Seahawks Insider

Seahawks trade for Terrelle Pryor

Post by Todd Dybas / The News Tribune on April 21, 2014 at 5:10 pm with 111 Comments »
April 21, 2014 5:59 pm

UPDATE 5:29: I can confirm the Seahawks are trading for Oakland quarterback Terrelle Pryor.

UPDATE 5:35: There are multiple reports the Seahawks acquired Pryor for a seventh-round pick. Essentially, the Seahawks are taking a low-risk shot with Pryor.

Both teams have officially announced the trade. The Seahawks traded their seventh-round pick, No. 247 overall, for Pryor.

“Terrelle is an incredibly explosive athlete and we’re excited for him to come in and compete,” Seahawks general manager John Schneider said in a statement.

This is the initial report from Pro Football Talk that caught everyone by surprise.

PFT’s Mike Florio said on 950-KJR that the Pryor contract is a non-guaranteed $705,000. Florio suggested the trade may be for a conditional pick.

The questions for the Seahawks are how Pryor will be used, and what this means for Tarvaris Jackson and B.J. Daniels. Jackson’s one-year deal is guaranteed.

Alex Marvez of Fox Sports reported yesterday that the Oakland Raiders were prepared to cut Pryor before the start of Tuesday’s voluntary workouts.

Pryor started nine games last season for the Raiders.

Leave a comment Comments → 111
  1. cseahawk says:

    Interesting…………not sure what to make of it but definite suprise…….

  2. The training camp highlight will be the battle between TP and BJ for third string.

  3. Ewalters7354 says:

    Typical Pete Carroll type player.Big, super fast and versatile.I call him a weapon, not backup QB.

  4. Dukeshire says:

    Got to agree with pabuwal, here.

    Actually, the question is what did they give up for him? We know they’re going to use him as a QB (sorry if that’s sarcastically obvious).

  5. banosser says:

    can he return punts?

  6. bird_spit says:

    Why? Please someone explain. Is it at all conceivable that the odd rumors that hawks will not resign Wilson even at all conceivable?

    I suspect that this guy will push for second string.

  7. How soon people forget….. draft season is WTH? time in Seattle. Always full of surprises.

  8. I would guess they gave up a 7th rounder contingent on him making the opening day roster.

  9. Ewalters7354 says:

    Duke-dude isn’t a QB by any means.6-4 230 with big time speed.I have a hunch they’ll use him elsewhere.He may be on the roster as a QB though.

  10. banosser says:

    “rumors that the hawks will not resign Wilson”… as in Russell?? I’d guess if there are any rumors of that ilk they’re being generated from near Santa Clara…

    I think the FO sees a 6-6 athlete with speed.. they might try to switch him to WR… or bulk him up for the OL

  11. DreadHawks says:

    Agree with Ewalters, this is let’s try this with this guy trade. Pryor ends up being a 7th round player with alot of potential….somewhere. Jameson Koonz type. May work may not.

  12. BJ Daniels is in trouble…

    Funny, I was just thinking that the guy who pulled off a 93 yard run on the first play of the game vs the Stealers might be a guy Seattle would/should be interested in….

    Thought they might bring him in once he was cut, never thought they’d trade for him…

    Hell Yeah! I think this guy can be good with some time on the bench learning behind T-Jack and Wilson!

  13. Not sure why people would assume Terrelle is competition for BJ Daniels. He may (or may not be) competition for TJack.

    Terrelle Pryor counts about $766 against the cap.
    http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/oakland-raiders/terrelle-pryor/

    TJack would count $1.25m against the cap.
    http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/tarvaris-jackson/

  14. Another angle…… maybe TJack is being traded.

  15. bird_spit says:

    This guy beat out Flynn in preseason, and nose-dove in the heat of the season. I think with maturity, he makes a longer term, inexpensive backup. TJ was never a long term solution. This will be an interesting pre-season, with 3 experienced NFL QBs and a likely practice squad seat warmer with potential. Besides, he will not be in the 9er camp, and can be our Colin K look-alike in practice.

  16. freedom_X says:

    If any team other than Seattle had made this move, we’d be mocking it. I have seen no evidence that Terelle Pryor has the ability to process pass defenses at the NFL level. Not even at a mediocre level.

    Perhaps Seattle is thinking about converting him to another position, but is Pryor willing to make the move? I thought part of the reason the Raiders are moving Pryor is that Pryor knows he’s going to be squeezed out at QB in Oakland and wants out. He won’t accept being a 2nd or 3rd string QB there. Is a Carroll mind trick going to change Pryor’s feelings?

  17. Pryor showed a few flashes of being an NFL quality passer last year but he’s stil a major, major project.

    Pryor at second string means the Seahawks are just one injury away from ending the quest for a repeat. The front office won’t let that happen.

  18. PFT says 9ers were after him too. Conspiracy Theory Warning; Perhaps the Whiners just want BJ Daniels back, and pursued Pryor just to see if they could push Seattle into trading for him, then cutting Daniels…

    Nah…simple answer always the best; Pryor is an athlete with potential, if raw; both teams wanted him.

  19. Athletes like Pryor are rare. I’m sure that’s at the front of Carroll’s thinking here.

  20. And U of Montana alum Colt Anderson has signed with the Colts. Good day!

    I cant see Pryor beating out T-jack for backup qb. Not if T-Jack plays like he did last preseason. And 700k is expensive for a third string qb. But I guess stranger things have happened..

    Be interesting to see if Seattle tries him at WR or TE as well as at qb…

  21. freedomx–Mocking a team for trading a SEVENTH ROUND PICK for an athlete of that magnitude?! Uh, no…and I like Pryor. I liked him in college, and I’d like to see what he can do with a quality franchise.

    He may not make it in the NFL as a qb, but I dont think 3 years with the Raiders tells you anything about him, other than he’s tough and has character. (I woudlnt wish being a Raider the last 3 years on anyone who isnt a 49er or Stealer)…

  22. My only hope is that Wilson goes on a Favrelike streak of consecutive games played.

  23. Bobbyk–LOL! Sheesh, man, you sound grumpier than Georgia, Nate and I on an argument jag! Lighten up! Seattle wont hesitate to cut his butt if he doesnt make the grade. At worst, he’s an intriguing athlete we get a chance to evaluate….

  24. In no way is he competition for Russell Wilson. My guess is they’re going to try him at wide receiver.

  25. emperorzook says:

    I think this is a ALWAYS Compete deal – nobodys job is safe all must be earned

  26. Well, PFT’s Mike FLorio has just devoted 4 straight posts to Terrelle Pryor going to Seattle. Even in a slow news time of year, thats amazing! I think its cool he’s gonna have a shot to stick with a good team that can afford to bring him along slowly.

    I would love to see us keep him and T-Jack. That would be cool.

    I think the kid has serious potential. Hell, Russell Wilson wouldnt be Rusell Wilson if he’d been drafted by that crappy team in Oakland…

  27. Pryor as Joker tight end? Monster corner? Option/wildcat QB?
    Far-fetched, yet… with PC/JS, not outside the realm of possibility.
    Leave no stone unturned – if you want to Win Forever.

  28. FleaFlicker says:

    CCVI: thinking the same thing. Maybe this is some sort of wildcat move? Or maybe it’s the deep game. Run six wildcat rushes over the course of the season, then pull out a wildcat throw on a fly route to Percival in a playoff game? Who knows. Maybe since today is the first day of OTAs there was something physically wrong with TJ? Wish I could be a fly on the wall at the VMAC…

  29. I think it’s simple. Pryor will compete at the QB position with the possible outcomes 2nd string, 3rd string or no roster spot. My guess is he ends up 3rd string.

  30. I agree with emperorzook. For the compete idea to work they need a specific number of players at each spot. I think as we get closer to the draft we will be able to predict a little easier what positions we will be drafting by the numbers currently competing at each position. We can pretty much scratch QB off of the draft predictions now.

  31. Kingpear says:

    So they gave up Mr Irrelevant in exchange or a guy who was arguably 3-4 round talent. Even as a QB, what competitor would you get picking at 230 some?

  32. Dukeshire says:

    Pryor has *only* bee a QB to date. Carroll may have other plans for him, like WR, but even that is a major project.

  33. Ray_Maines says:

    What did the Seahawks get from the Raiders in last April’s Matt Flynn trade? I’m thinking the ‘Hawks are a little ahead in this exchange of QB’s.

  34. Hammajamma says:

    Yes, the Colin Kaerpernick look alike. Of course.

  35. “Athletes like Pryor are rare. I’m sure that’s at the front of Carroll’s thinking here.”

    exactly. you weren’t going to get an athlete of this caliber with the last pick in the 7th round. and he’s still young.

    Who knows how we plan to get him on the field . . .

    interesting move for sure.

  36. chuck_easton says:

    Pryor’s 2014 contract is not guaranteed. TJack’s 2014 contract is fully guaranteed.

    Pryor won’t be replacing TJack in 2014, maybe 2015.

  37. Dukeshire says:

    Is Pryor going to participate in the Seahawks off season program, that began today. (Would someone please put a tweet out about this so we can know?)

  38. Southendzone says:

    I believe Tjax salary is guar for 2014, so i dont see Pryor as competition here. Hawks acquired an elite athlete.

    How will they use him? Will he make the roster? Who knows but you couldnt find this kinda player with pick 247. Low risk, high reward potential.

  39. I remember his 90+ yd touchdown run earlier this season – the guy can really run. I could see him as a big target WR. agree that he’s not going to unseat TJack for 2nd string; at least not next year.

  40. Dukeshire says:

    There have been all-pros that went I drafted, so the idea Seattle couldn’t find an athlete like this in the 7th is conjecture. BTW, has it confirmed they gave a 7th up for him? Regardless, simply because someone is an elite athlete that is middling at his (essentially) lifelong position, doesn’t mean he can be transitioned into whatever position de jour seems appropriate. But back to my original question, curious what they did give for him.

  41. vichawkfan says:

    Anyone know if Pete was still around at USC when Pryor was in recruitment years?

  42. FleaFlicker says:

    Maybe this is a simply a draft pick trade. Bring Pryor into camp. Let him get some good preseason exposure. Wait for a team with a desperate need for a QB or back-up (like the Jets when Michael Vick gets hurt) is ready to trade a 3rd rounder.

  43. Dukeshire says:

    He played against Carroll’s Trojans in ’08.

  44. Above it says

    “Both teams have officially announced the trade. The Seahawks traded their seventh-round pick, No. 247 overall, for Pryor.”

  45. He’s make a great TE, FB or H-Back

    And he’s used to throwing the ball. Could be a real triple threat.

  46. elite athletes are rare birds – – of course it’s conjecture to think he can be NFL level at another position — but i’d argue that you very rarely find guys w/his natural athletic ability (size/speed combo) at the bottom of the 7th. easily worth the risk. plus, it’s interesting for us fans . . .

  47. Singularitarian says:

    I thought pryer played outstanding at times last year and showed alot of potential. His athleticism is unheard of. I’ll take that gamble with a 7th round pick any day

  48. Chuck E. “Pryor’s 2014 contract is not guaranteed. TJack’s 2014 contract is fully guaranteed.
    Pryor won’t be replacing TJack in 2014, maybe 2015.”

    I was going to write that… If the Hawks keep Pryor at the QB spot he is only competing with BJ. However I don’t like the idea of the Hawks keeping 3 QB’s on the active roster. Our roster is so deep that 3 QBs is a luxury we don’t need. I rather keep an extra DB or LB or what ever position is having a serious talent battle for the last spot.

  49. Dukeshire says:

    He’d make a great FB? Lol. How so?

    pabuwal – Missed it. Thanks

  50. Dukeshire says:

    pdway – Don’t misunderstand: I like it. No team can have enough great athletes. But let’s understand it for what it is: the acquisition of an elite athlete that plays QB.

  51. Obviously this trade is all about acquiring an athlete with upside. It’s a minimal investment non-guaranteed contract. They’ll let him compete for whatever he’s willing to do. Put him in the film room with Russ and see how to really work at his craft. Maybe he can unseat T-Jack, maybe he can win the 3rd QB spot, maybe he can work as a big WR.

    The money indicates it’s unlikely he’ll unseat T-Jack, given his non-guaranteed contract vs the fully guaranteed contract of T-Jack, but that hasn’t stopped the Hawks management before. Maybe he plays well in preseason and they can trade one of the QBs to a needy team for something better than a 7th rounder.

    Good trade. Not much to lose, and it could potentially turn into something down the road.

  52. Man, I know it’s really out there, but this addition of Pryor is really exciting. Plus, we have precedent for players changing positions/sides and succeeding on our team already. Sherman went from WR to CB, Sweezy went from DL to OL, and Irvin was a safety before he bulked up and became a DE/OLB. Even Mike Rob and Kam were QB’s way back when.

    Just imagine our offense with Pryor as an H-back/Joker TE? So Percy Harvin is in the backfield with Marshawn, and Pryor is in the slot, with the potential of TP blazing down the seam on a 9 route as a decoy, running with the ball, handing off and throwing a flea flicker to Kearse or keeping on a H-back option?

    The possibilities are endless, and dizzying for opposing defenses.
    This kind of additional wrinkle to our already multi-dimensional offensive attack could really make D Coordinators lose their minds.
    DC’s would waste so much time every week preparing for the handful of snaps the special PH and TP packages actually constitute on offense.
    And it just might be the next logical step for our offense to progress and become a little bit more “DangeRuss” in the playoffs.
    Of course, having a healthy Harvin and Rice wouldn’t hurt, either.

  53. Im not even sure PC knows what they will try with Pryor. I think he makes the team as the third string qb, and they try him on ST and at WR and TE just to see what he can do…

    And if he doesnt fit, they wont hesitate to trade or cut him. Always compete.

    This guy is no savior, but what is wrong with bringing in an athlete of this caliber for the price of the last pick in the draft?!

    C’mon, man, give the guy a chance!

  54. seatowntp says:

    Lot’s of interesting speculation has been forwarded regarding the rationale behind trading for Terrelle Pryor. I think that motive is fairly straightforward. The Seahawks front office is sending an unequivocal message to Russell Wilson, put away the video game controller and get your lazy butt off the couch! Your attitude around film study and your work ethic better change or your name will be on the waiver wire! And stop taking Tuesdays off to prance around at Children’s Hospital with all the poor children who brighten like the sun in your presence! Your position on this team, Russell Wilson, is not guaranteed! Fairly simple to me.

  55. edstang45 says:

    Are you serious seatown for the Fo needing to tell Wilson to get off couch, your work ethic better change…Sheesh ….your post is very strange

  56. montanamike2 says:

    I think Pryor never had a chance on the Raiders, Mr. irrelevant has potential now. A 6-4 WR or punt returner or wherever Pete sees him maximizing his talents, nothing would really surprise me except maybe moving him to kicker. I like the idea of that we kept SF from acquiring him, i’d like to draft that hard hitting SS to sub in for Kam on occasion and maybe play a bigger role if his hip is still lingering. There’s nothing conventional about this team or the players, i like the trade.

  57. Ewalters7354 says:

    I just seen on Twitter Pryor isn’t switching positions…if that’s the case I see no way he makes the team.Unless g e unseats BJ Daniels who I think is better.

    Remember the Hawks second and third stringers murdered him in the final preseason game? Playing for the Raiders are no excuse.I

  58. chuck_easton says:

    edstang45,

    Ummm, sarcasm? And I’m all for getting a great athlete for what would have been one of the last picks in the draft, but Pryor has said all along that he won’t play any position except QB. I don’t think that’s going to change just because he’s now a Seahawk.

    Seattle will have to keep him on the 53 or cut him. He won’t make it to the PS even if he has any eligibility left.

    So, with this move the Seahawks have just signaled that they intent to not only keep three QB’s this year but they intent to carry 3 QB’s on the 53. Pryor may spend many game days in street clothes, but if he’s on the team at all it will be on the active roster.

  59. TallyHawk says:

    This is a low risk move. I’d like to see him make the team as the 3rd QB. Sit for a year and hopefully develop into a serviceable back up to RW. If he can’t beat out BJ Daniels then he has no shot at being an NFL QB because IMO BJ is not an NFL QB.

  60. yankinta says:

    Loved this Move by JS/PC. Let this dude compete with BJ, T-Jack. I’m rooting for Pryor and having him win the backup QB spot. It’d be nice if we can trade T-Jack by 3rd preseason game for a 2015 6th or 7th round pick… :)

    Out of the three Pryor’s ceiling as a QB is the highest,, and that’s not even a competition!..

  61. Ewalters7354 says:

    Chuck, if that wasn’t sarcasm, I don’t know what is lol

  62. yankinta says:

    For those of you wishing to the keep 3 QB on roster of 53,, I seriously doubt that will happen again…

  63. Ewalters7354 says:

    Yank-why is that? Didn’t they have Josh Portis as a 3rd QB? These guys have shown they like keeping projects on the roster.So I disagree.

  64. TallyHawk says:

    If they see the possibility for him to develop into a decent QB why wouldn’t they keep 3 Qbs? It’s not like everyone on the active roster suits up on game days. Weren’t there players who spent the entire year on the active roster but didn’t suit up for any or many games? Mayowa? Micheals for the most part. I just don’t see it as impossible.

  65. ChrisHolmes says:

    I could see Bevell creating a Kordell Stewert type “Slash” role for Pryor; just another offensive weapon to tote out during a game and give the defense fits, make them game plan for it, make them think about it. Another wrinkle.

    Clearly Seattle likes his athleticism. Maybe he makes some special teams plays; maybe they use him in other ways on offense. Who knows?

    And perhaps this is just currency for later. We all know Seattle’s FO likes to think ahead. Maybe they don’t expect TJack back next year, and they feel they can mold Pryor. And maybe in doing so, more people see progress from Pryor during pre-season play and garbage-time play, and someone decides to made a trade for the guy down the road. Maybe long-term Seattle turns this 7th round pick into a 4th or 5th rounder.

    None of us would complain.

    The way I see it: the 247’th pick in the draft may or may not make our roster; odds are against it given our depth. You send that pick to Oakland for an athletically gifted guy that you can use as a backup, maybe as a “Slash” player, and possibly as draft-pick fodder down the road. Seems like a win for Seattle.

  66. yankinta says:

    Ewalters7354 and TallyHawk, it’s because teams are reluctant to keep 3rd string QB’s including Seattle. The only reason we kept 3 QB last year was because we wanted to pick up BJ Daniels from 49ers practice squad. We weren’t planning to last year and that’s why we let go that QB from Cleveland Browns..

    Remember that keeping a 3rd string QB on roster will cost us really good players like John Lotulelei (2013) and Michael Bennett (3+ years ago)….

    If a 3rd string QB has to play in a game, chances are quite low that we wouldn’t win that game. What’s the point of 3rd string QB?? I’d rather keep a QB on practice squad, if we really wanted to develop him. BJ will likely end up on Practice squad.

  67. Ewalters7354 says:

    Yank-but remember Josh Poris being on the active roster?Seattle has never been reluctant to carry 3 QBs.

  68. yankinta says:

    I agree that we used to do that. But that was before we found a Franchise QB in RW. Teams with Franchise QB do not keep 3rd strings QB, especially in the past 2-3 years.

    If you think that’s incorrect, please give me a few examples where Teams with Franchise QB did that. We definitely have not for the past 2 years, (BJ was exception, cuz we were required to do that in order to steal him from 49ers)

  69. Let’s not make this more than it is.

    Hawks traded a 7th round pick for a one year option on Pryor at 705k.

    He’ll have a chance to show what he can do. The Raiders are not exactly a shining example of player development. Maybe being around a first class organization and lead-by-example QB will have a positive effect on Pryor.

    He has starting experience and elite athleticism. He’s young. There is a lot of upside. Maybe he’s the backup QB of the future, as T-Jack is only signed for a year.

    Will they keep 3 QBs? Before this trade I would have guessed no. Now, perhaps. It will depend on who the other bubble guys are.

  70. Dukeshire says:

    Fullback. Punt returner. Personally, I think he has a bright future as a long snapper.

    Folks, he’s almost certainly coming in to compete at QB. There is zero evidence that A – he’s capable of playing elsewhere and B – Carroll hasn’t changed someone’s position as dramatically as being purported here.

  71. HawkfaninMT says:

    I do not really have an opinion yet on the TP trade, simply because we do not know how he is going to be used. If he is brought in to strictly be a back up QB, I do not think we keep 3. he will then have to not only beat out T-Jack, but beat him so badly that the Hawks deem it worthy to pay T_jack to go away as his contract is fully guaranteed.

    If he has told PC/JS that he is willing to play in packages as a Joker TE, or attempt to learn the WR position, or run down Special teams, etc… Then he is kept along with T-Jack as a WR/TE/ST/Athlete and emergency QB. Remember that we have not re-signed our emergency QB yet.

    Last part of this puzzle for me. The Niners were reportedly in on this TP chase. I realize the difference in wins and stats, buuuuuut… Is TP really that much worse the Kaepernick? Both very fast, big and mobile. Both first read and go QBs. Both young and developing. One has had superior coaching and supporting cast and has consequently become more successful. But is TP really that much worse? Just a thought for discussion… I do not have the answer

  72. Dukeshire says:

    Just a few would include the Colts, Broncos, Steelers, and Dolphins. I’m sure there are more, but that’s just off the top.

  73. wazzulander says:

    I like this move, seems like a really good gamble for a 7th. I’ve heard he’s a really hard worker too, so maybe he’ll be able to thrive and develop into a good QB in this environment (good mentor, no pressure to start, being off the raiders…) If he doesn’t though, he could definitely be an asset as an H-back/joker.

  74. yankinta says:

    HawkfaninMT, if you’re comparing TP to CK then I’d say, for me the first thing I notice is how they spin the ball. CK spins the ball much better than TP. Therefore CK is a lot more accurate than TP. CK definitely has much better arm strength then TP as well.

  75. Macabrevity says:

    If the 2nd string QB needs to play a considerable amount of games, then usually the season is tanked for most teams out there. Why keep looking at Pryor as a possible starter, when we should be looking at him for what (I believe) PC/JS see, and that’s an unbelievable weapon in a limited role. Imagine you’re an opposing defensive coach, and you just temporarily knocked RW out of the game on 2nd and long. You feel pretty good about a 3rd and long, facing the Hawks back-up, right? Until you see Pryor trot out on the field, realizing he can just as easily run for a 1st down if it’s a 1 yard plunge or a 10 yard scamper. There’s no way we get a player as unique as Pryor with the Mr. Irrelevant pick. Good trade in my book.

  76. montanamike2 says:

    I’ve heard Pete say before that they should try to draft a QB every Draft. I think that it was a win for the end of the draft pick.

  77. Dukeshire says:

    For sure, that was the Schneider/Packer philosophy. And again, I too like the trade, I’m just saying let’s go easy on the position change conversation.

  78. I think it is possible that RW played thru an injury in the second half last season, as others here have noted. If so, that must have scared the crapola out of the team. All of a sudden, your great season can be over. As great as RW is, we have seen that it is possible for TJ to win games with this great team. Nine points would have won the SuperBowl. If Pryor can be better than him in the future, I say keep 3 QB’s. Of course, I’m a guy that’s been known to wear a belt AND suspenders on occasion.

  79. Southendzone says:

    It’s really hard to read the chicken guts here and determine what they are planning to do with him.

    1) RW is the starter, no question
    2) They love TJ as the backup AND his salary is guaranteed
    3) They don’t typically carry 3 QBs.
    4) They don’t run a gimmick offense.
    a) Wildcat: no
    b) Read Option: Not a lot

    Based on that, I feel like they want him at another position. If I was going to pull something out of deep left field, I’d say they think they can turn him into a star QB and not pay RW next year, though I think this has less than a 1% chance of being their true motivation.

  80. edstang45 says:

    Sarcasm?? Did you read seatown post. To suggest Wilson needs prodding to work harder and to say he is a slacker on film study is strange. Wilson is famous for his peparation….maybe I missed something

  81. TallyHawk says:

    Yank, I’m not saying it will happen just that it’s a possibility. To say that they won’t do it just because teams don’t keep 3 Qbs anymore is a little narrow minded IMO. One thing I know about PC/JS is that they think for themselves and often make unconventional moves. smh

  82. Dukeshire says:

    Teams still keep 3 QBs. Even the ones with so-called “franchise” QBs. See above… Yank is incorrect, here.

  83. edstang45 says:

    Russell Ain’t Goin nowhere…they must see him in another position. ..Gonna be interesting for sure

  84. Ewalters7354 says:

    Duke mentioned some teams I had in mind to prove my point. Just because RW is the franchise QB doesn’t mean teams don’t keep 3.

    Bennett a few years ago go cut in favor of Baraka Atkins (I think that’s his name) not in favor of a 3rd QB.

  85. That’s it! Fire the GM! I can’t believe we gave up the 247th pick for a subpar QB who happens to be a very good athlete… OK, now with that off my chest, could JS/PC have done this in part to keep talent out of the hands of the whiners? Nothing else makes sense unless they are contemplating a position change. If it were anyone but our brain trust I’d be mocking this trade.

  86. seahawkNJ says:

    They could have also had inquires about trading TJack or Daniels. This puts them in a better position to maneuver during the draft…if the option is there.

  87. yankinta says:

    lol TallyHawk and for those that say Hawks will keep 3 QBs on roster this year,, maybe we should make a bet…. :)

    As for our FO being unconventional, I completely agree!. If anything, I see our FO cutting T-Jack, if TP out plays him in camp and preseason.

    As for T-Jack’s salary ($1.5 mil) being guaranteed,, I’m not sure if you people recall, but there was a time our FO paid a guy name Matt Flynn $10 Mil Guaranteed and gave a starting job to some short QB named RW,,. Now I call that being Unconventional,, lol :)

    Ewalters7354 and Duke, let’s compare teams with Fran QB keeping 3 QB versus, not keeping QB. And as for Bennett, he was cut because we needed OL help due to injury during the Season. I argue that we should have cut the 3rd string QB instead, in retrospect. :)

  88. yankinta says:

    Krap, sorry that was way too many smiley faces,, but in my defense, I was smiling a lot the entire time I was typing…..

  89. grizindabox24 says:

    Plain and simple…how often can a team draft a 6′-6″ 230lb guy with 4.4 speed and is an athletic freak with pick #247? The Hawks traded for TP because they would not get that value at that point in the draft. The Hawks now have 4 months to take a look…low risk, high reward.

  90. Ewalters7354 says:

    Ok lets bet that if the Hawks keep 3 QBs you’ll actually start making sense with your post.Because I see a guy who thinks he knows the mind of the FO.

    Dude they have shown they have no problem with keeping a 3rd QB if he has potential. No one said they were gonna keep 3.Just looking at the history of this front office.I personally can care less if they do or don’t.But just because RW is the Franchise QB doesn’t mean other guys don’t stand a chance.

  91. EzraMelech says:

    This was a win/win/win trade. Extremely low risk, (would we find a better overall athlete with the 247th pick?) I doubt it, not impossible but doubtful. As others have mentioned TP brings a plethora of options for that pick. Backup QB (with HUGE upside), Position change (with great coaching(Offensive weapon), Trade bait for the draft (Turning 7th rounder into 4th or 5th rounder). Shoot even just as “insurance” or “competition” for TJack or BJ I wouldn’t complain. I’m thinking of Pete’s always compete montra here. Shoot Just keeping a gifted athlete out of the 49’rs hands is enough for me.

    I don’t see how this is a bad move in any sense.

    My2CentsWorth

  92. Dukeshire says:

    “:Ewalters7354 and Duke, let’s compare teams with Fran QB keeping 3 QB versus, not keeping QB”

    Huh? You said teams with a franchise QB don’t keep 3 QBs on the roster (paraphrase), and asked for a “few” examples. I provided that. You were wrong. Now, if you wish to further qualify that, be my guest, but I have no interest in chasing down a rabbit hole filled with your own imagined B.S..

    And yes, everyone here would have rather seen Mike Teel cut than Bennett. Way to go out on a limb.

  93. yankinta says:

    lol, nevertheless, I disagree that you said Andrew Luck was a Franchise QB. That’s like saying the Lions QB is a Franchise QB or the Bengal QB is Franchise QB. Pretty low standard…

    Let’s review shall we, I said before last Season that Andrew Luck would be an average QB with top 10 potential. I don’t think he lived up to top 10 just yet. Maybe barely top 15th, imo….

    And I said RW was top 10 with Top 5 potential,. He lived up to not only Top 5 but he was Top 3 QB last season.

    “Russell Wilson has 2 turnovers on 42 playoff drives in his career. One was a Hail Mary INT in Atlanta.” :)

    http://www.fieldgulls.com/football-breakdowns/2014/4/17/5546746/reloaded-russell-wilson-the-game-manager-label

  94. MoSeahawk12 says:

    and yet they are. You ask for examples and people deliver and yet you can still never admit you’re wrong 95% of the time.

  95. lol, what is there to admit?? I asked for Franchise QB and he gave me Andrew Luck. smh… that dude threw 7 ints in the playoff last year, and 4 of those ints came against 26th Ranked Defense.

    Imagine if he had to play against Top 5 Defenses like RW does on a regular basis… smh.

  96. Dukeshire says:

    And when faced with being wrong, he redefines a question he plainly asked. So, not only are you wrong, you’re not sharp enough to recall what you asked. Keep digging…

  97. Dukeshire says:

    Anyone who questions whether Andrew Luck is the Colts “franchise QB” is either a fool, or stupid, or simply willfully ignorant.

    What you are attempting to argue is the difference between elite and franchise.

  98. GeorgiaHawk says:

    He gave you the Broncos and the Steelers too.
    No where to hide on this one Yank. Lol.

  99. lol, again you invalidated your own answer to my question, when you said Andrew Luck was a Franchise QB…. I know the Fools on ESPN still think that but I don’t think the majority of people on this blog would agree. At least I hope not. I shouldn’t underestimate the power of ESPN brain washing… smh.

  100. GeorgiaHawk,, true that true that. but at best, that’s like 2 out of a dozen Teams with Franchise QB’s…. and one of those has 37 year old QB with known serious injuries in the recent years…

    and I still wouldn’t count Big Ben as a Franchise QB… at least not Top 12th QB in the league.

  101. Anyone who says Andrew Luck is the Colts “franchise QB” is either a fool, or Brainwashed, or simply willfully ignorant, OR Simply have very low Standard.

    Is Matthew Stafford a Franchise QB?? Is Andy Dalton a Franchise QB?? smh…

  102. Dukeshire says:

    Both are absolutely franchise QBs. Their organizations are committed to each for the foreseeable future. Are they “elite”? I wouldn’t make that argument; others might. But again, it’s two different things.

  103. Dukeshire says:

    In terms you might better understand: Hasselbeck was the Hawks franchise QB for the better part of a decade. Was he elite? Not many would make that argument. He wasn’t Brady or Manning, etc…

  104. Dukeshire says:

    And BTW, the difference between the two is common knowledge.

  105. Well, to me, Franchise QBs mean their organizations are likely to renew/extend their contracts, until the end of their careers.

    I don’t see Matthew Stafford and Andy Dalton finishing their careers as Starting QB for their teams. It’s a bit early to say that about Andrew Luck but if I had to make a bet based what I’ve seen so far, I’d take the bet against the odds about Luck not finishing his career with Colts as well.

    That to me is not Franchise QB. but I see your point..

  106. wazzulander says:

    So, Joe Montana wasn’t a franchise QB?

  107. MoSeahawk12 says:

    Well before yankers time.

  108. EzraMelech says:

    Yank a “Franchise” Quarterback is exactly what it means “THAT FRANCHISES QUARTERBACK” for the foreseeable future. It has absolutely NO BEARING on where that Quarterback ranks in the NFL. If the franchise itself is committed to that Quarterback then he is a franchise quarterback. Someone “that” franchise intends to build around (not look at upgrading or trading in immediate future)

    So is Andrew Luck a franchise Quarterback YES. Easiest way to look at it is this. Is a particular team looking to pick up a Quarterback in 1st round this year. If so then they don’t have franchise quarterback. If there not looking at one in 1st round then they most likely have a franchise quarterback.

    As someone else said Elite or HOF Quarterback vs Franchise Quarterback is comparing apples and oranges.

    My2CentsWorth

  109. There are 32 teams in the National Football League. Each team needs a QB. There are only 5 or so “elite” QB’s in the league. Not many are elite, or even considered elite by the media, or the majority of players, coaches, and fans. There are around 15 franchise QB’s who their respective teams are willing to build around, even though they may not be the absolute cream of the crop. Then there are the 10 or so journeymen or placeholder QB’s that the teams reluctantly go with because they have no better options, but always looking to upgrade.
    We can debate who the elite are, who the franchise guys are, and who are the journeymen. We can even discuss the merits of even having a franchise QB, how much that helps a team win a title due to their exorbitant salary. But this is how the league is structured currently. My2Cents.

  110. yankinta says:

    I see all of your points. I guess I agree. All I was trying to say is these teams will give up on those 3 QBs mid way thru their careers…. Cuz they will realize that they are just not good enough.

*
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