Seahawks Insider

Poll time: Weighing in the Whitehurst trade

Post by Eric Williams on March 17, 2010 at 5:08 pm with 85 Comments »
March 17, 2010 5:09 pm

With a new quarterback headed to Seattle in Charlie Whitehurst, we want you to weigh in on the Hawks’ latest move. So what do you think of Seattle’s newest addition at quarterback? Let us know here.

What do you think of the Seahawks trading for QB Charlie Whitehurst

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
NFL free agency
Leave a comment Comments → 85
  1. edstang45 says:

    The money doesn’t bother me, losing the 40th pick does. I don’t know anything about Whitehurst to make a comment about him. Gotta just trust they know something about this guy. But the next moves are gonna be paramount. I think though PC must be comitted now to the OL and playmakers on Offense. To let Matt get hammered and then bring Whithurst in to also get hammered will be idiotic, We gotta go OL and get a horse to run the ball with Forsett. and someone to throw to, and and crap we just don’t have enough picks.

  2. wowthetntisbad says:

    What bothers me the most about the comments about this trade are the ones about the price of the new guys contract. Who cares? They are uncapped, they have the richest owner in the NFL, and the contract will fit under the cap once it returns, most likely. They move down in the second round and lose a third next year, so what? They also don’t have to worry about wasting that 2nd on that clown Tebow or some over-hyped Notre Dame QB. They are pluggin holes, ditching dead weight, and adding depth, now they can draft for skill rather than need.

  3. Obviously the Seahawks are looking at money or they wouldn’t go through a roster purge.

    I would only take Hasselbeck over the following teams starters:


    That’s 5. What other teams would you guys add to this list? I asked this during the season and heard names like Rodgers and Schaub – please don’t add them.

  4. I’m glad we’re (probably) not looking at a ND QB or Tebow in the 2nd. At least that’s the way it appears.

    But, yeah, the organization is in a pickle when it comes to playmakers for the QB position.

    On one hand, they can allow Matt the “opportunity” to get destroyed again with a terrible OL and our “quality” WRs to throw to… but after he gets killed, does the FO really want their GoldenBoy to play with this sh!t offense too? I wouldn’t be surprised with those 3 picks each becoming offensive players. Maybe OL, WR, RB? Or OL, OL, WR?

  5. pabuwal – the only thing that would make you happy is if Matt died or was paralyzed. We know. It’s only the 939,309,393th time you’ve asked those questions.

  6. It’s an obvious exaggerating point… but you get the idea… just go back to about 2 months ago and reread all of the posts. I doubt anything changes from all the comments.

  7. chuck_easton says:


    If one of the big 3/4 OT’s fall to #6 and we grab him, then follow that up with one of the top remaining safeties or DL at 14 I think there will be some quality OG’s left in the 2nd round (even at 60).

    Team doesn’t need to draft a LB,TE or (it would appear) a QB high anymore. So they can concentrate on OL/DL/Safety and RB in the first 2 to 4 rounds.

  8. freedom_X says:

    It’s always stupid to pay $7 for a $2 candy bar. 7th richest man in the world or no. Especially when there are no other buyers (apparently anyway.) If he’s really just going to be a backup and hold a clipboard for $5 million/year – what do you suppose John Carlson asks for when his contract is up?

    Even if Buffalo was interested – are they going to pay Whitehurst $5 million/yr? Even if other teams would pay the trade price, who would pay that salary? Even Hasselbeck had to get traded 1st long before they reworked his contract.

    I am in the pro Hasselbeck camp, but I can’t see how this reads as anything but Hasselbeck being moved in the next 30 days. If not, then Seattle has a $10 million/yr backup unless Whitehurst completely flops or gets injured.

    If the Whitehurst contract is based off a huge bonus tied to starting games, and that’s where the $5 million figure comes from – then it makes more sense. But it doesn’t sound like that’s the case.

  9. Bobby – you have massive issues, most of which revolve around your obsession with Hutchinson and now Hasselbeck. You’ve attacked Rob Sims constantly because of Hasselbeck’s shortcomings since 2006. In your Hutch obsessed mind, it was Rob Sims’ fault that Hasselbeck couldn’t throw the ball over 20 yards.

