Month: September 2011 (Page 2 of 4)

Eyes on the prize: Andrew Luck will be the #1 overall pick next April

The Seattle Seahawks are a bad football team. No revelations there, as anyone who witnessed the first two weeks of the new season will testify. Michael Lombardi compared the Seahawks to an expansion franchise in the post-Pittsburgh aftermath: 

“I hate to be so critical in only the second week of the season but Seattle has not demonstrated any significant player on either side of the football who can make a play or stop someone from making a play. Their offensive line is very suspect. The defensive line doesn’t have a dominating player. And, when you look at the team, where are you going with Tarvaris Jackson at quarterback?” 

If we’re being really honest, it’s hard to argue against any of that. 

The offense has been a shambles so far. The defense has performed marginally better but relies on quirky scheme fits for pressure that isn’t always forthcoming. Special teams appears to be suffering – too any errors and the impact of Leon Washington (who won games for the Seahawks in 2010) is diminished due to the new kick off rules. The collective result has been difficult to watch and rightly people are dishing out the level of respect this team deserves so far – very little. 

I hear the counter arguments. It’s only week two, the lockout has hampered some teams more than others, Seattle is yet to have a home game. For the record I do think we’ll start to see a degree of improvement as the year goes on, but Sunday’s game is huge for the ambitions of this team being anything more than a patsy in 2011. Lose against Arizona and you’re looking at a possible 0-6 and goodnight Vienna. Win and suddenly there’s some light in what remains a pathetic NFC West. 

And that’s what bothers me. 

Sure the Seahawks can coast along in the NFC West, trying to make the playoffs every year with seven, eight or nine wins. The New Orleans game was fun to watch – it shocked the NFL world and gave some credence to the efforts of the new regime in year one. Let’s not kid ourselves though, this was an ugly football team that somehow got invited to the cool kids’ party. The subsequent beat-down in Chicago proved that the New Orleans game was a brilliant one-off crafted by a team and coaching staff that was able to create one night of magic. 

An effort that papered over the cracks. 

The Seahawks need a young star to build around, someone who can legitimise everything this regime is trying to do. The gaping hole at quarterback needs to be addressed, get someone who can potentially fill that hole with an injection of elite quality. There’s no guarantees in football, but roll the dice on this gamble working out. Take the pain in 2011 for a shot at a generation of success in the future. 

The city of Seattle needs a star. The Seattle Seahawks need a franchise quarterback. 

There are two players who are eligible for the 2012 draft with the potential to fill that role. Andrew Luck will almost certainly declare and is a shoe-in to be the #1 pick next April. It’s more of a debate as to whether Matt Barkley will join Luck in turning pro, but after three years starting amid USC’s sanctions, coaching changes and an inability to compete in Bowl games – he may be ready for the NFL. Like we said, there’s no such thing as a sure thing when it comes to the draft but it’s time Seattle placed it’s faith in a young, talented signal caller. These two offer as a good a reason you’ll ever find to pull the trigger. The thing is, you may need the #1 or #2 overall pick to have that opportunity. 

With all the ‘Suck for Luck’ talk doing the rounds, some fans have reacted badly to those hoping for a bad enough season to draft early and have a shot at Luck or Barkley. Only this week I argued myself that fans shouldn’t pine for Andrew Luck because it’ll drive you round the bend – it is so difficult to ‘earn’ the #1 overall pick, it’s something that has to be endured rather than enjoyed. Seattle has never had the #1 pick – and considering this franchise has had a few bad teams over the years – it goes to show just how difficult it is to own that top choice. Even when injuries decimated the franchise in 2008, a 4-12 record only brought about the #4 overall pick. 

Some could argue this piece contradicts what I debated in my earlier article about not pining for Luck – but let me explain the difference. Personally I will not spend the next 15 weeks tracking the scores of every other team that stinks or hope that the Seahawks will suffer a painful and embarrassing 0-16 campaign. It goes against the very nature of the sport to ‘hope’ to be awful. I’m not flying over 5000 miles in week eight to watch the Bengals game and celebrate a defeat. Yet despite all of that – I acknowledge that this team cannot keep drifting along being flat out bad, collecting players via the draft but never picking early enough to find the one guy who pieces everything together. It may take one hideous year to break a chain of mediocrity, paving a road to consistent success. That I am prepared for, I just won’t actively petition for it. 

Sure, there are other ways to build a franchise and find that starting quarterback. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick – but that’s not happening again any time soon. Aaron Rodgers was a later first round pick, but Green Bay had a unique situation starting an evergreen future Hall of Famer at quarterback who never missed a game. The Seahawks are in a completely different position. They need the foundation from which the rest of the house is going to be built and that’s going to take a top-end investment at QB. 

In the best interests of this franchise, a year of suffering may be a necessity. The team in it’s current form can only achieve mediocrity at best – be honest with yourself and admit that’s true. It’s only the pitiful NFC West that has allowedsuch mediocrity to thrive in the past. The Seahawks were being blown out plenty of times last season – including against NFC West opponents – had a losing record and relied on a 4-2 division record to make the post season. Could it happen again this year? It’s doubtful, yet equally not impossible –  but they’ll never earn much respect and they’ll never be a significant post-season threat. I don’t think you can repeat the New Orleans game three times to make the Super Bowl. The thought of this offense making the Super Bowl in it’s current form is frankly an insulting thought. 

It’s not a case of rooting for the team to lose because the NFL is unique compared to other sports. The draft lottery in the NBA all but removes the definite ‘advantage’ of being the worst. The NHL draft rarely has the same impact that we see in football (with a few obvious exceptions). The MLB is a completely different beast all together. In football, you can take a bad season and turn it into many good years with one great pick. Every fan wants his team to be successful, I don’t think we should be too critical of those who firmly believe one year of pain could lead to the promised land. It’s just a calculated gamble. 

So take the licks, endure the beatings, dream of a brighter future. The Seahawks need that ray of light that comes with a franchise quarterback that is capable of leading the charge. Dominate this division, don’t coast through it. Be a respected contender in the NFC, not a 7-9 novelty. Win a Super Bowl, move on from XL. None of this is guaranteed by picking at the very top of the NFL draft, but this could be a good year to be bad. 

***NOTES*** 

This weekend promises to be one of the more interesting for Seahawks fans hoping to look at potential quarterback draft picks. On my schedule I’ll be taking in NC State at Cincinnati (Mike Glennon), LSU at West Virginia (Geno Smith), USC at Arizona State (Matt Barkley & Brock Osweiler) and Oklahoma State vs Texas A&M (Brandon Weeden & Ryan Tannehill). In particular I’m looking forward to seeing if Tannehill can keep pace with OKSU’sproduction machine, watching Barkley on the road for the first time and seeing if Geno Smith continues to thrive on Dana Holgorsen’s offense against a SEC powerhouse. Expect plenty of analysis from the weekend onwards.

by Kip Earlywine

I realize the title of this post may sound overly presumptuous.  Seattle is only 2 games into the 2011 season, and to have a realistic shot at Matt Barkley, they would probably have to win fewer than 6 games (maybe less).  To have a realistic shot at Andrew Luck, they may have to win fewer than 2 games.  Seattle is a bad team, but with only a small sample size to work with, its too early to intellectually give up on the 2011 season, even if some of us already have emotionally.  Its entirely possible the Seahawks could win 6 games, especially if they make a change at QB sooner instead of later.  When its all said and done, its possible that neither player reaches Seattle in such a situation.  Talking about Luck vs. Barkley next April would probably be a waste of time if Seattle is picking 12th overall.

But there is a reason we, and even the national media, have been linking the Seahawks to these two quarterbacks.  Seattle is one of the most QB needy teams in the NFL, and they are also one of the league’s worst teams on paper.  Michael Lombardi recently said that the Seahawks reminded him of an expansion team, a point I struggle to disagree with.   At least right now, Seattle is still “in the hunt” for these two QBs, so for right now, its a worthy discussion about which QB would be the wiser investment.  If Seattle picked #1 overall, or if somehow both QBs reached Seattle’s pick, which one should they choose?

