Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

I always found Pete Carroll to be annoying, and his sense of timing with leaving USC was 'impeccable', but I respected Carroll's ability to win games that he shouldn't have won. No one really wanted to play the Seahawks, even when they weren't elite. They were always tough. I always had the feeling in that Carroll won more titles in both the NCAA and the NFL. Despite all the big names and glamor at USC, he only won 1 outright title and was gifted 0.5 of another title. The Seahawks were always in the mix, and they dominated the Broncos in the Super Bowl, but that was his only NFL title.

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:This trade, IMO, has a really good chance to work out well for both teams. The trade was costly to Denver but getting a sure-fire quarterback like Russell Wilson is worth it. They likely bought themselves a 3-4 year window with this deal. The Seahawks lose the face of the franchise and their greatest quarterback ever, but they got a good return.

Two first-round picks and two second-round picks provide a really good place for Seattle to start rebuilding. Noah Fant and Shelby Harris are good players who should contribute. If things turn out well in the draft, this trade might turn out very well for the Seahawks.

I'm not convinced that this is really going to do all that much for DEN because A) I don't see that they're really all that talented (they did just finish in last place in their division, after all) and B) they play in the A.F.C. West (where Russell isn't even the best quarterback - which he was in the N.F.C. West). As for the Seahawks, those picks mean something only if they can parlay them into meaningful talent, something that has eluded them over the last few years. The actual players the Seahawks got from DEN are, to borrow from "Collision Low Crossers," "just guys." Personally, I'm expecting the Seahawks to soon revisit their early 1990s years, which definitely weren't good for them. But then I'm naturally a bit pessimistic, so we'll see.

Here's one person who's not so sure that Carroll and Schneider should be trusted to rebuild the team: https://sports.yahoo.com/pete-carroll-j ... 37332.html

QB dominoes are falling now with Wilson in Denver and Wentz in Washington. I believe Trubiskey could go to the Giants or Colts now. If SF gives up on Jimmy G, could he go to the Colts, Raiders or Saints ? Who will take a chance on Winston or Mariota, though the Saints should resign Winston, who made small change there, these last two years.

Who will take a chance on Watson, after he serves a suspension ?

Watson has a court date on Friday. Not sure how much clarity about his future will come after that, but the media is reporting on it quite a bit today.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember an off-season with this much QB activity, with the combination of trades, signings, and major retirements. Sometimes there's one, maybe two blockbuster QB moves.

Considering Wilson only had one losing season in ten with Seattle, will be interesting to see if he can win with the Broncos and get that elusive second championship. I believe he will make the HOF due to his passing-running skills, championship with two NFC titles and winning pct. If he loses games and cant inspire/motivate his teammates or regresses somehow, his legacy from Seattle could take a hit but though I am disappointed he didnt finish his career in Seattle, his competiveness will please Bronco fans who have waited on a very good QB since Manning. Can he help lure quality free agents to the team ?

Watson was not indicted, so the Dolphins, Seahawks, Colts, Saints and Giants, could try to trade for him. Who may pull the trigger ?

racepug wrote:

Brian wolf wrote:Pete Carroll is just about out the door in Seattle. Lock is no lock to start ...

I fully expect the Seahawks to have a new head coach/GM in place by the beginning of the 2025 season (their 50th!) if not sooner.

50th? Egads.

When people talk about the Seahawks not running it in super bowl 49 I feel it's forgotten how lucky the Seahawks were to even be in the Super Bowl again. I wonder if the Seahawks would have been better off if they hadn't recovered that onside kick against the Packers.

Never seen a longer line of contagious misfortune in a playoffs. Lions-Cowboys, Cowboys-Packers, Packers-Seahawks and finally Seahawks-Patriots.

I feel they could have gotten more for Wilson but maybe not gutting his new team is their way of saying thank you. It's hard to tell because you don't know what starters the Bears offered but I think that deal was probably better. Seahawks went the Rams route the last few years and have nothing to show for it so getting as many picks back for Wilson was important. I think the Broncos won this trade they got a HOF QB for about 5-10 years without giving away any of their core players. Seahawks lost a HOF QB and are probably going to end up spending a lot of this bounty on a replacement who isn't as good. They needed to trade Wilson when he still had time left on his contract but Brady and Stafford winning superbowls in 1 year should have sent the price higher.

Do Bronco-fans even want Russell Wilson? Wouldn't he being there bring forth a permanent, grim reminder of...43-8?? As a New York Yankees-fan, this reminds me of Randy Johnson and Johnny Damon joining us thus reminding me of 2001 and 2004 respectively!

So close but yet so far, Hawks at least experiencing back-to-back Lombardis. But as much as I really wish they would have beaten the Pats (still heavily bothers me to this day), the result to me (if however razor-close) turned out to be the way it should have been. You can talk of not giving the rock to Beast Mode, but Seattle was 'lucky' enough to have even been in that position with that crazy Kearse catch. It, sadly, all evened itself out with that super-close Pats win. A win is a win just as the Hawks "could have" lost to GB two weeks earlier (some crazy plays in their favor as well), but they didn't. Return-trip to SB deserved if however super-barely.

As great as the Hawks ended up being in '14 after that 6-4 start, it was still a noticable-enough fall-off from how superior they were the year before. Had they been exactly what they were a year prior (clone of '13), both Packers and Pats games each would've been decided with minutes to go. '14 and '13 Hawks are almost like da '86 and '85 Bears despite just a one-win difference. Only that they, at least, made it back to the SB yet alone didn't go one-and-done.