Then again, many main stream ‘analysts’ don’t, either. He wrote a long, mostly pointless article today (and I kills me that I have to link to it), and included a snippet about Charlie Whitehurst which set me off:
2) Last Sunday’s performance by Charlie Whitehurst (44.3 QB rating) showed that Pete Carroll and Co. made the right decision in sticking by Matt Hasselbeck. But it also underscored the uncertain future at the position for the club. This much the Seahawks know: Whitehurst is not the long-term answer, which is a blow for the team considering it gave up a 2011 third-round pick and 20 spots in the second round last year to get him. Hasselbeck hasn’t lit the world on fire himself, his contract is up this offseason, his durability has been a question of late, and he’ll turn 36 during the first month of next season (if it starts on time). That means next April, the Seahawks very well could be a player in what figures to be a decent crop of quarterbacks, provided big names like Andrew Luck and Ryan Mallett declare. The good news, in that regard, is that the Seahawks already have that guy’s blindside bodyguard in place, Russell Okung.
God damn, if all it takes is a few Google searches to string together enough “research” to report for the NFL Network, sign me up. So I sent this assbag a note on Twitter, and the conversation went as follows:
That was hours ago, and no reply yet. Not that I expected one. This asshat’s ‘analysis’ is not only a joke, but insulting to the Seahawks organization. If I’m Pete Carroll or John Schneider, I’m royally pissed off that some slappy at NFL Network has published my sentiment that I made such a monumental decision from the results of one game?
Did Charlie Whitehurst have a good game? No. But he wasn’t a complete disaster, either. He was nervous, jumpy, and made a few goofs, but kept his head screwed on and didn’t make any disastrous errors. The first pick was on Mike Williams for bobbling the ball into the hands of the defender, and the second looked like route confusion.
If Mike Williams hadn’t caused the pick, Charlie Whitehust essentially threw two touchdowns against the NFL’s best defense. And he wasn’t sacked even once! How about a few more tidbits about that game:
- Charlie had a whopping three days of practice to work with the first team offense and prepare for the game
- The offensive line is in shambles, and most protection schemes required six or seven blockers. Do the math, and that doesn’t leave many receiving targets, does it?
- The Seahawks defense was ravaged by injury, and was unable to stop the Giants offense. Before Charlie knew it, his offense was in such a deep hole, the offensive game completely changes. For an inexperienced quarterback, it makes things about twice as hard.
- Again, the Giants’ defense is the best in the league, and it’s passing defense is especially tough.
Look, I understand that NFL analyists are given a monumental task to intelligently cover the ENTIRE NFL. I mean, that’s a crap ton of teams, players and games. But it still pisses me off that this kind of ‘analysis’ is passed off as professional and legitimate.