, and his guarantee was only $3.5 million, but I just like to point out that in my last two mentions of the Redskins, they've done this and had a battle between Grossman/Beck.
Shanahan won two Super Bowls. Three Six Mafia won an Academy Award. Avatar is the highest-grossing film ever. Life, you are one wild and crazy ride of randomness.
A year after being traded for a 2nd and a conditional 3rd, the Vikings traded a 6th and a conditional 6th to get McNabb. He was not very good.
Success Level - Somewhere between Anna Kournikova in singles competition and the TV show Joey.
Jay Cutler - CHI
On the flipside of Kyle Orton is Jay Cutler. The Bears have never had a great quarterback (in the modern era, is mostly what I am referring to) which might make Cutler the most talented QB they've ever had. That's why they gave up Orton, two firsts and a third in order to get Cutler. (An earlier rumor had a three-way deal that would send Cassel to the Broncos and Cutler to a third team, possibly the Lions or Buccaneers.) Was the cost worth it?
Success Level - Some. He's a good quarterback but the Bears offense has never really worked, for whatever reason. They've got Matt Forte, Cutler, some decent wide receivers, but they don't put a lot of points on the board. They went 11-5 in 2010 and were on their way to a similar record in 2011 before Cutler went down with injury.
Drew Brees - NO
The rare opportunity of a highly-thought of QB that enters the market because his former team already has a QBOTF and he's got injury questions. The Dolphins were interested but the Saints made the best play to get Brees.
Success Level - Kinda high.
Jake Delhomme - CAR
He was a pre-season star for the Saints until hitting free agency and signing with the Carolina Panthers. Rodney Peete was the starter at the very start of the year, but Delhomme replaced him in week one to lead Carolina to a comeback victory. He was entrenched as the starter from then on (2003-2009) until finally parting ways with tears after the 2009 season.
Success Level - Pretty high. Rarely spectacular, but the Panthers made a Super Bowl with Jake in 2003 and the NFC Championship that you may remember in 2005. He was good bang for your buck, in that he didn't cost the Panthers a bunch of high draft picks or compensation to start out with.
Kevin Kolb - ARI
He was the talk of the 2011 QB market, with fans in several cities clamoring for their team to do it whatever it takes to acquire him. The Cards ended up trading a 2nd round pick and Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie to get Kolb, plus signed him to a deal worth six-year, $65 million contract.
Success Level - Pretty low so far. As of today, it seems like they got similar (or better) production from John Skelton at a tiny percentage of the cost. Long-term, this could turn out to be a better deal than it looks as of today. But right now, I certainly would not regret the non-addition of Kevin Kolb by Seattle.
Let's Conclude This
I have looked at 19 quarterback acquisitions. Most of them are unique in some way. Not all of them were acquired to be QBOTFs, but some of them were. For instance, Vince Young was not, but his acquisition wasn't that much different than Vick's. It was a team taking a shot at finding a quality backup while they already had a confirmed starter.
If I have missed any examples that you think should be of note, please go ahead and throw it in the comments, but be as nice as possible. Because I'm sensitive okay???
Just for shits and giggles: 19 QB's resulted in one Super Bowl victory, that by Drew Brees. Easily the most successful QB on this list. The others to make a Super Bowl were Kurt Warner, Matt Hasselbeck and Jake Delhomme.
In comparison, of the last 20 Super Bowl teams, 13 of those quarterbacks were playing with the team that originally drafted them: (there's overlap with several guys making multiple Super Bowls) Tom Brady, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, Rex Grossman, Donovan McNabb. The guys that were acquired by other means: Warner twice with two teams, Rich Gannon, Brad Johnson, Delhomme, Hasselbeck, Brees.
Funny enough, Gannon and Johnson both started their careers with the Vikings. (Okay, not funny haha or even that funny interested. It's just a thing that happened and it piqued my interest. What if I said Gannon and Johnson both started in Minnesota and then threw for other teams and boy are their arms tired. Because they are old. Would that be funny haha? No. Okay, shoot me.)
And I think starting this article with me shooting myself and then you shooting me at the end wraps it up in a nice, little package. Don't you?
