What are Seattle’s quarterback plans in the 2012 draft?

March 17th, 2012 | Written by Rob Staton

A lot of Seahawks fans – maybe more than 50% – expect the team to draft a quarterback of the future next month. It’s considered Seattle’s greatest need, and with good reason. The upcoming draft will be the third conducted by Pete Carroll and John Schneider and so far they haven’t spent a single pick on the position. Fans don’t just expect that to change in 2012, they expect a quarterback to be drafted early. Some people are probably going to be disappointed.

It’s not like the Seahawks haven’t been preparing you for this. In an interview with KING-5’s Chris Egan, John Schneider stated the team wouldn’t ‘panic’ in the search for a long term solution at quarterback. Then just a few days later, Schneider reiterated that message when speaking to Clare Farnsworth: “I just know if you panic at the position, it can set the organization back. So we’re not going to do that. That may disappoint fans, because they want to see an instant guy and have that instant success. But really, you’re better off continuing to build your team.” In translation, it kind of means don’t get your hopes up.

The message is clear – trust us to get this right. So what is the plan?

Team’s tend to work ahead ahead more than we realise. That’s easier to do when you have the kind of experience Pete Carroll has working within the college ranks. By his own admission, that advantage will disappear soon. However, the Seahawks in my estimation have two more drafts (2012 & 2013) to tap into Carroll’s insider knowledge. That includes identifying a long term option at quarterback.

If the Seahawks believe the options will be superior next year, would they really spend an early pick on a quarterback for the sake of it? If you have two or three pass rushers rated very highly who will be available with the #12 pick, reaching on a quarterback would be the kind of ‘panic’ move Schneider says he wants to avoid. A lot of people are high on Ryan Tannehill, others not so much. I suspect the Seahawks will fit into the ‘not so much’ category. He’s the one rising prospect at the moment, but there’s also this great unknown about his potential. He’ll turn 24 in July, yet hasn’t got a great deal of starting experience. If and when the Seahawks do draft a quarterback in round one, I think they want a good feeling of what they’ll be getting at the next level. Tannehill is a tough one to work out and has a lot of growing to do, but he also has a high upside. I’m not sure the Seahawks will bank on pure upside, particularly when there are certain habits in Tannehill’s game that will need to be corrected.

In fact, I think it’s very likely they’ll have other quarterbacks – including Brock Osweiler and Kirk Cousins – graded above Tannehill, with the view that they present better value at the position they’ll be available. Osweiler is two and a half years younger than Tannehill, also has a high upside but isn’t likely to be taken in the top half of round one. You can afford to take your time with a prospect like that, while the investment needed to acquire him will carry less demand for an immediate return. Tannehill – the guy many believe will be the only other quarterback to be drafted in the first round after Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III – may not interest Seattle. So they move on, and this is where things get a little more complicated when we try to work out the team’s plan.

Let’s say there are at least two – maybe three – quarterbacks they rate very highly that will be part of next year’s class. Matt Barkley, Logan Thomas and Tyler Wilson are three names that intrigue me more than any other at this stage and the team may have a similar view of things. Let’s narrow it down even further and propose there’s one guy who really stands out. From a team’s perspective, you’ve maybe had your eye on him all along and are willing to do almost anything it takes to make him your quarterback. What’s more, you believe he’s the kind of prospect who can start early in his career and you’ve spent three years building the team in anticipation of acquiring a player just like this. Sure, there’s no guarantee you can get him. But you want the opportunity to at least find out, and you’ll forge a contingency plan just in case it doesn’t work out. In that scenario, do you take a quarterback in round two this year? Knowing that you’ll do whatever it takes to get the guy you really want in 12 months time?

For arguments sake let’s come up with a mock-scenario. You draft a guy in round two next month, high enough for people to believe this is your guy. The league generally considers a round two pick to be an impact player and a contributor, so you’re making a high investment in a quarterback who most people would expect to get a chance to start one day. Even so, he sits as a rookie because he’s a little bit more raw – maybe that’s why he fell to round two in the first place? Then in twelve months time, you draft another quarterback in round one – possibly after a bold trade up the board. People will ask – not unfairly – why did you draft that guy last year? He’s not played a snap as a rookie, and already you’re writing him off? Why didn’t you make better use of that pick?

Sure, he could start in year two and be the bridge to the new rookie. But the NFL is a different beast now and it’s something Carroll has touched on – college quarterbacks are more prepared to start, and in many ways they are also expected to start when drafted in the first round. I’m not sure you can necessarily say the same for an inexperienced player such as Brock Osweiler – a realistic second round option for a lot of teams. So if we consider that drafting a quarterback in round two isn’t likely to impact the starter in 2012 – it’ll still likely be Tarvaris Jackson or another veteran acquired during free agency – would it not be wiser to keep building other areas of the team in preparation for the move you intend to make next year?

People could counter by stating a lot of teams probably thought Andrew Luck was ‘the one’ a year ago, yet it took a truly absymal season by the Colts to land him. Nobody ever had the chance to trade up for the Stanford quarterback. It’s a valid point, but let’s also remember – Luck is a generational talent. The player Seattle could be targeting may not have the same reputation and therefore may be more attainable than you think. You might not even have to trade up. There will also be alternatives – as Washington realised in this draft class despite being ‘out of Luck’.

This is a just a situation I wanted to contemplate, a mock proposal. It’s not one I necessarily agree with, it’s not necessarily what the team will do. However, I think there’s a very realistic chance we won’t see a quarterback drafted in the first two rounds and some of the above may play a part in that. Personally I would have no issues with this team spending a second round pick on a player I rate as highly as Brock Osweiler, even if he never plays a down before you again invest in the position. As you can see in the video at the top of the page, there’s legitimate talent to work with. It also takes the pressure off the following year when you look to make the high pick on a quarterback. If you need to move up, having a guy in the stable could work as a leverage tactic in negotiations. If a deal can’t be done, you won’t need to panic. In many ways, I think it should be a no-brainer for Seattle – if Osweiler is there in round two, take the guy. That’s just my opinion.

