tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post822018870240268119..comments2024-01-31T17:34:09.607-08:00Comments on Seahawks Draft Blog: Updated mock draft: 22nd JanuaryRob Statonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-79110484248446276392010-04-04T01:35:45.611-07:002010-04-04T01:35:45.611-07:00bless you, sweet web-site
the easiest way to creat...bless you, sweet web-site<br />the easiest way to create blog posts that smash in your visitors:<br />http://tinyurl.com/ylpn9g8Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-43144113287900337912010-03-19T19:42:50.118-07:002010-03-19T19:42:50.118-07:00i easily enjoy your own writing choice, very attra...i easily enjoy your own writing choice, very attractive.<br />don't quit as well as keep penning since it simply nicely to follow it,<br />impatient to view even more of your current content articles, enjoy your day ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-31326960594048647842010-01-26T06:26:58.153-08:002010-01-26T06:26:58.153-08:00You may be correct about Morgan, but I didn't ...You may be correct about Morgan, but I didn't see that high a level of play from him; too, there seems to be some opinion that he has topped out. Also, DE doesn't seem high on the Bucs' radar.The semi-official website mentions a trade down to take Price or McClain; I am getting to like Rolando more & more as time goes on;I could see Rolando playing sam in a 43 defense.LBs have been great value round 1 the past few years.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08391319602253458938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-80389037540346793412010-01-25T17:40:13.517-08:002010-01-25T17:40:13.517-08:00Annonymous - the difference is though that 2010 is...Annonymous - the difference is though that 2010 is an uncapped year. Previously, the money tied up keeping an expensive rookie and a veteran would force the rookie to start. 2010 is unique because a team that is cash rich like Seattle would have no issue maintaining Clausen's salary as well as Hasselbeck's - with no cap implications.<br /><br />Nick - thanks for stopping by and posting your thoughts. Clearly Eric Berry has a lot of playmaking potential, he's dangerous with the ball in his hands. However, I just feel he might be too much of a luxury for any of the teams in the top nine picks. The Seahawks have major needs on the defensive line - there's a danger Berry will get swallowed in the mire of an exposed secondary as we've seen the last two years. The Seahawks also have huge needs on offense. Taking a safety and a linebacker with the #4 and #6 picks in back-to-back years and tying up around $100m at those positions with huge needs elsewhere would be a huge luxury Seattle can ill afford. I have reservations about Berry's all round game, I think he would be a better option at #14.<br /><br />However, I completely agree with your final paragraph. There's much to look forward to as a Seahawks fan and it's going to be a very interesting off season.Rob Statonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-86273700597486593752010-01-25T17:22:22.397-08:002010-01-25T17:22:22.397-08:00If the seahawks were to draft Clausen i think you ...If the seahawks were to draft Clausen i think you would have to start him his rookie year. In a perfect world I think you sit him, but to much money is invested in the number 6 pick for him not to start. I can't think of a QB taken that high in the last decade who didnt start his rookie season.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-69550964652013499932010-01-25T17:02:07.716-08:002010-01-25T17:02:07.716-08:00Sorry for any spelling mistakes in advance :)Sorry for any spelling mistakes in advance :)Nicknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-45636355598802299842010-01-25T17:01:00.568-08:002010-01-25T17:01:00.568-08:00Hey Rob. Solid site man, I come here every day bec...Hey Rob. Solid site man, I come here every day because I'm the biggest Hawk fan in Canada. I was wondering what everyone thinks about my two cents about the draft.<br /><br />Ever since I have started reading mocks there has always been one variable that is going to affect what happens in this draft. The St. Louis Rams. Think about it, whether they decide to pick Suh or Clausen is what is going to shake up the Hawks pick. If they take Clausen, the top defensive players will fall. If they take Suh, the quarterbacks will fall.<br /><br />In any case, I believe that if the Rams take Clausen, the Lions will take Suh, Tampa will take McCoy, Redskins will take Bradford, Kansas will take Okung and that will leave the Hawks with Eric Berry. To me, this is a fantastic pick for the Hawks. We get a play maker on defense, something we have been missing. We get a position of need and Berry can play either safety. And Berry will also be our counter to Jimmy Clausen as we will be seeing him a couple times a year.