A counter to my own article yesterday…

January 13th, 2023 | Written by Rob Staton

Yesterday I wrote a piece discussing the possibility of John Schneider and Pete Carroll having different ideas for the off-season. I speculated that might be one of the reasons why there’s been a bit of internet chatter about Carroll’s desire to carry on coaching beyond this season.

Today I’m going to discuss the other side of the argument.

An article by Brady Henderson was brought to my attention. It discussed the future of Geno Smith and had some interesting elements that are worth breaking down:

The Seahawks, meanwhile, no doubt want to re-sign their Pro Bowl quarterback, but they have an offensive system they believe to be QB-friendly. They also believe there are potentially viable alternatives on more affordable contracts should Smith’s asking price get too high for their liking.

This isn’t framed as an opinion. The article states what the team believes. This is sourced. This is from the Seahawks’ top brass. They think their scheme is quarterback friendly and they think they can find a cost-effective replacement for Smith if he doesn’t re-sign.

This isn’t insignificant.

Now, it could all be part of negotiating through the media. The Seahawks have dabbled in that over the years. It could be a dig in the ribs for Smith’s agency.

I’d go as far to say that’s pretty likely what this is. The Seahawks grabbing at some leverage, playing the game a little bit.

You can’t blame them. What else can they do? They can’t come out and talk about underwhelming performances and too many turnovers or near turnovers in the second half of the season. That would be a negotiation killer.

All they can do is set up the impression — whether it’s true or not — that they have a bunch of alternative options. Smith’s representatives will likely make a similar case on alternative suitors as both teams talk contract before free agency begins.

By suggesting the scheme is QB-friendly, they also subtly introduce the thought that Smith has succeeded as a 32-year-old not necessarily because of a career renaissance but because he has been set up to succeed by the system.

It also says to Smith — why would you want to play somewhere else? This scheme helps you shine.

Nevertheless, the line Henderson reports still suggests the Seahawks are prepared to move on. We’ve seen in the past talk of prioritising extending the contracts of Frank Clark and Jadeveon Clowney. Neither re-signed because the price was too high. This is a team that draws a line and tends to stick to it. If they are unwilling to meet Smith’s demands, they’ll likely stick to their guns even if it means looking elsewhere.

Carroll’s tone has also changed slightly. I asked him in Germany, following a NFL Network report about their keenness to keep Smith and Drew Lock, about his interest in keeping their QB’s:

Understandably Carroll mentioned it was too early to get into discussing contract talks but he made a point of speaking about how pleased he was with Smith and Lock while noting ‘a conversation was coming’ with the pair.

Within Henderson’s article, here’s what Carroll said:

“Well, we’ve work to do… but our system is really good. The system is really good, what we’re asking these guys to do.”

Carroll brings up the scheme — which chimes with the earlier part of Henderson’s report that the Seahawks believe their system is ‘quarterback friendly’.

It’s possible that both Schneider and Carroll are actually on the same page here — both in how they’re approaching negotiations and leverage with Smith but also in a willingness to move on if needs be.

Where else might they be aligned?

They might have agreed on a plan last year ahead of the Russell Wilson trade that they would set out to draft a quarterback in 2023.

Smith’s form in the first half of the season may have provoked a slight pause for thought as he was touted as an outside bet for MVP. Yet having thrown five interceptions in his last five games — a tally that could’ve easily been higher — they might’ve soured somewhat on a major investment in Smith.

As discussed yesterday, Seattle’s cap situation is not set-up to accommodate even a moderately well paid quarterback. They have the seventh most effective cap space ($28.5m) with the third fewest players contracted for 2023. They’ve got a lot of work to do without a lot of cap space to do it.

People have even talked about franchising Smith but I don’t know how you do that without hacking away at your roster — creating more holes — and failing to make any significant additions in the veteran market.

There’s likely a dollar amount they’d be willing to give Smith — it’s probably not close to the amount he’s hoping for. Which means he’ll need to establish his market and then the Seahawks will have a decision to make.

Smith seemed very emotional after the Rams game. There could be many reasons for that. At the time he didn’t know whether Seattle would make the playoffs and possibly assumed, like a lot of us, that Green Bay would beat Detroit. He possibly felt emotional because he thought it was his last game and he has an uncertain future.

After the game he said:

“It’s a business. Football is a business, a lot of people have a lot of decisions to make, that’s where I’ll leave it at.”

Again, it implies that the two sides might be further apart than some think and there’s a willingness on the Seahawks’ behalf to offer a certain salary and if the Smith camp want more, they’ll be prepared to move on.

I don’t think it’s that preposterous that a much cheaper Sam Darnold, Mason Rudolph, Gardner Minshew or Cooper Rush might be added to compete with Drew Lock — before the addition of a quarterback if the draft falls the right way at #5.

Both Carroll and Schneider might be very comfortable with that given how much they’re talking up the scheme. It’s justified too. We saw Jared Goff produce in LA. Baker Mayfield basically flew to the Rams, ran onto the field and had a modicum of success at the end of the season.

Will Levis had a tremendous season for Kentucky playing for Liam Coen in 2021. Aaron Rodgers had two MVP-level seasons playing under Matt LaFleur. Cincinnati made the Super Bowl with a talented offensive roster operating within this scheme.

The Kyle Shanahan and McVay schemes share a lot of DNA and we’re seeing Shanahan dominate games starting a third string ‘Mr Irrelevant’ this season.

I think it’s important to offer the other side to the article I wrote yesterday, which positioned Schneider and Carroll on opposite ends of a big off-season.

It’s possible the opposite is true but I also do lean towards the old ‘no smoke without fire’ when it comes to stuff like this.

Speaking of Levis — here’s something to remember. Not only does he have the physical qualities Schneider loves. His familiarity with the offense Seattle runs could make him even more attractive if he’s required to start sooner rather than later. He spent a year in the Rams offense and then a season in the Shanahan system in college. He will understand the terminology and how to run the scheme.

I’m not sure Levis will last to #5 but he could be a very attractive proposition if Carroll and Schneider are setting themselves up to go quarterback early.

Check out this video I posted on my YouTube channel earlier — it’s also available via ‘The Rebuild’ podcast streams:

If you enjoy the blog and appreciate what we do — why not consider supporting the site via Patreon — (click here)

202 Responses to “A counter to my own article yesterday…”

  1. ShowMeYourHawk says:

    Trying to figure all this out is a Lovecraftian descent into madness.

    This all seems like an attempt to keep Geno on a lower figure. While the dust has yet to settle on roster spots around the league, where else would Geno logically fit? Is there another team in the league that:

    1) Runs, or will adapt to run, a similar offense that Geno has excelled in this season?

    2) Has the cap to pay Geno $25-30 annually?

    3) Given Geno’s climbing age, is ready (or thinks they are) to contend, right now?

    I’m failing to come up with this mystery team. The best, and perhaps only option, is the Seahawks but even WE don’t currently match the second criteria. Some teams might be in on Geno as a Plan B or C, provided they can’t draft, trade for or sign a better, more established QB. I can’t for the life of me think of a squad that looks at Geno and says, “Him. He’s what our squad is missing.”

    Thoughts?

    • Rob Staton says:

      It probably is an attempt to get Geno back at a cheaper price

      But I also think if that cheaper price isn’t accepted, they’ll be prepared to move on

      Yesterday I opined that Carroll might be against moving on but today, after reading the ESPN piece, I’m not so sure

    • Mick says:

      I speculate, but I would think two possible destinations for Geno are Jets and Carolina.

      • ShowMeYourHawk says:

        The Jets currently have about $15 in cap space. Not likely. It would be poetic if this somehow happened. even karmic, perhaps.

        Carolina was projected to be over the cap. Again, not likely. I wouldn’t put it past Tepper to make this happen regardless though if his HC hire is onboard, so it’s not as unlikely. They may see the current NFC South as weak and for the taking. I’d think that a new HC would want “their own guy,” however.

        I still say Geno’s best option is to return, on a lower deal.

        • Daniel D. says:

          I don’t think the Jets could withstand the optics if they brought him back and it didn’t work out, which it probably wouldn’t. I don’t see that happening.

    • Spectator says:

      Colts? Atlanta? Even the Raiders?

      • ShowMeYourHawk says:

        That’s just naming teams with openings. Is a new HC in Indy going to want a 33 year old with a single year of productivity as his go-to QB? Is going from Carr to Smith a huge jump in talent for LV?

        • Rob Staton says:

          Indy will not sign another 30-something veteran

          They’ll be all about the draft and going young

          • ShowMeYourHawk says:

            Fully agreed. Unless something monumental happens in the offseason, which is wholly possible, I have to think Smith won’t have more than two serious suitors, of which we’re one.

            TEN and CAR would make some sense but both have cap issues. I suppose BAL and NE could enter the picture if Lamar is tagged and traded or NE gives up on Mac Jones. Neither is likely, in my mind.

  2. UkAlex6674 says:

    Great post again Rob. Thought provoking stuff.

  3. Forrest says:

    I do think Pete vs. John plays in here. The long-term future of the franchise would be best served with a rookie QB. But, if Pete wants to give it one more year before he retirees to try to win a Super Bowl, I could see him going after Lamar Jackson (back loading the cap hit to fit him artificially into 2023), Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers and then going all in on defense in the draft.

    Remember, this is the team that brought a private plan to pick up an aged Peyton Manning at the end of his career.

    • Rob Staton says:

      FYI — I can’t verify completely — but the source that provided me with the info to break this in 2010:

      https://imgbb.com/HXrwffn

      Also told me the Seahawks were not seriously in on Manning and I’m not sure that plane thing is accurate (but I don’t know for sure)

    • James Z says:

      It’s seems to me that picking one of the 4 QB’s at 5, if one is available, of course, is both in the short and long term interest of the team. If PC/JS both believe (even for the most part) that the offense as designed is QB friendly than any average QB (Geno being average, IMO) available on the market will fit the bill as a place holder at least and perhaps enough to get deeper into the playoffs or SB whether or not PC is still HC. I guess my point is that drafting one of the 4 works for the short or long-term makes sense at least potentially.

