POLL: Geno Is Our Franchise QB

[bigskydoc]

Some of us do have a few arguments regarding why Geno Smith may not be the future franchise QB in the NFL with the Seahawks, but these points are context-dependent and could evolve based on his performance over this season. Hence, the first half of the Bronco's game in week 1 vs Geno in the Steeler's game in week 2. Here are some of the common concerns raised about him:

1. Inconsistency​

One of the biggest criticisms of Geno Smith has been his inconsistency. While he has shown flashes of solid play, his performance can vary dramatically from game to game. In the NFL, consistency is crucial for a starting quarterback, especially when leading a team over the course of a season.

2. Turnovers​

In his earlier career, Geno struggled with turnovers. His decision-making at times led to costly interceptions or fumbles, and turnover-prone QBs tend to lose games. The question now is do we still view him as a reliable or a risky starter?

3. Limited Ceiling​

One can argue that Geno Smith may have reached his ceiling as a quarterback. While capable, can you say with complete confidence that he may be able to possess the elite-level talent to carry a team deep into the playoffs or to compete at the highest level consistently, which is often expected from starting QB's.

4. Lack of Experience as a Long-Term Starter​

Although he’s had stretches as a starter, Geno spent much of his career as a backup. His lack of experience leading a team for multiple seasons raises questions about whether he can maintain success or handle the pressure that comes with a starting role.

5. Competition in the NFL​

With many talented quarterbacks entering the league each year, there’s a constant influx of younger, more dynamic players, which I believe for us is Howell. Often teams might prefer a younger QB with a higher upside, relegating Geno to a backup or transitional role. Carolina, as they seem to be experiencing with their QB (cough cough Bryce), is not always a guarantee in the NFL, but what is to be perfectly honest. This may be where the Seahawk's front office stands at this moment in time, but holding their cards close to the vest.

6. Past Injuries​

Though not a major concern recently, perhaps one minor injury I believe around the preseason this year, Geno has dealt with injuries in the past. His durability over a full season is another potential issue for Seattle in evaluating his long-term viability as a starter.

That said, Geno Smith is having a resurgence with our team, showing improved decision-making and accuracy, so some of these concerns may be outdated depending on his more recent performances. Still, these points reflect why certain some of us as fans, being critics, might argue against him as a long-term starting option. It's also possible that with the current new regime, they are better suited in hiding any flaws that Geno may possess as a QB, where previous coaching staff left him exposed. Only time will tell.

Good post, and some reasonable points. I will say that I really don't care how Geno looked under Rex "Belichick would have the same number of rings without Brady" Ryan, who was pretty public with his disdain for the Smith pick, and Todd Bowles, under whom Smith had two injury shortened seasons. Nor do I think his time backing up Eli "least of the Gods" Manning, or Phil "The worst of the franchise QBs" Rivers.

To me, Geno is a young QB who is just chronologically older than his peers. He has the potential for being in the mold of the old-time franchise QBs who sat and learned their craft for several years before being thrown to into the fire.

 

[Hawknight]

Everything you just wrote is subjective and opinionated. There is not one single measurable data point to back it up. This is the opposite of scientific method. This is a firehose of personal belief disguised as a formatted fact sheet. The last paragraph yields a grudging concession to reality and then immediately dives right back into a personalized view. You are losing this poll in overwhelming fashion, yet still justify your argument with group think validity ("certain some of us fans, being critics, blah, blah, blah"). I'm glad to see that most of the folks responding to the poll have a lick of football sense.

While it's true that opinions can influence any sports discussion, the criticism that "everything is subjective" misrepresents the balance between qualitative and quantitative analysis. Sports, and football in particular, involve both measurable data (e.g., completion percentage, yards per game, passer rating) and subjective interpretation (e.g., leadership quality, decision-making, game management under pressure). It’s not merely a “firehose of personal belief”; it’s about interpreting data in a context that numbers alone can’t fully explain.

For example, while Geno Smith’s passer rating of 92.1 is a quantifiable metric, evaluating how well he functions under certain types of defensive pressure or in critical game moments involves a level of subjective judgment, even though it’s rooted in measurable performance. Statistics and interpretation go hand in hand in most sports analysis.

