Anyone else not sure what to think of this? One good year does not a great QB make. Hope for the best, expect the worst? That said, if I were calling shots right now, I'd trade KW3 and make Charbonet our full time RB. Dude is tough, doesn't bruise his vajayjay everytime he touches the ball.
Sam effing Darnold
- Thread starter CougInSpain
- Start date
I'm not sold on Sam Darnold, but I don't have a problem with the signing, he was probably the best free agent QB out there. I think most would agree Geno wasn't the long term answer and he wanted at least 40-45 million a year. We pick up Darnold for about 33 million a year, so they saved at least 8-12 million to use elsewhere. Being 27, Darnold probably has more upside than Geno, his red zone numbers were far better than Geno's last year, Geno led the league in redzone interceptions, Darnold led the league in Redzone efficiency. Geno had several would-be interceptions dropped last year or his numbers could have been worse. Darnold could be worse than Geno, which is certainly possible if he reverts back to the Darnold before last year. If that's the case you pick up a QB in the draft next year, or maybe you get lucky this year, and you're not stuck paying an extra 10 million a year for Geno.
I just remember his sideline attitude when he was at USC. I wasn't a fan. Maybe he's grown since that after being humbled at the Jets. For the record, I didn't like Herbert's attitude at Oregon either and he's definitely matured.
Not the best but, better than Geno IMO. Cheaper and comes with a third rounder, too!
Darnold had his best season as a 27 year old. Best team he’s ever been on, too? Don’t know that but he was certainly effective last season.
Darnold had his best season as a 27 year old. Best team he’s ever been on, too? Don’t know that but he was certainly effective last season.
Darnold is a good role player QB. Give him an O line, a TE who can catch & block, at least one tall WR and receivers that will hang on to the ball when hit, and he can fulfill the QB function. If any of those areas are weak or non-existent, his production falls rapidly.
The real question is whether the Seahawks will put together an O line and at least one more good WR.
The real question is whether the Seahawks will put together an O line and at least one more good WR.
I have concerns. Darnold had a really good supporting cast in Minnesota, with multiple good receivers, a reliable RB, and a good OL...plus a defense that was good enough to keep opponents to a reasonable score. It was a good situation to be in, and expectations were pretty low because he was supposed to be the backup. Everything will be different in Seattle - he has no OL, his RBs are unreliable, and right now he's got one receiver. And....he's the guy.
On the plus side, I don't think Geno was ever the answer, and I assume that they're saving a little money on Darnold - at least for this year. They bought a little flexibility and some time, and can now focus elsewhere. If Darnold pans out, great...it was a good move. If he doesn't...there's been little harm done, they needed to address QB anyway, and they have a placeholder for now. They can build up other areas and then find a new QB...which they needed to do anyway.
That said...the trend toward paying a QB based on 1 season of success is disturbing. QBs who look good on a solid team that makes a deep playoff run are not necessarily the same guys who are going to look good on a bottom half team. They're the ones that get propped up by the people around them, but can't carry the people around them. Nick Foles is another great example.
At $33.5 mm, Sam Darnold ranks 16th in the NFL projected for 2025.
Jalen Hurtz is 8th @$51 mm
Kyler Murray is 10th @$46.5mm
Goff is ranked 12th @ $42.5 mm
Matthew Stanford is 20th @$31 mm
Sam Darnold @$33.5 mm is not a highly paid QB by NFL standards.
Jalen Hurtz is 8th @$51 mm
Kyler Murray is 10th @$46.5mm
Goff is ranked 12th @ $42.5 mm
Matthew Stanford is 20th @$31 mm
Sam Darnold @$33.5 mm is not a highly paid QB by NFL standards.
Agree re: paying for one good season. NIL in college just accelerates that, since every player with a good year is now looking for a payday.
Posted the below in the Geno thread as well, but it's really a 2 year-deal or the third year has a low impact to the cap....Seattle isn't too hamstrung from this deal.
Saving ~$10m/season from Geno's contract, so only $55m guaranteed of the $100.5m, seven years younger + a 2025 3rd round pick.
This isn't how it's truly draw up with how the NFL cap works, but a general idea of why they went this route:
Year 1: $33.5mm
Year 2: $21.5mm (plus incentives to fulfill the deal number of $33.5m)
Year 3: $33.5m (but if he doesn't perform, you aren't out anything, a good stop gap for whatever young QB)
Depending how the cap ends up being spread, the dead money doesn't kill you long term.
Saving ~$10m/season from Geno's contract, so only $55m guaranteed of the $100.5m, seven years younger + a 2025 3rd round pick.
This isn't how it's truly draw up with how the NFL cap works, but a general idea of why they went this route:
Year 1: $33.5mm
Year 2: $21.5mm (plus incentives to fulfill the deal number of $33.5m)
Year 3: $33.5m (but if he doesn't perform, you aren't out anything, a good stop gap for whatever young QB)
Depending how the cap ends up being spread, the dead money doesn't kill you long term.
All those players are better than Darnold. But it’s not a big risk for the hawks on a shorter term deal. As you said earlier they got a similar if not better QB than Geno at a lower price tag and a + a 3rd rounder. In NFL terms that’s highway robbery. Who cares if Darnold is great you already won that swap with the price tag and the extra pick. If he sucks their record will reflect it and they will be in position to draft a potential franchise QB who can sit behind darnold for a year.
