Whitehurst - Traded to Seattle (1 Viewer)

[MAC_32]

You have no way to know this unless you are on the Chargers' staff.

Who from the Chargers staff is on the Seahawks staff?

How is this relevant to your claim?You're trying to make another point that you don't quite know how to put into words, aren't you?

No one on the Seahawks' staff knows anything more about him post draft except for what the team trying to sell him has told them.

 

[Mr. Bojangles]

You have no way to know this unless you are on the Chargers' staff.

Who from the Chargers staff is on the Seahawks staff?

How is this relevant to your claim?You're trying to make another point that you don't quite know how to put into words, aren't you?

No one on the Seahawks' staff knows anything more about him post draft except for what the team trying to sell him has told them.

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

 

[MAC_32]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

 

[Avery]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

 

[MAC_32]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

Is this the time when the thread turns to FBG jibberish because there's only one side of the argument making a point and the other side instead of debating makes totally cool internet jabs at the side making the point? Seems so, I'll just go to bed and check back sometime this weekend to see if I'm proven wrong. Enjoy your blind faith Whitehurst fans!

 

[Iron_Far]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

:(

Oh snap, we have a amateur scout in our midst!

 

[Go deep]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

Am i reading this right, did you just claim to be an amateur scout? :(

 

[Arch Stanton]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

Im i reading this right, did you just claim to be an amateur scout?

Not only that, but an amateur scout that knows Whitehurst sucks moreso than professional scouts on the Chargers, Cardinals and the Seahawks do. He also knows that the merits of the trade will be apparent by this weekend without even the benefit for us non amateur scouts, of seeing CW in action much less who the picks involved turn out to be. Furthermore, he still knows this move sets the team back 3 years. If he's this good now, I can't wait until he turnd pro.eta to add AZ

 

[Hooper31]

...and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, ...

Could we get some clarification on this? What exactly does being an "amateur scout" consist of? I'm curious because I'm wondering if I qualify. TIA.

 

[Couch Potato]

Could we get some clarification on this? What exactly does being an "amateur scout" consist of? I'm curious because I'm wondering if I qualify. TIA.

Maybe I can help. I did a lot of this scouting as a boy. We had an entire nationwide organization of these amateur scouts as a matter of fact. And after several years, if you became very good at it, you could scout the team from Philly.Yup, you got to be an Eagle Scout.

 

[Hooper31]

Could we get some clarification on this? What exactly does being an "amateur scout" consist of? I'm curious because I'm wondering if I qualify. TIA.

Maybe I can help. I did a lot of this scouting as a boy. We had an entire nationwide organization of these amateur scouts as a matter of fact. And after several years, if you became very good at it, you could scout the team from Philly.Yup, you got to be an Eagle Scout.

I've heard of those guys. I wouldn't have felt right about being a guy that referred to himself as a "We blow". If I'm following this correctly, MAC_32 is calling himself a member of the "we blow" club. Got it. Now that I know, I will pass.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

This move makes no sense to me for Seattle. I guess that's why they get the big bucks. I mean, forget giving up anything. Is Whitehurst worth $5 million a year? Then you give up a third. Then you swap 2nd round picks, which is a big drop down. Seems like a lot.

I know draft picks are risky, but they're gold to NFL teams. If nothing else, the Chargers can use those picks to trade for something else. Maybe throw in the third to move up and get someone they really want. They still have the early second and it cost them...Whitehurst?

Sure, maybe he ends up being a great starting QB. Or maybe he ends doing what he's done so far-- nothing. Maybe they see something special in him. The Cowboys knew they had something in Romo, so maybe these scouts see a big future for this guy.

I can say I'd rather be the Chargers in this deal.

 

[Sabertooth]

Matt Bowen seems to think this move could signal the end of the Hasselbach era in Seattle.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Is-Has...ty-at-risk.html

 

[ImTheScientist]

Not sure why all you hate Carroll so bad, but....

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/03/19/1...l?storylink=rss

The Seahawks' acquisition of QB Charlie Whitehurst appears to have been driven primarily by GM John Schneider.

Coach Pete Carroll joked Thursday that Schneider wanted the autograph of Charlie's father David, a quarterback for the Packers from 1977-1983. Schneider scouted Charlie at Clemson, where he fell for the QB's "swagger" and "juice." Explained Schneider: "I liked the way he threw the ball ... It's hard to get guys that can just spin the football like that out of your head."

 

[Balco]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

Im i reading this right, did you just claim to be an amateur scout?