Follow me on twitter if you dare and go to my website if you're like "I want to read more by this idiot." (Part III of my 150 lb weight loss story is up!)
99 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Kurt Warner in Arizona....
Dude, my dog can throw touchdowns to Larry Fitzgerald and my two year old can hit Anquan Boldin in stride. Any bag boy in any grocery store can throw touchdowns to those two.
Except Kevin Kolb.
I won the Super Bowl before I was even conceived.
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 Feb 1, 2012 1:36 PM PST up reply actions
The very thought of me being created before anything was created created the Super Bowl
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 Feb 1, 2012 5:30 PM PST up reply actions
And Max Hall and Derek Anderson and Matt Leinart and John Skelton...
As for the Seahawks, they shall have stars at elbow and foot...Though they sink through the sea they shall rise again...Death shall have no dominion.
by Cheddar28 on Feb 1, 2012 1:37 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Oh yeah, Kurt Warner, what a hack
What is this I don’t even.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 1, 2012 2:01 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, Matt Leinart and Josh McCown had those All-Pro seasons
with that talent before Kurt Warner even got there!
Gotta look big picture ...
Warner looked like a stud running the “greatest show on turf”.
Warner looked like Hot Garbage running the New York Giants.
Warner looked like a stud again running the well-equipped Cards for a few years.
Am I supposed to just ignore what he did his entire career before the NFL and in between STL and NYG?
Am I the only one reading the OP as sarcasm?
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
How is Drew Brees only "Kinda High"
Their offense is crazy good and they’ve already won a Superbowl. That should qualify as “high” shouldn’t it?
I was being jokey.
The success of Brees is obvious enough.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 1, 2012 1:20 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe you don't do that
in future articles
especially if you want to be taken seriously
humor has a time and place, but this doesn’t fit
You got it dude.
No more jokes!
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 2, 2012 8:19 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Would you mind buttoning your top collar for me?
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "to talk of many things."
What do mean
Travaris Jackson isn’t seattles QB of the future?
by Redzone59 on Feb 1, 2012 1:36 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Seriously needs to be green.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 2, 2012 8:19 AM PST up reply actions
I think what he means is
Charlie Whitehurst will be back next year and swoop that role right out of Jackson’s grasp
Schaub only had "some" success? No.
Rankings by DVOA: 5th in 2011, 13th in 2010, 6th in 2009, 8th in 2008, 17th in 2007.
If you want to ding the guy for having a couple injuries, fine. But I think you’re grossly underestimating how valuable that deal was for Houston.
Ball-parking the ‘trade-value’ would roughly equate that to drafting a rookie in the middle of the first round and having them be a top-10 QB through their first five years. This value doesn’t go down because his defense was abysmal (Though if you want to go down that road we can fall into the his defense sucked so it was easier for him to put up numbers loop for all eternity, but anyway.)
I love Matt Schaub. I didn't mean to convey that I didn't.
But we do have to calculate injuries and playoff payoff. Even if it’s not his fault, if I’m evaluating just the question “How well did this move payoff into playoff success” then I’d have to impart the Texans organizational success as a whole, not just Schaub’s part.
I agree that it was a good move for them to make. I should have made that more clear.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 1, 2012 2:28 PM PST up reply actions
Then your research is misguided. Sorry.
Any evaluation that can construe Mark Sanchez being drafted at 5th overall being a more successful move than trading two seconds for Matt Schaub—because he went to more playoffs and has a better QB record—needs to get thrown out of the window.
by SgtSasquatch on Feb 1, 2012 2:32 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Sorry, I'm not going to get into a semantics argument about the use of the word "Some"
If I was doing a piece on drafted QBs, then I would use something like “Some I guess” on Mark Sanchez. Or perhaps I would say “A pinches worth” or “Four out of Nine Stars” or something like that.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 1, 2012 2:47 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I didn't mean to seem like I was jumping on semantics so hard.
I was just bummed you didn’t have the same kinda Schaub love as me I guess. He just fits so nicely in my (never to be written) thesis associating QB play with the derp factor of their headshots.
Well, I reeeaallly like Schaub and the Texans are "my AFC team"
I bought a Texans jersey before they even had a player on their roster. I was stoked to see them make the playoffs this year and bummed that they couldn’t field all their stars at once, especially Schaub.
