Numark Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I have to do it. Not one for this speculation threads, but you have to assume he is available. Not only that, I think you have to believe he is available for cheap, as no way seattle will go into the camp paying 2 QBs over 5 million a season. Especially since one of them is older, injury prone, and not the head coaches "guy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kota Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 no salary cap it doesn't matter how much money they have tied up in a QB. Whitehurst's deal is only 2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobillsinytown Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I have to do it. Not one for this speculation threads, but you have to assume he is available. Not only that, I think you have to believe he is available for cheap, as no way seattle will go into the camp paying 2 QBs over 5 million a season. Especially since one of them is older, injury prone, and not the head coaches "guy." Why not? Although it would depend on the contract. He should attract at least some interest, even as a vetran backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I have to do it. Not one for this speculation threads, but you have to assume he is available. Not only that, I think you have to believe he is available for cheap, as no way seattle will go into the camp paying 2 QBs over 5 million a season. Especially since one of them is older, injury prone, and not the head coaches "guy." Is this the one you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Rob Johnson Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 no salary cap it doesn't matter how much money they have tied up in a QB. Whitehurst's deal is only 2 years. Teams still have internal budgets despite the lack of a cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjohns85 Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 not a bad option but he is way to injury prone. behind our o-line, pretty sure he would just get injured again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RalphW Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Wouldn't be my first choice but I wouldn't hate it either. He would be a better stop gap qb then any other vet that has been signed or traded. Draft lefeavor in 3rd and let him learn from hassleback for a year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark Posted March 18, 2010 Author Share Posted March 18, 2010 Is this the one you want? Absolutely. While he is still an old injury prone quarterback, he is still decent. And decent is much better than what we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Would be a good pickup. Hassleback (for 1 or 2 years) + #1 Draft pick (Clausen?) + Fitzpatrick/Brohm as #3. Trade Edwards for a case of beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 What do you think they'd want for him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Would be a good pickup. Hassleback (for 1 or 2 years) + #1 Draft pick (Clausen?) + Fitzpatrick/Brohm as #3. Trade Edwards for a case of beer. What kind of beer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 What kind of beer? Actually, how about a bottle of Malbec? Quite good... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Would be a good pickup. Hassleback (for 1 or 2 years) + #1 Draft pick (Clausen?) + Fitzpatrick/Brohm as #3. Trade Edwards for a case of beer. If you take Hasselebeck you do better to build your line this year and draft your franchise QB next year. New guy still gets a year to sit, and it gives you a yr to see if Brohm has anything. This time two yrs ago he was the Clausen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celtic_soulja Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Hasselwack is washed up...don't want or need him in Buffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 I woudln't hate it either. But I can't imagine Seattle doing that. If they draft Clausen like I think they will, they'll then go into opening day with 3 QBs haven't played a down in an NFL game. Even buffalo wouldn't do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 If you take Hasselebeck you do better to build your line this year and draft your franchise QB next year. New guy still gets a year to sit, and it gives you a yr to see if Brohm has anything. This time two yrs ago he was the Clausen. Maybe, but when you consider that it usually takes at least 2 or 3 years for a QB to develop into a high quality starter I'd want to try and get him on our roster ASAP. Besides, after reading the CBS sportsline story on the Bills it looks like our OL is pretty solid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts