Who'd Have Thunk It? (1 Viewer)

[MarcO]

7 Tds - 1 INT (that clearly should have been caught by Obamanu). Considering what he's done in the playoffs and with the lack of talent around him - you could make the argument he's been better even than Rodgers.

I wonder, does it change your outlook for next year (when/ if he's re-signed)? At the end of the reg. season you could have made a case for the question of why the Hawks would even re-sign him and that he doesn't deserve 2011 draft consideration - but now don't you have to consider him fringe top 20?

maybe not.

 

[Joe Summer]

6.5 yards-per-attempt = way too conservative.

 

[plyka]

7 Tds - 1 INT (that clearly should have been caught by Obamanu). Considering what he's done in the playoffs and with the lack of talent around him - you could make the argument he's been better even than Rodgers. I wonder, does it change your outlook for next year (when/ if he's re-signed)? At the end of the reg. season you could have made a case for the question of why the Hawks would even re-sign him and that he doesn't deserve 2011 draft consideration - but now don't you have to consider him fringe top 20? maybe not.

I'm sorry, but Hasselbeck is one of the WORST QBs in the league and has proven as much over the last 3 seasons. He had 1 good game, and that was the Saints game. In this last weekends game against the Bears, he did not have a good game WHEN IT COUNTED. The score was 28-0 with 3 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter. Hasselbeck and company scored 0 points in 3 quarters, and basically had a bunch of 3 and outs. Then the 4th quarter came around, the Chicago Bears understood that the game was over, and they moved into a soft/prevent type defense and Hass and the Seahawks took advantage of that by scoring a bunch of TDs in garbage time.But all this is moot when you look at Hasselbeck and the last 3 years of absolute garbage he has put out. His QB rating over the last 3 years is: 58, 75, and 73. Yes, this year his QB rating, over the SEASON, was 73 which means that only 3 qualified QBs had a worse rating than Hasselbeck. Jimmy Clausen, Brett Favre and Derek Anderson. FAvre's performance was so horrid that it did what nothing else could possibly have done, pushed Favre into retirement. Derek Anderson's performance was so atrocious that John Skelton, a garbage rookie QB drafted late in last years draft, overtook anderson for the starting QB job and actually pushed Anderson to the bench. And Clausen? Well, he is Jimmy Clausen, a horrible rookie who will most likely be out of the NFL in a year or two.Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

 

[r0llin_game]

Apparently Aaron Rodgers sucks.

 

[kevjones22]

A loser, really? Don't dramatize the sport. He is a fine placeholder but we need to look to the future next year for sure. I still hope hes back to compete for the job.

 

[Wyld Stallyns]

Hass brought his A-game for the playoffs, and it was good to see and all, but let's not get carried away here.

 

[mad sweeney]

7 Tds - 1 INT (that clearly should have been caught by Obamanu). Considering what he's done in the playoffs and with the lack of talent around him - you could make the argument he's been better even than Rodgers. I wonder, does it change your outlook for next year (when/ if he's re-signed)? At the end of the reg. season you could have made a case for the question of why the Hawks would even re-sign him and that he doesn't deserve 2011 draft consideration - but now don't you have to consider him fringe top 20? maybe not.

I'm sorry, but Hasselbeck is one of the WORST QBs in the league and has proven as much over the last 3 seasons. He had 1 good game, and that was the Saints game. In this last weekends game against the Bears, he did not have a good game WHEN IT COUNTED. The score was 28-0 with 3 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter. Hasselbeck and company scored 0 points in 3 quarters, and basically had a bunch of 3 and outs. Then the 4th quarter came around, the Chicago Bears understood that the game was over, and they moved into a soft/prevent type defense and Hass and the Seahawks took advantage of that by scoring a bunch of TDs in garbage time.But all this is moot when you look at Hasselbeck and the last 3 years of absolute garbage he has put out. His QB rating over the last 3 years is: 58, 75, and 73. Yes, this year his QB rating, over the SEASON, was 73 which means that only 3 qualified QBs had a worse rating than Hasselbeck. Jimmy Clausen, Brett Favre and Derek Anderson. FAvre's performance was so horrid that it did what nothing else could possibly have done, pushed Favre into retirement. Derek Anderson's performance was so atrocious that John Skelton, a garbage rookie QB drafted late in last years draft, overtook anderson for the starting QB job and actually pushed Anderson to the bench. And Clausen? Well, he is Jimmy Clausen, a horrible rookie who will most likely be out of the NFL in a year or two.Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

