Colts reportedly sign Matt Hasselbeck (update)

[jskinnz]

I don't get the people bashing this signing, even if the gripe is solely about the money. First off, he can still play a little if need be. Secondly, he offers an experienced mind for Luck. Third, he is a great lockerroom guy. Polian mentioned in his free agency special about the "special" free agents who bring something to the team outside of their ability on the field. There is no one who has a bad thing to say about Hasselbeck and with all the new guys brought in this offseason, I think that is a very valuable commodity.

Lastly, the money thing. I really think people need to stop focusing on how much money the team spent on player X. There are ways to write contracts that appears to be a 2 year deal, but that is on paper only. The Pats said as much about the Welker deal. Even if they pay Hasselbeck the full $8million, who cares? They decided he was worth it.

[ColtsBlueFL]

I don't get the people bashing this signing, even if the gripe is solely about the money. First off, he can still play a little if need be. Secondly, he offers an experienced mind for Luck. Third, he is a great lockerroom guy. Polian mentioned in his free agency special about the "special" free agents who bring something to the team outside of their ability on the field. There is no one who has a bad thing to say about Hasselbeck and with all the new guys brought in this offseason, I think that is a very valuable commodity.

Lastly, the money thing. I really think people need to stop focusing on how much money the team spent on player X. There are ways to write contracts that appears to be a 2 year deal, but that is on paper only. The Pats said as much about the Welker deal. Even if they pay Hasselbeck the full $8million, who cares? They decided he was worth it.

Because we don't have to agree.

 

It's too early before the season.  Draft hasn't even taken place.  Should some thing miraculous situation(s) appear over the next few months we can't move on or we lose out extending on a player that will be a UFA next season because we tossed 8 million at a 38 y/o cheerleader/ tutor/ almost ex QB, I'll be disheartened and lose faith in my teams decision making.

 

What's done is done. MH is a Colt.  We all hope the FO was right on every move, and it all works out for the best.  But there is a case to be made that the dollars may have been more wisely spent.  And that is what these forums are for.  To air those views out.  Not every fan has to agree with every single action the team makes every time.  and when we do, I'll likely not stop in anymore.

 

"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

George S. Patton

[Larry Horseman]

Because we don't have to agree.

 

It's too early before the season.  Draft hasn't even taken place.  Should some thing miraculous situation(s) appear over the next few months we can't move on or we lose out extending on a player that will be a UFA next season because we tossed 8 million at a 38 y/o cheerleader/ tutor/ almost ex QB, I'll be disheartened and lose faith in my teams decision making.

 

What's done is done. MH is a Colt.  We all hope the FO was right on every move, and it all works out for the best.  But there is a case to be made that the dollars may have been more wisely spent.  And that is what these forums are for.  To air those views out.  Not every fan has to agree with every single action the team makes every time.  and when we do, I'll likely not stop in anymore.

 

"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

George S. Patton

 

And you think that Grigson, Pagano, and Irsay haven't thought about the points you just made? If they felt this move would strap them the rest of the off-season and during the season to make usual or unexpected moves they wouldn't have done it. People need to stop assuming that they thought of something that the people running the organization are ignorant to. It's just silly.

 

Since our QB has 1 year of pro experience and our OC has zero years of pro OC experience, MH will be an excellent addition to the team. It's not my money; I trust the FO has looked at every possible scenario and isn't concerned this will have a negative impact; and am happy their is a vet in the QB and OC meetings. 

[TiagoAraruna]

Good sign but I still hope we get the WR Irsay tweeted about or I'm gonna be disappointed with him

[Superman]

Because we don't have to agree.

 

It's too early before the season.  Draft hasn't even taken place.  Should some thing miraculous situation(s) appear over the next few months we can't move on or we lose out extending on a player that will be a UFA next season because we tossed 8 million at a 38 y/o cheerleader/ tutor/ almost ex QB, I'll be disheartened and lose faith in my teams decision making.

 

What's done is done. MH is a Colt.  We all hope the FO was right on every move, and it all works out for the best.  But there is a case to be made that the dollars may have been more wisely spent.  And that is what these forums are for.  To air those views out.  Not every fan has to agree with every single action the team makes every time.  and when we do, I'll likely not stop in anymore.

 

"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

George S. Patton

 

I get your stance, that maybe there are mistakes that have been made. Odds are every move we made this offseason won't work out. Can't just co-sign everything the front office does. No one gets it right 100% of the time.