I love Schaub as a QB, but part of the reason the Texans havent been as successful over his five years is injury. I have to factor that in somewhat, at least in my opinion. Because a player will always be somewhat judged by injury if it keeps him from reaching his full potential.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 1, 2012 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
Well, there's having a reasonable argument
and being an “Oh-god-oh-god-oh-god someone is wrong on my Internet!” kind of nerd. I feel that I was walking closer to the later of those two options. It was actually a very good article and a little bit of confusion over semantics shouldn’t completely void that.
What can I say? QB wins just bring out the worst in me.
And I do realize the problems with numbers like that.
I think they do tell a tiny bit of the player, because of the importance of QB (I don’t take that 8-23 record by Warner during the middle of his career lightly, it’s an amazing contrast to the rest of his career at a time when he was not only getting hurt but was ineffective.) but I work within the best that Pro-Football-Ref gives me because it covers so many more years than a site like Football Outsiders.
Your point was well-taken of course, and I agree that I underestimated the acquisition of Schaub by the Texans, even though I realllly like him.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 2, 2012 8:23 AM PST up reply actions
It's a shame about his foot.
Most guys don’t come back from the surgery that he got, and those that do take forever to recover.
Go ahead an put Houston down as the #1 landing spot for Peyton Manning.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
Hey I wouldn't mind that
Bring in Peyton to lead them to back-to-back-to-back Super Bowls while grooming TJ Yates, and the Seahawks can trade for Schaub. Doooooooooooooooooo it.
by Matt Erickson on Feb 1, 2012 11:19 PM PST up reply actions
But the point is that Schaub is probably toast. For at least two years.
So I’d wager he’s never the same.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
I usually don't get worried until you start seeing recurring injuries to the same body part or injuries sustained as byproducts of other injuries.
But that’s just me. I feel that the injury-prone label gets thrown around a bit too hastily sometimes. It’s a rough game. You just don’t see a lot of guys playing 16 games a year. If each time it was concussion-related? I’d be sweating bullets yeah, but one time was a concussion and the other time was because he took a 300 lb lineman to the knee? (Skyrim!) Then well, that’s the reality of the game.
With the sample size so small-as it always is in football-I think luck is too much of a factor on if a player gets injured to be able to label someone “Injury-prone” when they get hurt by big hits/awkward landings. When the goal-line starts knocking your hip out of place, that’s when you can wear that crown. But that stuff never happens. Ever. Especially against the Bucs.
by SgtSasquatch on Feb 2, 2012 1:51 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I can only recall one game-winning 4th quarter drive this year. And we all know who was at the helm.
If I had my choice I would start Whitehurst over Jackson. I know he probably will be gone but we already know what Jackson is. Why give him those valuable snaps at all ? Charlie had how many starts? Two ? So we know he’s not good but Jackson still may be a winner ? Right. I’d give TJ a big pat on the back and say “congrats Bro ! you’re a lock for #2 !” Then start anybody but him.
It's more a case of neither guy is a winner
but the coaches and the players seem to really like TJ and the guy was a decent game manager, so he should start. I really can’t see the case for starting Whitehurst of all guys over Jackson, and I was one of the boneheads calling for that move as the pre-season started.
Funny thing, the point of the article (in my mind anyway) was to set up a historical precedent for Seattle acquiring a new QB via FA...
…and yet no comments to that effect.
An article today on NFL.com suggests that Seattle the most likely landing spot for Peyton Manning. http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/09000d5d8268227c/potential-landing-spots-for-peyton-manning?module=HP11_hot_topics
This would be from Manning’s perspective, in that Seattle fits the likely criteria he would have for signing with a team. So not from Seattle’s perspective – would PC/JS even want him?
Let’s say that the odds of Manning cut by Indy is 99%. Then lets say that Manning choosing Seattle is 75%. Now for the two larger questions/mysteries: what are the odds that Manning will be physically able to play in 2012? Let’s say 50%. Now what about Seattle’s interest in Manning? Let’s say 30% (high cost, health concern, doesn’t fit system, etc. etc.) Based on those assumptions, there is a 11% chance that Manning starts for the Seahawks in 2012.
The advantages would be many. Instant SB contender. Allows draft to focus on defense. Perfect bridge between now and the new QB (perhaps drafted this year, or next.)
Does this make any sense?
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
by Hawksince77 on Feb 1, 2012 4:08 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
A few other implications: one, TJax is gone...
…can you imagine how he feels being benched for another future HOFer? Who wants to be the answer to THAT NFL trivia question.
Let’s say Josh Portis makes the team (that would be a great sign – that he has potential) and they draft Brock Osweiler in the 2nd or 3rd round. If they don’t draft a QB, they are better off re-signing CW as the back-up, as he performs that role reasonably well.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
One more thing: signing Manning would likely fit more the Brees experience than others, for almost the same reason...
…injury, and Indy will draft their new QBotF.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
'cept Brees was 27
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 2, 2012 3:11 AM PST up reply actions
Holy crap I just thought of something else - what if Reggie Wayne comes with him?
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
by Hawksince77 on Feb 1, 2012 4:25 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Wayne's a solid player
Maybe he can take the next step if he comes here and learns a little something from Doug Baldwin.
ahem
Exactly - that's what I meant when I said he doesn't fit their system - or their prototype for the position.
What mitigates this is that it is obviously for one or two seasons. The person they groom for the longer term has to have those attributes they believe he needs.
Peyton transcends that though.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Peyton Manning is a true transcendental talent
You don’t turn down an opportunity to acquire him just because he doesn’t fit your system- you make your system fit him.
by Matt Erickson on Feb 1, 2012 11:21 PM PST up reply actions
Elway won his only two SBs at 37 and 38 years old.
Favre had his magical season with the Vikings at what – 39?
Warner took the Cards to the SB at 38.
Peyton Manning compares favorably to all three of these guys.
He won’t be the franchise guy like Brees became when he went to New Orleans. Different situation, but Manning, if he fully recovers, could easily play elite football for another year or two.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
by Hawksince77 on Feb 2, 2012 8:29 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
To clarify, Elway lost 3 SBs before winning his final two.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Elway is a special case.
He was with the Broncos his whole career and working in a system that he was very experienced within.
Warner came in and took three seasons before getting the Cards to the Super Bowl.
Favre is your one outlier, but the year before, he did nada with the Jets.
I am not against bringing Manning in completely. Obviously, he is an upgrade. However, the money well could be better spent elsewhere. I’d rather spend FA money on a Mario Williams if he’s available. I think that a more immediate positive effect will be created through spending at another impact position such as DE or MLB. There might even be a more positive impact on spending 10-12M on a number of secondary positions rather than on a year of Peyton Manning at this point.
People like to put on blinders for the disadvantages, but they exist.
When you pick up and pay Manning, you’re looking to instantly contend. Your FA and draft will prioritize instantly contending, which means “QBotF” is bumped down the rung as a priority pick.
Then factor in that while Manning is definitely a trascendent talent, a lot would have to change on this offense. The offensive line would have to re-learn a lot of what it’s doing, and the entire offense would essentially have to learn a new offense, because when you take Manning you essentially take a new OC.
And what about his injury? People like to ignore injury questions on FA, just assuming that we can hope them away. That’s why Rice was such a hot commodity. Is the same true for Manning?
And then we reach the end of the rung, and the time when Peyton’s skills decline. You think it’s easy to move on from an aging former superstar? Take a look at Hasselbeck’s ending days to freshen up your memory.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 2, 2012 3:06 AM PST up reply actions
I don't think signing Peyton changes anything about seeking a championship - it just makes it possible sooner.
In other words, they still need a long-term solution for the position. The consensus is that such a player won’t be available to Seattle in this draft (without trading up – an option that Seattle may be ill suited to do). If they do like someone outside the top two, signing Manning wouldn’t change their decision to draft that player. Even better – say it’s Brock Osweiler – they guy doesn’t have to start for a year, maybe two.
Your second point is more critical, and why I figure PC/JS’s interest at 30% (it may be zero). I don’t think PC will change anything in the offense or his approach to football. Manning is fully capable of operating Bevel’s offense – if he wants to. And that’s the rub. You have a strong personality facing another strong personality (PC/Manning). Two alpha dogs on the same team, and unlike Favre/Minn HC (can’t find his name in my brain) PC won’t back down. Instant conflict, unless by some chance they come to an understanding prior to the signing, and they both honor it.
As far as the injury goes, I put that at 50%, trying to read between the lines of all the reports. I am convinced Peyton wants to play (everybody root for brother Eli – if he wins, all the more incentive for Peyton to play) and I am also convinced it won’t be at Indy, for 28 million reasons. Perhaps just as important, Indy will not contend for the next couple of years. If Peyton is to catch brother Eli, it has to be now. But what Peyton wants and what his body allows may be two different things. If he can’t play, he’s no good to anyone.
As far as moving on from Peyton, I think that’s built into the signing. Two years, tops. Extend a third year if he can still play. Have Seattle’s Aaron Rodgers ready to go (Portis? Osweiler? Leinart? Barkley?).
So a lot of ifs.
I would love to hear what others think about this.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Signing Manning is no different than signing TJax - potentially the best option available at the position.
Until they can get that young, long-term QB, they upgrade every position with the best possible additions (draft, FA). This doesn’t mean mortgaging the future – that’s why they don’t spend a lot of draft picks on trades, and Manning (like TJax) wouldn’t cost any.
So that’s the real question for Seattle: who would you prefer start in 2012? TJax (current option)? Manning? Leinart? CW? RGIII (giving up lots of draft capital)? Brock Osweiler/Tennerhil/Cousins? Portis? Any other options anyone can think of?
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
No different? Really?
If you think the money and need to instantly compete will make no difference, then…ok.
“Placeholder QB” and “aged, championship QB” are pretty damn different in franchise model.
Also: RGIII.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 2, 2012 9:49 AM PST up reply actions
No different in that they are the 'best' QB option in FA for Seattle, given the circumstances.
PC signed a less-than-mediocre QB with no chance to become a long-term starter. Manning falls essentially in the same category as far as the future is concerned. In terms of quality, no doubt Manning stands heads and shoulders and stars above TJax (if he can play).
As far as RGIII goes, I can see spending the draft capital for him or Luck. What I have trouble seeing is Seattle given that opportunity. My basic position is that Seattle should make a play for both of them. Just don’t think it’s in the cards.
Seattle could always wait until after the draft to sign Manning – if they really think they have a shot at the top two. I just have trouble envisioning which franchise would trade which pick to give Seattle that opportunity. As far as the cost, I would trade any number of picks for Luck – not sure I’d break the draft bank on RGIII.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Given that my primary interest is seeing Seattle with an elite (or near-elite) QB...
…I would be thrilled to see them draft either Luck or RGIII. Manning is a short-term bridge, that’s all. It potentially makes the Seahawks more comptetive over the next two seasons or so. I can’t wait to see that 10-year starter drafted/signed.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Actually, the best possible scenario...
…is that Josh Portis is an up-and-coming elite NFL QB. He starts in 2012 (has a bumpy first season but shows progression) and ends up providing Seattle that 10-year guy. Cost zero draft capital, and little cap money (for a few years).
But while the best of all worlds, perhaps the least likely.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
I think you're ignoring the realities of how running a franchise works
If you invest, results are expected. From the fanbase, from the owner. You add a Tarvaris, everyone just shrugs at a 7-9 season. You add a Manning, you BETTER damn well make sure we see a return in deep playoff runs. Manning will still command a significant paycheck, and with that significant paycheck comes a chance in how the franchise can operate.
Also, remember Manning will be a free agent before free agency even starts. He could be gone quick, though it’s not likely.
I’d love Luck, but he won’t be available at any cost.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 2, 2012 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
Agreed that the expectations increase with the signing of Manning.
But I don’t see how that’s a problem. If you determine that he is capable of playing elite football (a big ‘if’) then you are not simply betting on a name, you are placing your evaluation ability on line (PC’s, JS’s). If they believe he can contend, they can live with the expectations.
When Warner retired, the Cards went from the SB to picking in the top ten. He was the only major loss.
When Indy lost Manning, they went from a constant appearance in the play-offs to picking number one overall.