Erik Galko yesterday speculated that Pete Carroll “loves” Osweiler, while Scott Enyeart noted that Carroll has been keeping a close eye on Kirk Cousins. I’ve heard similar things about both players – and also Wisconsin’s Russell Wilson – although I’d caution against optimistic thoughts any will be drafted within the first two rounds. However much they like Osweiler, they might like somebody else even more – that player just isn’t available yet. And if the grade between quarterback’s is pretty even across the board this year, picking Wilson in the fourth may give the team a chance to address other areas and max out value in each round.

Of course, there also comes a point when Osweiler is too good to pass. If a lack of experience and unique mechanics leads to a fall, in round three you’re not passing up an early Christmas gift like that. Seattle can justify usurping a third rounder 12 months down the line if it comes to that and it’s a par investment for a decent back-up quarterback. There’s also the opportunity to turn that investment into more draft stock (see: San Diego and Charlie Whitehurst) and expectations would be measured as a mid-rounder. It’s only one rounds difference, but Seattle’s ambitions are less likely to compromised or challenged if/when they go big a year later.

And amid all this talk of quarterbacks, we’re forgetting that there are other areas of the team that need addressing too. A plan such as this will also be about improving the team’s pass rush – currently solely reliant on Chris Clemons. It’s about filling holes at linebacker, with Leroy Hill and David Hawthorne still on the open market and perhaps preparing for a new challenge elsewhere. If they know who they want at quarterback – and he’s not available this year – I refer you back to Schneider’s quote from earlier: “Really, you’re better off continuing to build your team.” Get a dynamic pass rusher in round one. Find a starting linebacker. Maybe even consider boosting your run game further with a better compliment for Marshawn Lynch.

If what we’ve talked about here plays out, it shouldn’t be constituted as neglecting the quarterback position. If anything, it’s a real understanding of just how important it is to get this right. Carroll and Schneider may only get one chance to go ‘all-in’ on the position. Fail, and it’ll be costly on a team and individual level. If the guy you really want is going to be there next year and you have a firm belief that he’s the one, then who are we to argue if they’re trying to hit for the fences? Continue to build other areas of the team. This is a rebuild being crafted one step at a time, without forcing the issue and becoming careless. It could mean another year of patience, but the Carroll/Schneider story has started well enough, let’s see what the next chapter brings.

80 Responses to “What are Seattle’s quarterback plans in the 2012 draft?”

  1. Ben2 says:

    Good article Rob…after PC/JS pick “their” guy they’ll probably have to live or die with him, especially if he’s a first round guy and ever more so if they had to trade up to get him. So from their perspective I can see why they want to get it right. If they do get it right, we could be set for the next decade at the most important position in professional sports. I’m “all in” for beefing up other areas of need in this years draft if the plan is to go for broke and, if necessary, pull a Washington and draft THE guy. I have to agree with you in another area….it would be hard to pass up the raw potential Osweiler respresents at QB in RD2 but at the same time it would be the right move if you’re going all in for a QB next year…Osweiler might get over-drafted (see Ponder, Christian) and go in RD1 but if he’s there with our RD2 pick this is where the drama/second guessing could begin for Hawks fans during the draft. I can’t wait!!!

  2. AlaskaHawk says:

    The problem with PC method is two fold.

    I used to believe that building the team first was best because of wear and tear on a new QB going to a bad team. The problem with that method is you rise up the draft ranks as your team improves. We will never draft below #10 again and could very well draft #16 up next year. How will we ever be in line for an elite QB?

    The second issue is that the need for elite QBs is much greater than the supply. This fall the pundits said we had a deep QB class. At the end of the season that was narrowed down to 3, and then Barkley went back to school. We have six teams competing for 2 elites and some free agents. In all likelihood it will be the same next year.

    So to summarize: Next year the QBs will narrow down to a top 1-3 players, and we will probably be around the #16 draft spot of highter. That will not be low enough to get us within range of the elite 3, who are now being chosen in the top 10.

    So what is our plan? Lets see – Is it draft a late round QB or UFA each year? Okay so we have Portis. Did we play him last year to check his progress- NO. So no plan there.

    Is it the Colts approach of playing a bad QB and tanking your season? Let’s see – we could have left Whitehurst in the rest of the season while Tevaris healed up. We could have played Portis and tried him out. Did we do that? NO – we rushed Tevaris back in as soon as he could throw – pec tear and all.

    But we do have a plan – It’s called wait till next year. OKAY I understand. Good luck getting that elite QB at #16.

  3. Alex says:

    Brock is the definition of a talented project.

    Surprisingly good mobility for his size.
    Very strong arm.
    Height gives good vision.
    Decent release.

    Accuracy could use more work.
    Dumps off way too quick.
    A bit of risk taker and is willing to bet against the tight window.
    Puts WAY too much behind each throw, which is against the “soft, catch-able ball” characteristic that Pete Caroll learned from Bill Walsh. The word “touch” doesn’t exist in his dictionary.

  4. Colin says:

    Osweiler in round 2 is going to be mighty tempting, but I think this will qualify as one of John Schneiders “tough decisions” and he will pass. I’d take him in a minute though.

  5. Doug says:

    I think I disagree with ya Alaska – I think building the team first is the better route to take. A rookie would have been ruined for life playing behind last yerars line through the first half of the season, and might not have ever survived, depending on the grit of the QB. We can watch Sam Bradford next year to see how well he does, but, he wasn’t a 2-4 rounder, he was a #1 pick so it’s not quite the same.
    I guess what I’m trying to say is that a lower rated QB has a better chance to succeed with a stronger team behind him. Altho Sanchez didn’t take advantage of a good team… But I’ve never thought he was worth a damn anyways..

    But, a guy like Cousins would be way better off.

    But, they are taking Tannahil at #12 anyways… Way more upside than Upshaw for sure…

  6. Blake says:

    John Schneider’s been pretty truthful most of the time, so what doesn’t jive with me and this perspective goes back to something he said at the combine. He mention he prefers athletes at the QB position to guys that have gone through QB camps and been groomed to be QBs. That seems to sharply contrast with what Barkley is and how he’s developed.

