Whitehurst Contract Details Emerge

I just read an upadate in the Seattle Times which says the same thing about the amount.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/seahawks/2011372976_hawk18.html

So the rumor about us getting San Diego's Third this year was bogus as I thought, right? This deal has not grown on me yet... at all. I will give Pete and the brass the benefit of the doubt and see what else is in store but come on?! Why pay this much in comparison to the market, and while I like not surrendering a draft pick this year for Charlie Whitehurst, moving down in the 2nd and giving a high pick next year is just dumb. Anyway, go my bracket picks and hopefully the Hawks have a plan.

I think it was a great pickup. If he learns the system playing under Hass for a year and we get Marshall. He will be airing it out to Marshall, Housh and Butler in no time. Hopefully they can get a great LT in the draft.

why adding new players is bad the last 2 seasons was a joke let's clean up and rebuild with new blood

Go read Chris's thoughts on the Whitehurst trade.

http://seahawkaddicts.com/2010-articles/march/some-thoughts-on-whitehurst.html

My understanding is that Arizona wanted him to, so that probably forced us to up the antee, which took Arizona out of the picture, then they signed Anderson. What Chris says makes a lot of sense.

...and personally I'd rather take this flyer on Whitehurst than had signed Anderson... So now AZ has to deal with his ints..

but still bad. Not having that rumored third back makes this deal a real stretch.

I am now officially wincing every time I check this site, wondering what the FO is going to do next. I am not full of confidence.

The only thing that cheers me up is that MAYBE we just saved a ton of money on Clausen.

i cant wait untill the FO proves these whining (cynical) fans wrong!!!

First you need to be able to recognize value. Not all can see it.... I am not a professional football evaluator, but I am a guitar evaluator. This reminds me of a guitar I bought on Craigslist last month. It was a rare / unusually guitar that was listed for 12 hours before I saw it. I did not think I would be able to get there, before someone beat me to the punch. The guy had it listed for $400 and said he did lots of research on the net and knew what is was worth. His bottom line was $300, I said SOLD ! I turned the guitar within 2 weeks for $4K ! So, I guess the moral is, there is a lot of value out there that most don't / can't see... until it has its' payday. I am hoping this trade turns out the same, time will tell : )

I hope they do prove us wrong Elew, but right now it seems like every other GM is lining up to take advantage of us. I really don't mind bringing in Whitehurst, but many (including myself) think we overpaid in more ways then one to get him. It's like Carroll and Schneider are a young, overzealous married couple at the used car lot. They may get the car they want, but they certainly did not get the best deal. The only thing they have done right so far is to not give Denver a first for Marshall.

Let's call the Whitehurst trade the Mannhatten Project.

says that Hasselbeck cost us 580 point or the equivalent to the first pick in 2nd round (pick # 33)(going down from 10 to 17 plus pick # 72) whereas Withehurst cost us 270 point or the equivalent to the last pick in the 2nd round (pick # 64), so there is a difference there.
I believe we cannot judge this trade at this time. The cost for withehurst is very relative and it will depend of the outcome. If he turns out to be a probowler it will be a steal of a trade for us, if he turns out to be only an adequate starting QB it will be a very good trade still, if he only becomes an adequate backup QB it will be an even trade and if he turns out to be a bum, then we can say it was not a good trade.
The way I see it there is much more upside than downside to this trade, but I do agree that the fact that he is so unproven and with apparently little first hand contact with him makes it a bit riskier than the Hasselbeck trade. But he gives us a lot of flexibility in the upcoming draft now that we do not need a QB of the future at this time.

I go to this blog site because we have this common brotherhood of being Hawk fanatics. I don't want to see it turn into a situation where we polarize like we have in politics. Everyone expresses their viewpoints (which obviously you are always correct and know much more than the next guy, right?), but we should at the very least respect others as well. I think its fair to say none of us know the grand scheme or master plan. Being a good fan means having the faith, if I didn't I sure as hell wouldn't be a Hawk fan. I believe! We're on the same team

Seriously, enough on the sutpid, bent over, inexperienced GM nonsense. It's not constructive and shows a great deal of ignorance, in my opinion.

Market value demands the compensation package. QB's are thin this year in both FA and the draft. Charlie Whitehurst's value is what it is. We want new and fresh and young - he is all these things. He can even potentially start now.

There is far to much value, on the talk radio and on blogs, about the value of moving back 20 places in the 2nd. When you look at the draft prospects in the top and bottom half of the second, and you consider our two high 1sts, you can see, the value of moving back in this particular draft isn't all that extreme.

Moving back will also lessent the cost of signing and offset a little of the higher costs 6th and 14th picks. This may not be a huge consideration in the moves, but it must be a factor.

This is a good deal for us, given the market, our barganing position and our needs. We NEED someone like Whitehurst, now. When Matt goes down this season, of if his arm is completely noodled again - we MUST have someone like Whitehurst.

I wouldn't be suprised if Matt's already being talked to about having to compete for his job. When is the last time thats happened to Mr. August?

...need to spend more than ten seconds thinking about this. The trade value balances out 265 for 265. The Cardinals wanted Whitehurst too and offered the same amount. The two year contract isn't worth sneezing about risk-wise. How many of you knuckleheads were advocating drafting unproven rookie QB in the first round and giving them 5 yr 60m dollar contracts?? This deal is all upside and no downside. Get a grip on yourselves!!

I do not like this trade at all and there's a couple of reasons why.

1) Wallace and Quinn were traded for late round picks.

How can a guy who a)was 3rd string and showed nothing in preaseason and b) never thrown an NFL pass in the regular season be more valuable than a player who has thrown regular season passes?

2) you're already trading down in the second round. That should be more than enough to get Whitehurst. Why the extra pick? Why wouldn't they have made it a 6th and with playing time have it go to a 5th or 4th?


Very odd trade especially since I would think you could have traded Wallace for Quinn straight up or include a 2011 late round pick.

Help me understand the relevence? Two different BU QB's who have had opportunities and have demonstarted limited capability. Both not wanted by their respective teams.

Charlie, is sitting behind an all-pro and a very solid veteren BU, extremely unlikely to have an opportunity to play. SD didn't want to get rid of him, they just don't need a strong 3rd stringer when they have other needs. They are in a good place to deal him for value, they aren't dumping him like the other 2 QB's you mentioned.

People are acting like Whitehurst's maximum value was absolutely set at a third round pick. After all, the Cards (or anyone else with a third rounder) could have just signed him and that's all SD would have got. That's just not right, though. SD could always match. They could have leveraged this right to match into additional compensation regardless of who signed him and whether or not they had a third round pick. Would they have? I have no idea, $4M is a lot to pay a third string QB, but who knows what their plans were.

guys - I am in agreement with the majority that we gave up too much - considering what the market has dictated for QB's this year. However, lets take a breath and let it play out - as with the majority of trades/draft picks/free agent signings this will be few years before we can determine if it was a good trade or not. I just want to add that Carroll was recruiting when this guy was in HS and its possible he knows something we do not. He did have a decent career at Clemson.

The single most important need for the Seahawks, IMO, is QB. Matt is done, most likely sooner, perhaps a bit later, but his days are numbered, and they should be.

So alternatives:

1 - Wallace. Most of us agree that he is not a viable starter in the league, so he's gone.

2 - Brady Quinn - an option I was arguing for consideration, but nobody liked him, including his own team, Holmgren, most of the people on this site, etc. Talk about being traded for peanuts! So that option is out.

3 - Anderson. Really? Do we want him as a starting QB? Not just no, but hell no. Maybe as the #2, but not as a QB of the future.

4 - Draft Clausen or Bradford. I believe Clausen is all risk with very little up-side and of course very expensive, even if available at 6. Bradford will likely not be there at 6, and while I advocated trading up for him (QB being the single biggist need on the team) that would have been far more costly in draft picks and money than Whitehurst. Not even close, and plus, we couldn't expect Bradford to start anytime soon.

5 - draft a QB in later rounds. Tebow, anyone? He seems like the most intriguing possibility. Tony Pike might be a possibility. It wouldn't suprise me if Seattle drafts another QB later anyway.

6 - Trade for Kolb. Cost at least one of Seattle's 1st round picks (they were asking for both).

7 - Sign one of the other free agents? Delhome, perhaps, or Grossman.

8 - Count on Hasselbeck in 2010. If we did this, we WOULD be in the Locker sweepstakes.

9 - trade for Whitehurst, a medium cost option, who has spent his journyman years in a good place, with good fundamentals in size and arm strength, with nothing but potential. Medium risk, medium cost.

So what would you choose to do? Did I miss some options?

I for one am very happy that Seattle has added a young man with a live arm and the potential to actually win some games for a change.

I love all the outrage at this deal, I would rather give up next years 3rd and move down in this draft than use a 6th pick on Jimmy Clausen. Not saying Clausen wont work out but it seems like there are just as many NFL people doubting Clausen as a 1st round talent as there are in favor. Whitehurst obviously has some skill and potential so instead of claiming that our new staff is a bunch of idiots and that we all know way more about the nfl than they do why dont we give it a chance and be happy they are atleast making changes and trying to improve the team.

