I just had to post this article Sando posted over on ESPN completely agreeing with Scout Inc’s Matt Williamson. to me it proves the point that Sando is a complete idiot and just agrees with the cast of dumb asses writing about the Seattle Seahawks who have no clue. And he uses peoples comments to make his point? How amateurish is that, Sando your an idiot!
Yeah thats right we can say anything we want because we are the 12th Army of homer Seahawk fans who happen to disagree with you 100% and we will voice our opinion!
One of the more heated recent discussions on the blog slipped through during my recently-concluded vacation.
Matt Williamson of Scouts Inc. explained why he didn’t trust Matt Hasselbeck to have a good 2010 season even though Williamson thinks Hasselbeck “can still be successful.” His reasoning, basically, was that Hasselbeck could succeed in the right situation, but he wouldn’t be good enough at this stage to carry a supporting cast considered weak in key areas, including receiver.
“This article (which I agree with) is bound to upset Seahawks fans,” cloudturo wrote in the comments section. “Here we go.”
Williamson said he expected backup Charlie Whitehurst to take over as early as following the Seahawks’ Week 5 bye.
“Has Matt Williamson seen Charlie Whitehurst?” a reporter friend said to me via e-mail after reading the item. “In every practice I’ve seen, Hasselbeck is the far superior quarterback.”
I would expect Hasselbeck to be the superior quarterback through the remainder of the offseason. Like Williamson, however, I realize things change dramatically once the regular season begins. Quarterbacks get sacked. They take awkward hits. They get hurt. Hasselbeck proved last season that worries about his bad back were exaggerated. His back held up fine. He still took a pounding, however, and he wasn’t the same after the San Francisco 49ers’ Patrick Willis blasted him in the ribs during a Week 2 game.
The question this season is whether the Seahawks’ new offense and likely improved line will sufficiently shield Hasselbeck from the injuries that have affected his play in recent seasons. The new offense puts the quarterback on the move more frequently — more to avoid pressure than to scramble for yardage.
“You guys forget that Hasselbeck has never had a Pro Bowl receiver and always made his average guys look better,” Qwest12thMan wrote.
The receivers in Seattle aren’t special and too many of them have been injured. That position is of secondary concern on the list of potential trouble spots for Hasselbeck, in my view. His health is No. 1. Hasselbeck’s competitiveness has caught up to him in past seasons. He has welcomed contact when fighting for yardage. He probably needs to be more selective that way at this stage of his career.
I think Williamson is right when he concludes, in essence, that the odds are against Hasselbeck playing well for a full season as the Seahawks rebuild. He’s also right in thinking the Seahawks will want to see what Whitehurst can do during regular-season games. I do think it’s possible for Hasselbeck to play well enough to earn a contract extension and to keep Whitehurst off the field. It’ll be tough, though, without more from his supporting cast.
Tags: Charlie Whitehurst, Comments Section, Dumb Asses, E Mail, ESPN, Key Areas, Mike Sando, Offseason, Patrick Willis, Remainder, Ribs, San Francisco 49ers, Scout, Scouts Inc, seahawks fans, SEATTLE SEAHAWKS, Supporting Cast, Worries
Fair Use Notice This website may at times present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available in an effort to advance understandings of democratic, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. The author believes that this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U. S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the articles published on this website are distributed without profit for research and informational purposes. In most instances a link is placed to originator of Article and it is never expressly mentioned as written by, we use published by certain entities who write or publish for this said Blog..