 

But I would like to point out that, even after the Hasselbeck signing, the team will still have plenty of cap space, and plenty of fluidity to make adjustments if they want to make a significant move.

 

I'd also like to point out that I think you sell Matt Hasselbeck short -- far short -- with your condescending description of him as a cheerleader. He's performed at a very high level in the recent past, and is about the best veteran backup quarterback in the league.

[Superman]

Good sign but I still hope we get the WR Irsay tweeted about or I'm gonna be disappointed with him

 

You don't even know who the receiver is. How do you know you want him?

[Gavin]

For comparison, Our starting QB who was a #1 draft pick last year is on the books for a little over 5 mill this year, Next year he will be on the books for a little over 6 mill, Thats only 3 mill more over that same 2 year span, Conclusion, Grigson got had again

[Superman]

For comparison, Our starting QB who was a #1 draft pick last year is on the books for a little over 5 mill this year, Next year he will be on the books for a little over 6 mill, Thats only 3 mill more over that same 2 year span, Conclusion, Grigson got had again

 

Oh wow.

 

Have you considered that maybe Grigson values a veteran backup quarterback more than you do?

[TiagoAraruna]

You don't even know who the receiver is. How do you know you want him?

 

Honestly, I bet is a good one and we need WR. Wayne is not getting better and besides him and TY tell me a good one we have. Brazill? Maybe. Whalen? Possible. But the Colts need a proven WR and I hope we are trading for that kind of player. A guy that will be a starter since day one.

[jskinnz]

 

For comparison, Our starting QB who was a #1 draft pick last year is on the books for a little over 5 mill this year, Next year he will be on the books for a little over 6 mill, Thats only 3 mill more over that same 2 year span, Conclusion, Grigson got had again

 

Truly spectacular analysis with a staggering conlcusion.

[jskinnz]

 

Because we don't have to agree.

 

It's too early before the season.  Draft hasn't even taken place.  Should some thing miraculous situation(s) appear over the next few months we can't move on or we lose out extending on a player that will be a UFA next season because we tossed 8 million at a 38 y/o cheerleader/ tutor/ almost ex QB, I'll be disheartened and lose faith in my teams decision making.

 

What's done is done. MH is a Colt.  We all hope the FO was right on every move, and it all works out for the best.  But there is a case to be made that the dollars may have been more wisely spent.  And that is what these forums are for.  To air those views out.  Not every fan has to agree with every single action the team makes every time.  and when we do, I'll likely not stop in anymore.

 

"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking."

George S. Patton

Dear God...

[Kyle]

For comparison, Our starting QB who was a #1 draft pick last year is on the books for a little over 5 mill this year, Next year he will be on the books for a little over 6 mill, Thats only 3 mill more over that same 2 year span, Conclusion, Grigson got had again

just stop, just freaking stop. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

And you think that Grigson, Pagano, and Irsay haven't thought about the points you just made? If they felt this move would strap them the rest of the off-season and during the season to make usual or unexpected moves they wouldn't have done it. People need to stop assuming that they thought of something that the people running the organization are ignorant to. It's just silly.

 

Since our QB has 1 year of pro experience and our OC has zero years of pro OC experience, MH will be an excellent addition to the team. It's not my money; I trust the FO has looked at every possible scenario and isn't concerned this will have a negative impact; and am happy their is a vet in the QB and OC meetings. 

So just blowing money left and right is the right thing, become the next Dan Snyder.  I feel every FA was overpaid except Sidbury.  Cherilus and Landry by a little the other more.  But I'm ok with it because they all fill a need, each of them can improve, and they can impact things on the field and potentially justify the payday they received.

 

Hasselbeck really doesn't fill a vital need, cannot improve, and likely can't impact things on the field to justify his 8 miilion windfall.  I have papers and stats galore that show that 38 y/o QB are horrid and falling rapidly.  Only full career HOF QB's tilt the numbers up some to keep them form looking incredibly horrific.

 

And I'll get to his poor stats the last 5 years when I compare him to Jeff Garcia in reply to Superman's post.

[Balzer40]

How did I know there would be people here whining about overpaying? I have been a big supporter of Harnish and didn't see the need to bring in a guy like Hasselbeck, but I have a feeling this yrs. cap hit will be very small and his guaranteed money won't be significant. More than likely he gets cut next yr. and were not out much of anything. People act like their losing money out of their own pockets here. Yeah, I would rather that money get spent on another O-line upgrade, but it didn't and there's nothing I can do about it.

