Jump to content

The Starter has to be Hasselbeck, Comma


Jamalisms

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Not really, no.

I, as well as essentially all others, want Locker to win the job. If he isn't the starter, though, I won't cry about frank and beans, nor will I jump off a bridge claiming the world ended. There are plenty of reasons he might not start.

None of which make any sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamal, how does starting a veteran with declining arm strength for a team with mediocre talent make any sense whatsoever when you have the #8 pick in the draft on the team who produced in every situation that he was asked to a year ago, with those situations being in relief of the veteran with decreasing arm strength who couldn't produce against the same exact defenses?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because that's hardly a full picture.

I could come up with all sorts of hypotheticals on that, but that's all they would be so it's not overly valuable in June... similar to a belief that assumes it couldn't possibly be true. I don't even want Hasselbeck to start. I'm not convinced it will make sense to start him if they do ... but I can certainly imagine realistic scenarios where it makes sense.

I guarantee you this, if Hasselbeck starts it won't be because the coaching staff thinks it will lose them more games... and it won't be in spite of them believing the team is ruining Jake Locker forevermore and thereby damning the team to perpetual mediocrity... it will be because they weighed all options and considerations and determined it is the bet option.

Now, that won't mean they are right just because they are the coaches... but the level of certainty some will have, (in a belief that it was an epically boneheaded move), will be misguided.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamal, how does starting a veteran with declining arm strength for a team with mediocre talent make any sense whatsoever when you have the #8 pick in the draft on the team who produced in every situation that he was asked to a year ago, with those situations being in relief of the veteran with decreasing arm strength who couldn't produce against the same exact defenses?

Maybe because there was no offseason before Locker's rookie year in 2011, so this is really his first offseason in the NFL.

The team was unable to evaluate him before training camp, and they were 100% correct in not starting him last year. B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...