The claim that the argument is "the opposite of the scientific method" is itself flawed. The scientific method or in your words "football sense" involves observation, hypothesis, experimentation, and analysis of data. In sports, we observe performance (e.g., Smith’s passing stats), we hypothesize (e.g., “Smith’s inconsistency could be a weakness for his team”), and then we test this hypothesis by examining performance across various scenarios (crucial moments, different defenses, etc.). The process of interpreting sports statistics, while not strictly scientific, follows a similar analytical approach.

For instance, Smith was sacked 31 times last season, which is a measurable stat. The subjective interpretation of this could range from blaming his offensive line to scrutinizing his decision-making under pressure. Both viewpoints use measurable data but approach it from different angles.

While the critique of "my opinion" suggests that us fans or any analysts for that matter might blindly go against popular opinion, it’s important to note that differing opinions don’t inherently lack merit. We as fans, often the biggest critics come to different conclusions based on a combination of stats, observations, and experience. Disagreement is healthy in debates about sports performance, and it doesn’t automatically imply a lack of insight or understanding. So if my lick of football sense doesn't seem to match yours or others, it doesn't make you right or me wrong. Agree to disagree.

 

[Spin Doctor]

The biggest knock on Geno above all else is his redzone performance. He has an extremely low completion percentage even compared to his peers and under Geno Smith, Seattle has had one of the worst redzone offenses two years running. Now, we also do have to mention that Waldron, especially now that we see him in Chicago isn't look very good at coordinator. Offensive line and running game also play a part, so there are other factors at play.

Geno Smith is a fine QB and you can win with him. I do think that if we find a QB prospect that we like, that we should still draft them even if it is in the first round. I don't think Mahommes is Mahommes without sitting, hell I think Jordan Love would've been a bust if he started right away. Geno takes care of his body, but at his age we've seen a lot of QB's just fall off out of nowhere.

 

[Ad Hawk]

The biggest knock on Geno above all else is his redzone performance. He has an extremely low completion percentage even compared to his peers and under Geno Smith, Seattle has had one of the worst redzone offenses two years running. Now, we also do have to mention that Waldron, especially now that we see him in Chicago isn't look very good at coordinator. Offensive line and running game also play a part, so there are other factors at play.

Geno Smith is a fine QB and you can win with him. I do think that if we find a QB prospect that we like, that we should still draft them even if it is in the first round. I don't think Mahommes is Mahommes without sitting, hell I think Jordan Love would've been a bust if he started right away. Geno takes care of his body, but at his age we've seen a lot of QB's just fall off out of nowhere.

This is a fair take. Nuanced, and yet the numbers are not in Geno's favor in the red zone. It will be interesting to see if they do better this year under Grubb.

I do not think anyone is opposed to a drafted QB. Getting someone they like and sitting him behind Geno could pay huge dividends. But it seems--though it may not be true--that some of the QBotF crowd would sell the farm (draft picks) to gamble on a high 1st round QB. That seems irresponsible, and ignores needs in other places. If you miss and have nobody better, you could miss an open playoff/SB window provided the rest of the team is solid.

 

[Titus Pullo]

A franchise QB is someone who will be here for a min of 5 years. Hopefully, longer.
Someone you draft around.
Someone the offense is schemed around.
Someone who can lead the team deep into the playoffs every year.

This person is not Geno. He's a stopgap at best. A Teddy Bridgewater, if you will. Journeyman.

Who the hell will give Geno a 5-year 200+-million-dollar contract at his age (34)?

Maybe the Broncos would....... and possibly the Jets.

 

[Ad Hawk]

A franchise QB is someone who will be here for a min of 5 years. Hopefully, longer.
Someone you draft around.
Someone the offense is schemed around.
Someone who can lead the team deep into the playoffs every year.

This person is not Geno. He's a stopgap at best. A Teddy Bridgewater, if you will. Journeyman.

Who the hell will give Geno a 5-year 200+-million-dollar contract at his age (34)?

Maybe the Broncos would....... and possibly the Jets.

Interesting description of a franchise QB.

It sounds like you are describing a Mahomes or Tom Brady. Or do you mean Drew Brees or Payton Manning? Where do you think the team finds such a QB? Who in the draft do you suggest, and at what price?

