What happens if Drew Lock is decent?

[Appyhawk]

Lock is in pretty much a no win situation. He has to suddenly be as good as Russ was last year just to be an acceptable substitute, and as good as Russ ever was to be a keeper. I don't see any chance of the latter, so whatever it takes for us to get the QB who can do it is tops on our docket. Lock needs to do as well as he can to improve his trade attraction, or be happy to end up as a backup.

 

[Smellyman]

If Lock doesn't set a record for 3 and outs like the previous QB with great weapons around him and constantly putting the D back on the field, it is already a win

 

[seatownlowdown]

i'm hoping we exceed expectations this upcoming season. its a long 17 game season. can't worry about our overall record for 2022. our defense should be as much of an anchor to our overall record as the qb position. just gotta be competitive at every position- actually win as many games as possible with our current roster. it sends the wrong message to your young core players otherwise! only worry about 1 game at a time. sure, if we lose a bunch and secure a top 5 pick or 2 top 10 picks fine, whatever, you got outstanding draft capital going into the draft... but there are no guarantees anyway that whoever we do draft that high becomes a "peyton manning"... hell, the qb could end up being the next "ryan leaf", just never know. jamarcus russell was the #1 pick in the 2007 draft. although i'll keep an eye on college qbs this year, i'm not going to play the fantasy game of hoping we lose x games to secure x quarterback. that's just nonsensical.

besides, if the seahawks win more games than expected and drew lock does "good" next season, he becomes an asset. perhaps a tradeable asset.

 

[Scout]

Is it possible that Wilson was dragging the team down by making us one-dimensional, easy to defend, and putting our defense back on the field without a break?

I would suggest to you that Drew Lock, being average, being a game manager, just distributing the ball and keeping the chains moving may make us a better team and eventually get us back to the Super Bowl. Consistency is what makes great teams, and I am 100% on board with having a boring, no drama quarterback that just gets the job done for a change.

The old way of cliff hangers and dramatic finishes wasn't working, stop pounding the table like that's the only way it can. Please.

1st down conversions and flipping field position is all still important in the NFL so it might actually help the defense this year. But the defense has to be able to generate more TOs to shorten the field for the offense so they don't have to drive the entire length of the field and covert so many 1st downs.

PC #1 principal is protecting the football but also generating TOs. A defense that can generate TOs allows any offensive system to work. Only very few offensive systems can work when asked to consistently drive 70-80 yards down the field.

 

[BASF]

I find it funny people are bagging on the idea of having to pay Russ. If Locke comes out and is incredible and carries this team to a super bowl we will have to pay him a boatload of money to keep him so wouldn't we be in the exact same spot then?

The difference in the two is vast.

First is the age factor. Lock at only twenty-five still has upside. A lot of his mistakes are coachable. Wilson in the past few seasons has seemed uncoachable with his "I'm not going to change my mindset" attitude. With that age factor comes the fact that the way Wilson plays the game has been hampered by father time. He is not as quick or agile as he was, which has shown a drop in effectiveness. Give me paying a twenty-five year old who has upped his game enough to get us a Superb Owl win over a thirty-three year old who believes he is better than he is.

Second is the fact we know Wilson has already demanded to be the highest paid QB with his last contract. He had records to back up the fact that he deserves that consideration. Does anyone actually believe that he won't demand to be paid close to what Rodgers was paid? Lock can only point to a SB win to go for such a historic contract unless he puts up 45 or more TDs and 4500 yards to have him in the MVP running.

Third and I consider this most important, Wilson does not seem to be a good teammate. A lot of the things said about him by former players points to him not having the respect of the people he is supposed to be leading. I do not doubt Wilson's drive to win but when the players don't respect you, you can't lead effectively. We will see if Lock can earn the Seahawks players respect and trust. It certainly factors in a lot for a teams success.

 

[BASF]

Grievance with Pete? That makes no sense.

I don't hate the guy, just don't consider him a good coach in the past 5 years.

So all of the ageism shots you have taken at him were for laughs?

 

[TwistedHusky]

I think the ageism shots at Pete have been earned. Nothing wrong with it when it is true.