I didn't know you used 3 years to decide who had the best numbers in this year's playoffs. I'm not sure if you watched the Bears game, but Hass was the only Seahawk out there playing at a playoff level. Many of those 3 and outs were flat out drops by the WRs not to mention being against one of the best Ds in the league that shut down the running game and concentrated on nullifying Seattle's only weapon, Hasselbeck.He's had some awful games in the last 3 years and probably should go (though not becuase he's a loser) to Cleveland because he's not a great fit for Carroll's intended offense. But you name me a QB that's going to perform well over three years with no OL, no running game, no WRs, coaching conflicts with the GM, a terrible GM, an idiot coach, and an undersized D incapable of stopping anyone from doing most anything (especially if there's a record to break). But other than that, yeah Hasselbeck's been the problem! A lot of Seahawk fans seem to forget the days before Hass with Kitna, Dilfer and whoever the hell else they had in there behind center.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Aaron rodgers must be down

 

[Leroy Hoard]

this thread shows the last 5 years for playoff QBs.

 

[RudeDog]

This thread is just sad. Please allow the poor Seahawk fans their delusions during the long off-season.

 

[MarcO]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

 

[DropKick]

7 Tds - 1 INT (that clearly should have been caught by Obamanu). Considering what he's done in the playoffs and with the lack of talent around him - you could make the argument he's been better even than Rodgers. I wonder, does it change your outlook for next year (when/ if he's re-signed)? At the end of the reg. season you could have made a case for the question of why the Hawks would even re-sign him and that he doesn't deserve 2011 draft consideration - but now don't you have to consider him fringe top 20? maybe not.

I have a problem with statistics without context. The Seahawks had a great game against the Saints and a crappy game in Chicago. Citing his inflated stats after garbage time numbers against the Bears means nothing.By the same token, another QB could have pedestrian numbers because his team was in control of their game and he did what he needed to do to win.Fantasy numbers do not equate to NFL value.Anyway, I'd settle for Rodgers post season.

 

[ditka...mike ditka]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

Cutler outplayed him....

 

[plyka]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

He did have a pretty good playoffs, I don't want to take much away from him. He had one spectacular game against the Saints, and an OK game against the Bears with inflated stats due to garbage time. I can't say that a QB had a good game against a team (the Bears) if the offense couldn't even score a point and was down 28-0 until the end of the 3rd quarter, and then in the 4th quarter during garbage time amassed a bunch of meaningless stats. In fact, some would say that it was a horrible game when it mattered, but i'm digressing. Anyway, there is no doubt that Hass played his best ball in the playoffs. Unfortunately for Seahawk fans, of whom I am one, the future is no so bright. He has been atrocious for the last 3 years, 2 games just doesn't make up for it, and when you're comparing him against other QBs in the playoffs, he just falls short. Rodgers has been pure magic. Sanchez had a QB rating through the roof against the Jets, I think I heard Rex Ryan say it was 127 or so? That's a ridiculous number. But there is a difference between what Sanchez did and what Rodgers did. Rodgers was brilliant just brilliant. It wasn't just the stats, it was the manner in which he garnered those stats. He put the team on his back. He made throws that were just amazing. I mean, one throw was so perfect with such velocity, that I wager it did not rise above 7 feet off the ground and was a 20 yard pass --a frozen rope. Sanchez, although played well, was uninspiring. He may have had the stats, but you can't compare his performance with that of Rodgers', ya just can't.This is the same i feel about Hass. He performed in the playoffs, especially when you compared it with his putrid performance over the prior 3 seasons, but even while putting up good numbers, you can just see that he is not up to snuff.