Not only that, but an amateur scout that knows Whitehurst sucks moreso than professional scouts on the Chargers, Cardinals and the Seahawks do. He also knows that the merits of the trade will be apparent by this weekend without even the benefit for us non amateur scouts, of seeing CW in action much less who the picks involved turn out to be. Furthermore, he still knows this move sets the team back 3 years. If he's this good now, I can't wait until he turnd pro.eta to add AZ

No dog in this fight, but I absolutely hate when that is thrown around. There are some extremely knowledgeable posters/staff members on this board, that actually break down game film and scout players. Just because a person is employed as a scout on an NFL team does not make his view gospel. Every scout is right?Was Rick Mirer great because the Bears gave up a first rounder for him? After all, the scouts thought it was a great move.

 

[Arch Stanton]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

Im i reading this right, did you just claim to be an amateur scout?

Not only that, but an amateur scout that knows Whitehurst sucks moreso than professional scouts on the Chargers, Cardinals and the Seahawks do. He also knows that the merits of the trade will be apparent by this weekend without even the benefit for us non amateur scouts, of seeing CW in action much less who the picks involved turn out to be. Furthermore, he still knows this move sets the team back 3 years. If he's this good now, I can't wait until he turnd pro.eta to add AZ

No dog in this fight, but I absolutely hate when that is thrown around. There are some extremely knowledgeable posters/staff members on this board, that actually break down game film and scout players. Just because a person is employed as a scout on an NFL team does not make his view gospel. Every scout is right?Was Rick Mirer great because the Bears gave up a first rounder for him? After all, the scouts thought it was a great move.

I didn't make a blanket statement about the abilities of non pros or imply any infallibility on the part of the pros. In this specific instance, there's an " amateur scout" who has never seen more of CW than has been on TV, has never watched him practice, never spoken with him, stating that he knows more than 3 different pro teams' scouts. I find that absurd.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

I don't know much about Whithurst, but if he was so awful at Clemson would a really good GM like Smith waste a third round pick on him when they already had a young franchise QB?ETA: I'm not saying Smith is infallable, his recent RB picks say otherwise, but he's been a pretty good talent evaluator overall. It isn't like a thrid rounder is a throw away pick, he must have seen something and now two other NFL teams were interested.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Fascinating thread

 

[Brewzers]

Pat Kirwin made an interesting point on Sirius NFL Radio. If Seattle is planning on making an offer to somebody with a second round tender (Pierre Thomas or Melvin Bullitt for example), then trading down in the second round doesn't cost them anything. This trade essentially becomes Whitehurst for next year's third (from Seattle's point of view).

I believe if you make a RFA a tender, your pick has to be at least equal to your original slot. I am not 100% on this, but I think the above scenario is impossible.

Link?

I heard Kirwan say the same thing as Marauder. In fact he said more than once, it doesn't matter what spot you hold in the 2nd round to make an offer. He also mentioned using a poison pill in the offer. That has something to do with salary structure that would make exercising the first right of refusal too expensive. This strategy was used by the Vikings when acquiring Steve Hutchison many years ago. You got to think Kirwan knows what he is talking about. If the Seahawks do go after Pierre Thomas with this strategy, it could prove to be a very savvy move.

 

[Go deep]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd replace Browns fan with someone who watched him play a dozen or so times in school and amateur scouts in his spare time as a hobby, but if you want to single out the helmet logo under my name whatever works for you. He was given every opportunity to succeed in school and at his best was inconsistently average, at his worst it was really, really ugly. Can one of the defenders of this trade who has actually watched him play more than a couple of times say otherwise? I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

Im i reading this right, did you just claim to be an amateur scout?

Not only that, but an amateur scout that knows Whitehurst sucks moreso than professional scouts on the Chargers, Cardinals and the Seahawks do. He also knows that the merits of the trade will be apparent by this weekend without even the benefit for us non amateur scouts, of seeing CW in action much less who the picks involved turn out to be. Furthermore, he still knows this move sets the team back 3 years. If he's this good now, I can't wait until he turnd pro.eta to add AZ

No dog in this fight, but I absolutely hate when that is thrown around. There are some extremely knowledgeable posters/staff members on this board, that actually break down game film and scout players. Just because a person is employed as a scout on an NFL team does not make his view gospel. Every scout is right?Was Rick Mirer great because the Bears gave up a first rounder for him? After all, the scouts thought it was a great move.

Nobody said professional scouts were perfect, just far better than "amateur scouts" on this board. Most the info people are spewing on this board is just stuff they have read on the internet anyway. And watching a couple college games and youtube videos does not constitute "breaking down tape".

 

[Chase Stuart]

Nobody said professional scouts were perfect, just far better than "amateur scouts" on this board. Most the info peeple are spewing on this board is just stuff they have read on the internet anyway. And watching a couple college games and youtube videos does not constitute "breaking down tape".