But that isn't the point of this thread. Pete is the coach. We are stuck with him. It was worth arguing he had no value and was now a bottom-half coach back then when the choice was Pete or Russ.

That choice is gone, and so there is no point focusing on it anymore. We are stuck with him. I am not anti-Pete, just consider him a waste of time/resources because there is no upside to him. He has little value now and has turned into a bottom half coach, though he does a good job against sub .500 teams so he will probably always at least be at .500 or a little above.

The point is how Lock fits.
If Lock is terrible, we replace him and ideally Pete. (probably not).
But if Lock is good or even great, we are going to be average. Pete gives you a high floor but a low ceiling.
Now, a more appropriate question is whether it makes sense to expect anything moving forwards?
We had a good run, were a top winning team for almost a decade, went into every game with a reasonable expectation we would win, and went into almost every season with a reasonable expectation we would make the playoffs. We also did go to 2 SBs and won 1. Who we can attribute the SBs and winning is up for debate but it was there. And since NFL means Not For Long, change is expected.
We are now a team that is no longer a top team, with a roster that is likely average or worse. There is no reason to expect exceptional production, so the question is whether it makes sense to demand it.

I don't think Lock is going to be bad enough to force change and I don't think he will be good enough to make us anything better than average. And I don't think Pete has anything to contribute that will make a big enough difference.

Pete being old or worthless now isn't the point. The point is whether Lock does anything for this team but delay the inevitable. And I suspect it delays things at least a year or 2, which is not ideal.

 

[hawkfan68]

If Lock is decent, then the Seahawks have at least a good, maybe very good, QB. Right now the bar is a average QB with who is competing so the bar is fairly low. If Lock grabs the opportunity and plays well, it only could mean good things. If there is an opportunity to grab the next Rodgers, Allen, Brady, Wilson, or Mahomes in the future.....you take it. It's something they should have done while Wilson was still here. That's been biggest mistake that PC/JS has made since 2013. With only the lowly Alex McGough being the QB drafted besides Russell Wilson in PC/JS era.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Tom Brady in his 20s, for example.

I wouldn't call Brady a game manager in his 20s. You have to understand that the NFL was much different in the early 2000s. Brady's numbers were actually very good for that time. Sure, he wasn't Peyton Manning -- but he still was a top 5 QB at the time. The exception here is 2001, his first season.

We also have to remember that the rules in the NFL have changed substantially. Most of the people that have won Super Bowls, did it with really good QB play. Even the SB's won by mediocre QB's was due to elite stretches of gameplay by the likes of Foles and Flacco.

The rules have even been changed to favor offenses more since our Super Bowl win. Having a good QB is a necessity in today's NFL. Even look at the Rams with just the swap of Goff and Stafford.

 

[jammerhawk]

I doubt you have to have a team that is absolutely loaded to have success.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Can you give examples of teams that have had success without them in the past 7 years?

Are you going to argue the 49ers didn't? Because that is the closest thing to an example I can think of.

We had teams loaded with stars for years, when we lost them we basically turned into a wildcard team. Whether you can or cannot succeed without them is probably less relevant because you can see from the numbers Pete NEEDS them.

Look at what happened when Kam went out. Look at our record without Russ. Our coach struggles without them.

 

[onanygivensunday]

I think that most of you guys are arguing about nothing. Regardless of how well Drew Lock plays (or doesn't play), this team will not sniff 8 or 9 wins this season because of who are 2022 opponents are.

Aside from playing six games within our division against the Rams, 49-ers and Cardinals, we play the AFCW. I predict that we'll go 1-5 within our division (like last year) and get swept by the AFCW. That would make our record 1-9.

Next, we play the NFCS, where we can split, going 2-2, losing to TB and NO, and defeating ATL and CAR. That would make our record 3-11. Then we face DET, NYG and NYJ, which we could sweep but likely won't. I'm thinking 2-1 against those three.

Realistically, at best, we could win 6 games all year but likely won't unless our defense turns out to be stellar. Five wins is my prediction regardless of how well Drew Lock performs.

 

[Rainger]

The OP asked what happens if Lock is decent? HE WILL BE. I wont get into all the ramifications of that but I still think they will draft a QB in the first round next year to comPETE.