Roster projection in my view after tonight/ Not JS/PC

[xgeoff]

Really good list here, I agree with most of it.

 

[minormillikin]

I support keeping BJ Daniels over Tjack.

I would cut TJack and keep Archer as #2 and Daniels as #3 QB and as a WR.

What do you like about Archer?

 

[xgeoff]

I support keeping BJ Daniels over Tjack.

I would cut TJack and keep Archer as #2 and Daniels as #3 QB and as a WR.

What do you like about Archer?

What I have observed is that he has great composure back in the pocket throws a nice ball and hits his receivers. I don't think he runs the read option well, but I do think that he moved the offense well in the early games. I haven't seen anything to like in TJack in, well, ever.

 

[Mike 4G]

Do we have an official Seahawks cuts thread? Not seeing one.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

I think you have to keep TJack. Guaranteed money or not. Here's why:

One, he's still probably a much better quarterback than Daniels. There's a little more to QB than running read-option all over Oakland's scrubs. That being said, Daniels would be a nice emergency QB3 solution.

Two, if BJ is your primary backup, you can't use him as anything else. You can't risk your QB2 getting injured on punt coverage and then have your QB1 go down later. That would sort of defeat the purpose of his versatility. It only makes sense to have him do other things if he's just your emergency third option.

Plus, Carroll has repeatedly reiterated that TJack would be "ready" for Week One. Seems to suggest that decision has already been made.

I am with you on this for one reason. We did what you said in your Number 2 with Seneca Wallace. He was our backup only and we could not use him for WR or anything else during Hasselbecks tenure. We did do some plays late, but by then we could not help Seneca mature and grow into something we could use besides a bench warmer. The backup is ONLY a backup. You cant use him/her as anything else.