Why Russell Wilson’s salary is not holding back the Seahawks

October 28th, 2021 | Written by Rob Staton

Russell Wilson’s salary is not holding back the Seahawks — bad drafting and roster construction is

How often do you hear the following argument:

You can’t pay a quarterback top dollar and succeed in the NFL

It’s become football rhetoric. It’s an argument we increasingly see among Seahawks fans and media too.

Russell Wilson is earning too much and therefore the Seahawks can’t contend.

It’s not totally without merit. Only three times in the last 15 years has the Super Bowl winning quarterback been among the top-five highest paid.

Yet that stat fails to recognise that success can’t simply be defined by the one single quarterback who lifts the trophy. What about the three others who reached the AFC and NFC Championship games and otherwise had outstanding seasons?

It’s hardly a counter to paying an expensive quarterback if, say, the highest paid signal caller came up a game short or suffered tremendous misfortune in the final four. And how significant is the pay difference between the top-five highest paid and say the sixth or seventh highest paid, if they go on to win a Championship?

Yet increasingly counter arguments are not voiced to oppose the growing sentiment of success equating to cheap rookie contracts at the most important position in pro sport.

I’m going to try and push back a little today.

Here’s the short argument. Let’s say Wilson turned to the Seahawks and said he was going to take a dramatic $15m pay cut. His average salary would drop to $20m a year. That would make him the 16th highest paid quarterback in the league.

What exactly does that $15m get you? Is the difference between the Seahawks being highly competitive and a legit contender $15m in extra cap space?

It wouldn’t have been enough to sign Trent Williams ($23m a year) — NFL.com’s top non-QB free agent for 2021. You would’ve had just enough to out-spend Green Bay for Aaron Jones ($12m) but would you really want to spend that much on a running back?

Trey Hendrickson’s contract with the Bengals is worth $15m a year. So technically you could’ve signed him. He’s playing very well for Cincinnati but is he alone the difference between a good and great team?

You could of course add three players worth $5m. What exactly does $5m a player get you these days? After all, Bruce Irvin was on more than that last year. Benson Mayowa’s contract is worth $3.8m.

The point I’m getting at here is even if your franchise quarterback takes a massive, unrealistic pay cut — the salary cap space you create alone isn’t really a difference maker. It doesn’t present you with an opportunity to create an all-star team. You’d have just enough to add one high-profile free agent, probably of a reasonable standard. Or you can invest a bit in your depth but you might just end up adding three fairly average players.

The cost of Wilson’s salary is not the issue here. It’s 100% to do with intelligent use of resources with whatever you have available — whether your QB is on $35m a year or a rookie contract.

The Seahawks had ample resources to create a highly successful team from the 2018 reset onwards. They simply did a bad job in the draft and free agency.

For example, Seattle spent $58.25m on the following list of players during the 2020 off-season:

Jarran Reed $9.35m
Greg Olsen $6.9m
Bruce Irvin $5.9m
Carlos Hyde $4m
B.J. Finney $3.5m
Brandon Shell $3.475m
Quinton Dunbar $3.421m
Jacob Hollister $3.259m
Benson Mayowa $3.018m
Mike Iupati $2.5m
Cedric Obuehi $2.237m
Joey Hunt $2.1m
Branden Jackson $2.1m
David Moore $2.1m
Geno Smith $887,500
Neiko Thorpe $887,500
Luke Willson $887,500
Phillip Dorsett $887,500
Chance Warmack $887,500

They then spent two future first round picks and a third round pick on Jamal Adams.

That is massive investment. It’s eye-watering.

How can anyone say $58.25m plus two future first round picks isn’t enough to craft a successful team when you already have the likes of Wilson, D.K. Metcalf, Tyler Lockett, Duane Brown, Bobby Wagner and Quandre Diggs under contract?

How exactly is Wilson’s deal holding you back here?

On top of that, they started the 2018 and 2019 drafts with three total first round picks. They eventually used those picks on Rashaad Penny, L.J. Collier and Marquise Blair. All busts.

So even with Wilson on an enormous extension, they’ve had so much to spend to build a contender. Again — the problem isn’t a lack of resource. It’s the total misuse of the picks and money they’ve had.

They spent $11.796m on David Moore, Branden Jackson, Joey Hunt, Cedric Ogbuehi and Jacob Hollister a year ago.

They invested $12.8m in Greg Olsen (35 years-old) and Bruce Irvin (33-years-old) and got nothing out of it. Irvin received a 32% pay increase on his 2019 salary in Carolina.

They preferred to spread their cap space on three offensive linemen (B.J. Finney, Cedric Ogbuehi and Brandon Shell) instead of investing in all-pro right tackle Jack Conklin — who earned $8m last year in a starring role for Cleveland. His salary never tops $14m with the Browns.

You don’t need me to say any more about Jamal Adams and the draft investment wasted on him, not to mention the $17.5m a year they’re now committed to.

It really is as simple as this. Had the Seahawks spent their money and picks wisely — they could easily be a top contender in the NFC right now. The size of Wilson’s contract is a total moot point. It hasn’t restricted them at all. And with the cap likely to rise rapidly over the coming years, it probably won’t restrict them in the future either.

This is the same for any team — whether you have a cheap rookie quarterback or a seasoned veteran. It all comes down to team building.

The Bengals finished 4-11-1 last season even with Joe Burrow having a successful rookie season (before he got hurt). They have elevated to one of the top teams in the AFC in 2021 by continuing to make wise decisions in free agency and the draft.

They made the right call to select Ja’Marr Chase. They’ve invested in emerging defensive linemen. They’ve added pieces to their O-line to a point where it can be serviceable. They’ve retained core players and allowed other ageing players to leave.

They’ve also embraced current NFL trends and structured their game-plans around what is generally considered to be modern-day progressive thinking.

Their success isn’t predicated on the fact Burrow’s salary is only $9m this year. Their success is built on good personnel decisions, team building and philosophy.

And guess what? They have $10m in unspent cap space. So for the purpose of this argument, let’s just give it to Joe Burrow. Now he’s on $19m this year. Now let’s take Tyler Boyd and his $9m salary. Boyd has 329 yards (53rd in the NFL) and one touchdown this season. Let’s cut him and give another $9m to Burrow. Now he’s on near enough $30m.

Are they any worse? Is the difference between Cincinnati succeeding and not succeeding the 53rd ranked receiver in the league? Their #3 guy?

The fact that there’s $10m in unused salary and $9m invested in Boyd proves how much of a fallacy ‘quarterback pay’ is when it comes to determining the potential for success. You can bump Burrow’s salary to $30m by removing one player. Even the teams with good rookie QB’s are likely not using all their cap space or they’re wasting millions on other players.

The Bengals are trending upwards because they’ve made good personnel decisions. The Seahawks are trending downwards because they’ve made bad personnel decisions.

It’s as simple as that.

There are two other arguments I want to make.

Firstly, the idea of trading Wilson to replenish stock and then trying to find another quarterback in the draft is one I struggle with a lot. I don’t think people realise how difficult this is, not to mention how tricky it’ll be to actually turn those picks into good players (especially with the 2022 draft class looking pretty horrendous).

