Game Thread: Week 18 Season Finale: Seahawks vs Rams

[blstoker]

Honestly, I'm to the point I'm actually hoping the Seahawks extend Geno and announce the deal tomorrow just so this conversation can end. We're not even 3 days since the end of the season and I'm already over it

 

[MrS]

Honestly, I'm to the point I'm actually hoping the Seahawks extend Geno and announce the deal tomorrow just so this conversation can end. We're not even 3 days since the end of the season and I'm already over it

Ill be shocked if they dont extend him. Seattle marinerhawks.

 

[Anointed One]

Darnold would be a pretty risky signing especially if he does well in the playoffs. We really don't know how much of his performance is a reflection of the team he is on.

I think it's 100% a reflection of the team he's on...

 

[Anointed One]

Honestly, I'm to the point I'm actually hoping the Seahawks extend Geno and announce the deal tomorrow just so this conversation can end. We're not even 3 days since the end of the season and I'm already over it

I'll be ok with that as well... There just aren't too many options i'd rather have right now other than keeping Geno...

 

[flyerhawk]

I think it's 100% a reflection of the team he's on...

I'm sure that the teams he played on in the past hindered his development. But I agree that he's also enjoying playing on a very good team that is very well coached.

 

[Screamin12th]

If Darnolds success rides on the team he is on then whats Geno's problem? Our team is LOADED!

If I am the Vikings i DO NOT let Darnold walk and i DO NOT trade JJ. This also comes down to the playoffs. If he has another bad game then Darnold might not get a contract offer from the Vikings.

Yes a QB's success does in fact reflect on the team as a whole and this in turn points to QB's that have struggled on BAD TEAMS as options for the Hawks. The real issue is when a QB constantly struggles on a good team plowing through with mediocre results ... sound familure?

 

[WizardHawk]

If Darnolds success rides on the team he is on then whats Geno's problem? Our team is LOADED!

If I am the Vikings i DO NOT let Darnold walk and i DO NOT trade JJ. This also comes down to the playoffs. If he has another bad game then Darnold might not get a contract offer from the Vikings.

Yes a QB's success does in fact reflect on the team as a whole and this in turn points to QB's that have struggled on BAD TEAMS as options for the Hawks. The real issue is when a QB constantly struggles on a good team plowing through with mediocre results ... sound familure?

Loaded? They have dog shit line play.

Put Geno behind say, the 8th or 9th best line in the league and he's likely a significantly better QB.

No one believes he's a top 10 guy as built right now, and even with a better line he'd be lucky to broach the top 10.

Serious question here though: where does Geno rank on the all-time Seahawks list?

Did we get spoiled enough by Wilson to forget that this franchise didn't get competent QB play for most of it's history?

I'd maybe put Matt ahead of Geno, but who else outside of Russ?

Finding a top shelf QB is hard.

 

[Anointed One]

If Darnolds success rides on the team he is on then whats Geno's problem? Our team is LOADED!

Dude... Stop... our OL is awful... Loaded on offense? We couldn't run the ball... We couldn't run for 1 measly yard on several occassions to pick up a 1st down or get a TD at the GL... It was pathetic... Is it because Geno did a poor job at handing off the ball? I know you'd like to blame Geno for every single problem on the Seahawks but stating that we were loaded is a bit of a reach...

 

[flyerhawk]

Loaded? They have dog shit line play.

Put Geno behind say, the 8th or 9th best line in the league and he's likely a significantly better QB.

No one believes he's a top 10 guy as built right now, and even with a better line he'd be lucky to broach the top 10.

Serious question here though: where does Geno rank on the all-time Seahawks list?

Did we get spoiled enough by Wilson to forget that this franchise didn't get competent QB play for most of it's history?

I'd maybe put Matt ahead of Geno, but who else outside of Russ?

Finding a top shelf QB is hard.

I think that first part about the team being loaded is where the disconnect is for a lot of us. A lot of us think the team has really good skill position players on offense but OL is a HUGE problem. And it's not just the starters. Linemen get hurt. You need to have decent backups as well.

Just about everyone said that the biggest question mark for this team before the season was the OL line, particularly the interior line. And it turned out to be true. It didn't help that we had a turnstile at RT due to injuries this year.

As for Geno he would be either 3 or 4 on my top all time QB list. Russ #1 of course. But I would put Krieg as No. 2. I would probably put Geno ahead of Hass largely because Hass had a MUCH better OL to work with

 

[flyerhawk]

Here is an interesting comparison of two non-Seahawk QBs that are not going to be Seahawk QBs anytime soon.

Player 1

3,568 yards 25 TDs 9 Ints

Player 2

3541 yards 20 TDs 6 Ints

Player 1 is likely going to be Rookie of the Year
Player 2 is being talked about as a bust after 1 year

Player 1's team was 12-5 and in the playoffs
Player 2's team was 5-12 and a top 10 draft pick

Point being, winning and losing is a team effort and QBs tend to be judged by the team results more than their own performance.

Obviously there is more to being a QB than 3 stats. But those 3 stats tend to be the stats fans focus on a lot.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

I think it's 100% a reflection of the team he's on...

Agreed... and Geno played pretty damn well on his first year with Seattle. Almost identical to Darnold. And then declined a bit in 2023, and a bit more in 2024 - which I think could be relegated to coaching and other factors in all instances.

Now someone might say, "Geno went 9-8, the Vikes went 14-3!"

Well, in 2022/23 - Seattle's defense was ABYSMAL, Vikes are middle of the road this year - and that CERTAINLY results in more wins.

Back to Geno, despite a bad defense Geno did great (just like Darnold, again almost identical first year), but when the running game took a bit more of a toll in year 2, things started to slouch, and then he got this weird new offensive system with a new HC and an OC that IMO didn't know wtf he was doing when it came to an NFL offense.

Rushing per Geno years in Seattle:
2022 - 2K+ yards, 4.8YPC
2023 - 1.6K yards, 4.1YPC
2024 - 1.6K yards, 4.2YPC

Now in 2024 the defense (in the 2nd half) improved quite a bit and is on par with the Vikings, we went 10-7. If we'd had a running game (not to mention a FAIRLY competent OL and a non-rookie OC that was bringing in a College system), I'd imagine Geno's stats would've been much better and on par with Darnold again and Seattle would be in the playoffs. It didn't help we lost quite a few games we should've won while new coaches were figuring things out (including the defense).

Point all being: I see no fuckin' point to cut Geno (other than age) and bring in Darnold for some massive contract he may command. Makes zero sense. We can CERTAINLY keep Geno for cheaper for a little while longer since we're paying him at a bit of a low point compared to Darnold's amazing season.

 

[MrS]

As for Geno he would be either 3 or 4 on my top all time QB list. Russ #1 of course. But I would put Krieg as No. 2. I would probably put Geno ahead of Hass largely because Hass had a MUCH better OL to work with

id say geno has more talent than hasselbeck, but he is not the better QB.

 

[flyerhawk]

id say geno has more talent than hasselbeck, but he is not the better QB.

Replace Charles Cross and Laken Tomlinson with Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson and how many more wins do you think we would have had this year?

I loved Hass but I think he was a much bigger beneficiary of having a great offense around him than Geno has.

Having said all that, I'm fine with anyone who wants to put Hass above Geno. It doesn't matter that much to me.

 

[blstoker]

Loaded? They have dog shit line play.

Put Geno behind say, the 8th or 9th best line in the league and he's likely a significantly better QB.

No one believes he's a top 10 guy as built right now, and even with a better line he'd be lucky to broach the top 10.

Serious question here though: where does Geno rank on the all-time Seahawks list?

Did we get spoiled enough by Wilson to forget that this franchise didn't get competent QB play for most of it's history?

I'd maybe put Matt ahead of Geno, but who else outside of Russ?

Finding a top shelf QB is hard.

I don't know if I would say the Seahawks didn't get competent QB play for most of their history. They've had their run of Mirers, Gelbaughs and McGwires in the early 90s, but overall, the team has 4 QBs starting over half the team's total games in 49 seasons. While it's true that the Hawks haven't had the success of a Packers team with an unbelievable string of quality QBs for the last 30+ years, they haven't been the Browns either (who have more starting QBs in the last 20 years than Seattle has ever had).

As far as where I have Geno in all-time list of best QBs in Seattle, I'd put him in at #4. I still have Krieg listed higher.

 

[MrS]

Replace Charles Cross and Laken Tomlinson with Walter Jones and Steve Hutchinson and how many more wins do you think we would have had this year?

put dk and lockett and jsn on the 2002-2007 teams and how many superbowls do we win?

I loved Hass but I think he was a much bigger beneficiary of having a great offense around him than Geno has.

OL yes but not at other positions sans RB MAYBE. Nobody benefited more than alexander and i love the guy but a lot of Rbs would have had a sick career behind that line.

Having said all that, I'm fine with anyone who wants to put Hass above Geno. It doesn't matter that much to me.

Fair.

 

[flyerhawk]

put dk and lockett and jsn on the 2002-2007 teams and how many superbowls do we win?

Maybe we win the one against the Steelers. The offense was Shaun Alexander that year. He had 1880 yards rushing and 28 TDs. And it's not like our receivers sucked. Engram and Jackson were quality players and Jurevicious had 10 TDs that year.

This is a really weird take coming from you, a guy who preaches that games are won in the trenches. Hutch and Jones are Hall of Famers. Neither DK or TL are Hall of Famers.

OL yes but not at other positions sans RB MAYBE. Nobody benefited more than alexander and i love the guy but a lot of Rbs would have had a sick career behind that line.

But that's the point. The year the Seahawks got to the Super Bowl, the were 100% on converting 3rd and 2 or shorter. 100%. That's absolutely insane.

 

[MrS]

Maybe we win the one against the Steelers. The offense was Shaun Alexander that year. He had 1880 yards rushing and 28 TDs. And it's not like our receivers sucked. Engram and Jackson were quality players and Jurevicious had 10 TDs that year.

This is a really weird take coming from you, a guy who preaches that games are won in the trenches. Hutch and Jones are Hall of Famers. Neither DK or TL are Hall of Famers.



But that's the point. The year the Seahawks got to the Super Bowl, the were 100% on converting 3rd and 2 or shorter. 100%. That's absolutely insane.

Would you take engram and jackson and jj over our current Wrs? Of course not, the talent level is extremely lopsided.

My point is that geno benefits from the talent around him too, in my opinion geno doesnt elevate those guys where hasselbeck did.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Would you take engram and jackson and jj over our current Wrs? Of course not, the talent level is extremely lopsided.

My point is that geno benefits from the talent around him too, in my opinion geno doesnt elevate those guys where hasselbeck did.

Mmm, usually an OL is more important than amazing WRs, because it helps your run game as well. So you're helping 2 areas of the offense instead of just one (yes I get wideouts block and can stretch a field, etc.). Now ideally you want a bit of a balance. Look at Joe Burrow. Talented as hell but the Bengals sucked even with 2 elite WRs because the OL is pathetic and Burrow like Geno was getting rocked nearly 50 times this season (course their defense sucked too lol).

As for your comment on the WR talent is EXTREMELY lopsided.. Well...

DK/Jackson are almost identical. 14-14.5 YPC, about the same TDs, yards per season, etc. They do thing a little differently but that's a wash.
Engram and Lockett TODAY are basically the same player. Problem with Engram is he couldn't stay healthy but when he did he was good for 900-1K per season.
JSN is a different case and JJ did not compare to JSN by any stretch.

Is that lopsided? Eh sure, because of one player. EXTREMELY lopsided? No. Extremely lopsided is the OL comparing to the mid 2000s cast.

So you're comparing one player. Do I get rid of JSN or DK (about the same impact - JSN has the higher upside because he's younger) to GET Steve Hutchinson and JJ? Abso-fuckin' lutely. The run game would INSTANTLY improve and Cross/Olu (or whoever) would profit as well because you have a top 5 all time guard. And Cross had a great year, Walter Jones (yet if ever) he is not.

Would Geno do better? Absolutely... because we'd have an effective running game and he'd have more time in the pocket. Sure you might lose a talented WR, but that does F all if you have 2-3 seconds to throw every time and your running game is averaging barely over 4 YPC and you can't convert any short yardage situations. Kind of like those Bengals lol...

 

[flyerhawk]

Would you take engram and jackson and jj over our current Wrs? Of course not, the talent level is extremely lopsided.

My point is that geno benefits from the talent around him too, in my opinion geno doesnt elevate those guys where hasselbeck did.

OK. I guess. Is there a single lineman on this team you would take over the guy on the 2005 team?

 

[MrS]

Mmm, usually an OL is more important than amazing WRs, because it helps your run game as well. So you're helping 2 areas of the offense instead of just one (yes I get wideouts block and can stretch a field, etc.). Now ideally you want a bit of a balance. Look at Joe Burrow. Talented as hell but the Bengals sucked even with 2 elite WRs because the OL is pathetic and Burrow like Geno was getting rocked nearly 50 times this season (course their defense sucked too lol).

As for your comment on the WR talent is EXTREMELY lopsided.. Well...

DK/Jackson are almost identical. 14-14.5 YPC, about the same TDs, yards per season, etc. They do thing a little differently but that's a wash.
Engram and Lockett TODAY are basically the same player. Problem with Engram is he couldn't stay healthy but when he did he was good for 900-1K per season.
JSN is a different case and JJ did not compare to JSN by any stretch.

Is that lopsided? Eh sure, because of one player. EXTREMELY lopsided? No. Extremely lopsided is the OL comparing to the mid 2000s cast.

So you're comparing one player. Do I get rid of JSN or DK (about the same impact - JSN has the higher upside because he's younger) to GET Steve Hutchinson and JJ? Abso-fuckin' lutely. The run game would INSTANTLY improve and Cross/Olu (or whoever) would profit as well because you have a top 5 all time guard. And Cross had a great year, Walter Jones (yet if ever) he is not.

Would Geno do better? Absolutely... because we'd have an effective running game and he'd have more time in the pocket. Sure you might lose a talented WR, but that does F all if you have 2-3 seconds to throw every time and your running game is averaging barely over 4 YPC and you can't convert any short yardage situations. Kind of like those Bengals lol...

2005 OL would have elevated geno for sure, but our current Wrs would have been elevated by hasselbeck. The fact hasselbeck got similar production out of Darrel fucking jackson as geno did with dk says everything.
Loved djack but he was very average talent wise and dropped a shit load of passes.