  4. GrittyHawk says:

    I was curious how Geno’s last 5 games would project to a full season, and where he would rank. Obviously it’s a small sample size (and not really a statistically valid form of analysis), but here’s what it would look like for funsies (hypothetical ranks in parentheses):

    Yards: 3,784 (10th)
    TD: 27 (7th)
    TD Rate: 4.44% (18th)
    INT: 17 (most)
    INT Rate: 2.78% (26th lowest / 9th highest)
    Rating: 83.9 (28th)
    AY/A: 5.8 (31st)
    Bad Throw %: 15.0% (14th lowest / 20th highest)

    Obviously this doesn’t tell the full story of this season — if we did the opposite and looked at his first 12 games he would have been #1 with a 108 QB Rating and 2nd with 8.5 AY/A (and even with that rough stretch, his full season Bad Throw % was still best in the NFL), but I still think it’s mildly concerning that he had a 5-game stretch of Davis Mills / Matt Ryan / below-replacement-level performance, in the most important time of year. I think I’d feel better about his future prospects if this happened at the beginning or middle of the year and he recovered.

    The thought I keep coming back to is, even if games 1-12 are the real Geno we get next year, can this team be remotely competitive with a $30M QB preventing us from making any other roster improvements outside of the draft? Do people really think Anderson or Carter are the difference between mediocrity and contention?

  5. Bankhawk says:

    Rob, I love your balanced exploration of the #1 issue of the coming off-season, and the way the scenarios you’ve laid out are well grounded in the situation as it is, rather than knee jerk wish fulfillment!
    I personally have nothing but good wishes for Geeno (same being true for Russell, as well) and what he’s done for the club, but have to say I lean towards ‘the Schneider Scenario’. Love the peek inside your mock as well.
    Great work, mon! But then, it always is!

  6. Henry Taylor says:

    It does seem like the best case scenario is bringing back Geno at an reasonable price and drafting Richardson for the future. Best of both worlds for Pete and John. We can even do some Taysom Hill stuff with AR while he’s developing, Waldron has shown the willingness to do some wildcat stuff with DJ Dallas, so why not a real QB?

    • Ben says:

      Absolutely this. No matter what QB starts if it isn’t Richardson, and we draft AR, I hope they’re doing Taysom Hill-type subbing and getting him reps. He should easily be able to come into the NFL and wreak havoc like that.

  7. no frickin clue says:

    It’s also possible that their backup plan if Geno leaves is…Drew Lock.
    Already knows the offense. Not in a position to bargain much for an elevated salary.
    I would be thoroughly uninspired if they did that, but maybe Pete and John actually believe their hyperbole that they had “two number 1’s” this year?

    • Wade says:

      💯💯💯

      Rob, excellent article (per usual) and excellent question in Munich.

      Possibly too many tea leaves I’m reading, but Geno has sounded recently like someone who’s time in Seattle is winding down. Like Russ at the end of last season. (And even then, Pete was holding out hope.)

      I wonder if he and his agent realize that the parties are too far apart. Rob mentions Clark and Clowney. At least the Seahawks brass *wanted* to sign those players. It may be that Geno is too pricey and both parties have already agreed the best thing may be to move on.

    • Ben says:

      I personally think people seem to think Lock coming back is a 95% possibility where it may be more like 35%. He wasn’t a great QB in college and hasn’t been good in the NFL. I’m guessing if we don’t sign Geno, we’ll see at least 1 better QB interested in coming to Seattle trying to win the battle for the starting spot. The value of being a starting QB to someone who won’t get that chance elsewhere will allow us to sign someone at a greatly reduced price (10 to 15 mill?) than the 30 mill being talked about for Geno.

      • TatupuTime says:

        It’s not 95%, but I do think there is a very high likelihood that Drew is back in any QB room scenario that is Geno-Rookie QB.

        He’s going to be a pretty low cost signing and I think he’ll see what Geno has done and feel like Seattle is a good opportunity for him. My interpretation of Pete speak and seeing other interviews/interactions with players is that Pete and his teammates both really like him. I think the Seahawks will be interested in his familiarity with the system as well, especially if Geno leaves. Plus the man throws a real nice deep ball and I do think that it is something that Pete really likes.

        He was flawed for sure coming out of college (accuracy issues and dealing with pressure), but I actually thought he was pretty good in college. 72 touchdowns for Missouri in the SEC his last two years is still 72 touchdowns. His NFL career has not been good, but I’m not sure how much stock the Seahawks are going to put in that given they just entered this year with Geno/Lock and didn’t even both bringing in any other real challengers.

        • Ben says:

          We don’t tend to carry 3 QBs, seems costly. And why would he want to come back and be 3rd fiddle if some people here think he could return to start if Geno doesn’t…

  8. Plip says:

    It seems to me the foundation for the Seahawks’ championship was having very good quarterback who matured soon enough (at least in on-field play) to be able to contribute while still on his rookie contract. That is what enabled them to assemble arguably the NFL’s best defense of the decade and pay Marshawn.

    Of course, the #5 pick will cost a lot more than the #75 pick did. But you get an extra year with him, too. So if there’s a QB available at #5 that Pete thinks can contribute during his rookie deal (four years for ~$35M), that frees up a lot a lot of cap space to build the defense in ways that they couldn’t do paying Geno (or anyone who performs at that level) $30M+/year. That, I think, is what will appeal to Pete.

  9. Belfasthawk says:

    Rob, do you think Levis’s age (24 at start of the season) is an issue at all?

    I know you were far from sold on Hooker for lots of reasons but this was one of the negatives you mentioned on him. I know this is an apples and oranges thing but I wondered if the plan was for Geno for a year and then QB at 5 to take over (the chiefs’ Smith and Mohomes model) that Levis being older might make him slightly less preferable to Richardson or whenever.

    • Blitzy the Clown says:

      It’s less about age and more about experience.

      Hooker has zero experience running a pro style offense. So if you draft him you’re gonna have to factor in the time it’ll take to learn how to run a pro offense — at least one season, maybe more.

      That’s a problem if you’re already 25.

      But Levis has been running a pro offense for two years at Kentucky. He doesn’t need a redshirt year in the pros to learn how to recognize a defensive alignment and adjust the play call accordingly. He doesn’t need to learn how to look off defenders (even if he does need to practice it). He step into a pro system and start producing right away. Hence, age isn’t as important a factor for him as it would be for someone like Hooker.

  10. Big Mike says:

    Really excellent pair of articles the last 2 days Rob. I love that you present 2 possibilities rather than like so many nowadays, take one position and die on that hill e.g. “the Seahawks will never trade Russell Wilson”.
    Care to guess what you think the ceiling for paying Geno might be? Other folks feel free to offer an opinion as well! I’m at about 20 per, and that might even be high. This isn’t what you would pay him, rather a guess as to what you think the team will offer him.

    Oh and my opinion is that Levis doesn’t last to #5. Hawks either have to trade up or take the greener version of him in Richardson.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I don’t think Geno is going to get anything like the market some people think

      But I’m not sure I can offer a number as a prediction

      • Daniel D. says:

        That’s the problem– it’s challenging to predict the market because we haven’t seen a player revive his career like Geno has in a couple of decades, since before major changes to player contracts.

        Even in this QB dominant era, I do think we may see a middle class QB market emerge with the likes of Smith, Carr, and Daniel Jones. You can’t top the market to sign those guys, and in the wake of Kyler Murray’s contract something has to give.

        That said, the market for QBs is still absurd. The Colts gave up a third round pick for the right to pay Matt Ryan $54m over two seasons that became guaranteed with the deal He was about to turn 37 and coming off a worse season than Geno just had. We saw the madness with Watson and the draft capitol given up for Wentz and Darnold.

        There will be a market for Geno. That’s why I’d try to tag and trade him so that he can extend with a team more desperate than Seattle (Panthers, Commanders, etc)..

        • Rob Staton says:

          There is zero chance of a tag and trade as outlined in my other post because Geno will sign the tag and you are f****d unless you then extend him for about $30m per year and lower the year one cap hit.

          If you tag him and a guy who has never come close nor probably never expected to come close to $30m for one season signs the tag you literally have -$1.5m to spend and only 37 contracted players.

          It would be a disaster. You would be locked in to having to extend him for multiple years.

          • Forrest says:

            Is someone really going to give you more than a 2024 3rd round compensatory pick for a $30 million franchise tagged Geno? I agree with Rob that the gamble if far too high for the possible benefit.

  11. Rob Staton says:

    Big interview coming on Tuesday BTW

  12. Blitzy the Clown says:

    Anthony Amico
    @amicsta

    In 2021, Will Levis had success behind the 13th-rated (PFF) pass-blocking OL, and within NFL concepts run by Liam Coen.

    In 2022, Coen was gone, and Kentucky was 67th in pass-blocking. 2 of his top 3 receivers were freshmen.

    The NFL will like Levis better than you
    4:29 AM · Jan 13, 2023

      • Roy Batty says:

        It’s also worth noting the shade thrown AR’s way. All the statistical proof, they claim, that he is too raw and a massive gamble.

        Then you have others responding by pointing out Mahomes and Allen were raw, and those same people throwing shade claim they are unicorns. That the Hawks have more needs on the Dline.

        How the hell can they be unicorns if they were drafted one year apart?

        They had tremendous upside and were drafted by two patient teams. Teams who recognized the stratospheric upside. Those aren’t unicorns, they are investments.

  13. God of Thunder says:

    Great post by Rob.

    This is completely off topic, but … Jadaveon Clowney. He’s been poor, he’s been benched, he’s been injured and he’s been taking shots at his organization and teammates (Garrett). I know he wants to win and he’s not just a prima donna. But we dodged a bullet in not signing him to a long term contract.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Perhaps

      But I also wonder what would’ve happened in 2020 if they just had one player who could wreck a game like he could

      • Big Mike says:

        And if the Hawks sign him, it’s likely they don’t make the trade for the pompous peacock, the worst trade in franchise history. So we end up with a guy who has underperformed but still did more than Adams plus Seattle keeps those 2 first rounders. I’ll take that if I have to take one or the other.

  14. Jordan says:

    One thing I’ve learned from this Geno Pro Bowl season is not to make any definitive statements of what kind of player Drew Lock could become and what his future has in store now that he is in a quality program.

