Matt Barkley proves doubters wrong, is elite

November 20th, 2011 | Written by Rob Staton

I’ll compile my notes on Matt Barkley vs Oregon when the tape is ready to be published. In the meantime I wanted to make some notes on his performance overall, because he made a real statement on Saturday.

After months of hype for Andrew Luck, for one evening people were talking about someone else for a change. This year Barkley has continued to progress technically, improve his numbers and lead USC to key victories along the way. Despite that, there’s been a surprisingly negative undercurrent to Barkley’s draft stock. Now, it’s impossible to deny we’re looking at a top end quarterback prospect.

Yes, he has the luxury of playing with two of the finest young receiver’s in college football. No, USC wouldn’t have beaten Oregon without Matt Barkley.

We’ve often talked about what Barkley does well – his high command of the offense, his decision making and ability to make those decisions quickly while reading a defense. There was one throw on Saturday where Barkley looked to the left, pumped, came back to the middle of the field and after some neat footwork just lifted the ball over one defensive back into an impossible window ahead of a cornerback. All the while he had pressure in his face and was actually knocked to the ground just after releasing the ball. The touch, the accuracy, the decision making was at an elite level, it was one of the finest passes you’ll see this season. Let’s not forget, this is a defense Andrew Luck really struggled to cope with last week – and he had the benefit of home field advantage. 

We also know Barkley’s restrictions by now. Nobody would ever argue he’s a physically brilliant quarterback because that’s not his game. He compensates for not having blazing speed, great height or an arm for the ages by being incredibly polished in every other area of his game. His footwork and instinct makes up for a lack of pure speed, making him surprisingly elusive and capable to get the occassional first down on the ground. More importantly though, it allows him to extend plays in the pocket. One of the big problems with Landry Jones is his poor footwork facing pressure off a simple drop or snap in the gun – too often he panics. Barkley’s ability to move away from pressure with a minimal number of steps is as good as I’ve seen from a quarterback this year.

He hasn’t got an amazing deep ball – a lot of the time it’s slightly under thrown and certainly he’s not driving 60-yard bombs in-behind a defensive back for breakaway gains. However, his decision making and precision is again crucial here. I’m convinced I’ve not seen Barkley throw a deep ball into double coverage this season. He plays the percentages and if he needs to look off the safety with a quick pump or misdirection with his eyes – he’ll do it to create the one-on-one match-up he wants. When you’re throwing to a receiver as talented as Marqise Lee, you can afford to get it up there and let him make a play. At the next level he’s going to face greater problems against superior defensive schemes and secondary talent. However, he wouldn’t be the first quarterback to find ways to cope and let the smarts overcome the physical weaknesses. I’ve compared his potential to that of Matt Ryan early in his career – not because they have a lot of similarities in appearance or even technique – but in terms of being able to control an offense and make a lot out of what offensive talent he has. I think in that sense it’s a fair match.

Are there a lot of screens and high percentage passes in the USC offense? Yes, but that’s part of the gameplan. Being able to check down when necessary is part of the game of football, being able to take easy yards is also part of football. As long as you see evidence of a player getting out of that comfort zone and throwing low percentage passes and consistently executing, that’s all you need. Barkley has easily achieved that this year.

It wasn’t all perfect – Barkley made one awful decision trying to force a pass after a bad snap just after half time that probably should’ve been intercepted. The pick he did have was also avoidable – Barkley argued (fairly) that Robert Woods was being held and the flag should’ve been thrown. However, having detected the obstruction, why make the throw to a receiver in no position to make the play?

It’s impossible to define how this performance impacts his decision on whether to declare or not. On the one hand, Barkley has seen the potential in this team and with sanctions lifted next year – could USC be primed for a tilt at the PAC-12 title (or more)? There are also opposing arguments which could persuade Barkley to declare – for example, he could lose his top-end left tackle to the NFL in Matt Kalil. Wins over Notre Dame, Washington and now Oregon would allow him to depart with some level of achievement and his stock is higher now than it possibly ever will be. Returning comes with an injury and performance risk that could severely impact his stock. Perhaps the most important factor in favor of him moving on is simply that Barkley is ready for the pro’s. He’s ready to line-up in a NFL offense and having started three years in SoCal, he’s ready for the next chapter in his career. That doesn’t mean he’ll necessarily take it.