<br /><br />If however Suh is the Rams pick, this will result in McCoy going to the Lions, as Walt from Walterfootball has said that the Lions like Backus, and I agree with him. Tampa will take Berry, Redskins will take Bradford over Clausen because of Bradford's doctor being on Washington, and Kansas will take Okung. Now we land Clausen, which would be another great addition. While we do have two working Quarterbacks on the roster, we lack a long term solution. Pete missed his first chance getting him, and won't let him slip away again. He will sit for a year and take over once Matt leaves. <br /><br />Now with our bonus pick at 14, we need to take Spiller. I died a little inside every time I saw a 2 yard pass, a screen pass, or whenever Julis Jones touched the ball for that matter last year. Spiller can catch, run, and return kicks. We need people to make big plays on both sides of the ball, and in either scenario, we get two. <br /><br />Yes I did ignore the offensive tackle position. But after reading an article (on this site i believe), about Alex Gibbs turning trash into treasure with offensive lineman, I think the position will be filled later in the draft.<br /><br />As for DE or any other needs, the Seahawks will go out and grab one in free agency. I hope they nab Brandon Marshall too. Could you imagine Marshall with Pete's attitude?<br /><br />The future is bright everyone. Think about every time someone laughed at you for being a Seahawks fan or talked about how horrible they were. The sky is the limit here people. It may take some time but we are certainly headed in the right direction. Sit back and enjoy the ride to the top. There is no better time to be a Seahawks fan.Nicknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-19915714500594152222010-01-25T16:25:19.084-08:002010-01-25T16:25:19.084-08:00I think the Seahawks have too many needs to spend ...I think the Seahawks have too many needs to spend $60m on a safety. Berry is a good player, but he's a luxury. You're investing in his ability with the ball in his hands - that to me isn't for a 5-11 team in a major rebuild with serious question marks at OL, DL, QB, WR, RB, CB. He'd have to convince me he can lay cornerback at a high level to justify that pick.<br /><br />Not a Jonathan Dwyer fan at all. Over weight, lacks any kind of burst. Not a power back - he gets that reputation for his size not his play. Just doesn't do anything for me and playing in a triple option offense has inflated his stats to the max. I'd consider him in rounds 4-5.<br /><br />I would also disagree with the QB situation. The idea isn't to draft a QB then start them as a rookie with a lack of weapons, O-line. You draft the rookie and sit them for a year or two, develop the rest of the team and coach up the young signal caller - then put him in the team prepared and in a better situation. That's what GB did with Rodgers and it's paying dividends. The longer Seattle waits to draft a QB, the more likely they have to start a rookie. In any situation, that isn't ideal - you'd need to be borderline elite on defense and running game.Rob Statonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-12344537445404562052010-01-25T14:21:53.919-08:002010-01-25T14:21:53.919-08:00Since poor defensive line play caused the secondar...Since poor defensive line play caused the secondary to give up so many yards I would think that a DL would be first choice. But I don't think Seattle passes on Berry. They need a safety. QB or maybe OL at 14 would make sense. I also could see a RB at 14 or maybe round 2. I would love to see them get Dwyer in round 2. I'm not sold on Clausen and investing a high 1st round pick on that position behind a poor OL with no playmakers on the outside and so so running backs is not wise in my opinion.DBWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14435174679496206337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-77371483751454770212010-01-24T15:23:30.715-08:002010-01-24T15:23:30.715-08:00I would be extremely surprised - stunned even - if...I would be extremely surprised - stunned even - if the Browns trade for Hasselbeck, even with Holmgren running the show. I just don't see a team giving up anything like a third round pick for a 35 year old QB coming off injuries. They might be interested if he was a free agent, but in terms of a trade - I'm not sure they could offer a temptin deal. It's a pretty lazy rumor based on the Holmgren-Hasselbeck ties but I just can't see it. I think Seattle will run Hasselbeck this year whatever happens in the draft and then obviously he's set to be a free agent.