This is not simply a coincidence. Those two men made all the difference for their teams. Integrating that kind of talent with the current Seahawk team, and then add a defensive draft to go along with it, and you have a SB contender. Doesn’t mean you will see the Seahawks win everything, but they will be very competitive. I don’t know what more a fan could ask.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Exactly!
It’s not a coincidence because in adding or sticking with these players, both franchises had molded themselves around his abilities and capabilities, going for the short-term shot over investing into the long term. Not every franchise would do that, but it is a factor one can not ignore when talking about adding this kind of elite QB.
As you might be able to tell, the Manning option does not enthuse me.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 2, 2012 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
Okay, I understand you lack enthusiasm, what I don't get, is what you'd prefer to see happen at the position.
That’s what I am looking for – a reason NOT to root for Manning to sign in Seattle, because I haven’t heard one yet.
If the Seahawks faced a stark choice of Manning OR RGIII (or any other long-term elite prospect) I would understand the concern. You don’t want to see your team sacrifice the future for a possible now.
I just don’t see Seattle facing that choice. Nor do I see Manning blocking the development of the position. Even if they did draft RGIII, most people feel he is not a year-one starter anyway. Only Luck carries that expectation.
If Seattle drafts Cousins or Brockweiler (or whoever this year) you would expect them to sit for a year or two anyway, which means another year of TJax, sans a Manning signing.
As far as the cap goes, Manning won’t cost that much more than TJax and CW combined (QBs you wouldn’t expect to see re-signed). Besides, an elite QB is worth paying, regardless.
As a fan, I don’t see any downside. The issue may reside with PC/JS, in that Manning might not be compatible with how they want to run their team. If that’s the case, I can certainly respect that.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
You're not going to get a reason to roote against it from me, if that's what you're looking for
It’s just not something I’m actively rooting for.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 2, 2012 12:36 PM PST up reply actions
Just looking for a reasonable discussion, a positive argument one way or another.
“The Manning option doesn’t enthuse me” doesn’t add anything to the discussion.
As far as rooting goes, I am hoping to watch competitive Seahawk football, sooner rather than later, and the QB position is currently the key for that happening.
I think the overall quality of the team is of foremost importance, from coaching, recruiting, drafting, and obtaining the utmost talent and depth on the 53-man roster. Even more than the front seven, upgrading the QB position does the most for the 2012 Seahawks.
Between FA, the draft and the current roster, I don’t see any better alternative.
Am I just beating a dead horse here?
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Because "it doesn't enthuse me" is the conclusion to all of the preceding, not an argument of itself
I enumerated why I think it comes with drawbacks, and find the age and injury question marks big enough to not really consider it an upper-tier option. What I objected to was it being presented as an option that really only has advantages, when clearly it is not that.
And yes, we are talking in circles.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 2, 2012 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
Fair enough. I am not really convinced, one way or another.
I suppose there is really no way to apply any kind of analysis to the question, or a fact-based argument to convince one or dismiss the possibility altogether.
As far as lack of enthusiasm goes, that describes my feeling when considering the prospect of another year with TJax. Thus the unending quest for quality alternatives…
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Another year with T-Jax doesn't enthuse me either
And yes, this predictive business isn’t easy, especially when we really lack a lot of information regarding Manning.
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 3, 2012 3:08 AM PST up reply actions
Not actually the only loss..
Anquan Boldin, Karlos Dansby, Antrel Rolle, Bryant McFadden, Bertrand Berry… the Cards went through a major overhaul.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 2, 2012 10:53 AM PST up reply actions
I stand corrected.
ONLY IN SEATTLE:
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain, it raineth every day.
Uh, that's how it used to work.
That was before “win forever!”
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
I don't have quite that much faith in this FO
Formerly known as Vasilii, follow me on twitter @dolgorukii
by Thomas Beekers on Feb 2, 2012 10:00 AM PST up reply actions
I understand your argument about resource allocations
and how teams act in win now mode, but there were grumblings last season about the Colts drafting a QB to be Manning’s successor.
Any team that signs Manning will be doing so knowing that he’s a significant injury risk, is really only a 2-3 season best case scenario and they will do that knowing that they’d better have a capable back-up/QBOTF on the sideline.