 

[cacksman]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

Cutler outplayed him....

Cutler did not play that well and should have been picked multiple times if Seattle played better D.I do not think Hass played well enough to have started a thread about him in the playoffs, but to say Cutler outplayed him is ridiculous. It's easy to put up good numbers when your run game is getting a minimum of 4 yards a play, and the defense is dropping your mistakes.

 

[The_Wolfman]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.

And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.

He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

Cutler outplayed him....

Cutler did not play that well and should have been picked multiple times if Seattle played better D.I do not think Hass played well enough to have started a thread about him in the playoffs, but to say Cutler outplayed him is ridiculous. It's easy to put up good numbers when your run game is getting a minimum of 4 yards a play, and the defense is dropping your mistakes.

You realize the running game only averaged over 4.0 ypc because of Cutler, right? Taylor/Forte combined for 36 carries and 124 yards, for 3.4 YPC, only Cutler's 8 for 43 brings the average over 4.0. Not to mention that Cutler's deep passing kept Seattle from bringing up an 8th man in the box. I know you're a Seahawks fan but come on, guy had over 300 yards and 4 TDs, he clearly outplayed Hasselbeck who didn't do anything until the game was well out of hand.

 

[boubucarow]

I like how every Cutler pass that could have been picked is carefully noted to prove he isn't good. Yet, the same passes for other quarterbacks are completely ignored. Hasselbeck should have been picked by Tillman in the end zone on the 2nd Williams TD. He was picked by Jennings only to be saved by a ridiculous pass interference.

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

He did have a pretty good playoffs, I don't want to take much away from him. He had one spectacular game against the Saints, and an OK game against the Bears with inflated stats due to garbage time. I can't say that a QB had a good game against a team (the Bears) if the offense couldn't even score a point and was down 28-0 until the end of the 3rd quarter, and then in the 4th quarter during garbage time amassed a bunch of meaningless stats. In fact, some would say that it was a horrible game when it mattered, but i'm digressing. Anyway, there is no doubt that Hass played his best ball in the playoffs. Unfortunately for Seahawk fans, of whom I am one, the future is no so bright. He has been atrocious for the last 3 years, 2 games just doesn't make up for it, and when you're comparing him against other QBs in the playoffs, he just falls short. Rodgers has been pure magic. Sanchez had a QB rating through the roof against the Jets, I think I heard Rex Ryan say it was 127 or so? That's a ridiculous number. But there is a difference between what Sanchez did and what Rodgers did. Rodgers was brilliant just brilliant. It wasn't just the stats, it was the manner in which he garnered those stats. He put the team on his back. He made throws that were just amazing. I mean, one throw was so perfect with such velocity, that I wager it did not rise above 7 feet off the ground and was a 20 yard pass --a frozen rope. Sanchez, although played well, was uninspiring. He may have had the stats, but you can't compare his performance with that of Rodgers', ya just can't.This is the same i feel about Hass. He performed in the playoffs, especially when you compared it with his putrid performance over the prior 3 seasons, but even while putting up good numbers, you can just see that he is not up to snuff.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I will not take away a drowning man's life vest. Cling on, the waters are turbulent.

 

[MarcO]

I will not take away a drowning man's life vest. Cling on, the waters are turbulent.

Clearly, I need another week to get over it.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I will not take away a drowning man's life vest. Cling on, the waters are turbulent.

Clearly, I need another week to get over it.

It's alright brother, I'm still trying to get over 4th and 26. You go on and do what is necessary.

 

[DoubleG]

I like how every Cutler pass that could have been picked is carefully noted to prove he isn't good. Yet, the same passes for other quarterbacks are completely ignored. Hasselbeck should have been picked by Tillman in the end zone on the 2nd Williams TD. He was picked by Jennings only to be saved by a ridiculous pass interference.

As I was reading the "Cutler should have been picked off multiple times..." garbage, I was going to post the same.

 

[ookook]

I have plenty of nightmares about 4th and 26.