Every team is always building the strongest team they can; they don't wait until they have a QB they like. Because if they replace Geno (he retires, gets injured, play declines), the team will already be stacked. He's better than Bridgewater, and is worth building around, as MM has already shown. If he wasn't, he wouldn't be on the roster.

Because Geno can make every throw, with timing and precision, do you actually believe he is the reason the whole playbook would not be available? Grubb can certainly scheme around his play. He has wheels, too. No, he's not Lamar Jackson, but LJ is also 0-2 so far this season, so he's not a guy who can put the team on his shoulders and will a team to win, is he now?

It will be interesting to see if the FO extends Geno and for what price. If they extend him even 2-3 years, that's still a franchise guy in my view.

 

[Rat]

He's good enough where we don't have to be in a rush to find the next guy. I doubt he'll be a guy who can be depended on to lead a contender in three years though. I think some people overrate his "lower mileage", as I don't see him as a 34-year-old (next month) in a 27-year-old's body. His physical decline is likely still coming relatively soon.

 

[knownone]

Let's be honest. If Geno keeps playing at this level, he will get that three-year 45M APY extension sometime in the next calendar year. He's currently on a prove-it deal, and part of what he's proving is whether or not he's a franchise cornerstone. In my eyes, he looks like that guy, but we'll see what happens this season.

In any case, there's no timeline for what constitutes a franchise QB. Is anyone arguing that Rodgers is a stop-gap in New York or that Stafford was a stop-gap when he was traded to the Rams? The question is not how wide the window is but how high the ceiling is. That's what a franchise QB is all about.

 

[Mick063]

While it's true that opinions can influence any sports discussion, the criticism that "everything is subjective" misrepresents the balance between qualitative and quantitative analysis. Sports, and football in particular, involve both measurable data (e.g., completion percentage, yards per game, passer rating) and subjective interpretation (e.g., leadership quality, decision-making, game management under pressure). It’s not merely a “firehose of personal belief”; it’s about interpreting data in a context that numbers alone can’t fully explain.

For example, while Geno Smith’s passer rating of 92.1 is a quantifiable metric, evaluating how well he functions under certain types of defensive pressure or in critical game moments involves a level of subjective judgment, even though it’s rooted in measurable performance. Statistics and interpretation go hand in hand in most sports analysis.

The claim that the argument is "the opposite of the scientific method" is itself flawed. The scientific method or in your words "football sense" involves observation, hypothesis, experimentation, and analysis of data. In sports, we observe performance (e.g., Smith’s passing stats), we hypothesize (e.g., “Smith’s inconsistency could be a weakness for his team”), and then we test this hypothesis by examining performance across various scenarios (crucial moments, different defenses, etc.). The process of interpreting sports statistics, while not strictly scientific, follows a similar analytical approach.

For instance, Smith was sacked 31 times last season, which is a measurable stat. The subjective interpretation of this could range from blaming his offensive line to scrutinizing his decision-making under pressure. Both viewpoints use measurable data but approach it from different angles.

While the critique of "my opinion" suggests that us fans or any analysts for that matter might blindly go against popular opinion, it’s important to note that differing opinions don’t inherently lack merit. We as fans, often the biggest critics come to different conclusions based on a combination of stats, observations, and experience. Disagreement is healthy in debates about sports performance, and it doesn’t automatically imply a lack of insight or understanding. So if my lick of football sense doesn't seem to match yours or others, it doesn't make you right or me wrong. Agree to disagree.

Geno has top ten numbers in the last two (+) seasons. Period. Geno yields the best contract value of all starting quarterbacks that are not on a rookie deal. Period.

Your argument has failed you and this forum. Your firehose of personal opinion remains.

The scientific method is a measure of repeatable, quantifiable results in a controlled environment. With respect to Geno, the results have been repeated and can be measured. With numbers. Geno routinely performs reliably and adequately. The sample size is representative. The results are those of Geno's excellent personal performances at clutch moments to win games and this declaration has been confirmed by a new coaching staff that has no previous allegiance to Geno Smith. The superlatives coming from MacDonald's mouth are all the "subjective interpretation" that we need, and that "interpretation" source is much more credible than yours. Combine Macdonald's "subjective interpretations" with the hard numbers and Geno IS a franchise quarterback. Conversely, the Titans or Panthers coaches are not speaking in the same terms relative to their respective franchise quarterbacks, so no, Macdonald isn't just giving us coach speak. It is clearly evident that Macdonald genuinely appreciates Geno as his starting quarterback. So do the overwhelming majority of .Net poll participants. This puts you in a very small minority. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I am responding directly to you only to make it clear to readers that you hold a minority opinion. I do this so that forum lurkers can read a representative opinion to counter it.

 

[Spin Doctor]

This is a fair take. Nuanced, and yet the numbers are not in Geno's favor in the red zone. It will be interesting to see if they do better this year under Grubb.

I do not think anyone is opposed to a drafted QB. Getting someone they like and sitting him behind Geno could pay huge dividends. But it seems--though it may not be true--that some of the QBotF crowd would sell the farm (draft picks) to gamble on a high 1st round QB. That seems irresponsible, and ignores needs in other places. If you miss and have nobody better, you could miss an open playoff/SB window provided the rest of the team is solid.

I think if there is a player that Schneider falls in love with, he should absolutely pull the trigger given Geno's age. Alex Smith was one of the most efficient passers in the NFL the year that KC traded up to snatch Mahomes when they were 10-6 and we all know how people mocked the Jordan Love selection. I don't think Love in particular is successful given how rough his first starts were in GB if he is just thrown to the wolves.

Seattle is in a unique spot where they can groom a successor to Geno if they don't deem Howell to be the one.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Listen let's get back to reality a little bit here. Geno Smith is NOT a franchise QB. He is above average, but on what planet does a QB who has played in the league for over 10 years and has never won a playoff game considered a franchise QB. Did he play well on Sunday? Yes, but I have seen this same pattern over an over from this guy. He comes up extremely small in BIG games and in no way do I want this Franchise to tie its wagon to a 34 year old journeyman QB. The first two games of this season were definitely winnable ones for sure, but let's be serious did we blow either of those non-playoff teams out? He still trends as someone who is not pocket savy and in my opinion does not have a very high football IQ. If you are all happy about slipping into the playoffs and going one and out, then Geno is your man, otherwise I think we really need to start looking for our long term guy! Go Hawks!!!

This guy gets it

 

[pittpnthrs]

He is more accurate than Hasselbeck. Can identify coverages better than Wilson. His top speed is faster than Zorn.
People that have followed this franchise for 5+ decades fully appreciate what Geno brings to the table.

He also would have sat behind all three of them (already sat behind Wilson). If he's so great,,,,,why?

 

[pittpnthrs]

I don't think Mahommes is Mahommes without sitting,

Really? He sat for one season behind Alex Smith. I will agree to disagree with you on that one.

 

[Jac]

He's the starter, but not the 'franchise QB' and that's because of age. He has probably 2 to 3 more years as the starter and unfortunately I don't think the holes will be filled by then to line everything up. He has been playing well though and it could be a lot worse.

It's this in a nutshell. I think he's going to have a very good (and potentially great) year with Grubb. This is going to be a really fun year under his leadership. Next year too. But he's turning 34 and potentially positioning for the type of contract you don't want to give a guy in his late 30's. As seen by this thread, everybody has their own idea of what a "franchise QB" is. I think one thing that's fair to be part of that definition is putting the team on his back in a playoff game and winning it. That's what the "franchise" guys do. From a roster construction POV, they still need to evaluate if Howell is a longer-term solution or if they need to finally draft somebody to develop.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Geno has top ten numbers in the last two (+) seasons. Period. Geno yields the best contract value of all starting quarterbacks that are not on a rookie deal. Period.

Your argument has failed you and this forum. Your firehose of personal opinion remains.