An individual professional scout might be better than your average amateur scout, but I doubt a professional scout would be better than an average of a 100 random amateur scouts.

 

[Jack Burton]

As a Browns fan I am a resident expert on awful moves and this looks like a move I would expect from the Browns.Sorry Hawks fans, Carroll just set the franchise back 3 years minimum.

Carroll himself set the Seahawks back 3 years when he got hired so whats the difference

 

[Ministry of Pain]

No dog in this fight, but I absolutely hate when that is thrown around. There are some extremely knowledgeable posters/staff members on this board, that actually break down game film and scout players. Just because a person is employed as a scout on an NFL team does not make his view gospel. Every scout is right?Was Rick Mirer great because the Bears gave up a first rounder for him? After all, the scouts thought it was a great move.

Very well put. Just because a guy has M.D. credentials doesn't mean he actually is good at practicing medicine or whtever else. Great post!

 

[Go deep]

Nobody said professional scouts were perfect, just far better than "amateur scouts" on this board. Most the info peeple are spewing on this board is just stuff they have read on the internet anyway. And watching a couple college games and youtube videos does not constitute "breaking down tape".

An individual professional scout might be better than your average amateur scout, but I doubt a professional scout would be better than an average of a 100 random amateur scouts.

Like i said, all the info people are giving here is just stuff they are reading on the internet. Everyone is watching the same youtube videos and agreeing with guys like EBF(speaking of which, why dont we compare some of his rookie rankings against where the guys were actually drafted, and see who had a higher hit rate). Also, i dont think it is just one individual scout that determines where a guy is drafted in the NFL.

 

[Balco]

Nobody said professional scouts were perfect, just far better than "amateur scouts" on this board. Most the info peeple are spewing on this board is just stuff they have read on the internet anyway. And watching a couple college games and youtube videos does not constitute "breaking down tape".

An individual professional scout might be better than your average amateur scout, but I doubt a professional scout would be better than an average of a 100 random amateur scouts.

Like i said, all the info people are giving here is just stuff they are reading on the internet. Everyone is watching the same youtube videos and agreeing with guys like EBF(speaking of which, why dont we compare some of his rookie rankings against where the guys were actually drafted, and see who had a higher hit rate). Also, i dont think it is just one individual scout that determines where a guy is drafted in the NFL.

You seem to say that with certainty. When I break down a film, I don't write down what others say on the internet. I doubt Matt Waldman does, and I doubt EBF does. And while there are probably a lot of people who base their rankings on you tube highlights, there are many who don't.Everyone is going to miss. NFL scouts, and "amateur" scouts.

 

[Marauder]

Nobody said professional scouts were perfect, just far better than "amateur scouts" on this board. Most the info peeple are spewing on this board is just stuff they have read on the internet anyway. And watching a couple college games and youtube videos does not constitute "breaking down tape".

An individual professional scout might be better than your average amateur scout, but I doubt a professional scout would be better than an average of a 100 random amateur scouts.

I don't agree with this at all. I would say the very best of the amateur scouts (maybe top .001%) might be comparable to an average professional but the average of 100 randoms who claim to be amateur scouts would be far, far worse. Most people think they know a lot more than they actually do about player evaluation and there are very few real experts.To put it another way, if I was running a NFL team and I had a choice of either letting Bloom and Lamney handle my draft or use the consensus of the 100 most knowledgeable Shark Pool posters, I would choose Bloom and Lamney without hesitation. I don't think there are 10 posters on this board who are true experts in player evaluation.

 

[Go deep]

Nobody said professional scouts were perfect, just far better than "amateur scouts" on this board. Most the info peeple are spewing on this board is just stuff they have read on the internet anyway. And watching a couple college games and youtube videos does not constitute "breaking down tape".

An individual professional scout might be better than your average amateur scout, but I doubt a professional scout would be better than an average of a 100 random amateur scouts.

Like i said, all the info people are giving here is just stuff they are reading on the internet. Everyone is watching the same youtube videos and agreeing with guys like EBF(speaking of which, why dont we compare some of his rookie rankings against where the guys were actually drafted, and see who had a higher hit rate). Also, i dont think it is just one individual scout that determines where a guy is drafted in the NFL.

You seem to say that with certainty. When I break down a film, I don't write down what others say on the internet. I doubt Matt Waldman does, and I doubt EBF does. And while there are probably a lot of people who base their rankings on you tube highlights, there are many who don't.Everyone is going to miss. NFL scouts, and "amateur" scouts.

Right, and amateur scouts will miss more. Dont take it personally, NFL scouts probably cant do your job better than you either.