 

[lyon812]

The original post is definitely a bit over the top, but anyone who blames Hasselbeck for the receivers' inability to make plays didn't watch the game. He did what he needed to do; the rest of the team did not. Morrah, Stokley, and Williams were the goats in this game.

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

I like how every Cutler pass that could have been picked is carefully noted to prove he isn't good. Yet, the same passes for other quarterbacks are completely ignored. Hasselbeck should have been picked by Tillman in the end zone on the 2nd Williams TD. He was picked by Jennings only to be saved by a ridiculous pass interference.

As I was reading the "Cutler should have been picked off multiple times..." garbage, I was going to post the same.

I thought the Seattle WRs really let Hasselbeck down last week. IMO however, Cutler outplayed Hasselbeck. That doesn't mean Cutler shouldn't have been picked off at least a couple of times. He threw some right to defenders. I tried rooting for the Seahawks, but they made it very difficult. They couldn't catch anything, whether is was thrown from Hasselbeck or Cutler. Did you know Golden Tate led them in rushing? 1/13. Awesome. Sorry Seahawks fan. I felt your pain for a while on Sunday.

 

[ditka...mike ditka]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

Cutler outplayed him....

Cutler did not play that well and should have been picked multiple times if Seattle played better D.I do not think Hass played well enough to have started a thread about him in the playoffs, but to say Cutler outplayed him is ridiculous. It's easy to put up good numbers when your run game is getting a minimum of 4 yards a play, and the defense is dropping your mistakes.

can I nominate this guy for the "guy who knows the least about football on this board" award?

 

[DoubleG]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

Cutler outplayed him....

Cutler did not play that well and should have been picked multiple times if Seattle played better D.I do not think Hass played well enough to have started a thread about him in the playoffs, but to say Cutler outplayed him is ridiculous. It's easy to put up good numbers when your run game is getting a minimum of 4 yards a play, and the defense is dropping your mistakes.

can I nominate this guy for the "guy who knows the least about football on this board" award?

Don't kick a Seahwaks fan when he's down. Be better than that.

 

[Eric Stratton]

Does the all encompassing QB rating not spark your fancy? Well, what about the very statistic you used in order to support your argument? TD vs INT ratio. Of course you attempted to use it over a ridiculously small 2 game "sample size" which made it devoid of any value, but what the hell, I'm going to do it for the last 3 years. Over the last 3 years Hasselbeck has thrown 34 TDs and 44 INTs. If you don't know, that is a just down right putrid number. If you add in fumbles, the turnovers go into the mid to upper 50's vs only 34 TDs.And again, I am using 3 years of data while you wish to focus on 2 games, 1 of those games being completely misleading since all the stats from that game were accrued in garbage time when all parties understood that the game was over. You know what they say about a broken clock being correct twice per day? Or how the sun shines on a dogs ##### every now and again? Just cause Hass put up a good game and another ok one doesn't take away from his worst in the NFL type numbers he has put up consistantly over the last 3 years.He is a horrible QB and the Seahawks would be very smart to move on from this loser. In 2005 he was a good QB. Today he is just pathetic and a loser.

Not when it doesn't take into account an INT that bounced off a WR's hands or the double digit drops by his WRs... Or the terrible throws that a QB makes that should have been picks. I watched every playoff game in the last two weeks and he clearly played as well as anyone - other than maybe Rodgers. And given the talent around him you could argue that he even played at a higher level that Rodgers. yeah, and the sample size was intentional - "best QB in these playoffs" - meaning in this years playoffs he's clearly played better than any other QB in these playoffs - maybe with the exception of Rodgers.

Cutler outplayed him....

Cutler did not play that well and should have been picked multiple times if Seattle played better D.I do not think Hass played well enough to have started a thread about him in the playoffs, but to say Cutler outplayed him is ridiculous. It's easy to put up good numbers when your run game is getting a minimum of 4 yards a play, and the defense is dropping your mistakes.

can I nominate this guy for the "guy who knows the least about football on this board" award?

No..that would be DrJ for thinking the Bears weren't trying to score on their final drive against the Packers week 17.