Category: Main (Page 64 of 68)

We’re at week five of the college football season and I wanted to note the players I’ve seen that I feel are deserving of first round grades. It’s not a big list and it’s why I won’t compile a mock draft until closer to the new year. So far there are twelve players on the list. The first four guys (Luck, Barkley, Kalil and Richardson) are the only players I believe are worthy of top-five grades at this point.

*Note* – please remember that it’s still early. I’ll never make definite judgements based on 1-2 games and in some cases I just haven’t had the opportunity to watch certain teams/prospects. I’ll come back to this list in a month to see how things have changed.

The twelve prospects with first round grades as of October 2nd

Andrew Luck (QB, Stanford)
Decorated first round prospect who will be the #1 overall pick next April.

Matt Barkley (QB, USC)
The only other 2012 eligible quarterback who warrants a first round grade.

Matt Kalil (OT, USC)
Hugely talented in pass protection and that will secure a top grade, but needs to improve his run blocking.

Trent Richardson (RB, Alabama)
Now a potential top-five pick considering the new rookie pay scale. Richardson is just brilliant.

Dwight Jones (WR, North Carolina)
The complete package at wide receiver, Jones is now showing consistency and production.

Zach Brown (LB, North Carolina)
Always involved and jumps off the screen, the defensive MVP at UNC.

Peter Konz (C, Wisconsin)
Excellent interior line prospect who should be able to start quickly. Will he declare? Debatable.

Vontaze Burfict (LB, Arizona State)
Will bring attitude, talent and playmaking qualities to the NFL.

Jonathan Martin (OT, Stanford)
An athletic lineman that teams will covet due to the importance of blind-side blocking.

Mohamed Sanu (WR, Rutgers)
Sanu’s catching, running and blocking are all excellent – a unique physical talent.

Alshon Jeffery (WR, South Carolina)
Big possession receiver who will make a very good #2 at the next level.

Justin Blackmon (WR, Oklahoma State)
At his best comparable to Greg Jennings & Roddy White, but there are too many little mistakes.

There are also several prospects I’ve watched either in 2010 or 2011 that have created some impression. I want to note those players here as having the potential to be among the first round group by next month. Again, these are just a selection of names and are not all-inclusive or definitive. Indeed these players may never reach first round consideration, but they’re some of the players I wanted to highlight.

Players who have created an impression without solidifying first round grades

TJ McDonald (S, USC)
Good against the run but also above average in coverage – the best safety prospect for 2012.

Nick Perry (DE, USC)
Perry is now playing at 100% and he’s getting to the quarterback. Technique matches speed.

Kheeston Randall (DT, Texas)
He moves well and he’s tough to shift. Randall gets into the backfield but needs to learn to finish.

Melvin Ingram (DE, South Carolina)
Initially a rotational cog, but has worked into a greater role. I started the year thinking he’d be a mid/late rounder, but he just keeps making huge plays.

Greg Reid (CB, Florida State)
Reid is physical despite a lack of ideal size and he has a future at the next level.

Brandon Thompson (DT, Clemson)
Production not good enough so far considering the supporting cast and a year with Da’Quan Bowers, but there is something there.

Janoris Jenkins (CB, North Alabama)
Top-10 elite potential held back by off-field issues. AJ Green, Julio Jones and Alshon Jeffery had their worst games against Jenkins in 2010.

Marquis Spruill (OLB, Syracuse)
Electric linebacker prospect who will play three downs in the NFL.

Jayron Hosley (CB, Virginia Tech)
Hosley gets burned from time to time for being too aggressive, but he’s also a huge playmaker with 12 picks in the last year.

Jared Crick (DE, Nebraska)
At times Crick looks like a top-15 pick, but he also looks irrelevant at times too.

Kendall Wright (WR, Baylor)
Wright has enjoyed an explosive start to the season and despite lacking great size he’s becoming hard to ignore.

Logan Harrell (DT, Fresno State)
Under rated three-technique prospect who gets to the quarterback. I really like this guy.

Quinton Coples (DE, North Carolina)
Pure physical potential but doesn’t make the most of it.

Austin Davis (QB, Southern Miss)
Davis is an under rated quarterback prospect who deserves greater attention.

Stephen Lee (WR, Georgia Tech)
Lee is a big and fast receiver who flashes moments of quality.

Jeff Fuller (WR, Texas A&M)
The only player who gave Patrick Peterson a hard time last year, but Fuller hasn’t exploded in 2011.

Vinny Curry (DE, Marshall)
Curry is a consistent pass rusher who could lead the nation in sacks this year. LEO potential.

Alameda Ta’amu (DT, Washington)
Nose tackle prospect who is not in Phil Taylor’s class but he still has high first round potential.

Riley Reiff (OT, Iowa)
Reiff looked good blocking against Brandon Lindsey and Pittsburgh.

Morris Claiborne (CB, LSU)
So far it’s hard to ignore the terrific performances of this talented LSU corner in 2011.

Finally I wanted to note the five players who are generally given very high grades but I feel are over rated. That’s not to say that players like Quinton Coples and Landry Jones won’t be first round picks – maybe even early picks – but personally I wouldn’t advocate taking them as high as some have projected.

The top-five over rated prospects

Landry Jones (QB, Oklahoma)
A product of the Oklahoma offensive scheme, Jones hasn’t flashed top-end pro-potential in my view.

Dre Kirkpatrick (CB, Alabama)
Tall but should be much more physical than he is. A bit static, lacks fluidity and generally I haven’t been that impressed with Kirkpatrick.

Donte Paige-Moss (DE, North Carolina)
How is this guy graded in the first round by people who should know better? For the record, it’s one sack this year. One.

Jerel Worthy (DT, Michigan State)
Not great as a pass rusher or run stuffer and Worthy is often taken out for third downs.

Quinton Coples (North Carolina)
Coples is all about physical potential, but too often he’s annonymous.

Special mention: Ryan Tannehill (QB, Texas A&M) and Robert Griffin III (QB, Baylor)– two project quarterbacks at the next level that people appear desperate to promote above their means seemingly to justify premature and inaccurate claims that 2012 presents a rare class of QB’s. Tannehill is much more polished than Griffin III, but he’s still relatively inexperienced and learning the position. He stares down receivers and he’s not used to going through progressions. There’s a high degree of athletic potential and his technique is better than you’d expect, but he’s strictly a project in my mind. Griffin’s numbers are sensational this season, but he’s not a polished passer and his footwork needs a complete re-work. Team’s will show interest earlier than they should based on athleticism and leadership, but he’s a long term developmental project and I struggle to imagine Griffin III playing in the NFL.

JMPasq has supplied us with the tape (see above) for Ryan Tannehill’s performance against Oklahoma State. I’ll have more on this game later in the week and also some thoughts on UNC vs Georgia Tech that I’ve just finished watching.

This really was a contrasting performance from Tannehill. It was interesting to see on Twitter how people were climbing over each other to jump on the Tannehill bandwagon. In the second half, the masses fell silent. The only noise you could hear was a distant choking in the background, emanating from the television screen showing the game.

Before I get into a review of the performance I want to make a general point. A lot was written about Tannehill in the week, with high profile draft pundits such as Rob Rang tweeting that he could leap frog Matt Barkley and Landry Jones to be the #2 ranked quarterback behind Andrew Luck next April. In fairness Rang wasn’t alone in making that early prediction, yet I couldn’t disagree more.

This was Tannehill’s 1oth start for the Aggies, having previously been beaten to the starting job by Stephen McGee (a 4th round pick) and Jerrod Johnson (an UDFA, now a free agent after being released by Philadelphia). He’s had some impressive victories since replacing Johnson and shown plenty of promise and potential. Yet projections in the first round were putting the cart before the horse in my mind, a point I made long before Tannehill threw three picks against Oklahoma State in a floundering second half. I have no doubt that Andrew Luck and Matt Barkley are a class above any other 2012 draft eligible quarterback. Can Tannehill rise to the top of a growing second tier of QB’s? Sure – but let’s not go over the top on what he’s capable of achieving here.

