Richardson's accuracy "issues" shouldn't be a concern?

[Donn Beach]

Why would Jody Allen be interested in Pete not moving the team forward in this was the case? It's John's team too and I don't think John is going to fall off of the NFL planet once Pete retires.

Maybe because Jody doesn't own the team, it's in her brothers estate with instructions to eventually sell it.

Jesus your obsession with meaningless semantics is something else. So she want to run it into the ground before it sold????

Tell you what, I'll give up my sematics when you give up your hyperbole. And I wasn't talking semantics, it was self interest. Her vision could be as near term as Pete's.

[SeattleAddict]

This is what kills me about this discussion. Investing in a QB project that may or may not pay off someday in the future has become the "level headed" approach, where simply investing in what the team needs most now to really be competitive is "running the team into the ground". Give me a break with this shit lol. This team is not that far off from truly being competitive. They have a QB, in fact they have a pair of them. What they need is a force on defense. That is what's missing.

What, I'm not concerned enough about the future? Yeah, what I'm interested in is making a SB now. Pull off another good draft and this team wouldn't be far off. Oh, that's too big a gamble for you guys? Tell you what, posters here complain about the hawks only being concerned about making the playoffs but not a SB. Investing in a guy that might be your QB three seasons from now instead of a linchpin defensive lineman now is just that kind of thinking, it really is

100%.

It is sooooo obvious to me the way to go is to draft for defense, and if those guys aren't available, you trade #5 to a team that's desperate for a QB, and load up on the second-tier guys that are good and can fill immediate needs AND build for the future.

Now, if I felt like MsFan does about Richardson being the second coming of Mahomes/Allen, I'd understand. I personally wouldn't spend a 5th round pick on Richardson, much less #5 overall, but different strokes for different folks. Anything less than a superstar at #5 is unacceptable - and there are only two QBs that meet that criteria IMO, and they'll be gone by #3.

[Sexymarinersfan]

This is what kills me about this discussion. Investing in a QB project that may or may not pay off someday in the future has become the "level headed" approach, where simply investing in what the team needs most now to really be competitive is "running the team into the ground". Give me a break with this shit lol. This team is not that far off from truly being competitive. They have a QB, in fact they have a pair of them. What they need is a force on defense. That is what's missing.

What, I'm not concerned enough about the future? Yeah, what I'm interested in is making a SB now. Pull off another good draft and this team wouldn't be far off. Oh, that's too big a gamble for you guys? Tell you what, posters here complain about the hawks only being concerned about making the playoffs but not a SB. Investing in a guy that might be your QB three seasons from now instead of a linchpin defensive lineman now is just that kind of thinking, it really is

100%.

It is sooooo obvious to me the way to go is to draft for defense, and if those guys aren't available, you trade #5 to a team that's desperate for a QB, and load up on the second-tier guys that are good and can fill immediate needs AND build for the future.

Now, if I felt like MsFan does about Richardson being the second coming of Mahomes/Allen, I'd understand. I personally wouldn't spend a 5th round pick on Richardson, much less #5 overall, but different strokes for different folks. Anything less than a superstar at #5 is unacceptable - and there are only two QBs that meet that criteria IMO, and they'll be gone by #3.

Even if they take a QB at #5, they still have 3 picks left in the first two rounds. That's enough to add some serious damage on defense. Will McDonald at #20 could be huge!

[Michael K.]

Even if they take a QB at #5, they still have 3 picks left in the first two rounds. That's enough to add some serious damage on defense. Will McDonald at #20 could be huge!

I have heard Brock several times mention that there are said to be 8 to 10 elite players in this draft. Not sure I want to take one that won't play for two or three years. Red Shirting, as you say, doesn't make much sense in the NFL. There are too many other opportunities to take talented players at specific positions to take a project, IMO.

I heard for years that one day I would love the C Mike pick. We won't always have Beastmode, was the response. First, Beastmode played several more years and we had MANY opportunities to take his successor after wards. IMO, the same is true for Brooks and Penny. I read how Penny was responsible for more missed tackles than anyone else in the draft not named Barkley. Well, do you think the fact that Michell and Chubb split carries so didn't have nearly as many opportunities was why? LJ Collier had a great Senior Bowl, blah blah. I am sick of all the excuses being made for the same shit. We don't draft high enough, you can't continue to improve your roster by drafting players late in the first. Saying, don't worry, punt the #5 pick for the next two years because it's fine, we have 3 picks after 20! Bullshit. Did this roster get less talented because we drafted in the twenties every time? If you believe so, you can't bellieve that we can just use the top five pick we finally get on a guy that won't play for two years or more!

The moving targets established in here are hilarious. I understand it might not be you excusing the roster collapse of talent on late first round picks, but it is CONSTANT in here. "The 49ers are only better than us because they have more early first round picks." Is always used as an excuse for why we can't be better than them now. Fine, if that is the fact, maybe we should use that pick we finally get on a player that will be on the field.

