Ben Standig has produced an interesting article in the Athletic today. He polled NFL agents on a variety of topics to assess their views of each franchise. There are two things I wanted to focus on from a Seahawks perspective.

Firstly, there was a ton of praise for John Schneider. He was voted joint-best talent evaluator among GM’s (alongside Kansas City’s Brett Veach). He also finished fourth in a list for ‘best overall GM’ — half a vote behind Detroit’s Brad Holmes and two votes behind Veach and Philadelphia’s Howie Roseman.

Do not underestimate the benefit of having such a highly respected GM in charge of the Seahawks. You might disagree with some of Schneider’s decisions. You might linger on mistakes, or issues not addressed. However, this is a very difficult role to fill within an organisation. The Seahawks have a proven, respected man at the helm.

I think there are a couple of key examples, too, to justify the lofty praise. Firstly, while the last few years may feel somewhat squandered, we may well discover in the coming weeks that this was a coaching/development issue beyond the GM’s control. Derick Hall already looks like a different player under Mike Macdonald as a case in point. Secondly, let’s not lose sight that the GM in charge during the LOB years was Schneider. He helped create a legendary roster and find a franchise quarterback to cap things off in round three.

There have been misses too — such as the Jamal Adams trade and some whiffed high picks. But it’s clear Schneider’s evaluating skills are highly regarded and no GM has a perfect record on trades and picks.

I’d also remind people that on the day Kansas City drafted Patrick Mahomes, it was made very clear via the main national reporters covering the NFL that Schneider was a big fan:

It’s not often a GM or a team goes out of its way to let the world know they rated a player and would’ve drafted him in round one if possible, despite the fact they already had a bona fide franchise quarterback under contract. Further to this, Mahomes wasn’t seen as a ‘sure thing’. A lot of the mock drafts, as we’ve discussed on this blog, had him as a late first or second rounder. He wasn’t included in Daniel Jeremiah’s top-50 list in advance of the draft.

Schneider anticipated Mahomes’ greatness and was proven right. The hope has to be that he has a similar hunch in the near future about a young signal caller and is able to claim them.

If Schneider can find two young franchise quarterbacks during his Seahawks run, it’ll be quite an achievement.

There are other things that need to be addressed too. Why has it been so hard for the Seahawks to find any semblance of consistency and success on the offensive line? Can that change moving forward? Fixing this unit will be of near equal importance for the long-term.

Overall though Schneider has been a huge success for the Seahawks, deserves to be regarded highly in the Athletic article and deserved to lead the franchise into the post-Pete Carroll era. The decision on Carroll’s replacement, so far, looks like an inspired choice.

The anonymous quotes in the article praising Schneider are as follows:

“He’s a football guy and an outstanding talent evaluator with conviction about how to run a program. Good communicator.”

“Schneider is the GM, the best talent evaluator and very respected. Look at the front-office staffers hired away from Seattle by other teams — there is more to come. John hasn’t changed since he was a scout and avoids changing his evaluation methods for trendy takes.”

“Schneider is a man of great character. He communicates well, is a heck of an evaluator and is a leader. He tries to work out situations with the player and agent.”

On a less positive note, the Seahawks didn’t receive a single vote in the poll for ‘best run franchise’. 14 teams received votes but nobody went for Seattle. For context, they were not listed among the eight teams labelled ‘most unstable’ either. However, if I was working within the organisation I’d at least be a little miffed by the exclusion on the ‘best run’ list and would be working out how that could change for next year’s poll.

Of course, it’s not just about trying to satisfy agents so that they give you praise. It might be more healthy for them to feel less inclined to vote for you in a ‘best’ poll. However, the 49ers were praised for ‘The way they treat people and don’t skimp on expenses’. The Eagles were credited for, ‘Every year, free agents want to go there. They reward players, and (GM) Howie (Roseman) nails the draft’. The Chiefs were praised for having, ‘a Hall of Fame coach and GM, QB, tight end and ownership’. It was noted that Miami finished first in the NFLPA report cards (Seattle received very average grades, including only a ‘C’ for treatment of families, training staff and their training room), that the Ravens have a highly successful team and a family-organization approach, that the Vikings have ‘great facilities’ and that the Steelers and Packers are traditionally well run.

Is it just a case of only being able to vote for one team and getting lost among several options? Or are there things the Seahawks can still do better — despite clearly having an extremely well respected GM?