We’ll have a similar debate about Robert Griffin III when I get into the Oklahoma/Baylor tape. Griffin stood out again for his overall performance - including a last minute drive to get the go-ahead score on a brilliant pass across his body to the back of the end zone. Baylor will lose several key players next year and there’s not really much else for them to achieve, especially if they win a Bowl game. Griffin has considered law school, but that was before this season. More than ever it’s looking likely that he’ll declare and he’s seperating himself as the obvious #3 ranked quarterback in this group behind Luck and Barkley.

This week I will be publishing my first mock draft of the new season. Both Barkley and Griffin III will be included.

63 Responses to “Matt Barkley proves doubters wrong, is elite”

  1. Tom says:

    I don’t think there are doubters that Barkley is ready for the NFL and is an elite college QB.

    I like Barkley and think he’ll be a good QB. Barkley can prove me wrong when he gets to the NFL and becomes an elite signal caller, that’s when he can prove the doubters wrong.

    I hope he tears it up because I wish him well and if we aren’t able to draft him, I hope he heads to the AFC or returns to USC.

    • Rob says:

      There are plenty of doubters – they’ve just gone quiet. One guy sent me about 5-6 emails the night of the ASU game every time Barkley did something he constituted as a mistake. Jimmy Clausen comparisons aplenty. Barkley had a lot to prove – and he’s doing it. Luck and Barkley are the two elite QB’s in this class, that has never been in doubt for me.

      • Tom says:

        I haven’t seen the youtube on Barkley, so I can’t comment on Saturday’s performance. I still like Barkley and think his game intangibles are excellent as previously stated.

        If you’re giving me a choice between two 6’2″ QB’s, I’m going RG3 because I see more athleticism and upside. They both throw quite a few bubble screens, short stuff and 9 route fades, but I have a lean to RG3′s arm and middle of the field anticipatory stick throw accuracy that i just haven’t seen from Barkley.

        RG3 will have more technical work than a more polished Barkley, yes, but I would still have a slight lean to RG3 and think Barkley is a moot Hawk topic due to our record and remaining schedule.

        Draft day will be very interesting.

  2. Jarhead says:

    So the whole ‘winning is good’ debate is hopefully behind us, because we won today and anyone who thinks that was a positive step forward is clueless. We essentially beat up a really bad team decimated by injuries who quit midway through the third quarter. We had too many penalties, to many silly mistakes, and look bad when NOT compared to St. Louis. So winning doesn’t necessarily equate to improvement and optimism. Now I believe it’s a foregone conclusion that we will finish 6-10 or 7-9 and be in the 11-18 range in the draft. I feel that the team we have in place will be a team that can earn a .500 record WITHOUT any amount of talent at the QB position. So, if we add a QB with talent, I believe we almost instantly become a 10 win team. We have the pieces in place already, so I feel that it has become imperative to make the Barkley deal. He is our guy. Griffin would be great too, but Barkley is just nearly taylor-made for our system. We can get Asante Samuel in the secondary, we can get Mathis or even Mario Williams to rush, those are both very viable scenarios, so forget Coples, Claiborne, or anybody else who may be available at our spot. We need to pull the trigger on Barkley. Washington is our biggest hurdle, but I believe we can make a trade with Carolina who will want to add young talent with our draft picks. So that’s my theory: give the Panthers some good picks and we get our Q. And then we take a run at SF next year.

    • Don says:

      I absolutely agree 100% with you. With every win, Seattle will have to pay that much more to move up and out bid someone else to take a quality QB, and I hope it is Barkley. Not only does he have the skill set, but the leadership and poise to lead a team.

      Some people think that draft position doesn’t matter when picking a QB, that Aaron Rogers went #25, so the Seahawks should be able to find a pro bowler at #25. Green Bay was lucky that no other team ahead of them needed a QB. For every late round QB success, there are many more failures. There are 4-5 teams that will need a QB and they could be picking ahead of Seattle, or trading up. I would trade any number of draft picks this year to get Barkley.