Good article from ESPN.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/20312/whitehurst-much-cheaper-than-hasselbeck

Good points Hawksince77. I think you summed it up nicely. We should never trust a Notre Dame QB for sure. Of our options, I think the Hawks did just fine.

The Cardinals wanted to sign Whitehurst as a RFA, which means that the Chargers would have received their 3rd rounder as compensation. Why would the Chargers trade him to the Seahawks for LESS than what the Cardinals were willing to give up? That would make no sense. The only way the Seahawks were going to be able to make the deal was by giving up a little more than what the Cardinals were willing to give up, otherwise the Chargers have no reason to make the trade.

I'm not going to sell you my car if you're offering me less than someone else. The deal goes to the highest bidder. It's a pretty simple concept. The price for him was already set because the Cards wanted him for a 3rd. If we were the only ones in line to get him, we would have had some leverage...but we weren't.

Should have done a deal like this around 2 1/2 years ago. Then every time Hass would go down injured and didn't play it wouldn't have been an automatic loss.

If you look at Whitehurst's career stats, he has appeared in 2 regular season games, thrown no passes, rushed twice for a net of 13 yards. Once for 14, once for -1.
The telling thing is that while he was QB at Clemson he had some very credible games against ACC opponents, yes his team lost, to a TD pass with 11 seconds left in the game, in OT and in one case triple OT by 3 points. Thing is Clemson crafted a better record during those seasons than Washington has done now, which would mean you should value him higher than Locker.

A 3rd round pick next year holds the same value as a 4th round pick this year, so it might be a pain next year, but it isn't anything NOW. The move down from 40 to 60 basically means we need to take a LT no later than #14 and it likely will not be Charles Brown unless he really crashes.
Additionally, if we lose Sims or Spenser to an offer we choose not to match, we end up with a 4th or 1st round pick (respectively) for the one that goes.
All those 4th round picks turn into solid special teams guys, backup offensive linemen (which we need a gaggle of) and maybe a QB that will one day become Joe Montana (yeah sure!)
My biggest concern is that if we let both Simms and Spenser go, is that we are then expecting late round rookies to immediately step in and start and that so very seldom happens.

Maybe we could trade one of them 4th rounders to SF for Michael Crabtree if they are tired of his act yet.

Whitehurst's contract, unless guaranteed means we pay 4 mil for a clipboard carrier this year, and if management isn't happy with him, he is toast by March 1, 2011! Net cost 4mil to kick the tires of a guy who MIGHT be the answer at the most important position on the team. That's a price any riverboat gambler would take with that kind of reward!

The only way the Seahawks were going to be able to make the deal was by giving up a little more than what the Cardinals were willing to give up, otherwise the Chargers have no reason to make the trade.

If this is true, why was Whitehurst given the choice of where he wanted to go? No, the Chargers had to have accepted *both* offers, meaning they were equivalent offers. There was no higher offer by the Seahawks to the Chargers.

Exactly, equivalent offers, meaning Arizona was offering about the same, or do you think our FO office is stupid enough to just add an extra pick in 2011 if this was not needed?
Any way this is a done deal. I am thinking that as it stands now, we are in a good position to trade down our # 6 pick if Clausen is stil available (Clevelannd, Buffalo, Jacksonville to name a few) and add extra picks in later round.

Hey... what about his hair? That's got to count for something. I mean, remember Barry Gibb's hair.
"Stayin' Alive"........

..... Steve what are you smoking! We got robbed for an unkown player. We lose 20 spots, give up next years 3rd round and you want to say its not that bad?
Horrible Trade!

CWEH did you think the Hasselbeck trade was a bad one too?

"Big, talented, athletic guy with a strong arm and a competitive streak. We believe he has the potential to be a successful quarterback in this league."
-- John Schneider, Seahawks GM

"We are all about competition. Charlie has tremendous talent and upside and we are very excited to watch him develop and help our football team."
-- Pete Carroll, Seahawks coach

Johnny,
Whitehurst was only given a choice because he was a RFA. But the Hawks couldn't sign him as a RFA because we don't have a 3rd to offer as compensation. That means that the Cards could sign him as a RFA, but we couldn't. That means we have to convince the Chargers to make a deal with us instead of just allowing the Cards to sign him, which would result in the Cards' 3rd round pick being given up as compensation to the Chargers. So, we were at a disadvantage. The Cards can have him for a 3rd, and they don't even need the Chargers to agree to the deal, all they need is for Whitehurst to sign a contract and for the Chargers not to match it, then he's theirs. For the Hawks, we didn't have that luxury, so we had to not only get Whitehurst to agree to a deal so that we knew he would sign after the trade, but we also had to convince the Chargers to make a deal with us instead of just letting him go to the Cards as a RFA. What's their motivation? Why trade him to us if they can get the exact same compensation from the Cards? That's why I say that we clearly offered more than the Cards, because they weren't necessarily offering a trade...they were likely just offering a 3rd round pick as compensation for signing him as a RFA. Again, if we offered the exact same thing, why would the Chargers take the deal instead of just saying No, and letting him sign with the Cards. If they said no to the deal, whitehurst can't say anything about it, even if he wanted to come to Seattle. The fact is that we couldn't sign him as a RFA, we had to trade for him, therefore we had to give the Chargers a reason to make the trade.

If we did offer the exact same compensation as the Cards...let's say they made a trade offer, too, instead of just trying to get Whitehurst to sign a contract...well, why would the Chargers choose to trade with us instead of the Cards if the offers were identical? Because they like us more? Nope...because we offered more, which is what it took to get the deal done.

"Good points Hawksince77. I think you summed it up nicely. We should never trust a Notre Dame QB for sure. Of our options, I think the Hawks did just fine."

EVER HEARD OF A GUY NAMED JOE MONTANA? YEAH HE ACTUALLY PLAYED HIS COLLEGE BALL @ DAME! Not that Im a Clausen fan just saying though dont talk trash when you have no idea what youre talking about

all they need is for Whitehurst to sign a contract and for the Chargers not to match it, then he's theirs.

and:

Why trade him to us if they can get the exact same compensation from the Cards? That's why I say that we clearly offered more than the Cards,

I guess you missed the fact that Whitehurst himself had the choice of either team and he picked the Seahawks. Why would the Chargers give him that option if the Cardinals were offering less? The Chargers just say, "no, we won't take the third, we'll just match whatever salary you offer him unless you match the Seahawks offer." Obviously the Cards matched the Seahawks and they gave Whitehurst the choice. If either team had offered more to the Chargers, Whitehurst would have had no choice in the matter.

The telling thing is that while he was QB at Clemson he had some very credible games against ACC opponents, yes his team lost, to a TD pass with 11 seconds left in the game, in OT and in one case triple OT by 3 points. Thing is Clemson crafted a better record during those seasons than Washington has done now, which would mean you should value him higher than Locker. smilies/smiley.gif

okay, Clemson is a defensive minded college team. They are not known for a stellar offense, but have always had a good defense, and that is how they win most of their games. Can you name me another Clemson QB who plays in the league???
Whitehurst was a mediocre QB in college. He had a big arm, so San Diego took a flier on him, but had no need of his services with Philip Rivers and Drew Brees on the team. If you think that he has that much potential, then why isn't he the charger's 2nd string QB? Why did the Chargers feel the need to sign Billy Volek? What has he shown in 4 years? Nothing!

CWEH did you think the Hasselbeck trade was a bad one too?

Has he been a dominate player in preseason, like Hasslebeck was for Green Bay before we traded for him? Does our front office have intimate knowledge of this QB, like Holmgren did when he made the Hasslebeck move? ..... No to both

There is far to much value, on the talk radio and on blogs, about the value of moving back 20 places in the 2nd.

The value is more than just what is stated on the draft pick scale, because that doesn't take into account the draft day trades in which teams give up other picks to grab someone who has slipped out of the 1st round. If you want an example, just look at last year's draft, where we traded our 37th pick for Denver's 1st round pick this year(14)! Do those have equal value now? I will agree that 2nd round picks can be a crapshoot, but the value of that pick lies in the ability to trade down and get more value for that pick in the draft, therefore adding value to existing picks. Not giving away huge value, plus a 3rd round pick next year, for a player who had no value for the Chargers.

I honestly believe that if we had waited until draft day to make a trade for Whitehurst, we could have done it much cheaper. And this move likely eliminated trading our 2nd rounder for Brandon Marshall.

and it is easy to say that we don't know as much as the front office guys do, but EVERY MAJOR SPORTS NEWS AGENCY IS BLASTING THIS TRADE!!! and these are guys who know more than us, who do this professionally, and who know a lot of front office people around the league. If everyone is in agreement that this is a bad move, then it probably is one! and even the guys who try to put the lighter spin on it (Sando, Clayton), still admit that the Seahawks overpaid, probably by too much. Bad trade

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/...key-draft/

"1) Wallace and Quinn were traded for late round picks.

How can a guy who a)was 3rd string and showed nothing in preaseason and b) never thrown an NFL pass in the regular season be more valuable than a player who has thrown regular season passes?"