 

[Balco]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

 

[Go deep]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

While i dont think that means he will be good, i think it is encouraging that two teams thought he was good. I dont think i have ever seen Whitehurst throw a ball, but as soon as i heard both the Cardinals and Seahawks were interested in him i immediately put in bids for him in my dynasty leagues.

 

[Balco]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

While i dont think that means he will be good, i think it is encouraging that two teams thought he was good. I dont think i have ever seen Whitehurst throw a ball, but as soon as i heard both the Cardinals and Seahawks were interested in him i immediately put in bids for him in my dynasty leagues.

As will, I, but I truly have no idea if he was good. Remember, history shows alot of early picks are wasted in trades on qb's (Rob Johnson, Rick Mirer, AJ Feeley) that didn't pan out. And some have panned out (Brett Favre, Mark Brunell, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselback). So in other words. . . who knows

 

[Go deep]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

While i dont think that means he will be good, i think it is encouraging that two teams thought he was good. I dont think i have ever seen Whitehurst throw a ball, but as soon as i heard both the Cardinals and Seahawks were interested in him i immediately put in bids for him in my dynasty leagues.

As will, I, but I truly have no idea if he was good. Remember, history shows alot of early picks are wasted in trades on qb's (Rob Johnson, Rick Mirer, AJ Feeley) that didn't pan out. And some have panned out (Brett Favre, Mark Brunell, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselback). So in other words. . . who knows

Exactly!!!

 

[Christo]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

Hold it. We're getting waaaaaaaaaay off track here. The poster claimed to know Whitehurst was a bad QB now. I said he had no way to know this. He threw out the amateur scout thing and said he'd watched about a dozen of his college games. No one knows if the poster has any ability whatsoever to break down tape. But even if he does, his experience breaking down four year old tape of college games is irrelevant and in no way compares to the knowledge the pros have about him now.This was just a case of someone trying to BS his way through when there's no way he could have as much (let alone more) knowledge of Whitehurst than the SD, AZ & Sea staffs.

 

[Sabertooth]

Nobody can come in here and say Whitehurst will or will not be a top 20 Fantasy QB in 2010 or beyond. Fantasy success is based on both opportunity and talent. We know that he's got a great opportunity. Among NFL backups with good opportunities, I'd put him right behind Derek Anderson right now. I couldn't believe Hass was 35, he's damn near my age, poor guy. And his injuries seem to be a constant the past few seasons. So Whitehurst, barring a complete implosion in camp, will probably get to start a handful of games this season.

This is the whole point of this thread. He can be bought low, right now. His situation really reminds me of Chad Henne's heading into last season. He was a dynasty steal because the writing was on the wall for Pennington and it was pretty plain to see that Henne would at least get a crack at a few games. Same situation with Whitehurst.

Does he have the talent? Maybe, probably not. Very few guys have the talent to be a succesful NFL QB.

If Carroll decides he does have the talent, is he going to get his shot? Yes he is.

He's worth a gamble in dynasties.

 

[Go deep]

Nobody can come in here and say Whitehurst will or will not be a top 20 Fantasy QB in 2010 or beyond. Fantasy success is based on both opportunity and talent. We know that he's got a great opportunity. Among NFL backups with good opportunities, I'd put him right behind Derek Anderson right now. I couldn't believe Hass was 35, he's damn near my age, poor guy. And his injuries seem to be a constant the past few seasons. So Whitehurst, barring a complete implosion in camp, will probably get to start a handful of games this season.

This is the whole point of this thread. He can be bought low, right now. His situation really reminds me of Chad Henne's heading into last season. He was a dynasty steal because the writing was on the wall for Pennington and it was pretty plain to see that Henne would at least get a crack at a few games. Same situation with Whitehurst.

Does he have the talent? Maybe, probably not. Very few guys have the talent to be a succesful NFL QB.

If Carroll decides he does have the talent, is he going to get his shot? Yes he is.

He's worth a gamble in dynasties.

Do you mean you like Anderson better than Whitehurst?

 

[css2373]

Just curious, what film is everyone watching? Actuall coach's tape, recorded broadcast games, youtube?

 

[MG345]

Just curious, what film is everyone watching? Actuall coach's tape, recorded broadcast games, youtube?

Youtube.

 

[phthalatemagic]

Just curious, what film is everyone watching? Actuall coach's tape, recorded broadcast games, youtube?

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Some of these amateur scouts better be watching real film, instead of televised replays and youtube highlights. They most likely aren't.