Before I get to the players themselves, I need to discuss what might be the single most under-rated aspect of evaluating any prospect:  how well does he fit the scheme you are implementing?  In fact, I’d argue this is near the top end of importance for any position.  For example, consider how size matters for Seattle’s intentions with press coverage, or on the defensive line, or at wide receiver.  Its a big reason why Seattle has had good results from Red Bryant, seen encouraging signs from Richard Sherman, and had success with Mike Williams.  A big reason for the resurgence of Chris Clemons and Raheem Brock is that their pure pass rush skills fit well with the LEO role.  On the other side of the coin, we needn’t look any further than Tarvaris Jackson’s poor pocket presence to see how two weak areas on a team can compound each other.

Scheme consideration was, in my opinion, the biggest reason why Seattle never even considered Ryan Mallett earlier this year.  A lot of people talked about Mallett’s character concerns, but Seattle hasn’t shown much aversion to character risk types.  Rather, I think they viewed Mallett as a pure pocket QB who built his game off of the big play, and that didn’t jive with what Seattle is looking for: a quarterback who is capable of consistently building long drives while avoiding big risks.  I don’t think they have anything against “the big play,” but based on the way that they devalued Locker and Mallett, I would assume they resist QBs who have “propensity for the big play” at the top of their NFL resume.

Many comments have been made about Seattle’s desire for a “point guard” quarterback.  This has confused a lot of fans as the term is not often used and is easily misunderstood.  Here is a quick explanation:  A point guard in basketball plays the ball distribution role on the team.  If he has an open look at the basket, he’ll take a shot, but more often than not, he’ll pass to a teammate with a more open look.  In the NFL, the “shoot” part of the analogy means the quarterback will take off and run if doing so is uncontested.  The “pass” analogy is more direct, as it also means to pass the ball.  A point guard typically passes more than he shoots, and a point guard QB will typically pass more than he runs.  Examples of point guard quarterbacks currently in the NFL include Josh Freeman and Michael Vick.  I’m just speculating, but, I find it less than coincidental that all this talk about Carroll wanting a point guard quarterback came just a few months after he watched Josh Freeman toast his defense (21/26, 237 yards, 5 TD, no picks).  I’ve noticed that coaches tend to be biased in favor of players who kicked their butts.

Is Matt Barkley a point guard quarterback?

Not really.  He’s more of a pocket passer who runs occasionally.  He plays with “heavy legs” as I call it, meaning that he doesn’t look explosive or lightweight on his dropback and isn’t explosive when he takes off.  Barkley may very well run a 4.8 forty in a straight line, but I think that number covers up what looks like decent but not elite athleticism.  That said, Barkley isn’t completely glued to the pocket: he’s had 79 rush attempts in his first two seasons, or about three a game.  He’s a far cry from Ryan Mallett last year in this regard.  Barkley could succeed in the passing portion of the point guard role in that he’s perfectly capable of checking multiple reads and leading long, sustained drives.  He’s also excellent at executing play action and is above average on bootlegs- two areas of importance for a Pete Carroll quarterback.  Matt Barkley has a big play component to his game, but its not the first thing off the tongue when discussing him.  The first thing people mention when talking about Barkley is generally that he’s a very efficient, well rounded, NFL ready quarterback.