  3. Don says:

    Hi Rob,

    Who does Barkley most closely remind you of in the NFL ? I have read he is similar to Drew Breeze, physically and talent wise. Is that true?

    • Rob says:

      There are some similarities between the two. I think he has some of the characteristics you see in Rodgers – the mobility in the pocket, the technical ability to make quick reads and execute. There’s not one player he’s a carbon copy of – but he’s got a lot of talent and franchise QB potential.

    • Kip Earlywine says:

      I’d say he’s like a less athletic Carson Palmer. Matt Ryan isn’t a bad comp either.

  4. Ed says:

    We are not getting Barkley and I wouldn’t want to trade that much to move up (Jackson is playing pretty well). Indy and Miami will be in the top 5, so neither will fall farther than that. Then you still have KC/Cleveland/Washington that might pick ahead of us as well (there goes Jones and RG III). Looks like we continue to build or defense with either CB or DE or maybe get Richardson.

    • Jarhead says:

      Jackson is playing pretty well? Oh wow, that is not what I saw at all. I saw two careless interceptions thrown almost immediately. I saw a quarterback who was indecisive and held the ball much too long and cause sacks and unnecessary pressure from an anemic st. louis pass rush. He had an amazing amount of time considering two starting lineman are on IR and he still couldn’t get red zone td’s with any consistency. We have incredible weapons at wideout and TE, they continually make plays and make jackson look moderately serviceable, but don’t get nuts. As I said, we have the weapons in place, we don’t need a bunch of draft picks for players who aren’t even guaranteed to make the team. Short sighted and luke-warm commitment type thinking is going to get us nowhere fast. It’s time to be bold and make a rash move. And hey, Miami just blew out buffalo. You think they are going to truly end up behind washington, minnesota, carolina, jacksonville, arizona or st. louis? There are 6 teams right there, not including indy. We have just as much chance as anyone to make a move. Seattle fans need to start demanding more than just settling for whoever and hoping to slide in at 9-7. I want 13-3 and to be in the top 5 in total defense, rushing, time of possession, and turnover differential. Any other true Seattle fans out there that agree with me, let’s make ourselves heard and get our team in the right direction!

      • Ed says:

        I agree about holding the ball sometimes, but come on. Tate has been an underachiever, and rice is just getting healthy. Give him this year and an offseason, he will be better than throwing a rookie in there. And St Louis anemic defense leads the league in sacks, just so you know. I am not saying I don’t want a qb, I’m saying I would not give up 2 1st rd picks to move up and get a qb.

        • Rob says:

          Seattle would’ve been 14-0 in super quick time against a good team with those two careless picks. Let’s not confuse winning with great quarterbacking – that was not a good performance by TJ against a rank bad Rams outfit. The Seahawks must upgrade if they want to realise their potential.

    • Seth says:

      I was lucky enough to be at the game last night and you want to talk about a buzz kill and that was T-
      jack in the first half. He looked down right awful for parts of the game. Some Rams fans that were next to me asked me why Charlie wasn’t getting a chance because he has to be better. I had to tell them that Jackson has been playing better than Charlie and they looked at me as if I high. We need a QB that people will respect and fear. I say go out and get Barkley or Griffen. At least they will get rid of the ball and not take silly sacks or throw bad balls every other play.

  5. thebroski says:

    “Are there a lot of screens and high percentage passes in the USC offense? Yes, but that’s part of the gameplan. Being able to check down when necessary is part of the game of football, being able to take easy yards is also part of football.”

    This is consistently part of the criticism leveled against Landry Jones but it doesn’t seem like you weigh that as heavily against Barkley as you do Jones. Has Jones not shown his ability to get “out of that comfort zone and throwing low percentage passes and consistently executing?”

    • thebroski says:

      This wasn’t supposed to seem so off topic, but I want to make sure that you are using the same level of criticism for both quarterbacks.

      • Rob says:

        The reason I label it at Jones is simply down to the fact that the scheme defines Jones – I don’t see that with Barkley. As soon as Jones is forced to stray from the script, he struggles. He needs the screens etc. Barkley will improvise, he’s in control. If his hot read isn’t on, he’ll go to option 2-3. Jones is handcuffed. So to answer your question – I don’t believe Jones gets out of his comfort zone enough to consistently execute low percentage passes.