<br /><br />It's important to remember with Teel - he was drafted by Tim Ruskell. There's no links to the new regime. He'll go to camp and work out, but he'll have to fight for a roster spot.Rob Statonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-15260560479952047492010-01-24T15:01:17.824-08:002010-01-24T15:01:17.824-08:00What about the rumor that Holmgren brings Matt to ...What about the rumor that Holmgren brings Matt to Cleveland? This scenarion makes sense to me as he could not adjust to the new offensive scheme. He works well with Mike H and PC probably would like to groom someone younger. Seneca still gives the Hawks a veteran for a year allowing the younger guy to develop. Cleveland has two picks in round three so they could offer the Seahawks a good package. <br /><br />Is there any word on Mike Teel? I thought he was the project at QB?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-76500364863189189642010-01-24T14:59:43.831-08:002010-01-24T14:59:43.831-08:00Brandin - you'd be surprised how often an offe...Brandin - you'd be surprised how often an offensive minded coach picks defensive guys and vice versa. They often think they can coach up defensive talent and need to concentrate on the other side of the ball.<br /><br />Case in point? Rex Ryan and Mark Sanchez/Shonn Greene last year. You don't get more defensive than Ryan and they actually traded up to get both those guys.Rob Statonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-15847686825816167152010-01-24T14:28:16.097-08:002010-01-24T14:28:16.097-08:00Caroll is a defensive minded coach and i dont thin...Caroll is a defensive minded coach and i dont think they'll take a qb for the first pick. i can see him taking berry, derrick morgan as a first pick and than going some position on offense.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05932913174879805744noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-60713305103936400442010-01-24T09:02:48.012-08:002010-01-24T09:02:48.012-08:00Agree with Niners taking an OT and Spiller...but I...Agree with Niners taking an OT and Spiller...but I believe the order will be reversed and the OT will be Bulaga or Anthony Davis instead of Trent Williams. If Spiller's gone, then CB Donovan Warren would be a great pick. Even with Nate Clements expected back with a restructured contract, Singletary understands he can't have too many good CB's in his division. Coach can still get an impact KR in the <br />2nd or even 3rd rd.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-2491074110047103222010-01-24T07:14:20.029-08:002010-01-24T07:14:20.029-08:00Daryll Tapp is underrated. Mebane needs a wingman!...Daryll Tapp is underrated. Mebane needs a wingman!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-4507826551720038472010-01-23T20:42:44.771-08:002010-01-23T20:42:44.771-08:00Just listened to that KJR post by Kip, and I think...Just listened to that KJR post by Kip, and I think you are right. One will definately go offense.<br /><br />I think the Hawks have to be careful with JPP. He reminds me WAY too much of Vernon Ghoulston, who never panned out. Granted he wouldn't be asked to make a complete change of DE to 3-4 OLB but JPP would be a very small 4-3 DE. <br /><br /><br />Carroll's comments on using 3-4 personel in a 4-3 scheme could prove invaluable. But Curry is better suited for playing in space, and I would rather see a true 4-3 DE like Morgan/Dunlap.Vince Mulcahynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-77173747562452646372010-01-23T20:02:15.304-08:002010-01-23T20:02:15.304-08:00The obvious strength in this draft is on defense, ...The obvious strength in this draft is on defense, so it wouldn't surprise me. You can't ignore a talent like Gerald McCoy if he falls.<br /><br />I think the Seahawks would like to invest at least one of those first round picks on offense. As a defensive coach, I think Pete Carroll will believe he can get more out of your Aaron Curry's, Darryl Tapp's, Brandon Mebane's etc, but he might think that to be succesful at any level the offense will need to be rebuilt. However, if McCoy is there at #6 I think you cannot ignore taking him. Then at #14, well - you aren't going to make any major reaches. If a top defensive end is on the board (Morgan, JPP, Griffen) or a cornerback like Joe Haden - again, you might have to spend that pick on the defensive talent. It's not unlikely that both picks go defense, but as I say I think they'd ideally like at least one and possibly both to go on the offense.Rob Statonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-69579132915781137292010-01-23T19:35:33.640-08:002010-01-23T19:35:33.640-08:00Agreed, you have to look at Clausen. Just like any...Agreed, you have to look at Clausen. Just like any prospect, put him on the board and see where the organization would feel comfortable drafting him.