Seahawks Insider

Carroll on QB situation: “We’re going with Matt”

Post by Eric Williams on Dec. 20, 2010 at 3:50 pm with 53 Comments »
December 20, 2010 3:50 pm

Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll confirmed what he said earlier today on the radio – Matt Hasselbeck will start for Seattle at quarterback against Tampa Bay in a must-win situation on Sunday.

Carroll said he made the decision after talking with Hasselbeck today to judge where he’s at mentally after back-to-back poor performances.

“We’re going with Matt,” Carrroll said. “Matt’s been our quarterback. He’s the guy that’s given us a chance all throughout, and gives us our best chance to finish off right. And I’m excited in that sense that he’s going to pull this thing together with us.

“We have to play well around him. We have to take care of the quarterback in all ways protection-wise. We need to run the football. We need to play better on defense so it’s not all turning into the focus going to one guy and people can go ahead and try to point the finger. That’s not what’s going on around here. We’re tuned in that we need to play better football to give him a chance to play the way he’s capable.”

Carroll went on to say that the Seahawks need to do a better job of getting ahead in games so Hasselbeck doesn’t feel the need to press and try to win the game on his own.

Bottom line: Carroll will have a quick hook on Sunday the first sign that Hasselbeck shows he his not sticking with the plan and throwing the ball all over the place.

And ultimately the Seahawks feel more comfortable with Hasselbeck because he has a better grasp of the offense and gives Seattle more options in terms of play calling and running the entire playbook.

But Carroll said he’s not afraid to put Charlie Whitehurst in the game if Hasselbeck struggles.

“He handled himself very well yesterday,” Carroll said about Whitehurst. “And did a nice job in handling the situation, and if we need him we’ll call on him. Maybe just in that sense I feel better about him under those circumstances.”

I asked about the play-calling situation with offensive coordinator Jeremy Bates, and Carroll reiterated that he has the utmost confidence in him and that there’s no disconnect between Bates and Hasselbeck

“My say is I can do whatever I want, so I’m letting him (Bates) call the game – that’s my choice,” Carroll said about his involvement in Seattle’s offense. “ However, throughout the game there’s times during the game where I’ll interject and do some stuff, and there’s time during the week in specific situation I’ll interject to get things that I want.

“A question came earlier on the radio about are we being aggressive, do we want to be aggressive, do we not want to be aggressive? We always want to have aggressive options in our play calling. I’m totally support all of the calls and the structure for them, where you have an option for a guy to go deep, and if we can get him we want to throw the ball there, and if not we drop the ball down and go through your progression.

“You can plays without options in that manner. And there’s a variety of calls through the course of a football game and all of that. But we want to maintain the opportunity down filed, and if it’s there we want to take it. And if it isn’t we want to make good choices not to take it.”

Carroll said the team placed Roy Lewis on the season-ending injured reserve because his knee wasn’t right. Lewis will have surgery to fix the issue.

Carroll said Marcus Trufant has some lower back stiffness but feels better. Carroll said the injury is not related to the back issue that kept Trufant out for the first six weeks of the 2009 season

“We’ll probably make sure we’re easy on him Wednesday and see what happens on Thursday,” Carroll said.

Walter Thurmond is expected to return from his hamstring issue and be available if Trufant can’t make it back.

Linebacker Will Herring has a mild strain in his hamstring, and defensive tackle Junior Siavii still has a neck stinger that is giving him issues, and is uncertain for Sunday.

Leave a comment Comments → 53
  1. The Seahawks defense held Atlanta to a season low 266 yards. What more does Carroll want from them against the best team in the NFC?

    Carroll is just inviting Hasselbeck to go in to Captain Checkdown Mode. This way, no one can really point the blame on Hasselbeck even though the Seahawks will struggle to move the ball.

    How many more years until a winning record with this mess of a QB situation? Do we break the 4 year streak of 1991-1994?

  2. The 1991-1994 streak was a losing record streak as they went 8-8 in 1995 and finally had a winning record in 1999.

  3. Defense did their job yesterday for the most part – I don’t blame them for those short field scores ATL had. I love how stout we were against the run – against a very good RB.

    Well – let’s see how it goes against TB. As I said in earlier posts – our O-line and D-line both played well yesterday. Hass probably deserves to sit, but he for sure deserves to be on a short leash, mabye it will spur him on to a better performance.