    Only one year post-Russ worth of evidence, but the strength of the program may supersede the ability of the QB in a vacuum.

    So if we posit that this is a QB friendly place, Geno will be the 3rd QB Pete has taken to the playoffs, then I think you wish Geno well and insert a cheaper, younger option into the mix; and I’d be pumped if it were any of the 4 top draft eligible QBs.

    • Peter says:

      I kind of agree except the three qbs thing. Let’s get right here. Matt was coached by a very very good offensive mind and was a probably qb of the one time best offense in the league….not sure Pete’s system as it were carried matt there.

  15. God of Thunder says:

    “33 year old mostly career backup with one outstanding first half of season and one very solid second half of season … and one surprising playoff win over Santa Clara Niners* … seeks 30 million + per annum for long walks on the beach”

    * disclaimer: playoff win in Calif. may not actually happen

  16. Matt says:

    The guy I think makes a ton of sense, if Geno leaves is Jacoby Brissett. VERY similar type of QB who has done pretty well in some bad situations. Not to shortchange Geno, but I’m failing to see why Brissett couldn’t provide 85% of what Geno did at a much lower price. He’s known as a consummate professional.

    Just another option that could intrigue. The cool idea with this one, unlike Geno…let’s say the rookie QB is ready to go by Week 12…I would think the team would be more inclined to say, “let’s make the switch” (assuming there’s not a real playoff battle).

    • Jace says:

      Geno had one of the best seasons in Seahawks history. For Brissett to come in, learn the offense, and provide that, or 85% of that? I respectfully disagree. I also don’t see how they are similar players. I haven’t watched Brissett much but I don’t remember him making any of the plays Geno makes. I could be wrong but I don’t see it.

      • Rob Staton says:

        PFF grades for 2022:

        Jacoby Brissett — 82.6
        Geno Smith — 79.8

        Just saying…

        • Jace says:

          I just remember an average QB in Indy who could manage a game here and there. But then I again, I haven’t watched many Jacoby Brissett games. (To be fair to me, who would watch Jacoby Brissett games?).

          • Rob Staton says:

            This is the thing though, we all thought Geno was bang average a year ago

            • Jace says:

              That sounds right on the surface, but Geno had the advantage of sitting and learning the offense for a couple years, has familiarity with the players, and let’s face it, he didn’t really play much in the past 8 years. Meanwhile, we’ve seen Brissett play recently and be a starter, and he hasn’t done much. Maybe if he came to Seattle and we gave him a couple years he could be? But jumping in right away and learning a new playbook? I’m skeptical.

  17. UkAlex6674 says:

    I think from a stats perspective they are similar. But Brissett has even less last minute game winning drive in him the Geno.

    • Matt says:

      Candidly I’m not worried about that. More about general production and stability until the young pup takes over.

      *Valid point though

  18. DCSeattle says:

    Interesting debate around the offensive system and QB success. At least from an eye-test, this offense certainly performed better with Geno than Russ. We even saw some of that in his games last year while Russ was injured. So the idea that a QB that can operate within this offensive system will be successful, and that can transfer to any QB that can operate it seems sound.

    However, my biggest question is: is this offensive system that good? I don’t know that I am sold or that Waldron is the guy. We certainly saw good things this year, but not consistency. Really great drives with creative and logical play calls interspersed with head-scratching drives with play calls that are fireable offenses (STOP WITH THE DAMN SCREENS for example). Maybe year 3 is when we feel good about Waldron, but I’m not there yet.

    This playoff game could answer a lot of questions (weather permitting). If this coaching staff is staying, we need to see at least a sign that they’ve learned from past mistakes. They have the tape to not be surprised by Brock freakin Purdy. They have the tape and the game experience and roster knowledge to scheme something up against this 49ers defense. I don’t want to see useless screens, repeated runs into the middle, RBs not chipping edge rushers, Lockett returning a punt, choosing if DK or Lockett will be the receiver du jour, forgetting TEs exist (on offense or defense), any d-lineman covering Kittle or Ayuk, Bruce Irvin playing 80% of snaps…the usual nonsense we’ve seen over and over.

    I actually do think this game is winnable for the Hawks, there’s just something about this team that gives me hope. And that would be fun.

    • Rob Staton says:

      However, my biggest question is: is this offensive system that good?

      Well, it’s the Rams system which has worked in numerous places

      And it just turned a 32-year-old career journeyman and backup into a player some fans want to pay $30m a year

      • DCSeattle says:

        Very true.

        I’m just not totally sold on Waldron being the right play caller within the system. To be fair, this year was a lot better than last year, and who knows how much further along the offense would be without Russ (a guy notorious for wanting to do his thing on offense) at QB for a year. Signs point to growth as a play caller for Waldron, but (and just my opinion) I want to see more growth next year. Could be a personnel thing, could be a Pete’s offense thing (which I don’t think), could just be a first time OC (in his second year) with a new starting QB, only 2 WRs etc thing. While I am not opposed to a coaching turnover, I am certainly not calling for Waldron to be fired or anything.

        I just always hesitate to buy into the “it’s a Team X system” without seeing it work. We’ve seen perfect examples this year with the “Vic Fangio defenses” not exactly being that great without Fangio running them.

        *Not a bash on Russ’s abilities, he’s an all-timer, but he’s not a “system QB”

        • DCSeattle says:

          I guess in short form what I meant by “is this offensive system that good?” is more is this offensive system being executed by the Seahawks at the level that you can “plug and play” a QB.

      • TomLPDX says:

        This makes me think of Goff. He was not the answer for McVay yet he has been a good QB for the Lions. Is Geno Goff? (BTW, I like Goff and wish him success in Detroit).

      • Elmer says:

        And if you have an offensive system that is not friendly to the QB, then maybe it’s time to start looking for a new system.

  19. Big Mike says:

    All-pro team announced
    2nd team Center: Creed Humphrey. Could’ve been a Seahawk (no Tom, I’m not ever gonna get over it)
    1st team LG: Joel Bitonio, blog favorite coming out and available to Seattle to draft back then.

    Dear John, can we PLEASE address the C and one G positions.

    • TomLPDX says:

      HaHa! As I was reading this I was like “Let it go big guy!” I do feel your pain however and let’s hope they get their act together and get Van Pran. Wouldn’t that be sweet!

  20. Palatypus says:

    Is C.J. Golson a reliable source? He says the Colts are going to trade up with the Bears for Levis.

    https://twitter.com/CJGolson/status/1613563854499504128?t=IU-BVmnQvR-MRQVvgghVgQ&s=19

  21. Sam says:

    I wonder what Shane Waldron’s preference is and how much is he involved into making these decisions. Shane’s system looked way better with Geno than Russ.

    • Group Captain Mandrake says:

      My guess is that Waldron would prefer a QB who gets the ball out quickly and uses the whole field rather than avoiding the middle.

  22. BatteriesNotIncluded says:

    Were Stroud to stay at “The” Ohio State University and forsake a draft in which he’s highly likely to be the #1 pick it would markedly change the dynamics of the draft and especially at the #5 pick. Here’s why:
    1) It’s highly doubtful that one of now only 3 QBs, or Will Anderson, will be available at #5.
    2) There’s a significant drop-off in talent after those four selections are off the board.
    3) It pretty much demolishes the trade value of the #5 pick compared to what it would be with 4 QBs plus Will Anderson on the board for the top 5 picks.
    If, for example, the Seahawks were left with the 4th QB – either Young or Richardson – and for whatever reason did not like the QB available (too small, too raw) they could still trade down and make out like bandits…some team will pay dearly for one of those QBs, likely including a 2024 1st round pick plus 2023 picks in compensation. But if Stroud doesn’t enter the draft then that value disappears.
    Where does that leave you? Do you want to take a chance on Jalen Carter? My impression of that guy is, “…the shoes are moving, but nobody is in them”. I don’t want him on my team. Let’s hope Stroud commits for the NFL draft. If not, I think Schneider has two options: moving up in the draft to select the QB he wants, or trading the draft pick for a proven NFL player.
    The only QB worth trading up for is Levis, IMO, assuming Stroud stays at OSU. Levis should and will likely go #1, and the draft capital required to move up from #5 is not worth it (to me). Rob, as you noted, the Seahawks are not one player away, one draft away, from being a championship caliber team like the 49ers or Eagles. We need perhaps 2 draft-cycles, and additional impact players and depth. The 2011 Seahawks is a good comparison to the 2022 team. Unless Levis or Stroud magically fall to us at #5, I’d almost prefer to trade-down and accumulate extra draft capital. In that scenario, get a decent bridge QB like Darnold, Minschew, or maybe Lock (if Geno wants too much). Take a flyer on Stenson Bennett in the 3rd round…shucks, he’s not much different than Bryce Young and has played a sh*t-ton more games (one of Bill Parcells requirements in drafting a QB). Whatever happens, it’s going to be interesting.

  23. Blitzy the Clown says:

    Dianna Russini
    @diannaESPN

    Sean McVay informed members of the Rams organization that he will be staying on as the head coach, per sources. 12:27 PM · Jan 13, 2023

    Well there’s one question answered

    • TomLPDX says:

      I was actually glad to hear this. Sean needs to pick his ass up off the ground and get his team, HIS TEAM, out of the gutter and back on the field.

  24. Starhawk29 says:

    Great article, glad to see both sides of a debate covered. Frankly Rob, today’s post is at the core of why I disagreed with your article from yesterday. I really don’t think they’re sold on Geno. The point about the offense being QB friendly is a big one, and is often overlooked. We are running a very classic style of offense, with heavy play-action, balanced playcalling, and time-tested routes, just with a more modern spin (motion, shotgun, etc.). Geno was 100% setup for success (in hindsight), especially with two 1,000 yard receivers and a 1,000 yard rusher.

    This style of offense, with these weapons, is absolutely QB friendly. Geno did a great job of playing within himself, and occasionally attacking, but it always has felt very coached to me. The only time it hasn’t was when he got hot versus the Chargers. In that brief moment, he felt like a locomotive that drove the team. Otherwise, he appears well-managed to my eyes. And that is fine, you can win that way. But I don’t think Pete is all that interested in settling for what’s at hand.