Let’s look at every quarterback taken in the first two rounds since Wilson’s 2012 draft class:

2013

EJ Manuel — #16 overall

Geno Smith — #39 overall

2014

Blake Bortles — #3 overall

Johnny Manziel — #22 overall

Teddy Bridgewater — #32 overall

Derek Carr — #36 overall

2015

Jameis Winston — #1 overall

Marcus Mariota — #2 overall

In this three year spell alone, eight quarterbacks were taken in the first two rounds. Only Derek Carr was worth having — and he’s squarely in the second tier of NFL quarterbacks.

2016

Jared Goff — #1 overall

Carson Wentz — #2 overall

Paxton Lynch — #26 overall

Christian Hackenburg — #51 overall

2017

Mitchell Trubisky — #2 overall

Patrick Mahomes — #10 overall

Deshaun Watson — #12 overall

Deshone Kizer — #52

The interesting thing about these two drafts is Goff and Wentz were seen as ‘sure things’ yet amounted to average quarterbacks at best. Lynch and Hackenburg were both titanic busts.

In 2017, clearly Mahomes and Watson have reached elite standards. Yet Kizer was seen by many pundits as a prospective #1 overall pick for large parts of the 2015 and 2016 college seasons and Trubisky was viewed as an emerging star.

And as good as Mahomes and Watson are, there are four humongous disasters in these two years alone.

2018

Baker Mayfield — #1 overall

Sam Darnold — #3 overall

Josh Allen — #8 overall

Josh Rosen — #10 overall

Lamar Jackson — #32 overall

This was seen as an all-time draft class in 2018. Mayfield has been so-so and the Browns must be wondering whether he’s worth a big second contract. Darnold is on his second team and was just benched mid-game. Rosen has been a disaster.

Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson have been sensational — yet they were the third and fifth quarterbacks taken. This shows how difficult it is to identify the true quality available.

2019

Kyler Murray — #1 overall

Daniel Jones — #6 overall

Dwayne Haskins — #15 overall

Drew Lock — #42 overall

2020

Joe Burrow — #1 overall

Tua Tagovailoa — #5 overall

Justin Herbert — #6 overall

Jordan Love — #26 overall

Jalen Hurts — #53 overall

I am not including the 2021 draft class because it’s too early to judge them.

Exactly 30 quarterbacks were drafted between 2013-2020. Of that group, you can argue eight truly justified the picks used on them.

That’s a 26% success rate. Or in other words, history says you’ve got a 74% chance of making a bad investment at quarterback in the first two rounds.

The concept of getting rid of a quarterback of the quality of Wilson to enter a situation where you are trying to buy lottery tickets to get one of the 26%-ers is frightening. What’s more, five of the eight who justified their draft placing were taken in the top-10. So unless you have a top-five pick, or even the #1 overall pick, the chances are you simply won’t be in position to get the success story from a given draft class.

And of course there’s always the chance you hit on a Wilson or Dak Prescott beyond the first two rounds. That’s even rarer though than hitting with an early pick.

Let’s also not forget about Seattle’s other hand-selected quarterbacks in the Carroll era. They traded a third round pick and dropped down considerably in round two to acquire Charlie Whitehurst. They signed Tarvaris Jackson and Matt Flynn. Aside from Wilson, the only other pick they’ve spent on the position was a seventh rounder on Alex McGough.

It’s a horrible list.

Moving on from Wilson wouldn’t be a great opportunity to get cheaper at the position. It’d be a great opportunity to be a bad team — scrambling around looking for answers, constantly being undermined by your quarterback play.

See: the Denver Broncos

The only way you could justify it would be with the following:

1. You own the #1 draft pick where you are guaranteed to draft someone you have unquestioned faith in (a Trevor Lawrence type)

2. You immediately trade for a veteran of a similar quality — thus ending up in the same situation with a highly paid veteran on the roster

Again, trading Wilson isn’t the answer. Using the resources you actually have in the correct way is the key. Every team is looking for a Wilson-level starter. You don’t want to join the list of have-nots. It’s taken the Chicago Bears decades to find a franchise quarterback and they’re still looking.

The final argument I want to make is about the record of storied quarterbacks. It’s often stated, correctly, that Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees only have one Super Bowl ring each. This is lazily used to backup the point that expensive veteran quarterbacks can’t win.

Here’s the reality…

Aaron Rodgers has been in five NFC Championship games. The reason the Packers are 1-4 in those games is not down to Rodgers or his contract. Only one NFC team gets to make the Super Bowl. They’ve been beaten by rampaging Atlanta and San Francisco teams (both of which had paid high salaries to Matt Ryan and Jimmy Garoppolo). They were obviously very unfortunate against Seattle. A year ago, they blew a big opportunity to beat Tampa Bay due to errors and poor game management.

The Packers should have been in more Super Bowls. The reason they haven’t been is so much more nuanced than ‘Rodgers has a big contract’.

Now let’s look at the Saints. Drew Brees competed in three NFC Championship games, with a 1-2 record. They had a three-year run of the wildest misfortune any team could ever experience between 2017-19:

2018 — the Minnesota Miracle

2019 — botched DPI call gifts the Rams a win

2020 — heartbreaking overtime loss to the Vikings with a suspicious game-winning TD

Again, New Orleans’ playoff history is a lot more nuanced than simply asserting Brees was expensive therefore the Saints didn’t win a Super Bowl.

I suspect we’re all being influenced by two things. The CBA change in 2011 that created cheaper rookie contracts combining with the modern phenomena of a small number of young quarterbacks succeeding very early in their careers.

The NFL has changed. While it’s still very evident that some young quarterbacks struggle when they turn pro (as we’re seeing in 2021) — the transition for some hasn’t been as difficult.

By year two or three, quarterbacks are thriving. This enables a team to benefit with 2-3 years of cheap value at the position before — as we’ve seen with Mahomes and Allen — those players are paid record-breaking deals.

Yet there are two things to remember here.

Firstly, that value doesn’t last very long. It’s simply not realistic for a team to have a great quarterback for three or four years then move them on in favour of trying to find the next star. We’ve seen that with Kansas City and Buffalo. They realise how risky that is. I doubt any team will ever make the call to move on from a Mahomes or Allen before they reach their second contract to ‘try’ and find the next stud in the draft.

If the Seahawks did move Wilson and then hit the jackpot again — not only would they be very fortunate, they’d also be only three or four years removed from being in the same position of having to fork out a big extension.

Secondly, it’s pretty clear that what dictates success in the NFL isn’t value at quarterback. It’s quality. A top-class quarterback supported properly by wise personnel decisions to deliver a complementary roster.

Since Pete Carroll’s arrival in Seattle in January 2010, these are the quarterbacks to appear in the NFC or AFC Championship games:

Tom Brady (9)
Aaron Rodgers (5)
Peyton Manning (3)
Patrick Mahomes (3)
Drew Brees (2)
Ben Roethlisberger (2)
Matt Ryan (2)
Russell Wilson (2)
Mark Sanchez (2)
Colin Kaepernick (2)
Joe Flacco (2)
Brett Favre
Jay Cutler
Eli Manning
Alex Smith
Andrew Luck
Carson Palmer
Cam Newton
Case Keenum
Nick Foles
Blake Bortles
Jared Goff
Jimmy Garoppolo
Ryan Tannehill
Josh Allen

What this shows is that quality, regardless of cost, matters. Yes there are exceptions on the list. Nobody would mistake Mark Sanchez, Blake Bortles or Case Keenum as great players. Yet it’s worth noting just how good the rest of their rosters needed to be to essentially carry them at quarterback.

Typically the winning combo is this — an excellent quarterback well supported due to good roster building. That means good drafting and wise veterans additions.

Mahomes and Allen aren’t succeeding now because they’ve been cheap. They’re succeeding because they’re brilliant and the Chiefs and Bills have done an outstanding job in recent years building their rosters.

Tom Brady hasn’t been in nine Championship games because of his salary. He’s been in nine championship games because he’s the greatest quarterback ever to play the game and both New England and Tampa Bay have done a good job supporting him by drafting and signing well. That was down to intelligent decision making, not the fact Brady allowed both teams to save literally only a few million dollars.

The key to Seattle returning to the top echelon of the NFL is not trading Wilson, embracing an expansion-level rebuild and hoping magic is created.

The key is for the Seahawks to do a much better job in the draft and free agency and create the kind of environment that adequately supports Wilson and enables him to succeed.

This is why he’s been considering his future. He no longer believes in Pete Carroll’s philosophy. He doesn’t think the roster building has been good enough. He no longer thinks this team is positioning itself to be successful.

They have to get back to that. This organisation needs to prove to Wilson they are serious about returning to that level.

Please consider supporting the blog via Patreon (click the tab below)…

Become a Patron!

114 Responses to “Why Russell Wilson’s salary is not holding back the Seahawks”

  1. GlastoHawkUK says:

    Just seen a tweet referencing tickets for Jags game on Stubhub for $31, fans voting with their feet?

    • cha says:

      I think it’s already started. The Titans game wasn’t a full stadium, and the Rams game I went to surely wasn’t. I’d say about 75% full. They announced a sellout though, so some ate their tickets I would think.

      Some are Canadian ticket holders who cannot get over the border.

      And without getting overly political, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a healthy crossover between Seahawks fans and the anti-vax/anti-mask crowd.

      • Mac says:

        I went to the Saints game, it was pretty full. I got the tickets for a really good deal when Russ was still healthy for $120 each for 100 level. The game was kind of boring, outside of DK’s splash play. Real bummer as I thought I had scored big time, who knows when I can get the same deal again.

        I just tell people not to listen to a YouTuber, TV doctors, athletes or politicians for medical advice. People should spend some time chatting with their own doctor, someone who knows the X’s and O’s Of your own medical history and come up with a game plan for your health.

        • Paul Cook says:

          I found that it’s good to research your own health problems online. There are plenty of good and reputable places to start. I’ve found more answers and approaches to my health problems online that I have from my primary care physicians.

          I’ve gone through 5 primary care physicians or primary care personnel in the last 8-10 years. I’m constantly having to reeducate them to my particular needs. I’ve found it real hard to find a talented, caring, and trustworthy primary care person.

          I’ve found that primary care physicians/personnel are pretty much only good for three things for me:

          1) Getting diagnostic blood work done
          2) Filling the prescriptions I need
          3) Referring/approving me to see experts in a particular medical field

          That’s it. Primary care physicians/personnel have been a disappointment to me in almost every other way for a number of years.

          (Had to get that off my chest with what I’ve been through the last decade)

          • DC says:

            Paul – I’ve been where you are and know what you mean.

            There are some good primary care physicians out there, but in today’s world where the insurance and drug companies have too much involvement, unfortunately too many doctors are focused on how many patients they can see and just addressing the symptoms, not figuring out the underlying issue and throwing medication at it until the symptoms go away.

      • GoHawksDani says:

        I thought for some reason that people from Seattle are forward thinking, smart people in general. Do they also think that Bill Gates created the virus? That would be pretty mind-blowing :-O

    • Ashish says:

      I wish no one shows up to the stadium, kind of protest against Carroll. Some one should have a sign too.

  2. Ashish says:

    This roaster is crap – they are not using $$ wisely. Just one investment on Adams can bring at least 3 blue chip players or 5 good players.

    Pete Carroll and JS has destroy the team in last 3-4 years bit by bit. Now we don’t have picks or money only option is rebuild by new regime. I agree with Rob, JS also need to go.

  3. Chris A says:

    Imagine what our roster could be if we had Rob in charge for the last 4-5 years. If only.

    • Simo says:

      I wonder if Rob would actually want that kind of pressure? At times I think being the GM in charge of building the team would be a dream, at other times it’s probably more like a nighmare.

      Btw, I’m certain Rob would have made some of the fantastic picks he’s talked a lot about (Chubb, TJ Watt, etc), but he more than likely would have picked some duds as well. It just comes with the territory, as nobody gets it right all the time. Also, free agency and trades can be even more difficult to get right. I do tend to think we’d have a better roster right now though!!

      • Group Captain Mandrake says:

        It’s true. Rob would have picked some duds, but everyone misses on some. The professionals who run teams for a living miss out or make bad picks every year. The reality is that everyone who makes it to the NFL is immensely talented, and the difference between star and failure is not that big. That said, I have lost count of how many times I’ve seen someone play well against the Hawks and think, “damn, Rob said the Hawks should have looked at that guy – think TJ Watt – and they didn’t.” I have no doubt he’d at the very least build a better team than the Hawks are currently.

      • DC says:

        But what pressure does JS have? He only has 1 press conference a year…

        • Simo says:

          Hmm…good question! I’m not sure holding press conferences is the kind of pressure I was referring to, although I guess that’s when NFL executives have to answer for their decisions (but we’ve already established here that the Seattle media does not often challenge the Hawks leadership, so maybe JS does not have a lot of pressure during his single press conference).

          I really think the pressure of being a GM comes with trying to make good draft decisions, trades, and free agency acquisitions. And we’ve seen some very bad decisions in the last few years!

  4. cha says:

    Well said Rob. I think this is a talking point has hardened like concrete when discussing roster building and has somehow wormed its way into conventional thinking, without a very factual base to back it up.

    Case in point:

    I subscribe to a popular X’s and O’s youtuber. He recently did a breakdown on why the KC defense is so horrible this year. I grabbed my fork and knife and was ready to dive in.

    At the beginning of the video, I was treated to a 90 second treatise on how the team falling apart due to Patrick Mahome’s HALF A BILLION DOLLAR contract and how that is hindering the team, and will hinder every team from here to eternity that has a high-performing quarterback who gets paid.

    (Never mind that Mahomes is counting only $7.4m against the cap this year, and the defense has just as many high-paid stars as they always have. Let’s not let facts interrupt a good narrative we’ve got to beat to death.)

    He then proceeds to talk clearly about their issues. Spagnuolo isn’t adapting his defense, they’re doing a lot of the same things they’ve always done and teams are figuring them out, and players at times aren’t even lining up properly.

    Hmm. I’m sensing a disconnect here. Somehow giving Mahomes a big contract has crippled the coaches from…coaching?