    We know from games just a few weeks ago that he can still play well on occasion – - let’s hope the upcoming game is one of those occasions .

  4. Dukeshire says:

    Well, as long as Bates dials up a game play that doesn’t commit to some semblance of balance and relies on a vertical game, then yes, Capt’n Checkdown. And apparently Carroll is comfortable with that. I guess I just don’t equate a failure to go deep with a lack of aggression. You can attack the middle of the field in many ways aside from going deep, of course.

    This is a definite adjustment for me, as a fan. I’ve always identified smart and aggressive and winning football with ball control. As I said on the live chat, Walsh and Knox (two different styles mind you) vs Norv Turner and Cam Cameron. Both can be very successful with the right components. Seattle’s offense does not have the right pieces yet to play that style, that’s a fact.

  5. What’s up with Lewis? Torn ACL? Cleaning up loose cartilage? Inserting Josh Wilson DNA into a joint so he can score a couple of TDs in the nickel role next season?

    What about Unger? Is he walking around without a limp? If he had to play week 17, would the toe allow him to go (yes, I know he’s on IR and can’t play)?

  6. nighthawk2 says:

    We’re doomed. We have no chance of winning either of the last two games with Hasselsuck at quarterback. Carroll is an idiot, a complete and irredeemable idiot. What in the last 14 games makes this fool think this: ” He’s the guy that’s given us a chance all throughout, and gives us our best chance to finish off right.” Give us a chance for what, to get blown out with all his turnovers? Did you not see the last two games there Pete? How stupid do you have to be to keep playing Hasselsuck? Whitehurst will not get into the game until Hasselsuck has 3 or 4 turnovers and the game is out of reach; until Hasselsuck has blown the game for us and Bates goes into panic mode and has Charlie throwing deep on every play. Brilliant, just freaking brilliant decision Carroll. Moron.

  7. grizindabox24 says:

    I have two things to say:
    1. Even though the defense held Atlanta to a season low yardage total, they could not get off the field on third down the entire game. Atlanta made the most of thier yards, eating up 6-8 minutes each time.
    2. Do people actually think the chances of winning either of the last two games change if CW starts at QB? Not this guy. I am not in anyway saying who should start, just saying it really does not matter.

  8. Tell us how you really feel?

    For what it’s worth, we will also probably come out of the off-season without adding an offensive lineman in the first three rounds of the draft or actually sign a decent one in free agency. The way the last half decade has gone, it wouldn’t surprise me anymore.

    Our free agent splash will probably be a back-up TE who specializes in blocking and I would imagine we’ll be focusing on LB with the 1st round pick. lol

  9. nighthawk2 says:

    Yes, I think our chances of winning the last two go up exponentially wihout the constant turnovers. 6 interceptions and 2 lost fumbles in the last two games. You tell me if we have a better chance of winning without those? And one thing we can count on is that Hasselsuck is going to turn the ball over, a lot. Why can we count on that? Because he’s done it all season.

  10. bird_spit says:

    I dont think we can play any “style” until PC has the pieces in place. This year should be known as the Hawks disassembly year. Disassemble the Timmay f’ups, and see what you got. Next year, if there is a next year, would be the first year where we have a chance at having an offensive style other than make-do style. I’m wishing the reps would fall to CW at this point, cause we need him ready to go in 2011 or 2012.

  11. nighthawk2 says:

    If we got a pass rushing DE in the 1st round I’d be happy enough. We must pursue some offensive lineman in free agency like Carl Nicks. We need a right tackle and a guard (presuming Unger comes back healthy), 2nd round onward would fine for them I think. We also need better corners, better linebackers and better depth at DT. And a quarterback (since we won’t get to find out how Whitehurst would do as a starter in these last two games because our coach is an idiot).

  12. grizindabox24 says:

    Nighthawk, I agree the chances of winning improve with a decrease in turnovers, but that argument is independent of whether the Hawks chances of winning improve with CW starting.

  13. So Carroll’s only going to pull Hasselbeck AFTER he’s turned the ball over and managed to ruin any chance of winning? That makes sense.

    Obviously Whitehurst is not very good if they’re going to keep going with Hasselbeck, but Hasselbeck doesn’t deserve to start anymore. What’s the difference between him and Jake Delhomme?