[Superman]

Honestly, I bet is a good one and we need WR. Wayne is not getting better and besides him and TY tell me a good one we have. Brazill? Maybe. Whalen? Possible. But the Colts need a proven WR and I hope we are trading for that kind of player. A guy that will be a starter since day one.

 

But you don't know who the player is, or was.

 

What if it's Brandon Stokley? Still want him? Chad Johnson?

 

You're disappointed about not getting an unnamed player, and you might find that you'd be more disappointed if we actually brought said unnamed player in, depending on who it is. And no one knows who it is...

[Superman]

  

Truly spectacular analysis with a staggering conlcusion.

 

 

How did I know there would be people here whining about overpaying? I have been a big supporter of Harnish and didn't see the need to bring in a guy like Hasselbeck, but I have a feeling this yrs. cap hit will be very small and his guaranteed money won't be significant. More than likely he gets cut next yr. and were not out much of anything. People act like their losing money out of their own pockets here. Yeah, I would rather that money get spent on another O-line upgrade, but it didn't and there's nothing I can do about it.

 

Sometimes this forum needs one of these:

 

[Superman]

So just blowing money left and right is the right thing, become the next Dan Snyder.  I feel every FA was overpaid except Sidbury.  Cherilus and Landry by a little the other more.  But I'm ok with it because they all fill a need, each of them can improve, and they can impact things on the field and potentially justify the payday they received.

 

Hasselbeck really doesn't fill a vital need, cannot improve, and likely can't impact things on the field to justify his 8 miilion windfall.  I have papers and stats galore that show that 38 y/o QB are horrid and falling rapidly.  Only full career HOF QB's tilt the numbers up some to keep them form looking incredibly horrific.

 

And I'll get to his poor stats the last 5 years when I compare him to Jeff Garcia in reply to Superman's post.

 

Oh have mercy...

 

How is paying a backup quarterback $4m a year (going rate for a veteran backup quarterback, by the way) in any way reminiscent of Daniel Snyder? This is such a wild exaggeration that it's becoming comical.

 

Even if Hasselbeck should only have been paid half of what he's going to be paid, that still doesn't qualify as "blowing money left and right." Like every other signing this offseason, it doesn't have the potential to set the franchise back or cost the team the opportunity to land another good player. It's not $100m for Albert Haynesworth. It's not even $42.5m for Pierre Garcon.

 

To me, this is one of those moves where you say "wow, I didn't think he'd get that much, but at least we have a solid backup, and at least he can help Luck from behind the scenes." And then you move on. This is a lot of belly-aching over a difference that amounts to 1.6% of the salary cap. Especially for a team that just recently suffered through some of the worst quarterbacking in league history.

[Gavin]

Oh wow.

 

Have you considered that maybe Grigson values a veteran backup quarterback more than you do?

Your condoning signing a back up QB (Yes I know a good one) to a contract where he makes within 3 million of your franchise QB over a 2 year span? Grigson got had its really that simple in my opinion, Example: Matt Cassel may wind up the starter before its all said and done in Minn and looking at the list FA QB's he may have been one of the better ones on the market (Prior to Hasselbecks release) but Hasselbeck was not brought in to start and Matt actually has a pretty good chance if he actually stays healthy and Cassel still made a mill less over that same 2 year span while also being significantly younger and Hasselbeck is not significantly better then Cassel

[Old Colt]

WAY to much to hold a clip board.  We have a QB coach.....  money would have been better spent on a solid OL player to keep the back up QB where he belongs, on the bench with a clip board. 

[JColts72]

Superman to the Rescue! Classic game board idea (Office Space) Really can apply this to everyday life, made me laugh.

[TiagoAraruna]

But you don't know who the player is, or was.

 

What if it's Brandon Stokley? Still want him? Chad Johnson?

 

You're disappointed about not getting an unnamed player, and you might find that you'd be more disappointed if we actually brought said unnamed player in, depending on who it is. And no one knows who it is...

 

In Grigson we trust

[dw49]

I get your stance, that maybe there are mistakes that have been made. Odds are every move we made this offseason won't work out. Can't just co-sign everything the front office does. No one gets it right 100% of the time.

 

But I would like to point out that, even after the Hasselbeck signing, the team will still have plenty of cap space, and plenty of fluidity to make adjustments if they want to make a significant move.

 

I'd also like to point out that I think you sell Matt Hasselbeck short -- far short -- with your condescending description of him as a cheerleader. He's performed at a very high level in the recent past, and is about the best veteran backup quarterback in the league.

 

 

Yea.. agree. I don't like the move and I stated why. Some here are trying to make their opinions more like fact and "win the arguement. " There is nothng anyone can say at this point to make me think this guy is worth 1mill a year leass than Talib , the Texan safety , the Buc pass rusher. I think it's terrible value for money that could have been used on a starting guard or other depth. But that's just my opinion and I'm not stating my case like I have proven it. ll these signings might be horrible , all might be good but more than likely it's going to falll somewhere inbetween.

[Superman]

Your condoning signing a back up QB (Yes I know a good one) to a contract where he makes within 3 million of your franchise QB over a 2 year span?

 

How is that relevant?

 

Luck is on a tightly controlled rookie salary, one that is not consistent with either his performance or his value. We're fortunate to have him on a rookie scale contract. To compare his pay to his backup is willfully ignorant.

 

Grigson got had its really that simple in my opinion, Example: Matt Cassel may wind up the starter before its all said and done in Minn and looking at the list FA QB's he may have been one of the better ones on the market (Prior to Hasselbecks release) but Hasselbeck was not brought in to start

 

Why are you comparing Matt Cassel to Matt Hasselbeck? Different circumstances, different resumes, different objectives = different value.

 

And, money aside, would you rather have Cassel than Hasselbeck? I most certainly wouldn't.

 

and Matt actually has a pretty good chance if he actually stays healthy and Cassel still made a mill less over that same 2 year span while also being significantly younger and Hasselbeck is not significantly better then Cassel

 

He doesn't need to be younger. First of all, he's six months older than Peyton Manning. He's not quite geriatric. And having been a backup for the last two years, he has a little less mileage than normal.

 

He doesn't have to be significantly better, either. He only needs to be better. And he is, all things being equal. He's also better for our team, given his veteran status. So, wouldn't you agree that Cassel is more valuable to us than Cassel is?

 

And what's laughable is your claim that Grigson was somehow tricked into paying Hasselbeck more than he should have. Grigson knows the numbers, and has weighed them against the value. You can feel that Hasselbeck isn't as valuable to us as Grigson thinks he is, but to say that he's been had is another issue entirely.

[BOTT]

This forum is great for making a mountain out of a molehill......

[Superman]

Yea.. agree. I don't like the move and I stated why. Some here are trying to make their opinions more like fact and "win the arguement. " There is nothng anyone can say at this point to make me think this guy is worth 1mill a year leass than Talib , the Texan safety , the Buc pass rusher. I think it's terrible value for money that could have been used on a starting guard or other depth. But that's just my opinion and I'm not stating my case like I have proven it. ll these signings might be horrible , all might be good but more than likely it's going to falll somewhere inbetween.

 

 

It's hard to place a value on a backup quarterback, given the fact that, ideally, he never plays a down in a meaningful game. But over a couple seasons now, going rate on a veteran backup is right around what we're paying for Hasselbeck. If someone wants to bemoan that state of affairs, that's one thing. But suggesting Grigson is just throwing money around is entirely another.

 

Also, comparing his value to a troubled corner (Talib's value, if based purely on his play, is way above $5m/year), any pass rusher in this year's free agency (admittedly weird, but when Avril signs for $6.5m/year, you know something is different with the market), or a safety (one of the lowest valued starter positions in the league), is kind of missing the mark. All things being equal, I'd rather have Talib or Bennett, sure, especially for almost the same money. But those players are not quarterbacks.

[GoColts8818]

To all the people complaining about us over paying Chappell was on local radio today and explained it a bit.

 

He started off by saying you are going to over pay for free agents in the first place and he's write.  Look at it this way if you had three job offers and you were going to have leave your home town to take one no matter which one you take which job are you going to take?  Odds are the one that pays you the most.  I know not everyone would say that but the vast majority of people would which is what you see with NFL free agents the vast majority go to the team that is offering them the most cash.  Now and then you'll see a guy take a little less to go to another if he thinks they can win him a ring or it's closer to home or something but that's the minority.

