Written by Kip Earlywine
Let’s be honest Seahawks fans. How many of you lose sleep at night worrying about Seattle’s future at quarterback? From the comments I’ve read across several prominent blogs and message boards, it seems like a lot.
I’m no different.
Tarvaris Jackson’s better than expected 2011 performance has all but guaranteed that he will remain a Seahawk in 2012. Additionally, it seems highly likely that he will start at least the beginning of next season. Jackson still has plenty of room for improvement, and while you could argue that he’s held the Seahawks back on numerous occasions, I think it would be wrong to say he’s hurt this team. This coaching staff has successfully turned Jackson from an erratic playmaker type to a more conservative, safer game-manager type, and its made Jackson a better quarterback, despite playing hurt most of the season.
Pete Carroll and John Schneider have made a big commitment to Jackson. In words. In patience. Even in cash. They put their foots in their mouths regarding Minnesota and how they “jerked him around.” If Seattle had benched Jackson at any point, those words would come back to bite them in the ass and paint them as incompetent hypocrites. That’s a lot of incentive to stay the course at quarterback. Its an incentive that, I believe, will still factor in 2012 as well. Pete Carroll has gone above and beyond to reinforce Jackson’s job security and help him believe that he’s “the guy.” Its smart coaching. You don’t want your quarterback constantly worrying about his job status. Just look at Vince Young. That said, drafting a quarterback in the first round sends a message about the previous starter, and no matter how its spun, its a message that will work against the good trust that Pete has tried to build with Jackson.
This is worrisome to Seahawks fans. I respect what Tarvaris has done. I appreciate that he has room for improvement and he’s still a guy with some potential. As a stopgap, he’s been all I could have asked for. I have absolutely no problem with him being our starter in 2012, and possibly beyond depending on development time for his successor. But if Tarvaris Jackson is an obstacle to Seattle drafting a franchise quarterback, I think its safe to say that most Seahawks fans would want him off the team this very instant. However, I am beginning to fear that this is a very real possibility.
Life is full of adversity and downright scary moments. As a believer, I find that I can seek comfort in asking God for help, even if its just to help me calm down. I know many of you probably can’t relate to that, and far be it from me to push my beliefs on anyone else. Rather, I simply bring this up to illustrate a point- too often, critical things in our lives are completely out of our control. Prominent Mariners blogger Dave Cameron was recently diagnosed with a form of cancer, and though he’s about as anti-intangible as they come, even he admitted to putting faith in betting against the odds. Sometimes, if only for the sake of our own sanity, its good to have a little faith. In this case, it would mean having faith in Pete Carroll and John Schneider and their plan for the quarterback position.
I have a lot of faith in those guys. I could go on and on about it. Red Bryant anyone? How about Stokely, Brock, Hargrove, Browner, BMW, Lynch, Gallery, Rice, Miller and even Tom Cable. And that’s just on the transaction/player revamp side of the equation.
I have a lot of self-confidence in this site’s ability to project players. Rob in particular has a rare gift for noticing first round talents before almost anyone else does. He proclaimed Blaine Gabbert as a top 10 pick in December of last year, back when very few people even knew who Gabbert was. He called Jimmy Smith, Derrick Morgan, James Carpenter and many, many others before mainstream draft analysts did. Kyle handily predicted Stafford as the superior quarterback to Sanchez. My track record here doesn’t go back very far and isn’t as great as theirs, but I was a fan of Russell Okung and many years before that I was a huge fan of Brandon Mebane before Seattle drafted him.
But even having said all that, I don’t think our ability to evaluate talent comes even close to what John Schneider and his scouting group has done. We tend to focus on big name prospects here- guys that are likely to be drafted in the first three rounds. We have lives to live outside of Seahawks football, and our resources are very limited. John Schneider, Scot McCloughan, Scott Fitterer, and his six regional scouts are all full time, highly paid professionals obsessed with finding as much talent as possible. Not only are they more qualified than anyone who writes here, but they have resources we can only dream of. I can only imagine how proud I’d be if I had talked up Richard Sherman before last year’s draft. And that’s just one player. Never mind Kam Chancellor, KJ Wright, or Doug Baldwin.
And therein lies the rub. There are going to be roughly a thousand draft eligible players in any given year, and here at this site, we’d be lucky to cover a hundred of them. Guys like Doug Baldwin easily slipped past our radar completely, but he didn’t slip past John Schneider’s. Really, the closest we’ve come to touting a player on the fringe is Austin Davis. Our front office makes several Austin Davis type sleeper moves every year, with a surprising number of those moves paying off.
I’m not trying to convince anyone that passing on Griffin or Barkley is a good idea. I think that the potential rewards are such that Seattle should not take them lightly. But at the same time, I think that this front office has more than earned our patience and good faith should they go a different direction next April.
This front office has been very protective of Josh Portis, even to the point of throwing away a win by starting Whitehurst against the lowly Browns. Portis is a project, but flashed serious potential in the preseason. I’m admittedly shooting in the dark here, but is it possible the front office thinks they have something in Josh Portis? Or what if they have a non-first round quarterback who really intrigues them? Perhaps Austin Davis. Or perhaps someone we’ve never even thought about.
This is not meant to be taken as an argument against drafting a first round quarterback. Its only to say that sometimes, smart people will do befuddling things only to prove later that those moves were master strokes. The Tapp and Wilson trades caused a righteous outcry among Seahawks fans. And for good reason, Tapp and Wilson were two of Seattle’s better defenders the year before. Yet, the Tapp trade netted us Chris Clemons, and the Wilson trade landed us Richard Sherman. Rather unbelievably, the Seahawks unloaded those players for a fraction of their worth and came out ahead. Way ahead.
If Seattle passes on Matt Barkley or Robert Griffin III next April, there will be no shortage of consternation. But should that unfortunate reality come to pass, I would advise us all: “have a little faith.” These guys have earned it. It wouldn’t be the first time they did something that looked stupid on the surface but proved brilliant in retrospect.
It will be interesting to see whether PC/JS will extend Jackson’s contract. If they give him a long term extension and pay him similar to what Fitzpatrick got from Buffalo, then it will be a clue that they see Jackson as their guy and will probably pass on a QB prospect in the 1st round.
I suspect that TJ wouldn’t take offense even if PC/JS do draft a QB in the 1st round next April. Seattle was probably the only team that gave him a shot as a starter. I suspect that he wouldn’t mind being a bridge QB and perhaps even stick around later as a backup.
I am very impressed with how PC/JS found all those solid starters through late round drafts, trades, and cheap free agency.
Absolutely phenomenal article, Kip. You expressed quite eloquently precisely what has been on my mind the past several weeks.
This franchise has never had any luck with first-round quarterbacks, but we do have an interesting history with undrafted free agents at that position. So a true Seahawks fan should probably be the last one to automatically dismiss the idea that Josh Portis might turn out to be the one we’ve been looking for.
Very well written article Kip, I’m sure I wasn’t the only one who felt you were reading my mind. Also nice to see that we have at least two interests in common; God and the Seahawks…
I agree with Jeremy. A great article. And neat to find another Seahawks fan who is a believer. Are you on Twitter, Kip?
I agree that John Schneider has his hits, but he also drafted Golden Tate, DE C.J. Wilson and Mark Lagree. Traded for Charlie Whitehurst. They are good but not yet great. One more plus draft that includes a possible starter at QB and DE. They need depth at TE, CB, LB and RB. In the NFL you have to continually replenishing a roster.
So while Kip is one of my favorite contributors for this site, and this article is very well written, I must disagree. Tarvaris Jackson is NOT a rookie. He has been in the league for several years and in this system for all of it. To say he has shown improvement and has done some surprisingly nice things should not apply. If he were a rookie and just starting out, that is one thing. But he is a veteran. I don’t want my veteran to come in and “show improvement” but still continue to make several needless mistakes and take us to a sub .500 record. To me, a 5-7 record for this team is unacceptable. We have too much talent to perform at this level, but that is only if Tarvaris is “the guy”. He has shown what we are going to get. For every 2 plays were he flashes enough skill to prove something, we will get 8 plays of mediocre, substandard football. I can be patient with him for now, but only as a quick and temporary solution to a bad problem where we had a shortened free agency period and no quarterback. I do have faith in the Seahawks FO, but I have faith that they will take the appropriate steps to install a fixture at quarterback, someone who will become the face of this franchise. I feel there is some real talent out there that is accessible to us, so I have faith that we will reach for it. Great article, Kip. But I cannot trust in Jackson. I firmly believe that under him, we will never achieve true greatness.
I don’t think we’ll be winning a superbowl with Jackson either. In that sense, he’s “unacceptable” as the long term solution. Jarhead, I’m busy at the moment and I’ll have a lengthier response later on, but my “suspicions” about Tarvaris are not based on the idea that he’s their “franchise quarterback.” Rather, its that they see him as being good enough to buy them time to roll the dice on Portis and another late round quarterback. I HOPE this isn’t the case, but if it is, I see some logic in it, and given their penchant for developing talent, it wouldn’t shock me if it worked out. Its too risky for my blood, and its not what I would do personally, but I get it.
Excellent article and thoughts Kip.
Yes, it is possible to get a good QB in the later rounds. But for every mid to late round round QB success story, there are 10x more failures. It is a risky move to count on finding a franchise QB in the mid rounds, one I wouldn’t make either, especially if I were the GM and my job was on the line. But the key element in all of this is how desparate the team is. The late round success stories seem to come from examples where the team had an established QB already. Therefore they had the luxury to throw the dice on drafting a QB in the later rounds because if it didn’t work, it wouldn’t cost them much. No harm done.
Look at Hasselbeck (and Rogers) being picked later as an after thought in Green Bay with Favre already entrenched. Or, New England picking Ryan Mallett in the 3rd round. You and I know that in a few years when Brady retires, Mallett will be ready to go. You only hear about the few success stories, but never hear about the many more late round QB’s that never make it and get cut.
Seattle should not be risking the health and success of the franchise by counting on luck to find a QB in the later rounds. Waiting until the later rounds for QB shows how low of a priority the position is, and it could take years before finding “The Guy”. The position is just too important and deserves a more pro-active, and agressive approach in the first round.
Like the cartoon showing two vultures talking in a tree, and one saying to the other ” I am tired of waiting around, lets just go out there and kill somehing!”
As you can see, I am one of those fans who stay up late at night worring about Seattle’s future QB 🙂
You already know my thoughts on this one, Kip. Seattle can have it’s heart set on a QB in the draft, but that doesn’t mean he is there when the Hawks pick. Selecting a guy who you aren’t completely sold on in round one just because you are filling a need is one of hte biggest mistakes a franchise can make.
John and Pete have a great track record at always upgrading the team, position by position. Forget faith, the history of those two guys, going far back into thier football careers, suggests they are not stupid with the position of quarterback. We may not like the current results, but they have been just as active at QB since they arrived as at other positions. They will get their guy.
Good article Kip – I agree with most of what you say. I have faith that Carroll & Schneider have the skills, knowledge, and ability to find good players throughout all rounds of the draft. It is obviously too early to analyze their personnel body of work with any depth because they haven’t been here long enough, but what I’ve seen I like. Because of their ability to find players like Baldwin, Chancellor, Wright, etc., I think that we have two talented personnel people evaluating talent and finding talent that fits a specific scheme. Its a big change from Tim Ruskell.
For the QB position, I think that they know what to do and how to get it done. I personally believe that they need to trade up to get a legitimate franchise type QB. That is what it takes to win championships in the NFL. I also agree with you that they will be looking for late-round gems. I mentioned this in a thread a week or two ago, but I think the Hawks will be drafting 2 QBs this year – one early and one late.
I am happy to have Scheider and Carroll pulling the personnel strings, but don’t think that they should or will wait until later rounds for a QB. During Schneider’s Green Bay days, his team took Rogers even though they hade Favre (who was still playing very well), they also spent a 2nd round pick on Brian Brohm and took Flynn in round 6 of the same draft. That tells me that he understands that the QB position is so important, it justifies using high picks even for a backup QB, and that it is important to always have young QBs to develop. I think I read somewhere that the Packer pilosophy was to draft a QB every year, develop them and either play them, trade them or cut them, but to always be developing somene new.