    He’s only had one good year of the last 4 and he’s as good as gone. Maybe you need to follow Hasselbeck’s new team along with the Vikings. You’d rather see the Seahawks get blown out by 40 every week with Hasselbeck than grow with someone else.

  10. Bobby – you took the point about Hasselbeck’s skills too far with those comments.

  11. freedom_X says:

    This move doesn’t mean Seattle won’t go for a developmental prospect. Consider this:

    Whitehurst – takes over now, he’s 28.

    Teel – presumably out the door.

    Seattle trades down 20 spots on their #2. Rumors have interest in Tebow.

    Well, a low #2 probably is about the high end of the right value for Tebow, give or take a dozen spots. Seattle’s original #2 would have been pretty high. If Seattle’s draft board has Tebow as highly likely to be there at SD’s original #2 spot – the trade makes more sense, and Tebow sits at least 2 years, maybe fills the fullback spot in the meantime. :)

    More likely, Seattle has a lot of players in the 2nd round rated the same, so they don’t think it’s really going to cost them anything by trading down (and they even benefit from paying out a smaller $$$ contract to the lower pick.)

  12. Your poll doesn’t seem to work with FF 3.6, even with all add ons turned off.

  13. edstang45 says:

    BobbyK is on point

  14. wowthetntisbad says:


    I don’t care how much a candy bar costs if I’m not paying for it. Why is this even our business? It is not our money, we aren’t paying it. If you want to use the argument of the cost of tickets rising, etc., well, they have been rising no matter what, so if they will rise with effort rather than stagnant BS, then fine. And a TE is not going to compare himself to a QB in contract negotiations, he’ll compare himself to other TE’s.

  15. chuck – I’ve always liked Mike Johnson as a late 2nd round pick or 3rd rounder. I think he’d do just fine at LG. In no way am I comparing him to Oher, but like Oher last year, his stock has seemed to go down a bit and that’s after all of the games have been played, which makes no sense. In November it looked like he was a late 1st to early 2nd round pick.

    Maybe Okung at #6, a playmaker at #14, and Johnson at #60?

    pab – when was the last time I mentioned Hutch? You’re right, I have beaten that dead horse… but I guarantee that I haven’t mentioned that more than you have mentioned that Matt sucks. It may be a tie though.

  16. Coolalvin says:

    Wouldn’t it been better to keep our 2nd round position and draft a QB that is in their early twenties instead of a guy like Whitehurst who has no more pro experience?

    We have a new circus in town folks!

  17. BenderHawkFan says:

    Man, it’s getting chippy today—I like it!

    Btw- Tebow doesn’t belong in the second. Maybe the 4th. Someone will take him though, since he’s a good leader, and has charisma and God on his side. Fail.

  18. After this dumb trade, if we draft Tebow in the 2nd round it will prove the management is smoking something.

    The need this year is and always has been OL, DL and Safetymaybe a receiver or CB
    trading away good picks for an unproven nobody QB to then draft a QB most think will never make it in the NFL is just plain crack pipe smoking
    If the trade involved another SD player or one of their picks it would sit better to me.

  19. JazBadAzz says:

    Matt isn’t the same without a really good running game and Holmgren putting azz in check when he gets ballzy…

  20. BobbyK – its not so much the direct mention of Hutch, its the constant mention of how much his replacement, Rob Sims sucks. Rob Sims cant even compare to Hutch. Hutch is the greatest Guard of this decade. But Rob Sims and this OL aren’t responsible for all of the QB’s shortcomings.

    I’ve mentioned Hasselbeck sucks for the last year because he does. For the past 4 years I’ve been on this blog, I never said anything like that. And the fact that the new regime sees this has all the “Matt” fans up in a tizzy about how terrible this new regime will be. All this proves is they are astute football men.

