Not all QB questions created equal

In partnership with

It is tempting to boil down the conversation over an NFL team’s chances to a simple question: Does it have the quarterback or not?

This makes a certain amount of sense given that having a really good quarterback is the single most important variable in differentiating the NFL teams that regularly make the playoffs from the teams that rarely do so.

However, there are a few notable downsides to this approach.

1. We end up spending a lot of time debating which quarterbacks, specifically, fall into this category. This is often done using labels like “elite” or “franchise quarterbacks.”

2. Hoping you have a franchise quarterback is very different thing from actually possessing one.

3. Not all teams who lack a franchise quarterback are created equal.

I do not think that Geno Smith is a franchise quarterback. I think he is an above-average starter in the NFL, and while I know the Seahawks are hoping he will be better than that, they have not risked the next few years of their franchise on the belief that he will be.

Compare this to a team like Miami, which just paid Tua Tagovoiloa. Or Washington, which drafted Jayden Daniels.

Are those quarterbacks better than Smith? Maybe. But if they’re not, that’s going to be a serious problem for their teams going forward.

Today’s newsletter is going to ask how many teams in the NFL have a demonstrably better situation at quarterback than the Seahawks. 

This may sound like a different way of ranking Smith among the league’s quarterbacks, but it’s actually not.

While I don’t think the Seahawks have their long-term answer at quarterback, they’re not acting like they do, either, and betting their short-term future on his ability to take the next step. This puts them ahead of some other teams whose quarterbacks may be seen to have more upside, but who could wind up to be lesser quarterbacks than Smith. 

I’m going to let that marinate for a few paragraphs while I whine about the Mariners and then we’ll get back to it.

In case you missed it, the Mariners were down to their last out on Tuesday night, trailing the Detroit Tigers 4-2 with Luke Raley coming to the plate.

Tigers manager A.J. Hinch summoned left-handed Beau Brieske (whose name I pronounce “Bill Brasky”) to face Raley.

A couple of things to note: Raley’s fifht-inning homer accounted for Seattle’s only run in the first eight innings. However, Raley is a left-handed hitter who is batting .176 against left-handed pitchers this season. Only one of his 13 home runs have come off a left-hander this season.

It’s understandable why Servais elected to pinch-hit for him. 

He opted for Mitch Garver.

Uh-oh. 

Garver is hitting .166 this season though I do feel compelled to point out that he’s been much better against lefties (.227 average, .792 OPS) as compared to righties (.141, .542).

It is understandable why Servais opted for Garver vs. the leftie. It’s also understandable why people would groan. 

It’s hard for me to tell you how badly I wanted Garver to NOT make an out. See, I’m still feeling a little bad about how hard-hit he’s been by the criticism over what has been a no-good, terrible, very bad year.

I know, I know, he’s a professional, a well-paid pro at that, but I’ve felt bad, and I didn’t want him to make the final out of the game especially because I knew the howling that would ensue. 

Spoiler alert: Garver struck out on three pitches and the howling has in fact ensued. The Mariners are 59-55, half-a-game ahead of the Houston Astros.

OK. Back to the Seahawks and the question of quarterbacks.

The Seattle Seahawks currently have three quarterbacks on the roster:

• Smith, who’s in the second of a three-year deal that averages $25 million.

• Sam Howell, who’s in the third year of his rookie deal.

• P.J. Walker

Which teams have a quarterback situation you’d prefer to the point you’d swap Seattle’s guys — contracts and all?

I’ll start with the seven teams with established and undisputed starters who I would deem an automatic, no-doubt-about-it upgrade over Seattle’s situation:

There are five teams whose quarterback situations I wouldn’t touch with a 10-foot pole because of the talent or the contracts or both.

 I’m going to add Denver and Carolina to that list because while each team is a young quarterback chosen high in the first round, I am sufficiently underwhelmed by the pro prospects to say that I’d prefer Geno & Company.

That leaves Seattle among 18 teams in a somewhat muddled middle.

Two teams have their fingers crossed that they’ve got their guy:

Personally, I’d probably take Green Bay’s situation, but not Miami’s. 

Six teams are hitched to top-shelf QB picks:

 I think Williams has sufficient promise and Stroud was fairly incredible as a rookie. I’d put both of those ahead of where Seattle currently sits.

I’d also do that with Indianapolis, but this might be a more personal thing. See, I love Richardson, the way he runs and the way he throws. However, his injury history is not encouraging. Nor was his accuracy as a college passer. What I’m saying is that my preference is based on my heart, not on my head.

Daniels, Maye and McCarthy all constitute too big of a risk in my mind. I’d love to have any one of those quarterbacks developing behind Smith, but wouldn’t be willing to cut Smith loose and hitch my wagon to any of those three.

For the record, I’d prefer Rodgers, Stafford and Prescott ahead of Smith even though all three are significantly more expensive. I’m not sure I’d consider any of the remaining four quarterbacks to be an upgrade over Smith.  

Then there are two outliers:

San Francisco: starter is Brock Purdy. A seventh-round pick in 2022, he led the 49ers to the Super Bowl last year. He’s probably the biggest bargain in the league. Two things, though: It’s unclear how much of his success is due to the system he plays in (i.e. the fact he plays for Kyle Shanahan). He’s also about to get very expensive. 

Atlanta: First, the Falcons bought the best quarterback they could in free agency, signing Kirk Cousins. THEN they picked the best quarterback they could, choosing Michael Penix with the 8^th overall selection. The team essentially cast its two biggest bets on two guys who can’t possibly play at the same time. Maybe it will give Atlanta a two-step progression of improvement at the most important position. Maybe it will be way too many resources spent on one position.

To conclude this exercise, I’m going to provide a little data. In Monday’s newsletter, I asked my premium subscribers to compare Seattle’s current situation at quarterback with three other teams: Arizona, Washington, Dallas and San Francisco.

Now, I have a high estimation of my subscribers’ intellect. However, I did consider the possibility that they might not be so objective when it came to evaluating the Seahawks vis-a-vis the 49ers. I found the results interesting.

I also sent out an anonymous survey to half a dozen media members who’ve covered Seattle closely and whose opinions I really respect. I added Tampa Bay to the mix.

Here were the four responses I got:

 If you weight those answers with six points going to a first-place ranking, one to a sixth-place, Dallas had the most points with 27 followed by San Francisco with 24 and Seattle was third with 20 with Washington at 15.