Spohawk5092 wrote:but it shouldn't. If we had won the games we should have this season, we wouldn't be as dependent. I give the Cards little to no chance here.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I have no interest in the playoffs. Just dropping draft position to be a non-contender. I don't care who wins the Rams-Card game. As far as I'm concerned, our season is over and has been for some time. I hope John is planning for the draft as he has a lot of work to do to make this team a real contender. It's been 10 years since we were real contenders.
As far as I'm concerned, I want to fast forward to the draft. If John continues to draft badly, he needs to go. I have reached the point of fatigue watching this team barely make the playoffs and do nothing against the better teams in the league due to a low talent base and a more bad teams than good in the NFL. Being a middling team is nearly as bad as being a bad team as the result at the end of the year is the same and you also don't get much in draft position.
This team needs a lot of work. It especially needs an upgrade at QB and interior O-line.
Not even sure I like Grubb as OC. Seems far too committed to the pass for my tastes. Racks up more passing yards, doesn't seem to rack up more TDs.
Main positive for me from this year is Mike MacDonald does seem to have greatly improved the defense. I figure with more development time, we will have a strong defense again even against good teams. Mike needs better players and maybe a different OC and a talent infusion on offense. Geno will never lead a contending team. If we are keeping him around to be a mediocre, middling contender, then pull the bandaid off and get rid of Geno, crash and burn, get someone better with higher draft position.
NorthHawk wrote:It seems to me that a higher draft slot will be better for the 2nd and later picks and not much for the 1st round this year.
I think this draft has a limited number of top end players, but the middle to late 1st rounders could be players that are solid players at positions that don't usually go early. We are in need of those types like Guards and Centers along with LBs and TE's so just maybe this draft can fit what we need. I think the bulk of the QBs are 2nd or later talents so maybe there's one that catches Schneider's eye and we might take him. QBs are usually drafted higher than they should but I think after the Sanders and Ward types it seems that there is a significant dropoff. There are probably some good RBs to be found in the 3rd and 4th so we might let Walker go or trade him as his value behind a bad OL isn't being used and it would permit JS to not re-sign him.
There are probably some good WRs, too in the mid rounds should they think they need an addition if they let Lockett go or maybe even DK to save Cap space.
For us to draft a Guard or Center early, JS would have to break his pattern of bypassing talent and earnestly address the OL problem.
I think we're a few drafts and a starting QB away from contention. I don't mean barely making the playoffs with near zero chance of a Super Bowl. I mean drafting a competitive starting QB who can win consistently even against other strong teams and making it to the Conference championship and a Super Bowl.
What would suck is having a few bad few years with bad drafts, seeing Schneider and then MacDonald fired, then heading into the limbo of non-competitive ineptness you see on so many teams in the NFL. Noncompetitive indefinitely with no light at the end of the tunnel in sight. It's all going to come down to if Schneider can draft a starting QB for MacDonald's coaching era. If he can, then MacDonald has a chance of succeeding and if he can't, then MacDonald likely doesn't succeed and we're in that dark non-competitive limbo.
One thing is clearly obvious after the last few years: Geno isn't a competitive starting QB. He had the one year that made him look like a fugazi starter and has come back down to the backup level he is.
Aseahawkfan wrote:If Field Gulls is right, with Buffalo, Minnesota, and Washington winning, the last game is meaningless.
If that proves to be true, I'd sit Geno and see what we have in Howell with preparation. That will provide more information on how to move forward at the QB position. Keep believing Geno can be "The Man" with a better O-line with his backup level production from year to year or go with a much cheaper Howell for similar production and see what happens then see what's in the draft.
Aseahawkfan wrote:If Field Gulls is right, with Buffalo, Minnesota, and Washington winning, the last game is meaningless.
If that proves to be true, I'd sit Geno and see what we have in Howell with preparation. That will provide more information on how to move forward at the QB position. Keep believing Geno can be "The Man" with a better O-line with his backup level production from year to year or go with a much cheaper Howell for similar production and see what happens then see what's in the draft.
Oly wrote:I'm 100% with you, but it's a much bigger decision. Geno is within pretty easy reach of something like $6M in incentives, and if they bench him, the locker room might get pretty pissed. When it comes to hitting escalators in contracts, players usually have each other's backs. With Geno's good locker room reputation, benching him could lead to a bigger problem. I'm still for benching him though. He's not the future so I don't really want to tie up $6M more of our cap next year in a bridge-at-best QB when we should be using it to attract some better OL.
River Dog wrote:Good point about the incentives angle. It's something that I wasn't even aware of.
However, I'd still be reluctant to sit Geno not only for what you mentioned, but the whole thing about not trying to win. I don't like the message it sends. It's one thing to set someone who is nursing injuries but simply turning it into a glorified preseason game isn't something that will build a winning culture. I don't think the scant info on your backup QB that could be gleaned from one game is worth the damage that could be done to team psyche. Players are competitive and like winning even if it doesn't have any bearing on the playoffs. You don't want to make it too business-like.
River Dog wrote:Good point about the incentives angle. It's something that I wasn't even aware of.
However, I'd still be reluctant to sit Geno not only for what you mentioned, but the whole thing about not trying to win. I don't like the message it sends. It's one thing to set someone who is nursing injuries but simply turning it into a glorified preseason game isn't something that will build a winning culture. I don't think the scant info on your backup QB that could be gleaned from one game is worth the damage that could be done to team psyche. Players are competitive and like winning even if it doesn't have any bearing on the playoffs. You don't want to make it too business-like.
Aseahawkfan wrote:If I were GM, I would manage it like a business with the goal of real contention with cycles based on the quality of the QB and the talent. Why? Because that's how the NFL is built to work, intentionally.
People with this, "You'll teach the players to lose" rubbish don't want to accept how the real NFL works. You have to allow for major downside drops so you can draft quality talent. It's an expected part of the cycle built into the system. The number of years you contend is built around the quality of your QB and the talent you surround him with in the modern era. Sure, you can have some one offs with an amazing defense like Baltimore or Tampa Bay in the 2000s, but perennial contenders have high quality, dominant QBs with quality head coaches and as much quality talent as you can surround them with.
A GM should be able to go, "I need to assess this backup Howell. Geno is not the long-term answer at QB. I need to know if Howell can replace him while I cut cap to set up for the next competitive cycle." You do this without telling the head coach to lose. Rather you want him to evaluate and set up the QB to see if they can do the job at a replacement level for less money than your overpaid backup QB that you have starting.
There is nothing that makes me more unhappy than to see a GM and head coach who are bad at talent evaluation. I have known for years and it was made me want to move on from Pete that this team has a low talent base. It's talent base is still lacking. There needs to be strong, strong accountability during a rebuild cycle for poor performance as in cut them loose and take a bit losing season before you tolerate some mediocre middle performance that doesn't set you up in the draft or make you a real contender. That is mediocre purgatory, almost as bad as being eternally bad.
It's where we've been for ten years now. Mediocre Purgatory where your fanbase is just happy to make the playoffs and be one and done hoping for some miracle run that happens once in a blue moon rather than just going into full rebuild mode, crashing a few seasons, and getting some high end talent infusions to your team.
Another ten years of one and done playoffs pretender contention is what we've had most of this franchise's history until Paul Allen came. With him gone, it's looking like we're heading back to middling contention if John Schneider doesn't start showing he knows how to build and manage a team meaning knowing when you have a non-competitive talent base with a non-contending QB that needs to be kicked loose until you let competition find a high upside QB you can build the next contending cycle around.
That's how the NFL works. Wasting time with middle tier QBs is what puts teams in bad to mediocre purgatory of non-contention or pretender contention where the fan base becomes used to watching one and done playoff runs.
Screw that. Ten years of it is enough. I want a real contending team built which means going younger at QB and pushing competition at that position until someone comes out on top.
River Dog wrote:It doesn't sound like Mike Macdonald is subscribing to your philosophy:
Seattle Seahawks head coach Mike Macdonald said the team doesn't plan on playing backup quarterback Sam Howell in their Week 18 regular-season finale on Sunday against the division-rival Los Angeles Rams.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/se ... ngNewsSerp
For Booker, who switched from offensive tackle to guard early in the season, he is one of the more nasty players you will come to find in the trenches. He thrives in the run game and has made strides in pass protection since sliding inside.
NorthHawk wrote:MacDonald (and his Coordinators) and Schneider have to agree on a plan for it to work. GMs don't acquire players in isolation and then say ' Here, coach em up'.
So they have to agree on what qualities and skills the players they want have then go after them. IF they can get the players they want then the plan can be fully implemented. However, this happens rarely and we were the beneficiaries of it early on the in the Carroll/Schneider era with fantastic results. If they can't get the players they want, then the next FA and Draft will be the next attempt.
This is where the team identity comes in and I don't think we've done that in a long time. JS talked about returning to being the bully on the field then drafted skill and finesse players along with signing FA's that were on their last years or were cheap backups to fill the holes. So to me, this will be a defining draft for JS on his own. If he doesn't get this right or at least get on track towards that end, it could be his last chance in Seattle. The ownership got rid of Carroll so it seems there are some expected results but what we don't know is how much time to give him is in the ownerships minds.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests