Chuck Powell interesting idea - trade Russell

[Anthony!]

I love Russell but it became pretty obvious this year that Marshawn and the defense stirred the drink. Seems kind of a waste to pay any qb a bunch of money. The more we pass, the worse we get. We don't even have to take Watson. What if we took Fournette? Maybe Watson makes it near 25? We could have the running game, the young running qb, have money to get the best tackle in free agency, and still get the Browns' top-3 pick next season as well. Remember, we won with a cheap qb. Let's get back to our roots and win championships.

Hmm and yet that's same defense and Lynch got us nowhere till Wilson got here. Add to that stirred the drink and yet we have made the playoffs every year even without lynch, and have made it at last to the 2nd round even without lynch. Interesting how you use this year when we went as far as we did last year with Lynch and farther than we did before Wilson but with Lynch. Interesting how you pick a year where our QB is injured in game one and not 100% all year, and we have numerous other injuries. What became pretty obvious to any9oen who understands that understands the game is you need to protect your QB, that what we learned. Nothing that happens this year proves we need Lynch nor did it prove he was the thing that stirred the drink. What we prove dis we can win without Lynch and if we improve the pass protection probably win another SB without Lynch. A healthy Wilson and ET and upgrade in pass protection is all we really need. But hey thanks for the laughs, because this whole thread has to be a joke

 

[Anthony!]

Wilson will be the QB for the duration of his contract and likely beyond. The organization would have to be fully convinced that Wilson is on the downside of his career to consider any drastic measure.

While the offseason is fun to conjure up progessive and unique approaches to a roster overhaul, the risk far outweighs the reward in this scenario. Watson could be just another fast running, athletic QB that lacks the intangibles to achieve at the NFL level. We know what Wilson is capable of when healthy-and that's pretty damn good.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

The premise of the OP subject (not the poster, he's posting an opinion from someone else) is a bit short sighted actually. IF we were to do something like this, you sure as hell wouldn't trade Russell then draft a guy and hope he works out. .

I agree the OP was posting the opinion of the writer, but the OP agrees which is hilarious.

 

[rcaido]

It has begun

 

[RiverDog]

I think the emergence of Dak Prescott and what RW accomplished during his first few years has people thinking this foolishness. Guys who step in as rookies are extremely rare. For all we know, Watson could be the next Jamarcus Russell or Andre Ware or Akili Smith....none of those would be a good thing for the Seahawks. It's certain that RW is at least top 10 QB in the league, if not higher than that. Why part with that to create more uncertainty at a valuable position? Doesn't make much sense.

Best post.

And I'll add that Dak stepped into an ideal situation, with a great OL, a HOF tight end, a true #1 receiver, and arguably the best running back in the league. Taking nothing away from Prescott as he surprised the hell out of a lot of us, if ever there was a situation that was set up for success, it was the 2016 Dallas Cowboys.

I am not opposed to trading away one or two of our core players if we had some type of offer we couldn't refuse, which would have to include an All Pro player in his mid to late 20's and a couple of #1 draft picks. Some of us are old enough to remember the Herschel Walker trade and the effect it had. But franchise quarterbacks are too hard to come by. Only if we were blowing up the team and starting over would I give trading Russell a thought.

But we need more than a tweak here or a tweak there to get us back to where we were from 2012-2014. In relation to those teams, these last two editions were sub standard.

 

[Yxes1122]

I understand what you're saying but if you look at the QBs who have won Super Bowls over the last 20 years you would only find 3 to 5 (Depending on how you value Eli Manning) winners that had a mediocre QB. Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer and Joe Flacco are the only non-franchise QBs that have won Super Bowls in the last 20 years. You need a great QB.

I think the biggest loss for the Hawks, and why we have problems, was losing Lynch. Lynch was a generational talent and a generational leader. Maybe not in the outward, conventional way, but Lynch could put this team on his back when he needed to. And, no matter how bad other phases of a game were, Lynch was the consistent heartbeat that set the floor. Getting rid of Russell isn't going to fix that. Having more cap space isn't going to fix that. I don't even think getting Fournette is going to fix that. I think Pete and John reevaluating and tweaking their principles fixes this, not trying to go back to what worked when we had Lynch.

 

[Uncle Si]

I understand what you're saying but if you look at the QBs who have won Super Bowls over the last 20 years you would only find 3 to 5 (Depending on how you value Eli Manning) winners that had a mediocre QB. Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer and Joe Flacco are the only non-franchise QBs that have won Super Bowls in the last 20 years. You need a great QB.

This is the extent of it right here...

the last few Super Bowls have seen the likes of Tom Brady, Matt Ryan, Cam, Flacco, Eli and Peyton, Brees, Rodgers, Rothlisberger, Palmer... and Russel (and some guy from the 49ers).

These guys (even Kaep) have had MVP-esque seasons in the last 5-6 years. The NFL is built around the QB. The fact we got RW's developmental years on the cheap and the Cowboys struck gold (and some luck) with Prescott should not deflect from how important that list of names above is.

Really, you'd be hard pressed to find a team that has remained competitive without a top drawer QB.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

There's a saying, "those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it" or something like that. Who here remembers the following sequence?

Kemp, Gelbaugh, Stouffer, McGuire, Mirer, Friesz, Moon, Kitna, Foley, Huard, Dilfer

I think you are correct on the term. I offer a tiny twist tho..."those that dont remember and learn from history are doomed to repeat it. "


All those qbs???? was that over a 3 day period??? LOL ukeface:

 

[Ozzy]

Teams spend decades trying to find an elite QB, this is a terrible idea although it being the off season I really have no problem with him floating ideas out there. It's fun to think about but Pete wouldn't trade Wilson for multiple first round picks is my guess.

 

[onanygivensunday]

Who is Chuck Powell... and why should we value his opinion?

 

[Hyak]

Aside from the absurdity of it from an on the field aspect, where he's at in his current contract makes him untradeable. The Seahawks would save $ 200 K in 2017 cap space if they traded Wilson as they would have to take the accelerated cap hit for his prorated signing bonus money in his long term deal.

It's laughable that a professional sports show host lacks the fundamental knowledge on this.

 

[HawkFan72]

I get the point of the argument and can even understand the logic behind it.

But it is also assuming we find another QB who can do the things Russell Wilson does. If we were not fortunate enough to have had Russell Wilson fall into our laps in the 3rd round, we likely would have endured Matt Flynn's bad shoulder, not made it to the Super Bowl in the Pete Carroll era, and still be dreaming about a franchise QB who could possibly be better than Matt Hasselbeck.

It is HARD to find good QBs. Assuming we would find one in our first draft after trading Russell Wilson is where I have a problem with the argument.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Who is Chuck Powell... and why should we value his opinion?

He is a no talent radio hack, and you shouldn't value his opinion.

 

[rcaido]

Isn't Powell more of a baseball guy.

Seahawks has just been unlucky with our core players being injured at key times. No need to trade our best player & face of the franchise for unknown draft picks when our Superbowl window is still high.

 

[Silver Hawk]

One of the absolute worst football ideas that I have ever heard. LOL.

Maybe the Seahawks could go back to the days of Tarvaris Jackson or the great Matt Flynn. QB hell.

 

[WilsonMVP]

It's a false equivalency because he's looking through the Tom Brady lens, who is probably the most criminally underpaid player in NFL history. But Brady is ok with it because he's made enough money and his wife is richer than he will ever be. Can't fairly compare anyone to Brady, because he should be the highest paid player in the league. He just willingly takes less.

Another thing that pisses me off about the Pats

Brady is the greatest QB ever and his avg salary is like bottom half of the league for his career..or in the middle at best..like wtf..how..how is that even a thing

 

[rcaido]

It's a false equivalency because he's looking through the Tom Brady lens, who is probably the most criminally underpaid player in NFL history. But Brady is ok with it because he's made enough money and his wife is richer than he will ever be. Can't fairly compare anyone to Brady, because he should be the highest paid player in the league. He just willingly takes less.

Another thing that pisses me off about the Pats

Brady is the greatest QB ever and his avg salary is like bottom half of the league for his career..or in the middle at best..like wtf..how..how is that even a thing

#underthetablegate

 

[Anthony!]

One of the absolute worst football ideas that I have ever heard. LOL.

Maybe the Seahawks could go back to the days of Tarvaris Jackson or the great Matt Flynn. QB hell.

Agree can anyone tell me the last time a team traded a Franchise Qb who is still not in his prime or in his prime and it worked out? I can't recall one.

 

[StoneCold]

Trolling. Pure and simple. It's the times we live in. Nothing but fake ideas.

 

[Anthony!]

It's a false equivalency because he's looking through the Tom Brady lens, who is probably the most criminally underpaid player in NFL history. But Brady is ok with it because he's made enough money and his wife is richer than he will ever be. Can't fairly compare anyone to Brady, because he should be the highest paid player in the league. He just willingly takes less.

Another thing that pisses me off about the Pats

Brady is the greatest QB ever and his avg salary is like bottom half of the league for his career..or in the middle at best..like wtf..how..how is that even a thing

Ahh cant say for his career but right now that is not totally right

Brady avg per year right now 12th and is 20.5 mil and is only 1.4 less than Wilson. However he is 2nd in % avg guaranteed money per year. He is also 4th in avg Guaranteed money per year and double Wilson. People need to understand it is not just the final over all numbers it is how it is designed and paid. Brady has a much higher % of his last contract guaranteed. Also this is not his first contract, when he signed his first big contract it was the biggest at that time. As a % of cap for 2017 New England was 13th while we were 20th. In 2018 New England is #1 while we are 16th. in 2019 New England is 3rd while we are 8th. So basically Brady is taking up a higher % of the cap because of the way his deal is structured.

 

[canfan]

I love Russell but it became pretty obvious this year that Marshawn and the defense stirred the drink. Seems kind of a waste to pay any qb a bunch of money. The more we pass, the worse we get. We don't even have to take Watson. What if we took Fournette? Maybe Watson makes it near 25? We could have the running game, the young running qb, have money to get the best tackle in free agency, and still get the Browns' top-3 pick next season as well. Remember, we won with a cheap qb. Let's get back to our roots and win championships.

I guess I would like to ask that if a cheap QB and a superior running game are a ticket to the SB, why don't the Vikings have 2 or 3 rings by now? I think you might need the "right" cheap QB to make this work. It took us 40 years to get a consensus top 10 QB. I don't think we should just abandon him.

Personally I am cautious about drawing too many conclusions from this year. I think there were many issues that led to the end result (which was still a Division win and a play off appearance!). I would put the lack of talent out of the 2013 and 2014 draft as a larger team issue than Wilson's salary.