    In other words, he initially posits a tired trope as a reason the defense is bad, then completely busts the trope with a real X’s and O’s examination of the defense that has very little to do with the purse strings being tightened.

    It’s out of control.

    Thank you for giving the topic a thorough examination.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Exactly Cha. It’s become widespread conventional wisdom without much evidence at all.

    • Jordan says:

      Yep. KC’s struggles aren’t related to the cap or what they’re paying Mahomes.

      Roster mismanagement. They just have so many holes and have allowed their roster to go to poop, aside from QB1, WR1, TE1, and an elite FS.

      Uninspiring defensive personnel, awful WR depth, and an offensive line that they heavily invested in fixing, but still sucks. A great QB can only prop up a struggling operation so much.

      • Roy Batty says:

        Mahommes is having his Favre year. Throwing everything and anything into tight windows. Unfortunately that means picks, deflections and misreads aplenty.

    • Joshua G Smith says:

      Thank you for this.
      I agree with both this and Robs statements above. Although, I do think there is something to the thought that paying one great player makes it difficult to “share the wealth”. It is not the determining factor.
      Roster management and coaching have more to do with it. Coaching being the number one thing in my opinion..
      This defense has had some talented players. Yet, we are not getting the most out of them. I am not staying they could be great. But how much better would this defense be if this was Belichick coaching. The Hawks need to actually scheme for other teams. Pete and Norton are coaching this defense like they are the LOB. “This is what we do. Come at us”. It worked when you have talented players at almost every position.
      But we don’t and they are still coaching the same way…
      It’s the definition of insanity.

  5. Paul Cook says:

    This column is very well written, statistically supported, and provides heavy does of realism to this particular QB argument, Rob. Bravo. You brought concisely together and deftly articulated my own thoughts and feelings about the QB position, especially in this era of CAP restraint.

    Only one team and one QB wins the Super Bowl each year. It’s almost a minor miracle any team wins it all other than the fact that some team has to. The point is you want to be one of those handful of teams that truly has a chance to win it all on a more or less consistent basis over a span of years. Good luck with that if you don’t have a true franchise QB.

    Go back in time. Look at all the Super Bowl winning teams. It’s largely a whose who list of HOF QB’s, or competent QB’s playing on great teams. True, there are exceptions. But exceptions aren’t the rule.

    Great piece.

  6. BobbyK says:

    I’ve been saying this for a long time, too. I hate the ignorance of “he makes too much so we can’t be good” or “we’ll just find another quarterback because we found him in round three”.

    Wilson making too much money had nothing to do with them being idiots by taking Malik ATV or TJ Watt or taking Penny over Chubb or even why the took Collier and Blair before drafting DK. If anything, Wilson “making too much money” you think would make them not want to spare a couple of 1st round picks for an overrated safety because the 1st rounders would be cheap whereas you know for a fact they were going to need to pay Jamal.

    If anyone thinks a QB is find – they didn’t live through Seahawks football in the 1990s. Or they suffered significant head trauma and can’t remember that decade of their lives.

    Great article, Rob. And not basically because I’ve been saying the same stuff. It’s well thought out, well articulated, and actually backed with good information, unlike many of the arguments arguing why the team should dump a franchise QB.

    • BobbyK says:

      And for anyone that thinks this team is “done” and they need to fully rebuild:

      No. They don’t.

      The Seahawks have a franchise QB in his prime. As bad as they suck and the overall depth is – no team is perfectly constructed with studs and depth at every position. They simply need to draft good players at a higher rate than they draft crappy players. No team hits on all their picks, but they can certainly improve their hit rate. Drafting is only part of the overall equation.

      Look at how these guys blow money, as I’m quoting Rob from above:

      “They spent $11.796m on David Moore, Branden Jackson, Joey Hunt, Cedric Ogbuehi and Jacob Hollister a year ago. They invested $12.8m in Greg Olsen (35 years-old) and Bruce Irvin (33-years-old) and got nothing out of it.” And when you’re wasting resources like using a 1st round pick on Collier or giving millions to BJ Finney – it’s not the QBs fault he’s making “too much”.

      This team could go to the Super Bowl next year with a good off-season (pending coaching situation, of course). They’d have to have an unusually high hit rate on their draft picks, use their free agent dollars better, and make better trades… but it can be done because they have a franchise QB.

      But if you ask Geno Smith, Andy Dalton, or Teddy Bridgewater to QB this team and add Aaron Donald, Jalen Ramsey, and Jack Conklin… they’re still not going to the Super Bowl.

      We’re luckier than we realize and I don’t see any reason we can’t go into the 2023 season as a Super Bowl favorite. There’s no way that would be realistic if they went into full rebuild mode. We’d be screwed for at least a half decade if we did something that dumb.

      • Jordan says:

        Agreed. When the QB is in place, the right regime change can turn things around in a season. Football allows for huge improvement one season to the next given that you build with fully formed adults and not teenage prospects (hockey, baseball). You’ve got QB1, WR1, WR2, MLB, possibly a high end Edge in Taylor and a SS who can hopefully be coached back into his all-pro form (26 is too young for that decline to be physical).

      • GoHawksDani says:

        I agree that if they hit the jackpot of an offseason they can go to SB next year. But they still need a total rebuild. Who would you take to an SB from this team?
        As of me: Wilson, DK, Lockett, Dickson
        Apart from them I don’t see anyone as a must have player.
        Brown will be out of contract, and while he’s a decent, but still ageing LT. Bobby is solid, but he cost crazy amounts. Reed is an OK CB but not a superstar lockdown guy. Carson can’t take the workload and gets hurt a lot. Taylor showed some flashes, but no one can say if he’s a superstar in the making or someone who had a couple of good snaps/games

        Sure, there are a ton of OK guys: Robinson, Amadi, Ford, Diggs, Lewis, Brooks, Dunlap, Collins, Neal, Everett, Swain

        But these are the guys who just happens to be on your roster. Not superstars.

        Let’s see a couple of other rosters and their star players (wrote some in parentheses as not sures):
        KC: Jones, Butker, Mahomes, Mathieu, Orlando Brown, Kelce, Hill, CEH (Nnadi, Reed, Nick Bolton, Hitchens?)
        Bills: Tre’Davious White, Josh Allen, Ed Oliver, Micah Hyde, Poyer, Diggs, Sanders (Mario Addison, Rousseau, Butler, Edmunds, Klein?)
        Saints: Armstead, Demario Davis, Cam Jordan, Malcolm Jenkins, Kamara, Lattimore, Michael Thomas (Davenport, Ramczyk?)
        Cards: Ertz, AJ Green, Hopkins, Chandler Jones, Murray, Byron Murphy, JJ Watt (Budda Baker, Chase Edmonds, Andy Lee, Markus Golden, Jordan Hicks, Prater, Isaiah Simmons?)

        That’s 7 per roster on avg. If we add some of these questionables that’s like 9-10 great to elite player per roster. That is 4 for the Hawks. If we count some questionables that could be 6-7 maybe 8 but that feels a bit of a stretch.