    He wants to go out on top, and I’d be surprised if he doesn’t see an elite, young QB as a core part of that. As you’ve said in the past, there is two main ways to build a team: methodically add all-pros at every level of the offense and defense, or build a good team and snag a QB that can be best in the league. The former is near impossible to perform, as it would essentially be rebuilding the LOB teams. The latter though, that is far more realistic. If I was a coach trying to find a way back to the SB, which option would I take? The smarter bet on his part, as I have stated, is to look for the QB that can allow them to beat anyone, regardless of how good his defense is. I think Pete’s ideal situation is that of Sean McDermott.

  25. Doge says:

    Good stuff Rob. Will push back on a couple points though. I still think our plan A is keep Geno and Drew. At the same time, they won’t break the bank to make it work cause there are a number of QBs that can fit here whether its Drew, a vet or a rookie. I don’t think its anything to do with not liking Geno, just business – Geno knows that side of the NFL and will play that game too. That said, if we don’t value QB high enough to pay Geno (who deserves a pretty sizeable contract), and believe we don’t place the same value on the position other teams do, why would we take the third QB in the draft top 5?

    Now I think Pete is kinda bluffing here, he does very much value the position, but I just don’t buy that he’d prefer picking say Levis at 5 over paying Geno. The upside may be there, but given they trust the scheme to be “QB friendly” that upside doesn’t seem more valuable than the known quantity (who plays at a very high level).

    Geno had a couple bad picks to end the year, but on the whole showed he was a strength to the offense and our limitations came from other positions. Another QB would face the same situation, it makes a lot of sense to fix those issues and build a roster for the next 3+ years with the assumption you have great QB play imo – seeing as its terribly difficult to find. That gives plenty of time to develop a future option while competing. If we could get picks for Geno it might be a different story but cap alone doesn’t seem worth it – you have to spend it regardless so why not on a top 10 QB?

    I still think we target a DL prospect. I think its really important to remember that outside of the very top prospects, high first round picks are largely driven by traits and projection 2-3 years down the line. I don’t think we’d expect a Tyree Wilson to come out of the box as a game wrecker, but you also won’t find a prospect with his traits outside of the top half of the first round, so if you like his foundation, think he fits your culture and you can coach him up he’s a great pick. As much as high first round DL prospects can bust, thats true for every position. If you compare the outcomes in a 4 year window as Geno + Wilson vs Richardson + *the best DL player you can sign* I have a tough time believing the latter is best. I suppose lucky for us free agency comes first, maybe we get lucky and a phenomenal pass rusher signs and the situation changes.

    • BK26 says:

      I’ll say this: I’m glad you think that Geno played at a very high level. And that he only had a couple bad picks to end the year. For me the position desperately needs to be upgraded. If it isn’t, then we are where we have been for years: stuck in the middle treading water. That is the worst spot to be in.

      My opinion is that if they look at our current quarterback situation and are happy with it, then it’s time for Pete and John to be gone. I think John wants and has been planning for a rookie, Pete I am not sure. I can see him almost giddy using a pick from Russ’s trade to get his successor. I can also see him salivating at a top DE. But quarterback is not a position of strength today.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I don’t think its anything to do with not liking Geno, just business

      Well, I never said they didn’t like Geno Smith.

      Geno knows that side of the NFL and will play that game too. That said, if we don’t value QB high enough to pay Geno (who deserves a pretty sizeable contract)

      As the article lays out, the Seahawks think their scheme is QB friendly. Thus, they probably don’t think he deserves a sizeable contract.

      why would we take the third QB in the draft top 5?

      Because they like him?

      They liked the third QB taken in 2018 plenty enough (Josh Allen).

      First, second, third, fourth — it doesn’t matter the order. It’s all about the evaluation. If there are three or even four QB’s they love, it doesn’t matter who went before them.

      The point is they will have a $6m cap hit. Geno Smith would not have a $6m cap hit.

      And thinking your scheme is QB friendly doesn’t mean not spending high picks on a QB. It means not feeling like you need to commit $30m to a journeyman who had one good season.

      Now I think Pete is kinda bluffing here, he does very much value the position, but I just don’t buy that he’d prefer picking say Levis at 5 over paying Geno. The upside may be there, but given they trust the scheme to be “QB friendly” that upside doesn’t seem more valuable than the known quantity (who plays at a very high level).

      Maybe Pete does prefer to sign Geno Smith.

      But it’s Geno Smith.

      And what we need to remember here is, they don’t have many top five picks.

      People are caught up in Geno’s one good season.

      Imagine not taking a QB you like because you had your head turned by half a season of really good play from Geno Smith.

      It would beggar belief.

      Geno had a couple bad picks to end the year

      No, he had five interceptions in his final five games and was really, really lucky not to have more.

      Another QB would face the same situation, it makes a lot of sense to fix those issues and build a roster for the next 3+ years with the assumption you have great QB play imo – seeing as its terribly difficult to find.

      It doesn’t make sense to deliberately avoid the QB position when you have a rare top five pick if there’s a QB available you like.

      Because if you spend the next 2-3 years building a roster to avoid picking that early, you won’t be in a position to draft a top QB.

      And with two firsts, two seconds and a third rounder this year you have ample stock to draft a QB and STILL address the needs you are referring to.

      One defensive player drafted at five isn’t that important, or that necessary, to neglect the QB position.

      I think its really important to remember that outside of the very top prospects, high first round picks are largely driven by traits and projection 2-3 years down the line. I don’t think we’d expect a Tyree Wilson to come out of the box as a game wrecker, but you also won’t find a prospect with his traits outside of the top half of the first round, so if you like his foundation, think he fits your culture and you can coach him up he’s a great pick.

      And good luck finding a quarterback with ‘traits’ outside of the top-10.

      No different there.

      A quarterback like Allen, Mahomes, Herbert elevates your franchise in a way a Tyree Wilson never ever will be able to.

      If you compare the outcomes in a 4 year window as Geno + Wilson vs Richardson + *the best DL player you can sign* I have a tough time believing the latter is best.

      A four year window where you’re relying on a 36/37 year old Geno Smith to win you a Super Bowl.

      Sounds decidedly unlikely to ever happen.

      • Doge says:

        All goo points Rob. I think at a certain level it comes down to a disagreement on how good Geno is. The drop off in QB production is real, but imo has more to do with protection issues and a fall off in the run game. Without truly breaking down all the plays, Geno’s mistakes have been mostly trying to make a very tough throw, when no throws are really there. Its not a problem misreading a defense or even poor quality as a passer as much as it is trying to be the guy to make a play where there is no play to be made. The truth is, thats one of the things we’ve needed with banged up WRs, RBs and shoddy protection – it’s not totally unexpected that Geno needs to do some limit testing. I believe I heard Geno’s EPA last game was 17th in the league for the week – which for his worst game of the year is not bad at all (didn’t fact check that so feel free to correct). I feel like baked into the discussion is an assessment of Geno Smith and from everything I’ve watched, the stats I’ve seen and the analysis I’ve seen from people smarter than me, I believe he will be a franchise QB for the next 3+ years. I think I disagree with the majority here, and I’d change my opinion with some evidence – I just haven’t seen it.

        That said, I’m still open to a QB in the first round – because as you highlight the potential of a Richardson or Levis is higher than Wilson. I also think in terms of improving the team the most, our best options involve taking a pass rusher in that spot. I have trouble believing the cap savings from a rookie contract QB will create more production elsewhere on the roster.

        My point regarding Carroll maybe thinking they don’t want to break the bank for a QB is if they don’t believe they need to invest big $ in the position due to scheme it stands to reason they also don’t believe in investing big in draft capital there. I also think Pete is bluffing a bit with that – they’ve shown many times they value QBs very highly. I think his opinion would be more in line with, “QB is the most important position, but it doesn’t make sense to overinvest there as no matter who that player is, they need to be surrounded with an incredibly talented roster to win championships”.

        • Rob Staton says:

          The drop off in QB production is real, but imo has more to do with protection issues and a fall off in the run game.

          I think it’s very fair to highlight this and the terrible way the defense played.

          But it’s also absolutely true that Geno started throwing several ‘WTF’ throws and had some very ugly interceptions and some very nearly ugly interceptions that were on him.

          Its not a problem misreading a defense or even poor quality as a passer as much as it is trying to be the guy to make a play where there is no play to be made.

          That’s quarterbacking 101 though

          You can’t play good football if you’re forcing things and turning the ball over

          I feel like baked into the discussion is an assessment of Geno Smith and from everything I’ve watched, the stats I’ve seen and the analysis I’ve seen from people smarter than me, I believe he will be a franchise QB for the next 3+ years.

          I don’t share that belief. Not on the second half of the season. He became a serious turnover threat and his play regressed against a powder puff schedule of opponents.

          We also need to remember here that banking on a 32-year-old’s one good season, in a scheme the team is literally telling the media is QB friendly, would be dangerous beyond belief. You need to ask yourself what is more likely. Geno Smith went from journeyman backup QB to franchise QB based on half a season of fantastic play (before regressing). Or the scheme is, as the team claims, capable of making players look good.

          Because if you commit money to Smith in his age 33-35 seasons and ignore QB now — you eat up most of your cap space for 2023 and you eliminate the best chance you have in a generation to draft a young QB.

          I think his opinion would be more in line with, “QB is the most important position, but it doesn’t make sense to overinvest there as no matter who that player is, they need to be surrounded with an incredibly talented roster to win championships”.

          The evidence suggests otherwise though given they basically spent 3-4 years falling in behind Wilson and embracing his massive cap hit and not having as much to spend on the rest of the roster.

          I think it’s simple as this. The Seahawks will have a dollar amount they’re willing to pay Geno. It won’t be anywhere near as high as people think but will still be far more than anyone expected last summer. Some Seahawks fans are going to have a meltdown if he moves on for an amount they deem to be fair. But ultimately Seattle is in position to draft a very good, young, cheap QB that can potentially be a franchise QB for a decade plus, not 1-3 years having thrown five picks in the last five games (nearly more) to eventually go into the off-season, short of a minor miracle on Saturday, making PCJS question whether it was ever Geno or the scheme.

