Seahawks Insider

Poll: Is Hasselbeck done?

Post by Ian Swenson / The News Tribune on Oct. 4, 2010 at 11:23 am with 35 Comments »
October 4, 2010 11:23 am

Are you ready for the Seahawks to move on from Matt Hasselbeck?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Leave a comment Comments → 35
  1. freedom_X says:

    For the people who think the Seahawks can’t be worse off (than with Hasselbeck at QB) – take a look around the league. (Buffalo, Arizona.) They can be worse off. A lot worse off.

    But Hasselbeck has to deliver more than mediocrity at QB. He needs to do more than talk about missing opportunities and not making mistakes – he needs to do it. He had bad protection yesterday but he didn’t perform up to par when he did have protection in past games. Of course, we could be overrating the quality of his receivers.

    He’s healthy, and has as much mobility as he’s ever had, so that’s not the problem. The real issue is that he’s the decorated veteran with over a decade of experience. I have much higher expectations from him than I do a raw rookie or untested veteran. That’s why I expect a lot more from him.

    I would say Hasselbeck will get 2 more games to deliver at least one performance that shows he can still get it done on this team. Again, while he’s hardly been handed a spiffy Cadillac to drive, he’s the experienced veteran who should be helping compensate for weaknesses on the team.

    I suppose it’s possible he actually is, and if he weren’t there we’d really see how ineffective the team is offensively, but I don’t see what he is really adding. Knowing that might be the clue as to why they aren’t starting the Whitehurst era. Maybe Whitehurst can’t call audibles well, or help set the blocking schemes, or make sight adjustments.

  2. irrationalexuberance says:

    This is a given, no surprise on the results. At this point in the season Hasslebeck is 0-4 in any game time wins. Week 1 defense. Week 2 loss. Week 3. Defense and special teams, Week 4. Loss. So how many more horrible to mediocre performances do we need to test Matt Hasslebeck? 2008,2009, and a quarter of this season has shown, he is done. When your leader is also your statistical worse player that wont work. He is trying to lead from the rear at this point.

    What is more interesting is people had no problem throwing an MVP running back under the bus when he didnt perform…….

  3. chuck_easton says:

    I’m guessing Matt has one more game and that will be on the road in Chicago.

    If he stinks up the joint I expect Whitebeard will be the started for our game 6.

  4. Wonder how much Cleveland would give up for MH?

  5. “At this point in the season Hasslebeck is 0-4 in any game time wins. Week 1 defense. Week 2 loss. Week 3. Defense and special teams, Week 4. Loss. ”

    Not really a fair assessment imo. He played well in game 1, threw for 2 td’s ran for another. And the SD game wasn’t that bad either – his stats should’ve been helped by the Branch TD that wasn’t.

    The QB tends to get an inordinate amount of the credit in good times, and of the blame in bad, and the unknown back-up QB is almost always viewed as the one who can save/change everything.

    All that said – I think if we lose the next 2 games – and Hass’ play is the same level as it was yesterday, then we see Whitehurst.

  6. JohnnyBGood says:

    You left the right option out of the vote:

    Hasselbeck is still a great QB. The struggles you see making the QB look bad are with the entire offense.

  7. irrationalexuberance says:


    Its is a fair assessment a in the game one his QB rating on the year is 70.7, which is inexcusable for a veteran QB. Game 1 Stats 18/23, 170 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT….I would classify that is a not losing for us status given to a rookie more so than efficient playing. Matter of fact Hasslebeck was given all kinds of time to throw. So the quick receiver O-line dump is relevant. Game 3. 19/32, 220 YDS, 1 TD, 1 INT, again he was given alot of opportunities and failed.

    The QB is the person who receives all the snaps. He is typically the team leader and best player on a team. As stated by Deon Branch, “you team is as only as good as the QB”.

    Actually I have beat this point into the ground. Take a look around the league, how many top tier QB besides Peyton Manning havent stepped out of the role as a backup? So this assertion that the ‘unknown” factor is of far greater risk than the known failures of the current QB is ridiculous. I would take the unknown over the proven failure 10 out of 10 times that is what professional sports is all about.

  8. agfishburne says:

    The question really is about whether or not they think Whitehurst’s mobility and stronger arm (especially on the run) will provide a better chance to win with a still-evolving O-Line (i.e. to make up for O-Line problems). If yes, then I think – despite his great Seahawk career – Hasselbeck is done as a starter in Seattle. My response here is cautioned by the fact that I’ve been a ‘Hawks fan long enough to hope (many times over) for various QB changes, only to realize that the team wasn’t good enough to put any QB in a position to look consistently good.

  9. bulldog80 says:

    The definition of insanity is continually doing the same things but expecting different results.

    Matt’s performance has gotten progressively worse. What makes any of you think that another two games is going to get better?

  10. agfishburne says:

    How many teams have made a QB change thinking their problems would be magically fixed? That may be the pattern we should evaluate, when it comes to your definition of insanity.