I’m curious to see the actual structure. The 33.5M number assumes he gets the full value of the contract, which is questionable. My guess is his actual average will be more like 25M…which isn’t an unreasonable price, and is a big savings over Geno.
On a one year deal you’d pay more for all of them..with the exception of maybe Murray who’s a head case .
Darnold was available to upgrade the QB position. Would I take Mahomes on a one year deal for $33 mm? Who wouldn’t? But that wasn’t reality.
Darnold >>> Geno, no question. The money saved by Seattle is as real as the new third round draft pick.
Seahawks got better with this qb change.
I was at that game..... It was electric! That was also the same game where one of the USC players basically pushed one of our fans/students while headed to the locker room after the game was over. Which, led to the start of fining school's for fans rushing the field by our man Larry Scott.
It didn't work on phone or tablet, but did play on the PC. Still, it took several seconds to load on PC.
I wasn’t optimistic about the Seahawks decision making before, and nothing in free agency makes me feel better. On the plus side, they were at least aware that they had gutted the WR corps, leaving Darnold nobody to throw to. To fix that, they went and got a big name receiver who’s been unable to stay healthy for a couple years and another who will turn 30 before the ink is dry, and has never hit 700 yards. Color me unimpressed.
To make things worse, they did almost nothing on the OL, only picking up an OK tackle on a 1-year deal. That’s not going to make the difference on an OL that gave up 54 sacks and couldn’t run effectively either.
On the D, outside of re-signings, their only real move was picking up a DE who’s about to turn 33 and only played 4 games last season. DL wasn’t their biggest problem, but this doesn’t seem like a big help.
I understand the idea of gambling on players with some red flags and hoping they’ll have a breakout return from injury, or maybe one last big year before age catches up to them. But I don’t understand doing that with everyone you pick up. Looks to me like Seattle is assembling a roster based on 2022 performances and positive thoughts…and that’s not going to work.
To make things worse, they did almost nothing on the OL, only picking up an OK tackle on a 1-year deal. That’s not going to make the difference on an OL that gave up 54 sacks and couldn’t run effectively either.
On the D, outside of re-signings, their only real move was picking up a DE who’s about to turn 33 and only played 4 games last season. DL wasn’t their biggest problem, but this doesn’t seem like a big help.
I understand the idea of gambling on players with some red flags and hoping they’ll have a breakout return from injury, or maybe one last big year before age catches up to them. But I don’t understand doing that with everyone you pick up. Looks to me like Seattle is assembling a roster based on 2022 performances and positive thoughts…and that’s not going to work.
There is still a lot of time left in Free Agency, and still some big name, good, semi great, even semi awesome free agents left. And sometimes good, great, awesome, Big name free agents, sometimes hold out, negotiate, see, get a lot of offers, from a lot of teams, until almost end of Free Agency period, before they will finally sign, so because of that the Hawks could still end up hmgetting some pretty good Big names.
Also even if the Hawks don't do as good in Free Agency, the Hawks have about 13,14,15 picks in 1 of the deepest, best drafts in a extremely long time. Hawks will be getting 2 O linemen in Draft, 2 WR, 1 DL, 1 LB, 1 RB, 1 secondary, 1 TE, 1 QB.
But even if the Hawks do bad next year, then Seahawks get a buttload of picks in 2025, 2026 drafts, and will draft a Franchise QB, another 1,2,3,4 OL, another WR, and still will have a LOT of CAP to make FA moves in 2025, 2026, 2027.
And because of that Seahawks are likely to be GOOD in 2026, OR bad in 2026, but GOOD in 2027, and if bad in 2027, GOOD in 2028, and GOOD in 2029.
The Hawks are rebuilding the right way. The only way they blow this:
1. Blowing the rest of Free Agency this year. AND, COMBINED WITH:
2. Blowing the Draft. AND, COMBINED with:
3. Blowing the Free Agency after next season. AND, COMBINED with:
4. Blowing the Draft AFTER next season
That's a lot to blow, and even the Hawks would have a harder time Blowing ALL THAT, tho it's still possible, as Hawks have done worse under worse owners, worse president's, GM's, coaches, etc.
We'll see what happens.
Logic would say they add 2-3 OLine pieces with all of their draft capital. Now watch Schneider go out and draft 3 safeties.
I was hoping they’d put more effort into someone like Mekhi Becton, rather than Kupp, but they didn’t seem to engage much on OL at all. It’s not a bad draft for linemen, so maybe their plan is to go heavy on OL…but that’s a tough position to improve quickly through the draft. All but the very best OL prospects usually take a few seasons to adjust to the NFL, so if I was going to try to build a playoff roster I’d look for FA OL first. If I’m in a position where I’m looking to the draft for starting OL, I’m probably at the point where I’m gutting the roster and going into 100% rebuild.
Feel like the cowboys of the 90s turned a few of those Hershel picks into OLinemen. Sure they had Aikman Erving and Emmett but the foundation of that team was the OLine. They had studs at all 5 spots.