 

[Sabertooth]

Nobody can come in here and say Whitehurst will or will not be a top 20 Fantasy QB in 2010 or beyond. Fantasy success is based on both opportunity and talent. We know that he's got a great opportunity. Among NFL backups with good opportunities, I'd put him right behind Derek Anderson right now. I couldn't believe Hass was 35, he's damn near my age, poor guy. And his injuries seem to be a constant the past few seasons. So Whitehurst, barring a complete implosion in camp, will probably get to start a handful of games this season.

This is the whole point of this thread. He can be bought low, right now. His situation really reminds me of Chad Henne's heading into last season. He was a dynasty steal because the writing was on the wall for Pennington and it was pretty plain to see that Henne would at least get a crack at a few games. Same situation with Whitehurst.

Does he have the talent? Maybe, probably not. Very few guys have the talent to be a succesful NFL QB.

If Carroll decides he does have the talent, is he going to get his shot? Yes he is.

He's worth a gamble in dynasties.

Do you mean you like Anderson better than Whitehurst?

They are neck and neck for me. Both have plusses. I give Anderson the edge based on Fitzgerald alone. If he wins the job, he could produce pretty good numbers. Whitehurst is coming into a very murky situation and even if he wins the job, he might not be able to do a lot fantasy-wise with those weak wideouts.

 

[Donnybrook]

Not sure why all you hate Carroll so bad, but....

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/03/19/1...l?storylink=rss

The Seahawks' acquisition of QB Charlie Whitehurst appears to have been driven primarily by GM John Schneider.

Coach Pete Carroll joked Thursday that Schneider wanted the autograph of Charlie's father David, a quarterback for the Packers from 1977-1983. Schneider scouted Charlie at Clemson, where he fell for the QB's "swagger" and "juice." Explained Schneider: "I liked the way he threw the ball ... It's hard to get guys that can just spin the football like that out of your head."

Good link. Another quote from the story:

So the move to pick up Whitehurst rules out the possibility of Seattle taking a quarterback in the first round, right?

Wrong.

“Absolutely not,” Schneider said. “We’re going to compete at every position. And you guys are going to get tired of hearing this, but we’re going to be going down every road. Even if there’s five of them standing there, we’re going to be evaluating all of them.”

Still, I doubt that Seattle goes QB in the 1st round but what about going QB in the 2nd round with the pick they acquired from SD. I keep thinking that Seattle moved down for more than one reason. Unlike the Raiders, maybe they rather gamble that a player will fall to them than reach. It would be extremely interesting if Seattle adds a QB with that pick - whoever it is Lefevour, Tebow, or McCoy.

 

[Go deep]

Nobody can come in here and say Whitehurst will or will not be a top 20 Fantasy QB in 2010 or beyond. Fantasy success is based on both opportunity and talent. We know that he's got a great opportunity. Among NFL backups with good opportunities, I'd put him right behind Derek Anderson right now. I couldn't believe Hass was 35, he's damn near my age, poor guy. And his injuries seem to be a constant the past few seasons. So Whitehurst, barring a complete implosion in camp, will probably get to start a handful of games this season.

This is the whole point of this thread. He can be bought low, right now. His situation really reminds me of Chad Henne's heading into last season. He was a dynasty steal because the writing was on the wall for Pennington and it was pretty plain to see that Henne would at least get a crack at a few games. Same situation with Whitehurst.

Does he have the talent? Maybe, probably not. Very few guys have the talent to be a succesful NFL QB.

If Carroll decides he does have the talent, is he going to get his shot? Yes he is.

He's worth a gamble in dynasties.

Do you mean you like Anderson better than Whitehurst?

They are neck and neck for me. Both have plusses. I give Anderson the edge based on Fitzgerald alone. If he wins the job, he could produce pretty good numbers. Whitehurst is coming into a very murky situation and even if he wins the job, he might not be able to do a lot fantasy-wise with those weak wideouts.

Im not a "scout", amateur or otherwise, but i have seen Anderson play many times, and never seen Whitehurst play. With that said, i will take Whitehurst hands down, no matter what their situation is. I also think the Cardinals prefered Whitehurst, but settled for Anderson once Whitehurst was traded to the Seahawks.

 

[Sabertooth]

Not sure why all you hate Carroll so bad, but....

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2010/03/19/1...l?storylink=rss

The Seahawks' acquisition of QB Charlie Whitehurst appears to have been driven primarily by GM John Schneider.

Coach Pete Carroll joked Thursday that Schneider wanted the autograph of Charlie's father David, a quarterback for the Packers from 1977-1983. Schneider scouted Charlie at Clemson, where he fell for the QB's "swagger" and "juice." Explained Schneider: "I liked the way he threw the ball ... It's hard to get guys that can just spin the football like that out of your head."

Good link. Another quote from the story:

So the move to pick up Whitehurst rules out the possibility of Seattle taking a quarterback in the first round, right?