Maybe I should refrain from making an NFL comparison for either of these quarterbacks.  Comparisons to successful NFL quarterbacks lead to unfair and sometimes inaccurate expectations.  Need I remind anyone that Bill Walsh compared Rick Mirer to Joe Montana?  On the other hand, looking at comparable quarterbacks in the NFL is a good tool for determining the kind of system a prospect would be best in, so I decided to look over a list of successful quarterbacks to see if any of them strongly resembled Matt Barkley’s game.  Going in, I had a hunch he’d resemble Aaron Rodgers, but as it turns out, not really.  My instincts pointed at Rodgers, a fellow 6’2″ quarterback with an excellent ability to read defenses and all the arm/release goodness to get it done, but the comparison does come up short in one way, and that is that Rodgers plays with significantly more mobility.  After repeating this exercise for several other quarterbacks, I did find one player who looked eerily similar, even down to the little details.  Ironically,  it turned out to be a blindingly obvious comparison that I should have made much sooner.  Check these two out, side by side:

That’s right, Carson Palmer.  If it wasn’t such a dead on comparison, I’d feel ashamed for using it just for how lazy it appears on the surface.   Palmer ran a 4.63 forty time at his pro day, but never became a threat running the ball.  Palmer also has that same “tired legs” dropback, and isn’t an explosive rusher.  Both have nearly identical looking mechanics, pump fakes, and decisive natures.  Both check multiple reads with impressive speed.   I’d probably give Palmer a slight edge in athleticism, but its close, and Palmer was never known as a dual threat quarterback at any time in the NFL.  The biggest difference between the two is size, Palmer has got about two or three inches of height and 15 pounds on Barkley.  Barkley’s size is certainly NFL adequate though.

While its clear that Barkley does not fit the typical point guard quarterback mold, he looks like the mirror image of a quarterback Seattle just spent months hoping to trade for.  And then, obviously, you have the connection Barkley and Carroll share from USC.  Barkley is not a perfect fit, but is he on the radar?  You bet your ass.

Is Andrew Luck a point guard quarterback?

The answer is a surprisingly emphatic “yes.”  Luck has rushed the ball 116 times the last two seasons, and if you’ve ever sat down and watched Andrew Luck play a full game, its obvious that mobility is a huge part of what makes him so effective.  In 2010, he out-rushed Jake Locker in fewer than half the rush attempts, for an outstanding 8.4 yards per carry average.  That high average speaks not just of Luck’s running ability, but to the intelligent timing of when he decides to run.

Luck also completed 70.1% of his passes in 2010, which is astronomically high for having played in a pro style offense.  Andrew Luck is probably the best pro-style college quarterback we’ve seen at grinding out long drives in many years.  Like every good point guard quarterback, Luck excels at spreading the football, although he did show a strong preference for targeting Doug Baldwin.  Conveniently, Baldwin is already a Seahawk and playing himself into the slot receiver role.

Andrew Luck is constantly mentioned in the same breath as Peyton Manning.  While its a great honor to be compared to arguably the greatest quarterback on Earth, I always felt it was a pretty weak comparison when putting on the tape.  Manning has always been a fairly pure pocket passing quarterback.  A much closer analogy would be a right-handed Steve Young.  Young currently holds the best career passer rating among non-active quarterbacks, and is 2nd all time for rushing yards by a quarterback.  Luck has been known for long, impressive runs, including a 58 yard touchdown run last year.  Perhaps the most famous play Steve Young ever made was this run against the Vikings.  Young was also a guy that didn’t run too much, he only ran when running the ball was the most sensible thing to do.  In my opinion, Steve Young is the greatest point guard quarterback of all time, and Luck bears a strong resemblance to him.

As noted in an excellent fieldgulls article by Dan Kelly, Pete Carroll’s book Win Forever mentions how the current Seahawks coach had a formative moment with Bill Walsh back when Carroll was the 49ers defensive coordinator.  Walsh was out of coaching at this time, but was apparently still closely connected to the 49ers organization.  Pete Carroll sought Walsh out, trying to soak up any insights he could offer.  One of the things Carroll recalled about that time was this:

“We talked a lot about the quarterback position. Coach Walsh was one of the great quarterback gurus in the history of the game, and he convinced me that everything a coach does in designing his offense should be about making it easy for his quarterback, because his job is so difficult. He believed that everything should be be structured with the quarterback in mind.”

This pretty much goes to the heart of what Seattle truly wants at quarterback.  They aren’t looking for a Peyton Manning type who can carry the fortunes of a franchise all by himself.  Rather, they are looking for the kind of guy who can walk into a system and have immediate and strong success due to strong synergies with his supporting cast.