Wallace and Quinn proved that they sucked. Whitehurst has not done that.

This trade is telling us that we are going to fill our other more glaring holes O Line, Safety & D Line through the draft. This is not a great trade but it's not a significant cost either.

Also, am I the only one who doesn't care about the draft value chart?

If Seattle waited until the draft, Whitehurst, for better or worse, would be playing for the Cards, not the Seahawks.

Seattle made the deal necessary to bring the ONLY option for a number 2 QB who can start in the NFL in 2010 (and likely will).

Is Bradford worth what he will be paid? No, but that's the situation for him and the team that drafts him. Same situation for Seattle. Under the circumstances, they paid what was necessary to get a starting-caliber QB.

For all of you nay-sayers on this move, name another alternative that brings a starting QB to the team. I can't think of any, or anything I would rather they did (see my post above for various alternatives).

Seattle has something they haven't had in two years: a viable starting QB with long-term potential.

Maybe Whitehurst is the bridge between now and when a new QB (Bradford/Clausen/Other) is ready to start, I don't know. What I do know is that I am ready to see somebody else other than Matt Hasselbeck take snaps in regular season Seahawk games.

Keeping Hass as the starter has the same emotional affect on me than having kept Mora on for another season: nothing but pain and disappointment to look forward to.

The past two years have sucked. The team has sucked. As far as I am concerned, PT and company have carte blanche to change whatever they think necessary to make this team competitive. They can't do any worse than Mora did.

We have a new QB. I am thrilled, and whether my excitement lasts through the first half of the first game, who knows? But at least I don't have to spend my time between now and then completely depressed.

Beercan you make a good argument but im curious would you rather the Hawks waste a draftpick on someone like Derek Anderson who doesnt fit into Bates offensive scheme or waste a roster spot on Wallace who only seems to be able to run backwards out of bounds when he has the ball. There was also Brady Quinn but if Mike Holmgren prefers INT machine Jake Delhomme i think that speaks volumes about his potential. We could hope Clausen is available and gamble a 6th pick on him along with a ton of money or trade away atleast 1 1st rounder for Kevin Kolb. I agree the price was steep but given the current Qb situation in the league it may have been necessary.

Farmer-

That was a good read and although I'm still up in the air I do think it is a chess game. I do think Whitehurst is more valuable than Seneca, because we know what Wallace can be (or lack there of) and Whitehurst hasn't been given the chance. They obviously liked something about him and although it's a bit of a reach and could be a bust, it could also make our FO look like geniuses. He would be a better prospect than a rookie in my opinion as the success rate is low and he has about the same odds only having 3 years to adapt a bit to the NFL. Maybe not in games, but practice/preseason is the same speed. At the very least we loose a 3rd instead of a #6 if Bradford/Clausen don't pan out either. I just think we have a more viable back up in Whitehurst now with upside in the case that Hass goes down and at very little cost. Maybe they like Teel or another guy in the draft, but feel that in that case aren't ready and this was a better option. I'm starting to warm up a bit and now it frees up the draft a bit too.

yall some haters.
considering the options this isnt a bad pick up to free up some draft picks

What if Hawks pick up Melvin Bullitt (RFA), SS, Colts. Age: 25 for a second rd tender?Then trading from #40 pick to #60 makes little difference.We get Whitehurste for next years 3rd.Could be they are looking at something like that.

Settle down dude. I know exactly what I'm talking about. Of course I knew Joe was from ND. Name me one decent NFL QB from Notre Dame since Montana.

Seahawks official site reports an undisclosed draft pick in 2011. To me this may mean that they have conditions on how high that pick is. These other sources may be talking about a 3rd in 2011 may have heard (that if he starts) it will be the third round and jumped to conclusion.

you ever think that the FO might have their sites on a player that they wanted to grab in the 2nd round, but at 40 would have been over paid?

Lets trust in what they are doing, and if it doesn't work out then you can blast them for the mistakes you think they made.

San Diego is the same way the said he was traded for compensation but they do not even list the 2nd rounders swaping. I don't doubt they do but the two teams are both doing the same thing, and possibly some of the final trade could depend on other events to come. They have reached an agreement on Whitehurst but maybe this trade is part of a bigger picture trade.

to sign a RFA to a tender the team must hold their own pick in the given rnd inorder to sign the tender. By trading that pick to San Diego we no longer fullfill that criteria.

For the record I like this trade alot and do not feel we overpaid at all. If PC truly believes that he is the real deal I am glad he has the balls to go get him.

As for listening to all the talking heads in the media who are almost NEVER right this is not proof of anything to me other then they dont know anythng about him either.

As for everyone saying he has never taken an NFL snap....NEITHER DID PEYTON MANNING when they "threw away thier 1st overall pick on him"...just saying it means nothing and is further proof that the talking heads in the media only want a story.

Johnny,
That is a good point. But I was really trying to point out that the Seahawks didn't overpay in this trade. If the Cards offered the same compensation in a trade, it just further reinforces the fact that we didn't overpay, and that we paid market value for Whitehurst. I guess that was my main point more than anything else. We had no choice but to give up MORE than his RFA compensation (a 3rd round pick) in order to get the deal done, otherwise the Cards would have gotten him, either through a similar trade, or through a RFA signing. I'm not saying that he was worth what we gave up...we don't really know that yet. I'm just saying that we gave up the necessary compensation to get the deal done, given that we were competing with the Cards to get him.

So for all those who think that we overpaid, consider that we wouldn't have gotten Whitehurst if we had offered less. He would have gone to the Cards, and then we would be the ones stuck with Derek Anderson. It's not like we threw in next year's 3rd rounder just to be nice...it was necessary to get the deal done. What we should really be debating is whether or no he is worth what both the Cards and Seahawks were willing to pay, not just what the Hawks were willing to pay. Besides, this is how market values are determined...they are based on what people are willing to pay. It's clear that two teams helped to determine his value, and that's what we paid.

Blueprint:
1. Address QB situation...check
2. Address O-Line...pending
3. Address Defensive Backfield and Pass Rush...pending
4. Finish filling out the team...pending

(from evoxx) Blueprint:
1. Address QB situation...check
2. Address O-Line...pending (Charles Brown?)
3. Address Defensive Backfield and Pass Rush...pending (McCoy/Berry/Thomas/Haden?)
3a (my addition) Address offensive playmaker...pending (Marshall? Spiller? Mathews? Best?)
4. Finish filling out the team...pending

Renton, Wash. - The Seattle Seahawks acquired QB Charlie Whitehurst via trade from the San Diego Chargers, the team announced today. The teams will swap second-round draft choices in this April's NFL Draft with Seattle sending the 40th overall selection to San Diego for the Chargers 60th overall pick. San Diego will also receive an undisclosed 2011 NFL Draft choice from Seattle.

"Big, talented, athletic guy with a strong arm and a competitive streak," said General Manager John Schneider. "We believe he has the potential to be a successful quarterback in this league."

"We are all about competition," said Head Coach Pete Carroll. "Charlie has tremendous talent and upside and we are very excited to watch him develop and help our football team."

Whitehurst, from Clemson, was originally a 2006 third-round draft choice by San Diego where he spent the last four seasons. After serving as the backup in 2006, he has been inactive each of the last three years as the third quarterback. In 2006, he saw action in two games with no passes attempted. Versus Tennessee that season, he replaced Phillip Rivers late in the fourth quarter and scored his first-career NFL touchdown on a 14-yard run.

He finished his collegiate career with 25 wins, second-best total in school history, and earned second-team All-ACC as a senior in 2005. Among his win total were eight fourth quarter come-from-behind victories, seven wins over top-25 teams and three wins versus top-10 teams. He graduated with 46 school records, including career passing yardage, completions, touchdown passes, completion percentage and 300-yard games.

^^^^ from Seattle Seahawks web site

Did you just really compare Charlie Whitehurst to Peyton Manning, because Peyton manning had not thrown an NFL pass prior to being in the NFL?

Ok, well, Whitehurt has been in the NFL for 4 years now and has never thrown a pass. Peyton threw many passes in his first year. He was able to get on the field in his first year. He started every game of his rookie year. Again, Charlie has been on an NFL roster for 4 years without throwing a pass.

Does that not strike you as incredibly telling? Starting your first game (and every game since) versus never throwing a pass in 4 years? I will tell you, it is clearly indicative of Peyton Manning being amazing, and Charlie being bad. If you are good, you find ways onto the field. I would understand one or two years where you learn, but 4 is a ton. One last time, 4 NFL season and he has not thrown a pass. It does not "mean nothing" as you put it.

It's cool to be an optimistic fan and all, but it is always a good idea to throw a little logic into one's argument, even when it is about one's favorite team.