Are we desperate to promote quarterbacks above their means, particularly this year given how much everyone has talked up the class? Possibly so and it’s not a surprise given how many teams (including the Seahawks) need a franchise passer. However, we can’t force players into grades they don’t deserve. I’ve maintained a mid-round grade on Tannehill with potential to rise. I see him as someone who shouldn’t be expected to start early, but could sit and learn and develop into a possible starter. You also have the added bonus that he could work out at receiver or take part in some trick plays and special packages early in his pro-career. Is he a handcuff quarterback who you stake your reputation on with a first round pick? No. No. No.

I’m far from an oracle on quarterbacks, but I’ve had some success grading the position since I started writing this blog. When most people were projecting Jimmy Clausen as a shoe-in top five pick, potentially the #1 overall choice, I gave him a round two grade and put Sam Bradford at #1 long before those two possibilities became a reality. Not many people will remember Bradford as a skinny, spread offense quarterback who would be a permanent liability with injury – but that’s what a lot of people believed at the time. Clausen wasn’t turnig the ball over and was putting up big numbers, but he played in a Charlie Weis offense that dictated the situation. Here’s what I wrote on the 16th November, 2009: “I’ve just gone through Notre Dame’s 27-22 defeat to Pittsburgh and I have to admit quarterback Jimmy Clausen was very disappointing. Despite all the injuries and the fact he’s coming from a spread offense, Sam Bradford has to be the highest ranked quarterback for the 2010 draft.”

I didn’t have Colt McCoy in round one or two that year – and projected Tebow poorly despite admitting he would almost certainly be a first round pick. A year later I was among the first (if not the first) to pair Cam Newton with the Carolina Panthers. In fact, as soon as Andrew Luck chose not to declare, Newton was my #1 as evidenced in this piece I wrote: “I’ve no doubt that Newton has star-potential – the kind of ceiling that Clausen will never have. It’s unfortunate for him that Carolina have regressed this much to be in position to own the #1 pick – but that’s life. Cam Newton can have the kind of impact for the Panthers that a Bowers, Fairley, Green – or a Clausen – simply cannot match. For that reason, I maintain that Carolina should and possibly will draft a quarterback with the first overall pick – even with Luck out of the picture.”

Has Newton shown start potential so far? I’d say so. It wasn’t just about physical qualities either – he was always a much more natural passer than many gave him credit for. What about the next two quarterbacks taken – Jake Locker and Blaine Gabbert? Against popular opinion I consistently maintained Jake Locker would be a top-ten pick throughout the process – he went #8 to Tennessee. I couldn’t find a mock draft that included Blaine Gabbert in round one before my own, when I had him going to Seattle at #13 by Christmas Eve. A little while later he declared and eventually was taken with the 10th overall pick. I stated he had top-ten potential in this piece.

So by now I know what you’re thinking – how arrogant to spend the last three paragraphs pumping up his own tyres. I’ve not got everything correct – far from it in fact. I graded Christian Ponder in the mid/late rounds last year – projected he would be taken as a reach in round two – yet he ended up being the 12th overall pick. I thought Andy Dalton would be a mid/late rounder but he went at the top of round two. C’est la via, you can’t win them all.

However, the reason I linked to those old pieces and took the role of shameless self promoting was purely to try and add some value to the point I’m about to make – that the class of 2012 will not bring about a timeless group of quarterbacks. If Matt Barkley returns to USC, which remains a possibility, we’ll have one player and one player only who I believe is capable of having a lasting impact as one of 32 starting quarterbacks in the NFL –  and of course that’s Andrew Luck.