 

Back to Chap here.  He said if you look at how these contracts are being written it's with small signing bonuses and the Colts are pretty much guarantying the first two years of the contracts to make up for that.  With the logic being if the player doesn't work out after two years they can release them and take a small cap hit.  When asked why the Colts would do this he said they are trying to avoid doing what Polian did with his contracts which was have large signing bonuses that counted against the cap resulting in the huge cap hits we took last year. 

 

Chap also made the point that every single one of the players the Colts went after other than the one linebacker who signed the one year deal for pretty much league minimum had interest from other teams besides the Colts.  So that's why they got more than what some would have liked.  The Colts had to pay them more or they weren't going to land them.  Again welcome to NFL free agency.  If you want a guy that another team is showing interest in you are going to end up over paying at least some. 

 

How much the Colts over payed we don't know and will never know in all likely hood.  My guess is that they didn't offer a guy 10 million that was being offered 3 million by another team for example.  It was probably like someone else will give you 8 or 9 million so we will give you 10.  I also think it's a little unfair to get too upset over these signings till we see exactly what they can do in a game.  Keep in mind these guys haven't even had a practice yet and people are already trying to write some of them off.  I think that is more of a product of people being excited by all these big names they thought we would go get all off-season and when they didn't people just don't like the signings because they aren't the big names people wanted and expected.  If you look at the positions Grigson signed he's addressed needs, O-line, D-line, OLB, cornerback, safety, and now back up QB.  It sounds like they are going to go after a number two WR, which I know has been debated here if it's a true need or not but clearly the Colts are siding on the side that it is.  It's not like Grigson traded for Alex Smith, brought in three big name WRs, and then signed a big name running back and called it a day.  He signed guys that addressed our needs that he felt will give them the most bang for their buck.  Let's see how they do before we lose our minds over this.  Honestly if Grigson lands a number two WR and then drafts a pass rusher and guard in the draft I think they will have addressed just about every major hole they have.  Which is remarkable to think that in just two years he will have probably plugged all the holes from a 2-14 team and gotten us younger at the same time.  I know people are questioning Grigson but the man came in and took a 2-14 team to 11-5 in one season and was the NFL executive of the year.  He's earned at least a little trust.  Let's see how it plays out before we all get upset.

 

With that said, to Superman's point from earlier.  I am sure not every single one of these moves will work out.  No one is perfect.  With that said I am also sure not every single one of these moves is going to end up bad either.  Let's just have a little patience and see what happens.  Trust me if  he fails there will still be plenty of time to get your bashes in on Grigson for what a terrible job he did in free agency. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

Here is our backup QB over the last 5 seasons-

 

record since 2008:  23 wins   33 losses

TD to int ratio-        59 TD's    63 INT's

6.38 y/a    199.72 yds. / game   59.2% comp

 

Jeff Garcia was a similar player, often had better numbers, and was totally washed up by 38.  And we throw 8 million to a similar 38 y/o QB for the possibility of getting that production, if we're lucky, isn't even needed...

 

I just don't like it.

 

Kyle Orton   -  26 wins  33 losses  

79 TD's    49 INT's   6.94 y/a   221.36 y/gm   59.7%

 

Jason Campbell   23 Wins  28 losses

51 TD's   35 INT's   6.98 y/a  202 yds /gm   61.8%

 

These two are better...  and not declining as fast either.

[Superman]

In Grigson we trust

 

That's cool.

[Gavin]

How is that relevant?

 

Luck is on a tightly controlled rookie salary, one that is not consistent with either his performance or his value. We're fortunate to have him on a rookie scale contract. To compare his pay to his backup is willfully ignorant.

 

 

Why are you comparing Matt Cassel to Matt Hasselbeck? Different circumstances, different resumes, different objectives = different value.

 

And, money aside, would you rather have Cassel than Hasselbeck? I most certainly wouldn't.

 

 

He doesn't need to be younger. First of all, he's six months older than Peyton Manning. He's not quite geriatric. And having been a backup for the last two years, he has a little less mileage than normal.

 

He doesn't have to be significantly better, either. He only needs to be better. And he is, all things being equal. He's also better for our team, given his veteran status. So, wouldn't you agree that Cassel is more valuable to us than Cassel is?

 

And what's laughable is you're claim that Grigson was somehow tricked into paying Hasselbeck more than he should have. Grigson knows the numbers, and has weighed them against the value. You can feel that Hasselbeck isn't as valuable to us as Grigson thinks he is, but to say that he's been had is another issue entirely.