The scientific method is a measure of repeatable, quantifiable results in a controlled environment. With respect to Geno, the results have been repeated and can be measured. With numbers. Geno routinely performs reliably and adequately. The sample size is representative. The results are those of Geno's excellent personal performances at clutch moments to win games and this declaration has been confirmed by a new coaching staff that has no previous allegiance to Geno Smith. The superlatives coming from MacDonald's mouth are all the "subjective interpretation" that we need, and that "interpretation" source is much more credible than yours. Combine Macdonald's "subjective interpretations" with the hard numbers and Geno IS a franchise quarterback. Conversely, the Titans or Panthers coaches are not speaking in the same terms relative to their respective franchise quarterbacks, so no, Macdonald isn't just giving us coach speak. It is clearly evident that Macdonald genuinely appreciates Geno as his starting quarterback. So do the overwhelming majority of .Net poll participants. This puts you in a very small minority. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I am responding directly to you only to make it clear to readers that you hold a minority opinion. I do this so that forum lurkers can read a representative opinion to counter it.

Geno has never won a post season game. Period.

His argument is as valid as yours except his is without bias.

The coach talking up his player is nothing new and expected. What is MM suppossed to say anyways, that his QB is ok but nothing special? MM just came from a team where his QB is a multi time MVP. Your making MM's words more than what it is. Your basically saying that because MM said Geno was good we should all conform to that. That's silly. Also, of course most .Netters think he's great, it's a fan forum. Most .Netters get bent out of shape if you say anything negative about the team. Most .Netters wanted to keep Carroll although it was evident he was done years ago. Holding a different opinion than the majority on this forum is fine as most fans wear rose colored glasses.

 

[bigskydoc]

The biggest knock on Geno above all else is his redzone performance. He has an extremely low completion percentage even compared to his peers and under Geno Smith, Seattle has had one of the worst redzone offenses two years running. Now, we also do have to mention that Waldron, especially now that we see him in Chicago isn't look very good at coordinator. Offensive line and running game also play a part, so there are other factors at play.

Geno Smith is a fine QB and you can win with him. I do think that if we find a QB prospect that we like, that we should still draft them even if it is in the first round. I don't think Mahommes is Mahommes without sitting, hell I think Jordan Love would've been a bust if he started right away. Geno takes care of his body, but at his age we've seen a lot of QB's just fall off out of nowhere.

After consistently being in the top ten for percentage of red zone possessions resulting in touchdowns, since XLVIII days, there was a steep drop off in 2021, when Waldron was brought on board.

Even Wilson didn’t produce at his previous level, granted he was playing through injury to keep Smith from showing him up.

3rd down conversion percentage was pretty atrocious too, somewhat owing to the number of 3rd and long situations we faced.

Run game support was non-existent, and passing concepts were rudimentary, making it easy for opposing defenses to focus on the passing game. None of that changed during Waldron’s tenure.

While that doesn’t absolve Smith, it does add some nuance to the discussion. How he performs under Grubb will be telling.

I agree that if our QBOTF falls to us, we should take him, regardless of how Geno is playing.

 

[CallMeADawg]

I agree that if the right guy is there in the draft, you take him. I bet you anything that Seattle did not expect JSN to be there when they picked him, and probably tripped over phone cords trying to turn in the pick card they moved so quickly.

 

[Jac]

I agree that if the right guy is there in the draft, you take him. I bet you anything that Seattle did not expect JSN to be there when they picked him, and probably tripped over phone cords trying to turn in the pick card they moved so quickly.

Murphy too for that matter.

 

[sutz]

If you think the window is 5 years, consider this. This is Geno's 3rd year as a starter. If he gets a modest extension of say 2-3 years he'll have his chance to fill in that arbitrary box in his resume. Assuming he continues to play at the curent pace, I could easily see that happening.

Howell might be that mythical QBOTF so many are looking for, or we could strike gold in the draft in the next year or two. Who knows? I think the team is leaning toward Howell. The bird in the hand and all that, you know?

 

[SoulfishHawk]

If he balls out and wins a playoff game or two? Hell yes, redo his deal. But not before then. Just my opinion.
He just signed a deal not long ago. This wanting to change it up soon after stuff is ridiculous. JS needs to stick to his guns and talk AFTER the season. And I hope he gets a big deal. Why? Because that means the team was successful in 2024. And just making the playoffs isn't success, imo.
Even with a team that is in a transition. If they are sitting at 3-0 after Sunday, my expectations have shifted. And I suspect it will for many others.