<br /><br />How would you feel about taking two defensive players? Going back to laying a foundation around the QB position (regardless of who it is) and trying to build a team like MN that you can essentially plug a QB in and win games.<br /><br /><br />Personally I would like to see a version of the ball hawking defense of 07 when we only allowed 15 passing TD all season. Whether the 6th/14th pick could be:<br /><br />Morgan/Earl Thomas<br />Berry/Dunlap<br />McCoy*/Mays<br /><br />*A reach but something like this could make McCoy fall:<br /><br />STL: Clausen- QB is a glaring need with a great RB and some high pick O-linemen.<br /><br />DET: Okung (or Davis)- Stafford was a $70 million investment, and Okung would be the insurance policy.<br /><br />TB: Berry- Even with a potential wrap up issue, people have questioned Ed Reed's tackling and he has seen a pro bowl or two.<br /><br />WAS: Bradford- DC's fans are going to run Campbell out of there. And Shanahan likes developing QBs.<br /><br />KC: Davis (or Okung)- Same reasoning as Detroit. If you pay a QB to throw the ball he has to have some time.<br /><br />SEA: McCoy- maybe a stretch, but the team needs are there for the top 5 picks.Vince Mulcahynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-13524719722372613952010-01-23T19:04:29.628-08:002010-01-23T19:04:29.628-08:00Vince - absolutely love the debate. The blog is at...Vince - absolutely love the debate. The blog is at it's best when the comments are pouring in and we can have a healthy discussion. I appreciate every comment, positive or negative, in agreement or disagreement. Thank you also for the kind words about the blog.<br /><br />I think they have to look at Clausen and Bradford and ask whether that is the direction they want to go. The purpose really of this mock is to represent that it is a possibility that they'll make that decision. Unquestionably for me, their is every possibility they'll look at Jimmy Clausen and think he can be a productive NFL quarterback. It would be wrong for me to only focus on the negatives in Clausen's game on the blog, when clearly quarterbacks with similar issues have been succesful.<br /><br />But at the same time, I also appreciate that they'll potentially see those concerns and pass. I've portrayed that possibility in my previous mocks. That is a possibility too, of course.<br /><br />But I wouldn't rule either out at this stage.Rob Statonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-81428718345762352652010-01-23T18:58:13.339-08:002010-01-23T18:58:13.339-08:00Good point John: Rob I too hope that you enjoy an ...Good point John: Rob I too hope that you enjoy an intelligent debate, and find every aspect of our Hawks worth talking about. And I want to challenge your opinion, but respect what you have done with SDB. One of the best sites regarding the Seahawks and your imediate responses are awesome!<br /><br />And I agree that FA is going to be some what of a non-factor this offseason. So we are basically building from the draft and I just don't see the value in drafting a QB and sitting him on the bench when we have Hass who a lot of people are questioning. I would hate to see a Josh Freeman in Seattle, in the sense that if Matt threw another couple 3 pick games would the coaches be forced to start the rookie? With our current roster that is almost guarenteed career suicide.<br /><br />If I were Carroll/Schneider, and believed I had a long term job, I would basically go off my draft board and take the BPA. When a team has so many holes we eventually need to fill them anyways, so why not take the best? <br /><br />Rob you have done a good job explaining that we can't just look at the best player available in this years draft class, but we have to compare Clausen/Bradford to future classes as well. If we aren't set on his play than we cannot reach with the amount of money you are talking about at 6.Vince Mulcahynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-41699937866838006592010-01-23T18:12:52.950-08:002010-01-23T18:12:52.950-08:00Fair points overall, Vince. As for free agency - I...Fair points overall, Vince. As for free agency - I doubt many teams are able to do much this off season. It's pretty restrictive because of the uncapped year. The teams that competed in the playoffs last week aren't able to sign anyone unless they lose players of a similar value in free agency. It seems likely most teams will tag their most valued players and build through the draft. What it does mean though, is we might see more trades for players/picks. Teams with big needs might be more willing to move up to take them and teams might be willing to fill holes by giving up picks for players. So it could be interesting in that sense even if free agency is a bit tame.