No 2 QB Dilema

[dw49]

After reading your comments it does seem you have an agenda that involves Harnish. You stated you thought he was better than Hass. That opinion is not shared by any other poster I have read. If you did not like the Colts signing Hass thats no problem. But bringing all this other clutter into the pictures has zero to do with that. You insulting other posters will get you nothing in return. The Colts have seen what happens when a decent QB is not on the roster when the starter goes down. If you think by throwing that responsibility on Harnish is the answer thats on you. Grigson and the rest of the coaching staff feels different. It's choices like Painter and Collins that put the final nail in Polians coffin in Indy. I don't think the Colts even want to test those waters again.

 

 

I have no "agenda" involving Harnish. The only "clutter " I mentioned was that we might have to use 3 roster spots on the QB position. With a 4.5 mill back up . I would think most teams would prefer to have 2 roster spots and a PS QB. The rest comes from people inferring that we did absolutely everything we wanted and didn't need that cap space. That's just silly and the "insults" are a result of some putting words into my mouth and some other nonsense like you have posted. 

As far as going with Harnish as the primary backup to begin pre season , I can understand how that could lead to signing MH for 4mill per. I just don't think that was the only good option. Just because we have good management and coaching , it doesn't mean we all have to agree with all the football moves.

[dw49]

Oh man, u called me blood in the cracks! The zingers to end all zingers!

Go ahead, keep attempting your defend your ridiculous argument.....which is basically "I TOLD YOU SO"

 

 

 

Sorry man.. I really did think that was your handle.

[GoColts8818]

I mean gosh guy , your a good poster and a smart guy. But Jesus , don't give me the " I am sure if the Colts thought Harnish could handle the back up job they wouldn't have signed Hasslebeck in the first place. ' kind of stuff. Teams make personal mistakes all the time and of coarse if they thought that , they wouldn't have signed MH. I'm saying I think they made a mistake. I might be right ..I might be wrong. Could we let it play out and see ?

If NE knew that Tom Brady was better than Drew Bledsoe before the season started , wouldn't they have tried to trade Bledsoe ?

they did once they figured out Brady was the guy.

Brady played well enough to out preform the back up at the time. So they saw something in him. If the Colts saw that in Harnish then why sign Hasslebeck? Just keep Harnish as the back up like New England did with Brady and move on.

[dw49]

Jim Irsay has said multiple times this off-season we got every free agent we went after.  I told you that earlier in this thread.  Is the owner of the team a good enough source for you? It's not like he's been hiding it he's said it in interviews and said it on twitter.  If you don't believe him show me something that says we didn't get a player we went after.  Other wise I see no reason to doubt or at least have some kinda proof to doubt him with.

 

Clearly the Colts disagree with you on what they should have used the extra money on.  Just because you think there were other ways they could have used that money doesn't mean the Colts felt it was the best use for it.  Also, if the Colts wanted to they could probably still extend Davis's contract right now if they wanted too, honestly extending him would probably lower his cap figure for this season.  So I don't think Hasslebeck's contract played any kind of role in that making it moot when it comes to this discussion so why even bring him up?

 

Again the Colts clearly viewed the back up QB position as a need, based on what happened after Peyton Manning went down I can't say I blame them.  They have already tried the late round cheap back up result and it didn't pay off (for what it's worth Painter was a sixth round pick vs. Harnish being the last pick in the draft).  Add to that fact that he can also help teach the younger QBs and that's an added bonus.  If the Colts thought Harnish was the answer they would have never signed Hasslebeck in the first place.  They see these guys a lot more than we do maybe we should just trust our GM of the year and runner up for Coach of the Year? 

 

 

I believe that they signed every guy that they really went after. But really man , if you don't go after say.. Hasslebech and say Landry , couldn't you go after another guy that you like a lot. I know your not telling me that the only players they liked in free agency they signed ? That's kind of what the logic is to what you're saying. 