  11. irrationalexuberance says:

    Hasselbeck is still a great QB. The struggles you see making the QB look bad are with the entire offense.

    Read more:

    Please provide the statistics or facts to validate that claim of a “great” QB. Do you think he will get into the Hall of Fame?

  12. Regardless of whether or not he is done, the real issue is that he will be done long before they has enough talent to be a contender. He cannot win SB here because there isn’t time, so we need to move on.
    There is both over reaction to wins and over reaction to losses. What I see is an average team -a little better than average on defense and worse than average on offense. However, an average team is a big improvement from last year, and that is the bottom line. If they continue to improve things in future years as they have this year, they will be contenders before long. It is obvious they have things to work on, but the improvement this year gives me hope.

  13. zombiehooliganfc says:

    Career, career, career…blah, blah, blah. Outcomes matter and the guy isn’t providing the right outcomes. He had been a poor to mediocre at best QB, he’s been given every excuse in the book as for why he is so bad, but the fact is that he cannot throw the football. It has nothing to do with protection or the running game, or any other lame excuse, it has to do with even when he gets a chance to throw the ball, he rarely connects, and it isn’t because the receivers suck or the play called was bad, it is because he does not have a live arm. Clog up the the field for ten yards and your defense will be stupid with three and outs. He cannot keep the other team honest, there is no threat. He can’t run, he is not accurate, and he cannot go deep. But, I guess, he’s a swell guy, so lets keep him around because he was a pro bowl QB a long time ago.

  14. irrationalexuberance says:


    I think the other side of that is how many teams have made a QB change and are now successful because of it? Arizona offensive problems are clearly shown not only by the loss of Kurt Warner but also Anquan Boldin. SF has no real play makers besides Gore and their TE. STL has no real playmakers besides their QB and Steven Jackson, what is more interesting is how a QB can make a good player look great.

    We saw this same thing in 2006 when the Patriots with no real big name receivers picked apart the # 1 seed Chargers, why because Tom Brady is such a good player he makes everyone else shine around him. Same thing for Peyton Manning and Phillip Rivers. So its time to stop looking for players to make the QB look great and the QB to make the players look great.

  15. BenderHawkFan says:

    Matt’s confidence seems to be a big issue. Maybe his physical skills are still there, I don’t know. Still, if it’s not there between the ears then nothing else matters.

    I’d like to see some QB moxy.

    Speaking of which…holy crap…for those that watched last night’s game…think how Cutler must feel. I only felt bad for him because he’s my fantasy QB, otherwise…meh.

  16. BrianBlades says:

    “What would Cleveland give up for MH”.

    Nothing. Hasselbeck could maybe start for the Cards for the rest of the year.

    Who else in the league starts him? The market speaks.

    zombie is on the money with “he’s a swell guy” being the reason so many are attached to him.

  17. BrianBlades says:

    Cutler – talk about O-line problems. He’s got an issue.

  18. irrationalexuberance says:

    NFL network Pat Kirwan is getting dyslexic. He has an article talking about QB under fire and he claims that in Hass last 8 starts he is 6-2, which should actually be 2-6, which included losing the last 4 of the season in 2009.

    Another interesting thing is the question is arising between keep starting Seneca Wallace or Delhomme when he gets healthy.

    This year has two themes, head coaches and QB’s are in the sights as first to take a shot when matters go less than expected.

  19. Hasselbeck is learning his second new offense in two years, working with four new receivers, only two o-lineman that were there last year, and everyone expects him to be the same as he was in 2005. He is still our best shot at respectability. Whitehurst was a third round pick that no matter how hard San Diego wanted him to compete, couldn’t move ahead of Billy Volek on the depth chart even though one of the best Offnsive minds was the head coach (Norv Turner.) If Whitehurst becomes the starter, our season is done. If management was sold on him, they would have signed him for more than a 2 year deal, especially if they were anticipating Hass being the starter this year.

  20. OldLefty says:

    Matt isn’t calling the plays.

    How many times are you going to call a run on 2nd and 10?

  21. irrationalexuberance says:

    So Hasslebeck learning a new system is why he is rated 24th in the league in QB rating, 3rd in for INTs, 18th for TDs, and 17th for yardage. hmmmmmm, I wonder if any other starting QB have faced a similar scenario of changing offenses in 2 years and yet still performed????????????

    Why Kyle Orton is a good example He was picked up by Denver last year and had an 86.8 QB rating with 21 TDs and 12 INTs, so it appears that new coaches, teams and offensive schemes seem to have very little effective on a QB is they have the talent.

  22. irrationalexuberance says:

    Is anyone going to make a factual claim as to why Hasslebeck shouldnt be benched???????????

    It could be worse with Whitehurst, without giving him a chance, the o-lines fault/protection, WR and TE not running their 5-15 yrd routes can only go so far………….

  23. ljarllrajl says:

    I was for Hasselbeck going into the season, but I’m having a very hard time remembering the last time we won a game that I felt we would not have if it was for #8. Can anyone refresh my memory?

  24. Dukeshire says:

    What is meant by “factual claim”?