  14. Does the Hass have more picks then 1st downs? Bates play calling is ridiculous as some of you have already pointed out. Our secondary is a joke too. I wish we would start Whitehurst to see what he is all about, we sure paid enough for him. I feel this blog is turning into a place for all people to vent. What are we going to do for QB next year?

  15. IdahoHawk says:

    Mr. Bates why on the first drive you ran the ball down the falcons throat. Then you got away from that. Lynch had 12 carries, which he got 4 or 5 on the first series. I don’t get it. We don’t have a qb on this roster that can run a pass first O. RUN THE F-ING BALL. If you can’t run the ball it will use more time off the clock for your D to rest (with the same results of passing).

  16. Dukeshire says:

    Lynch had 6 carries on the first drive. They ran it 7 out of 21 total on that first drive. A third of their total carries came on a successful drive, in a game that was within on score 5+ minutes into the third quarter came. I don’t get that either. At all.

  17. Dukeshire says:

    within *one* score… (And I don’t know where that “came” came from)

  18. SeahawkFan12 says:

    IdahoHawk, you are saying what I have been thinking and that is that even if the run game stalls, at last the D gets some time off. Totally agree with you.

    I am more upset with the play calling on offense, and a big reason why I disagree with all the hate being directed at one player. The offensive tempo, the play calling and the lack of tackling on D is mystifying, too…

  19. Because it’s worked so well. Dumb move!

  20. I know we ran the ball on the first drive yesterday and agree that it was stupid to abandon it the way we did. I am not trying to defend Bates by any stretch of the imagination, but I would have a hard time playing armchair offensive coordinator for this team.

    I have limited confidence in calling running plays. I like our RBs but I hate our blocking. We all know we’re probably going to lose a yard if we’re in a 3rd and 1 situation and the opponent knows we’re going to run it (insert fade joke here).

    One thing that makes it easier to run the ball is that opponents won’t expect us to be able to do it and, therefore, aren’t going to have an extra man in the box. This brings up a troubling point… if that safety isn’t in the box, then that means he’s defending the pass. And if we continue to pass with that DB in coverage then should we really be surprised when we can’t throw it the way we’d like (in no way am I making Matt Hasselbeck excuses for the past few weeks!).

    Our LG is an older warrior who is on his last legs (literally). I don’t know if an off-season could get him back to his pre-injury form. I doubt it, in part due to age and natural declining skills at that age.

    Our C may not suck anymore, but he’s not an overly good player either. My heart won’t be broken if he leaves in free agency. I’ll laugh at the team who signs him if they give him a decent sized contract though.

    Our RG (Unger, Andrews, Gibson) situation isn’t very good. Sure, the Unger injury hurt (literally) but he wasn’t exactly getting much push in the pre-season or the opener (pass pro was good though). Andrews sucked. And Gibson was so bad that we released him a few months ago and nobody wanted him and now he’s starting!

    Our RT is an ugly situation too. Otis Nixon ugly. Marshawn Lynch ugly.

    Seriously, I don’t know what I could/would call consistently when your taking a knife to a gun fight. Maybe I would just run it over left tackle 3 times in a row so the clock runs? That’s about the only way I know of to sustain a drive of almost a couple of minutes. lol

  21. SeahawkFan12 says:

    Bobby, I agree on the RT situation…ugly. The whole right side of the line is frightening, but I have to hope Unger’s return will improve things. WOW…hard to do much with a bad O-line.

    Of you are building an expansion franchise, you start with O and D line. Sometimes it feels like we are an expansion team…

  22. nighthawk2 says:

    I disagree that Carroll’s decision to stick with Hasselbeck (yes, I know what his name really is) shows that Whitehurst isn’t very good. It just shows our coaching staff isn’t very smart. Holmgren used to stick with guys that were clearly done too, and he’s out of coaching now. Unless he pulls a Flores and names himself coach this off season. If Whitehurst plays, I think the turnovers significantly decrease, and yes, that will increase our chances of winning. Don’t see it as seperate issue.

    Chicago’s line sucks, it’s the same personnel that we beat there and was getting Jay Cutler killed earlier in the season–10 sacks by the Giants. And they just won the North division. And without much of a run game. How’d they do it? Look at their defense, and their quarterback; neither of which we have.