 

Of coarse the Colts don't agree with what I'm saying. But that doesn't mean that they made a good signing here. Bottom line is if Harnish looks to be the best guy to move the team going forward , this is a bad signing and you are going to be punished with losing a roster spot. Not that any of you would admit this regardless of how this plays out. It would just be more gibberish about just having MH hold the clipboard and "advise " was worth the money.

 

As far as Davis.. Like I said it was a hypothetical. But as far as your take on extending him this year , I don't think you have the cap room as you say. Something like 4 years at 32 million would be the cheapest I would think. Say 14 mill guaranteed would pro rate to 3.5 of the bonus for 2013. Now you could do a roster bonus for next year and make the number smaller for 2013 but lets say we did the "standard" type contract. His cap hit for 2013 would be say the 3.5 plus a base of at least 1 mill. This  (4.5mill) would put us way too tight on the cap to work the year. Plus you say by extending him  would probably lower his cap for this year. I really doubt that as it's presently 1.8. But as I said , I have no idea if the Colts even considered extending Davis.

[SteelCityColt]

I may not agree with what you think, but I do admire how you've tried to portray your arguments, there seems to be more slander and less substance to the debates on here lately. 

 

As for the matter at hand I liked the signing of MH8 (we can only refer to players by initial and number now, right?), aside from I don't think Harnish is ready to carry starting duties should the worst happen, I think MH8 does offer a lot on the mentoring side.

 

Although he's never been regarded as an elite or even outstanding QB he has been around the league a while, been to the big game, and forgotten more snaps than David Carr took (and probably got sacked on) in his entire career. 

 

Yes it's a lot of money, but if it's for 2 seasons, if he helps Luck develop and hit his ceiling then it's money well spent. 

[AntonMcG]

I never had such a view on Painter , and although I can remember a lot of Colt football , I can't remember how Painter looked in his rookie year. All of what you say has merit , but Hasslebeck needs to be far better than Harnish to warrant that kind of cap room. I don't think Luck needs a 4.5 million $ clip board guy to help him out. Hire another coach for 250K that has Hasslebeck credentials. Now Irsay can pocket the 4 mill or spend it on a player that can contribute

 

I don't know who that would be, or whether such a coach exists. Hasselbeck is still a safe backup, if nothing else. He is a player who prides hmself on his game IQ, and someone who thrived in a West-Coast style whilst reaching a Super Bowl. Yeah he is probably past it, but he could only be beneficial for Luck and for the team. I agree we overpaid him, but I feel the only pinch will be in Irsay's pocket.

 

I wasn't ecstatic about the signing, not to the extent of the mainstream media who seemed to think this move was the Colt's single greatest transaction in the off-season (which is just ridiculous)... but I see the benefits.

 

I thought Harnish looked great last pre-season but as another poster eluded to, it was against scrap. I really have little other basis to go on with him.

[AntonMcG]

Another thought... does the signing of Hasselbeck indicate a lack of faith in Clyde Christensen?

[crazycolt1]

I have no "agenda" involving Harnish. The only "clutter " I mentioned was that we might have to use 3 roster spots on the QB position. With a 4.5 mill back up . I would think most teams would prefer to have 2 roster spots and a PS QB. The rest comes from people inferring that we did absolutely everything we wanted and didn't need that cap space. That's just silly and the "insults" are a result of some putting words into my mouth and some other nonsense like you have posted. 

As far as going with Harnish as the primary backup to begin pre season , I can understand how that could lead to signing MH for 4mill per. I just don't think that was the only good option. Just because we have good management and coaching , it doesn't mean we all have to agree with all the football moves.

If you think by throwing the insults around you going to be taken serious think again. You may very well call some of my post nonsense but this thread right here is some of the biggest nonsense I have read in my opinion.

[crazycolt1]

Another thought... does the signing of Hasselbeck indicate a lack of faith in Clyde Christensen?

Your afterthought does bring up a good point. I guess time will tell.

[lollygagger8]

[Kyle]

@DW49

 

I think the part you are overlooking is what hasselbeck can do off of the field.  whether he is better than Harnish on the field matters very little.  Hasselbeck can sit with Luck when breaking down film every week or stand with him at practice and break down every throw he makes.  most people learn more doing something than what they ever could learn by being told how.  Luck is now learning by doing, and learning from someone who has been there and done it.

[Smonroe]

Does anyone think we kept Sorgi around all those years for his laser rocket arm?  Supposedly he was very good in the film room and had a keen eye on the sidelines.

 

Now we have a guy with those attributes, and can play if really needed. 

 

Well worth the investment.

[scootermac23]

I was happy with the signing and still am.

Harnish is only going to improve more by having Hasslebeck on the team, it's not like having Hasslebeck at number 2 is negatively impacting him.

If some view it as a problem, then it's a pretty good problem to have.

I'd just be annoyed if Harnish got cut and another team picked him up (even tho he is still unproven).

[Susie Q]

I've always thought Irsay kinda made a private vale after the 2011 season that he would never lose because of that reason again.  They might lose for other reasons but I think felt like they would never get caught without a proven back up again, it's why they were so quick to trade for Stanton last year when it became clear he was on the market and why they were so quick to sign Hasslebeck this off-season. 

In short after 2011 Irsay is not getting caught with his pants down again. Goes to show why he is a smart owner. In Irsay we trust.

[PrincetonTiger]

MH is a mentor to Luck

[Jason_]

@DW49

 

I think the part you are overlooking is what hasselbeck can do off of the field.  whether he is better than Harnish on the field matters very little.  Hasselbeck can sit with Luck when breaking down film every week or stand with him at practice and break down every throw he makes.  most people learn more doing something than what they ever could learn by being told how.  Luck is now learning by doing, and learning from someone who has been there and done it.

 

I don't think dw49 is overlooking that point...I am beginning to think that's his biggest issue with the signing of MH.  From the original post:

 

 I then and still do have a hard time understanding why a brilliant , mature QB like Luck would need a veteran QB holding the clipboard.

 

I'm beginning to think that dw49 is just offended that anyone thinks that Luck might need a mentor at this stage in his career.  

 

I mean, Luck is the greatest prospect of all time and is going to be the best QB to ever play the game.  Paying a guy $10 to be Luck's mentor is a waste of money because Luck is so awesomely brilliant that there's nothing anyone could tell him that he doesn't already know.   (to be clear, this last paragraph was sarcasm)

[jamesie jr]

I feel like Hasselbeck is tutoring Harnish more than he is tutoring Luck. Then when he retires Harnish will take over as back up.

 

Plus Hasselbeck did an ok job for the titans last year so he should do ok this year.

[Kyle]

I don't think dw49 is overlooking that point...I am beginning to think that's his biggest issue with the signing of MH.  From the original post:

 

 

 

 

I'm beginning to think that dw49 is just offended that anyone thinks that Luck might need a mentor at this stage in his career.  

 

I mean, Luck is the greatest prospect of all time and is going to be the best QB to ever play the game.  Paying a guy $10 to be Luck's mentor is a waste of money because Luck is so awesomely brilliant that there's nothing anyone could tell him that he doesn't already know.   (to be clear, this last paragraph was sarcasm)

 

my counter to him would be choose one option:

 

A. Greatest prospect ever with a good mentor

B. Greatest prospect ever without a good mentor

 

I choose A.

[SteelCityColt]

I mean, Luck is the greatest prospect of all time and is going to be the best QB to ever play the game.  Paying a guy $10 to be Luck's mentor is a waste of money because Luck is so awesomely brilliant that there's nothing anyone could tell him that he doesn't already know.   (to be clear, this last paragraph was sarcasm)   

 

Fixed that for you  

[SteelCityColt]

Does anyone think we kept Sorgi around all those years for his laser rocket arm?  Supposedly he was very good in the film room and had a keen eye on the sidelines.

 

Now we have a guy with those attributes, and can play if really needed. 

 

Well worth the investment.

 

I thought every QB from Michigan drafted in the 6th was elite talent ready to break out? It it wasn't for that pesky Manning kid he might have pulled it off too. 

[NewColtsFan]

I have no "agenda" involving Harnish. The only "clutter " I mentioned was that we might have to use 3 roster spots on the QB position. With a 4.5 mill back up . I would think most teams would prefer to have 2 roster spots and a PS QB. The rest comes from people inferring that we did absolutely everything we wanted and didn't need that cap space. That's just silly and the "insults" are a result of some putting words into my mouth and some other nonsense like you have posted. 

As far as going with Harnish as the primary backup to begin pre season , I can understand how that could lead to signing MH for 4mill per. I just don't think that was the only good option. Just because we have good management and coaching , it doesn't mean we all have to agree with all the football moves.

 

 

What I don't understand, DW,  is that we're just a two years away from Manning going down and the Colt's being left with way below average QB's to back him up.     

 

I also don't understand what you're reading that convinces you that Harnisch is way out playing Hasselbeck....   do ANY of those tweets and/or stories tell you who (or which defense)  each is going against?    Do you know if Hasselbeck is going against the 1's and/or 2's,  or if Harnisch is going against the 1's, 2's, 3's or 4's?    I don't recall reading that anywhere....

 

Hasselbeck is a security blanket....   He's the guy I'd like backing up Luck if Andrew gets hurt....   and he's the guy I want Luck talking to after every series Andrew comes off the field.

 

For me,  he's worth every penny.    

 

Just a different perspective.....

[Smonroe]

I thought every QB from Michigan drafted in the 6th was elite talent ready to break out? It it wasn't for that pesky Manning kid he might have pulled it off too. 

 

The Sorginator was from Wisconsin.  As a Buckeye, he's a ... painful memory.

[SteelCityColt]

The Sorginator was from Wisconsin.  As a Buckeye, he's a ... painful memory.

 

To be pedantic I never said he went to college at Michigan. Thankfully for the purposes of my poor attempt at humor he was born in Michigan

[dw49]

I hear all of your views on this and regardless of what transpires , other than the colts trying to move Harnish to the practice squad and losing him , I probably can't win this one. If Luck stays healthy , we'll really never really know if the Colts paid 4 mill per year for a "mentor." 

 

To that I say where is RG3's mentor ? Where is Russell Wilson's mentor. Tannyhill has Moore who I don't think is a guru and his contract looks to be structured for him to be cut next year. What in the world do you have a QB coach and OC for ? 

 

My take on all this is if Harnish is very good and Hasselbeck is just a statue who's skills are rapidly regressing at 38 , this is a bad sign. I think if you look at other teams with young QB's , I have good basis for this argument. 

 

I evidently stand alone on this , which is a bit strange because I was not the only one that didn't like this signing when it took place. In any event , as much as I'd like to take the time to answer each  of your posts , I just don't have that much time to devote to this.

[NewColtsFan]

I hear all of your views on this and regardless of what transpires , other than the colts trying to move Harnish to the practice squad and losing him , I probably can't win this one. If Luck stays healthy , we'll really never really know if the Colts paid 4 mill per year for a "mentor." 

 

To that I say where is RG3's mentor ? Where is Russell Wilson's mentor. Tannyhill has Moore who I don't think is a guru and his contract looks to be structured for him to be cut next year. What in the world do you have a QB coach and OC for ? 

 

My take on all this is if Harnish is very good and Hasselbeck is just a statue who's skills are rapidly regressing at 38 , this is a bad sign. I think if you look at other teams with young QB's , I have good basis for this argument. 

 

I evidently stand alone on this , which is a bit strange because I was not the only one that didn't like this signing when it took place. In any event , as much as I'd like to take the time to answer each  of your posts , I just don't have that much time to devote to this.

 

 

I think you're making way too many assumptions...

 

You assume that RG3 and RW not having an experienced back-up is a good thing?    Maybe.   But maybe it's not.

 

Also,  the Skins have Cousins to step in and play and he can play well.   The job we've got Hasselbeck for....   Not sure who Seattle is using these days...   too many comings and goings...

 

Why doesn't the Colts 2011 season end this discussion for you.   No adequate back-up for Peyton and look what happened?

 

And where is it confirmed that Hasselbeck's skills are rapidly regressing....     I think you're connecting dots that are not there yet....