  6. TJ says:

    I agree with you Jarhead. Carroll/Schneider need to package picks and trade up to grab whoever “their guy” is. Unless they can pull the trigger and find the guy that will get them over the top I am afraid the Seahawks are destined to be a 7-9 to 9-7 team year after year. Being in the same division as St. Louis and Arizona essentially guarantees too many wins to ever be in the running for an elite QB in the draft. Carolina could be a team willing to move down. They have their QB. Now, they need as many picks as they can get to build a team around him.

    • AP says:

      True – Carolina really needs a defense, but they certainly aren’t far off from being a winner again. I wonder if (when the time comes) Carolina will be our handcuff for the draft day dance. Most of those other teams down there “need” Barkley as much as the Hawks and there’s no way we would trade out of a position to get a potential elite.

      Viable trade partners to keep an eye on:
      Minnesota
      Carolina
      Jacksonville
      Maybe even Philadelphia

      I’m also thinking that, if I were Indy, I would at least price out my draft position. It is terrible that the difference between contender and winless is one player. I wouldn’t assume I could, nor want to, repeat that sort of franchise building with Mr Luck.

  7. Jarhead says:

    And by the way, all the mockers that I’m seeing that have us drafting a CB saying it’s some glaring need, do they even WATCH the games? Our Walter thurmond is on IR and quite frankly I think Sherman is playing excellent. Browner will be a more than adequate nickelback to cover those those tall slot receivers. To me, it seems a lot of mockers just see names they don’t recognize and think ‘Oh, they stink.’ I know most don’t account for trades in mocks, but if they at least did a little research… I’d just like to see some accurate insight into who could help our team on the long shot that we DON’T make a move at Q

    • Ed says:

      outside of qb, cb and de (maybe even speed rb) are our biggest needs. trufant/thurmond are injury prone, and i like sherman and browner, but we need more. and browner is not a nickel back (he is too big and not fast enough to cover the slot. he is much better on the outside roughing up wideouts).

      • Rob says:

        The team can get by with the talent they have in the secondary. Not sure the same can be said for other areas. CB is a need, but it’s at best third on the list.

        • Rugby Lock says:

          I actually think the secondary is doing extremely well with the absolutely pathetic pass rush we have (yesterday’s feasting was a aberration and needs to be ignored IMO). Can you imagine how good they would be with even an average pass rush?? So, whereas I am in agreement that we could always use more guys who can cover I do not agree with Ed that it is anywhere near as big of a need as qb and de.

          • Rugby Lock says:

            I really want to highlight how good ET is… He is the main reason that Seattle’s D doesn’t get lit up as it should with their anemic pass rush…

            • That and playing consistently bad QB’s in 4 of the last 5 games.

              • Kip Earlywine says:

                2 out of 5 by my count. No way I’d call Flacco or Romo consistently bad, and Dalton has been solid statistically.

                I think a better point to make is that elite quarterbacks will still light this secondary up (as Romo and Big Ben did).

  8. Colin says:

    Simply put, you can’t be afraid of success. Afraid of trading up for a potentially great player can’t be an option- you’ll never get where you want to go otherwise.

    It’s like the old adage in baseball: You play for one run, you’re gonna get only one run.

    Keep Tarvaris, and you’ll have a guy who is decent, can run the offense, has maxed his potential out, will continue to make bone headed plays and never be a championship QB.

    Spend a 1st round pick or two, and this team could be 7-3, 8-2 or better next year at this time.
    Keep Tarvaris, and pray for .500.

    Choice is clear: Take the chance.

    • Rob says:

      Yeah, nailed it again Colin. Being scared to fail can lead to failure itself.

    • Rugby Lock says:

      Hear hear!

    • Major Major Major says:

      Totally agreed. Obviously Luck is selling the farm but if a team like Minnesota or Carolina have picks ahead of Miami/Washington/Cleveland… Carroll/Schneider need to pull a trigger on a trade. Think about it… without Hasselbeck the Seahawks were relegated to years of 6-10 to 8-8 with mediocre quarterbacks… we need the franchise signal caller no matter what.