  7. Phil says:

    Forgive me for posting this twice, but I think it offers an alternate plan to the QBOTF.

    Rob – Although I don’t agree with your point of view re: free agency, I love the blog. It’s a great way to see the big diversity of views regarding the Seahawks and it’s fun to put into writing what you would do if you were calling the shots.

    On that point, I keep coming back to what strategy we can use to help us get Barkley next year. I think it will take us multiple first round picks to get him. I know you have doubts about this. But, I’ll offer my twopence worth anyway.

    At #12 this year, I don’t see an obvious, elite pass rusher. (I do see some guys — Ingram/Upshaw/Coples — who may turn out to be improvements over what we now have.) In other words, I think there may be as much pass-rushing talent available in the second round as there is in the first. So, on draft day, why not contact a team (let’s use Cleveland as an example) and see what we could get for our #12 pick? What I’d be looking for was their 2013 first round pick plus an additional pick this year.

    I suspect that you are going to say that teams don’t usually trade current first round picks for future first round picks and I think you are right. But, this year — in my opinion — is different in the sense that our #12 pick is not that much more valuable to us than a pick in the second round would be. There are still going to be lots of speedy, pass-rushing LBs available in round 2.

    But the big advantage with this approach would be the real importance of having two first rounders next year. Looking into my crystal ball, I’m guessing that the Seahawks’ first round pick will be in the range of, say, #8 to #15, and the first round pick we (hypothetically) pick up from Cleveland would probably be in a similar range. So, packaging two first-round picks should give us lots of ammo to trade up to get our man Barkley.

    At worst, we would still have 2 firsts to fill whatever needs are obvious when the 2013 draft comes around.

  8. AlaskaHawk says:

    Doug – In the past I thought build the team first. I have been very supportive of that strategy till now. It’s just that we will always be picking the #3 QB with that strategy. It might work, no one has a crystal ball on which QBs succeed.

    Also the areas that we targeted for building did not improve. We have had two first rounders and a third, plus two FA targeted toward the offensive line. Next season we may get two healthy player from all that. Meanwhile the defensive line and linebackers that we ignored in early rounds stepped up their game.

    Here is another strategy. Pick your #1 QB and sit them down for two years while you rebuild. Let them play once in awhile to improve skills. Play Tevaris the majority of the time while you rebuild. After two years start the #1 QB. It gets you to the same place we want to go but with an elite QB. I also have to ask – our teams so desperate that they always start their rookies now? Apparently so.

  9. Colin says:

    For what it’s worth, I think Pete and John are going to make a big move when the time is correct. I’m not opposed to Phil’s idea of loading up for 2013 (when they MUST make a move), but that’s in the grey area of counting our chickens before they hatch.

    I also think we will also see some free agent activity for us in the next few days. Getting good depth players and maybe a starter at LB for good prices. I bet Hill or Hawthorne come back.

  10. jj says:

    [Brock = Big Ben 2.0 tho he looks even lighter and more agile] could be a very nice early 2nd rnd steal i believe Ben went mid 1st into a great situation primed for his success with a dominant run game and strong D he only had to make certain throws in his 1st year allowing time for his growth into the QB he is today.
    -Hawks with Brock could do the same.

  11. Ed says:

    We signed jason jones (dliine). a dt with pass rush skills. i really think this means we are trading back. outside of qb, our team is in really good shape. trade back to a team looking for dt (poe/cox/upshaw/coples) or ol (martin/decastro).

  12. AlaskaHawk says:

    We my as well get Brock, we can always trade him a year or two later if we don’t like him.

  13. Frank says:

    What if Weeden makes a draft day fall? Would he be to much of a value in the second round to pass on? He’s old but Qb are late bloomers anyway. If Weeden has 6 to 8 pro years in him the rest of the roster has plenty of time to mature. I like Oswieler and love Barkley next year but the need is great enought to get away with going 2rd to 3rd round this year, and going all in next year for the guy. A Qb like Oswieler would hold their value as well as Whitehurst, wouldn’t hurt us to move for a pick in a couple years. I understand it may take 2 first round picks and more to get Barkley next year. A insurance pick could be considerd as a impact pick given the escalating price of franchise Qbs. Don’t panic but at least take a shot.

  14. AlaskaHawk says:

    Yes I think we have to take a second or third round shot at a QB. We will be back in this same situation next year but picking at the #16+ (I am very optomistic about having a great 2012 season). Weeden and Osweiller will probably go in the second round.

  15. Jarhead says:

    I have always believed Barkley was the QB for Seattle. It doesn’t matter where we are drafting. At that point, draft picks are expendable. Do what it takes. And hey, every team in our division has improved. The Rams aren’t going 2-14 next year. We are playing a much tougher schedule. We are fielding a similar team to last year aside from rookies. In all likelihood we could be picking near #10. It doesn’t matter though. Get Barkley, and that’s that. It’s that simple. I don’t really care what happens, but I think that’s where this franchise will make its mark. Maybe Rob’s right and this was the plan all along. That would be some serious presumption on the FO’s part if it’s true

  16. Mike says:

    Great write up. My enthusiasm for the short term has been curbed. Long term, I actually think that this approach is smart–it just makes it frustrating as a fan. I really don’t want to stomach another year of TJack, but if it means Barkley, or another franchise QB, I can take it.

  17. Doug says:

    Color me stupid, but I kinda like TJack until we get a good QB. I think he will be a different guy then we saw last year, He will have better line in front of him, he will have better WR’s to throw to, and he will have TE’s running routes instead of always blocking.
    Don’t get me wrong, he isn’t our guy, but until we do, I like him better than a lot of current QB’s, I mean we could have Clausen or something… I know he always does really stupid things, and kills us at the moment of importance, he runs OB instead of throwing it away, he fumbles at the worst possible times, he can’t seem to find the open guy, and he can’t really run through his progressions, but asides from those few flaws, I kinda took a shine to the guy…

  18. Bug juice says:

    After so many years ignoring the position, I’m with you, Rob. Draft a QB this year in rounds 2 or 3 and, if there is someone you believe in high in the draft, take one next year. We have taken OT’s in the first round of the past two drafts. I would have no problem taking high draft fliers on the most important position if JS and PC really believe in those guys.