Landry Jones, Ryan Tannehill, Kirk Cousins, Robert Griffin III – if you’re banking on those guys being your savior, good luck with that. That’s not to say they can’t start or shouldn’t be on your board – I’d happily take a flier on Jones in the second round for example knowing I could move on if it didn’t work out possibly with reputation intact. I would’ve gambled on Ryan Mallett in a similar range, knowing that the risk was decreased outside of round one. If you can sit a quarterback like Jones and really work on the things he needs to improve, I think it could be a long term success story. Unfortunately, he’ll almost certainly be drafted above his means to a team that will essentially throw him in much too soon. Blaine Gabbert is already starting in Jacksonville and how long will it be until Christian Ponder takes over from Donovan McNabb in Minnesota? Both quarterbacks needed much more time than either will be given, although obviously I believe Gabbert is much more equipped to make it work.

That’s just my opinion. Like with Ponder, I could be completely wrong. On the other hand, maybe I’ll be right and next time I need to back up a bold statement on a quarterback class I’ll be linking to this piece. If I am wrong I’ll eat my words – I’m not here to be seen to be right every time, I’m here to make judgements and form opinions with the same differing results that everyone else has who follows the draft.

So what about Tannehill? For starters he’s strictly a one-read guy. I’ve noticed he often stares down receivers and doesn’t even resort to the checkdown and a number of his bad throws against OKSU came when trying to force things on the hot read. Some of the good throws came from this issue as well, including the first touchdown pass to Jeff Fuller which was a good, accurate throw with perfect velocity to a receiver who was well covered but only by one defensive back. Good throw, good catch.

He anticipates routes quite well, particularly come backs to the back shoulder. That’s a plus because it translates to the next level. What I didn’t like was his inability to react and get out of either a broken play or realise when the hot read wasn’t on. One of his three picks came when the receiver tripped up, yet Tannehill still makes the throw despite the cornerback having an obvious advantage. It’s a bad decision, one that I suspect Luck, Barkley and Landry Jones would avoid by checking off to the next option or throwing underneath. You simply don’t try that pass in any circumstance, yet Tannehill just ploughs in like a bull in a china shop.

The second interception was another bad decision – he’s staring down his target despite blanket coverage to the right hand side. He tries to fit the pass into an impossible window despite heavy pressure and an advancing pass rusher. Tannehill gets hit as the ball comes out, but in reality where was he going with that pass? Why doesn’t he see the danger there? I can’t decide whether it’s just a lack of experience, the system or if this is a more pressing concern. Staring down receivers will not get you a starting job in the NFL, and it’s one of Tannehill’s biggest issues based on the evidence in this game. The third and game-deciding pick was almost identical – again a bad decision to throw to a receiver he tracked all the way.

Teams are going to adapt and respond during a game. If something is working in one half, it won’t necessarily work in the second. Brandon Weeden took a difficult first half for his team and turned it around for an impressive win by making adjustments. When Texas A&M needed a response, they were found wanting. Andrew Luck’s offense at Stanford is a well oiled machine and he rarely has to make more than one read, but always has the checkdown or scramble option. Matt Barkley is adept at going through his progressions and already manages the USC offense like a pro-starter. Considering both players are also technically excellent and physically capable, it already puts them both on a completely different plateau to a quarterback like Tannehill. Really the only area Tannehill grades higher is with physical attributes, but even then it’s not like Luck and Barkley aren’t athletes, just just won’t see USC’s quarterback running a QB-option to the house.

There’s no doubt he is an athlete. The quarterback option draw that led to a big touchdown run was pure brilliance – Tannehill had the vision to make the call, execute and punish the Oklahoma State offense. It’s a big play aspect he’ll have in his locker that will interest pro-teams, even if this isn’t the kind of play he’ll ever run at the next level. Arm strength is more than good enough and from a technical point of view, his release and footwork is better than you’d expect from a convert.

Overall my impression is that Tannehill warrants a grade in the R3-4 area based on physical potential, but is likely to be one of thoseprospects who goes earlier due to the increasing importance of the QB position. I would be very cautious of investing a high pick and then hoping that he’ll end up making your reputation because you need to find ‘the guy’ for the next decade. He could be another Kevin Kolb who will not ultimately benefit the team who drafts him on the field, but could train up behind a proven veteran and earn a trade/starting gig elsewhere.

From a pure physical and potential stand point, he may be a more promising overall player than Landry Jones with more experience and starts. However, the suggestion that he could be better than Luck or Barkley I find slightly preposterous. Until he learns to run through progressions and stop staring down targets – even just take what a team gives him – he will turn the ball over against good teams when fighting from behind or needing to press matters.

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.

Tonight I’ll be recording Arizona vs Oklahoma State. The Bowl game last season was a completely one-sided affair and I don’t expect much difference tonight. I don’t rate Nick Foles or the Arizona offensive scheme and Brandon Weeden and Justin Blackmon should have a field day. Expect some thoughts on the game this weekend in the round-up. I’m also scheduled to watch tape of Alabama against Penn State, Notre Dame at Michigan and Florida Atlantic versus Michigan State this weekend.

The unquestioned star of week one in my view was Robert Griffin III (QB, Baylor) who had a tremendous performance against TCU. We’ll soon find out if it’s a sign of TCU’s defense taking a big step back, but it’s important to remember that in previous years they’ve had one of the best unit’s in college football – no exaggeration.

Griffin (I’m going to lose the ‘III’ bit for the rest of the article) is a redshirt junior despite currently featuring in his fourth year starting. He started 11 of 12 games a freshman and redshirted as a sophomore in 2009 after suffering an ACL injury. Due to the fact he’d only played three games that season, he was granted redshirt status and maintained an extra year of eligibility. What it means is he isn’t a lock to enter the draft next year despite four years of service at Baylor. Whether he can perform consistently as a passer will play some part, as will the feedback he receives from the draft committee.

His story is an interesting one – Griffin was born in Japan where his parents were stationed as US Army Sergeants. He moved around a lot – even living briefly in Washington state before finally settling in Texas. At high school he set state records for the 110m hurdles and on the AAU track and field circuit he won gold in the 110m and 400m hurdles. His athletic achievements stretch to a semi-final place for the US Olympic team in preperation for Beijing 2008. He received football interest from – amongst others – Oregon, Washington State, Stanford and Tennessee before committing to Houston. When coach Art Briles left the Cougars to join Baylor, he similarly switched to the Bears.

From a physical stand point he looks the part – 6-3 in height and around 215-220lbs in pads. He’ll celebrate his 22nd birthday just over two months prior to the 2012 NFL draft.

Before we get into his technical make-up, I want to stress that in studying Griffin on and off for the last 18 months I’ve never found anything but incredible praise for his leadership and character. This guy is the heartbeat of the Baylor programme, he leads by example and everyone looks up to him. Listen to one of his interviews and you won’t find a shred of arrogance or attitude, he’s a completely humble individual. That will help him when and if he ever gets a shot in the NFL because there are a lot of areas technically he will need to improve.

I was quite surprised how accomplished he looked throwing the football against TCU, because I’d not seen evidence of that previously. There were games when Baylor resorted to repetitive, simple screens and passes into the flats and I remember watching one performance (I forget who the opponent was) where Griffin barely threw a pass past the line of scrimmage. It was almost like he’d switched to rugby momentarily where the forward pass it outlawed.

My impression coming into this year was an athlete who on his day is capable of beating you with a combination of pass/run/athleticism, but ultimately he was a player with little future in the NFL apart from maybe a gimmick role. What we need to work out now is whether this is a matured, coached and capable throwing quarterback who is starting to blossom or whether this is going to be that one game where everything clicks and he dominates.