  9. mattlock3 says:

    If the Seahawks have the opportunity to trade up for Barkley or stand pat for Griffin (as much as I love Barkley) I think I’d rather have, for example, Griffin in the 1st/Perry in the 2nd/Curry in the 3rd than Barkley with no 2nd and maybe no 3rd or no 1st next year.

    • Rob says:

      Seattle hasn’t needed a third round pick in recent years to improve… and it hasn’t had a great deal of success in R2. To get an elite QB prospect, I think it’s worth it. We can over value picks sometimes – players win games and getting a great QB for 10+ years will be the most important thing this team ever does.

      • Peck says:

        I want to get Barkley or even Griffin badly. But I just don’t se it happens.
        The price for moving up is more or less consensus – two first and may be three and four depends on the final draft spot. If you are Carolina do you will take 16-th from Seattle or 7-th from Washington or Cleveland? It is simple like this – there are two or three teams that have much more to offer than we have. I don’t see our FO bold enough to pack up entire draft for QB.

  10. Doug says:

    Give up the farm for Barkley. The way I see it is that there is enough talent on this team right now to be on par with SF, except for QB play. Carolina is HORRIBLE, but see how dangerous they are now just because of the addition of Cam. Green Bay is AWESOME because of Rogers. Look what Indy is without Payton. Imagine us having an O that doesn’t go backwards for 30 yards in a fast 3 and out numerous times a game! Just think how much more ferocious our D will be when they are on the field a LOT less often. Just changing ONE 3 and out into a TD drive can create a 14 point differential, and can create an easy 3-5 minute swing in TOP.
    I think TJ is a bottom third QB at best, and Clippy isn’t on the roster next year. TJ get’s one more year (partial year probably) for Barkley to get accustomed to the speed/size differential of the pros, and then it’s on. Let the decade of Seahawk domination begin. NFC west will dominate for years now, and the stupid east coast bias will be forced to capitulate finally acknowledging that west coast teams are better. Sunday night football didn’t even bother to mention the Hawks/Rams game. Seriously?

  11. Jim J says:

    Hey guys,
    First, what’s with all the negativity? So Tevaris didn’t have a perfect game, it was still a win. Quit your crying! You should be celebrating! You can bet the Philadelphia fans are celebrating Young’s victory – that was an ugly win but he did it.

    Barkley – I was a doubter. Not that he coudn’t play, but I am suspicious of all these poles that place Luck and Barkley first and second. Yesterday I put my doubts aside. He has as good a shot as anyone to make it in the pros. Regarding the screens, they are not that easy to pull off. A lot of defenses sniff them out. I am getting real tired of seeing some poor receiver catch it near the sideline and get plastered by a linebacker. Sometimes you shouldn’t throw the screen or sideline pattern.

    Most likely that Luck and Barkley will be gone before Seattle picks. Probably a 60% chance tha Griffin is gone too. So I hope that the Seahawks scouts have some other choices. I have been saying that this is a deep QB field. Beyond the three I named, who have the best chance of making it (all of 40%), there are a bunch of other names that I don’t know anything about. Will we move up or be picking from that pool?

    Great win Seahawks!!!

    • Ed says:

      I’m with you Jim J. For two years now everyone is saying a rookie qb will make us so much better and we should sell out to get one. Our team was terrible a few years back, devoid of talent. Car & Sch are doing a good job of putting talent on this team. No running game or line for years (solved, although we still could use a homerun rb). No run defense for years (solved). No deep threat (rice is getting healthy). Yes, we could use a young qb, but not by giving up multiple #1. If we are inside the top 10, get (barkley or rgIII), if we are outside the top 10, draft best available (de/cb/rb).

      • Rob says:

        Well if the team is consistently undermined by bad quarterback play, you might take a different view. It’s no coincidence that in recent years every Super Bowl team has had one key factor in common. Getting a franchise QB can define a team for a decade.

        • Ed says:

          I totally agree, I just don’t agree with giving up 2 #1′s for a qb that could hit or miss. That goes for every draft spot and pick, I know, but it seems a reach to me. And all those franchise qb’s in recent years (Rodgers late 1st rd, Brees 2nd rd, Rothlesberger mid 1st, Brady 7th rd.) Only the Manning brothers were early 1st (#1 overall of course) and Eli is still highly debated about being an elite qb.

          I guess in the end, we will agree to disagree and hope which ever way we go, it will be the right way

          • Charles says:

            Ed, You listed a few of the 32 starting QBs to come out later in the draft, unfortunately, it has been proven that 1st round QBs still have a significantly higher percentage of success than any other round drafted. Go through the teams this year with quality starting QBs and more than half of them will have QBs selected in the early first round, or ones that were graded there but slipped (Rodgers was looked at going 1st instead of Smith, 49ers just picked wrong and no one else needed a QB).

            We have to take a chance on a QB because currently the lack of talent there is making the rest of our offensive playmakers look worse. How many times this season have you seen Rice having to dive/jump catch a ball into the ground, rather than being able to catch the ball in stride? How often have we seen our O-Line get blamed for the QB holding the ball for 7+ seconds before taking the sack. I’m not trying to say our O-Line has been anything close to great this season, but it’s definately improved, and the QB usually has time to throw, he just doesn’t.

            I’d rather take the gamble at a QB in the first round, preferrably early, than not take one at all.

            • Jim J says:

              I can only list a few QBs that I consider elite. Ben Rothlisburger, Manning, Brady, Brees, Rogers. So out of the 32 teams, I can only list 5 elite QBs. Maybe a few others will join them like Alex Smith. Maybe your list is a little longer. I guess there just aren’t that many elites.

      • Ryan says:

        Repeat after me: Tarvaris Jackson is not taking us to the Super Bowl.
        Tarvaris Jackson is not taking us to the Super Bowl.
        Tarvaris Jackson is not taking us to the Super Bowl.

        Unless you’re happy with 7-9 annually, the QB position needs to be addressed.

        • Ed says:

          And Barkley and Luck will. Dude, you don’t know. Look at Bradford now. Giving up 2-4 high picks in multiple years won’t get us there either. None of those teams traded multiple picks to get their qb. All those teams that have won championships build with goods drafts, not selling the farm for one player.

          • Tell that to the Colts. A franchise quarterback CAN elevate the talent around him and be worth multiple high picks. We have WR talent, a developing O-line, and other picks in the top 100 to use on defense – our surrounding offense is closer than people give it credit for. Sell the farm.

          • Colin says:

            Tell that to the Falcons.
            Tell that to the Colts.

            Ed, at some point you have to go get your guy. You can’t sit around with Jacksons and Ortons and McCoys of the world.

            They are successful because they have THE guy. Not A GUY.

            • Ed says:

              I’m with you guys. But once again, those teams drafted where they were at. They didn’t sell the farm to get either guy. If we were in position, I would say yes. But not giving up multiple 1st and probably 2nd and 3rd for a qb that may/may not be good at the next level.

              • Colin says:

                That isn’t the point Ed. The point is they took their guy in the 1st round, and most were taken highly. They are not regretting it. Seattle needs to look at the guys available (Luck Barkley RG3) and make a play for one. The upside of having a franchise QB outweighs the risk of flopping. I trust Schneider and Carroll, so if they do move up I believe they are going to get us one we can count on.

                • Ed says:

                  That is the point. If we were in the position to draft the qb, do it. If not, don’t. Those teams picked the qb where they drafted. Everyone said the same thing last year, trade up to get the qb. Outside of Locker (who looked real good, but he has sat for 10 weeks), all those qb’s are interception machines and the teams are still doing lousy. If RG III or Barley fall to 15 (sweet), but I’m just not comfortable trading up 10 spots. So do you not trust them if they don’t trade up?

                  • Jim J says:

                    An interesting point about Locker, he is playing for a team with a good offensive line. Hasselback has been sacked 1/3 of the number of times Tevaris has. So Locker gets the good protection, he has time to throw.

                    Once again the Seahawks offensive line has been decimated with injuries. And that effects everything. Lynch can’t run as well. Tavaris is getting sacked or hurrying throws. It is all interwoven.

                    I would love to get a number one QB. But it won’t help us if he is injured his first season. And he will be with this line.