<br /><br />John - absolutely enjoying the debate. I think it would be fair to say that Favre and Hasselbeck are two very different quarterbacks. Whilst I completely agree that Hasselbeck can be servicable with a great supporting cast, he's verging into 'game manager' territory even as a 35 year old to be. Favre has that element of magic about him, being able to make the impossible play. I genuinly believe he could carry on well into his 40's (injury permitting) and still be a pro-active force rather than a 'keep things ticking over' type. It helps though, that he's signed for a Vikings team with a great defensive line, great offensive line, great running back and playmakers at receiver.<br /><br />Seattle won't be afforded the luxury of creating that for Hasselbeck. It could take a year or two, and then you're looking at a 37-38 year old QB who would've had to be extended beyond 2010.<br /><br />I also believe that if all parties wanted to get it done, they could keep Hasselbeck and a rookie beyond 2011 if they wished. I'm not sure there'd be a huge market for a 36 year old QB. I'm not sure Hasselbeck would need the extra $2-3m to have to move his entire family away from the Northwest. A modest one year deal could be agreed to allow Hasselbeck to have another year starting. I could see that happening.<br /><br />I wouldn't say it won't happen with regard taking a QB early and as I maintain, there is good reason for it. More than anything else, a poor situation at QB will hold back the Seahawks. Any quarterback taken early will come with an element of risk. Any rookie 'period' carries a risk. If they feel that the positives outweight the negatives with Bradford/Clausen and that either can make an offense tick, they have to consider them.Rob Statonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-33921108984031949142010-01-23T17:50:37.644-08:002010-01-23T17:50:37.644-08:00Rob, Thanks for discussing. Hope you are enjoying ...Rob, Thanks for discussing. Hope you are enjoying it as much as I am.<br /><br />The statement you made about Hasselbeck/Holmgren was the same thing they said about Favre after Holmgren left. Favre took a turn for the worse that season. Funny how it has turned around completely and more people are now wondering what Holmgren can do without Favre.<br /><br />What we saw from Favre then is what a good QB looks like without any help from the rest of his offense. Since then we have learned far different about Favre and his ability to succeed if he has enough help around him.<br /><br />No one anywhere near the Seahawks makes any claims for the rest of the offense giving Hasselbeck any kind of reasonable help the last few seasons, yet somehow people don't factor this in when looking at his performance. Big mistake.<br /><br />And picking a shaky QB prospect high in the draft is not just a risk, it's risking it all. If they sign a high draft pick QB, they *can't* resign Hass and they can't really develop anyone else. So both their pro careers depend on that guy working out. Huge, huge risk, for no good reason. Won't happen.JohnnyBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05480622074021055014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-3512404401368518172010-01-23T17:43:21.465-08:002010-01-23T17:43:21.465-08:00Rob,
I completely agree that 12th is still a high...Rob,<br /><br />I completely agree that 12th is still a high pick, but the difference in pay between 1-5 and 12 is a big drop. Just ask Crabtree lol.<br /><br />But saying Atlanta had a poor defense? I'm not sure what you are basing that off of but the two most important stats are points allowed and your W-L record. Atlanta was 11th for defense PPG, and 11-5.<br /><br /><br />And are we talking about the same Balitmore Ravens? Yes they had a bad year in 07 but their defense has been stout (that was down year but you definately have to place some of that blame on the offense not being able to move the chains at all). Also note that Ray Rice only ran for 450 yards his rookie season, the run game was featuring Willis McGahee and LeRon McClain.<br /><br />Because college programs are getting more and more advanced, players are able to step into a full time starting job in the NFL. There is no reason a qb can't do the same. I agree that running a rookie qb is a risk, but so is starting a rookie in any position. And yes the qb is the most difficult position to play you said yourself that the new FO are going to not necessarily be turned off just because of risk.