          And despite what they say, this team is building. I fear on Saturday we’ll get an ugly reality check on just how far they are from being a true contender and as such, they should be viewing the 2023 off-season as stage two of a rebuild — not stage one of ‘try and win with Geno now’.

        • TomLPDX says:

          The opening interception in the Rams game to Ramsey was not a tough throw. It was bad execution. Can we please just call it what it was.

          • Doge says:

            Agreed he shouldn’t have thrown it. Great play by Ramsey. The throw was a bit off, and DK’s break was bad. Execution errors from WR and QB. Honestly though Ramsey made up a lot of ground on a play he was outleveraged, I think you tip your cap to him for a great play.

    • Ben says:

      You can have a QB friendly system and still want a QB that tilts the field. AR-15 is a guy who even if he doesn’t fix his completion rate, can still tilt the field with his running. I think that’s going to make the Hawks a very dangerous team if we can grab him.

      • DC1234 says:

        You need a franchise qb to win the superbowl. There are rare occasions like Dilfer, Foles, Flacco.

        I honestly believe Geno with a upgraded defense next year can, at best win one playoff game next year.

        The NFL right now have so many young generational Qb’s, i dont want seahawks to miss out on a future one because Geno has played well this year.

      • Doge says:

        Great point.

  26. SeaTim says:

    Much, much respect for the discipline, intensity and judgment that Rob and cha bring to this blog. I love reading it. I’m a confirmed lurker but the threads of the past few weeks have triggered me. Cha already did a good job defending Pete Carrol’s stature for Seattle fans like me but I wanted to pitch in.
    The NFL has mediocrity, call it parity if you like, built into its DNA. Everyone thinks of the salary cap and the draft as the enforcers of mediocrity but it goes much deeper. There are not 32 teams worth of great players at every position (great athletes, yes). There are not 32 great first round draft picks annually, 32 great owners, 32 great GMs, or even 32 great playing fields. There aren’t even 16 great officiating teams. The only unfailing excellence in the NFL is in the video capture for broadcast (in my opinion). Prolonged success is the exception. San Francisco’s current awesome team took about a decade of dreck to get to. The fact that Seattle has overperformed in many ways is part of the reason that Seattle has been too consistently on the bottom tier of playoff teams. It is frustrating to skim along in purgatory but for me it truly does beat 10 years in the deeper layers of NFL hell. I too want to kick it up a notch but it’s crazy not to acknowledge how challenging even our current stature is to achieve.
    You can rightly quarrel with many Seahawks drafting and free agency decisions but you also have to acknowledge that Pete coached Woolen, Chancellor, Baldwin, Sherman, L. Willson, J. Hollister, Chris Carter, W. Dissly, B. Mone, Poona, Mayowa and even Tre Flowers (a favorite Seattle whipping post playing as important depth for the Bengals) and other lowish draft picks or UDFAs into successful NFL careers. Some of them them are probably JAGs but Pete has shown time and again that he can turn relatively unformed college kids from small schools or unsuccessful college teams into pro football players and keep them motivated to play out of their minds. That is his greatest strength. Having said that I also agree with Rob in that there’s precious little evidence of any clarity or focus in terms of long term strategy or urgency in the draft or free agency between the SB years until recently, it has felt like more of a bargain hunting exercise than a team building/succession plan.
    I think Pete Carroll recognized that Russell Wilson’s overall athleticism and long ball were Wilson’s exceptional skills and that the athleticism part of it wouldn’t last. I view Wilson’s tenure in Seattle as Pete and a succession of OCs trying turn him into a franchise level “system” quarterback that was able to play the quick passing game and Wilson’s inability or lack of desire to become that slowly becoming an intractable problem. I have never understood all the chatter about “Pete breaking Russ”, “Pete the run-first dinosaur”, etc. There is no way that scramble drills win championships. There is no way around “run-run-pass” when your scramble specialist QB can’t counter what the defense is giving with a quick passing game.
    This is additional speculation, but I think that this year’s run defense scheme was probably conceived to revolve around Jamal Adams as a hybrid safety/linebacker. He’s an excellent tackler in comparison to his pass defense, and there was too much appreciation for his salary and athletic potential to not plan around him. Obviously we’ll never know whether that was the plan or whether having Adams on the field would have created a better defense but I have a hard time casting shade at anyone for not being prescient that a young athlete would suddenly turn to glass (see also Rashaad Penny, Dee Eskridge, possibly Tyreke Smith). I also can’t hate Adams because he was able to get a big payday and don’t feel that hating him is a requirement for moving on from that burden. The players know it’s a business, so should we.

    Many thanks again to Rob for running the best sports blog that I know about. Also thanks for having the stomach to keep up with Twitter.

    • Big Mike says:

      Good post. I’d like to respond to a couple of things.

      One, Pete can flat out coach DBs. There’s been too many good ones here to think otherwise. It’s the biggest reason I’ve never understood why Griffin flamed out. Lack of desire is all I can guess.

      As for Adams, I don’t hate him and I’m one of his most vocal critics. I reserve my sports hate for the stealers, cowgirls and yankoffs. And sports hate is still not real hate. However I have zero respect for Adams. He’s a poor player as his PFF grades 2 seasons in a row will attest. Worse is the preening, strutting behavior despite poor on field play. As for the money, that’s not his fault at all. That was nothing more than Carroll trying to save face rather than admit it was a mistake and just move on.

      • Big Mike says:

        I mean how sad is Adams when he’s talking shit to the Jets after the Seahawks beat them when he didn’t play. A perfect example of what I’m talking about. There are others, plenty in fact.

        • Rob Staton says:

          Yeah, those tweets were a major eye roll

          The guy hasn’t done anything in two years and has become a forgotten man in the NFL

          The trade for him has been an unmitigated disaster

          But you’re giving it the big-un because a few nob head Jets fans sent you some tweets?

          Give over

    • RealHawk says:

      Totally agree 100% with this.

  27. Ashish says:

    No one talking about Wildcard game tomorrow? I understand we have 22% chance but anything can happen. Last game was very close before Homer fumbled score could have been 7-10 vs 14-3.

    • TomLPDX says:

      Oh, it’s sprinkled in Ashish. The weather will be a factor if the forecasts are correct but it still comes down to execution. San Fran’s defense is elite this year but we are still a good offense so it won’t be a calk walk for them. Should be a fun game regardless, and I don’t expect a blowout.

    • A week ago, we had what I reckoned to be about a 20% chance at best for us to both beat the Rams AND for the Lions to beat the Packers at Lambeau. And yet… here we are.

      Anything can happen in the playoffs. While a Super Bowl run is probably out of the question, it’s not 100% out of the question. And by comparison, stealing a road win against a #2 seed in a game that is likely to be as much about the weather as anything, seems attainable. I’m just happy we have a ticket to scratch.

  28. jessie says:

    Does Geno have any trade value? A team like the dolphins are a qb away from being a superbowl contender and they run the same scheme. If we tag + trade is there any possibilty dolphins give us say a 3rd rounder this year and a 2nd next year?

    I can’t imagine letting a pro bowl qb walk for free but it also seems more and more like we really won’t be able to pay him. As highlighted we will have to cut alot of players (which we should do btw – guys like Mone/Quinton Jefferson/Diggs) but even so when or if we cut those guys i want to actually use the money to bring in other players like Dre-Mont Jones or the unlikely one is Daron Payne. So with all that said is seems highly unlikely we are able to bring him back.

    Are there any later round qb prospects you like? Maybe Phil Jurkovic or Cam Ward. Outside of the top guys have you had a chance to scout anyone in the later rounds. I wonder how the Stanford qb would fair in our system.

    • Rob Staton says:

      You can’t tag him

      He will sign up for $30m guaranteed next season within seconds of the tag being used

      And then you have -$2.5m to spend this off-season

      Phil Jurkovec is absolutely rubbish and just transferred to Pittsburgh to try and salvage career. He’s not in the draft.

      • jessie says:

        What do you think of Tanner Mckee, his stats arent the greatest but he has the ability to move around in the pocket, decent arm. When I watch his tape it seems like he is under pressure on every snap. I kind of put him in the Will Levis category of his team did him no favors (though Levis had it worse playing in the SEC vs PAC-12). I honestly don’t think that Stanford team has any other draft prospects outside of Mckee and definitely not high ones.

      • I have a sinking feeling that by the time the cdraft rolls around, Levis and Richardson will emerge as the the consensus #1 and #2 picks. I don’t think we’ll be able to get either unless we try and move up with Chicago, and that is likely to be an ugly bidding war I’d want no part of.

        Assuming Stround declares (and if he doesn’t, this scenario gets exponentially more dire for a team looking for the QB of the future) it’s possible that we see 4 QBs taken with the top 4 picks, given the questions about Will Anderson’s drop off this year and the well discussed concerns with Jalen Carter’s stamina. If we stick at #5 and we’re looking at the first non-QB, I think we have to go Anderson or trade down for more 2nd-3rd round firepower.

        Question is: if Pete and John really believe that they have the right system to maximize the value of a “system QB” and all of the elite QB prospects are gone, do they spend a mid-round pick on a lower upside player who may be able to thrive in their scheme? Tanner McKee, Jaren Hall, Dorian Thompson-Robinson, etc. in the hopes of grabbing this year’s version of Brock Purdy or Bailey Zappe? Seems to me that they almost have to have that as plan B if the QBs they love are simply unobtainable.

        Weird to think we’re talking about Will Anderson as a consolation prize at #5, but here we are. He’s the obvious pick ahead of Carter, IMO.

        • jessie says:

          I’ve wondered if 4 qb’s could go first 4. Arizona doesn’t need a qb they could trade back. Bears could trade back as well. That in combination with 0 qb’s going top 15 last year leaves alot of qb needy teams with no rookie qb they feel satisfied with giving another year. I honestly think this draft will be a lot more odd then people think.

        • Rob Staton says:

          I’m fairly relaxed about the situation

          If you can’t get at the QB’s then it is what it is

          We’ll be able to get a good player at #5

          And if there’s a QB they have to have, they have the stock to move up

          • Ashish says:

            I like that answer, Rob. Also Bryce Young atleast in media is still a top choice and want to see get selected in top 4 giving more choice to Hawks. But i really wants QB, don’t want to select in top 5 again in 10 years.

          • jessie says:

            This is where I kind of hate not losing our final 2 games and giving us a top 10 pick in every round. If we want a Cj Stroud it would of been easy to trade say our #5, our 2nd rounder and next years 1st. Then recoup the lost draft picks by trading our other top 10 pick back to regain some of that lost value. Going from 8th overall to 15th would probably net you a future 1st per example.

            Now to get Stroud (if he declares) will most likely hinder this draft because it will cost us alot of our draft stock. But you know what if we draft Stroud then it isn’t about next season, it will be about the seasons beyond – 2024-25-26.

    • Daniel D. says:

      I think tagging and trading is more plausible than Rob allows. It gets Geno to a team that’s willing to extend him. We’ve seen the Seahawks do this with Frank Clark. We’ve also seen QB-needy teams trade real draft capital for Wentz and Darnold.

      • Rob Staton says:

        It’s not plausible at all

        Because the minute he is tagged he can sign the contract and that’s it. You are committed. Full guaranteed $30m deal.

        This idea that Geno will go “oh yeah that’s cool, no trade me somewhere so you can get a pick, I don’t mind, I won’t guarantee myself 30m” simply isn’t happening guys

        He will sign the tag, get a cool $30m and you will be in the red in terms of cap space with a roster to fill out

        That’s it

        If you tag him, you would only do so because you intend to sign him to a longer term deal worth at least the price of the tag per year which is about $30m

        So unless you are prepared to do that, there’s no tag. And there’s definitely no tag and trade.

        Clark was totally different because they intended to sign him, not trade him. And he was also prepared to wait it out and not sign the tag and let the DE market explode. As soon as it did, they dealt him. This is not the same thing. Geno is 32 and wouldn’t have dreamed of getting $30m for one year. Clark was coming off a huge year as a young stud and always anticipated a big second deal.

  29. PG Hawk says:

    I think its fairly safe to say that the QB needy teams will pay to be picking 1-2-3.

    The question than becomes how the other QB Needy teams and Seattle value Anthony Richardson. Is he a %53.8 completion percentage QB who lacks pocket presence or is he a Unicorn like Lamar Jackson or Kyler Murray?

    • I bet after the combine and pro days, Richardson will be #1 on the board for a number of QB needy teams. Hope I”m wrong and he can be had at #5.

      I agree with Rob that 4 QBs in the first 4 picks would be suprising, but you already have two teams very likely to go QB (Houston and Indy) ahead of us, and Chicago and Arizona who will likely get plenty of offers to move down and collect more picks in this draft, where there is very good depth. Neither of those squads are 1 DL or OL player away from contending. Depending on what shakes out in free agency, it’s not a stretch for me to see Carolina, Atlanta, Washington, maybe even Las Vegas or Tennesee all willing to make compelling offers to jump ahead of us and grab the last of the big 4 QBs before we pick at 5.

      If Bryce Young is the most likely to slip to us, I hope we grab him. Who better to gamble on an undersized QB who could turn out to be an amazing point guard than us?

  30. Hoggs41 says:

    There were no signs of Geno having the season he did so why not give Lock a chance if Geno is asking for to much. Personally I would rather have Lock and Levis/Richardson then I would Geno. Would open up some money to maybe go after a guy like Daron Payne should he get to free agency.

    • jessie says:

      I agree and really want Daron Payne because he does what Jalen Carter does in college already in the nfl. However it is unlikely. I think Dre-mont Jones is more realistically, maybe bringing Jadeveon Clowney back or sending a 3rd round pick to the Chargers for Khalil Mack. Mack is due 27 mill next year and Joey Bosa is due 27 mill, i don’t really see anyway the chargers are keeping Mack.

      But yea long story short is there will be options to add quality players to make our team better if we don’t have an expensive qb. If we do pay our qb then we have really no options. I think it’s pointing that we will go with Drew Lock and/or a rookie qb. I’m fine with it btw. If we went Drew lock and then beefed up this team in free agency + the draft we could have a loaded roster.

  31. 509 Chris says:

    How does everyone feel about trading up to 1 or 2 to guarantee you get a, or the guy you want? Especially if stroud stays at Ohio, 5 probably won’t get a qb. I don’t know what the organization thinks about the group so who knows? If they do trade up, how much is too much? 2 firsts this year and next year’s first? I will be bummed if they don’t end up with a levis or Richardson this year, so I wouldn’t mind making sure they get the right guy. This squad does have some good young talent, especially on offense, and I could see a qb coming in and having some success in a couple years.

    • Palatypus says:

      I would rather trade down to get more stock in next year’s draft if the QB we want is not there. If you figure a 1st round pick is worth half the value in the next year, per the trade value chart, the nominal value is 500 points. A top-five pick can buy you four of those.

    • MCOHawk says:

      I would have no problem with it. I think they could put together the most attractive package this year. The Seahawks are one of the few teams that have 2 firsts this year. Per the draft charts it would roughly take both firsts and next years 2nd rounder and change to move up to #1.

  32. Seattle Murphy says:

    Foremost Rob, can’t thank you enough for your consistently thoughtful analysis as we head into the biggest offseason in a decade. I’m checking in daily hoping for more insights. Your willingness to play with all the angles and poke at what may be going on behind Seattle’s curtain is unparalleled. I’ve read every word you’ve written here for years.

    Your Pete vs John query is at the heart of our team’s collective future. I sure feel like Carroll has the lead. You speculated that his retirement talk might hint at unrest regarding Pete’s preferences. But what of Schneider? Is there a scenario where he’s the one to become frustrated with a lack of long term planning (specifically at QB) and walk? You point out he comes from the Green Bay system. They certainly prepare early for QB transitions (Drafting Rodgers and Brohm with Favre; Love with Rodgers). Yet Seattle has really failed to follow the blueprint of preparing for QB succession. For me, this hints at Pete being top dog on personnel decisions.

    We have seen almost nothing of Drew Lock since his acquisition. The timing of his preseason bout with Covid didn’t help. Then Geno’s ascension left him no room. I wonder if Pete’s belief in their “QB-friendly system” has them yet believing he’s a viable option should Smith receive offers from contesting teams, and Lock re-sign on the cheap. Hard to get excited about, but then many of us underestimated Geno. Could Lock be the “vet” signed as a bridge to a drafted newcomer?

    But even drafting at 5 will Seattle have a crack at the big top four quarterbacks?

    I agree with your earlier speculation Chicago will trade down from 1. The Bears have seemed to suggest as much via the media. They could even trade twice and really make a haul. Say, with the Colts to 4, then again with Vegas to 7, Atlanta to 8, or Carolina to 9. Feels possible. They could likely get WR Johnston in that range. Feels like a match.

    Similarly, could we see Arizona trade out of 3 with a QB-needy team?

    If so, what are the chances we see the top four QBs off the board in picks 1-4? Perhaps the Colts to 1, and Carolina, the Raiders, Washington, etc, to 3 AND 4, respectively?

    Are the two big defensive names being overrated, in Carter and Anderson? Is the QB crop too strong to last?

    And a final query, what if Levis, Richardson and Stroud are off the board by 5? What do you think the chances are Seattle gambles on Young and his diminutive size?

    Thanks for all the analysis, Rob! Exciting times.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I think Arizona will appoint Vance Joseph as Head Coach and will draft defense at #3 — probably Will Anderson to replace the edge threat they’ve lost over the last two years

      I think the Seahawks would definitely consider Young. Everyone will love him apart from the size — and it’s a significant concern and one teams will battle with but you have to consider him he’s too talented not to

  33. dand393 says:

    I think CJ Stroud is going back to Ohio State it’s the only logical reason he hasn’t declared yet, if he makes a huge sum of money on an NIL deal for 1 more year he at least guarantee’s himself a large amount of money then goes in top 5 next year and gets his rookie contract it just makes too much sense for him

    • Denver Hawker says:

      Really shakes up the board for the Hawks if he does stay.

    • Jabroni-DC says:

      Or blows out a knee.
      He’s not going to improve his draft stock. It can only fall.

      • Peter says:

        Agree.

        Top five this year.

        Next year anything can happen. So hopefully the NIL money will cover any potential loss in draft order.

      • Rob Staton says:

        This isn’t true.

        He would’ve won the Heisman if he beat Michigan. If he goes back and gets the job done this year, he gets it.

        Stock improved.

        There’s nothing scary in the Big 10. He could win the BIG10 and a National title.

        It really bothers me at times how people immediately harp on about injuries and ‘stock’ when players go back. Let these young men live their lives how THEY want to! If he has dreams and ambitions and goals that are unfulfilled at Ohio State, good for him for going back to accomplish them.

        The NFL isn’t the be-all and end-all. Money isn’t the be-all and end-all.

        You don’t get to go back to Ohio State in five years. It’s now or never. His chance to leave a legacy.

        If he returns, I will applaud him.

        • Nick says:

          Bravo Rob. Absolutely nailed it here!

        • Denver Hawker says:

          Well said.

        • Jabroni-DC says:

          If he wants to stay at Ohio State that’s great for him. I believe in choice & I’m not knocking his & I’m not on Twitter.
          By his ‘stock’ I’m referring to his draft position & after watching him vs Georgia he could easily be #1. You can’t get picked higher than #1.

          • Rob Staton says:

            Well he could be #1 next year too

            • Jack Frost says:

              Thanks Rob,
              Some kids really do have high goals for their college career. That should be applauded. On the other hand, coming out in theory gets them to their second contract a year sooner. And I have personally witnessed a friend’s son go back to accomplish an almost previously achieved goal only to have a less than stellar year. It cost him a lot. Btw, last time I checked injury insurance costs about $50k per $5 Million for one year. Stroud would have to drop a chunk of change to insure against a catastrophe.

            • Peter says:

              I agree with you a ton on a ton of things…ridiculous way to put it I know.

              But this I disagree pretty completely with.

              Last year Levis would have almost been the number one pick. Now people parse if he’s actually a bust waiting to happen.

              One the one hand Stroud most likely could win the Heisman and even the national championship. Alternately there’s just as likely chance as they don’t.

              As far as letting him live his life on that we completely agree.

