Yes, I have officially hopped onto the Charlie Whitehurst bandwagon. I can probably guess that a lot of Seahawks’ fans are thinking that Whitehurst looks solid, but at times inaccurate, yet still incapable of leading the Seahawks this season. Well, what I got out of Whitehurst in these past two preseason games is that he’s daring – someone who is not afraid to make certain throws, someone who is willing to take the risk, and someone who is completely opposite of Matt Hasselbeck.
If you take the time to look at the preseason stats and compare Whitehurst to Hasselbeck, you may see that Whitehurst holds a QB rating of 70.2 – with a 54.8% completion rating and a 3/3 TD to INT ratio. While Hasselbeck, on the other hand, looks pretty on paper with a QB rating of 90.2 – and a 60% completion and a 1/0 TD to INT ratio. However, if you actually watched the preseason games, the first one (against the Titans) in particular, our first team offense was matched up with a nearly second team Titans’ defense (5+ starters on the Titans defense sat out) and yet they still managed to shut us down. Immediately, I noticed a similar style of offensive play that earned Seattle a 5-11 record and put us at the bottom of the NFL last year. What kind of style of play, you ask? The kind of play when we’re put in a 3rd and long situation and Mopey-Matt can’t even get the ball anywhere near the first down mark. The kind of play where on each play we’re lucky to earn more than 3 yards. And the kind of play where we’ll most likely end up with 14 points at the end of the game, if we’re lucky. My point is, that offense (last season), that I’m sure every single Seahawks’ fan wants to destroy from their memory, was completely ineffective, and I love Matt Hasselbeck and everything he’s done for the Seahawks during his tenure here, but at this point in his career, I am beginning to realize that the quarterback – being the most essential piece to an offense – has to be somewhat fearless and in control. When I watch Matt, all I see is a scared old man who is more focused on who he’s about to get hit by and less focused on where his receivers will be.
Now, I am not saying Whitehurst is the better quarterback, at this point. What I am trying to get across is, the Seahawks are starting fresh. They brought in a bunch of new members onto the staff (including Carroll), they made a ridiculous amount of transactions (roster moves) that has rebuilding written all over it, and most importantly, they brought in a new quarterback (Whitehurst) because they had the slight thought that Matt might not be able to come through. Matt is entering the final year of his contract and, throughout the league he is still somewhat considered starting material, which makes it even less likely that we’ll be willing to cough up the dough once that time comes. Now, it’s not like we’re expecting the Seahawks to make it far in the playoffs this year or even make the playoffs at all. So, why not put in Whitehurst for the season so that he can develop some chemistry with the front line, the receivers, the running backs, the coaches, and the offense in general? Let him make mistakes in the regular season so that he can improve and grow from them, and let him mature into the quarterback that Carroll imagined when he decided to bring him on board.
He may not seem like the answer for all our problems (right now), he may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but he’s not horrible and he has the potential. So, why not?
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..