In that regard Kip, we are in total congruence. I do believe that our FO is the type to believe that they can hand mold just about anyone into the appropriate player to fit their goals. So Portis may actually be their future and none of us know about it. Everything you mention above is completely possible. As a matter of fact, it is something that significantly worries me. Because this staff has been so good at evaluating, training, and coaching players they may not necessarily believe that they will need a more high-profile finished product. They may feel that what they have is going to work. So we are in agreement there. I also hope sincerely that they feel more like you, myself and so many other true fans do, that we make a splash and get some bigtime playmaker. For no other reason than maybe we just need some flash and notoriety in Seattle. I wouldn’t mind that. You have brought up an excellent point in this article, one Seahawks fans should be very cognizant of
I’m with you Kip. Everyone keeps hoping we lose the last two years so we can draft a qb (or trading multiple 1st to get our qb of the future), I am glad we have been building a team instead. We didn’t have a running game, defense or oline and now it looks like we have all 3 (oline still unsettled with injuries). And with no training camp, I think Jackson has showed he can play. He is not Brady/Manning (who is), but if we continue to build the team, I think our team can be like the bucs (good running game, solid defense and respectable offense).
If Tavaris starts looking more like Brees or Plunkett hooray! Keep him as the starter.
However, if he becomes Alex Smith. Despite Smith’s good 2011 so far. Nope.
I agree with Ed. He can play. But, it’s still difficult to envision him as a QB who can lead big comebacks or destroy offenses with 300+yds and 3 TDs.
But, he does deserve a chance. Especially, since he is playing while injured.
And, I agree with Kip. I think he will be the starter in 2012. At least at the beginning of the year. Then, it depends on how well he improves.
Great write up. I’m not sold on Jackson, yet, but I look at how far he has progressed this year, with a major injury, and can’t help but think he could be even better next year. If Seattle has a chance to pick one of the top three QB’s this year, we should do it. But, I’m not buying into the sell the farm model for one guy, QB or anyone else. We have a lot of needs and depth is a major issue as we are now seeing with the O- line and linebackers. I have mentioned this in past posts but I don’t the team is in a place where we can give up picks for any position. Thanks for the great insight and all the time you guys put into this site.
TJ- Very insightful point about the Packers and loading up on QBs. That was something Mike Holmgren (who also came from the Packers) did too while in Seattle, but with less success.
Don- Agreed that late round success stories are usually guys who play behind established QBs. Hasselbeck was a backup for 4 seasons before getting his shot as a starter. Tony Romo was the same. Tom Brady held a clipboard for a year before an injury to Bledsoe thrust him into starting. This explains why Seattle was very active and persistent regarding Carson Palmer.
Jarhead-
While its true that Jackson is not a rookie, he only had 19 total starts before this season, and only had one season (2007) in which he started more than 3 games in a row. Jackson was sorely under-coached at Minnesota and it shows. Since coming to Seattle, his pocket presence and decision making- though still below average- have improved considerably. I never claimed that Jackson was a rookie, but it is true that he had a lot of undeveloped areas and he’s made noticeable improvements. Though not consistent enough, he’s already playing the most consistent football of his pro career, with a lot of room for further improvement.
I agree that as a veteran option, Tarvaris is less than ideal. That’s why Seattle had interest in bringing Hasselbeck back. Its why they had a strong interest in Palmer. Jackson was basically a fallback, emergency option.
However, I do think he’s played better than we thought he would, and he’s not the reason for Seattle’s 5-7 record. Brad Johnson won a superbowl with a QB rating nearly identical to Jackson’s in 2002. Which isn’t to say that Jackson has been great or even good enough, but he’s good enough to avoid being a problem.
The larger reason for Seattle’s 5-7 record is that they were a young team that has lost a few games young teams lose (Bengals, Browns, Redskins). Seattle is the second youngest team in the NFL, and the second most penalized team in the NFL. Young teams and highly penalized teams are usually very bad. Going 5-7 given those factors is actually a bit of an accomplishment.
