Page 5 of 26 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 380
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    40,748
    Quote Originally Posted by jammer View Post
    Despite being peppered with questions about his QB in his season closing 45 min press conf. yesterday PC says TJax remains the QB going forward:



    http://www.seahawks.com/news/article...6-69d76ebbf235

    So much for CBJ, and so much for instant change at QB, we seem stuck with Jackson for at least another year. Carroll did say in his presser that there would be competition at the position next season but offered up the injury excuse as a reason why Jax didn't perform better, yet remained concerned about Jax inability to finish games. The press conference is worth listening to, though there is a lot of coach speak typically to be expected.

    http://www.seahawks.com/videos-photo...1-d24a7dfcab93
    Well, if you remember correctly, he said the same thing about CBJ before Tjax was signed prior to this season...

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    11,807
    I haven't listen to the PC yet, but I find it interesting that Jammer can hear it and think "we're definitely stuck with Jackson" and Dave Boling can hear it and think "we're definitely drafting a QB in the 1st round".

    Of course, those two aren't exclusive, but out of the same PC one is a pretty negative reaction and the other is pretty positive.

    Reading between the lines on the few quotes I've seen, I think QB is very high on the list for JS and PC.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Duncan, B.C., Canada
    Posts
    8,281
    Hey, I listened to the PC and thought there were indications the team isn't presently looking at trading up in the 1st if it involves losing the 2nd rd pick. There was a lot of coach speak during the PC and some significant reading between the lines is necessary to interpret what he really was saying.

    Frankly I hope my "negative" view is not sustained and Boling ids right b/c I don't see Tjax as being capable of being 'the guy' going forward as he seems to not be able to process information on the field quick enough and doesn't se the field well under pressure. However I do believe he's got ample physical skills to be an NFL QB.

    Completely agree that the team will be looking to improve the competition at QB but wonder if they intent to go after any special player.
    If you're not mad as hell you're not paying attention.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    40,748
    Quote Originally Posted by jammer View Post
    Hey, I listened to the PC and thought there were indications the team isn't presently looking at trading up in the 1st if it involves losing the 2nd rd pick. There was a lot of coach speak during the PC and some significant reading between the lines is necessary to interpret what he really was saying.

    Frankly I hope my "negative" view is not sustained and Boling ids right b/c I don't see Tjax as being capable of being 'the guy' going forward as he seems to not be able to process information on the field quick enough and doesn't se the field well under pressure. However I do believe he's got ample physical skills to be an NFL QB.

    Completely agree that the team will be looking to improve the competition at QB but wonder if they intent to go after any special player.
    Like you, I don't see us trading up by any means to draft Griffin or Luck... I would be absolutely stunned if that happened... In fact, Schneider's history show's that he prefers to trade down for players rather than up... When I discuss our options, I don't even include Luck or Griffin because I absolutely do not see that happening... I don't think we have a shot in H E double hockey sticks of landing either one of those guys...
    Last edited by Anointed One; 01-04-2012 at 07:12 PM.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    11,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Anointed One View Post
    Like you, I don't see us trading up by any means to great Griffin or Luck... I would be absolutely stunned if that happened... In fact, Schneider's history show's that he prefers to trade down for players rather than up... When I discuss our options, I don't even include Luck or Griffin because I absolutely do not see that happening... I don't think we have a shot in H E double hockey sticks of landing either one of those guys...
    I hate you.

    GBN has us taking Landry Jones.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    40,748
    Quote Originally Posted by McGruffHawk View Post
    I hate you.

    GBN has us taking Landry Jones.
    Ugh, I don't want to touch Landry Jones with a 20 foot goal post...

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    11,807
    Quote Originally Posted by Anointed One View Post
    Ugh, I don't want to touch Landry Jones with a 20 foot goal post...
    If we end up with Jones or Tannehill, I trust in John and Pete enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Gopher Hole
    Posts
    8,837
    Quote Originally Posted by McGruffHawk View Post
    If we end up with Jones or Tannehill, I trust in John and Pete enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.
    I would rather have Tannehill at this point. The more I saw Jones, the more I saw a system QB. Talk about a guy who's confidence went into the crapper after Broyles injury. I didn't initially like Tannehill at first, but I'm warming up on him. Definitely a team player and is still somewhat raw. If the kinks can be ironed out, he might turn out to be a good QB at the next level.
    Common sense is not so common. ~ Voltaire

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    26,622
    Quote Originally Posted by McGruffHawk View Post
    If we end up with Jones or Tannehill, I trust in John and Pete enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.
    Because of the great job they've done evaluating QBs up to this point?