I’d be all for signing Manning provided we used a second round pick on QB (Osweiler or Cousins).
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.
"I don't know what I would personally do with a fourth round draft pick."
And with the 107th pick the Seattle Seahawks select… A. Snickers?
We had better draft a QB
They need to draft a guy and bring in a FA who is better than Whitehurst and let the competition work itself out. It would be pretty sweet to get Peyton Manning if he can actually play with that injury but it just seems unlikely to me. Who knows though, I think our receivers would be pretty bad ass with Peyton throwing the ball their way. We would still need a QBOTF though. For some reason I have a feeling that they may bring in Jason Campbell to compete with Tarvaris this year and they will also draft Osweiler or Cousins. I don’t really like the idea but for some reason it just seems to me like it is going to happen that way.
What I took from this article -
We need to do one of two things: either sign a Drew Brees in free agency or draft a Tom Brady in the sixth round. Got it!
(Alternatively, catch two unicorn farts, tie them to a shooting star and ride the awesome forever. Got it!)
by John Edwards on Feb 1, 2012 4:43 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
In all seriousness, I hope nobody has gathered that I've made any flat-out statements about what I think the Seahawks should do with the QB situation.
But if I anyone WAS asking… My ideal situation, given the facts of the draft, free agency, and trade, would be a serious exploration of trading up for Robert Griffin III based on how I feel about him as a prospect, how he fits in the system, and what history tells us about the important of a QB to a Super Bowl-winning formula, and the fact that most Super Bowl quarterbacks of an elite level are acquired by their teams in the draft.
That’s my stance s of 2/1/2012, before the combine, before free agency.
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 1, 2012 4:54 PM PST up reply actions
Im with you on getting RG3
If that doesn’t happen get Manning as stop gap and draft Barkley in 2013. Seattle is going to have to pay the price sooner or later. With this coaching staff I just dont see the hawks picking in the top 5.
by Redzone59 on Feb 1, 2012 5:10 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Should have said..
Picking in the top 5 as a natural pick.
by Redzone59 on Feb 1, 2012 5:11 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I didn't think you were making any flat-out statements, I was just trying to lampoon the type of poorly thought out opinions that I frequently see in assorted comment sections.
I enjoy any article and/or comment that includes research and thoughtful assessment…like this one! I hope my comment didn’t come off as a negative response to your work.
Obviously the Seahawks should win every game they play. Less obviously is how the fuck to make that a possibility.
That was my guess
Props for taking the chance.
Great perspective Kenny.
Awesome work.
by jhmg16 on Feb 1, 2012 8:37 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Thanks.
Sounds like I picked up some hecklers with this article!
follow @casetines
by Kenneth Arthur on Feb 2, 2012 8:26 AM PST up reply actions
We want Steve Deberg for QB
When he was playing for San Francisco, they got Joe Montana and he got demoted to backup. He was then traded to Denver, and a year later they got Elway, and he was demoted to backup. He was traded to Tampa Bay, and they got Steve Young and Vinny testaverde, and he was demoted to backup.
Deberg is the best way to get a QB, and Seattle can get him cheap!
by blazerbill on Feb 1, 2012 10:57 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Sounds like we already have him
Except now his name rhymes with “Varvaris.”
by Matt Erickson on Feb 1, 2012 11:27 PM PST up reply actions
Great article Kenneth.
I enjoy your sarcasm and humor. Quite a large fan of commentary.
As for the quarterback situation, I am getting less enthusiastic about FA options as well as Brock Osweiler. I saw the disrespect he showed towards Erickson in the bowl game. I don’t want that on the Seahawks. I want Austin or B.J. Coleman, and sign some free agents for depth if we have a chance.
Manning is a legend, but let’s not have the same thing that happened to Jerry Rice happen to Peyton.
by Neonjerseysplease on Feb 2, 2012 7:51 PM PST reply actions
You mean when he wanted to go for it on 4th down?
Players do that all the time, it’s rare that coaches actually cave though.
And ASU is eminently stupid to let a coach they had just fired coach the game.
70% of space is covered by dark matter, the rest by ET.

by 
































