Welcome Drew Lock

[trharder]

Seahawks elect to keep the same QB hand as last year.
It seems less likely we'd take a QB in the draft now.

https://sports.mynorthwest.com/1746335/ ... returning/

[Sexymarinersfan]

Seahawks elect to keep the same QB hand as last year.
It seems less likely we'd take a QB in the draft now.

https://sports.mynorthwest.com/1746335/ ... returning/

Lol hardly

Well, it took all of 5 seconds for the “You can forget about Seattle picking a QB at #5 now” BS to start making the rounds on the various sites and streams.

Why do people think signing a backup QB, to a one-year contract makes the signing of Lock look like a nail in the coffin for picking a QB in the draft?

With that rational, they should also be saying, “You can forget about them drafting a DT, since they just grabbed two in FA.”

I'm gonna explain this as easy I can, it's called hedging, plain and simple. If anything it's the perfect smokescreen for other teams thinking that they won't have to trade up into the third spot.

The Seahawks have also re-signed Drew Lock today on a one-year deal. Another excellent move. They needed a backup quarterback, regardless of their plans for the #5 pick. Lock knows the offense and has more physical talent than most backups.

Again, it doesn’t preclude anything in round one. It’s a one-year contract. Let’s say the Seahawks draft Anthony Richardson. You want to redshirt him, not make him the backup where he’s a hit away from starting.

This is a good move — securing the QB position for 2023 but leaving the options open for the future.
~Rob Staton

[Donn Beach]

So they pay Lock $4 mil to make sure the guy they used the 5th pick in the draft on doesn't have to play, interesting

[trharder]

So they pay Lock $4 mil to make sure the guy they used the 5th pick in the draft on doesn't have to play, interesting

You might call it interesting. I call it bull shit.

[auroraave]

Seattle killing it this off season - dline, qb room, center, LB, already building depth allowing them to walk into the draft with maximum flexibility. Having consistency and experience in the QB room is about the greatest asset you can have - ask the 9ers. I am impressed with what they have done so far - absolutely killing it. Now they will probably trade back, acquire more picks, and not have the pressure of adding a top ten pick contract - allowing even more cap flexibility affording them more quality depth. with the new 45 game season - it's all gonna be about depth.

[Michael K.]

Seahawks elect to keep the same QB hand as last year.
It seems less likely we'd take a QB in the draft now.

https://sports.mynorthwest.com/1746335/ ... returning/

Why do people think signing a backup QB, to a one-year contract makes the signing of Lock look like a nail in the coffin for picking a QB in the draft?

With that rational, they should also be saying, “You can forget about them drafting a DT, since they just grabbed two in FA.”

Come on now. Are you obviously going to compare having multiple DTs that play in the same game to the amount of snaps more than one QB take? Take a good hard look at how many back up QBs actually take a snap each year, and how many teams carry three. Sure, they could have just signed a guy they plan on cutting after the draft, but I highly doubt it. Use the number 5 pick on a guy we plan on putting on the practice squad? Pay Lock for a year with the plan of cutting him? I don't agree.

[Sexymarinersfan]

Seahawks elect to keep the same QB hand as last year.
It seems less likely we'd take a QB in the draft now.

https://sports.mynorthwest.com/1746335/ ... returning/

Why do people think signing a backup QB, to a one-year contract makes the signing of Lock look like a nail in the coffin for picking a QB in the draft?

With that rational, they should also be saying, “You can forget about them drafting a DT, since they just grabbed two in FA.”

Come on now. Are you obviously going to compare having multiple DTs that play in the same game to the amount of snaps more than one QB take? Take a good hard look at how many back up QBs actually take a snap each year, and how many teams carry three. Sure, they could have just signed a guy they plan on cutting after the draft, but I highly doubt it. Use the number 5 pick on a guy we plan on putting on the practice squad? Pay Lock for a year with the plan of cutting him? I don't agree.

You might not agree, but that's exactly what I would do. Redshirt Richardson's ass his first year. I love having Geno and Drew back, but in no way doesn't that prevent them from drafting a franchise signal caller.

[Michael K.]

You might not agree, but that's exactly what I would do. Redshirt Richardson's ass his first year. I love having Geno and Drew back, but in no way doesn't that prevent them from drafting a franchise signal caller.

That is a lot of money to tie up in three freaking QBs. You honestly think they signed Geno so they could not make a playoff run next year? I think if Anderson is gone, and they don't want Carter, or he is gone? They trade back, or take another defensive player they like. Geno isn't going anywhere, even next year if they want. Maybe they don't like these QBs as much as they are letting on?

You could be right, it's not like the Seahawks don't like to do things different. And drafting a QB like Richardson at #5 while you just signed two FA QBs would definitely be different. I wonder when the last time a QB was taken top five to be third string? I am not saying they won't take a QB, heck, maybe they love Hooker? But I just don't see a good reason to use a Top 5 pick on a guy you don't intend to play for two years and won't take a snap at all next year. Especially when they have needs elsewhere, to make NEXT year's team better.

[auroraave]

You might not agree, but that's exactly what I would do. Redshirt Richardson's ass his first year. I love having Geno and Drew back, but in no way doesn't that prevent them from drafting a franchise signal caller.

That is a lot of money to tie up in three freaking QBs. You honestly think they signed Geno so they could not make a playoff run next year? I think if Anderson is gone, and they don't want Carter, or he is gone? They trade back, or take another defensive player they like. Geno isn't going anywhere, even next year if they want. Maybe they don't like these QBs as much as they are letting on?

You could be right, it's not like the Seahawks don't like to do things different. And drafting a QB like Richardson at #5 while you just signed two FA QBs would definitely be different. I wonder when the last time a QB was taken top five to be third string? I am not saying they won't take a QB, heck, maybe they love Hooker? But I just don't see a good reason to use a Top 5 pick on a guy you don't intend to play for two years and won't take a snap at all next year. Especially when they have needs elsewhere, to make NEXT year's team better.

Michael - it's for depth and for playing the long game. Rookie qb's rarely start and excel. the 9ers proved the desperate need for depth. You aren't considering the bigger picture strategically. A new QB can walk his way into the future startes role - not be shoved into it. how often does that work in the 2023 NFL?

[Cascade Kid]

Seahawks elect to keep the same QB hand as last year.
It seems less likely we'd take a QB in the draft now.

https://sports.mynorthwest.com/1746335/ ... returning/

Lock's 1 year deal is a backstop, nothing more. I guarantee John and Pete have QB on their big board. ...As well as starter ready Center, LB, and DL on their big board.