  19. Bill says:

    I have been reading your blog for quite a while now.
    I would totally agree with you on this one… I have grown to trust our FO and
    think they have a plan for next year.

  20. Tom T. says:

    Rob, if Kendricks, Martin, and Osweiller are all there for our pick in round 2, do you think JS and PC would trade back a few picks and try to get the one that is left over? I love Osweiller, but it seems that the writing is on the wall that Seattle already plans on finding a way to get Barley next year.

  21. Not sure I agree with the part about QB’s being expected to start right out of college. After Aaron Rodgers, it might become increasingly “in vogue” to sit and develop rookies behind a veteran. We saw Minnesota, Tennessee, and Jacksonville all try it this year (to varying degrees of succcess).

    But I do agree that “Seattle loves Osweiler” could mean anything. Seattle was reportedly “high” on Dalton and Kaepernick last year, yet passed on both of them in favor of a right tackle.

  22. Dan V. says:

    Dead on Rob. We’ve talked about the 2013 draft, and I totally agree. I know Seahawk fans get tired of hearing the “Next year’s QB draft is the one” talk, I totally get that. But to the three you mentioned I would add Aaron Murray and Geno Smith as possible first rounders, and that doesn’t even take into account the possibility that Landry Jones will end up being viewed by a team as a first-round talent as well.

    The idea that you would have to “sell out” to get Barkley next year comes solely from fans who have no idea who the other 5 guys are. It’s human nature, if I don’t know about a guy then he must not be any good. From what you, and guys like Scott Enyeart have told me, the Seahawks are ABSOLUTELY aware of the potential QB bounty in 2013 and are building the roster with an eye on getting one from that class as the final piece of this puzzle.

    So I’m totally on board with waiting until after the 2nd round to nab the best QB who’s left. I’ll be extremely happy taking a flyer on a Chandler Harnish, BJ Coleman or Russell Wilson in the 4th or 6th round. There is too much interesting depth at OLB and DE in the top 60 of this draft to only come away with one of those players. Let’s put the front 7 over the top, continue to build that dominant running game, and ultimately provide the perfect situation for a possible rookie QB to come in and start in 2013.

    Now, excuse me while I rush off to look up Logan Thomas, because he’s the ONE guy I haven’t yet heard of!

  23. Dan V. says:

    OK, mission accomplished. Logan Thomas is intriguing. Hmmmmm….

    So that makes SIX possible first round QB’s next year, according to scouting types I’ve talked to.

    1. Matt Barkley, USC
    2. Tyler Wilson, Arkansas
    3. Logan Thomas, Virginia Tech
    4. Tyler Bray, Tennessee
    5. Geno Smith, West Virginia
    6. Aaron Murray, Georgia

    And again, that doesn’t even include Jones, who doesn’t fit the Seahawks profile, but may entice another team into a first round pick.

    That’s the kind of depth that provides all sorts of opportunities. Different teams will have different views on who they prefer, but you don’t HAVE to trade up to get a potential franchise QB.

  24. Mike says:

    I understand to a degree the thought process on next year. 2013 may resemble the ’83 draft with plenty of big strong armed kids with first round talent. Not mentioned above with Barkley, Thomas and Wilson:

    1. Landry Jones
    2. EJ Manual
    3. Tyler Bray
    4. Geno Smith

    Not one under 6’3″ and they all play in top notch programs. This would to me, back up the thoughts put forth in the article.

  25. Mike says:

    LOL, Dan V. beat me to the submit button. I will just say ditto!!

  26. Stuart says:

    JJ could be right. It has been said a few times now that Osweiler is Big Ben 2.0. Seahawks would be wise to draft him, now. He is only 21 years old!

  27. Stuart says:

    Personaly I would address some of our draft needs in FA’s. That way we wont be stressed in R-2 to pick Osweiler. If this guy is as good as advertised, PC will know during camp, pre-season etc. If it was determined that he wont be the guy for us…you can always trade him for possibly a 1st rounder. It’s a win/win situation for the fans and the organization. Does JS view other QB’s in 2013 as having more upside (excluding Barkley)? T Jack will be a free agent after this season so we will have Osweiler, Porter and 2013 draft pick.

    Great article on Field Gulls regarding Matt Flynn. After reading it, lets please pass on that guy.

  28. Kip Earlywine says:

    Thanks Alex for saving me the trouble of typing anything. I agree 100%.

  29. Sean says:

    At some point this team will need to make a bold move in order to find their QBOTF. Could mean trading for a veteran next year or drafting someone in the 1st round in 2013. My personal choice would be to draft Tannehill this year if available. Many people thought Josh Freeman was a 2nd round QB in 2009. The Bucs took a chance on his tools (strong arm, athleticism) and were rewarded. Not saying Tannehill will be Freeman but I think there are some similarities between the two.

  30. Richard says:

    Rob, Great article and discussion but how does it jive with needing a speed pass rusher and taking a running back early. I don’t think anybody believes Brock will make it out of the 2nd round. The only way I see it happening is a RB in the 3rd or a trade down to have 3 picks by our 2nd (43rd).

  31. ET29Love says:

    As much as i hate the idea, it makes sense to draft a qb in the second this year, then go all in on Barkley in 2013. PC can then stick by his motto “always compete”, whoever we do pick up then could push Barkley to be a better qb every year

  32. Kip Earlywine says:

    @Jarhead

    “I have always believed Barkley was the QB for Seattle. It doesn’t matter where we are drafting.”

    This is pretty much how I feel as well. Even in a best case scenario (Seattle picks 32nd next year), I wouldn’t completely rule out a big move for a QB. Any team would be insane to turn down an RG3 sized draft pick package, even if it came from a team picking at the bottom of each round. If Seattle is dead set on getting a QB, they will probably be able to do it, its more a matter of cost than probability.

    Would Seattle give up an RG3 sized bounty for Barkley? I know Schneider would be against it, but Pete wears the pants in the relationship, so it wouldn’t surprise me if it happened. If they are willing to almost completely bypass QB this year it must mean someone (Pete) BADLY wants a QB next year.