Wrong.

“Absolutely not,” Schneider said. “We’re going to compete at every position. And you guys are going to get tired of hearing this, but we’re going to be going down every road. Even if there’s five of them standing there, we’re going to be evaluating all of them.”

Still, I doubt that Seattle goes QB in the 1st round but what about going QB in the 2nd round with the pick they acquired from SD. I keep thinking that Seattle moved down for more than one reason. Unlike the Raiders, maybe they rather gamble that a player will fall to them than reach. It would be extremely interesting if Seattle adds a QB with that pick - whoever it is Lefevour, Tebow, or McCoy.

Schneider comes from the Ron Wolf tree. Wolf was known as a great drafter not because he hit on every pick, but because he subscribed to the "throw a lot of #### at the wall and something will stick" theory. He drafted and acquired QBs almost every year and Schneider is not practicing GM-speak here. Frankly, I'm not sure why teams don't do this more at the QB position. It is THE PREMIUM POSITION in the NFL. I'd always have this at the top of my need list, much like Carolina does with running backs...problem being the RB is not as valuable a position as QB. Think about that, if Carolina had Flacco instead of Stewart right now, they'd be in much better shape. I'd love to see Seattle grab Colt McCoy or Dan Lefevour and they might.

 

[Sabertooth]

Nobody can come in here and say Whitehurst will or will not be a top 20 Fantasy QB in 2010 or beyond. Fantasy success is based on both opportunity and talent. We know that he's got a great opportunity. Among NFL backups with good opportunities, I'd put him right behind Derek Anderson right now. I couldn't believe Hass was 35, he's damn near my age, poor guy. And his injuries seem to be a constant the past few seasons. So Whitehurst, barring a complete implosion in camp, will probably get to start a handful of games this season.

This is the whole point of this thread. He can be bought low, right now. His situation really reminds me of Chad Henne's heading into last season. He was a dynasty steal because the writing was on the wall for Pennington and it was pretty plain to see that Henne would at least get a crack at a few games. Same situation with Whitehurst.

Does he have the talent? Maybe, probably not. Very few guys have the talent to be a succesful NFL QB.

If Carroll decides he does have the talent, is he going to get his shot? Yes he is.

He's worth a gamble in dynasties.

Do you mean you like Anderson better than Whitehurst?

They are neck and neck for me. Both have plusses. I give Anderson the edge based on Fitzgerald alone. If he wins the job, he could produce pretty good numbers. Whitehurst is coming into a very murky situation and even if he wins the job, he might not be able to do a lot fantasy-wise with those weak wideouts.

Im not a "scout", amateur or otherwise, but i have seen Anderson play many times, and never seen Whitehurst play. With that said, i will take Whitehurst hands down, no matter what their situation is. I also think the Cardinals prefered Whitehurst, but settled for Anderson once Whitehurst was traded to the Seahawks.

I can see where you'd feel that way as well. I just have a hard time forgetting that Pro Bowl season he had. That said, I don't believe I've ever seen Anderson play. He is just some numbers on paper to me.

 

[Go deep]

Nobody can come in here and say Whitehurst will or will not be a top 20 Fantasy QB in 2010 or beyond. Fantasy success is based on both opportunity and talent. We know that he's got a great opportunity. Among NFL backups with good opportunities, I'd put him right behind Derek Anderson right now. I couldn't believe Hass was 35, he's damn near my age, poor guy. And his injuries seem to be a constant the past few seasons. So Whitehurst, barring a complete implosion in camp, will probably get to start a handful of games this season.

This is the whole point of this thread. He can be bought low, right now. His situation really reminds me of Chad Henne's heading into last season. He was a dynasty steal because the writing was on the wall for Pennington and it was pretty plain to see that Henne would at least get a crack at a few games. Same situation with Whitehurst.

Does he have the talent? Maybe, probably not. Very few guys have the talent to be a succesful NFL QB.

If Carroll decides he does have the talent, is he going to get his shot? Yes he is.

He's worth a gamble in dynasties.

Do you mean you like Anderson better than Whitehurst?

They are neck and neck for me. Both have plusses. I give Anderson the edge based on Fitzgerald alone. If he wins the job, he could produce pretty good numbers. Whitehurst is coming into a very murky situation and even if he wins the job, he might not be able to do a lot fantasy-wise with those weak wideouts.

Im not a "scout", amateur or otherwise, but i have seen Anderson play many times, and never seen Whitehurst play. With that said, i will take Whitehurst hands down, no matter what their situation is. I also think the Cardinals prefered Whitehurst, but settled for Anderson once Whitehurst was traded to the Seahawks.

I can see where you'd feel that way as well. I just have a hard time forgetting that Pro Bowl season he had. That said, I don't believe I've ever seen Anderson play. He is just some numbers on paper to me.

Dont take my word for it, ive owned Anderson since his good year, im bitter.

 

[Donnybrook]

Matt Bowen seems to think this move could signal the end of the Hasselbach era in Seattle.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Is-Has...ty-at-risk.html

If Schneider and Carrol choose to clean house and part way with Hasselbeck I can't say I would blame them. Keeping Hasslebeck under center now would be like the Detriot Lions handing the starting job to Jon Kitna circa 2006. I never really saw the point then and I do not see it now. Whitehurst has been in the league long enough. It time to find out whether he capable of playing on the big stage. If Hasselbeck is healthy they should shop him to a team outside the division.

 

[Mr. Bojangles]

But yet you, a fan of the Browns, know he will suck? Gotcha.

I'd love to read a counter argument with some substance and not just blind optimism like he must've learned something holding a clipboard under Norv Turner and behind Phil Rivers.

Excuse me Mr. amateur scout, but what substance have you offered? Amateur scout

 

[MAC_32]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun. Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

It's a hobby, hence - amateur. Like Balco, who posts some GREAT threads that get little attention on this forum breaking down college tape I like watching players develop and make notes throughout the process - watching games (live and recorded) and following off field progress (in-season and offseason). I watch more than most football fans, and do so for somewhat different reasons (being a fan of lousy teams helps), but not as much as guys who do it for a living. I'm wrong about some (like anyone), but I'm right more than I'm wrong. I also keep an open mind, if something I didn't know about the player gets brought to the table I may change my mind. Two days later and...nothing...a lot of people were easily hooked though...shocking.Whitehurst hasn't shown anything outside of San Diego's coaching staff he may be any different than when he came out of school - an NFL arm with no head. Trade a future 3rd for him? Ok, maybe, I don't agree but that's the sort of trade you make for a backup. Trade down 20 spots in the 2nd and give him $10 mil? That's just silly.

 

[css2373]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

It's a hobby, hence - amateur. Like Balco, who posts some GREAT threads that get little attention on this forum breaking down college tape I like watching players develop and make notes throughout the process - watching games (live and recorded) and following off field progress (in-season and offseason). I watch more than most football fans, and do so for somewhat different reasons (being a fan of lousy teams helps), but not as much as guys who do it for a living. I'm wrong about some (like anyone), but I'm right more than I'm wrong. I also keep an open mind, if something I didn't know about the player gets brought to the table I may change my mind. Two days later and...nothing...a lot of people were easily hooked though...shocking.Whitehurst hasn't shown anything outside of San Diego's coaching staff he may be any different than when he came out of school - an NFL arm with no head. Trade a future 3rd for him? Ok, maybe, I don't agree but that's the sort of trade you make for a backup. Trade down 20 spots in the 2nd and give him $10 mil? That's just silly.

From my experience, the only way to truly evaluate football players is by watching the end zone view of the Coach's tape. These used to be difficult to acquire unless you were a scout or part of the coaching staff. Things may have changed, maybe everyone can get these which used to be treated like gold.Without being able to see the whole field to determine what the back end of the defense was doing, how well the receivers created separation, all I can tell from broadcast tape is what the offensive and defensive lines are doing. And I can get an idea of the QB's mechanics under pressure. But I have no idea, really, why he did or did not throw a pass, took a sack, or scrambled from the pocket, unless I have the Coach's tape which shows everything else the QB saw.

 

[Arch Stanton]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

It's a hobby, hence - amateur. Like Balco, who posts some GREAT threads that get little attention on this forum breaking down college tape I like watching players develop and make notes throughout the process - watching games (live and recorded) and following off field progress (in-season and offseason). I watch more than most football fans, and do so for somewhat different reasons (being a fan of lousy teams helps), but not as much as guys who do it for a living. I'm wrong about some (like anyone), but I'm right more than I'm wrong. I also keep an open mind, if something I didn't know about the player gets brought to the table I may change my mind. Two days later and...nothing...a lot of people were easily hooked though...shocking.Whitehurst hasn't shown anything outside of San Diego's coaching staff he may be any different than when he came out of school - an NFL arm with no head. Trade a future 3rd for him? Ok, maybe, I don't agree but that's the sort of trade you make for a backup. Trade down 20 spots in the 2nd and give him $10 mil? That's just silly.