If there truely are 8 to 10 studs in this draft, take one. Trade back a spot or two if you think Carter is one of those 8 and you can still get him, what ever. But if anyone in here believes we are only in the mediocre position we are now talent wise because of low first round draft picks believes we should get one finally and punt it for two or more years? Then they are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Add in the fact that we are already paying two QBs we just resigned this off season? Sorry, the logic just isn't there. Wilson, Anderson or Carter should be available. Those are impact players that rush the passer. Gee, I wonder what team I watched last year that needed help in that department? I have seen projections with Murphy and Carter falling to 8 and below. A trade back and still getting one of those guys would be pretty damn cool.

I just think if you look at the position of QB, you pretty much have to believe that there is no chance Richardson isn't the next Josh Allen, if you take him and wait two years. There are guys like Hooker in this draft that will go later and there are guys in next year's draft that could be available. I remember a TON of guys excusing the Seahawks for not taking Lamar Jackson, and that dude was more NFL ready than Richardson. I just don't get it. It's the fifth fucking pick. If we were a team that had EARNED the 5th pick by being a shitty NLF team? OK, let's build. This team isn't in build mode. Geno's contract isn't going to cripple this team next year or the year after, and the salary cap is set to explode. Pretending that we have no shot at a QB anytime soon if we pass on Richardson, making up stats by removing drops and throw aways? This stuff is getting comical.

[Donn Beach]

Yeah, they have a QB that had one the best seasons in Seahawks history and they have a developmental QB behind him. They could be a handful of players away from another SB run and have the remarkable blessing of the fifth pick in the draft. They should use it on another QB? Honestly, I don't get it.

[D-train]

Maybe because Jody doesn't own the team, it's in her brothers estate with instructions to eventually sell it.

Jesus your obsession with meaningless semantics is something else. So she want to run it into the ground before it sold????

Tell you what, I'll give up my sematics when you give up your hyperbole. And I wasn't talking semantics, it was self interest. Her vision could be as near term as Pete's.

You indicated that things would be different if Paul was still alive and was still owner or if she had inherited with no stipulations. If she isn't involved in football decisions why does it matter if she want to sell the team in one year or 10 years.

[Michael K.]

I think the Jody Allen discussion has gone off the rails. I think we need to know two things...and the one that is most important? She is NOT involved in football decisions. If I had to venture a guess, Pete hasn't spoken with her for more than five minutes about anything he plans to do in this draft. I am not sure after a rebuild season were we made the playoffs? That he would have needed to talk to Paul either. There is a reason that the Redskins are the worst run organization in the NFL, and pretty damn close to worst in any Pro Sport. They have an idiot owner that is far too involved.

The second thing? Yes, Jody is the boss. But, of the people in here that work for someone else. How often do you discuss your day to day operations with the actual owner of the company? I highly doubt Pete and John are having meetings with Jody Allen about what to do with the fifth pick in the draft.

[douche]

The offense was so far from our problem last year I can't even begin to describe it. The Defense was absolute Horseshit.

If I had to choose between a stud run stuffer or a QB at #5, it would be the run stuffer.

[Cascade Kid]

https://sports.mynorthwest.com/1746787/ ... cy-issues/

Adjust for coaching too. Florida's play calling had been awful all year. Designing routes that, more often than acceptable, don't make sense. Many of the routes pull receivers right into a cluster of DBs and lacks challenging DBs in having to make a decision. Receivers not running routes properly all the time too.

Then take Tennessee and the vertical spread they run with a very talented supporting cast. There spread offense makes it near impossible to properly evaluate a QB since it does not offer as many opportunities for the QB to move through read progressions. The vertical spread offense is the most stat bloating passing scheme in football, and does not translate to the NFL. So on the other end of the spectrum there would be some questions around how Hendon Hooker's success will translate on the NFL level.

[Michael K.]

The vertical spread offense is the most stat bloating passing scheme in football, and does not translate to the NFL. So on the other end of the spectrum there would be some questions around how Hendon Hooker's success will translate on the NFL level.

Remind me the offense that Mahomes ran again? And do you think what Buffalo, KC and Cincy run now is severely far removed from a pass first?

Oh, and there is this.

"We're definitely going to run the ball, but there's going to be a lot of depth with play action and then downfield plays, I feel like. And then with the staff and the people we have on the team, from the quarterback to the backfield, even the receivers, I feel like we can do honestly everything," Torrence added.

So, unless everyone in here is ready to abandon the philosophy that the run game leads to the play action and a more efficient passing game? Maybe you want to change your philosophy on how Florida's style was so negative on the QB. Sounds to me like they tried to make it as easy as they could, and he still couldn't complete much more than half his passes. I guess all the desk pounding about using the run to set up the pass makes things easier on the Qb only works when you aren't trying to explain why the QB in the run first offense is pretty fucking inefficient?

https://www.si.com/college/florida/foot ... s-torrence

Oh, and check this out.

https://fftoday.com/stats/22_run_pass_ratios.html

Yeah, the NFL is a run first league. 1 playoff team in the NFL ran it more than they threw it. Another was 50 50. So, of sixteen playoff teams? fourteen threw it more than ran it. Even the run heavy 49ers!