              However, and I am a big supporter of ncaa athletes getting paid, I can’t square the comment that there’s more to life than money when it’s estimated that Stroud has made 2.5 million dollars in endorsements. Have to imagine that changes the calculus at least a little when deciding to come back or not.

  34. pdway says:

    I guess it’s QB-friendly…seems to me that all the easy stuff that was working in the first half of the year, really went away in the 2nd half, along w our running game.

    Geno’s errors, best I could tell, weren’t of the missing wide-open receivers variety. My take is that w the run game diminished, and the easy scheme throws not so plentiful – Geno was forced to be more of a playmaker, and to take more risks – and the results were not great.

    I do think Geno has real talent – his mid and longer throws earlier in the year were often with great touch and perfect placement. But – there’s no way around that fact that he was shaky down the stretch – and that’s enough, for me, to agree w the premise that we should take a QB w that 5th pick if there is one we want.

    It was very, very tantalizing to think about adding two two-20 talents to a defense that so obviously needs it – and I would have done so after 9 games – but the longterm play is to take a QB.

    • Palatypus says:

      Is “QB Friendly” like “user friendly” in the computer industry? Because every time they update Windows I want to kill somebody.

  35. Denver Hawker says:

    Seahawks don’t have the best national reputation, but this is pretty cool: https://twitter.com/lions/status/1614011026395090952?s=46&t=YpwLvwM2qkU0AhWtZXM_0A

  36. Jabroni-DC says:

    Huskies WR Rome Odunze returning for 2023 season.

    • Palatypus says:

      Softy said that ALL draft-eligible players are returning.

      • Peter says:

        Good for them. Realistically all of them could improve their draft positioning.

        Additionally doesn’t the pac-12 become the pac-10 again? Great chance to win the conference no one watches and if they do really well maybe get “tcu-ed” in the playoffs.

  37. Daniel D. says:

    I’m right here with your analysis in this piece, and I’m glad you offered both sides. It’s the best way to get as close as we can to what’s actually going to play out.

    I think the Seahawks are wide-eyed pragmatists, willing to take whichever pathway opens up and gives them the chance to build the best team. That’s why I think they’ll at least entertain tagging Geno and trading him. Looking back at the assets given up by the Colts for Wentz and by the Jets for Darnold, it’s hard to imagine that the Seahawks couldn’t get at least a second pick for Geno, and if I had to guess, another conditional pick too.

    QB desperate teams that pick later in the draft– Commanders and Panthers come to mind– would be motivated to add a Pro Bowl, playoff QB. It’s not an amazing move for any team but a helluva lot better than the Wentz and Darnold deals for a team that believes in its roster.

    For the Seahawks, it’s the chance to move on from Smith after a season he’s unlikely to replicate, to add a pick, to give lock a chance, and then to give the keys to Levis, Richardson, etc. Always compete, right?

    • Rob Staton says:

      If you tag Geno, he will immediately drive to the VMAC and sign the contract and you’ll be left with about minus-$1.5m to spend in cap space. He isn’t going to turn down a guaranteed $30m.

      If they had $100m to spend like Chicago, that would make sense.

      But they only have $28.5m to spend.

      Tagging him would mean they have nothing left and only 37 contracted players — needing to cut others to create more cap space.

      • Palatypus says:

        But, what kind of car would he immediately drive to the VMAC in?

      • Daniel D. says:

        I think they could finesse with Geno’s camp and another team in advance of the transaction, so that he’s tagged, traded, and the other team has an extension in place. Everybody wins.

        Matt Ryan going to the Colts before this season with $54m guaranteed for his age 37 and 38 seasons leads me to believe that there’s a second rounder to be had for Geno playing for $30.

        • Romeo A57 says:

          I just can’t believe that there is a single team that will pay Geno 30 Million based on one year of good performances after 9byears of bad to mediocre. Ryan was a very good QB, not anymore obviously. Also remember that Geno is only a few years younger.

        • Rob Staton says:

          It’s not happening

          There’s no finessing this situation

          Geno’s camp would say get stuffed either let him be a FA or we’re having that guaranteed $30m

        • Matt says:

          Geno and his agent will be doing malpractice if they don’t go after the biggest contract. He has to – there will be no other opportunity for him to get paid.

  38. AL says:

    I’m sorry, but am I wrong for thinking the only QB that will be available at the #5 pick will be some 5’10” (not quite) 186 lb (weighed after dinner) guy named Bryce Young?

    I hear he’s really talented, but wasn’t the guy we had last year a talented, bigger and stronger version of a short QB most everyone thought had height issues? Would PC and Js really go their again?

    Anthony Richardson isn’t going to make it to pick #5. To talented.

    I’m just curious, what it would cost the Seahawks to move from #5 to #1 this year to get there QB or pick of QB’s? Considering there will be a bidding war, would it be worth it?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Young’s size is a concern that teams will need to debate and discuss and I think he will last longer than the mainstream media which seem to think he’s destined to go first overall

      But let’s also not go OTT in knocking him

    • Carl says:

      I am confused why we think the Seahawks who got HOF numbers from Russell Wilson would just never go short at QB again. Love him or hate him now the Russell Wilson experiment in Seattle was a resounding success, a decade of good QB play including a SB win, sure he had problems and he certainly had issues playing within an offensive structure, but it isn’t as if his tenure in Seattle was a failure by any measure.

  39. Palatypus says:

    Theoretically 300 points according to the Draft Tek trade value chart, which is roughly equal to pick #60. In reality, it would be more than that. Probably next year’s first-round draft pick or our pick at #38. But being that they are only going to give that pick to the highest bidder, and it’s the #1 pick, they would probably ask for #20.

  40. Thomas says:

    I think if Stroud doesn’t declare, they may trade down if Young is the only QB left at that spot. They’d have to talk Carolina into giving their 1st rounder in 2024 or maybe Indy or Washington.

    Or, they might trade up. The trouble is it would probably have to be with Chicago. I would think they’d have to give up both 1sts and a 2nd.

    Let’s hope Stroud declares. Or… maybe they think Lock could be the guy next year.

    What does the 2024 qb class look like?

    • Big Mike says:

      I saw a wishful thinking mock out of Chicago where we traded our first, the Denver acquired 2nd and DK for the 1st overall and their pick #160 overall.

  41. KD says:

    My appologies for going off-topic, but did anyone else here se Elvis? I know it was released around the same time as Top Gun, but I just watched it, and…….ho….leeeee……shit. That might be one of the greatest acting performances that I have ever seen

  42. Old but Slow says:

    A way of looking at the question. Given a mythological team, if you can only have one, would you take Mahomes in his prime, or Aaron Donald?

    No brainer, right? Take the QB.

    Apply to 2023 draft: question answered.

    • Peter says:

      Actually pretty simple thought experiment. Well done.

    • Matt says:

      I hate using this term – but kind of a brilliantly simple thought exercise. Makes total sense.

    • Wade says:

      On the other hand…would you rather roster Dion Jordan or tie your franchise to Zach Wilson for three years? (Sounds like the Jets FO are planning for another Wilson year)

      • Geoff u says:

        You are not tied to the QB any more than any other position unless the team is stupid. Ask Josh Rosen.

      • Osprey says:

        ZW will have to show out big time in the pre-season to have any shot at starting year three. Can’t imagine the Jets not hedging with some improvement to the QB room to offer competition.

  43. UkAlex6674 says:

    Ryan Neal ready to play tonight

    • Peter says:

      Good news in what looks to be a tough game for everyone on the field.

      And a possibly long game with projected lightning storms near the fourth quarter.

  44. Dustin says:

    it seems likely Geno will regress next year. He was playing like a top 5 QB for a lot of the year, and I don’t see that happening again next year. He has showed enough this year that I think he’ll be at least a top 15 QB next year, but is it worth it to shell out 25-30 million for the 13th or 14th best QB? Unless Geno is willing to play for a discount, I hope they don’t resign him and draft a QB. They should keep Drew Lock and have him and the rookie battle it out for the starting job.

    • Matt says:

      Good post.

      No matter the sport, the worst thing you can do is overpay above average players with no sustained track record of success. That’s why I don’t want Geno back at any significant money.

      You pay difference makers. That’s it. When you overpay those average or above average players; typically 2 things happen:

      1) you are paying them for a season they will never have again (past performance)

      And

      2) because of said investment, you are usually robbing a younger player of an opportunity, who could provide similar or better impact at a significant discount.

      I really hope the Seahawks stay disciplined here. Pay Daron Payne (youth + production). Don’t pay Geno (Age + one outlier year).

  45. UkAlex6674 says:

    So it looks like the weather is storm conditions tonight. People being advised not to travel to the game.

    How do you all view this? Is it something that can be used to our advantage, or will the conditions affect both teams equally?

    • Blitzy the Clown says:

      Looks like most of the wet will be over by kickoff. Don’t know about the wind

      I think chaos favors Seattle. But the mildly interesting stat you mention below suggests we’re gonna need a lot of chaos

  46. UkAlex6674 says:

    Mildly interesting stat:

    Since the 1970 merger, there have been 22 instances of teams that swept an opponent in the regular season then facing them in the playoffs. The side that swept the regular season meetings is 14-8 in the third meeting. When playing that third game at home, they’re 12-6. In those 12 victories, the win was by 10+ points nine times.

  47. Jabroni-DC says:

    The Seahawks need to play with measured patience today. We are punching above our weight class. Exploit opportunities when they present themselves, protect the football, throw the ball away vs taking sacks & play clean (limit penalties). It’ll be interesting see how Purdy plays if we’re able to take the lead. Coaching needs to be sharp too!

    Go Hawks!!!

  48. Cambs says:

    An observation only tangential to this post — the age structure of the QB position as a whole in the NFL is really strange at this point, as there’s basically a “lost generation” from the arid early-2010s draft classes that have yielded so few guys that remain today as starters. Not talking Pro Bowlers here, just top-32 starters.