    Plus, there is a very real chance that Barkley may not even be the first QB off the board. He’s only 6’2″. 18 quarterbacks have been drafted #1 overall in the Super Bowl era, and only 2 (Vick and Stafford) measured 6’2″ and under. Vick was a generational talent, the fastest and most agile QB in the history of the sport. Stafford was a “meh I guess we’ll take a QB” pick by the Lions in 2009, who had courted several other options at #1 including Aaron Curry before settling on Stafford. There could be fierce competition at the top of the first round from guys like Logan Thomas and EJ Manuel if they have big years to match their big talent. But even if Barkley did become a #1 overall lock, if the top team is selling, I wouldn’t rule Seattle out.

  33. Colin says:

    Pete does not play not to lose, and I expect the Seahawks to carry that attitude towards finding a franchise QB.

  34. Michael (CLT) says:

    I have bookmarked this thread. Will be interesting to see the reality of the 2013 QB class. As it stands, this is most likely conclusion:

    – Barkley – Will most likely be a top two pick. Sell the farm?
    – Murray – Is not considered a top pick. Will stay for his senior year.
    – Thomas – He has high upside, but is currently the 4th rated passer… in the 2014 class
    – Price – Will most likely stay his senior year and attempt to further bulk up
    – Bray – Just missed his sophomore year. I doubt very much he will come out in 2013
    – Jones – No one on this board likes him. So, I suppose PC loves him. LOL.
    – Wilson – Is not 6’3. Is an overachiever. Could not beat out Mallet. Will most likely go in the 2nd round in 2013
    – Smith – Had an incredible game against the team that had earlier destroyed Logan Thomas’ team twice. Boom or bust kind of guy. Buyer beware. Thus, I am pretty sure our FO will love him.
    – Manual – Fools gold. It will be proven yet again in 2012.
    – Glennon – This may be the kid that the FO is watching
    – Renfree – See Glennon
    – Tuel – One can dream, eh :)

    So, that leaves Barkley, Wilson, Smith, Manual, Glennon, Renfree, Tuel.

    Ah. So. Which of these guys is better than Tanneyhill? Barkley is my only choice.

    Alabama destroyed Wilson this year. LSU destroyed Smith. FSU destroyed Manual. Glennon was destroyed by numerous teams in 2011. Renfree/Tuel. Ah…

    So… ah, hey guys. Get ready to squirm next year. It is not a banner year for QB. In fact, I am prepared for the inevitable Rob Report that says: 2013 QB’s highly overrated.

    Is what it is.

    Football is a win now sport. So win now.

  35. JoeV says:

    I’m with the ones that want to aquire a 1st round pick for next year. Trading back to get a 1st in 2013 and picking up another second while sliding back in round 1 is the best move imo. We could get Kendricks and Martin/wilson in rd2 while say picking up Mercilus in the backend of round 1. Maybe the compinsation im envisioning is off but the type of players and number of picks would be the best situation for us.

  36. Kurt says:

    Good post Rob! From what I’ve seen on Osweiler,very little, I wouldn’t spend a second rd pick. I trust JS/PC when they say there will be competition at the QB position. As to who it will be and how competitive is anybodys guess.

  37. Hawksince77 says:

    Rob,

    I think the idea of targeting a particular QB in next year’s draft is the opposite of ‘letting the draft come to me,’ JS’s current approach.

    Instead, I think JS looks for value – in FA, in the draft. He is going to take advantage of the opportunities that come to him – he’s not going to go ‘all in’ on anyone. The Williams situation made that clear. Paying one player that kind of contract hurts the team. Same for what Manning wants – crazy, and only disfunctional organizations (i.e. Washington) pays the kind of bounty for someone not named Luck.

    As far as the position of QB, no Seahawk fan is more agitated than I am about the situation. But I sincerely believe that PC/JS have made all the right moves (and non-moves) they should have: trading for CW (number two guy replacing Wallace with a shot to start); starting Hass the first year; not overpaying/over-commiting to Hass the second; passing on Mallett/Dalton et. al. in last year’s draft; signing TJax as the best option in 2011.

    My prediction for this year is that with an entire off-season, a full FA period and draft, PC/JS will be able to upgrade the starting QB this year, whether it be with Flynn, Alex Smith, or even a QB they draft this year.

    What I have witnessed is JS/PC taking advantage of every opportunity to add talent and depth to every position they can. That will happen this year at QB. No matter what they do at this point, they will be able to upgrade the position again next year in the draft, if they get the chance. But you won’t see a Washington-type trade because the value isn’t there.

    The team will get better every year, and in so doing build upon the young talent they can aquire without distorting the structure of the culture they are creating.

    So bottom line: I can see them drafting one, perhaps two QBs this year, even if they sign Flynn or Smith (or some other FA yet to be identified). Somebody will beat TJax out, and I will be surprised if he makes the final cut. Next year will be no different: if they can get a guy they like at the price they like, they will draft/sign him. And the competition will continue…all to the good.

    At least that’s what I see happening…

  38. dave crockett says:

    This is the entry I’ve been waiting for Rob, to get a more detailed look on what they might be thinking about QB (beyond, “they’re waiting for their guy”). Great writeup.

    If we’re talking about drafting a first round QB, I completely agree. Wait for your guy. You can’t make a mistake. The costs go way beyond contract size. So I’m with you on not liking Tannehill as an option at #12.

    However, it’s a fool’s errand to target any *one* player in the draft a year ahead of time. You simply have no idea a year out the hill you’ll have to climb to get him. Six months ago Seattle was considered a favorite to get Andrew Luck. Then we won 7 games and Luck is completely out of reach.

    Seattle projects to be a 7-10 win team again this year, barring injury. But even if we win 2 games this season, and are in prime position to draft Barkeley next spring, that’s no reason to pass on Osweiler in the 2nd round now. A 2nd round pick is simply not a prohibitive enough cost to deter Seattle’s from a better option.

  39. Ryan says:

    I agree completely and appreciate the perspective. The more digging I do the more I really hope we don’t draft a QB in the first 3 rounds.