Hey Rob and bloggers. I understand the logic in aquiring Whitehurst. When you think about it, we didnt give up that much. Obvisouly Pete Carroll knew that there was a good chance that both Clausen and Bradford will be gone by pick 6. Carroll also new that neither QB's are worthy of moving up to get. Seattle media are complaining that we paid to much for a QB who has not took a snap. If you took any QB at pick 6, you would be paying 40 million to a player that has not took a snap. I would rather pay 8 million/2years( not 10 as earlier reported.) If he does not pan out, all you really lost was a 3rd round pick. If you draft A QB at 6th, your stuck with a 40 million dollar contract for a player that will be holding a clipboard. At least Whitehurst has had good training under SD's staff and playing behind Rivers. By signing Whitehurst instaead of rookie QB, you bipass the baby period and go straight to the teen stage. My overall point is this, The same risk is asscociated with both scenarios however one scenario is far less expensive. I think Whitehurst is a better back up and potential starter than any QB we could have drafted in this years 3rd round. Us fans should let Carrol and Co. do their jobs. They get paid to scout talent, let them do it. Matt Scaub was in the same situation as Whitehurst. He is now a Pro Bowl QB. Ander Johnson helped his transition and that is why us signing Marshall or drafting a great reciever is essential to Whitehurst's success. Hey Rob, tell me what you think.

What if you are serving out your rookie contract on a team behind a young all-pro starter? What if you aren't done filling that contract and your team trades you to another team for a decent compensation and you now have a chance to "get on the field"? Would that not be kind of like your suggestion about "good players find ways to get on the field?"

Help me out here please.

How can you can say a QB starting from day 1 is indicitave of him being amazing and one that hasnt played yet means he is bad. There are plenty of QBs that have started from day one, Ryan Leaf for example, and been terrible and vice versa. Tom Brady is considered one of the best of all time and he was a back up who was only given a chance due to injury. Besides it not like Whitehurst was a backup for a team like ST Louis or Cleveland he was playing behind one of the best Qb's in the game and one of the better back ups in the NFL.

The end.

excelent points lenny!

It's not a clear cut 3rd round pick next year....would the upset fans be ok if it turns out to be a 5th or 6th?

"Seattle sending the 40th overall selection to San Diego for the Chargers 60th overall pick. San Diego will also receive an undisclosed 2011 NFL Draft choice from Seattle."

Anyone know if there is a video link to the press conference?

I agree that it is ridiculous to compare Whitehurst to Manning, however, it is fair to compare him to Hass, Rodgers, Cassell, Romo, Schaub, Brady, Steve Young just to name a few. It is the STANDARD in the NFL to groom a QB. Guys like Manning, Ryan, Rothlisberger, etc. typically don't happen and the teams it does happen to are usually the bottom of the barrel teams that have no choice but to start a rookie like Detroit and soon to be St. Louis.

SD has Rivers!! Just because he didn't beat out Rivers or the very competent vet backup Volek doesn't mean he's a bum. It means they have their guy in Rivers, Volek is a great back up and he is still in the hunt. On someone else's team he could be a great back up or potentially the starter if given the chance and no way he beats out Rivers.

I couldnt agree with you more every sees that he has been a back up for 4 years and instantly thinks he is going to be garbage. Kurt Warner worked as a grocery clerk late into his 20's and turned out to be a hall of famer, not saying i think Whitehurst will be a hall of famer im just saying that we shouldnt judge someone before they have been given a proper chance.

Honestly doesnt matter if Hasselbeck wins the job or not. It just matters if he can stay healthy cause as soon and I mean the instant he goes down with an injury for what? the 4th year in a row. Whitehurst will take over and that will be the end of Hass in Seattle as a starter.

I was not comparing Peyton Manning to Whitehurst. If you actually read my post clearly, I was stating that I do not buy the argument of "He has never taken a NFL snap" as an effective or relevent argument. Obviously Whitehurst is no Peyton Manning...DUH. If you are going to try trashing someone try listening first!

Has anyone seen Bucky Brooks latest mock. He has Suh falling past the Hawks. I don't see that happening but how sweet would it be to be able to pick up Suh. Mccoy would be great to but man this would be insane.

Well, seeing how ESPN reported Whitehurst was the hottest RFA, and many teams were seeking to land him, I've got to say I'm pleased with the deal! I know we're all a bit concerned about the price we paid, but I'm willing to bet they (and the other teams) know what they're talking about. And the future will show just what we were lucky to get.....

Who are you gonna push off the field? Remember Drew Brees got basically released by SD 3-4 years ago, Voleck would start for about 20 teams in the league, and Rivers pushed Brees out of town. If Lord Favre had stayed in GB, I bet you that Aaron Rogers would now still be waiting for a chance to start, does that make him awful? (And GB released Brian Brohm to try to stick him on the PS last year, which is how he ended up in Buffalo (much to MY chagrin, because I think he is a damm fine QB too)

this trade greases the skids for another trade with the Chargers. Sando threw this out there today and it would make me feel a whole lot better about this Whitehurst thing.

Chargers now hold #28 & #40 which basically add up to the value of #14. So if the Chargers wanted to trade up for Spiller or the Tenn DT the Hawks could drop back to #28 and get their #40 pick back leaving them with 2 firsts and 2 seconds. Not that would be something to get excited about.

Coughawk
I like the way you guys are thinking
So here is what I think. I no its rediculous but Bucky Brooks from nfl.com has Suh sliding past us to oakland. So with this in mind I make my hawks draft with the trade listed above in mind.
#6 Suh
#28 Charles Brown
#40 Best WR (Branden Lafell, Golden Tate, Damien Williams.)
#60 Morgan Burnett
#101 Best OL
#102 (from Browns for Sims or better hopefully)Best QB/RB (more competition and future)
#124 Best OL/DL
This rounds out the first four rounds.

Still have 3 picks to get more depth and competion at (WR, DB, OL, DL, RB) anything we want.

I can easily see either McCoy or Suh at #6 if Lions go Okung. I was thinking Brown at #28 as well. Of course the Marshall thing could still happen with either #28 or #40.

Here's some facts:

1) I'd rather have Bradford as well. But he never would have been available at 6, so forget him.

2) Clausen is an overrated idiot. I'd rather have Whitehurst any day of the week and twice on Tuesday.

3) We pick up a left tackle and RB somewhere and we have a new offense ladies and germs.

4) Whitehurst sucks it up in 2010 and the 'Hawks go nowhere? We didn't waste any money on a 1st round QB this year so we're in the running for...

5) Jake Locker. Whitehurst DEFINITELY makes Locker a viable option in 2011 - who is miles above any QB is the 2010 draft class.

I just want to say this. I am not complaining but I hope Mike Teel gets a fair shake at the starting job as his stats from College are actually quite good. Just hope all three of our QB's are in on the competition scene.

Ya, Teel needs a fair shake too, and I love that they're finally making Matt sweat a little.... competition is a good thing!

Jake Locker IS OVERRATED..UW fans needs to get off his nuts and stop thinking he is gods gift to football

Jake Locker IS OVERRATED..UW fans needs to get off his nuts and stop thinking he is gods gift to football

You will eat those words eventually. Every scout that has seen him play goes nuts for him. Give Sarkisian another year to mold him and he will be the best QB prospect to enter the league in a decade.

Look, I am not opposed to getting Whitehurst. I know that he might end up being a good player. But the Seahawks gave in to a false sense of urgency to get him now, when they could have waited until draft day and made a better move. Making quick personnel decisions based on an inflated market value is a flawed operating system for a GM. It is the same basic strategy that bad GMs have employed for years. Look at Bavasi's tenure as the Mariner's GM, and as a contrast, look at Jack Z's now. Calculated moves on objective player ratings, based on an overall strategy to build through defense and youth, while never letting the diminished market set the price for a player, or overpaying for a middling prospect. No one knows what whitehurst will actually do, not me, not Carroll & Schenider, not the Chargers F.O. And i sincerely hope he exceeds every expectation, but i disagree wholeheartedly with an operating system which allows a team to overpay that highly for an unknown player.

Pete Carroll (before he had anything to do with the 'hawks and when he was pissed off at UW) said that Locker was the best college QB he's played against in 10 years.... think about the guys SC has been up against in the last 10 years.

Oh yeah, and this proves that Carroll loves Locker. Also, pretty tight with Sark... AND they're all in the same city for a bit. Locker's gonna stay home next year.

The Hawks either have Jesus or one of the Bee Gee's at QB.

BTW - Perhaps Locker should try to crack the .500 mark before being crowned the king of all QB's. Husky fans don't bother with a stellar Cougar slam. I know they suck.

It is always quite interesting how some fans feel a team is overpaying and in this case for someone that is considered unknown or unproven yet Bradford will be making 4-5 times guaranteed and he hasn't played a down in the NFL and is coming off shoulder surgery. It's a crapshoot and if Whitehurst was a 3rd round talent in 2007 and he's now had time to mature and learn what it's like in the NFL why isn't a future 3rd round pick and a swap of this yrs pick reasonable? I don't want to go another season with a banged up and declining QB. Now we can grab some young players and also have a far more depth at QB. Teel should have been given some time last yr IMHO he looked promising.

There is a reason why Bradford will make big money because he is projected to be the #1 pick of all college football. Whitehurst was projected to be a third round pick. The odds of everyone being wrong about Bradford is a lot less than the Seahawks being wrong about Whitehurst.

Somebody might have said this, but 87 posts is a lot to go through, so I will say it up front that I agree with you if you already said what I am about to say.
1st. We all know Mike H. is able to tell if a QB has it or he doesnt right? If you agree then you know that D. Anderson was shipped out of Cleveland in a heartbeat (yes, I know the money had something to do with it) but I trust that Holmy and Pete saw something in D.A. that didnt impress them, so lets exlude D.A. from an option for the Hawks.
2nd. I would bet the farm that a lot of NFL teams have a pretty good idea of which team is going to pick which player. They might not be able to know all the way down to a singular player, but they know each teams top 2 or 3. Even we know this by what positions each team needs the most. With that being said, I bet the Hawks know that Clauson, and Bradford would be gone by the time #6 rolls around, so they had no other choice. What else were they suppose to do? Keep Seneca and relive the past two years? I love the guy, but he will forever be a backup. Whitehurst was the best option with the best upside, and the Hawks grabbed him.
3. This might just be wishful thinking because I love Matt, but we have seen a lot of QB's play into their late 30's. Matt is getting up there, but if we can give up a 3rd rounder for a solid backup, and have the chance to keep Matt around for 2-4 more years then this allows the Hawks to address other glaring needs. I get that it takes time for a QB to adjust to the NFL, so we should get one now, but Matt Ryan did okay, Joe Flacco, and Mark Sanchez to name a few, PLUS Pete pretty much had to coach a new QB how to play primetime Trojan football every 2 years. I know the NFL is a whole hell of a lot different, but Pete has shown that he can take a freshman QB with the rest of a solid young team that just got picked apart in the draft, and go into a place like Ohio State on primetime TV and beat them (anybody that watched this last years SC vs. Ohio State game knows what I am talking about). If I remember right that was one of their first games of the year too.
4. My point is that this is not a temp. solution, or a long term solution, but a mid solution. I think Pete and John either knew the best QB's would be off the board, or they just werent going to be all that, so why pick one just because and pay him a crap ton of money, only to do what the Browns had to do this year and dump him a few years down the road and be no better off?

One thing that occurs to me is that PC was down there in So Cal running the USC program. The closest NFL team is the Chargers.

Is it possible, or even likely, that PC took in some Chargers games and knows the coaching staff down there and has some inside info on the progess and abilities of Whitehurst?

I'm hoping that's the case.

Obviously, the guy is a Hawk now so I'll support him. Welcome to the Great Pacific Northwet Charlie!

nwpride and highlander are both making valid points.
Our new coach and gm have some inside info into this guy and we might have just scored Hass 2.0. The thought of Seneca losing another ten yards on every other down scares me, this makes sense. I hope i see a bit of Teel this year. I won't let a couple of chess moves derail my optimism that was lost these last 2 years.

its possible that we wanted to trade back and maybe grab mount Cody at 60. this makes sense if were switching to a 3-4, which it sure as hell looks like were doing, then move meebs to DE, and jackson as the other one, then have curry,reed, and hill playing and alternating at olb and hawthorne and tatupu in the middle

exactly how were we going to stop the cards from signing whitehurst inorder to "wait until draft time to sign him"? Just curious!

Well, one doesn't exist, so it must be Barry Gibb, (in his younger days, of course)

Interested in finding out what the undisclosed draft pick will be that we give up in 2011, the details about it. GO HAWKS!!

I didn't see it posted, so here it is.

http://seattleseahawks.com/

Mt Cody wont be around at #40, never mind #60. Hopefully what is gonna happen is the sort of deal where we end up with a 2nd trade with SD moving back from 14 to 28 and re-couping #40, which would then allow us to snag Cody at 28 (about even money is there then) and still pick up 2 potential starters at 40 and 60...

I'd be surprised to see another trade with SD. If they wanted to swap #14 for #28 & #40, wouldn't they have made this happen in the original deal? Why make it two separate trades?

"Perhaps Locker should try to crack the .500 mark before being crowned the king of all QB's"

What was Elways record at Stanford??

just sayin'

Jake Locker can't even hold Jimmy Clausen's jockstrap. How about that sub .500 UW record! Seriously if anyone is overrated it's Locker, he is used to playing on a B-List program and probably won't make it as a pro.
The haters panned Sanchez and the rookie had the poise to help lead his team to the playoffs. The doubters will be proven wrong again when Clausen is a star. Hasselbeck would have had a losing record with the Jets because he has no mobile savvy in the pocket, mediocre accuracy and poor arm strenght.
I'm even excited about Whitehurst as a welcome change!

A trade may already be worked out but I'm sure it is dependant on whether the player the Chargers want is available at #14. Otherwise why would they trade just to trade.

How can people say that Locker is garbage when Mel Kiper has him rated as the number 1 QB in 2011 and for a time had him going number 1 this year in his early mock drafts. Are you going to argue that Kiper is misguided too? Yes he is not the most polished college QB out there but his NFL potential is unmatched among current college QBs.

Is it possible, or even likely, that PC took in some Chargers games and knows the coaching staff down there and has some inside info on the progess and abilities of Whitehurst?

Of course the Chargers poured on all the positive information they could about Whitehurst to the Seahawk staff, like car salesmen. Why wouldn't they, while trying to drive up his price?

And of course the Seahawks have tons more information on him than any of us, particularly extensive analysis of actual game film of all his play in college and in the pros.

I'm a current (and Alum ironically) UW student and I actually think Locker is a bit overrated myself. HOWEVER, I don't think you should use the .500 mark as an argument because 1) It's not like ND is blowing things up. 2) We probably would have only won 2 games this past year if it wasn't for Locker. A QB can't do EVERYTHING.

Of course the Chargers poured on all the positive information they could about Whitehurst to the Seahawk staff, like car salesmen. Why wouldn't they, while trying to drive up his price?

So what you're saying, JohnnyB, is that while PC was still a coach at USC and the idea of him being the coach of the Seahawks hadn't even been concieved the Chargers predicted that and were talking up Whitehurst in the hopes of driving up the trade price on him?
Really?!

not sure why you said waste a pick on Anderson? DA was a free agent and it would have not required a draft pick if we would have signed him! And yes I would take 1 one time pro bowler over an unknown. At least I know what I am getting.

If Anderson would have been signed the following could have happened:

2010 2nd round could have been still considered for B. Marshall trade.
2011 1st and 3rd could have been packaged to move up in 2011 draft to get Jake Locker, if none of the 2010 QB class interests you!

Nothing would have sounded better to get Marshall this year, drafted OT and DT in the first round and next year picked up QB of the future in Locker………. Now kiss Locker good buy. Before you start disputing, Locker has more talent then Bradford, clauson or any other QB that will come out next year and that’s coming from a WSU alumn!

Also, say what you want, but you can not deny that Holmy is one of the best QB coach and talent evaluators and we all know that he was in need of a QB! Now if he picked Wallace and Jake D before “Whitehurt”, then what does that tell you about Whitehurst?

My apologies for writing waste a draft pick on Anderson i meant roster spot but my point is Anderson may have been a 1 time pro bowler but not only does his skill set not fit with Bates offensive scheme he was also rejected by Holmgren, the best QB coach there is, what does that tell you about Anderson? Also just because Holmgren didnt trade for Whitehurst doesnt mean anything about him other than maybe Holmgren doesnt view him as a west coast offense type QB

I do agree with you about Marshall and Locker though.

You asked:

Is it possible, or even likely, that PC took in some Chargers games and knows the coaching staff down there and has some inside info on the progess and abilities of Whitehurst?

I said of course he has inside info from the Chargers, not from when he was down there, but from when they were negotiating. What's so hard to understand?

I said of course he has inside info from the Chargers, not from when he was down there, but from when they were negotiating. What's so hard to understand?

And what proof do you have that PC never had communication with the Chargers during his time at USC? You seem to be making quite a strong claim I rather doubt you can sustain.

Highlander I have not read your entire conversation with JohnnyB but heres what I think. I agree with you that he probably had info from when he was there, but they surely were not talking about Whitehurst to work out a trade. Uh maybe they thought he could pass as a college QB again.
You are both right and both are unwilling to admit that there is more than your own perspective.
Problem with chats is you don't see the expressions on peoples faces so you can't get to attached to what is being said.

Why is Brock such an idiot? He goes on and on about the contract and how much they are paying Whitehurst and that the consolation is that at least its just a two year deal.

Hey knuckledhead, most every NFL contract is a two year deal because after that its generally not guaranteed.

The consolation is that at least they didn't get stuck with Anderson whom you were wrong to push as the best option.

No one should have a problem with giving this guy a chance. Even if he never starts for the Hawks and Hasselback beats him out as starter for the next two years, it is probably an upgrade from previous years backups and it will be money well spent if it gets career years out of Hasselback. Even he wins the starting job, even better.

The only problem with this deal is the Seahawks over-paid the Chargers. Looking at what was traded for quarterbacks the last few years, this deal was ridiculous. One other team involved did not create a "hot" market, and the Hawks should have pokerfaced until the Cards folded. If they had been aggressive while patient the deal would have been sweeter.

The Chargers fans said when he was tendered for a 3rd rounder that if any team signed him, the Chargers would not match and they'd be happy with a third. The Seahawks paid almost twice that amount.

That 40th pick was a real asset that should not have been surrendered so readily. If the deal needed to be increased over the third for next year, it should have been additional later pick(s), not a top 40 pick this year.

" the Hawks should have pokerfaced until the Cards folded."

Um, the Seahawks never outbid the Cardinals. Their offers were equal. If the Seahawks would have outbid the Cardinals, Whitehurst wouldn't have been deciding himself where he was going to go. Whitehurst rejected the Cardinals himself, the Chargers didn't do it.

The idea that the Seahawks overpaid for Whitehurst is also ridiculous. They gave up back up QB draft picks and gave him a back up quarterback contract (and a small one at that), any way you look at it. This for a guy who has a real chance of being much more than a back up. No, this was a good deal.

Highlander I have not read your entire conversation with JohnnyB but heres what I think. I agree with you that he probably had info from when he was there, but they surely were not talking about Whitehurst to work out a trade. Uh maybe they thought he could pass as a college QB again.

I agree...although that was the implication JohnnyB was suggesting...at least in reading the way he wrote his post. I would have assumed he meant it differently, although he insists that PC never spoke with or attended any Charger games.

It really is no matter. Whitehurst is a Seahawk in either case.

Go Hawks!

Why is neither team willing to admit publicly what exactly the trade is. Everyone and there sister is claiming that it is the swap of the seconds and the Hawks giving away next years 3rd. But Seahawks and Chargers official sites only speak about undisclosed picks.

What is going on guys?

Correction,
Seahawks official site states the idea of the swap of 2nds.

http://www.mynorthwest.com/res...144311.mp3

Sarcasm there... He suggests we should have grabbed McNabb w/ our 14th and taken his contract. He believes we would have been set for 5 years.

Just WOW. Be glad, folks, that our front office is not listening to the pundents.

JonB,
I agree 100%. We didn't overpay, we gave up exactly what we had to in order to get the deal done. No more, no less. Simple as that. Also, maybe both teams aren't officially announcing the 3rd round pick in 2011 because the deal isn't completely official yet? I don't know, it does seem odd.

evoxx,
The Seahawks paid the equivalent of a 3rd and a 4th. The move back 20 spots in the 2nd is the equivalent of a 3rd round pick, and the 3rd rounder in 2011 is technically valued the same a 2010 4th round pick. That's not "twice" the amount that was being asked. And besides, anything less would not have gotten the deal done. If we had a 3rd, we could have negotiated solely with Whitehurst and only given up a 3rd after signing him as a RFA. But that wasn't possible, and since the Cards also wanted him, we had to up the ante.

beercan?
written by texashawk, March 19, 2010
exactly how were we going to stop the cards from signing whitehurst inorder to "wait until draft time to sign him"? Just curious!

How do you know that the Cardnials were going to actually sign him? there has been no real confirmation that the Cardinals ever intended to sign him, only speculation. most observers thought that the Cardinals had focused on Derrick Anderson, and were going to sign him, which they did. There was no way that they were going to get both, and Anderson was going to pick the Cardinals over the Seahawks, due to the higher chance of starting. If the Hawks hadnt acted desperate, and had not tipped their hands that they showed serious interest in Whitehurst, then they could have approached the Chargers on draft day with a potential deal and gotten him for a lot less.

As far as round tenders on restricted free agents go, this was a horrible move, and sets a bad precedent for future trades. the typical route that takes is that a team lists a player at a certain worth, and that is the starting negotiating point, but it is ALMOST ALWAYS LOWER THAN THAT. Hence why most observers thought that Marshall would be traded to us for less than a 1st rounder, despite the 1st round tender.

Now, after the Seahawks gave up twice the value of a 3rd round tender for a 3rd string QB with no experience, do you think that Denver's GM is going to accept any less than that for a pro bowler with 4,000 recieving yards in 4 years?

And its galling to read a Don Banks interview with AJ Smith, (the chargers GM), on SI.com where even after saying how good Whitehurst "could" be, he is laughing at the end of the interview.

Overpaid??
written by JohnnyB, March 19, 2010
The idea that the Seahawks overpaid for Whitehurst is also ridiculous. They gave up back up QB draft picks and gave him a back up quarterback contract (and a small one at that), any way you look at it. This for a guy who has a real chance of being much more than a back up. No, this was a good deal.

Do you know that for sure? 4 mil a year is not a little contract for a backup QB, unless it is a backup who was a 1st round pick and couldn't play his way into the starters role. In fact, it is about 1 mil more than an average backup, with NFL experience makes. and this for a 3rd string QB, who has never made a throw.

Check the rules of the tag. By default, Arizona showed interest and offered the tender. We traded for Charlie, SD did not simply tender him to us. If you believe the AZ tender wasn't validated by our FO, then there's no point continuing this discussion.

We got a great deal on the salary too. Don't believe it, check some data. If he is the starter in either year, he is a steal regardless of his production. His compensation is greater than a typical BU, but not completely out of line. He is much cheaper than rookie contract QB's who are 1st round picks by far.

He wasn't signed to carry Matts clipboard.
http://content.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/

Everything that I read says that Whitehurst was taken for the equivalent of 270 points on the chart. This is not my number it is the "experts". Now I believe that our third rounder this year would have been 240 points and that would have been what we gave them if we had it. This means we are only giving up an extra 30 points for him.
30 points in the chart is realy nothing to worry about, that is basically the worth of our 6th round pick this year. So we actually gave the equivalent of this years 3rd and 6th. But we do not loose a draft pick until next year. This truly is as close to a perfect trade as we could have without having our 3rd rounder and just signing him to an offer sheet.

Here is a little food for thought on you guys who downplay the move down from 40 to 60. I am going to list some guys taken in the last 5 years between 40 and 60, some of the guys are familiar, pro bowl players, a lot of others are solid starters on good teams. This is the type of talent available in the early part of the 2nd round, good players who slip out of the first round for one reason or another. This is the unspoken value of that pick. And you can be certain that there will be at least 5-6 guys who the hawks could have picked in this upcoming draft, called the deepest in years, that would also be on a list like this

i am excluding 2009, despite a few good players (Max Unger for one), because it is too early to make a judgement on them. And keep in mind, this is ONLY between picks 40 - 59.

2008
Tracy Porter (Saints CB, caught winning pick off Peyton Manning in this year's Super Bowl)
Eddie Royal (solid WR, Broncos)
Matt Forte (Pro Bowl RB, Bears)
DeSean Jackson (Pro Bowl WR, Eagles)
Ray Rice (solid RB, Ravens)
Chad Henne (Starting QB, Dolphins)

2007
Tony Ugoh (Pro Bowl OT, Colts)
Sidney Rice (Pro Bowl WR, Vikings)
Steve Smith (solid WR, NY Giants)
Josh Wilson (starting CB, Seahawks)
Lamar Woodley (starting OLB, Steelers)

2006
Duece Lutui (starting LG, Cardinals)
Marcus McNeill (Pro Bowl OT, Chargers)
Devin Hester (Pro Bowl Returner/WR)
Greg Jennings (Pro Bowl WR, Green Bay)
Daniel Manning (starting FS, Bears)
Cedric Griffin (starting CB, Vikings)
Bernard Pollard (starting SS, Texans)

2005
Micheal Roos (Pro Bowl OT, Titans)
Lofa Tatupu (Pro Bowl LB, Seahawks)
Corey Webster (starting CB, NY Giants)
Ronald Bartell (Rams best CB)
Nick Collins (Starting FS, Green Bay)

Beercan
written by gnarlyhawks, March 19, 2010
Check the rules of the tag. By default, Arizona showed interest and offered the tender. We traded for Charlie, SD did not simply tender him to us. If you believe the AZ tender wasn't validated by our FO, then there's no point continuing this discussion.

He was never signed to an offer sheet from Arizona. The tender he signed was from San Diego, which allowed us to trade for him.

This is from Don Bank's interview with AJ Smith:

"We just fell into it," Smith said of the trade talks that emerged after San Diego tendered Whitehurst, a restricted free agent, at a third-round level (his original draft slot). "We tendered a third, at a $1.1 million (salary) this year, [thinking] if he returns to us this year, we'll have the same rock and roll band again this season with Rivers, Volek and Whitehurst.

"But now here comes the activity, and it's between Arizona, which had a standard third-round pick, and Seattle. But there's a little bit of a twist because the Seahawks didn't have a three. So I presented a package to them that I thought was attractive to us, and it's accepted. They wanted the player. And that's how it went down." (It feels like the words "lo and behold" should be in that quote somewhere, but I checked, and they're not.)

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...z0ifgGeQ35

a 6 and 14. I'm not sure in the context of our extra 4ths, and the TWO HIGH 1st round picks, 20 spots in the second is going to break the bank. It's not like any draft pick is guaranteed. At least now, we don't have to barter for a rookie QB and we have an option to trade down if someone wants a QB at 6.

You have to look at ALL the offseason moves once they are done, only then will you kow that the end game looks like from the FO perspective.