        So I think we need 3-4-5 really good/great/elite talent for our roster. Doable in one offseason if hittin the draft crazy good and making 2 or 3 really good or lucky decisions in FA.
        I doubt anyone can be that good and lucky in one year, but there’s some possibility. So while it’s not a total rebuild, we pretty much need great/elite player power in every position group (except QB, WR and likely ST). I would like a good-great DT. A good DE who you can count on game after game. Who can contain the outside runs and also rush the passer. I’d like an RB who can take 30-40 snaps a game and run 20-25 times if needed. Who is decent at pass blocking, can run through contact and sometimes even break a long one. I’d like a TE who can block and catch some. Not a Kelce-Kittle-Andrews talent, we don’t need that, but let’s say at least 2 Everetts. I’d like an OL, especially middle who is decent or even good at run and pass blocking. I’d like at least a decent strong safety in place of Adams. A good shutdown corner (Reed could be CB2) and maybe a SAM or LB depth, because I don’t wanna see Barton playing

  7. DarrellDownUnder says:

    Crackin column Rob, what an effing eye opener on the task of nailing down the QB position.
    If you have a good one you better damn well hang onto him.
    Has any team drafted worse in recent years?

    • Rob Staton says:

      There are certainly teams who have drafted very poorly. I’m not sure there’s been a worse team in how they’ve used their overall resources though since the 2018 reset.

  8. Paul Cook says:

    I only see one college QB now who I would rate as a worthy top of the draft board pick now, Caleb Williams, and he’s a true freshman and won’t be available until the 2024 draft. True, somebody will probably emerge in the interim, but I sure haven’t seen it yet.

  9. BobbyK says:

    When the Seahawks went to the Super Bowl (and lost) they had Percy Harvin and Brandon Mebane taking up over $12 million of their salary cap. Both players were basically worthless that season and did nothing to help the Seahawks.

    That same year, Peyton Manning made $17.5 million, Tom Brady $14.8 million, and Tony Romo made less than Mebane/Harvin combined. The Seahawks overcame the Mebane injury and Harvin moronfest because they had drafted well and had good depth. If you could have gotten rid of Mebane and Harvin and given all that money to Wilson – then he would have been one of the higher paid QBs in the NFL and the Seahawks would have still made it to the Super Bowl in spite their QB being among the highest paid. But it’s easier to say the only reason the Seahawks made the Super Bowl is because their QB was cheap.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Exactly

      This is the thing people constantly don’t consider. The assumption is — cheap QB enabled franchise to create loaded roster. In reality, it’s the fact the QB’s were talented and well supported due to wise drafting/signing. Because there’s nearly always a crap contract on every roster, or dead money, or even unused money which could easily just be given to that QB and nothing changes in terms of roster quality.

  10. cha says:

    I think another issue the general public has gotten entirely wrong is what RW would fetch on the trade market.

    Last year (when I wrote that nuance piece) I actually heard local casters talking about that Russell freaking Wilson would only fetch two first round picks and a middling player. Basically the same thing the Seahawks gave up for Jamal Adams.

    Three contracted years of a top 5 QB at basically half his market value – $19m-22m a year (and an automatic option to convert salary to bonus for flexibility) would only fetch two first round picks? And you know RW would automatically kick those first rounders out of the top 10 and into the teens or even the twenties right??

    There’s no way. There’s just no way.

    The ONLY reason I could even consider being on board with a RW trade was something like what we were talking about with Chicago trading Khalil Mack AND three first round picks. At least then you get an established superstar player to build your defense around, and then have options to either move around in the QB draft market, have the cap room to sign a free agent you like or make a big trade for a player like a Deshaun Watson or Aaron Rodgers.

    • Mac says:

      I agree Cha, I would expect a haul for Russ. I would be saddened when Pete/JS would turn it into a random LB from Utah, a safety with a madden auto generated name, and a a long snapper lol

      I just can’t trust them with allocating resources. They are allergic to premium talent in free agency even with a good amount of funds, I would of rather had conklin than bj finney, bruce Irvin and Greg Olsen.

    • Submanjoe says:

      Spot on Cha. I say an entire draft the first year and two subsequent 1sts and 2nds and a player of my choice. I’d kindly throw in Bobby Wagner or Duane or somebody along those lines too.

    • Blitzy the Clown says:

      Totally. I couldn’t believe it either. Especially considering how much the Rams paid for Stafford.

      But you raise an interesting point. What if a team ‘over’ offers for Wilson?

      I’m 100% for keeping him and rebuilding around him. But at what point does an offer become too good to refuse?

      For example, and there are any number of them to pick from so have at it, what if the NY Giants offer:

      2022 picks:
      R1 (6)
      R1 (16)
      R2

      2023 picks:
      R1
      R2

      …and, say, Leonard Williams.

      I think I could make an argument for taking an offer like that, depending on who’s making the decisions on how to utilize the newly available resources to replace Wilson and fill roster holes.

      • Submanjoe says:

        Plus 3-7 round picks in 22 and Saquon and jabril peppers & I’ll throw in Jamal

      • BobbyK says:

        If you’re committed to rebuilding around nobody at QB – who cares about Leonard Williams and his salary?

        Remember back when the Seahawks signed Chad Brown? He was a stud. They sent a helicopter to get him and it was a big ordeal. Brown was everything the Seahawks hoped for. He was a stud. But who cares in retrospect? He was a great player on a team with crap at QB.

        For a better example, think Kennedy, Cortez. Who cares how good of a DT you have if your QB position is a pile of dung?

        Let’s say you get that “too good of an offer” for RW that includes Williams at DT plus No. 6, 16, and R2 in ’22 and then 1/2 in ’23. You know the ’23 picks won’t be high.

        Who’s playing QB then? For how much?

        Rob just highlighted above how you’ve basically got a 25% hit rate on getting a stud QB in the early rounds. I’ve looked at that extensively before too. That means you acquired 5 high 1st round picks the next two years and if you take a QB at each spot… you’ll get one that you hope is as good as RW. The rest are bums. Then you have 1 extra pick to help build a team around them. How’s that “too good” to be true? BUT you have to probably waste a couple years waiting for said QB to develop.

        There’s a reason teams don’t deal franchise QBs. Nor should they.

        • Blitzy the Clown says:

          Where do you get that I’m committed to building around a nobody QB?

          I’d be looking to trade some of that haul for Aaron Rodgers or Deshaun Watson depending on his availability and cost.

          What I wouldn’t do is look to the draft for a rookie QB to build around, nor would I trade Wilson (for ANY amount) without knowing if I could get Rodgers or Watson, or someone else reasonably similar, on the flip side.

          Anyway it’s just a thought exercise. Like I said, I’m 100% committed to rebuilding around Wilson.

      • BobbyK says:

        fwiw… I don’t believe the Rams paid a lot for Stafford. Sure, they traded a pair of 1’s and a 3 for him, but that’s what the Seahawks paid for worthless safety. With Stafford (at the most important position in sports), the Rams are 6-1 and will be picking in the 20s/30s this year and probably the same next year.

        Remember when the Texans traded Brock Osweiller AND a 2nd round pick to the Browns just to take their worthlessness at QB? Well, the Rams got the Lions to take some money, too. Double-win.

        Each trade is different, but I think the Rams won the Stafford deal. And Stafford isn’t even close to the franchise QB level that Wilson is.

