Top 5 Seahawks QB's of all time?

[Sgt. Largent]

Pretty sad that our 5th best QB in 38 years is a guy who only played 39 games and went 18-15 in 2 1/2 mediocre seasons.

 

[XxXdragonXxX]

KITNA?

#1. Wilson
#2. Hasselbeck
#2A. Zorn
#4. Kreig
#5. Tjack

Tjack????? Over Moon????

 

[IBleedBlueAndGreen]

Do people really have a good understanding of Jim Zorn as a quarterback in Seattle?

Yes he played nine seasons. That is a long time.

During that time he threw 107 touchdowns, AND 133 INTERCEPTIONS. His quarterback rating in his entire Seahawks career was 67.9. His completion percentage was 53.3 PERCENT. He averaged 160 YARDS PER GAME passing. Steve Largent, a hall of famer wide receiver was on the team for Zorn's entire Seahawks career. I don't understand why Hawk Nation has this appreciation of him as a quality quarterback like it does.

 

[pehawk]

Do people really have a good understanding of Jim Zorn as a quarterback in Seattle?

Yes he played nine seasons. That is a long time.

During that time he threw 107 touchdowns, AND 133 INTERCEPTIONS. His quarterback rating in his entire Seahawks career was 67.9. His completion percentage was 53.3 PERCENT. He averaged 160 YARDS PER GAME passing. Steve Largent, a hall of famer wide receiver was on the team for Zorn's entire Seahawks career. I don't understand why Hawk Nation has this appreciation of him as a quality quarterback like it does.

How old are you?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

KITNA?

#1. Wilson
#2. Hasselbeck
#2A. Zorn
#4. Kreig
#5. Tjack

Tjack????? Over Moon????

Moon's a gray area for me. He barely played two seasons, and yeah he's in the HOF, but he was nowhere near that player by the time he got here.

So in the end, I don't really consider him a Seahawk QB like these other guys who were drafted or traded here young and played for an extended period of time.

 

[Seahwkgal]

1. Russell Wilson- even in just his 3rd season, his Super Bowl championship trumps all.

2. Matt Hasselbeck- NFC championship, most passing yards, and three Pro Bowl seasons.

3. Dave Krieg- most TDs, second most yards, three playoff wins, and three Pro Bowl seasons.

4. Jim Zorn- NFC Offensive Rookie of the Year, three-consecutive 3,000 yard seasons, and Second-Team All-Pro in 1978.

5. Jon Kitna- only other QB in team history to lead the team to the playoffs.

Picking a fifth best QB is the hard part. Warren Moon almost wins by default because he's the only other QB in team history to go to the Pro Bowl, and he won Pro Bowl MVP. Moon threw for 3,678 yards and 25 TDs that year at 41 years old.

Rick Mirer was so disappointing that it's had to write his name here, though they were able to get a first round pick out of him. He is still fourth all time in passing yards and won AFC Rookie of the Year in 1993.

^^^^^^This, This, This!!!!!

I have a real soft spot for Zorn though. He was my first crush and I am still Horny for Zorny. :3:

 

[XxXdragonXxX]

KITNA?

#1. Wilson
#2. Hasselbeck
#2A. Zorn
#4. Kreig
#5. Tjack

Tjack????? Over Moon????

Moon's a gray area for me. He barely played two seasons, and yeah he's in the HOF, but he was nowhere near that player by the time he got here.

So in the end, I don't really consider him a Seahawk QB like these other guys who were drafted or traded here young and played for an extended period of time.

But TJack pretty much fits the same criteria. He was picked up as a free agent, started for only 1 season, traded away, re signed the next season and has been a backup for 1.5 seasons. He has a whole .5 more seasons (and 7 fewer games played) than Moon with Seattle. The difference, Moon was actually good for a year, made a pro bowl in fact.

 

[Hasselbeck]

1A. Matt Flynn
1B. Russell Wilson
3. Matt Hasselbeck
4. Jim Zorn
5. Dave Krieg

 

[Sgt. Largent]

But TJack pretty much fits the same criteria. He was picked up as a free agent, started for only 1 season, traded away, re signed the next season and has been a backup for 1.5 seasons. He has a whole .5 more seasons (and 7 fewer games played) than Moon with Seattle. The difference, Moon was actually good for a year, made a pro bowl in fact.

I agree, and why I wouldn't have T-Jack on my list either.

In the end all this thread has done is make me depressed about how god awful our QB's have been. Thank baby jesus for Russell or this list would have made me find the nearest ledge to jump off.

 

[Sac]

1) Russell "da gawd" Wilson
2) Hass
3) Krieg
4) Zorn
5) Kitna

 

[volsunghawk]

But TJack pretty much fits the same criteria. He was picked up as a free agent, started for only 1 season, traded away, re signed the next season and has been a backup for 1.5 seasons. He has a whole .5 more seasons (and 7 fewer games played) than Moon with Seattle. The difference, Moon was actually good for a year, made a pro bowl in fact.