    Hasselbeck, the individual, is a class man. I am pleased that we had him vs the knucklehead who had a SB handed to him. Sometimes there is no justice in this world. Hasselbeck, the QB, at one point 5 years ago was a top shelf QB. Now he’s nothing more than Jake Delhomme West.

  21. BORNHAWK says:

    No words can express my disgust with the price we paid.

  22. pab – you must admit that I have admitted that Sims had turned into a solid player this past season. Although I certainly won’t be broken hearted to see him traded, I have gone on record as saying he was our best OL this past season (not that that’s saying much) and I’ve been proud of his development.

    And he has not sucked for 4 years. IMO his ’07 season was his best. He had no running game and he carried that offense. Coincidentaly, that’s the last unit that did a good job in pass protection, as the ’08 and ’09 pass protection was terrible. Improve the OL and you’ll see an improved Hasselbeck, as w/any QB.

  23. Correct on all points.

  24. freedom_X says:

    When it comes to pay, that’s not how it works in real life. If I’m a counter person at McDonald’s making $9/hr, and I hear the store is paying the fry cook $30/hr, I’m going to be pretty upset about that. If I have any leverage at all, I’m going to demand a lot more money that I would otherwise. If I don’t have leverage, I’m going to be a very disgruntled employee. Anyone remember Shawn Kemp and Jim McIlvaine?

    Once a franchise starts throwing money around recklessly, everyone is going to line up at the trough. And yes, Carlson should be rated against the TE’s, but in his mind, Whitehurst should be rated against the backup QB’s. And if Seattle is willing to toss abnormal money for a backup QB, why not toss abnormal money at a starting TE? Who actually is more deserving of getting a freakish amount of money?

    If Seattle pays Mare $8 million/yr, even if they can afford it – you really think that’s not going to have salary consequences on the team?

    I just relate it to real life – if some co-worker of mine, even if it’s not the same job, gets paid an outlandish amount of money, then there better be a good reason for it. Like getting promoted to “starter.”

    If the only good reason is “the company has plenty of $$$ and can afford it” then I am going to get really unhappy if I don’t get a share of that $$$, and I don’t get paid outlandishly.

  25. vichawkfan says:

    pay is about right for a guy you expect to come in a show us something. Don’t pay him enough and what’s his motivation?

  26. footballscaa says:

    Big guy with a big arm. Hope he’s still got it. Mariners are on!

  27. “Buffalo, Cleveland, Oakland, KC, STL”

    “What other teams would you guys add to this list? ”

    Based on last years performance alone, forgetting about broken ribs, no effective pass-pro, et al, I’d take Matt over the following QBs who played at least 25% of their team’s snaps: Matthew Stafford, JaMarcus Russell, Mark Sanchez, Derek Anderson, Daunte Culpepper, Brady Quinn, Kyle Boller, Josh Freeman, Marc Bulger, Matt Moore, Jake Delhomme, Matt Cassel, Shaun Hill, Kerry Collins, Trent Edwards, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Jason Campbell, and Bruce Gradkowski.

    But the reason to keep Matt isn’t last year’s performance, nor his ’05 performance. It’s because he has some familiarity with J.Bates style of WCO, while Whitehurst is only conversant with the Norv Turner Offense, which is fundamentally different from what Bates is gonna play this year.

  28. I have a trade proposal… new regimes like their guys…

    Redskins trade S Landry for LB Hill. Both make a lot of money (as Landry was a high pick) and are about the same age. Both new regimes can claim they get “their” guy and clean house at the same time.

    That would take care of SS for us. That would give Mr. Happy his Tim McDonald.

  29. Forgot to add, that it’s the same argument against D.Anderson, he doesn’t fit the WCO.

  30. chuck_easton says:


    I’d do that trade in a nano-second. I’d personally drive Hill to the airport. Heck, I’d drive him all the way to DC. Problem is I don’t think even Snyder is that dumb.

  31. klm008 – you basically added 3 rookie 1st round QBs, Carolina through Matt Moore and Washington through Campbell. That makes just 10 teams where Hasselbeck would be an upgrade according to you.

    Matt Moore is going to be a pretty good QB, he already has has the numbers and wins to back that statement up. Campbell I was on the fence about, and 3 rookie 1st round draft picks always have the future upside rather than the immediate performance. I don’t know why Hasselbeck would be an upgrade over those 3.

  32. From the profootballtalk board:

    “As a lifelong Chargers fan, I will go out on a limb and say that Charlie Whitehurst will have a break out year in this upcoming season. He has all the mechanics of a solid quarterback and the experience of working with one of the best quarterback “breeders” in Norv Turner. I am actually sad that he left. Chargers should’ve given up Billy Volek instead. Whitehurst is a Tom Brady waiting to happen. Mark my words.”

    Who knows . . .

  33. chuck – that’s a trade I’d swap picks with them, too. Maybe give them the Phil 4 (later in round) and receive the Wash. 6 (early in round). I read a Wash. Post article on Landry last year and they were pretty down on him (but he seems to be playing out of position at FS, instead of where he should be, SS). I’m sure it’d never happen, but it’s fun to speculate.

  34. BORNHAWK says:

    Can anybody explain to me why they are making such irresponsible decisions that are completely unreasonable and idiotic? I have no problem bringing in Whitehurst, in fact I think he will be a good player, but why give up so much for a third string QB and trade away young talent like Tapp for nothing? Please tell me they have something up their sleeves to compensate the loose of the 40th overall pick, other than dropping 20 picks down. I do not see any upside to these moves, just getting worse by the day. Can somebody show me the light at the end of this dark tunnel? I don’t want to keep loosing but I have seen no additions that will make us better, in fact thus far we have gotten worse. Where the hell are they taking this team? What is their game plan and why the hell do you give up so much for a third string QB? I have sat here and watched all this happening and I have held my tongue but this is just to far and for those of you that say Matt came here under the same circumstances just stop, he was mentored by Holmgren and that’s why he succeeded, what does PC know about his new player, just the film he has watched. Sorry, I needed to vent. No matter what, GO HAWKS.

  35. I don’t know that we can truly call the FO idiots yet for giving up a 3 and swapping 2s. Afterall, Whitehurst could turn out to be good. We don’t know. But if he turns into a good QB, this’ll be a good deal. IF, IF, IF…???

    However, I am more skeptical about them today than I was a few days ago. We’ll see. We all want to win.

  36. pab-
    Among QBs who played 25% of their team’s offensive snaps (qualifier – so we’re not looking at players who’ve taken one snap @ QB like SEA’s P Jon Ryan – who probably grades out with higher QB performance numbers than Matt) that’s the list of players that Matt played better than in ’09. Each team has 2-3 QBs, with few, other than where the backup played significant time, backups included. If you want to win now and win always, you play the better QB now and sit the backup QB until he’s totally ready and able to shove the starting QB out of his starting position. The timing should depend on the HC/OC’s satisfaction with the QBs actual on-field play, not watching cut and paste films of the players from last season. When CW is ready to start, MH should already know it in his head if not his heart.

  37. If you don’t want to win now and always, then trade Matt for whatever you can get and play CW. That way we’d have a darn good chance at Locker next year’s draft.

  38. klm008 is right. Hasselbeck is too classy to deal with all this garbage anyway.

  39. Dukeshire says:

    Can I just say that I am exhausted. I’m nervous and excited and have no idea what is next. This has been a hell of an off season so far, for good or ill. Years from now we’ll all look back at this off season and draft as a significant turning point in the franchise. Here’s hoping there is a Lombardi Trophy on display at VMAC when that reflection comes.

  40. seahawk44 says:


    1. I hope this regime improves the OL drastically
    2. Hasselbeck deserves a shot as starter behind that improved OL
    3. Whitehurst will be there if Matt is indeed done.
    4. Whitehurst could be the next Tom Brady.
    5. Teel could still turn into something good for the team, also.

    I have been to a number of preseason Charger games in the last few years, and I always remember being impressed with Whitehurst.

    Go Seahawks //// Change is exciting (especially after going 9-23 in two seasons)

    draft OL ..OL in 1st round ……..and maybe Walter Jones comes back!

  41. Apparently the ticker on ESPN is reporting that we got San Diego’s 3rd rounder this year as well (per seahawkaddicts). That makes things look a little bit better

  42. If that’s true, we got CW for a pittance….oh, great…I can just hear it now…we’re paying $5M to a player who wasn’t even worth a 3rd round draft choice! lol

  43. oh christ we signed quentin gainther too.

  44. I hope Ganther can return punts/kickoffs.

  45. seahawklovertoo says:

    pdway @7:21 pm, I was very much against this trade until I started looking into it a bit more. Accordingly to wiki , his dad was also an NFL QB which I consider a plus. Next, I did the astrology and numerology on CW and he checked out well ;
    the only possible problem may be his desire to party and BE the toast of the party.(Hopefully he won’t turn “Big Ben” on us once he gets the big bucks) This year will be good for him and for his career (unless he gets hit by a drunk driver or, something like that ) and 2011 should be the same. 2012 will be trying year for him. Maybe PC knows this things as well so, that is where only two year contract comes from.
    I second that opinion from profooyballtalk.

  46. vichawkfan says:

    hey BobbyK – I remember your man-crush on Moreno last year at #4 – so why not Spiller at #6 and OT at 14? Could see Trent Williams, or Brown at 14. Okung is there fine, but not likely….Buluga has peaked from what I’ve heard… Gibbs doesn’t need the big mauler tackles to run the offense we’re considering, but we sure as sh*t need a RB to make defenses honest. Whatcha say – Spiller?

  47. 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. Oh everyone is complaining about these other guys they are signing, they are getting them all fairly cheap and they need to get some new players in here, some of the players on this team might be fan favorites but are getting old, and getting over paid so change is good. I do love how everyone is so passionate about what the hawks are doing this year, it is good. This is bring exciting that wasn’t there last year wether this turns into wins at the start who knows but hey look the national media is talking about the Seahawks, can’t go wrong there.

  48. SeahawkFan12 says:

    I may be a bit late on this, but I have BobbyK’s back on Matt Hasselbeck.

    Whiners/washouts like pabuwal have lost touch.

    Please don’t forget Hasselbeck’s leadership and fire that kept this team together last season. Hass was the one getting killed week after week behind a deplorable O-line.

    Most people on this blog think it was Hasselbeck’s fault. What a childish, myopic outlook. Bring any QB in here, play behind last year (and the last 2 years) line with our receivers and see how they do.

    You think Tebow (bar, give me a Sea Gal instead) or Claussen or Whitehurst or ANY OTHER QB is going to do better, you need a reality check.

    Get real, Hasselbeck is not done.

  49. Hasselbeck might not be done as I agree but his time in Seattle is short. Seattle is in the beginning off rebuilding and Hasselebeck is not going to be in their future plans. Just think if you were the FO would you want Hasselbeck after this year, take the personal instincts out if it and think in terms of a business and rebuilding? The answer is no because you need to start to mold another qb for the future. I am a big fan of Matt but he does has some value still so I would trade him and get some what I could for him and start Whitehurst. Why start Hasselback when he is going to be gone next year? This team is not going to compete for a superbowl, they somehow might sqeak in to the playoffs with how bad our division is, who knows. I just need you have to look to the future and get what you can for Matt now. If Favre doesn’t come back I could see the Viking wanting Matt which I think would be a good fit.

  50. freedom_X says:

    If Seattle gets SD’s #3 this year, then I reverse my opinion and say this was a good trade value wise. If this draft really is the deepest in 6 years, then the #3 this year from SD probably will be worth more than Seatte’s #3 next year, even if we figure that Seattle will be crappy next season and it will be a high #3, and even factoring out present value vs. future value.

    And if the contract is backloaded (as an example say $2 million this year, $8 million next year) then it makes way more sense. Whitehurst is the backup this year, at that price. A clear message. If Hasselbeck plays well and stays healthy, they can try to re-sign him. If he flops, enter Whitehurst. And if Whitehurst doesn’t become the starter, Seattle lets him go or trades him (if his backloaded salary in 2011 is huge, probably Seattle lets him go.)

    Even if Hasselbeck has a chip on his shoulder because of this, at 36 he’s not going to have that many other options to sign, if Seattle makes him a nice offer to return. He’d have to be so mad that he’d take less money to go somewhere else. And the chip on his shoulder could help motivate him to greater heights (though with Hasselbeck’s character, I doubt he’s deliberately slacking. But a grudge can often get a little extra out of a person.)

  51. Yes. I loved Moreno last year. Depending on what the medical staff would have told me about Walt (if they would have said Walt will be 95% ready for training camp) last year, I would have selected Moreno at #4. But if they had questions, it is well documented that I would have gobbled up Oher b/c of my hatred for our OL. Still, I saw Moreno as an every down back, whereas I see Spiller as a more explosive player, but a situational player. I like Spiller, don’t get me wrong, but not at #6. Maybe at #14 and that’s if D. Morgan is gone. I also have no problem taking Bulaga or Iupati over Spiller either if the opportunity presents itself. Ideally, if guys like that are still available, I’d like to trade down a few spots and just take the last one available. That way we pick up picks and still get a good player.

    We are taking a gamble on Whitehurst, but it is a good gamble (if it’s true we traded two picks for two picks). A rebuilding team can’t and shouldn’t be trading picks away and we didn’t (thank goodness). Granted, I’d rather have the #40 over the #60… but if it means possible getting our future QB, then it’s certainly worth the risk…

  52. 1(6)
    3(from SD)
    4(from Phil)
    6(probable Sims trade)
    7(probable comp)
    7(probable comp)

    That’s an estimated 12 picks. Not too shabby. Get young. Get hungry.

    Maybe even another pick for Branch?

  53. SeahawkFan12 says:

    BobbyK, I hear you, Bro but I just DO NOT see Whithurst as our ‘future’ QB.

  54. I apologize if anyone has already posted these:

    Stats of Charlie “Not Mr. August” Whitehurst from 2009 Preseason

    Seattle (20 – 14 Loss) – 55.7 Rating
    Went 15 for 29 and 193 yards, 1 TD and 2 picks. He was sacked three times. Lost one fumble.

    Cards (17-6 Win) – 72.5 Rating
    Wnt 5 for 9 and 52 yards. No TD’s or picks. Sacked once.

    Atlanta (27 – 24 Loss) 66.1 Rating
    4 for 8 and 43 yards. No TD’s, picks or sacks.

    Niners (26 – 7 Win) 114,6 Rating
    Went 10 for 14 and 98 yards. 1 TD, no picks, sacked twice. Fumbled twice (lost ball once)

  55. freedom_X says:

    I’m not so worried about the loss in 2nd round draft position in this deal. I think Seattle has enough highly rated players in the 2nd round that they think they can easily get one of them with SD’s pick, and pay less $$$ to boot. It will only hurt if some top 1st round talent slid out of the 1st round, and we wouldn’t be able to snag them.

    BTW I heard on the old-fashioned radio that Seattle signed Redskins RB Quinton Ganther… busy times in the Seahawk front office lately.

  56. I know nothing of the other games, but remember when we played the Chargers last year? Nick Reed was a madman getting to the QB. Michael Bennett wasn’t too far off either. And Derek Walker played well. Basically, Whitehurst was tormented by our vicious DL pressure (too bad we never can do that with our “real” players). Not that I’m trying to make excuses for our new QB because I don’t have a vested interest either way (I want him to do well… but have no knowledge if I think he will be good or suck… just hoping for the best)… All I know is that almost every QB sucks under constant pressure. Again, I have no knowledge about why the numbers wouldn’t look good in the other games though. Good point, canfan.

  57. I agree if Seahawks are in a rebuilding mode get as many draft picks as you can. This year’s draft is pretty deap, Cleveland has 12 picks and you know Mike is happy as can be with that. This is just me, if you can get value for Matt right now do it because the Seahawks are not going to re-sign him to Starter role, maybe back up next year so get what value you can right now. I tell if you Favre doesn’t play for the Viking’s this year You could get something good from the Viking for Matt since he does have some gas in the tank and can be effective on a team that can block. Like I said I am a Matt fan but pull the trigger and get some more draft picks.

  58. Canfan — I see your stats and there are 3 fumbles. That SUCKS!!! I read his college scouting report from a few sources and he seems to be a repeat offender when it comes to fumbling. That’s NOT a good sign. And that was going into his 4th training camp. I would have hoped that by his 4th year in the NFL he would have realized that fumbling is bad. If there’s a pattern in his other pre-season games with respect to fumbling… that’s definitely something to be concerned about. I hate turnovers. A fumble prone QB especially needs a good OL.

  59. BobbyAyala says:

    Matt’s already gone. They aren’t paying Whitehurst 5 million to hold the clipboard.

  60. I don’t believe any stats that are in preseason. Usually the 1st string is not in or only a few or what not. When you look if a qb is fumbled proned you have to look at some variables, does his line suck and he does not get enough time to through to ball and get blind sided a alot? Or is there really a problem with him and how he holds the ball. Take Dave Krieg, that guy could fumble the ball when he had two hands on it and still was a decent qb back in the day. So does he really have a fumbling problem? We won’t know until he is on the field and playing.

  61. hawkdawg says:

    Does ANYbody have a link for us getting SD’s third this year (and I don’t count Addicts,God bless ‘em, as a verifying link)? Any link to the ESPN bit which people are mentioning?

    Becuas if that’s true, this was a good trade. Period.

  62. BobbyAyala says:

    if c-dub was fumbling behind a third string line in preseason ball, i think that’s reason enough to declare this acquisition a complete and utter failure. It’s a mistake of epic proportions, and I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that when Whitehurst was at Clemson, Pete Carroll bought his parents a house.

  63. SeahawkFan12 says:

    BobbyA, you are wrong. They simply overpaid for Whitehurst.

  64. SeahawkFan12, how do you know they over paid for Whitehurst? All we know is the deal is worth $10 million over 2 years but you don’t know how it is structured. It could be inncentive based by games started, % of plays, etc. Before stating that the Seahawks over paid for this play you might want to have the facts first. So many fans react before knowing the full story. Lets wait and see how it plays out.

  65. BobbyAyala says:

    It’s two years, five mil each homeboy. Matt’s making 5.25. Here’s what’s gonna happen. Matt’s gonna land in some far off burg like jacksonville and we’ll get a 5th rounder back.

    We’ll draft Tebow with the 60th pick and Charlie Whitehurst will be finding Brandon Marshall for the Hawks’ first score in 2010.

  66. What the hell is Ron Washington doing snorting coke? WTF?

  67. Fumbling behind the Chargers 3rd string O-line is like fumbling behind our 1st string O-line. It is roughly the same protection. Actually, the Chargers 3rd string may be better than our 1st string.

  68. I second that bhamfan :).

  69. BobbyAyala says:

    dude, seriously, the line woes are a bit overstated.

    IN the last quarter of the season we avg’d 5 per carry.

    When Lock went down, and Chris at center, all hell broke lose.

    That said, Willis is a good lineman. Lock is paid like a good lineman and Unger has Tobeck potential.

    Sims is hot and cold, but his stubby arms need to be shipped off, and Spencer is nothing more than a good ole fashioned Tim Ruskell f&#K up.

    All’s not lost on our line. With Gibbs in and Solari (who was good a decade ago and was living off his rep) out. THings aren’t nearly as bad as everyone thinks.

    Just bring in two solid dudes. Get Okung or Baluga and you’re half way there.

  70. BobbyAyala says:

    Speaking as a bald man, it’s sad to see Matt go. Looking at c-Dub in the pic Eric’s folk posted, it looks like Brandon or Dylan will be behind center next season.

    Bad news for the bald community (we’re a sect), but at least when we get back to the Super Bowl, the network broadcasting won’t find it necessary to cut half of our QB’s head off during the pregame features in an attempt to hide his shame.