    The first round though im sold on Courtney Upshaw:

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/nfl/03/16/courtney.upshaw/index.html?sct=nfl_bf3_a4

  40. tom page says:

    Brock reminds me of Derek Anderson, good arm but poor accuracy. Pass.

  41. Kip Earlywine says:

    Yeah, Osweiler’s inconsistent accuracy is a bit of a red flag for me as well. He’s badly missed some mid range targets with alarming frequency, even when he has plenty of time to make the throw. If you can fix that accuracy issue, there IS a lot to like about the guy. I’m not surprised that Carroll likes Osweiler. This FO liked Chad Henne too and he’s a guy with similar strengths and weaknesses.

    Regarding TYLER BRAY, I don’t think he’ll be on Seattle’s radar next year. Go watch him on youtube if you get the chance. He’s the SEC’s version of Nick Foles. That said, its possible he could draw a 1st round grade and crowd the 1st round field, which is always a good thing.

  42. Hawksince77 says:

    Seattle’s QB plan:

    1 – sign Flynn
    2 – draft Wilson

    Done and done.

  43. Richard says:

    Anybody have any input on how they will use Jason Jones and rather he would be an every down guy or not?

    http://blog.seahawks.com/2012/03/17/jones-agrees-to-terms/

  44. Rob says:

    Phil – I just think it’s very difficult to make that kind of deal. You run the risk of making a considerable drop in R1 by essentially carrying your pick into next year – while trading up using future picks is more of a ‘front foot’ move. If you make a bold move up the board, you’re backing yourself to draft a guy who makes the team better and the pick you give up worse. By trading current picks to build stock, you’re making another team better and giving them a chance to make your pick worse. Seattle would be better off spending the #12 pick and then trading up (if needed) using future picks. However, it’s a situation I wouldn’t rule out. Depending on what happens in the rest of free agency, of course. But I suspect there’s only one player left on the market who could impact this.

    Ed – The Jones signing shouldn’t impact the draft. He’ll be a situational three-tech who is added to the rotation of DT’s. They still want a DE.

    Frank – I’m not a big fan of Weeden, I think a lot of people are using his age to justify a shorter learning curve. If anything, the Ok. St. offense will make his learning curve steeper. I just don’t see him as an option for Seattle.

    Tom T – I think they’d most likely take the guy they like the most. That would be a great trio to choose from.

    Hawksince77 – A lot of logical points there. Thanks for adding to the debate. Not sure about the second point though – Seattle hasn’t signed Flynn or drafted Wilson!

    Richard – They’ll use him as a three technique for sure, possibly spelling into specific looks and situations. I’m guessing he’ll split time with Alan Branch, but he’s also flexible to play a little edge rush if needed or act as a five-technique.

  45. troy says:

    2:35 is a perfect example of why Osweiler is so intriguing to me. He’s been compared to Roethlisberger a lot, and there are definitely flaws to that comparison, but he does show a very Roethlisbergian ability to avoid sacks, extend plays, and make throws with a defender about to level him. He’s tough. I absolutely love that in a quarterback.

  46. matt says:

    rob.i guess for those fixated on the qbotf will, as evidenced, like this article and way of thought.and hey if the fo is thinking this way,great, more power to them.but from my perspective i have seen the writing on the wall just as you and others have described it previously.these guys are sharp and focused.But no optimal situation has occurred up to this point in the 2 year timeframe to capitalize on the qb part.all those who are so fixated on this one tree,cant see the forest.the hawks have 6,7? pics this year,they have holes,and if or when the importance of those holes matches the highest rated player in that hole.they will draft that player.As for oswieler, alex laid out his strengths and weaknesses but if you prioritze his list osweiler is weakest in the most important areas! a qb must be accurate,And truthfully i dont think its a fixable trait,What about No touch? what top flite qb doesnt master touch?(Montana.mannings,staubach,rodgers,bart star,stabler,(should i go on?)Heck even
    (dang,my minds gone blank,4 time superbowl winner for pittsburg had touch)
    my semi(illiterate)educated guess is DE,first round,lb or rb 2nd,and 3rd.the 4th 5th 6th are for ol,wr,qb, whichever slots.
    the FO have been totally upfront with their plans.
    Now because they’ve been so adept in the previous 2 years,(im flabbergasted at some peoples responses,2 effin years,nothing short of phenominal for a rebuild!)(not just this board),they have a chance to create a top 5 defence.nuff said.so take it and beat the shite out of the opponent.score enough to win.no matter what the detractors say,tjax,is one tough dude,who just happens to be one of the captains.we’ll see.

  47. Jarhead says:

    Totally Kip. Barkley is the only QB I have any interest in next year. He is the prototype for Seattle. And anyone who thinks we won’t make a move for a QB they love, is just nitpicking. Maybe they didn’t love any of the QB’s this year who could be signed/traded for. I’m not sorry we’re not signing Flynn and drafting a late round QB is no form of statement, it’s just picking a player. Just like you said Kip, these guys know exactly what they’re doing. And all the other QB’s doing brilliantly can only help us get our guy. I hope sincerely that there are a few griffin type risers, so Barkley becomes even less expensive. Seattle knows who they’re getting. Just enjoy our team when it all comes together

  48. Donald says:

    All good thoughts, but no one mentioned the obvious.

    Planning on taking Barkley, and trading and stock piling picks for Barkley next year, only works if the OTHER team is willing to trade. The team with the #1 pick will most likely be as desparate for an elete QB like Barkley, and they will not accept any offers to give up the prize. They suffered through 15 losses and they are going to get the elite QB because they may never again have the chance to again.

    Look at Indy this year. They have a ton of holes to fill, but the chance to grab an elite QB with the #1 pick is too good to pass up. No amount of picks will change their minds, especially from a team that is picking in the middle of the draft. Seattle will be scarificing good QB’s (possibly great QB’s) now, for Barkely who they would never be able to get.

    Get the best QB you can now, in any round that you need, #1 or 2, and then build the rest of the team around the QB. Seattle may never again be picking this high in the draft again.