<br /><br />But I don't see us doing a whole lot in free agency. Scheider was big in building a team from the draft and I'm not so sure that is a bad thing, or will change.Vince Mulcahynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-60145754478414306442010-01-23T17:02:06.501-08:002010-01-23T17:02:06.501-08:00I think it's slightly ambitious to suggest the...I think it's slightly ambitious to suggest the Seahawks will find 'reasonably' high level of QB play over the next few years relying on Hasselbeck and Wallace. I'm a big fan of Matt Hasselbeck. But he'll be 35 this year. With the greatest respect to Matt, I do have concerns about his play since Holmgren left. Yes - it hasn't helped playing behind a porous line with very little in terms of playmakers on the roster. But he's started to do things he'd never do with a seething Holmgren waiting on the sideline. Hasselbeck was always a timing QB who worked well in the Holmgren system - I need to be convinced that at 35, having suffered a string of injuries, that he's capable of adapting and playing in another offensive scheme. He'll be the starter in 2010 and no doubt has the chance to prove that yes, he can adapt and prolong his career. However - if he struggles again, and with his contract expiring after 2010, he's no shoe in to remain with the franchise beyond even next year. Even if he does well in 2010, I think it's highly ambitious to expect he can be productive for '3-4 years'. In four years, he'll be approaching his 39th birthday. <br /><br />With regard to Wallace, I have little faith in his ability to be a starting quarterback in the NFL. I've not seen anything that suggests he'll offer 'reasonably high' levels of QB play if Matt did leave the team.<br /><br />You rightly say that I've pointed out issues with regard to Clausen and Bradford. That is true - and I'm not saying that the Seahawks 'have to' take those guys. Don't get me wrong though, there are positives with both prospects too. If they believe that Clausen/Bradford can make the offense tick - they have to consider them. That's all I'm trying to represent in this mock, because I do think the Seahawks need a quarterback solution long term. They may well not have the chance to draft Clausen or Bradford. They may pass on one or both. But the longer they wait to draft the next QB of this team, the increased likelihood they'll have to start a rookie down the line. I feel this is the last chance really to bring in a guy and sit them behind a veteran for a minimum of one year.<br /><br />It's funny you should mention Rivers though, because I do see similarities between him and Clausen. From a technique point of view, they are incredibly alike. I would have said the same things about Rivers on this blog that I say about Clausen. Side arm action, not a huge arm, do throw passes up for grabs sometimes. But if anything, Rivers is the reason not to write off Clausen as a potential top 10 pick.<br /><br />I also believe that this new regime won't be concerned with making 'safe' picks to avoid risks. I'm not suggesting they'll be reckless, but I certainly believe that Pete Carroll won't be scared to take on a project or roll the dice on a young quarterback. If anything, he could be the 'anti-Ruskell' in that sense. I don't think the risk factor will be an issue.Rob Statonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16481945325907207562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5053006193215777292.post-43604108893834409372010-01-23T16:27:17.436-08:002010-01-23T16:27:17.436-08:00I never said the Seahawks consider the QB situatio...I never said the Seahawks consider the QB situation set long term, I said they are not desperate, which is another way of saying they think things are fine, *short term.* They will likely have a reasonably high level of play at QB in the next few years with what they already have. Hard to argue that.<br /><br />Both of the QBs who might go high in this draft have *serious* issues as you yourself have pointed out. This means that taking either of them high in the draft is a much higher risk than picking a, say, Peyton Manning or Phillip Rivers high in the draft. Hard to argue that either. So the only team who should take one of them high in the draft is a team who is desperate for a QB ASAP, like the Rams.<br /><br />If Hasselbeck is reasonably protected it's easy to see him succeeding for another three or four years. Same with Wallace. This means the Seahawks have at least two more offseasons after this one to find QB of the future and still have him sit for one season.<br /><br />Compare that strategy to being the new Seahawk GM or coach, picking Bradford or Clausen instead of a lower risk pick, and having your career hinge on the success of that one guy. Are you really going to do it? No way.JohnnyBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05480622074021055014noreply@blogger.com