Right now, we are just dumb and reactionary.

and this:

Long term, this may wind up being a steal for Seattle. But until Whitehurst proves himself, it'll be scored as a heck of a coup for Smith and the Chargers. Especially if San Diego lands itself a blue-chip player at No. 40 in April.

"Your words, not mine," Smith said after listening to my instant analysis of the trade. But he was laughing when he said it, and I think I know why.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...z0ifgkQJqN

there has been no real confirmation that the Cardinals ever intended to sign him, only speculation.

Yeah, there has been confirmation. Whitehurst was deciding between the two. He chose the Seahawks. That has been confirmed. This means the Cardinals had an official offer in equivalent to the Seahawks offer.

4 mil a year is not a little contract for a backup QB

Who gives a crap? It doesn't matter at all how much he's making because there is no cap. It's not hurting the team. They can cut him with no cap hit before next season. Are you worrying about how much Paul Allen's heirs are going to get in their will?

Who gives a crap? It doesn't matter at all how much he's making because there is no cap. It's not hurting the team. They can cut him with no cap hit before next season. Are you worrying about how much Paul Allen's heirs are going to get in their will?

No, just disproving your point.

Yeah, there has been confirmation. Whitehurst was deciding between the two. He chose the Seahawks. That has been confirmed. This means the Cardinals had an official offer in equivalent to the Seahawks offer.

Once again, never signed an offer sheet. The Chargers could have traded him to either of the teams. They chose us because of the offer we accepted, and because Whitehurst wanted to play for us.

K
So with sixty we could still pick up one of the 7 highly liked Safeties or the 7 DTs that everyone is raving about. Maybe one of the 5 top Receivers will be there, or how about the 6 or 7 highly rated CBs. Now we go to OT were there are about 7 that could easily go before 60, elsewhere on the O line at Gaurd there are about three or 4 worth at least second round grade. The top 2 centers will likely be off the board but we do not need them. likely 3 or 4QBs, 6 worthy DEs (Tapp was taken at 63), 5 LBs, 4 or 5 RB, 1 or 2 TE.

I count 59 or 60 players that I would love to take in the top #60. That is off the top of my head though I did not list names they are there.

It is likely that one of the DT, DE, S, RB, OG, OT, that we could have chosen at 4 will be there at 60.

Seahawks draft blog has us taking the same DT at 60 as they had us taking at 40 in there last mock. Likely or not it is what happened in the mock and could potentially happen in real life.

There was a rookie pro bowler chosen in the 5th round last year.

You know what? I'd rather overpay for someone like Whitehurst instead of a dirtbag has-been like Joey Porter -- as the Cardinals just did.

First, those quoting the value charts have to take into account that everyone is saying 2010 is a better draft. They may be wrong but that would drive up the values of the picks if it is.

Second, my understanding is that Cards and Hawks offered identical 2yr 8m dollar deals to Whitehurst and then Hawks added 2m in incentives to finish the deal.

Then when then they spoke to Chargers, the Chargers said here is what it will take to get this deal done and the Hawks said OK. So, essentially the Chargers outplayed them by convincing them they would not accept less. That is where the error occurred in overpaying. I may be wrong but if Hawks were the only offer of a 3rd and a 5th from 2011 it would have eventually worked.

This may turn out like Lofa, where they overpaid but everyone forgot because Lofa played really well.

But if he turns out to be a guy that pushes Hasselback but can't beat him out, they overpaid.

This is near the end of the thread, so few will probably see it, but here is what I think is so smart about the Whitehurst trade.

1. We now have what our FO considers to be at the least a solid backup to Hass who has the tools to be a future starter. Teams need quality backups too - especially the Hawks.
2. The FO doesn't have to pick a QB early this year
3. The deal is only for 2 years. If they see him play/practice and he proves to be the real deal and the long-term answer, they can extend him. We will have our QB of the future and the eventual transition from Hass to Whitehurst will be a smooth one.
4. The deal is only for 2 years. If they discover that he isn't the long term answer, they can draft a QB next year and he will serve as the transition QB between Hass and the eventual QB of the future. He won't eat into a future salary cap, and the FO will be able to let him walk without salary penalty. I think there will be good QBs available next year and I pessimistically expect us to have a high pick.

I think that the opportunity to evaluate him this year and see how he progresses with a QB friendly OC is valuable, and should be considered when looking at the cost.

I'll probably re-post this on a future thread because I'm so late on this one...

Drafttek.com has these as #51-70 rated players.
51 Rodger Saffold OT OG, 52 Dexter McCluster WRS/KR, 53 Tyson Alualu DT43, 54 Tim Tebow QB, 55 Rob Gronkowski TE, 56 Vladimir Ducasse OG/OT, 57 Chad Jones SS, 58 Arrelious Benn WRF/KR, 59 Koa Misi DE43, 60 Brandon Ghee CB, 61 John Jerry OG/OT, 62 Morgan Burnett SS, 63 Aaron Hernandez TE/FB, 64 Toby Gerhart RBF, 65 Chris Cook CB/FS, 66 Taylor Price WRF, 67 Montario Hardesty RBF, 68 Anthony McCoy TE, 69 Jared Veldheer OT, 70 Sean Lee LB.

Take out those from positions that are not a need (LB, TE, and Speed WR) We have just about 15 players that I would love to have as a starter or a rookie QB on this team next year with the 60th pick. Some such as Morgan Burnett and Chad Jones are players that I would have been happy with at #40 and fill the huge need of Safety that we have. Such players also include Tyson Alualu, and Arelious Benn.

Who gives a crap? It doesn't matter at all how much he's making because there is no cap. It's not hurting the team. They can cut him with no cap hit before next season. Are you worrying about how much Paul Allen's heirs are going to get in their will?

No, just disproving your point.

My point is that the contract they gave him has zero cap risk, zero long term commitment, zero chance of any downside at all for the team. So, low, low, low, risk. Certainly not what any team gives to someone they want to be the starting QB on their team. How is that disproved?

They chose us because of the offer we accepted, and because Whitehurst wanted to play for us.

Where is your evidence that the Chargers chose us? What we know is Whitehurst was deciding between the Seahawks and the Chargers. It doesn't take much brains to understand that he never would have had the choice at all if the Seahawks were offering more than the Cardinals. You're saying the Chargers said to Whitehurst, "Charlie, the Seahawks are offering us way more, but you go ahead and pick who you want and we'll take the Cardinals low offer if you want us to."

That's ridiculous.

Well... at least they didn't give 33 yr old Joey Porter $17 mil like AZ just did...

I don't care what we give this guy in contract. What im upset about is that we move down 20 spots and give up a 3rd next year. This trade is a joke. 3rd string QB when the price was only a 3rd. Poor Management, we are on a downhill rolling fast.

The one thing I would add in contrast to my previous posts is that this may be a brilliant move by a master motivator. There is a theory in management that if you treat someone as if they are of more value than they may be, it will motivate them to seek to become as they are treated.

Beercan you should change your name to brickwall.

Just sayin

I don't care what we give this guy in contract. What im upset about is that we move down 20 spots and give up a 3rd next year. This trade is a joke. 3rd string QB when the price was only a 3rd. Poor Management, we are on a downhill rolling fast.

The guy has a chance to be first string. A real good chance. The whole NFL knows it, including the Chargers, but they happen to have two QBs who have been even better (so far) in front of him. If you want to get a great QB cheap, that's exactly the type of situation you have to take him from.

As far as the trade cost. Crunch the trade value numbers. If you value Whitehurst where he was taken in the draft, the Seahawks traded picks for almost exactly what he was worth.

-This years draft is so deep there is reputed to be little drop off between 40 and 60: Advantage Seahawks.

-The Seahawks are surely already planning on taking someone in the second round who will likely be available at 60 anyway: Advantage Seahawks.

-Since being drafted, Whitehurst has shown himself to be better than where he was drafted: Advantage Seahawks.

-With their extensive analysis, the FO thinks Whitehurst has a very good chance of being a great QB in this league. If they are right: HUGE Advantage Seahawks.

Costs too much, nobody likes it but we are going to be stuck with it.

Beercan you should change your name to brickwall.

so now i am being called a brickwall for making an opposing argument? At least i am putting comprehensive arguments out there, backed by a little research. Can you say the same Texashawk? Or are you simply calling me a brickwall because you lack the ability to make a convincing argument?

Its a bad trade. there is almost universal agreement from the NFL analysts around the league, and i have listed a ton of reasons why it is a bad deal. I'm sorry, but i won't sugarcoat a trade that doesn't get equal value. And paying that much for a QB who had no value for the team he was on is not getting equal value. Its a desperation move, and it doesn't bode well that the front office is making desperation moves in the first 4 months of their regime. This is the type of risk that GMs on the last year of their contracts take, because they have nothing to lose. Making it this early, for a guy with no experience? C'mon!
I don't like the trade, and nothing i have seen posted here or anywhere else has made me change my mind.
Is it the pessimistic take? No, its the realistic take. Whitehurst is going to have to become a stud QB for this trade to be worth it, and from what i have read about him, that's not very likely.