  49. Donald says:

    Barkley will be just as hyped as Luck in next years draft, and the worse team will not trade him for anything. Just like Indy.

    Pick the best QB that you can now. Seattle will have a worse pick next year.

  50. A. SImmons says:

    Let’s see here. Both Green Bay and Seattle have never had a high first round QB as their starter during their most competitive periods. Green Bay had Bart Starr (199 pick, round 17), Brett Favre (2nd round pick, traded for), and Aaron Rodgers (24 overall pick) when they won Super Bowls. Seattle had Dave Krieg (UDFA) and Matt Hasselbeck (6th round pick). Pete Carroll is part of the Bud Grant tree and taught by San Francisco. San Francisco Joe Montana (3rd round pick) and Steve Young (round 1 supplemental draft, traded for 2nd/4th). Minnesota had Fran Tarkenton (3rd round, 29th overall).

    We are team that has a GM and a coach that do not buy into the “You need to draft a QB high in the first round to be compeitive and win a Super Bowl” probably more than any other team in the league. And they have the proof to back up their philosophy.

    So we can read all those articles showing how we have a higher percentage chance of winning a Super Bowl with a high 1st round QB. Schneider and Pete will show us that they have an alternative high percentage method of winning or getting to a Super Bowl that doesn’t involve drafting a high first round QB. And their article would be as right as anything we could produce given their experience.

    So who you going to trust? Schneider from Green Bay who comes from a team with four Super Bowls and none of them lead by a high first round QB. Pete Carroll whose mentors include Bud Grant who led Minnesota to four Super Bowls with a 3rd round QB and George Seifert and Bill Walsh who both won Super Bowls without a top 1st round QB. And was also mentored by Monte Kiffin who was part of a Super Bowl winning team led by Brad Smith.

    Let’s face it. If there are two guys that can find a top QB outside of the top 10 of the first round, it’s our two guys: Schneider and Carroll. That’s all they’ve been around is teams that find QB talent outside the top part of the 1st round and achieve incredible results. I’m going to trust their plan because it is the plan they were trained to execute by multiple successful mentors.

  51. Rob says:

    Donald – it’s still a major assumption that Barkley is even going to go in the top five, let alone #1 overall. I really like the guy, but he’s a technically gifted QB, not a physically gifted quarterback. He’s not Stafford, Bradford, Newton, Gabbert, Luck, Griffin III. He’ll be a four-year starter at QB, which always leads to over analysis. He will find it very hard to match his peak from 2011 and with expectation growing, so will the pressure. He will not be as hyped as Luck, I’m not sure anybody ever will be.

  52. woofu says:

    Smith is now visiting with the Dolphins. Good grief!

  53. Christon says:

    Good thoughts on the QB position Rob. I didn’t realize that Tannehill is 24 and that has changed my thinking about his ceiling and overall grow potential in the league.

    If the Seahawks really have set their sights on a QB next year, they may consider moving down to the back end of the first round to acquire an additional first round pick next year. They know it will take a lot to get Barkley and Pete and John don’t seem like the type to mortgage the future for any one player – waiting for value where ever they draft.

    If the Seahawks can Sign Matt Flynn to a 2-3 year deal, it wouldn’t prevent them from drafting Oswieler in the 3rd if they saw it as a good value or even taking a QB next year with a lot of potencial.

  54. Clayton says:

    I think Seattle is already set on its QB of the future, and he is in next years draft. Seattle will draft a QB but I do not see them realistically doing this until the 3rd and more likely the 4th round. What the ADMIN has shown over the last two years is that we are looking for someone to compete and also a stop gap solution incase QB 1 gets injured or just does not perform. This was never more evident in what we had going last year. Tjack showed he has some ability to play QB but could not take his game to the next level and Whitehurst was given his opportunity’s and showed why he is a 2nd and 3rd choice back-up. The Seahawks will continue their 3-4 year rebuilding process, with the defense and will have the opportunity once again to turn the record into 10-5 or better based on the current schedule. With that said, unless the current QB can win games late in the game, or our new QB via this draft can supplant him the defense will probably have to carry us to that 10-5 record. IF the defense holds opponents to 15 or less the 10-5 is possible if not, we are right around 9-7 to 6-10 team again due to the lack of offense namely at the QB position. Lastly, knowing we are a QB away from seriously contending for NFC West and Conference success the Seahawks Admin shows they “are all in” to the fans and go after Barkley.

    Clayton.

    PS, Rob since you have now done at least two, 2 round drafts how about stretching it to 3 or 4 rounds by April 15.
    Keep up the great work, it is always great to read what other Seahawks fans are thinking.

    Currently from the UAE. OUT!!!

  55. Rugby Lock says:

    I’m wondering if the Hawks will go after A Smith… He would be an upgrade over Tjak for sure and his contract would not be a break the bank panic move type one either.

  56. Phil says:

    Seems to me that at a minimum, we will have to sign a veteran QB to back up (“compete with”) Tarvaris this year. Instead, if all we do is draft a QB this year, then next year our QB situation could be pretty thin. For example, if we don’t sign a veteran this year, with Tarvaris being a free agent in 2013, we could conceivably be faced with a 2013 stable of QBs composed of this year’s drafted QB, Portis, and next year’s drafted QB. I suppose that we could wait and sign a veteran next year (as well as draft our QBOTF), but we would still have only one QB (Portis) who has played (or practiced) in Bevell’s offense. Or, I suppose we could re-sign Tarvaris ….

    As Rob has said before, I think that the feeding frenzy surrounding Manning will leave some QB chum in the water (e.g., Hass, Alex Smith, Matt Moore, Kolb, et al). If we are patient, we ought to be able to find a journeyman QB to act as a mentor/backup to Tarvaris in 2012 and then our QBOTF in 2013.

  57. Phil says:

    Building on my thoughts, that may be why the Seahawks seem to be getting soft on signing Matt Flynn. I think they really want someone with more experience — someone who can be a backup to the QBOTF but, perhaps more importantly, someone who can act as a mentor to him.