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    In a theatre near you.
    Posts
    16,323
    Quote Originally Posted by SilverSeahawk View Post
    Because of the great job they've done evaluating QBs up to this point?
    Fair point, but it's worth noting that the just about every move they've made at other positions has panned out. Gallery and CBJ being the only real exceptions I can think of. I say this arguing that despite their statements to the contrary PC and Schneider brought in Jackson to be nothing more than a stop gap solution.
    "I believe it is the duty of each of us to act as if the fate of the world depended on him. Admittedly, one man by himself cannot do the job. However, one man can make a difference."

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    11,807
    Quote Originally Posted by SilverSeahawk View Post
    Because of the great job they've done evaluating QBs up to this point?
    Whitehurst was a total whiff. That's a fair point.

    With Jackson, I would argue he was the best option in a bad lot of QB's last year. The only other option that makes sense, even in hindsight, given the cost and availability, would be Andy Dalton (who, BTW, I wanted us to draft).

    Other than Dalton, we didn't have a shot at any of the young starting QB's in the draft, and the other FA options were guys like Leinart, and there's little certainty he would've been better. We could've given an arm and a leg plus a huge contract to Kolb, but that didn't turn out well for the Cards.

    Jackson was a low cost, low risk move, who panned out better than most thought he would. Regardless, a two year deal was a pretty sure indication that Seattle didn't (and doesn't) see him as a long term starter . . . and so he is exactly what they thought he would be . . . a low rent stop gap. I don't see that as a misjudgment by Pete and John at all.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington
    Posts
    27,180
    Landry Jones back to school.

    I didn't really want him at 11/12, but this further thins the QB pool. I wonder if a team like Miami would grab Tannehill in the top 10. Crazy to think about, but teams always need QBs.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington
    Posts
    27,180
    Quote Originally Posted by McGruffHawk View Post
    Whitehurst was a total whiff. That's a fair point.

    With Jackson, I would argue he was the best option in a bad lot of QB's last year. The only other option that makes sense, even in hindsight, given the cost and availability, would be Andy Dalton (who, BTW, I wanted us to draft).

    Other than Dalton, we didn't have a shot at any of the young starting QB's in the draft, and the other FA options were guys like Leinart, and there's little certainty he would've been better. We could've given an arm and a leg plus a huge contract to Kolb, but that didn't turn out well for the Cards.

    Jackson was a low cost, low risk move, who panned out better than most thought he would. Regardless, a two year deal was a pretty sure indication that Seattle didn't (and doesn't) see him as a long term starter . . . and so he is exactly what they thought he would be . . . a low rent stop gap. I don't see that as a misjudgment by Pete and John at all.
    My biggest problem with Jackson was bringing him on period. I still would have rather just ran with what we had (Whitehurst) or even brought Matt back (although he probably wouldn't have survived). We knew what we were getting with Jackson, and that's exactly what we got: a below-average mistake prone QB.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    40,748
    Quote Originally Posted by seahawksfan837 View Post
    Landry Jones back to school.

    I didn't really want him at 11/12, but this further thins the QB pool. I wonder if a team like Miami would grab Tannehill in the top 10. Crazy to think about, but teams always need QBs.
    I'm glad as well, I didn't want the Hawks to land Jones either with our first rounder... You're right, I think this is the new age where we'll see QB's drafted higher than they normally would with the new rookie salary structure... I wouldn't be surprised to see Tannehill drafted that high...

    With the rookie salary cap, I think we'll also see more kids returning for their senior year than we have in the past...

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington
    Posts
    27,180
    Yeah, agreed. The big money is made now on the 2nd contract, not the rookie one. Might as well get yourself in the best possible shape for sustainable success.

    Which is how it should have been all along IMO.

Page 5 of 26 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  






Fantasy Football Rankings


Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.