  23. I think Trufant is an okay player. But at $9 million, or whatever, per season — he sucks. I want a $9 million player to actually be good/dominant at what he does. Releasing him would make our team worse, but keeping him at that cost means there’s less of the pie to use on other parts of the team.

    Curry is improving, but that dude still looks lost as hell in space. That one play yesterday at the end zone was pathetic when he looked back. WTF?

    Why do we watch Patriot games or highlights and see Branch wide open? I don’t care who the QB is, why did he never run “wide open” with us? Seriously, some of his highligths have him with his man beat by 5 yards. You never saw that here.

    I wonder what the new CBA, assuming there is one, is going to look like? I have heard the original intent of the franchise tag was to make sure that the main players, i.e. quarterbacks, could be franchised. The intent wasn’t originally supposed to enable one to franchise a kicker, nose tackle, tight end, etc.

    I wonder what the rookie salary scale is going to look like? There’s got to be some way for common sense to win out, right?

    I still can’t believe that the league is wanting 18 games. As Duke has pointed out a few times, how can they talk about player safety out one side of their mouth and then add more games? Hey, more chances for concussions… oh wait, supposedly they want less of them. Stupid.

  24. Dukeshire says:

    The one when he turned sideways to see if Thomas was behind him? lol. That was awful.

    I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if Tru is done in Seattle, for good or ill.

  25. Yes. That one. I couldn’t believe it. It was almost commical.

  26. freedom_X says:

    Even if Seattle upgrades the OL individual talent, the guys simply have to stay healthy for the line to really get better. I don’t know if it’s a curse, bad training techniques, or the FieldTurf, but the old guys get hurt and the young guys get hurt.

    Even if Chicago’s line is poor, the sum of a line can easily exceed the value of it’s individual parts if they stay healthy and work together. The reverse is true – lack of cohesion and continuity means even great O-line talent will make too many mistakes. I defintely feel Chicago’s line has gotten much better and has usually played better than they did against Seattle, even if they have lapses now and then.

    Also Chicago’s receivers have stayed healthy, allowing Cutler to build his rapport with them (which you can see as great passing improvement since the Seattle game) and they have established some semblance of a running game (big change from typical Martz) even if they aren’t dominant on the ground.

    So until the injury curse is lifted from Seattle (6th most injured team in the league according to Pro Football Weekly) , and especially on the O-line, the moves won’t help much.

  27. nighthawk2 says:

    Holidays are supposed to be depressing, or why else would the suicide rates be so high then? I got to looking at past drafts starting at 2004, first year Holmgren wasn’t officially the GM. Just the 1st round.

    2004 Marcus Tubbs, passed over Steven Jackson and gave Shaun Alexander the money that could have gone to Steve Hutchinson. We could have cut SA loose after the 2005 season and kept Hutchinson. LB Karlos Dansby and G Chris Snee were taken 33rd and 34th also.

    2005 Chris Spencer, passed on WR Roddy White (who as taken next), G Logan Mankins, LB Barrett Ruud (36th), OT Michael Roos (41st).

    2006 Kelly Jennings, passed on DE Mathias Kiwanuka, LB DeMeco Ryans (next two picks), LB Thomas Howard (38th)

    2007 traded for Deion Branch (how’d that one work out?), missed out on S Brandon Merriweather, LB Jon Beason, G Ben Grubbs, OT Joe Staley, TE Greg Olsen,

    2008 Lawrence Jackson, passed on TE Dustin Keller, FS Kenny Phillips, CB Brandon Flowers. We also traded up from about 60th to 38th for John Carlson, who is an afterthought for this idiotic coaching staff. Had we taken Keller at 30th (there was no 32nd pick, NE forfeited in Spygate) these players were availabe at 38–CB Tracy Porter, WR Eddie Royal, RB Matt Forte, WR DeSean Jackson, DE Calais Campbell, RB Ray Rice.

    2009 Aaron Curry, passed on/missed on trading down for QB Mark Sanchez, OT Eugene Monroe, DT B.J. Raji, WR Michael Crabtree, RB Knowshon Moreno, DE Brian Orakpo, LB Brian Cushing, QB Josh Freeman, C Alex Mack, WR Percy Harvin, OT Michael Oher, LB Clay Matthews.

    2010 Russell Okung, Earl Thomas. Can’t complain about those at all, but if we’d addressed OT the year before by trading down from 4 and getting Monroe or Oher, we could have gotten CB Joe Haden, or RT Anthony Davis, or MLB Rolano McClain (I think we can agree Tatupu’s best years are behind him). Had we not traded for Branch, we could have gotten FS Merriweather and used our second 1st round pick on C Maurkice Pouncey, DE Jason Pierre-Paul or WR Dez Bryant.

    As it stands now, we have the 13th overall pick. After we lose the next two thanks to 4 or 5 more interceptions and a couple of lost fumbles by Hasselbeck, we’ll be 6-10 and probably a Top 10 pick (I’m thinking 8th). We could wind up with DE Robert Quinn, DT Marcel Dareus, DT Nick Fairley (Lombardi Award Winner). 8th might be too high for an OT; trade down.

  28. Only team I have ever seen to not run a screen, draw or counter all year. Message to Jeremy: You are predictable. Do us and your offense a favor and run a screen at least once this year. You may even throw off the defense you are facing.

  29. maddog12 says:

    I remember us all saying this was a rebuild year. We all had low expectations. I still do, In fact, I think PC and company have done a good job considering what they had to start with.

    We will not be able to go deep in the playoffs without a top, elite qb. One who can but the O on his shoulders and carry them if need be. They are very hard to find…maybe there is one in this draft. I think we need to try to trade up for the best qb and start there.

    We got our LT last year now its time for a qb who doesn’t buckle under pressure but thrives on it.

  30. GeorgiaHawk says:

    With all this doom and gloom being poured on the Seahawk’s today tell’s me some folk’s may have had their expectation’s way to high for this year?

  31. Dukeshire says:

    I generally give Carroll high marks for what he’s done so far. But his two biggest mistakes or at least two most confusing moves to me, both involve Whitehurst; trading for him and now not starting him. I don’t get either one. At all.

  32. I don’t care how “talented” or untalented a one-legged LG is, a RG who sucks so bad that he was out of the NFL a few months ago, and a worthless RT. Throw them into an average C and they are going to be worthless. I don’t care if they have played 20 games in a row together. You need talent and cohesion on the OL and we have neither, but you do need both. Aside from Okung, there isn’t much talent so I don’t care… we’re going to suck up front. I don’t care how long a group has worked together if it’s 3rd and 1 and you run the ball and every one of your Gs and RT cannot beat their man you’re odds of making the tough yard are not good. That’s a fact.

    If you look at the Bears OL, which is crap that we’re having this conversation, you have: a player taken with the 13th overall pick a couple of years ago (Williams), a veteran C who is still one of the better ones in the league (Kreutz), and a rookie in J’Marcus Webb.

    The announcers were talking about Webb last night and I focued on him awhile and holy crap, he is a big (6’8, 335lb), athletic RT. He’s really going to be good. Do you know what else he has on every Seahawk OL besides Okung? Talent. He’s raw, but he’s got talent! Talent, talent, talent. You don’t tacke a bunch of garbage like we have and magically think that by working together that they are going to be good. I don’t care if Locklear lines up next to the same guard for two years, when it comes time to move the pile on 4th and Goal — he’s going to get pushed backwards because he sucks.

    The Bears have 3 players on the OL who possess talent. We certainly don’t have that many. We have Okung and Spencer and I actually hope Spencer doesn’t come back next year.

    I’m not saying the Bears have a great line, because they don’t; they suck too. But aside from only blaming continuity for our troubles, you need real talent too and we are still lacking in talent up front.

    I’m perfectly fine with going into 2011 with Polumbus as our primary back-up at tackle and Gibson as back-up to our guards, but that’s it (obviously, Okung is starting at LT). If Unger takes over at Center, that’s okay by me, in part, because he’s 4 years younger and IMO he will be better than Spencer when he’s as old as Spencer is now. I like his future better. That still means we need a couple of guards and a starting RT. And it would be nice if they had some talent too!

  33. bayareahawkfan says:

    Just a quick observation: I have the utmost respect for Hass and his legacy as a Seahawk. But after he has magically turned into Jake Delhomme over the last 3 weeks, I’m finally ready to see him sit. At this point I would rather see CW, warts and all, with his upside than watch Matt throw the game away again.

    One other observation: anyone else notice that when things were going well and we were all optimistic earlier in the season, Nghthawk was nowhere to be found, but now that things are looking bad, he’s back in full force?

    As annoyed as I sometimes am by Pabuwal’s one-note (albeit thoughtfully and creatively supported) “Hass sucks” posts, at least he’s been consistently here through ups and downs this season.

    In contrast to Nighthawk’s proclamation, I agree with Duke and others that there are too many variables to make the call on this coaching staff/front office right now – after a couple more drafts and seasons, then I’ll feel comfortable drawing conclusions. I’m unhappy with how things are going generally right now, but for mid-to-long term, I still give Carroll + Schneider high marks.

  34. I’m not sure what Pete could do right now with this team, except figure what the F Bates has been doing with the play calling. I thought 6 wins would be the max at the beginning of the season, but then I got fooled after the Chi-Town game and then have been getting a heavy dose of reality game after game since then. This is a rebuilding team as some keep pointing out. If everyone suck with their initial ideas of what they thought this team was going to be, then their probably wouldn’t be so much shit talkin’, but I think that since we got tricked earlier in the season (shame on us for that), people are taking it a little harder, myself included. Now, I am curious to see what we do about the QB, OL, DL, and offensive and secondary playmakers during the offseason and draft.

  35. stuck, not suck

  36. chuck_easton says:

    I would say that Hass better be almost perfect this weekend or he will lose the fans but it’s pretty obvious he has already lost the fans.

    Question is, if Hass is perfect, or at least error free, this Sunday and the team either wins or is competitive can he win back the fanbase?

    Being a lifelong Seahawk fan I’ve had my heart, and just about every other vital organ, ripped out by the team, stomped on, and handed back to me, and I still come back for more. I guess if Matty can somehow find the magic for two more games I’ll forgive him enough to wish him the best and look forward to seeing his name in the ring of honor some day.

    If he continues to perform as he has the last couple of games I will take the position of ‘don’t let the door hit your rather large derriere on the way out fella’.

  37. I won’t turn on Matt….We’re fortunate to have had him at QB all these years. But, it’s time to pass the torch.

    I agree with Eric about the play calling…That’s not the problem.

    Don’t forget that Matt can be a real pain in the ass for a coach. It took years for Holmgren to teach Matt to play with discipline. Two years removed and we’re seeing Hasselbeck regress to his pre-Holmgren form.

    I think Matt wants to approach the game like Favre does, but he doesn’t have the tools Favre has/had.

    He plays like a Pit Bull trapped in a Chihuahua’s body. Very few QBs can force plays and get away with it. Cutler can throw off balance into triple coverage because he has a cannon. Rothlesburger is a tank with a catapult hanging off the side.

    Hass had only an average arm in his prime…and now he throws like gumby.

    I’ll miss Hass…he has been a good leader and has helped take this team to places we haven’t been before.

    Holmgren leaving was the beginning of the end of Matt’s career in Seattle.

    Now we have a huge problem…what to do at QB.

  38. Dukeshire says:

    That’s an interesting question, Chuck. Hass has been / is on a very short list of my all-time favorite Seahawks, which makes what we’re seeing right in front of us even more difficult. That said, I believe if he plays lights out in these next two, those who liked him before, will come back in off the ledge so-to-speak, and some will even say Seattle ought to re-sign him to mentor his eventual replacement. That’s the nature of fans and their relationship with QBs.

    But my feeling is that regardless how he plays, Seattle needs to cut ties with him after the season. I think it’s the best thing for the future of this franchise. His presence here will cast a shadow over whomever is playing in front of him for as long as he’s around. But more importantly, tools-wise, he’s not even close to being the type of player Bates needs to make his offense function. Even the ’05 or ’07 Hasselbeck would struggle in this system let alone the ’10 version.

    He’ll likely sign elsewhere, but IMO, Seattle cannot be afraid to enter 2011 without him. Through the draft and FA another QB (likely 2) will be added to CW, at least that’s how I see it.

    Let’s presume they miss the playoffs and lose to the Rams on Jan 2, Everyone at Qwest ought to give him a standing O after the game for all he’s done here. Some of the best times in Seahawk history, because it’s very likely that will be his last in Seattle.

  39. Can’t wait to hear the excuses next week. TB 27 Heehawks 16

  40. Carroll should take his lead from the Broncos, who are giving Tebow a chance to prove himself.

    Maybe Carroll thinks Hassleback can be any better than he has shown so far.

    Well with no playoff hope with Hassleback Carroll will have a long off-season to re-evaluate his misjudgment.

  41. One more thing. Has the Seahawks gone with Dilfer (a proven Superbowl winner) instead of Hassleback in the beginning, then there just might be a Lombardi trophy in the Northwest now.

  42. northsc,

    Now there’s an interesting (if not outlandish) thought. Not likely…but at least it’s original enough to provoke some lively discussion. lol

  43. Yes, Dilfer was so great that the Ravens tried their best to keep him.

    Duke, I’m sure PC realizes now that trading for CW was a mistake. And he doesn’t want to compound the mistake by playing CW now and missing out on the playoffs. Not that I support PC’s decision. I think CW deserves another chance. But I also believe Hass is just as capable of surprising us as he is of disappointing us.

  44. CaliSeahawker says:

    Pete has been dog **** as an NFL coach for the most part, and it’s supposed to change now that he is in SEA after a wonderful tenure as USC head coach? Please. We should just get a competent NFL coach, who doesn’t make boneheaded decisions on a weekly basis, and who can actually out coach the opposition.

    Also, I say we give up two first rounders for Vick :-)

  45. longco44 says:

    I agree with bringing in Vick too.. Maybe we can throw a couple dogs along with the first rounders too.. I mean, I think I did hear he wants a dog now!

  46. I’ll never turn on Matt with respect to celebrating his leaving Seattle. However, I know that I want a 1st round QB to be our starter next season and for a veteran to be brought in to help mentor the new guy (Matt would cast too big a shadow). I don’t care if the veteran would give us a better chance to win next year — I only care about the rookie 1st rounder getting thrown into the fire and gaining experience with a beefed up OL built in free agency (and, yes, they will come if you offer them more damn — usually, not Dielman, but usually, there’s always an exception to almost every rule). If the coaching staff feels this strongly about Charlie not playing this week, then I don’t want anything to do with him next year (if practices have been that utterly horrible). Admit he was a mistake, get a real QB with potential who isn’t almost 30, and move on the right way. I don’t want some “bridge” to the future crap. Turn the page and move on. Get this team on track to legitimately to compete in ’13 with a QB who already has 16 NFL starts under his belt (barring injury).

  47. I hope you mean ’12 and not ’13, Bobby.

    I think the problem with Carroll right now is politics. A playoff game his first year would give he and his coaching staff some breathing room. If we back into the playoffs, play our asses off, and win a playoff game, everyone will forget about this painful season.

    I wouldn’t right off CW just because Carroll refuses to play him. As far as you know, it’s bates who’s insisting on Hasselbeck so he can use more of his playbook.

  48. GeorgiaHawk says:

    It’s playoff’s or a high draft pick! I will take that for the first year of rebuilding!

  49. GeorgiaHawk,

    Really, you couldn’t have summarized this year any better.

  50. I don’t think getting into the playoffs by default with a losing record and then getting destroyed at home by an actual playoff team and then drafting later then teams with a winning records is an ideal first year success story for a coaching staff. Start your evaluation of what we got and can work with now should be the priority. Haven’t we been going threw this the last two years now. It seems like most of us want to see what we have and move on. Not keep playing the same old, litereally old, players when we obviously need to move forward in rebuilding. CW should start, and all are young talent should should start seeing the feild a lot more in my opinion. Anyone who has a shot on being on the team next year should be be aditioning and gaining experiance.

  51. Audible – I really did mean ’13. I don’t expect much in ’12 with a R starting at QB. All I would expect next year is growth and visual improvement. The average NFL R QB doesn’t get handed the keys to a dominant team like Rapistburger got when he was a R (or even a team with a D like Flacco had at his disposal in ’08). I want to set my sights high, I like dreaming, but I think we need to be a bit realistic too.

  52. GeorgiaHawk says:

    So if a wild card team happen’s to win the Superbowl is that by default?

  53. “You can plays without options in that manner. And there’s a variety of calls through the course of a football game and all of that.” ?

*
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