        • Blitzy the Clown says:

          I agree that the Rams made a good trade. Stafford has been worth every penny so to speak.

          What I meant was, Russell Wilson >>> Matthew Stafford. So if a QB needy team is willing to spend two R1s and a R3, then surely Wilson is worth, what, at least three R1s and a R2?

          I don’t know that any team would actually give up that much, but based on what the Rams paid for Stafford, it’s the opening bid you have to call me up with if I’m Seattle’s GM.

          For purposes of the thought exercise, I intentionally ‘over offered’ by adding an additional R2 and a pro bowl player at a position of extreme need. FWIW I do not think any team would ever offer that much for Russell Wilson. And finally, I chose the Giants because they have two R1s in the next draft, which is worth more than three R1s spread out over three drafts, especially if you think Wilson will make a big enough difference for the other team such that the subsequent R1 picks are more towards the end of the first round.

        • Cambs says:

          The Texans’ second-round pick from the Osweiler trade is the one the Browns used on Nick Chubb 😀

  11. Mick says:

    Rob you totally get my vote for this. I must say, it feels like everyone’s so impacted by computer games where it’s so cool to trade a whole roster and sign young guys that develop in monster players. Reality is different. That’s why you keep Wilson, that’s why you keep Lockett, that’s why you keep Metcalf.

    I hope we don’t bust our 2020 draft. We got some potential there with Brooks, Taylor, Lewis, Robinson, Swain and to some extent also Parkinson and Dallas. We must let them play (it’s incredible how much Mayowa plays and how little Alton Robinson gets on the pitch with better production) and we must use them where they play best. If you ask Brooks to do what Jamal Adams should be doing, you get a player with PFF rating 40. If you ask him to stop the run, he’ll crush Kamara like he just did. Same with Lewis, move him back at RG if the LG experiment doesn’t work.

  12. Big Mike says:

    The last QB the Chicago Bears had that was a true HOFer was Sid Luckman. He retired in 1950. Is that an extreme example? A bit yes but remember, the Seahawks went from 1976 to 2012, a full 36 years without a true franchise QB. Hasselbeck was close but he’s not getting HOF votes and Russ will be a first ballot inductee.

    Fantastic article Rob, well backed up by facts, facts and more facts. Thanks much for the effort.

    • Tomas says:

      Not rebutting anyone’s point at all, and Rob’s convincing piece should persuade the reasonable. But thinking way back about the Bear’s QB travails – Rudy Bukich, Bobby Douglass, etc. – it should be noted that a journeyman by the name of Bill Wade “led” the 1963 Bears to the NFL championship. That team had one of the greatest defenses ever, and deserves to be remembered every bit as much as the 1986 Bears defense in my view. But the ‘63 Bears were also lucky, barely edging out the Packers that year for the West crown, with a record of 11-1-2; the Packers finished 11-2-1, and were without a still great Paul Hornung that year – he’d been suspended for the year for betting on the horses, a violation of strict NFL anti-gambling rules. (The fearsome Alex Karras of the Lions was also suspended that year for the same offense.) In the championship game against the NY Giants, featuring a stout defense and great offense, led by Y.A. Tittle (36 TD passes, then a record), Frank Gifford, and receiver Del Shofner, the Giants passing game was slicing up the Bears early, though Shofner dropped a perfect pass in the end zone, on which play Tittle sustained a grevious knee injury when LB Larry Morris rolled into his planted knee as the pass was released. Shofner’s drop led to a successful FG and a 10-0 first half lead for the Giants. But Tittle’s knee was toast, his precision passes were thereafter floating in the air like zeppelins, and interceptions allowed the Bears to prevail 14-10. My first sports heartbreak, at the age of 10. Damn.

      • Big Mike says:

        That was the year before I started watching football. I was 7 during that championship game. Firsat bone I saw was Jim Brown’s ’64 championship.
        A question if you see this: A number of people I’ve heard talk about the ’63 Chargers have said they’d have beaten the ’63 Bears. Did you watch the AFL in those days? Do you agree?

  13. Submanjoe says:

    If you have a qb who’s won or who’s young and gotten close to winning, you pay him and you’re obligated essentially to do the best you can to build around him a team that can compete and keep competing until he retires. For me, that’s the Seahawks situation right now. Only way I’m trading Russ is if he demands it and then I’m demanding the moon and the sun in return.
    You don’t want to be Minnesota paying Kirk Cousins guaranteed money and then being stuck with him for several years, cousins hasn’t done enough to show he’s worth the money, he’s never won and barely has a winning record.
    Seattle have made poor choices and unfortunately for Pete those choices are catching up to him and they are negatively affecting Russell Wilson.

  14. AlaskaHawk says:

    A very well written argument Rob. I only have a few minor issues about what you said.

    But I agree that the team needs to improve and Pete Carroll has literally driven a super bowl team into the ground. Get rid of Carroll and the coaches and start rebuilding.

    My only 2 concerns – it will take longer to rebuild then you expect.
    Wilson will be gone at the end of his contract at the latest.

    • Rob Staton says:

      And yet there’s no evidence that it will take as long as some of you keep saying.

      You just keep saying it’ll take a long time but don’t offer any reasons why

      Whereas I’ve explained how I’d create a bunch of cap space and I’ve listed a whole bunch of prospective free agents — and said where I would be prioritising my draft picks and written a whole bunch about players in the 2022 class

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        I suppose it’s because I’ve heard or thought the Seahawks will turn it around next year for 7 years now. But it doesn’t happen. Your idea is based on
        A. Pete Carroll is gone and probably John Schneider too.
        B. The next coach and general manager will be better at making picks. By the way, how are they going to get the next coach on board before the draft? Can the owner make a franchise altering decision in a month or two?
        C. The majority of the new GMs draft picks will be successful.
        D. That they can supplement with free agents when the cap available after resigning will be in the 35 million range.

        My opinion is that the Seahawks need at least 3 new offensive linemen, a good running back, a different field goal kicker on offense. I’ve totally ignored some key areas such as receivers. Then a defensive end and possibly two if the current ones don’t develop, a linebacker, a couple more developing corners though I like the ones they got, and another safety in case Adams gets hurt. There are just too many holes to fill in one year.

        • Rob Staton says:

          My ‘idea’ is more of a plan and it’s not based on any of that.

          It’s my plan. What I would do. And I’ve given you a list of players to potentially sign, broken down an early look at the draft class and noted how I would create cap space and shift resource. I can give examples on how the Packers shifted resource quickly and swiftly and went from 6-9-1 to 13-3 in back-to-back years.

          It’s nothing to do with any of that list A-D.

          And all people like yourself ever say is ‘too many things to do, need years’.

          It’s frustrating to read because it’s not backed up with anything.

          • Justaguy says:

            Rob’s “finger has been on the pulse” of the Seahawks far beyond any other writer or podcaster. If you are going to throw out some horseshit you better be ready to eat it

            • AlaskaHawk says:

              Tough talk – go eat your own guy.

              I hope the Seahawks are successful – but I’m not betting on it.

          • Joe says:

            I think the problem is looking at the holes on the team and thinking if it isn’t all fixed Russ is gone. I think the approach you you’ve outlined will get the team back on the right track. Will it be overnight? No. But Russ is a smart guy and if the progress starts to move in the positive direction that will factor into his decisions down the road.