Perhaps the most striking thing was how little he attempted to run, it’s almost as if that option was taken away from him once Baylor felt confident throwing downfield. Griffin has been the very definition of a dual-threat quarterback, but was seemingly always more dangerous running. In this game, it was all about some pretty impressive deep passes, multiple touchdowns and big plays.

So onto the technique – which as I said needs a lot of work. The main thing that bugs me is the footwork, which is awful. Griffin has a habit of taking the snap, faking the hand off and jumping back with his legs spread out creating a situation where he’s immobile. The stance he gets into in preparation to throw is one that makes it so difficult to avoid pressure if he needs to make more than one read and move away from the pocket. It’s a really unnatural move for a quarterback and a major problem that needs to be worked on, he can’t take a snap and turn into a statue to throw.

Occasionally he also dances into this stance, as if he’s playing quarterback and also preparing to be in the background of Timbaland’s latest music video at the same time. I can’t stress enough just how bad this footwork is, how it prevents Griffin from really making the most of his throwing velocity, how it will make him a sitting target at the next level and bizarrely how it takes away one of the greatest aspects of his game – the ability to move around as a great athlete. This alone will set him back years of work – perhaps 2-3 solid years of practise and improvement – before he’s ready to truly face a starting NFL defense.

Having said that, it looks like he has worked to get stronger in the upper body and therefore gets more zip on those passes. When he was given a clean pocket and time to throw in this game, he actually did an excellent job whether it was throwing deep, finding open targets or even going through the odd progression. His ball placement was very good and he allowed Baylor’s playmakers a chance to thrive. The footwork would be even more of a concern if he didn’t flash some nice ability throwing the ball. If he can play half as well as he did here for the rest of the season, then he has a chance to spark some interest.

He gets the ball out fairly quickly and his release point is fine but not ideal. There were some occassions where he threw slightly more 3/4 than you’d hope for under pressure, but that’s to be expected especially if you need to get the ball out quickly.

The offensive scheme he works from is alien to the NFL, lot’s of option plays and one-read stuff. Alongside the footwork he’ll need a lot of time to adjust taking regular snaps from under center, reading a defense and learning to make more than one quick read and then resorting to a check down.

Teams love athletic quarterbacks who can make unpredictable plays. If they also limit turnovers in college and have the kind of personality that attracts coaches, then they get drafted. Griffin isn’t going to have a TCU game every week but it’s a good start and he’s at least showing improvement and progression as a quarterback. That too will perhaps make a team or two wonder – how good could he be if he continues this upward trend? I came into the year thinking he’d be an UDFA or low round level prospect, but if nothing else in week one he flashed enough to make you consider a home in the middle rounds – even if he will be a substantial project.

Tony Pauline gives Griffin a round 3-4 grade, stating: “Athletic quarterback with a developing game. Has the arm strength necessary to make all the passes, accurate on his throws and also dangerous carrying the ball. Has shown consistent improvement since his freshman season.”

I also noticed Pauline giving some praise to one of my favorite players, Fresno State’s defensive tackle Logan Harrell. I included him on my ’50 to watch’ list for 2012 and see him as a potential pass rushing interior sleeper. Pauline: “Hard-working, tough interior lineman that shows a lot of quickness and explosion in his game. Has an upside and could surprise with a big senior season.”

I will be taking a second look at the Vikings game tomorrow and perhaps my perceptions will change slightly. However, I came away from the game with a few thoughts and some concerns.

The offense looked poor, rhythmless and lacking focus. This isn’t a big surprise and major context is required here – we’ve not seen anything like a natural off-season and groups are being put together on the run. Teams that have a long term structure such as New England and Pittsburgh will likely dominate this upcoming season simply because of familiarity. Teams that are rebuilding like Seattle are going to suffer.

Yet there’s still something about the Seahawks offense that bothers me. The offensive line was flat out bad. For me it’s further evidence of a point I’ve often made amid constant promotions of ‘building through the trenches’ – that lines are not built around high picks and instant chemistry doesn’t exist. The best offensive lines in the league blend talent, execution, consistency, health and pure time on the field to create a perfect storm. You can’t just throw picks and dollars at the offensive line and hope to turn a major weakness into an overnight success.

