Seahawks Insider

Hawks show QB Whitehurst the money

Post by Eric Williams on March 17, 2010 at 3:39 pm with 72 Comments »
March 17, 2010 3:59 pm

Wow.

San Diego free agent Charlie Whitehurst will be paid handsomely to be the Seattle Seahawks backup quarterback, and may be in Seattle’s plans sooner rather than later considering what the Seahawks gave up to get him and how much he will make in Seattle.

According to a report from ESPN, the Seahawks will swap second-round picks with the Chargers, giving up the team’s 40th overall pick in the second round for San Diego’s second-round pick in the 60s. Seattle also gave up the team’s third-round pick n 2011.

All for a the fourth-year pro out of Clemson who has not thrown a regular-season pass in the NFL.

And according to the report, they’ll pay Whitehurst $5 million annually for the next two years.

So the move would appear to lessen the likelihood of the Seahawks selecting a quarterback early in this year’s draft, as they appear to have put all their chips in Whitehurst becoming the team’s quarterback of the future.

We’re still seeking word from the team on the deal.

Here’s a link to some highlights of Whitehurst during his playing days at Clemson. I’d link to some NFL highlights, but I can’t find any video to Whitehurst playing in preseason games.

Categories:
NFL free agency
Leave a comment Comments → 72
  1. hambone08 says:

    This is ludicrous, please let this be an early April Fool’s Day prank…

  2. I wonder if the new regime is going to try to build an OL? They can’t be that dumb, can they? Wait. Maybe you shouldn’t comment on that.

  3. chuck_easton says:

    What’s the problem?

    When Seattle traded for Hasselbeck he was 26 years old was buried on the depth chart in GB behind Favre and had never thrown a regular season pass.

    Whitehurst will be 28 in August, he’s buried on the depth chart behind Phillip Rivers (pro-bowler and Franchise QB).

    Matt is 6′ 4″ and 225 lbs.
    Charlie is 6′ 4″ 220 lbs.

    Charlie is supposedly more mobile than Matt and faster.

    If (big IF here) Charlie can develop the way Matt did this will look like a steal in 8 years or so.

  4. Eric, you’re going a bit far in terms of saying “all their chips.” Not even close.

  5. Wow, this makes no sense… way too much to give up for someone who is a short term fix, but if they think he’s the future, why only a two year deal? Leads me to believe they have a trade worked out for Hasselbeck. Starting Hass this year and Whitehurst next year would mean we’re only getting one season out of this trade.

  6. Southendzone says:

    Not considering the $ in the contract, this seems like a big-time overpayment in terms of trade value. At least the 3rd round pick is next year where the lockout will be in effect so it’s not as bad.

    Don’t know a thing about this QB, at least there’s some hope.

  7. At least I don’t have to worry about us drafting a Notre Dame QB in a month.

  8. Pat_riot says:

    Wow.. the last two years of darkness were just the beginning it seems.. there are many long years of sucking ahead.. thanks PC!!

  9. chrisj122 says:

    Only time will tell how this trade works out. But i do recall being really upset when we traded for Hass and signed him to a big contract at the time he was totally unproven and now Matt is my all time favorite Hawk. That is saying alot cause i was kid growing up watching Steve Largent.

  10. sugashack says:

    Agree with your take, chuck, but the price does still seem to be quite high. That being said, PC has had some pretty decent QBs at USC so *maybe* he does have an eye for QB talent. To be honest, I could think of a lot worse places to be at QB (e.g. Seneca still being our 2nd string QB). Bad thing about giving up that pick is I was hoping we could pick up Best with that pick but I know they are interested in Dwyer as well. Still good RB talent to be had with that pick. Pray for at least one O-line draft choice in the first round and I wouldn’t be opposed to two…

  11. Dukeshire says:

    The one significant difference to me is Holmgren. He drafted Matt and knew him. He knew who he was trading for even if we didn’t. Holmgren’s background, developing and working with QBs, is his forte. None of these things can be said about Carroll. That’s why, for me, there is a great deal of trepidation. But he’s here and I’m in. I sincerely hope he isn’t as gangly and awkward in reality as I remember him looking last August in San Diego during the pre-season game. Bernie Kosar comes to mind.

  12. Pat_riot says:

    True.. at least that means we won’t have Clausen.. TG! there isn’t any moves that make any kind of logical sense thus far with this regime though.. I sure hope I see some light in all this mayhem before camp opens up!

  13. We just signed a guy who has a cannon arm, good speed, quick release, accuracy, and four years mentoring him under one of the best in Norv Turner and behind a pro bowler. Get a grip! The dude is ready to start and we’re paying him less than one of the top QBs in the draft this year. CW has obvious talent or he wouldn’t have been in the league this long in the San Diego system. The chance that one of the top QBs drafted this year will bust is about 50%. The chance that this guy will bust is considerably less because he’s been in a very relaxed situation in a great organization.

  14. chuck_easton says:

    Keep in mind that I am a MATTHEW HASSELBECK fan. I own only one Seahawks Jersey and it has #8 on it. I think Matty is the best QB Seattle has ever had. I don’t think he’s HOF material but I would pick him over 90% of the starting QB’s in the league right now.

    With that said I’m willing to give Charlie the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

  15. A big reason why a lot of top QBs bust is because they walk into a bad situation, bad coaching, and they get ruined by being thrown into action too soon. That’s not what’s happening here. And, $5 mil a year is chump change for a good starting QB.

  16. chrisj122 says:

    I have hope this will all work out but if Matt gets traded i will cry a little girl with a skined knee!

  17. BenderHawkFan says:

    Well, he has mighty purdy hair, and that has to stand for something uh?

    Welcome aboard matey!!

  18. BenderHawkFan says:

    Now we just need to figure out a trade for Q. Latifa…we’d be set at LT for years.

  19. chuck_easton says:

    And with that first name he’s got to be a real standup and all around good type of guy!

    (Though my nickname has always been chuckie and not charlie…so when somebody tries to insult me by calling me chuckie it just doesn’t have the impact they think it will).

  20. We have more reason to believe CW will be succesful than we do any of the QBs in this year’s draft class. He has a longer resume than any of the guys getting drafted next month and he has four years of grooming under his belt. It’s not his fault he’s had so much talent in front of him in SD. But, that’s good for us because he’s learned a lot in the past four years. How much better at a job were you out of college? This is a terrific move!

  21. chrisj122 says:

    After a few years and a lot of hits his head will be just as shiney as Hasselbeck’s.

  22. BenderHawkFan says:

    Audible-

    Thanks for injecting some sensibility into the convo. Way smaller gamble than Clausen, and yeah…what audible said.

  23. mkelly534 says:

    Pete Carrol has also developed QBs (Sanchez/Palmer/Lienhart) and worked in Southern Cal while Whitehurst played in SD, Maybe he knows something we don’t. Maybe there will a draft day trade (Hass to the Browns?.) Ruskell made some bold moves when he was GM but few of them worked. Lets see if this one does. These guys are not fools and they have been around a while. I think another shoe will be dropping soon.

    Mike Kelly

  24. BenderHawkFan says:

    Chuck-

    How about Charles?

    heh

  25. vichawkfan says:

    at least Holmgren knew exactly what he was getting with Matt. way back when Carroll’s working off film and references….big difference.

  26. bird_spit says:

    What is not to love about the deal. There will be competition at QB assuming Hass is not traded. Otherwise there will be competition with a drafted QB. Prior to the last few days, we had Seneca that could not compete with Hass.

  27. Dukeshire says:

    Where does this “cannon arm” and “quick release” and “accuracy” scouting report stem from?

  28. If CW is so good, why 3rd stringer and not back-up? A lot of teams need QB’s so why only AZ and C-town sniffin’. Az signed Anderson, so why not low ball Diego, he’s their 3rd stringer. This is weird. Sorry to say, but Hass is probably gone. 4 years deep, this kid is probably going to play this year for the hawks, what’s the point in sittin’ him another year.

  29. MattandCindy says:

    Please don’t be worried guys. Let’s all hug.

    EVERYTHING’S GOING TO BE ALL RIGHT! I PROMISE!!!
    Mark my words………we’ll be super-duper fine.

    *Denial* (a dangerous thing)

  30. Well we currently have 5 draft choices in the first 4 rounds of the draft and presumably none will be spent on a QB. We ought to be able to plug several gaping holes with that. Assuming Whitehurst turns out to be a viable replacement for Matt as early as next year and a few good choices in next years draft and we should be much, much stronger. I think that this year we just have to have patience and not succumb to total negativism. Positive signs of improvement are what we should expect. I did not like having to swap 2nd round picks though. Who do you think will be available at the 60th position?

  31. Dukeshire says:

    “He has a longer resume than any of the guys getting drafted next month and he has four years of grooming under his belt.” – …AND 4 years of grooming. That implies his “longer resume” is in addition to 4 years on the bench. What has he done to enhance his resume the last 4 years?