          • GaiusMarius says:

            I like your plan.

            I just don’t have faith that the Seahawks will pull it off. 🙂

  15. Erik says:

    Rob, hypothetical. If an NFL team executive called you tomorrow with an above average offer to join their front office, to act as permanent draft, free-agent, and overall team building consultant, would you relocate?

  16. cha says:

    Why didn’t you throw more to DK Monday, Shane Waldron?

    ‘The weather was a problem and we wanted to play complementary football’

    How was the running game Monday, Shane Waldron?

    ‘I thought it was OK…blah blah weather…blah blah Saints run defense…Something to keep learning from and growing from.’

    Kill me now.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I’ve interviewed so many coaches over the years

      I’m telling you now — 100%

      How you communicate to the fans matters

      When things aren’t going well they can spot BS, they can tell when they’re being fobbed off and generally they don’t want to be treated like mugs

      • erik halverson says:

        I often get an British slang word education from this website. Would it be appropriate to google the phrases “fobbed off” or “treated like mugs” while at work? More evidence of the joy I get from reading seahawksdraftblog.com.

      • cha says:

        I don’t think Shane Waldron has said one interesting thing in all the time he’s been here. The interview didn’t even last 5 minutes, it was so boring.

        I shouldn’t take a personal shot at him, but guys like this, I wonder how they met/married their wives?

        Buddy: ‘So how did your date go, Shane?’

        Shane: ‘I considered the weather, studied the menu and thought about how much pressure to squeeze her hand with. She’s notoriously prudish so I know getting a kiss wouldn’t be easy.’

        Buddy: ‘So you got a kiss?’

        Shane: ‘Well I’m gonna learn from this and execute like a know I can next time.’

      • UkAlex6674 says:

        This is why I am rooting for the Lions so much right now. Their HC is a great communicator in my opinion. He is transparent and open, full of (first year) enthusiasm. And there will be one week where they get the W and my accumulator will pay off big time. GO LIONS!

  17. cha says:

    This is along the lines of what I expected for the Kraken home opener.

    THIS is how you get fans excited for your team.

    https://twitter.com/Canucks/status/1453179716710526979

    • Matthew says:

      This gives me the impression people’s dopamine receptors are absolutely fried from years of overstimulation. Can’t just have a club playing a game, has to be some Hollywood production to get up for it?

    • Group Captain Mandrake says:

      What really gets fans excited about a team is putting a competitive, or at least exciting team on the field. I cannot speak for anyone else, but I find all the extraneous stuff annoying. I’m there for the sports, not the rest of the frippery. I’m looking at you, Mariners and your stupid hydro races.

  18. KennyBadger says:

    I’ve read SDB for a while and have seen Rob predict how we got to this place but it still puts a pit in my stomach to see the moves of the last few years summarized. It’s not just bad roster building, it amongst the worst in the league. It’s very frustrating that local media have not held their feet to the fire because Pete would have grill marks in many other cities. The franchise seems to be at a crossroads and the best way forward cannot include the current decision makers, except the one at QB. Thanks for another great read Rob.

  19. Tomas says:

    Clayton strikes again (just now on 710): “Ridiculous” to talk of firing Carroll.

    • Rob Staton says:

      I can’t believe he’s still on there, frankly

    • BobbyK says:

      Okay, John, I’ll take the bait.

      Then why is there no talk of keeping him as coach but firing him as the guy who makes final approval of taking ATV over TJ, Penny over Chubb, okay’s Collier, Blair, Pocic, Ifedi, wasted all those late-3rd round picks (Naz Jones, CJ, Vannett, Hill, then TT in the early 4th)?

      And “prioritizing” bums like Finney early in FA and blowing over $50 million last off-season.

      Let’s not even get to the Jamal Adams disaster.

      How does one keep their job, or dare not be questioned, when you’ve presided and had final decisions on such horrible roster moves, for the most part, for a half-decade. Heck, even Matt Millen drafted Megatron so the sun shines on a dogs a– every once in awhile so I don’t need to hear about striking gold about a DK every once in a blue moon, when your resume is filled with bad trades, draft picks, and wasted salary cap space.

  20. Justaguy says:

    None ya can know if Russ is holding us back until we turn him loose to run his own offense a la Double A Rodgers. Russ deserves that shot in Seattle. That said I still pull for AZ to run GB

  21. STTBM says:

    Rob, you make excellent points. But it’s not simply down to Personnel decisions, the Coaching staff mistakes of the last six years–losing great young coaches and replacing them with Cronies and never-weres–and terrible in-game coaching and hysterically inept game planning also have played a big role in Seattle s decline.

    The Coaches have made this team even less than the sun of it’s parts. And that sum was already not good enough.

    • Rob Staton says:

      That’s irrelevant in this instance though.

      The point of the article is to show a variety of reasons why Wilson’s salary doesn’t matter. By highlighting how much they’ve actually squandered, how the rhetoric around high salaried QB’s have performed and why the difference between someone like JB isn’t that big.

      • STTBM says:

        Ok, I see your point. But I also think the poor staff and coaching are yet another reason Wilson’s salary isn’t what’s holding them down.

  22. cha says:

    Pack are missing Adams and Lazard from their offense. Doom?

    Nope. They have 130 rushing yards after 3 quarters and Jones has caught another 5 balls for 37 yards.

    Eight different Packers have targets from Aaron Rodgers.

    This is how you offense when you are missing core players.

    Hope you’re watching Pete.

    • Big Mike says:

      I’m so jealous watching Green Bay’s offensive line. Packers have run for 5 yd a carry

      • OP_Chillin says:

        I think you’re spot on there Mike. Their RBs are Def better than ours but our OL was getting destroyed snap in snap out esp in the run game on Monday. Got owned on most straight dropbacks.

        Also noticed Rodgers barely held the ball. Almost every passing play was a variation of a quick out or screen and somehow it worked decently well. Reminded me of the hawks game plan against WFT last year. That came down to the last drive as well.

    • McZ says:

      Neither do we have a quality OL, nor do we have Aaron Jones, nor do we have a dependable smashing 3rd down back as Dillon. This roster is a combination of bad construction and worse drafting.

  23. BobbyK says:

    Russell Wilson could work for free and the Idiot Patrol of Carroll/Schneider (who won’t/don’t work for free – with no salary cap at their positions, though they are among the most highly paid) still couldn’t put a Super Bowl roster together. Sure, they did it a decade ago and had a great track record then… but have proven pretty worthless the last half decade.

    • Peter Jakubisin says:

      I’m serious when i say this. From 2017 to now is an almost fireable level of draft capital.

      A great WR. A punter. An injury prone RB who was good but not so much any more.

      And everyone else is a JAG. I’ll reserve opinion on Taylor who may be snake bit. And Robinson to see if pete remembers he’s on the team.

      NINE draft picks on safeties to have none of them work out….!!!…i mean that might be cool if Seattle ran some crazy 3/3/5 look with a fleet of death backers….but no it’s just a ton of guys who did next to nothing.

  24. Blitzy the Clown says:

    Wow what a red zone/goal line defensive stand for the Cardinals!

    Great game between two teams at the top of the Conference.

  25. SeaTown says:

    Does anyone watch a Shane Waldron presser and think he’s some brilliant offensive guru? Watching paint dry is more exciting than listening to him. He was the best of the lot of potential OCs this off-season? FFS!!

    • McZ says:

      Really, what were his merits, when he came into town? To have some minor role under McVay? Some were desperate enough to put their hopes high, reading FG, you came to the impression, an offensive mastermind was hired.

      No, it was a rookie OC. And not a capable, save good one.

  26. GoHawks5151 says:

    Kyler may be too slight for this game. I see him as a guy who misses a couple games a year. Just gotta stay away from the big ones

  27. GoHawksDani says:

    The best way would be to keep Russ, change FO and make some smart calculated decision in the offseason.

    BUT

    I don’t trust this FO, I don’t trust this ownership, I don’t trust the positional coaches, the medical staff and I don’t trust RW.
    He’s a great QB when it comes to mechanics and backyard football and intuitions, but I think he has mediocre football iq and almost zero strategic sense. So if he’d get a big say in the FO and the offseason player choices not sure it’d be good for the org. He’s a worker, not a thinker.

    So…while I hope owners will move on from this FO, appoint a good HC, GM, Russ will stay, they make great decisions and this team can be a contender in the next year…

    I wouldn’t mind blowing it all up, changing every coach, decision maker, the complete roster. It’d 99% ruin the franchise for some time, but the ride would be interesting. I’m soo bored at all the old faces, who are also bored at this whole situation. It’s like a bad marriage between players and the franchise and the coaches and everyone relevant. I’d be interested to see some players go and some new, exciting and fresh faces come

  28. I will say this Percy harvin returned the kick-off for a touchdown in the Superbowl in was checkmate Denver. It was game over. Speaking of Denver Last Sunday Denver played banged up Bridgewater over healthy Drew lock.oh yeah how much confidence does Miami have in Tua these days?. one more quick thing Rob is it just me because every time I see the Seahawks kick returner trying to take out of endzone I basically cringe do they ever make it to the 25 yard line?I yell down it at the TV screen.oh yeah keep Russ

    • DriveByPoster says:

      No, it’s not just you! 🙂
      If anything sums up poor coaching then it is constantly allowing guys to run the ball out, risking a turnover, in a vain attempt to get to the 25. Where they would be anyway if they just let the ball go dead. It’s absolutely pathetic.

      And that Percy Harvin return (pain in the backside though he was) was the summit of the Seahawks achievement for me. All the angst & halftime adjustments the Broncos must have gone through & then 1 play later they are cooked.

  29. 206 says:

    I honestly hope the Jags kick our ass on Sunday. Oh what this has come to LOL

  30. cha says:

    https://youtu.be/VBYa6zW6SGk

    Olsen on Cowherd ‘let him be Russell the whole game’

  31. Sea Mode says:

    Josh Allen for Russ, what could have been…

    https://www.foxnews.com/sports/browns-close-russell-wilson

    • cha says:

      Meh. We’re too far down the road to see this as a golden missed opportunity.

      Josh Allen handing the ball off for 3 quarters then being expected to ‘save’ the team from a poor defense and Pete’s conservative leanings? With no leverage at all to tell Pete to let him cook?

      John Schneider taking the $30million in QB savings and loading the team with even more aging backup-level players?

      Russell Wilson in Cleveland behind THAT offensive line, handing the ball off to Nick Chubb and throwing to Landry and OBJ?

      No thank you.

      • Sea Mode says:

        Yeah, I didn’t mean it in a missed opportunity sense as much as a curious “what if?” sense.

        • Scot04 says:

          We’d be saying the same things. Only difference is it would be Josh Allen and not RW at odds with PC.

      • Scot04 says:

        Totally agree Cha; only Allen has slightly less help mobility, so might have been hurt sooner behind our poor O-lines.

  32. cha says:

    Ryan Wood
    @ByRyanWood
    #Packers were without their top 3 WRs, top 2 CBs, All-Pro LT, All-Pro pass rusher, starting center and defensive coordinator and just beat the NFL‘s last undefeated team 24-21.

    On the road. On a short week.

    Best win of the Matt LaFleur era.
    8:40 PM · Oct 28, 2021

    • Gross MaToast says:

      This perfectly summarizes the point of this article – having an elite quarterback is everything.

      What if they had their top 3 receivers and, say, Geno Smith. Would they have won that game?

      You cannot trade an elite quarterback because he no longer believes in the organizational philosophy. You change the organizational philosophy.

      Great anti-conventional wisdom article, Rob. Teams that have “half-billion dollar quarterbacks” are the lucky ones.

  33. Olyhawksfan says:

    What do you think about trading DK? Outside of Wilson he’s their biggest trade chip. He’s so talented it’s hard to think about it, but they’ve won a ring without a “DK” before. Not to take away from Doug and that receiving core.

  34. Palatypus says:

    You know, with little value in the first round of the draft this year and the fact that we will probably be picking in the top ten in the second round, I would be okay with trading down a couple times.

    How many players have first-round grades?

  35. cha says:

    Dugar, Michael-Shawn
    @MikeDugar
    ·
    6m
    Duane Brown (illness), Damien Lewis (shoulder) and Alex Collins (groin) are listed questionable to play Sunday. No injury designations for DK Metcalf and Darrell Taylor.

  36. Chris says:

    A basic tenet in Economics when looking at efficient resource use is that a producer (in this case the Seahawks organization) should employ higher marginal product per $ resources before lower MP per $ resources (essentially a comparison of additional production relative to wage, when applied to labor). Given the enormous importance of quarterback to a team’s success relative to other positions I’d have a hard time believing any franchise level quarterback was actually overpaid.

    Safeties and middle linebackers on the other hand …

  37. Chris says:

    I guess I should also say that part of the problem seems to be that people equate “success” with winning a superbowl. When thinking about it, tho, this is an extremely difficult thing to do as you’ve only got 1 in 32 teams that will be able to do it. That means not performing just above average, but far far above average. Having a quality veteran quarterback that is perhaps in actuality slightly UNDERPAID may be enough to get you in the top 16 teams, but getting to be the #1 top team in all of the league is easier if your quarterback isn’t just underpaid, but VERY underpaid (thus the emphasis on needing franchise QBs on rookie contracts or … Tom Brady over the years).

    A team of fairly compensated players will on average give you an average team. To be the #1 team out of 32 means a whole bunch of things likely have to be right (A RW on a rookie deal, great trades for a Clemmons and Lynch, underpaying for a Bennet and Avril, drafting out of your mind on a Sherman and Chancellor along with other high quality draft picks on a Thomas, Wagner, etc). IMO the Seahawks have made so many inefficient moves that it is far outweighing the slight underpaying of RW, and now that he’s gone we’re seeing how bad the rest of the roster has been mismanaged.

    • Thomas Wells says:

      Winning a Super Bowl isn’t the only way to be successful, but it’s the ultimate goal. When you have a quarterback like Russell Wilson, success has to be defined as being a legitimate contender for a title. This team hasn’t been on that level in years.