    The draft classes from that period make grim reading:

    2010 — Bradford and Tebow were the first-rounders
    2011 — the hits (for various values of “hit”) are Cam, Kaep, and Andy Dalton, all of whom are now dust
    2012 — Luck and RG3 at the top, gone too early. Tannehill, Russ, Cousins still persist. (This is the only good QB draft class of this period — also had Foles, Osweiler, and UDFA Keenum)
    2013 — the EJ Manuel class, no QB hits … pending what Geno’s second act produces
    2014 — Bortles and Manziel class. The mehhh hits are Carr and Jimmy G, and maybe Teddy B in a what-might-have-been mode.
    2015 — no QB hits; Mariota just flunked his rehab chance, maybe Jameis will get his
    2016 — Goff, Wentz, and Paxton Lynch were the first-rounders; Dak Prescott in the fourth redeems the class

    So at present, among guys who are probably starters next year, only Goff (29), Dak (30), Jimmy G (31), Carr (32), and Geno (33) fall in the age 29-34 bucket. All save Dak are in some danger (ranging up to some certainty) of changing teams next year and are probably year-to-year, bridge-QB propositions in GMs’ eyes rather than dudes you’d feel solid about counting on as the face of the franchise for the next three or four years.

    So there’s a bit of a shortage of guys in that “dependable veteran, not yet old” demographic that a competitive team that doesn’t have access to a top draft pick could credibly plug in.

    Senior to them are the last of the geriatric warhorses from a bygone generation, Brady and Rodgers — we’ve bid farewell to many of their colleagues in recent years.

    Then there’s a set of exactly-35-year-olds: Cousins, making insane bank — plus Stafford, Russ, and Tannehill, all entering next season with some question marks and perhaps physically eroding? How long these guys remain capable and available over the next few years will have a lot to say about the aggregate quality of quarterbacking in the league.

    And then junior to them are all the young stars from the next QB generation — Mahomes and Watson (28), Allen (27), Burrow, Lamar, Kyler (all 26), Herbert and Hurts (25), etc.

    Not making any larger point here but I got to thinking about it when considering the options open to the various QB-needy teams drafting after Houston, including Seattle. It’s very much a young man’s position at the moment … we might see some urgent trade-up offers from franchises whose other alternative to solving the QB position for the 2020s is “hope not to get jilted by Derek Carr”.

  49. JR says:

    I think Drew Lock’s contract will determine if they plan on drafting a QB. If they wait and sign him late to a 1 year backup salary they will draft their QBOF. If the give him a multi year contract before the draft the probably are not going to draft a QB. Structure of his contract will also be telling.
    Also no one is talking about Tampa Bay being in the Geno hunt. If Brady retires they only have Blaine Gabbart.

    • Peter says:

      I don’t know this FO famously gave Matt Flynn a pretty big chunk of cash for finishing a season with four great games and then we all watched Wilson go off in preseason and the rest was history.

      Financially what would lock even be worth? Like a pre 2022 season geno level compensation at best?

  50. Forrest says:

    Can we all just snapshot the current mock drafts that have:

    Levis going #9
    https://walterfootball.com/draft2023.amp

    Levis going #9
    https://www.sportingnews.com/us/amp/nfl/news/nfl-mock-draft-2023-bears-texans-colts-panthers/gale3pxmjqfzwvjlcxe4ieql

    Stroud going #7
    https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2023-nfl-mock-draft-five-qbs-first-round-colts-trade-bryce-young

    Levis going #7
    https://www.tankathon.com/nfl/mock_draft

    Levis going #7 and AJ not even listed in R1
    https://www.drafttek.com/2023-NFL-Mock-Draft/2023-NFL-Mock-Draft-Round-1.asp

    These are the highest ranked mock drafts in Google.

    Many thanks to Rob for being a year ahead of even the current mocks with Levis, etc.

  51. Romeo A57 says:

    https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1614246845462548482

    Sounds like a lot of people are really upset about the officiating in last weeks Seahawks win. DK and Diggs not getting flagged for taunting was a bit surprising to me.

    • Pran says:

      Felt the same..

      Is it 9ers raising this in league meetings to force Refs against Seahawks not that it matters or someone looking for a scapegoat.

    • Big Mike says:

      I’ll answer their complaints with this; Super Bowl XL*
      Until you have a championship stolen from you by the NFL via “inept” officiating (funny how inept followed their “Bettis comes home to Detroit to win a Super Bowl” script though wasn’t it?), just shut up. Oh and btw, we got the officiating shaft in that Raiders game too.

      All that said, DK especially should’ve been flagged. Immature tool.

    • pdway says:

      DK took a late-hit cheap shot that wasn’t called when the two guys had him stood up and progress-stopped, and that wasn’t called either. Diggs not getting flagged didn’t change much anyway, would have been post position, and still would have been Hawks first down.

  52. Wade says:

    What tf is Ian Rap talking about this morning?

    https://twitter.com/RapSheet?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

    Who would leak this? What do either side have to gain?

    The tea leaves are now upside down. Maybe I should switch to coffee.

    • HOUSE says:

      I see ZERO shot of him being franchised

      • Rob Staton says:

        The only way they franchise him is if they sign him to a longer extension immediately after to lower the cap

        • Trevor says:

          Sounds like nothing more than we have been hearing all year. They want and expect him to be back next year. What else would they say? I think Rappaport inserted the franchise tag part as it did not sound specific in anyway.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Weird AF report

      What if he throws three picks today?

      Timing???

      • Rob Staton says:

        Maybe they think the uncertainty is bothering him and want him to feel better before the Niners game???

        • pdway says:

          had that though too. settles him down. makes the whole team feel good about things? seems like geno is pretty well-liked by his teammates.

          • Wade says:

            Great points. Maybe only way to explain it.

            To add, if I was Geno, I’d hate to stand at the podium after a loss and be asked questions about my future with the team.

    • pdway says:

      Given how clear-cut Rap made his statement, “My understanding is Geno Smith will be back in 2023” – the most straightforward explanation is that he has reliable sources telling him that contract talks are underway and close to final. Otherwise, he would have hedged more, a la, ‘the sides are talking’, or, “the Seahawks are hoping to re-sign him”, etc.

      No.?

      • Wade says:

        My immediate thought, too.

        But why mention the tag in that case?

        And if the purpose is to settle Geno down, why would the team leak this info to fans? I get suggesting something in private, perhaps after talks were going south these last few weeks (again, tea leaves based on Pete and Genos recent comments).

        Why would Genos team leak this to fans?

        The most likely scenario is that Geno goes out and has a poor game today, considering team and weather. The taste of this game is going to be in fans’ minds all offseason.

        • Wade says:

          “Tag” feels like a negotiating tool teams use (sometimes through the media) for players who want more than the tag.

    • Submanjoe says:

      I agree that the Seahawks should not tag geno. But they can tag him. If for some reason he doesn’t sign it right away, my understanding is that he wouldn’t be on ‘the books’ but the Seahawks would have his ‘rights’. If he does sign the tag then obviously the Seahawks would have to make some moves to ensure they’d have cap room, while potentially negotiating a different deal. Obviously, a trade could be worked out too, if he didn’t sign. There are many possibilities in this scenario.

      Again, I agree, don’t tag Geno. Frankly, I think that tagging Geno eliminates the Seahawks leverage rather than giving them leverage. But that’s because I believe he won’t get what some think he might get on the open market. But Pete has a way of bidding against himself in these contracts sometimes.

      • Rob Staton says:

        The only way they tag him is if they are comfortable signing him for 2-4 years on $30m a year.

      • pdway says:

        seems to me – saying ‘we’ll use the tag if we can’t reach a deal” – is the right tactic to make potential suitors look elsewhere, while the Hawks try to negotiate a deal w Geno. Esp so for a QB at this age.

    • Matt says:

      If true, then I standby the last 2 weeks have been utterly disastrous for the long term future of this team and our ability to ever win another SB.

  53. JimQ says:

    QB-Tyson Bagent, a very small school “sleeper QB” for the Seahawks? Worth a late round draft pick? Why not?
    https://heavy.com/sports/seattle-seahawks/seahawks-best-landing-spot-record-breaking-tyson-bagent/

    • JAaS says:

      If you’ve ever watched the Arm Wrestling documentary called “Pulling John”, then this guy is the son of world class arm wrestler Travis Bagent. Would it be a stretch to assume the guy has a great arm and would be a good pickup?

  54. Romeo A57 says:

    I definitely thought about ” That Superbowl that shall not be named” when reading this article about the officials. I just saw this as ESPN’s top headline and was trying to figure out where it was coming from. Some upset Lion’s executives?

    One mediocre team in Detroit may have lost a playoff spot to a more mediocre team in Seattle because of a few no calls?

  55. Big Mike says:

    Don’t know if cha’s able to do watch points today, but I’ll drop one in: Jason Meyers can’t miss any kicks today and Michael Dickson can’t shank any punts. Considering the weather is supposed to be bad, the team that is most successful in the kicking game will have a definite advantage. Seattle doesn’t have the talent in comparison to SF to survive mistakes.

    • pdway says:

      feels like a day to run, and defend the run. wish we were better at defending it.

      still, given SF’s overall talent/speed advantage, seems like a stormy/rainy day is more good than bad for us.

      i’m pretty relaxed though, no expectations coming into this one – if we play them tough and make a game of it, it’s a total bonus.

    • TomLPDX says:

      Weather reports are calming down a bit (per Weather Channel) with no more thunderstorms in the forecast and just a light rain. We’ll see how it holds up.

    • Rob Staton says:

      It’s live now — I was tied up with work so apologies for the late posting

  56. JP says:

    I really don’t get this whole “sign Geno at all costs” thing because that’s what it sort of sounds like. Like what’s the rush? Is the front office really so deluded that they think they can win soon with him?

    With how badly they’ve looked in the second half, it feels like that’s who they really are, just like how Geno was briefly a top 5 QB before turning into a pumpkin in the second half. Let him see what’s out there.

    • Matt says:

      If you dare get into debates about this on Twitter; it comes down to a few things for these folks.

      1) Geno having been a backup means he hasn’t aged for the last decade.
      2) Geno was this good all along but the NFL is racist (not kidding).
      3) if not 2, he’s simply been screwed because teams had it out for him.
      4) They don’t believe in turnoverworthy throws and subsequent luck this season.
      5) The team is a super bowl contender snd therefore it’s dumb to change anything.
      6) Any bad play by Geno is not his fault, but rather the fault of the OL and WRs (sounds familiar to the RW crew).

      This is literally all the talking points I’ve been given.