    Palmer / Leinart / Sanchez is a far cry from Young / Favre / Hasselbeck but point taken.

  32. chrisj122 says:

    Please, give us one more year with Hasselbeck in blue. PLEASE!

  33. By the way, I live in San Diego and his “mullet” is the beach style a lot of the young surfers wear down here.

  34. What about Booty

  35. chuck_easton says:

    Duke,

    Here’s one scouting report:

    http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/players/3036/Charlie_Whitehurst

    Says strong arm, accurate, and fluid movement. Says he does tend to hold on to the ball too long or throw it away too soon (that seems like an oxymoron to me, which is it guys?)

    Also, Whitehurst was the Offensive MVP for the South team in the 2006 Senior Bowl.

  36. Dukeshire says:

    Booty is a counter argument.

  37. Christ, you give the keys to a college coach, this is expected. Pete Carroll need be one-and done.

  38. What he has done is spent four years preparing for NFL games, looking at NFL tape, going to NFL practices, learning from good NFL coaches and top NFL players, and biding his time waiting for an opportunity. How much did you learn the first four years on your job? Would you have hit the ground rolling a little fast if you spent for years as an apprentice with top coaching and players in front and around you?

  39. Just seems he could a got better deal done, that’s what puzzles me. I like the idea of cleaning house, but you would think you could be a little smarter about it. What do I know.

  40. Dukeshire says:

    Thank you Chuck. That is a bit more tempered. And yes, it’s a little confusing but both point to trusting his instincts, I would think.

    A little research revealed that he has been in a regular season game. Before Volek, in ’06, he was #2 for games 1-5 and played in a week two “blowout” vs. the Titans. Didn’t throw a pass but ran for a TD.

  41. Not only that, but men mature a lot between 22 and 27 and that’s a fact, so when he does face adversity he’s going to more prepared to deal with it than some wide-eyed rookie who’s still figuring out what to do with all of his money and newfound celebrity.

  42. BrianBlades says:

    I’m on board, nervous sure, but I’m sure he’ll get the same amount of time Hass got to develop also, right?

    Does anyone else remember early Seahawks-era Hass or does it all start with 2005 here? Crowds chanting Dilfer-Dilfer-Dilfer (at Husky Stadium).

    Welcome Charlie, I hope the coaching staff sees something that internet message board posters do not!

  43. Soggybuc says:

    I think it’s 5 a year for 2 only to say..A’ight kid show us you can do what we think you can do.
    Mr. happy has said he hopes he can count on #8 for another 2 years. 10 mill$ is a hell of a lot less than we would have to pay jimmy the pickle in the same time frame. smarter move from the fiscal side of things than reaching for the pickle at #6.

    As for the Teel fans out there, he was a reach pick for MH and a project guy from the get go. i believe or own mr. Divish said several times last year that he wasnt seeing it in practice when the fan base screamed for Mora to start him.

  44. Dukeshire says:

    Audible – Everyone is different, those broad generalizations may or may not apply. I’m not knocking him, but trying to add a little perspective. If I were to sit back an only “prepare” for 4 years I likely would get bored and not remain as focused. I think I learn from trial and error more than an apprentice, per se. We are all different. And I hope this has truly been what’s best for his development, as he is now “ours”.

  45. chuck_easton says:

    Oh, I remember those first couple of years with Hass. I also remember the crowd at Husky stadium cheering when Hass’ knee got bent up behind him and Dilfer came in. Not the proudest moment to be a Seahawks fan.

    It was watching what Matty went through that first season that made me a fan of his. Anyone that can go through being cheered off the field so Dilfer could take his job and still being the upbeat face of the City says alot about him as a person.

  46. Tarcat88 says:

    I’m sure his booty matches the surfers down there too. LOL!

  47. freedom_X says:

    If Whitehurst was that good, why weren’t other teams willing to trade for him? Teams that are far more desperate for a QB (not to say Seattle doesn’t have a need) ought to have gladly paid the price. If he’s that good, a #3 straight out is cheap. Look at what it took Houston to get Schaub. Holmgren had inside information (and a great track record with QB’s) when he made the Hasselbeck deal. What’s the secret angle with Whitehurst?

    For me, it’s not really whether Whitehurst turns out to be a franchise QB or not (though I hope he does) but rather, that it seems like Seattle overpaid in every way for him. If you’re convinced a piece of property in Las Vegas is worth $300,000, but the going market rate is $100,000, you pay $100,000 for it (or a bit more.) Not $300,000.

    Overpaying is a sign of a novice – I would have thought Schneider would be a reality check for Carroll. Imagine myself as a home decorator, which I know zilch about. Suppose I fall in love with granite countertops and just have to have it. A person with experience will know (and pay) the going price. A novice will just pay whatever it takes to get it right away, because they’ve fallen in love with it and have no perspective.

    That’s what I’m afraid of.

  48. chuck_easton says:

    Apparently it was more than just Seattle and Arizona that were interested. There are articles out there that Buffalo was strongly considering him as well, but couldn’t make up their minds in time to get into the running.

    Aside from that how many other teams have a need for a future QB that do not already have one on their team? (Buffalo, maybe Washington, the Rams, Arizona, Seattle)…

  49. chuck_easton says:

    Here’s a link to the Buffalo angle:

    http://www.buffalosportsdaily.com/2010/03/are-the-bills-interested-in-charlie-whitehurst/

    There writers were saying a 3rd might not be too much to give up.

  50. Too much salary. Too much to give up. THIRD string QB’s don’t get a lot of reps in practice, either. “Competition at QB” is NOT a good thing. If Whitehurst is really that good, SD wouldn’t have been paying Volek these last few years. I feel sick.

  51. hambone08 says:

    I don’t care how much NFL tape he’s analyzed, how many NFL practices he’s attended, or how much he’s been coached up – A bad OL won’t protect Whitehurst any longer that it’d protect Hasselbeck or whoever. We have much more pressing needs (tack on DE as of yesterday) and we go out and give up 20 spots in this year’s 2nd round and next year’s 3rd rounder (not to mention sign him a healthy pay bump he hasn’t earned IMO). Whitehurst is a “four year vet” who’s never thrown a pass in a real game. I guarantee there’s a good reason not named Phillip Rivers this guy has been riding pine in SD the last four years.

  52. I could not agree more with those that have commented about this years draftable QB’s and the Hawks not taking one of them (except maybe a late round). The Hawks higher round (1-4) picks are too important for far to many other needs.

    Trading for Whitehurst may or may not be a good thing and at least he has some NFL background versus a draft pick.

    Simply stated, the HUGE problem is the overpayment to get him.

  53. chuck_easton says:

    hmbone08,

    And exaclty how many games did Hasselbeck win in GB before Seattle traded for him and annointed him their starting QB? If Hasselbeck was THAT good he surely would have beaten out that guy Favre for the starting job in GB.

    Rivers is the Franchise QB in SD and makes the big bucks. Voleck was brought in by Turner who inherited Whitehurst. Voleck was specifically brought in to be the veteran backup in the event Rivers got hurt.

  54. freedom_X says:

    Actually, that Buffalo news concerns me a bit more. That’s right, the Buffalo GM used to work for San Diego. If *Buffalo* had overpaid for Whitehurst, I could understand it better, since they would have inside knowledge similar to Holmgren and Hasselbeck.

    But the fact Buffalo didn’t target Whitehurst or make a strong move for him early could mean they have a less-than-competent front office (possible) or they don’t think think he’s that good (much more likely.)

  55. Soggybuc says:

    CW was RFA , wich means he did have say in where he was going to go. wether it was by signing a tender outright or signing after a sign and trade deal was in place. AZ had a third in play to deal with so they really had the drivers seat in this thing. once they went with DA it left us and Sd free to negotiate.

  56. hambone08 says:

    Like Duke said earlier, I have trouble comparing the two situations because Hasselbeck was brought in by Holmgren, the same guy who groomed “that Favre guy”, who worked as a QB coach under Walsh for three years in the late 80’s with Montana and Young, not not mention he played the position…turned out he knew what he was talking about.

  57. There is a HUGE difference in what was known about Hasselbeck versus Whitehurst.

    Holmgren was Hasselbeck’s coach. He knew everything about Matt and had already invested time in him in GB. Holmgren had FIRST HAND and ON HAND knowledge and experience with Matt.

    So there is really no comparrison in that regard.

    With specific regard to Whitehurst, he MAY turn out to be a good QB for Seattle, but it makes no sense to overpay to try to find out given the “success” rate of QB’s in the NFL.

  58. chuck_easton says:

    I absolutely LOVE Hasselbeck. I’m just hoping that lighting strikes twice as I’m willing to see the similarities rather than trash the whole idea that Whitehurst just might be something.

    If and until he proves otherwise I’m going to go with my Matty 2.0 hope and not close my mind to the deal.

  59. chuck_easton says:

    Oh and Jc50…I sent an apology to you in the last thread. I let my fingers type before I put the brain in gear.

  60. edstang45 says:

    Lots of stuff said here, but as he hasn’t taken a snap none of us can say we know his skill set, Gotta hope PC knows what he’s doing I’m sure he has gone over practice tapes of this guy. If any of us had the skill of evaluating talent like PC we’d be employed in the NFL, I’m abit worried but gotta let the new regime do what they do. Hopefully he’ll be a success like Matt is.
    I just hate losing the 40th pick. Seems to me though they saved the best picks hopefully for some dominate OL

  61. Really savvy trade Schneid!

    Smart move to give up more for this unproven RFA than he’d get if we made him an offer. Only 5 mil/year? Wow, Paul must be really happy to pay that little.

    Can’t wait to see how the rest of the preseason turns out for us.

  62. chuck_easton says:

    jammer,

    point of correction. The team couldn’t make him an offer because the team doesn’t have a 3rd round draft choice this season. That mean the only way Seattle could get him would be to trade for him.

    To do that Seattle had to make it worth SD’s while. The deal is SD gets Seattle’s 3rd round draft choice in 2011 instead of 2010. For this ‘opportunity’ Seattle swapped places in the 2nd round. Here’s an article I already linked to that proposes pretty much what Seattle did right down to the money given to Whitehurst.

    http://nfl.sportsnewsandscores.com/football/what-is-charlie-whitehurst-worth-to-the-seattle-seahawks.html

  63. Dukeshire says:

    “I absolutely LOVE Hasselbeck. I’m just hoping that lighting strikes twice as I’m willing to see the similarities rather than trash the whole idea that Whitehurst just might be something.” – I agree with this sentiment. I don’t mean to trash it, if it has come across that way.

  64. Either PC is a genius or an idiot. I’m strongly suspecting it’s idiot, but we’ll know soon.

  65. Norv Turner knows how good CW is. I’m hoping he’s very, very good. I’m also hoping he sits this year (at the very least) behind Matt, because Hawks offensive system is not a total reboot.

    Again, from Brock (sorry if that offends some):
    “J Bates WC system is much more similar to Holmgren’s WC system than Mora/Knapp’s WC system was, with the zone blocking and all the play action offense. The difference to Holmgren’s offense is the multipla formations and motions. J Bates = J Gruden, that’s where he learned his football. J Bates was in Denver with M Shanahan, but he took that next step, ascended in his career with the year, or with the hours, and hours, and hours, and hours with J Gruden, up early and staying up late. J Bates is a ‘grinder’. He learned it all from J Gruden. And what was J Gruden? J Gruden was formations. He was motions. Lots of language within all the things, and all the different variations and looks. So a lot of the passing tree will be very similar to Hasselbeck and company, but a lot more formations, and a lot more language within his WC system. …”

    “J Bates WCO system fits well with Matt Hasselbeck’s talent. Look at how well S Payton’s offensive system’s strengths fit with D Brees talent strengths. Based on where J Bates has been, the two NFL minds that he’s studied under are M Shanahan and J Gruden. And based on those two guys and their different systems, and their ability to win a SB adjusting their offense to meet their QBs strengths. J Gruden won a SB with the limited arm strength B Johnson had. When B Johnson can’t throw it over 40 yards. In practice, B Johnson would tell his receivers to look for the ball early on their go routes, that he would back shoulder it, but to look for it before they got 40 yds because he couldn’t throw it farther than that late in his career. M Shanahan also had a J Elway and could uncork it a little more and throw it deep down the field. So the two guys that he has studied under, systemmatically, yes – J Elway, yes – B Griese, yes – D Kennel, yes – C Simms … they can tweak a system to marry and to fit to Hasselbeck’s strengths, and this one in particular, those two guys in particular, I think, really do play to some of Matt’s strengths. His cerebral side, his ability to handle formations, his ability to manipulate at the LOS, his ability – most importantly – to play within rhythem and tempo from 15 yards and under. D Brees in that SB, how many throws did he have farther than 22 yards? Only 7 or 8 throws over 10 yards. Beyond 20 yards he completed one little ‘deep seam over’ route, he threw one incomplete early, and that was it. 39 attempts, everything was intermediate. He looked deep, but he didn’t throw deep. And there were times in the game where even Phil Simms said ‘Boy, looks like there was a window there’, but Brees said ‘No, I’m not gonna do it, I’m gonna check it down, I see they’re playing zone, I’m gonna take the easy one here, I’m gonna check it down’. And, you know what? That’s a lot of what J Gruden liked to do in TB. In watching a little bit of M Barclay at USC last year, on a very rudimentary level, I mean that’s as basic as its gonna get – stripped down as much as you can with a true freshman out of high school … But this is a WC. I would define this one, and we hear it all the time, I would define, and you listen to M Holmgren, you listen to Bill Walsh say who are some of the guys still closest to the WC? Well, J Gruden’s closer. M Shanahan expanded, went a lot more empty, went shotgun before any of those other guys did. So J Bates though, from a language standpoint, from a philosophy standpoint, will be a lot of what M Hasselbeck is most comfortable with. ”

    and,
    “The Norv Turner Offense: “Aggressive”. Norv Turner was “big picture”, it was like ‘moving the masses’. Right, it was like I’m going to effect this whole field with these guys running and just sucking up, and then I’ve got this – and he attacked chunks of field. I want this chunk effected so I can throw that deep over. And you can close your eyes and you can look at Phillip Rivers, and look at all of the go routes, look at the corners, look at the deep overs, look at the chunk plays. What Norv Turner did with Dallas and Troy Aikman in 3 SBs. It was chunks, it was over the top to Harper, it was Irvin on the deep come-backs, the deep digs, the deep ins. Still rhythm to it, lots of rhythm. You know the details don’t get lost. Still lots of rhythm to it, but in much deeper chunks than the WC system traditionally had. Mike Martz was another version of this, (deep crosses) he loves 7-step drops and he puts alot of burden on his tackles, but he is also from the ‘Air Coryell’, he’s from the Norv Turner ‘I want chunks of real estate’, I don’t want to nickle and dime, I don’t want to make it difficult, I don’t want 12-play drives all of the time, I want a 20-yarder, I need an explosive play mixed in there. I want a chunk of yardage.”

    Maybe J.Bates will be able to manipulate his system to take best advantage of whatever CW has to offer, but let CW learn the WCO some sitting behind Matt.

  66. footballscaa says:

    Big guy with a big arm. Hope he’s still got it. At worst it’ll make MH step up, if he still can. Play him!

  67. chuck…. great buff link….based on your comments, you’re liking this trade… I’m not sure you’re wrong… Like the article says, and we know from all around the league, if one is ‘locked’ behind a great performer at the position, ya never get a chance… as an athlete, It is really tough to handle… There’s a tough mental side…. especially at QB…. (remember when many on our blog were less than happy not giving Teel some game time last year when games were out of control..?)

    Time will tell, for sure, but to bash this move at this point, I’m not sure that is correct… The odds are against it coming out awesome, but, who knows, maybe we won’t need awesome… we really didn’t have that in Wallace… yes?
    Actually haven’t had that from our ‘beat up’ Hass either…

  68. Give me a break….is it really that bad to give up a 3rd rd pick for QB? I don’t like the fact that they switched the 2nd rd pick, but I’m hoping they’ll either get another 2nd or 3rd pick this year by trading down with one of their 1st rd picks. I’m more concerned about how this is going to affect the Brandon Marshall situation. I’m all for Whitehurst. I’d rather they take a chance on a QB with a 3rd rd pick than with a 1st.

  69. It looks like the Chargers gave us their 3rd round pick this year and we gave them ours next year according to espn so we just swapped 2nd round picks this year and who knows how that $10 million dollars is structured, it could be heavily based on playing time and what not. I love how people get in an up roar over Whitehurst. If he is good people will be like over this was awsome move by Pete and the FO and if he doesn’t work out how how could they do this, ha ha. We need another qb and this guy has very little wear and tear on himself who knows how he will be. All I know is he more prepared than anyone coming out of the draft as of right now. Good thing us fans don’t run the Seahawks or we would still have Kenny Easley and Largent playing lol. For the Hawks to get better they do need to clean house. Don’t expect miricles in the 1st year of Pete and company. I just want see in the first year that the team is getting better and has a plan for the future.

  70. Yep should have gone after Tebow his a proven winner.

  71. MattandCindy says:

    What’s taking so long on dumping Branch??? I’m sure there’s not a huge market for him…but he’s wasting money and space. He’ll make Whitehurst worse just by being on the sideline.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0