Interesting then that two teams were bidding on him knowing there was a third round tender for him. Everybody's wrong, but when there're 3 teams' scouts liking a guy then I'll take their assessment over someone who hasn't seen anywhere near the amount of tape they have, much less seen him in person. Of course i should weigh in that you're obviously very much smarter than they are so maybe the Seahawks should just forfeit for the next 3 years since, according to you who knows more than 3 treams' scouts, they're set back three years and CW's contract is just silly. Maybe you should change professions and make billions as a trade consultant.

 

[Balco]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

It's a hobby, hence - amateur. Like Balco, who posts some GREAT threads that get little attention on this forum breaking down college tape I like watching players develop and make notes throughout the process - watching games (live and recorded) and following off field progress (in-season and offseason). I watch more than most football fans, and do so for somewhat different reasons (being a fan of lousy teams helps), but not as much as guys who do it for a living. I'm wrong about some (like anyone), but I'm right more than I'm wrong. I also keep an open mind, if something I didn't know about the player gets brought to the table I may change my mind. Two days later and...nothing...a lot of people were easily hooked though...shocking.Whitehurst hasn't shown anything outside of San Diego's coaching staff he may be any different than when he came out of school - an NFL arm with no head. Trade a future 3rd for him? Ok, maybe, I don't agree but that's the sort of trade you make for a backup. Trade down 20 spots in the 2nd and give him $10 mil? That's just silly.

From my experience, the only way to truly evaluate football players is by watching the end zone view of the Coach's tape. These used to be difficult to acquire unless you were a scout or part of the coaching staff. Things may have changed, maybe everyone can get these which used to be treated like gold.Without being able to see the whole field to determine what the back end of the defense was doing, how well the receivers created separation, all I can tell from broadcast tape is what the offensive and defensive lines are doing. And I can get an idea of the QB's mechanics under pressure. But I have no idea, really, why he did or did not throw a pass, took a sack, or scrambled from the pocket, unless I have the Coach's tape which shows everything else the QB saw.

You are correct. I make observations on receivers, and dbs, but it is very tough to do when you don't have a full "coaches" tape that shows the entire field. I still think you can adequately break down a qb based on what is seen on tv, though. I focus on the lines, especially offensive line when I break down film. And obviously running backs are easy to break down as well.

 

[Go deep]

I cannot imagine how much time a professional scout spends breaking down film. Believe me, I don't envy them at all. I take no offense, breaking down games is something I do for fun.

Just find it funny when people use the argument "Oh, I see, we should all listen to an internet poster over a scout/gm/owner . . . etc." Ridiculous. If you want to say that Charlie Whitehurst will be good. Great, add something substantive regarding him that makes you see that. Same if you think he will be bad. Using the "well, he must be good if 2 teams were competing for him" or "He must be bad because he was a backup" just doesn't do it for me.

It's a hobby, hence - amateur. Like Balco, who posts some GREAT threads that get little attention on this forum breaking down college tape I like watching players develop and make notes throughout the process - watching games (live and recorded) and following off field progress (in-season and offseason). I watch more than most football fans, and do so for somewhat different reasons (being a fan of lousy teams helps), but not as much as guys who do it for a living. I'm wrong about some (like anyone), but I'm right more than I'm wrong. I also keep an open mind, if something I didn't know about the player gets brought to the table I may change my mind. Two days later and...nothing...a lot of people were easily hooked though...shocking.Whitehurst hasn't shown anything outside of San Diego's coaching staff he may be any different than when he came out of school - an NFL arm with no head. Trade a future 3rd for him? Ok, maybe, I don't agree but that's the sort of trade you make for a backup. Trade down 20 spots in the 2nd and give him $10 mil? That's just silly.

From my experience, the only way to truly evaluate football players is by watching the end zone view of the Coach's tape. These used to be difficult to acquire unless you were a scout or part of the coaching staff. Things may have changed, maybe everyone can get these which used to be treated like gold.Without being able to see the whole field to determine what the back end of the defense was doing, how well the receivers created separation, all I can tell from broadcast tape is what the offensive and defensive lines are doing. And I can get an idea of the QB's mechanics under pressure. But I have no idea, really, why he did or did not throw a pass, took a sack, or scrambled from the pocket, unless I have the Coach's tape which shows everything else the QB saw.

You are correct. I make observations on receivers, and dbs, but it is very tough to do when you don't have a full "coaches" tape that shows the entire field. I still think you can adequately break down a qb based on what is seen on tv, though. I focus on the lines, especially offensive line when I break down film. And obviously running backs are easy to break down as well.

This is also difficult as you cant see what the qb is seeing. Sure, you may see him complete a 7 yard pass to the TE over the middle, but you can see that fact that he missed his WR wide open 25 yards down field. This is just one example, but i would think you need multiple camera angles on every play to be able to accurately break down a specifics players game.