Now, is QB the most UPGRADEABLE position on the team? Absolutely. But its also not a glaring hole, and whereas Matt was in a state of perpetual decline, Tarvaris is moving the opposite direction. And as mentioned in the article, this FO has a lot invested in his starter status. Like you, like all of us really, I would STILL draft a good QB early, moving up if necessary. However, I can see a scenario where they buy into Jackson (and Portis) enough to avoid a huge investment at quarterback next year. If that’s true, then they will still draft a quarterback, but won’t trade the draft for a quarterback. That said, if they rate a QB super-high and he’s there, I doubt they’d pass. Schneider is all about “opportunity” when it comes to getting talent. That’s the reason they drafted Aaron Rodgers back in 2005.
Nice write up Kip.
This is a tough situation that we are in. I have become enamored with Barkley, I know Pete really thought a lot about Barkley and Sark seems even higher on him.
Carroll and Schnieder have really impressed me with their scouting ability, though neither are perfect they might be the best talent evaluators we have ever seen for this franchise.
This brings me right back to Barkley, What would you give up for him? That’s a question we have to ask ourselves. Obviously, we have no control on who this franchise selects as its next signal caller, but look again at our team.
Doug Baldwin – undrafted
KJ Wright – 4th round
Kam Chancellor- 5th round
Richard Sherman – 6th round
Malcolm Smith – 7th round
Beast Mode – 4th rounder/5th rounder via Buffalo
I guess what I’m trying to say is this, when you can dig up first grade talent in almost any round your 1st round picks aren’t as critical towards building your future. Getting a guy like Barkley doesn’t come around very often. The guy has no red flags. He sees the field better than I can remember of any QB prospect. If we were to draft Barkley you would have a hard time convincing me that we wouldn’t be fighting tooth and nail for the NFC title, and if we became playoff bound those first rounders we gave up become late first rounders.
I feel this team is so close. I love what Pete and John have done, and if they decide that trading up is too costly so be it, but I would give up 3 first rounders without hesitation knowing we had a QB with the tools to get us to a SB. Has anyone noticed we have all of our picks heading into the 2012 draft plus the pick from Curry? That’s a first, but I don’t think its coincidence.
We went through 5 years of first round flops with Ruskell.
I’m tired of not having a Franchise QB. I want someone that would breath life into this franchise. I’ll always be a fan no matter what, but this is the one time where first rounders mean nothing to me.
Perhaps you’re right Kip. Maybe Portis is our future, but if you’re Carroll and you want to go out with a bang, do you pin it on Portis or TJ?
“Perhaps you’re right Kip. Maybe Portis is our future, but if you’re Carroll and you want to go out with a bang, do you pin it on Portis or TJ?”
Nope. But I’m not Carroll so what do I know. I think its worth noting that in the college football environment where national championships are rarely won by top NFL QB prospects, Pete Carroll at USC always made it a point to recruit blue chip quarterbacks with strong pro potential. It’s the perfect opposite in the NFL, so it would be strange if Carroll changed his tune now.
I’d pay two firsts for Barkley in the blink of an eye. Hell, I’d probably go as high as what the Falcons paid for Julio Jones.
We should be glad these guys are running the team and not me though. I know I am.
Don’t count out Tampa’s josh Johnson. Perhaps a more athletic, lesser armed Jackson. Lots of interesting late rounders: Cousins, Lindley (aka CW part deux), Austin Davis (who looked awesome today). Even Keenum, or Moore. Game managers.
The one fact in all of these discussions is that next year Carroll will have to claim to “have” his starter. Next years QB will be his success; or his failure.
No more “rebuild” years left. Time to win. Choose wisely 🙂
you mean josh johnson the cousin of Marshawn lynch?, i heard hes got alot of speed jus not known for his arm, i’ve seen the Bucs run him in some QB keepers before. I believe he can throw though because I believe he set records at San diego when he played.
im much more interested in Davis then Keenum though, moores interesting, ESPN has him listed at 6-1? and i thought that was weird because i thought he would barely reach 5-11.
Nice writing Kip.
I think that another way to frame your basic point–for those readers less comfortable with the “faith” framing–is that the front office is following the first axiom of Moneyball. Once you say, “We MUST have player X or Y” you’re already lost. Most experts are saying that there are only three first round QBs (i.e., Luck, Barkley, RGIII in some order). At least three teams (i.e., Indy, Miami, and Washington) with QB needs are almost a mortal lock to draft ahead of Seattle.
The FO had BETTER prepare as if no first rd caliber QB will be available when it selects. It had BETTER NOT be talking itself into Landry Jones in the first round. Let’s not make this complicated folks. Pulling the trigger on Luck, Barkley, or RGIII would be the easiest decision in the world for Seattle. The tough call–and the far more likely one–is figuring out what to do if all those guys are gone.
I think the FO is trying to put itself in position to go with best player available, which is exactly what they have to do.
I have neve been more excited about a draft than I am with this upcoming one. The thing is, every GM and coach will be holding their cards close to the vest, trying not to slip up and devulge their plans to every sports analyst who will be asking. I was living in Denver in “84, and the Elway trade was a complete surprise by everyone. Most of us were saying “Elway who? And we gave up our first round offensive lineman AND next year’s first round pick!! He better be worth it” 🙂
I don’t have anything to contribute other than a compliment on the article. It was a logical, articulate and very realistic assessment of the situation. Well done.
Thanks Dave for the moneyball comment. I agree that a big reason for Green Bay’s success, and John Schneider’s as well, is his ability to avoid falling in love with players. It can be frustrating as Seattle is not a bad enough team to have a good QB fall to them easily, but in the long haul, I’m very happy with the measured approach they take. I just hope other fans can be equally as understanding.
Oh, and nice article on Fieldgulls by the way.
(For everyone else:)
http://www.fieldgulls.com/2011/12/4/2609737/a-thought-on-false-dichotomies-yet-another-qb-post#comments
NOW THATS WHAT I CALL THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX!!! I always love hearing the sides that aren’t so predictable but could happen. I continue to think of competition for positions & if bringing in a qb (High pick or low) only to challenge Jackson & Portis why not do it… All in all we want a good competition against the best players we can get. I remember thinking “What if we traded down, Portis was #2, we drafted a pass rusher, corner (Trufants gone), & o-line depth. This post makes me see im not the only one.
Kip,
Or anyone for that matter, I’ve read quite a few blogs and articles about the success of QB’s relative to the rounds they’ve been drafted, but has anyone seen any article about the success rates of QB’s relative to playing time. I’ve long wondered if the data about QB success is skewed towards the fact that QB’s taken in later rounds simply get less time to hone their craft.
I’m not even addressing the idea of QB’s sitting, I’m talking about actual regular season playing time.
Most teams obviously aren’t going to work through someone’s flaws, but what has struck me about the PC/JS regime is that they do seem willing to do that, and are starting to look vindicated, think penalty machine Browner, who now is slowly becoming a good to great corner-there’s an article about it on Yahoo sports. Or The Tim Tebow experiment that is paying huge dividends in Denver.
Think Alex Smith this year though not putting up Pro-bowl numbers but keeps doing the small things to win, whereas I can remember when the guy looked like he was still paying in a spread option and would make terrible decisions. Or from our own team, Matt Hasselbeck sitting for years, but when he first came out I wouldn’t say he was all that great, until obviously 2005. Or even when the hated Big Ben first came out, he wasn’t all that remarkable, and it took years for him to become a weapon unto himself.
Anyways I know this is rambling but if any of you have seen any data about starts vs. success, let me know.
Thank you for reminding us about the return in those trades especially the Josh Wilson one. It’s easy to forget some of the great moves JS/PC have made.
Peter,
I don’t know if I’ve ever seen definitive data on that. However, I do remember seeing a study a few years back that quarterbacks who start immediately fair better on average than those that sit. Part of that is obviously because QBs who start immediately tend to be better QBs- that’s why they are starting immediately. I’m sure that playing time could be a factor there though.
Peter,
For the QB who are drafted in later rounds or are UDFA, I think the good ones will be able to emerge even though initially they might not have been given time to play. The first thing that the successful ones had done (and had to do) were to beat their competitors for the 2nd string job in the preseasons. Then, they were given opportunities (due to 1st string guys being injured or not playing well) to start one or more regular season games, and played well enough to get the attentions of their own head coaches or the FO of other teams. This is the process through which Tom Brady, Tony Romo, Matt Cassel, etc. had emerged. Matt Flynn could perhaps be the next example of this process.