  72. MattandCindy says:

    If Matty leaves…then I say we retire old number 8 for good. Right away. He was an outstanding QB, a gracious humanitarian, and a wonderful ambassador for Washington State, the Seattle Seahawks, and the National Football League.

  73. freedom_X says:

    About that Seattle getting SD’s 2010 3rd rumor – I haven’t been able to find that rumor online either. I think I heard that on radio (would have been FOX Sports since I was tuned to 950 – same place I heard about the Ganther signing.)

    But I wonder if I was just brainwashed by wishful thinking. :) More likely, if it’s not true, FOX just got the story wrong (it was a sports update type report.)

  74. I listened to Paul Silvi on the late sports news. He said Seattle traded #40 for #60 and their third round pick next year. No mention of the Chargers third round pick this year.

  75. edstang45 says:

    Was it Clayton who broke this?? Shefter?? well neither team site has officially commented yet, could the numbers be wrong?? Espn although very late there does not list it yet. maybe just maybe

  76. judycan2 says:

    good move getting a quarterback that doesen’t need training right away, no matter matts status. Maybe pete and staff are concentrating on a run game and are putting the pieces together step by step…I can see that. Maybe baluga and spiller?

  77. chuck_easton says:

    The trade won’t be official until later today when the league office approves it.

    So there aren’t any details regarding what actually was swapped and what the actual contract looks like until later today.

    That is why neither team’s official sites mention it. The teams can’t talk about it until the final deal is approved by the league.

  78. Dukeshire says:

    Here is how Schefter and Clayton report the deal. No mention of a returning 3rd.

  79. ESPN’s ticker yesterday did say that we swapped picks in the second round, and we got a 3rd round pick next year from SD. I assumed that it was a typo.

  80. yankinta says:


    We got a 3rd round pick from SD? What????

  81. ElPerroGrandeIII says:

    This trade only reinforces the fact Paul Allen is a joke and a disgrace of an owner as evident by the signing of Whitehurst, the hiriings of Carroll, Schneider, Ruskell and Mora, the non-firiing of idiot Leiweke, and the firing of Holmgren. Stick a fork in the Seahawks until Allen sells the team to an owner who cares and who has a NFL IQ of above 3.

  82. yankinta says:


    Dude you couldn’t be more wrong….he spends more of his own money (MILLIONS) on the HAWKS than any other owner in the league…he is the best owner by far. It’s not his fault that Holmgren no longer wanted to a coach.

  83. Why do people still respond to EPG or his multis?

    I don’t like any of the answers available to me on the poll. I want my money back.

    My response would be “I like it. Let him compete with Hasselbeck, unless there is a fair trade market for Matt. Then trade him.”

  84. Come on, we overpaid for him. And anybody who says, “who cares, we can afford it”, really. If they are already making bad decisions or analysis on what people are worth, what’s stopping them from continuing this trend torwards other aspects of the game, like evaluating talent and keeping a lockeroom. How’s the rest of players going to feel if an unproven 3rd stringer is getting paid and they aren’t. Also, any free agants and draft picks will see this and drive up their own prices. I don’t mind the move, but the price was ridiculous, so I guess I do mind the move.

  85. For a 3rd string backup QB who’s never taken a regular season snap – no film – one who sits behind Billy Volek, you wouldn’t pay more than maybe $1M/yr and you wouldn’t give more than a 5th round pick in trade. I can see where somebody typing scrolls at ESPN could make the mental switch from SEA giving SD a 3rd rd pick in ’11 to the other way ’round. Makes more sense that way. Also, CW needs training, maybe more than a college draftee. He’s learned/practiced in a different pro system than what he’ll play here under Bates, (WC system is not the same as the Norv Turner offense) but he hasn’t played in a regular season nor playoffs since ’06. A college draftee has just recently played a dozen or more games. Stats for rookie NFL QBs usually mimic their 1st yr college stats. Getting Jake Plummer outta retirement might have been better, since he at least played in ’06.

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