The Seahawks have maybe the most expensive group in the NFL in terms of draft stock, yet you couldn’t tell last night. There’s going to be teething problems for a while and this is just something we’re going to have to live through. Hopefully James Carpenter and John Moffitt develop, Max Unger becomes a solid center and Russell Okung stays healthy. It may be that some of those guys don’t work out. Either way we’ll have to roll with the punches because this isn’t getting sorted any time soon. Enough stock and energy has been placed in the line and it’s time to let the things grow naturally. Seattle’s continuing issues on the offensive line are not going to be solved with even more first round picks.

When Sidney Rice and Zach Miller were signed, together with the investment and effort made to improve the line, I wondered if the Seahawks were creating an environment for a quarterback to at least be competitive. This was a reckless judgement on my behalf that went against everything I’ve argued in the past. Maybe I got caught up in the post-lockout euphoria coinciding with Seattle becoming big players during free agency? Whatever the cause, it was my mistake.

Tarvaris Jackson had basically no opportunity what so ever to succeed against Minnesota. Those still grumbling about Matt Hasselbeck playing elsewhere should be relieved their favorite former Seahawk isn’t faced with the situation that Jackson had last night. In fact Jackson’s ability to actually scramble away from pressure is looking more and more like a major positive, just because it at least extends the play momentarily giving him a slightly better chance than nil to make a completion or run for positive yardage. The Seahawks signed some very good players in free agency and certainly I cannot criticise the franchise for significantly upgrading several positions. Yet it comes back to the big issue I have always had with this type of rebuild. It is mind blowingly difficult to improve every single area of a team in order to create an environment fit for a fill-in quarterback to succeed.

People love to quote the New York Jets and point to Mark Sanchez as a counter. What they don’t realise is that the Jets are the poster example of the exact opposite argument. What was the first thing Rex Ryan and the Jets did upon their marriage? They made an aggressive trade to get Mark Sanchez. They then built around their quarterback, adding a number of big name veterans and developing a patented Ryan defense. Inheriting an offensive line containing two former first round picks is not ‘building’ a team before drafting a quarterback. The Jets did it the right way – get your quarterback, establish a direction and try to make his life easier. The Jets glorious success and the fact Sanchez hasn’t put up amazing numbers clouds the truth somewhat, but that’s to Ryan’s credit for doing such a great job building around his QB.

Look at New Orleans – a team going nowhere fast a few years ago. Sean Peyton arrives, the first thing they do is sign Drew Brees and establish an instant identity to build around. Championship.

The Atlanta Falcons – left with a severe Michael Vick sized hangover and awful football team, they go from bad to contender with one inspired move – drafting Matt Ryan. This enables them to play to their quarterbacks strengths and limit his weaknesses. They knew Ryan could manage a possession-based offense that controls time of possession. They get a power running back in free agency and then supply Ryan with an elite tight end, a new left tackle and most recently another dynamic weapon at receiver. Who would bet against that formula winning a Championship in the next few years?

Look across the league at the teams who have gone from bad to contending and a common theme emerges – they built an offense around their quarterback. The Seahawks appear to be doing the exact opposite.

A quarterback will make up for weaknesses elsewhere. They control so much of a game that a talented signal caller can manipulate things to his favor. A team that has invested in strength everywhere but the QB rarely bails out bad quarterbacking. It is much harder to win being great at several positions than it is to win being good at just one position – behind center.

So far the Seahawks regime has pumped two first round picks into the offensive line. They’ve made a big splash at receiver with a second round pick and a free agent grab and they’ve traded for a big name running back. They’ve gone through two offensive coordinators and two offensive line coaches. They’ve signed a tight end to a deal comparable to that awarded to Antonio Gates.