I agree, and why I wouldn't have T-Jack on my list either.

In the end all this thread has done is make me depressed about how god awful our QB's have been. Thank baby jesus for Russell or this list would have made me find the nearest ledge to jump off.

I put T-Jack on my list because I didn't see any substantive difference in his performance as the Seahawks starter and the performances of Kitna or Moon, and also because T-Jack has gotten crapped on way too much on this board.

In all honesty, I don't think you can make a top 5 QBs in franchise history list for the Seahawks. We've only had 4 worth any real mention.

 

[drdiags]

When Zorn came on-board, expansion teams were expected to stink for a long period of time. The talent level was bottom of the barrel and for him to provide any kind of decent QB play with that talent is commendable. Sure, his stats are pretty bleak looking at the glamour boys of his time, but he did his job providing a bridge to future QBs by helping to make the team competitive. It isn't like the team was 0-16 every year. The fact they never were 0-16 during his years speaks to his play as well as the other junk-yard dog players.

One of the Seahawks biggest problems was their early years, they had more success than their talent level should have allowed them, thus putting them the perpetual state of not being able to get the top-tier athletes over a big span of time. That and maybe before McCormick, they had drafts that didn't seem to get them the sustaining talent they needed.

Sorry, rambling here.

 

[pehawk]

When Zorn came on-board, expansion teams were expected to stink for a long period of time. The talent level was bottom of the barrel and for him to provide any kind of decent QB play with that talent is commendable. Sure, his stats are pretty bleak looking at the glamour boys of his time, but he did his job providing a bridge to future QBs by helping to make the team competitive. It isn't like the team was 0-16 every year. The fact they never were 0-16 during his years speaks to his play as well as the other junk-yard dog players.

One of the Seahawks biggest problems was their early years, they had more success than their talent level should have allowed them, thus putting them the perpetual state of not being able to get the top-tier athletes over a big span of time. That and maybe before McCormick, they had drafts that didn't seem to get them the sustaining talent they needed.

Sorry, rambling here.

I discovered football around 1982. So, I for one dig the rambling.

Even though I never saw it, I've always graded Zorn on a curve, as well. And, if I'm not mistaken, there was no salary cap then (nor free agency). So, the disadvantages we're massive for expansion clubs. They we're fielding teams using their 12 picks, and most likely UDFA's.

 

[IBleedBlueAndGreen]

Do people really have a good understanding of Jim Zorn as a quarterback in Seattle?

Yes he played nine seasons. That is a long time.

During that time he threw 107 touchdowns, AND 133 INTERCEPTIONS. His quarterback rating in his entire Seahawks career was 67.9. His completion percentage was 53.3 PERCENT. He averaged 160 YARDS PER GAME passing. Steve Largent, a hall of famer wide receiver was on the team for Zorn's entire Seahawks career. I don't understand why Hawk Nation has this appreciation of him as a quality quarterback like it does.

How old are you?

His poor stats are dependent on my age?

Look I understand the limitations in talent that Jim Zorn had to work with. I watched this team struggle through their first decade of existence. However, I still don't understand why Zorn has historically been given as much love as he has by our fan base. He had TWO seasons in his career where he threw more touchdowns than he did interceptions. TWO. The guy was mediocre (and maybe because the majority of the team was worse than mediocre it has some people feel like he should be given more credit than I feel like he deserves).

I'm sure there are many out there that disagree with me. Just an opinion.

 

[pehawk]

Do people really have a good understanding of Jim Zorn as a quarterback in Seattle?

Yes he played nine seasons. That is a long time.

During that time he threw 107 touchdowns, AND 133 INTERCEPTIONS. His quarterback rating in his entire Seahawks career was 67.9. His completion percentage was 53.3 PERCENT. He averaged 160 YARDS PER GAME passing. Steve Largent, a hall of famer wide receiver was on the team for Zorn's entire Seahawks career. I don't understand why Hawk Nation has this appreciation of him as a quality quarterback like it does.

How old are you?

His poor stats are dependent on my age?

No, I have a curious mind. So, if you we're lets say 45+ years of age, I'd be curious to hear you expand on your opinion. I would be curious on your thoughts and feelings for the talent around him. Because you're opinion would be interesting to me because I didn't get to see him play.

That's why I asked your age Sugarpants, nothing else.

 

[volsunghawk]

When Zorn came on-board, expansion teams were expected to stink for a long period of time. The talent level was bottom of the barrel and for him to provide any kind of decent QB play with that talent is commendable. Sure, his stats are pretty bleak looking at the glamour boys of his time, but he did his job providing a bridge to future QBs by helping to make the team competitive. It isn't like the team was 0-16 every year. The fact they never were 0-16 during his years speaks to his play as well as the other junk-yard dog players.

One of the Seahawks biggest problems was their early years, they had more success than their talent level should have allowed them, thus putting them the perpetual state of not being able to get the top-tier athletes over a big span of time. That and maybe before McCormick, they had drafts that didn't seem to get them the sustaining talent they needed.

Sorry, rambling here.

I discovered football around 1982. So, I for one dig the rambling.

Even though I never saw it, I've always graded Zorn on a curve, as well. And, if I'm not mistaken, there was no salary cap then (nor free agency). So, the disadvantages we're massive for expansion clubs. They we're fielding teams using their 12 picks, and most likely UDFA's.

There was the 1976 expansion draft that allowed the Seahawks and Buccaneers to select three players from each of the other 26 teams (for a total of 39 players for each expansion club). The existing teams provided a list of "unprotected" players from which the new clubs could choose. If a player was selected from a team, that team was allowed to "protect" 2 more players on its list. That's how the expansion teams filled out their rosters and how we ended up with Dave Brown (from the Steelers).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_NFL_expansion_draft

 

[IBleedBlueAndGreen]

Do people really have a good understanding of Jim Zorn as a quarterback in Seattle?

Yes he played nine seasons. That is a long time.

During that time he threw 107 touchdowns, AND 133 INTERCEPTIONS. His quarterback rating in his entire Seahawks career was 67.9. His completion percentage was 53.3 PERCENT. He averaged 160 YARDS PER GAME passing. Steve Largent, a hall of famer wide receiver was on the team for Zorn's entire Seahawks career. I don't understand why Hawk Nation has this appreciation of him as a quality quarterback like it does.

How old are you?

His poor stats are dependent on my age?

No, I have a curious mind. So, if you we're lets say 45+ years of age, I'd be curios to hear you expand on your opinion. I would be curios on your thoughts and feelings for the talent around him. Because you're opinion would be interesting to me because I didn't get to see him play.

That's why I asked your age Sugarpants, nothing else.

I am honestly glad you're back pehawk. I think you bring an element to this board that we were missing for a while. Cheers! :thirishdrinkers:

 

[Cartire]

Do people really have a good understanding of Jim Zorn as a quarterback in Seattle?

Yes he played nine seasons. That is a long time.

During that time he threw 107 touchdowns, AND 133 INTERCEPTIONS. His quarterback rating in his entire Seahawks career was 67.9. His completion percentage was 53.3 PERCENT. He averaged 160 YARDS PER GAME passing. Steve Largent, a hall of famer wide receiver was on the team for Zorn's entire Seahawks career. I don't understand why Hawk Nation has this appreciation of him as a quality quarterback like it does.

How old are you?

His poor stats are dependent on my age?

Look I understand the limitations in talent that Jim Zorn had to work with. I watched this team struggle through their first decade of existence. However, I still don't understand why Zorn has historically been given as much love as he has by our fan base. He had TWO seasons in his career where he threw more touchdowns than he did interceptions. TWO. The guy was mediocre (and maybe because the majority of the team was worse than mediocre it has some people feel like he should be given more credit than I feel like he deserves).

I'm sure there are many out there that disagree with me. Just an opinion.

No, but his poor stats are also dependent on the era he played.

Go ahead and put Manning and Brady in that era when defenses could actually effect routes and destroy QB's without giving up 50 yard penalties.

 

[oldhawkfan]

Do people really have a good understanding of Jim Zorn as a quarterback in Seattle?

Yes he played nine seasons. That is a long time.

During that time he threw 107 touchdowns, AND 133 INTERCEPTIONS. His quarterback rating in his entire Seahawks career was 67.9. His completion percentage was 53.3 PERCENT. He averaged 160 YARDS PER GAME passing. Steve Largent, a hall of famer wide receiver was on the team for Zorn's entire Seahawks career. I don't understand why Hawk Nation has this appreciation of him as a quality quarterback like it does.

How old are you?

His poor stats are dependent on my age?

Look I understand the limitations in talent that Jim Zorn had to work with. I watched this team struggle through their first decade of existence. However, I still don't understand why Zorn has historically been given as much love as he has by our fan base. He had TWO seasons in his career where he threw more touchdowns than he did interceptions. TWO. The guy was mediocre (and maybe because the majority of the team was worse than mediocre it has some people feel like he should be given more credit than I feel like he deserves).

I'm sure there are many out there that disagree with me. Just an opinion.

No, but his poor stats are also dependent on the era he played.

Go ahead and put Manning and Brady in that era when defenses could actually effect routes and destroy QB's without giving up 50 yard penalties.

^ This. Also add in the fact that it was less of a passing league then and more of a running league. More RBs from that era are considered elite big time backs than QBs.

 

[BlueBlood]

Wilson #1
Kreig #2
Hass #3
Moon #4
Zorn #5