-This years draft is so deep there is reputed to be little drop off between 40 and 60: Advantage Seahawks.

Disadvantage. Moving down means that 19 fewer players will be available when the seahawks pick.

-The Seahawks are surely already planning on taking someone in the second round who will likely be available at 60 anyway: Advantage Seahawks.

Disadvantage. You can't tell me that the Seahawks would have been targeting a late 2nd guy as their pick with 40. That would make no sense for an NFL team. And even If that were the case, they could have moved down on draft day and picked up additional draft picks.(Or Whitehurst, if they hadn't gotten into a bidding war for him before the draft)

-Since being drafted, Whitehurst has shown himself to be better than where he was drafted: Advantage Seahawks.

Yes, because he has made a steady rise in the depth chart for san diego in his 4 years with the team..... Oh, Wait. No, he is still the 3rd string QB... with more INTs then TDs... And a 65.3 PRESEASON passer rating....

-With their extensive analysis, the FO thinks Whitehurst has a very good chance of being a great QB in this league. If they are right: HUGE Advantage Seahawks.

Extensive analysis? What time did the Front office have to make this "Extensive analysis"? They have been in place for a very short amount of time. And what could they have analyzed? His extensive NFL game film? it doesn't exist! His only NFL experience is the preseason, where he has been less than stellar.

Extensive analysis? What time did the Front office have to make this "Extensive analysis"? They have been in place for a very short amount of time. And what could they have analyzed? His extensive NFL game film? it doesn't exist! His only NFL experience is the preseason, where he has been less than stellar.

The stupidest thing by far that football fans do is ignore their own ignorance. To illustrate this point, let's take a look at the astounding amount of your ignorance you are ignoring. Remember, you are stating here that you know better than the FO about Whitehurst and his potential.

The FO has all his stats, including his college stats, and all his pro stats, his combine stats, and stats from his pro practices. Many dozens of figures. You have about ten of the stats they have.

The FO has interviewed him extensively, asking him tough questions about football and numerous other things. They have talked to a number of people who know him well and have played with him. They have gotten to know a lot about him personally. And you? Well, you are completely clueless about his personality. You know absolutely nothing about his life, his mentality, his intelligence, his background. Zero, zip, nada.

The FO has spoken extensively with his coaches. They have heard how he has progressed since being in the NFL, what his weaknesses were and are, what he has learned, etc. Chapter and verse, a huge amount of information. You again have zero information about this. Completely clueless. You know nothing at all about what he's done as a pro beyond about ten stats.

The FO has watched his college film and all his preseason film. They have seen 100+ plays in a Pro system. They have seen him repeatedly make all the throws an NFL QB must make. They have seen him throw under heavy rush and unpressured. The have seen deep passes, comebacks, short passes, runs, throw aways, all of it. And they have seen all this repeatedly, forward and reverse on overhead tape, over and over. And you? What?? You haven't even seen one second of him playing anywhere?? Not even on TV? Nothing???

And despite this stunning amount of ignorance, despite you getting virtually all your information about him out of a beercan, somehow you think you are in a better position to make a judgement about him than six or seven lifetime football experts with all this information???

Need I say more?

Opinions aside on the topic of the Whitehurst trade - We're all fans here and we all are allowed our own opinions; it's whats being a fan is all about. Please, lets not get overly personal or beligerant w/ one another.

Now, Beercan, I don't agree w/ you POV on the trade, could argure/debate ever point etc. Thats ok. Neither of us are right or wrong, I don't believe in clear cut right or wrong's on this stuff.

Lets all agree to disagree on the ponts and not argure further. There are clearly two sides to this trade, those pro, and those con.

I propose, we all just note which side we are and respect the other. I even move for a friendly wager...

One year from today, why don't we just round to next St. Pattys day, we all reconvene here and review the trade. Something telss me, we'll all be laughing about this.

Why? Why shouldn't we argue? That's the main point of this blog. And I'm not being personal at all. I believe the propensity to ignore their own ignorance is rampant among football fans. Beercan just happened to provide a beautiful example of it. Moron Morgan at field gulls has made a science out of it. He should change the name of his blog to: "If I Can't See It, It Doesn't Exist."

and calling out others for being ignorant.

The topic has been hashed, the points made and folks are either on one side or the other. It's futile to continue to try and convince others who don't want to be convinced.

To argue is not the point of the blog. Arguing creates dissention. Healthy debate is the point. It's been had, IMO and its time to move on.

A poll however, on the topic, would be a nice change of pace.

LOL - I like it. I got banned over there. I think it was for being offensive. I told his chronies to quit sucking off John and trying to write like him in the comments. They love to gang bang folks in the minority, especially when you directly challenge their points. Then switch to using pointless multi=sylabic words noone ever uses in conversation to try and gain some pseudo advantage in their debates. Guess John didn't like my directness.

Peace!

and calling out others for being ignorant.

Ignorance is not a personality characteristic. It is completely curable via education, discussion, and, yes, argument. Whether we know it or not, trying to cure our own ignorance (and others') is the reason we argue.

To argue is not the point of the blog. Arguing creates dissention. Healthy debate is the point. It's been had, IMO and its time to move on.

'Debate' and 'argument' are synonyms. At least in my book.

Wow! now we are arguing about the definition of argument versus debate. This is the difference Debates are structured and they end after each point has been said and disputed. Every point about Whitehurst has been both said and disputed.

Arguments keep going back and forth and get of the original topic which has obviously happened because we are talking about ignorance, Debate, and argument instead of football.

I would love to talk about football, and I would like to hear other peoples opinions about what I have to say and hopefully it goes the other way to. Fact is the FO is smarter than we are. When they make a deal that we all truly love we will say "how did they ever accomplish that?".

I do have one thought to discuss. Our New FO are mostly new to there position in the NFL. I think that it is very likely that they are building relationships with multiple teams. They have given a fair/good trade to the Broncos, Chargers, Browns. Our FO needs to throw some bones in the direction of other FOs around the league so that maybe next year we have teams that like doing business with us. When you have multiple teams that like your teams leadership you can actually start making things work to your advantage. If you have a friend, they generally give you a better deal on a car than some average Joe off the street.

They have built relationships without much loss as far as talent and draft picks go so far IMO. The only pick we have lost is possibly a 3rd rounder next year. We have not lost a starter as Seneca was an average to good backup, and Jackson beat out Tapp for the starting Job day one under Holmy 2 years ago.

Our New FO are mostly new to there position in the NFL.

Hey JonB, you must like me, since you copied my nick. It's always great to have fans!

Anyway, Both Schneider and Ribary (the pro personnel director) have been in NFL scouting for fifteen plus years each. They have numerous connections on numerous teams. They have already facilitated numerous deals for and with numerous teams.

Your perception that they are giving more than they are getting right now is a mis-perception. It isn't happening. It looks like that to us because they are getting rid of players we know lots about and acquiring players we know almost nothing about.

The FO knows a huge amount more about these guys than apparently most of you know. It's hilarious Beercan thinks they had no time to evaluate Whitehurst. ("If I can't see it, it doesn't exist!"). Ribary spends all day, all year evaluating players in the NFL. That has been his entire job for ten years! He has a big file on Whitehurst and has been evaluating him personally for years. This evaluation was stepped up in the last month. Multiply this times two because Schneider has been doing the same thing. Factor in them catching up Carroll who has been working 16 hour days since he got here.

The reality is: There is a huge submerged iceburg of analysis going on that none of us see. If anyone here was saying: "Hey, I've watched Whitehurst and studied him on film. Here's why he sucks, A,B,C..." they would deserve some respect. But "this guy is third string, the FO are idiots" deserves little attention and less respect.

I don't think the trades are bad trades. I think they are good trades (Read what I read about my thoughts on Tapp versus Jackson and that the only thing we do not have that we did is a pick in next years draft. And they are not being greedy in what they want from other teams. No body wants to be taken advantage of. And when you make good trades that work for both teams, the GMs doing business will be likely to do business again.

Schneider has been in the league for a while but never as GM, that is what I was saying before "New to there position". He may have been in the room during trades that took place but he was not the GM making decisions and building that relationship with other GMs.

I have not said anything bad about the Whitehurst trade, and I agree with you that those who are still hung up on what a bad move it is need to just accept it and realize the FO is better at what they are doing than we could be.

Oh and by the way my name is Jon and my last name starts with a B. Sorry I was born that way so it isn't a nickname.

so it isn't a nickname

Admit it! You love me!! Your name isn't "Jon B" It's "John Brown" or "John Borowski" or "John Bitchslap." It ain't "Jon B!" That's a nick!

said it starts with a b not that my last name is b

http://www.buydiscountuggs.com

Cheap NFL jerseys and discounts NBA Jerseys for sale http://www.jerseycaptain.com, Wholesale cheap NFL jerseys, sale Dallas Cowboys NFL Jerseys, cheap jerseys for sale http://www.jerseycaptain.com/i...st&cid=237

among all the customers around the world. Our ultimate goals are to satisfy our customers through high standard quality Canada Goose Chilliwack products, and to motivate employees by the ultimate goal.