  12. Billy Showbiz says:

    We absolutely need a QB. I think that draft picks are way overvalued at times. A stud QB is worth more than just one mid first round draft pick. Of course this team has some other needs but nothing this pressing. If Pete and John are certain one of these guys can come in and be great NFL players for years to come then we have to make the move up. We have an 8-8 level team right now and that will continue if we keep it going with T-Jax.

  13. Swamp_Fox says:

    The mind wanders… with the wheels coming off in St Louis and Spags looking vulnerable, might a new FO consider working out a draft day trade that sends Bradford to Wash or Clev in exchange for their 1st and 2nd Rd picks, and take Barkley themselves?

    • Rob says:

      Shanhan loved Bradford… you never know…

    • Kip Earlywine says:

      I really doubt it. Its not like they inherited Bradford, they picked him themselves, and they were rather emphatic about picking Bradford #1 too.

      A lot of people expected Bradford to struggle in McDaniel’s offense in year 1. I’m not saying this as an endorsement of Bradford, but quitting on a first round QB after just two years is something a failing franchise does.

  14. Major Major Major says:

    Tarvaris Jackson’s lifetime quarterback rating is 75.5 and this year his quarterback rating is 73.1. Look at the teams who are consistently good, they have a franchise quarterback. On pure numbers alone… Both Colt McCoy and Matt Moore have better numbers this year. It’s clear that Tarvaris Jackson is akin to Seneca Wallace, a serviceable back-up but not the kind of QB that will take the Hawks to the promised land. If Carroll and Schneider don’t make a bold move for a future quarterback, they will be stuck in Dennis Erickson/Tom Flores era mediocrity. Those teams had pretty decent defenses as well…

  15. Jim Kelly says:

    Pete Carroll and John Schneider won’t be mortgaging the Seahawks’ future with a massive trade up to get an elite qb. They will be mortgaging their own futures to do so. If they screw up, then they will be gone. Paul Allen will fire them, obviously, if they don’t achieve sustainable success. Most of the elite qbs taken in the draft have fallen to the team that took them. Admitted, some of those players didn’t have to fall very far, seeing how they were taken at the top of the first round.

    Over the last 15 years it was rare to see teams trade up, and take an elite player, especially a qb. (Rare is a relative term. I’m comparing recently to a time before qbs got unfathomable contracts prior to ever playing a game.) Now, with the advent of the rookie pay scale, I’m expecting to see more trades in the vein of Julio Jones. Qbs will command more compensation, but that’s due to the nature of their position.

    The Hawks need to do whatever they deem necessary to get their man. Within reason. I can’t see Schneider and Carroll trading multiple picks, Okung, and Rice to get an elite qb. (I know that’s an exaggeration, but it is also a trade almost no team would turn away from.) Something like that would set the Seahawks back too far to be competitive. Multiple picks, or a first rounder and Doug Baldwin wouldn’t be too much in my opinion. I don’t think any fan wouldn’t mind a trade, even for a high price, as long as it isn’t insane.

    We also need to look at the foundation that has been built. New York and Green Bay built up their teams before committing to a qb. (Admittedly, in different ways.) But they had a winning formulae prior to that. Detroit committed to Stafford before that foundation had been laid, and have since then not only struggled, but their franchise qb has been injured repeatedly. I can’t even guess at the mental beat down that he’s suffered. I’d rather the front office follow the former way to success, rather than Detroit’s way.

    One final thing. Jarhead, and people like you are idiots. Winning is GOOD. You’ve obviously never been part of a team or you would understand the positive effects that winning has on those associated with the act winning. If you don’t want to win, but would rather lose to get better draft position, go support Indy. True fans want to win. The players and staff want to win. “No one likes a loser.” How many times have you heard that? We all want to be associated with a winner, yet the only way to do that is to win. Sometimes it may seem better to lose, to try to win tomorrow, but if that’s the case, then you’d be in the NBA. The Bulls front office wanted them to lose the rest of their games, not make the playoffs, and get a better draft pick. Michael Jordan was pissed. He carried them into the playoffs, where they were bounced in the first round. But we were able to witness one of the single greatest playoff performances of all time. It also led to a winning culture in their locker room. THAT led to six championships. Right now, the Hawks are on par with that Bulls team. Both made the playoffs on the last day, with losing records, both had memorable games (Jordan’s 63 pts. on Boston, and “Beast Quake.”), and both were shaky the next year looking for players to lift them to the next level. I’d much rather see the Seahawks fight to get to that next level then lay down, frightened, and too afraid to win. One last thing. If I were Andrew Luck, and I saw a team not even try to fight to win, I wouldn’t want to play for them. Why should I, they’re losers, and why would I want to be associated with them.

    • Matt says:

      Just building on your point, to me if you finish with 6-8 wins, that just reinforces the idea that you should trade up to get your QB. If you identify a guy that a) fits your system, and b) you are confident in his ability, then you do what it takes to get him. The difference between 7 wins and 11 wins for the Seahawks this year, will be based on QB play. I am not saying Tarvaris is losing games, but he’s clearly not winning them. That means, you have talent at other places on the roster that are making up for his shortcomings. So what happens if you introduce above average QB play to a team with bad QB play, but still manages to win 6-8 games? We are not a bad team by any means. We have nice pieces on offense and a growing defense, the only piece missing is a QB. I don’t want to play the odds that we magically find 3 Hall of Famers on defense who can make up for crap QB play (ie Ravens) in order to win a super bowl.

      Get our guy. Do what it takes. That doesn’t mean be reckless, but that does mean to have the confidence that you are making the right move. Now is not the time to play scared.

    • Colin says:

      Jim, I couldn’t agree more. Although I do think the consequences for not going after a QB could be just as bad for Carroll/Schneider as being aggressive.
      I would disagree with the assertion of staying put and taking the best player available for the simple fact that he likely isn’t going to boost this team into contention. Right now, the way I see this roster, if you don’t add a top end QB soon, we’re going to be in that 7-9 win range for awhile. Do you really think Seattle will ever get their man picking in that range? I sure don’t.

      Carroll has built this team to make life easier for a QB. Now he must go get one.

      I will repeat this till the sun burns out if I have to :AT SOME POINT, YOU MUST GO GET YOUR MAN AT QB.

      • Jim Kelly says:

        Matt and Colin,

        Thanks, guys. I agree with both of you. Thanks for being more succinct than I was able to be.

        Rob, great post. keep up the good work, man.

  16. Jarhead says:

    Well keep drinking the Jonestown punch Jim Kelly. How’s it taste? Like mediocrity? Yeah, I thought so. Since you are so enjoying speaking in hyperbole and have absolutely no comprehension or insight to what I am saying, I will ignore most of your argument as it is irrelevant. Maybe you should remove your lime green mullet because it’s obviously hampering your vision when you watch the games. Your assumptions are ridiculous, and you know nothing of me or what I’ve been through or done. Also resorting to internet name-calling is just childish. So stop it. MY POINT IS: Winning does not always reinforce positive results. If you are mediocre and win 8 games a year and NEVER make the playoffs? IS that success? IS IT? Maybe for clueless fans yes. But I want a championship! As do all the TRUE fans who have been rooting for the Seahawks for years. Winning 8 games and saying “Hey we didn’t lose them all! We competed!” is not good enough. I want an organization who will do anything to win, whatever it takes. You and Ed And Jim J and whoever is spouting your rhetoric are all people who bought #59 Aaron Curry jerseys I’m sure, or better yet you still wear your #8 Hasselbeck jerseys that weren’t even purchased until Seattle beat Washington in their superbowl run. So good luck with T-Jack and all the lovely wins against sub .500 teams he will bring and then get blanked by Pittsburgh and made a laughing stock of the league. You may be fine with perennial sub-standard play, but I am not. This team can be legit, SUPERBOWL legit. And if our team isn’t competing for a Superbowl, that’s not good enough

  17. Mariner says:

    Btw, just a question to any here.

    If Barkley, Griffin III, and Jones are already drafted by the time the Seahawks get their pick.

    Do you like the idea of drafting Russell Wilson or Kellen Moore later if they are availible?

    Or, do you think those two QBs aren’t worth drafting even if it’s the 2nd round or later?

  18. Rob says:

    Hey Mariner,

    Personally, I wouldn’t spend a pick in any round on Wilson or Moore. I just can’t see a future for them in the NFL, even if they do a good job for their teams in college.