  58. MJ says:

    Great work per usual. I must say that I am not terribly excited about Osweiler. I see Jake Locker lite in all honesty. Take away the long handoff type throws, and without 60% completion rate, I think he’d be getting torched about poor accuracy by the media. He does make some impressive throws (Like Locker), but also many that are complete misfires (like Locker). I will give Osweiler credit that I saw his headmoving and scanning the field(though limited reads). I wouldn’t disagree with the pick after round 2 at all, but I do think he’s a real long shot to become a viable NFL QB. I would much prefer Kendricks, Z. Brown, Lamar Miller in round 2 over him.

    Though his upside is somewhat limited, I still like Cousins the best. I think he is a real heady guy whose tools are being vastly underrated because of some major toolsy QBs in the draft.

  59. peter says:

    Rob,

    Does it Hurt Osweiler’s stock at all to wait until the Ariz St. pro-day to tell everyone that you are going to sit out and go on a different day?

    I’m always curious how it stands in scouts’ eyes when players have new timetables, and in his case, besides due diligence, I am not sure anyone is really in Arizona for anything other then to watch him throw….it’s certainly not to watch Burfict work his way into the UDFA territory.

  60. AlaskaHawk says:

    Rob- I would still stay that by the end of next year the deep field of college QBs will separate into 1-2 elites and a middle group and the rest. Just like they did this year and have done every year. With our improved team we will probably be drafting around #16 next year. The elites will be gone by #5.

    Without focusing on any one QB – lets just say we want an elite QB – what plan do we really have for getting him? It is okay to be hopeful for a deep draft next year, but that isn’t a plan. I think that is one of the reasons so many people throw out ideas like trading the #1 for next year. It may not be a good idea, but at least it’s a plan and not a wish.

  61. AlaskaHawk says:

    Let me correct and say we want a starter QB (instead of elite which is too high of a standard). I looked at last years draft and the only starter I saw was Cam Newton. I don’t think watching all the rookies season changed my opinion.
    Next year will be Barkley and ???. Maybe one or two other QBs. How do we get them from the #16 spot?

  62. Coach says:

    The way we move up to draft Barkley Next year is by trading this years #12 for a first next year and a second this year, and maybe we trade back again, This is a deep defensive draft this year adding extra second and third rd pks we can get some real good players and puts us in position to possibly draft Cousins… I would rather see us sign Alex Smith, not draft a QB this year and use the above scenario as a way to draft BARKLEY next year….

  63. woofu says:

    Smith is visiting Seattle next. rotoworld

  64. Rob says:

    Peter – I’m not sure to be honest. If I was a scout or coach expecting to see him throw and wasn’t given prior warning, I’d want to know what’s going on. But at the same time – it may just be part of the process and one of the frustrations of the job. And it’s unclear how many scouts/coaches actually travelled and how senior those people were who did.

    Alaskahawk – I think it comes down to the ‘don’t panic’ ideology. Review the situation as it develops. Have the intention, see if it’s possible – look at alternatives if it’s not. I think that’s what they did this year.

  65. Phil says:

    Just had an awful vision — Matt Hasselbeck returns to play in Seattle, but this time HE’S WEARING A 49ers JERSEY!! Seriously, if Manning ends up in Tennessee, I can easily envision the Titans trading Hass, and with the way that the 49ers have treated Alex Smith, I can see him going to Miami leaving the 49ers looking for an experienced QB.

    How much would it cost us to get Matt back? Would it be worth it to have him back for a few years while we groom the QBOTF?

  66. Rob says:

    That ship has sailed, Phil, and it’s time to move on. Frankly, I’d welcome Hasselbeck in a 49ers jersey. I sense Harbaugh is treating this entire situation with the confidence that if he doesn’t land Manning, he has Colin Kaepernick waiting in the wings. Let’s not forget, the Niners traded UP to get Kaepernick. So I doubt they’d have much interest in Hasselbeck anyway.

  67. Donald says:

    I agree with MJ

    I like Cousins better than Osweiler. He may not have the rocket arm, but he has enough arm to make all the throws with speed or touch. More importantly, Cousins is more accruate.

    If we all want to go after Barkley, then the only way to do that is tank the season and pick in the top two. PC and JS will not go along with this (but secretely they probably would sacrifice a season to get Barkely). I say we as fans have to help them lose. Seattle is famous for its 12th man noise, so lets go out every week and be the first city in history to make noise when the OFFENSE is on the field! We will be shouting “Barkley” , while wearing hawk jearseys with Barkley on the back. LOL

  68. Coach says:

    We dont have to tank a season.Dont over pay FA’s and trade our #12 for a first next year and second this year, may be trade back again…. I would rather see Smith in green+blue instead of Flynn.

  69. John says:

    We signed Flynn to 3 year deal with 10 mill guaranteed… dunno how I feel about this….

  70. John says:

    According to Schefty

  71. Gramsci says:

    Rob, you were wrong about the Seahawks interest in Flynn. Hubris.

  72. Ed says:

    $10 mil guarantee. So basically, if he stinks, we cut him after two years and it only costs us $5 millions be per season.

    not a bad move.

  73. woofu says:

    Insiders be damned.

  74. Ryan says:

    Bye bye Barkley

  75. Ed says:

    not necessarily. our team is getting much better. get rid of tjack after this year, it would leave flynn/os or cousins and we can still draft a rookie in 1st.

  76. woofu says:

    If you sign Smith to the same deal and cut TJack it costs you $1 mill more yr for both. Now that would be a competition.

  77. andy says:

    T Jack is not getting cut folks! He and Flynn will comPETE for the starting job this year.

  78. […] for a starting role in 2012, with the situation likely to be reviewed at the end of the season. As we discussed yesterday, the Seahawks could already have quarterback targets in the 2013 draft class. Flynn’s […]

  79. fryshake says:

    wow, Flynn picked up on the cheap. I wonder how this will turn out. Upgrade from clipboard! I hope smith goes to Miami, manning to tenn, Hass to chiefs, and miners get kaepernick to start since harbough is a d.

  80. AlaskaHawk says:

    Sweet – PC continues his tradition of finding value in the 7th round – of free agents!!!!