Yet at quarterback they’ve coasted along.

The trade for Whitehurst was promising in that if nothing else it was aggressive. Yet the investment has never been matched with an opportunity to prove it was all worthwhile. The only other significant move was to sign a quarterback seemingly based around the fact he was familiar with the new offensive coordinator and was mobile. That relationship between Bevell and Jackson leads me onto another grumble which I’ll come onto in a moment.

There seems to be a faceless vision for the future at quarterback. We know the Seahawks want someone who can move around in the pocket, that has been made clear. Yet when you build a team around a vision without actually committing to it’s central figure, you end up backing yourself into a corner. What if the team is well placed to draft a potential franchise quarterback who doesn’t match the criteria? Do you avoid them and prolong the agonising search? Or do you rip up the blue print and start again in spite of what you’ve built towards so far? At the moment I’m a little bit concerned that the Seahawks’ grand plan will forever be incomplete until they have ‘that guy’ at quarterback.

And to counter myself slightly I appreciate the lack of options the Seahawks have had so far regarding quarterbacks. Drafting 25th overall took the team out of any potential race for the Gabbert group this year and the 2010 class was just flat out poor. But eventually they either need to pull the trigger or they need to make things happen by being aggressive. This team will not be able to fully rebuild with stop gaps and re-treads at quarterback.

What confuses me a little is that while the Seahawks move along this off season, they appear so tied to Jackson. Where’s the competition? Isn’t that the mantra of this organisation? I understand the thinking behind backing Jackson – less time to work out the offense, his familiarity with Bevell etc etc. Even so, it seems somewhat selective and hypocritical that this isn’t an open competition. What if Whitehurst is the better guy? Is it really beyond comprehension that the much maligned Jackson isn’t the best option? Is Carroll now handcuffed to Jackson for 2011 just because of the Bevell connection? How does it relate to Sidney Rice, given how he was almost certainly recruited on the basis he would get to play with his friend?

Are we creating an environment of competition for some unless you’re a coaches favorite? Carroll has done a great job showing no defining loyalty to his USC guys, but does that extend to other coaches and their guys? If you make competition the heartbeat of the team, does it weaken the beat if it appears to be an inconsistent message?

This brings me on to the point I said I’d eventually get onto. Do the staff under Carroll have too much input on personnel?

My own view is that a NFL franchise needs a long term vision beyond it’s coaching staff because there are constant changes in that department. Appointing a General Manager is supposed to be a long term plan. Coaches tend to come and go a lot more regularly without instant success. You also have to factor in that succesful DC’s and OC’s will be poached.

When the Seahawks appointed Alex Gibbs last year, they went about making the offensive line in his vision, which Carroll agreed with. That completely changed when he abruptly departed and since then it’s changed again with Tom Cable coming in. Gibbs, Cable and Jeremy Bates have all had a go at designing a successful offensive line. Carroll wants a zone blocking scheme, but that in fairness is so vague and only scratches the surface. Why in just 12-18 months has this team lurched from one type of player to another, one ideology to another on it’s offensive line? Does there not need to be consistency and a departure from a position coaches vision to a franchise vision?

It appears Cable had strong input into the team’s two early draft picks and the signing of Robert Gallery and Zach Miller. Darrell Bevell must have had significant input into the signing of Jackson and Rice. What if in 12-24 months it’s two others trying to run Seattle’s offense? Do you start again by bringing in more favorites and changing ideas? It’s not like there hasn’t been major turnover within Carroll’s staff so far, so how can you rule such a proposition out?

The offense in fairness does seem to be being built around a master vision from Carroll, but it’s the staff below putting it together. Is that really a good idea? Of course coaches have input, but in Seattle they appear to have carte blanche.

As the Seahawks build this offense towards hopefully a productive unit, they’re going to need to roll with the punches and stay on track. Is it wrong to be slightly concerned that the major influencing factors in this personnel rebuild right now are not necessarily the team’s GM and Head Coach?