Yeah, it's almost playoff season, but different discussions are always open, right?
Anyways, am I the only one who thinks that the Seahawks' Matt Hasselbeck is getting seriously overlooked as far as future quarterbacks go? Don't get me wrong, I love Michael Vick as much as the next guy, but Hasselbeck just had another 400+ yard game today against the Chargers, not to mention that he brought them back from a 28-14 deficit to win 31-28 in overtime. And yet, despite the Seahawks' pretty awesome run for the last month and a half, this guy isn't getting near the press that a lot of other quarterbacks are getting. Maybe I'm wrong (heck, I like in Ottawa, Canada, which is nowhere near Seattle) but I hardly hear many people (press or fans) talk about this guy. Am I wrong?
Heck, Seattle's looking like they're building something special for the future team-wise too.
Seattle is looking good. Unfortunately, they started out the season missing their left tackle and had some injuries to the offensive line. The switch from the AFC West to the NFC West did not help either. The Seahawks are not a bad team and if Holmgren is still around next year they should be a force in the NFC and contend for a wildcard spot.
From the infamous Wrestleline SS interview:
DTD: If you were to make changes in WCW, if you were in charge and not Ric Flair, what would they be?
SS: I'd get rid of all the old guys, and push the talent that has waited to get the push. The things they are doing, it's back in the 1980s. It's just bad, man. Flair doesn't even deserve to be on the show. You've got to get rid of all the old guys. Like what Vince did, they started pushing guys. Nobody knew who The Rock was 2 years ago. He made The Rock. Now The Rock just did Saturday Night Live. You've got to start with the young talent, talent people can relate to. Who are we trying to relate to if we've got a 50 year old man out there? Are we trying to relate, so a 50 year people and above will go out and buy a f*cking little toy? That ain't gonna happen. It's a f*cking joke.
I think it's too soon to tell that, since Trent Dilfer started for Seattle, and Hasselbeck got the job once he got hurt. Plus, Seattle hasn't been much of a playoff threat all year. Next year might tell a different story though.
Seattle is looking good. Unfortunately, they started out the season missing their left tackle and had some injuries to the offensive line. The switch from the AFC West to the NFC West did not help either.
Are you kidding? Seattle would much rather play twice against the Cardinals and the now-weak Rams than have to battle Oakland, Denver, San Diego and KC twice each.
"If you go out with a girl and they say she has a great personality, she's ugly. If they tell you a guy works hard, he can't play a lick. Same thing." -- Charles Barkley
Hasselbeck had three great games in a row. I don't think anyone's gonna question that. His performances vs. the Falcons, Rams, and Chargers was one of the best three-game stretches of the year by any QB...
HOWEVER, let's take a closer look at the three opponents, starting with the most glaring case -
San Diego, 32nd vs. Pass (268.4 YPGA), 7.46 yards per attempt allowed. Allowing an 87.2 QB rating on average, 26th in the league.
St. Louis, the 2nd least thrown on team in the league (461 attempts, 2nd to Cincy at 454). 12th vs. Pass (200.6 YPGA), 7.48 yards per attempt allowed. Allowing an 86.0 QB rating on average, 24th in the league.
Atlanta. Now we get to a good defense. 16th vs. Pass (205.4 YPGA), with the 4th best QB Rating allowed in the league at 72.8. Add 24 picks and 47 sacks for the team, and Hasselbeck's performance against them is a LOT more meaningful than either of the other wins.
When you get confidence beating a good team, it's easy to play well against two of the worst defenses in the league. The flashes of brilliance to close out the season will have to be tempered by consistency in 2003, if Hasselbeck wins the starting job, if we can start calling him a really good quarterback.