  25. bird_spit says:

    Yesterdays loss is a team loss that I bet could never be pinned on the QB if we had access to the game day film.

    Stokely was the leading receiver should tell you something.. We have a very young WR corp. Why would Hass find Stokely who practiced less than a week?

    IMHO, we should play Hass until we are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. The only argument against that should be that we want to throw games to have a better draft position. (and I lean to throwing games sometimes via a CW try-out)

    I am sure CW has a stronger arm, and is more mobile, but I ill take Hass as the QB any day because of his years at identifying the defense, and reacting to it. Yeah, he is not winning the games for us, but he is not loosing the games either. It is a team lose, not a one man caused lose. (and man did they ever stink it up in StL.)

  26. JohnnyBGood says:

    “is anyone going to make a factual claim as to why Hasslebeck shouldnt be benched???????????”

    The “factual claim” comes only with understanding football and how the QB’s effect on the offense has an exaggerated appearance. Most fans never learn to see what is really going on, they just watch the quarterback and assume that if they can’t see something, it doesn’t exist.

    For example, most fans don’t even think about whether there were open receivers to throw to, because they can’t see the receiver patterns. Instead of understanding this gap in their knowledge, they see the QB fail to throw and take a sack, then they blame the QB.

    There are plenty more examples of why Hasselbeck looks bad, having nothing to do with his ability. Hasselbeck was quoted before the game (paraphrasing): “If I have time to throw the ball, the offense will do well.” Well, obviously he didn’t have time to throw the ball. The Seahawks shuffling on the Oline finally caught up with them.

    Thirdly, see any running game to take the heat off the QB? Put these together with all the other offenses problems and you’ll understand the real reason the offense is sputtering. Stop focusing on just the exposed part of the iceberg. Look at the huge submerged problem and you’ll better understand why the coaching staff keeps playing him, instead of listening to the mass of unsophisticated fans.

  27. I got a few chuckles out of this thread, check it out.

  28. Dukeshire says:

    “unsophisticated fans”… lol, Some of these comments are too much.

  29. The one I would like to here from on what he thinks of MH QBing is Dukeshire.

  30. Dukeshire, I was thinking the same thing.

    Fieldgulls-Ivy League
    TNT-State College
    PI-High School
    Seattle Times-GED/Phoenix University/High School dropout

  31. sherminator says:

    Hass may or may not be “done”. We do know the offense is not doing well, whether or not it is due to Matt’s lack of arm strength, decision-making ability, or whatever, but he certainly is not leading his teammates to be better than their collective parts. I would like to see if Whiteurst maybe can. Whitehurst may or may not be the answer, and none of us know until he gets a chance to play. If he does worse, we can go back to Matt. Let CW compete for the job, and let’s find out if we need to draft a 1st round QB. Playoffs are not important this year, what is important is finding a QB for the next year and the years after.

  32. irrationalexuberance says:

    facts dont come from understanding, they come from performance. If I didnt know anything about football would that change the play of Mattt Hasslebeck? No it wouldnt it would only at best, change my outlook.

    So I rest my case no one has a fact that can back up why Matt Hasslebeck shouldnt be benched. Its this “I just like the guy, it isnt his fault” which are both opinion based statements and add nothing to the competitive level of the seahawks.

    My opinion is we have given Hasslebeck enough time to see what he is made of. If the Seahawks want to be a competitive they will need to be without the services of Hasslebeck. That is a fact, how can I prove that the offensive stats show. THe play calling is that of a rookie, they clearly show that the offensive coordinator doesnt trust Matt hasslebeck.

  33. irrationalexuberance says:

    Anyone going to make the claim that any of the 4 games thus far Matt Hasslebeck hasnt had the time to throw??????????????

    This becoming cat a mouse, Hass throws an Int, its the receivers fault for running the wrong route, Hass gets sacked, its the o line fault, Hass can complete passes its the run games fault.

    This is a condition called denial. Denying the appartent facts, Hasslebeck is not the answer for the Seahawks offensive leader.

  34. irrationalexuberance says:

    I wonder how many of these Hasslebeck supporters were season ticket holders who arent no longer because of the mounting losses????????????????????????

    I look forward to see what team Hass will start for next season.

  35. JohnnyBGood says:

    Someone said:
    “This is a condition called denial. Denying the appartent facts, Hasslebeck is not the answer for the Seahawks offensive leader.”

    Someone else said:
    “My opinion is we have given Hasslebeck enough time to see what he is made of.”

    And your opinion is wrong. Ever wonder why the coaching staff doesn’t do what you think they should do? See my post above for the reason. They have the “facts” and you don’t. There are very good reasons they keep playing him. See my post above for why all of you haters don’t understand their reasons.

    Think about it for five seconds…Either they don’t know what they are doing or you don’t. The hilarious part is that some fans are so ignorant, they don’t even realize how little facts they have compared to the coaches, and these ignorant fans fume and rant about how stupid the coaching staff has to be, when really they should be saying it into a mirror.

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