If you can name one mid 30's or older QB that is a back up thats making as much as  Hasselbeck over a 2 year span Ill buy the argument and drop it and never speak another word about it, Hey Im glad we got a bit of an insurance policy but I think one could have been had for a little less, Byron Leftwich for example (for the record I dont think Leftwich is as good as Hasselbeck but I dont believe Hasselbeck in significantly better either)

[lollygagger8]

I like the signing, just think we paid a tad too much.

[Balzer40]

And what's laughable is your claim that Grigson was somehow tricked into paying Hasselbeck more than he should have. Grigson knows the numbers, and has weighed them against the value. You can feel that Hasselbeck isn't as valuable to us as Grigson thinks he is, but to say that he's been had is another issue entirely.

 

 

You're forgetting who you're dealing with Superman. Gavin is obviously trained in the art of negotiating with professional agents and knows exactly what every players market value is. He has been very adamant that he knows this stuff because he reads NFL.com and a few other websites online. We have overpaid for every player we've signed and Grigson is obviously a baffoon for offering what he has to our players. Ok, my sarcastic rant is now off.

[Superman]

Here is our backup QB over the last 5 seasons-

 

record since 2008:  23 wins   33 losses

TD to int ratio-        59 TD's    63 INT's

6.38 y/a    199.72 yds. / game   59.2% comp

 

Jeff Garcia was a similar player, often had better numbers, and was totally washed up by 38.  And we throw 8 million to a similar 38 y/o QB for the possibility of getting that production, if we're lucky, isn't even needed...

 

I just don't like it.

 

Kyle Orton   -  26 wins  33 losses  

79 TD's    49 INT's   6.94 y/a   221.36 y/gm   59.7%

 

Jason Campbell   23 Wins  28 losses

51 TD's   35 INT's   6.98 y/a  202 yds /gm   61.8%

 

These two are better...  and not declining as fast either.

 

1) How was Jeff Garcia similar to Matt Hasselbeck? What, they both balded early??? They were completely different kinds of players...

 

2) Ideally, Hasselbeck never plays a meaningful down for us, making his presumed decline irrelevant.

 

3) If he does get pressed into service, isn't is disingenuous for you to use his numbers from the last five years? He wasn't a backup for three of those, dealt with some injuries and played with a pretty sorry team for his last three years in Seattle. (Despite that team being pretty bad, they made the playoffs in 2010 with Hasselbeck as the starter, and he threw 7 touchdowns and one interception in two games, winning one.) As a backup and part-time starter the last two years, his numbers were better across the board than they were his last three years in Seattle, and the team went 11-10 with him as the starter. Isn't that split relevant?

 

4) Kyle Orton isn't a free agent. And he signed for $3.5m/year as a backup.

 

5) Jason Campbell doesn't have the intangibles Hasselbeck has, and isn't as ideal a fit for our team. And his deal as a backup was $3.5m for one year. Both he and Orton support this approximately $4m/year market for a veteran backup quarterback. And neither is as good as Hasselbeck.

[Balzer40]

Here is our backup QB over the last 5 seasons-

 

record since 2008:  23 wins   33 losses

TD to int ratio-        59 TD's    63 INT's

6.38 y/a    199.72 yds. / game   59.2% comp

 

Jeff Garcia was a similar player, often had better numbers, and was totally washed up by 38.  And we throw 8 million to a similar 38 y/o QB for the possibility of getting that production, if we're lucky, isn't even needed...

 

I just don't like it.

 

Kyle Orton   -  26 wins  33 losses  

79 TD's    49 INT's   6.94 y/a   221.36 y/gm   59.7%

 

Jason Campbell   23 Wins  28 losses

51 TD's   35 INT's   6.98 y/a  202 yds /gm   61.8%

 

These two are better...  and not declining as fast either.

 

 

 

Ok, there are ways to make your point, but this isn't it. There isn't a NFL GM/Exec in the league that would say that Orton and Campbell are better than Hasselbeck. Once again, I would bet his hit cap hit for this yr. is small and he will only be here for 1 yr.. Next season he will be cut and Harnish will take over backup duties and we'll be out very little. 

[Gavin]

You're forgetting who you're dealing with Superman. Gavin is obviously trained in the art of negotiating with professional agents and knows exactly what every players market value is. He has been very adamant that he knows this stuff because he reads NFL.com and a few other websites online. We have overpaid for every player we've signed and Grigson is obviously a baffoon for offering what he has to our players. Ok, my sarcastic rant is now off.