A guy like Steve Young, who just happened to be the quarterback of the 49ers during Carroll’s tenure there.

Andrew Luck isn’t just a fantastic quarterback prospect, he’s a perfect fit for what the Seahawks are looking for at quarterback.  I look at Matt Barkley and I see a guy who is going to be a very good, championship level player in the NFL.  But I look at Andrew Luck, and look at how he fits this team, and the word “special” comes to mind.  If Seattle was just some faceless team without any major preferences and could build around either guy, I’d probably take Barkley by a nose (although the remainder of the season could change that opinion).  But considering the rather strict preferences Pete Carroll has for quarterbacks, its hard to ignore just how perfectly Andrew Luck fits them.  If Seattle picks 1st overall, I doubt they’d pass on Luck for Barkley or anyone else.  In the end, we should be very excited should Seattle be privileged enough to land either one.

There’s a buzz around the Seattle Seahawks and it’s not being created by the product on the field. Sunday’s miserable 24-0 defeat in Pittsburgh was the viewing equivalent of being poked in the eye.

Several times. With a cactus.

As the game laboured to it’s pitiful conclusion, for the first time in my life watching the Hawks people began to wonder if the team genuinely is the worst in the NFL? The hype surrounding Stanford quarterback Andrew Luck is so great, being worst has taken on a Holy Grail status. Who will win the competition to be that bad? Who will be the first to give up on their season and punt for Luck? Have the Seahawks already reached that level in sticking with the clearly struggling Tarvaris Jackson as the unquestioned starter?

Only as the Kansas City Chiefs lost more key starters and conceded even more points did people begin to wonder if this was even a competition. The Colts are kind of bad too – should we be worried here? Are they a ‘threat’ to Seattle’s absolute stinkiness? As the second half dragged on I started to notice fans across the NFL ranking the teams who were in the Luck sweepstakes. Some Seahawks fans were already noting ‘competitors’.

Let’s get one thing straight now – DO NOT ROOT FOR THE #1 PICK. STEP AWAY FROM THOSE THOUGHTS. NOW.

It is unhealthy. You will suffer much more stress than you ever will hoping for the team to win. When you’re investing so much time in taking satisfaction from your own team losing, that’s one thing. When you’re also stressing about other teams winning who you’d otherwise find insufferable, it takes on a whole new world. I more than anyone have banged on and on about needing to draft a franchise quarterback. I more than anyone have banged on about the Seahawks probably needing to draft that quarterback very early in the first round. Rooting to be the #32 team out of #32 however is like rooting for a lottery win. To some extent Seattle needs that early pick to really shift this rebuild into gear, but hoping to be bad enough to pick first overall will be like taking on a second full-time job.

Earning the opportunity to draft Andrew Luck will likely take more than being flat out bad. It’ll probably take an injury list similar to the ones being experienced in Kansas City or Indianapolis – key players missing for the season. The Seahawks do have a tough schedule, but they also play in the NFC West. The 2009 Seahawks were impossible to watch and went 5-11. The 2008 Seahawks were ravaged with an incredible injury list but had superior coaching and younger players and went 4-12. Being ‘just’ bad isn’t enough in my mind – as strange as that sounds – to be the worst in the NFL. It will take more.

I appreciate that people will point to the recently announced absence of Robert Gallery with a groin injury, continued issues with Russell Okung’s ankle and now Sidney Rice’s torn labrum. Others will direct focus at Tarvaris Jackson and say he’s reason enough the Seahawks are capable of earning the #1 pick. I still remain sceptical – I think the Seahawks look like a bad four win team that plays six games in the NFC West, not a truly chaotic 0-2 win team like Carolina last year that has to face divisional games against Atlanta, New Orleans and Tampa Bay.

And while many will prey that the Seahawks will ‘suck for Luck’, the truth is they could get away with ‘bad for Barkley’.

You can take it to the bank now that Andrew Luck will be the #1 pick next April. We can run through different teams that ‘might’ pass, but the reality is you’d need to own a young, elite passer to ignore a player as hyped as Luck. A team with a young, elite passer will not be picking #1 overall in all likelihood. Elsewhere, Indianapolis have seen what life after Manning looks like and it isn’t pretty. Other teams will see it as their opportunity to get the next big thing and players like Matt Cassell are not going to force your hand. Forget about picking anywhere other than #1 overall to get a shot at Luck.

Likewise forget about trading up. The stigma of passing on Andrew Luck for any amount of draft stock will be far greater than actually taking the guy and him not ending up as the greatest quarterback pick since Peyton Manning. Teams will want a kings ransom to put themselves in that position and even that might not be enough to tempt.

The Seahawks will have to be a complete and utter shambles 14-15 times in 2011, not twice, in order for a shot at the Luckmeister. I wouldn’t rule that out right now, particularly after the first two weeks. Yet they may only have to be bad enough to pick in the top five or ten to get a shot at Matt Barkley.

For starters, he simply isn’t receiving anywhere near the same level of hype as Andrew Luck. USC being out of the national picture even at 3-0 is keeping Barkley’s profile in check – almost like he’s admired from afar but not universally discussed. Without sanctions looming over the Trojans like a thick grey cloud, his 70% completions – 892 yard – nine touchdown – one interception start to the season would be generating much more hype.

Luck choosing not to declare for 2011 has created a monster that we didn’t see last year as he grew into a redshirt sophomore starting for a second season. This is Barkley’s first opportunity to consider the draft, thus keeping a lid on things for now. Opinion is also a lot more mixed on Barkley – and while I think there’s actually very little between the two top ranked quarterbacks – big name pundits like Todd McShay have not matched grades offered by the likes of Tony Pauline and Mel Kiper in the early first round.

While Kansas City won’t be able to resist the temptation to bin Matt Cassel in favor of Andrew Luck, they may be more hesitant when presented with the chance to draft Matt Barkley. It could be a similar story for Indianapolis who let’s not forget just invested in an insane contract for Peyton Manning. Drafting Luck would be a steal and set them up for years – but if he’s not there, would they rather concentrate on keeping Manning upright for the rest of his bumper deal with perhaps a franchise left tackle in Ryan Kalil instead? They did just draft Anthony Castonzo.

There are others – Minnesota for example – who would be less inclined to draft Barkley but would probably write off Christian Ponder if offered Luck. Suddenly you’re wondering if the Seahawks could finish possibly with a #4 or #5 pick and still have a very realistic shot at a quarterback with franchise potential. It’d still be a stress inducing wait, because I don’t rate any other 2012 eligible quarterback close to a top ten grade at this stage.

So yeah – this is a bad Seahawks team and only the most eternal optomist can expect they’ll pull off another miracle by somehow scraping into the playoffs. Sunday’s game against Arizona will essentially dictate the season – lose that game and an 0-6 record looks likely before the Bengals arrive in Seattle. Win it and suddenly that Atlanta home game offers an opportunity to maybe – against all odds – take a 2-2 record into road games against New York and Cleveland. It seems unlikely, of course it does, but those are the kind of margins between a team that stutters along just about competing in the NFC West and a team that has a shot at the #1 overall pick.

Having the chance to draft Andrew Luck may well put this team on track for a decade of challenging at the top table. I’m a Luck fan, but he’s not Superman and would have a lot to prove.  Yet if the Seahawks are bad enough to pick early – but not quite bad enough to be worst – there’s every chance they’ll still have a chance at getting their quarterback.

***NOTES***

Speaking of Matt Barkley, see the video above for his performance against Syracuse on Saturday. The USC quarterback threw five touchdown passes – equalling a school record. Although it’s only a highlights tape and doesn’t show bad plays, it’s worth noting how well Barkley goes through progressions. I’m not sure I’ve seen a college player work through 3-4 targets as well as Barkley and still manage to stay fairly decisive. It’s an under rated quality and one which will help him at the next level significantly, particularly if asked to start early.