Twist this how you want, if you dont like an opinion or a poster for that matter then feel free to look around My posts, I have an opinion, deal with it, you seem to forget your opinion is as good as mine around here

[Superman]

If you can name one mid 30's or older QB that is a back up thats making as much as  Hasselbeck over a 2 year span Ill buy the argument and drop it and never speak another word about it, Hey Im glad we got a bit of an insurance policy but I think one could have been had for a little less, Byron Leftwich for example (for the record I dont think Leftwich is as good as Hasselbeck but I dont believe Hasselbeck in significantly better either)

 

Would you rather have Byron Leftwich at $1m/year than Hasselbeck at $4m/year? If the answer is yes, then we are hopelessly opposed on this issue.

 

As for your question about a backup QB at 30 or older making as much as Hasselbeck, I have a couple of points. One, Kyle Orton is making $3.5m/year over three years. Two, having probably the best veteran backup in the league means you're going to pay a little bit more than someone else.

 

Lastly, as I said before, you can chalk this up to Grigson valuing Hasselbeck's potential contributions more than you do. You come across a certain kind of way when you make dogmatic statements like "Grigson's been had."

[Superman]

Twist this how you want, if you dont like an opinion or a poster for that matter then feel free to look around My posts, I have an opinion, deal with it, you seem to forget your opinion is as good as mine around here

 

You're a good sport, Gavin. But you must realize that you open yourself up to this kind of stuff, don't you?

[Balzer40]

Twist this how you want, if you dont like an opinion or a poster for that matter then feel free to look around My posts, I have an opinion, deal with it, you seem to forget your opinion is as good as mine around here

 

 

 

You state your opinion as fact Gavin and that is what is rubbing people the wrong way. When I post my opinion, I say it's my opinion. You haven't said a good word about anybody we've signed, you've stated that we've overpaid for every one of them. When we've signed a player you, either, say its a bad signing, dumb signing, way over paid, so on and so on. Basically, if they done something you don't agree with(which has been everything so far) you say they're wrong. You're the one that also said that Grigson was essentially fooled into signing Hasselbeck, and like it or not, That is ignorant.

[Gavin]

Would you rather have Byron Leftwich at $1m/year than Hasselbeck at $4m/year? If the answer is yes, then we are hopelessly opposed on this issue.

 

As for your question about a backup QB at 30 or older making as much as Hasselbeck, I have a couple of points. One, Kyle Orton is making $3.5m/year over three years. Two, having probably the best veteran backup in the league means you're going to pay a little bit more than someone else.

 

Lastly, as I said before, you can chalk this up to Grigson valuing Hasselbeck's potential contributions more than you do. You come across a certain kind of way when you make dogmatic statements like "Grigson's been had."

 "One, Kyle Orton is making $3.5m/year over three years" 

 

 

Well played....consider it dropped

[corgi]

From Stampede Blue

 

"Let's just say that he (Hasselbeck) is due to make $4 million this year anyway. With Luck making only $1,394,909 and Chandler Harnish making only $480,000, the Colts would still be paying only $5,874,909 to all three of their quarterbacks combined."

[jskinnz]

 

1) How was Jeff Garcia similar to Matt Hasselbeck? What, they both balded early??? They were completely different kinds of players...

 

2) Ideally, Hasselbeck never plays a meaningful down for us, making his presumed decline irrelevant.

 

3) If he does get pressed into service, isn't is disingenuous for you to use his numbers from the last five years? He wasn't a backup for three of those, dealt with some injuries and played with a pretty sorry team for his last three years in Seattle. (Despite that team being pretty bad, they made the playoffs in 2010 with Hasselbeck as the starter, and he threw 7 touchdowns and one interception in two games, winning one.) As a backup and part-time starter the last two years, his numbers were better across the board than they were his last three years in Seattle, and the team went 11-10 with him as the starter. Isn't that split relevant?

 

4) Kyle Orton isn't a free agent. And he signed for $3.5m/year as a backup.

 

5) Jason Campbell doesn't have the intangibles Hasselbeck has, and isn't as ideal a fit for our team. And his deal as a backup was $3.5m for one year. Both he and Orton support this approximately $4m/year market for a veteran backup quarterback. And neither is as good as Hasselbeck.

 

I think the thing you overlook in Point # 1 is the hotness of both Garcia & MH's wives. That is another thing they have in common.

Points 2 through 5 - spot on.