 

And what have you seen that tells you that Harnisch is "very good"??    What has he done?    Until he's done it in NFL regular season games,   my view is, we just don't know...    I wouldn't entrust the back-up position to CH at this point in his career.

 

You apparently would.....      and so we disagree....

[Jason_]

Fixed that for you

 

:hmm:

[GoDeep]

No

[HtownColt]

@TribStarTJames: What the Colts want to do offensively isnt far removed from what Tom Moore did when he was OC. Use the run to set up the pass. Play action.

[Valpo2004]

I think you're making way too many assumptions...

 

You assume that RG3 and RW not having an experienced back-up is a good thing?    Maybe.   But maybe it's not.

 

Also,  the Skins have Cousins to step in and play and he can play well.   The job we've got Hasselbeck for....   Not sure who Seattle is using these days...   too many comings and goings...

 

Why doesn't the Colts 2011 season end this discussion for you.   No adequate back-up for Peyton and look what happened?

 

And where is it confirmed that Hasselbeck's skills are rapidly regressing....     I think you're connecting dots that are not there yet....

 

And what have you seen that tells you that Harnisch is "very good"??    What has he done?    Until he's done it in NFL regular season games,   my view is, we just don't know...    I wouldn't entrust the back-up position to CH at this point in his career.

 

You apparently would.....      and so we disagree....

 

Also despite the fact that he's been regulated to 3rd string, the Skins hung onto Rex Grossman.  Food for thought.  

[colts 101]

I feel like Hasselbeck is tutoring Harnish more than he is tutoring Luck. Then when he retires Harnish will take over as back up.

 

Plus Hasselbeck did an ok job for the titans last year so he should do ok this year.

In college Harnish played in the MAC if I remember correctly and probably didn't have the high profile training most elite college QBs receive. The rumor mill suggests that he has improved exponentially since being drafted, which might explain a comment from the coaching staff recently that if the 2012 draft were held today he would likely go in the 3rd to 4th round. But keep in mind I got this information second handed. All said, how can we go wrong with Hasselbeck on the roster, I know I will sleep better! We have the best of both worlds.

[Superman]

 

I evidently stand alone on this , which is a bit strange because I was not the only one that didn't like this signing when it took place. In any event , as much as I'd like to take the time to answer each  of your posts , I just don't have that much time to devote to this.

 

I don't think you stand alone, and you're right, you're not the only one who had an issue with it. I remember there being at least a handful of vocal dissidents at the time of the signing.

 

I disagree, because to me, it comes down to the simple idea that Hasselbeck is a better option than Harnish. We upgraded the backup quarterback spot. And I personally think Hasselbeck is the best guy in the league to play that role, given his experience and the likelihood that he'd be able to step in and perform solidly if necessary (and we all hope it's never necessary). 

 

Separate from that, I do think we overpaid for him by a little bit. His contract makes him one of the highest paid backups in the league. And if we broke it down to guys who signed specifically to be a backup, he's probably far and away the highest paid backup. And ideally, he'll never see the field, and so will never earn that contract through his production. But let's say we're paying him twice what we should be, it's still not a significant portion of the cap.

 

There's also the possibility that Harnish is a very capable backup, although I think that possibility isn't one you want to hang the fate of your season on. If your starter goes down for a month, you want someone you can rely on, not someone who has never seen gameday lights before. But he is physically talented, and so it's possible that he'd be a capable backup. But that's a nerve-wracking proposition, I think.

 

I get your points. I just think we're better off with Hasselbeck, even if he's overpaid. As such, we don't have a QB2 dilemna. 

[dw49]

I don't think you stand alone, and you're right, you're not the only one who had an issue with it. I remember there being at least a handful of vocal dissidents at the time of the signing.

 

I disagree, because to me, it comes down to the simple idea that Hasselbeck is a better option than Harnish. We upgraded the backup quarterback spot. And I personally think Hasselbeck is the best guy in the league to play that role, given his experience and the likelihood that he'd be able to step in and perform solidly if necessary (and we all hope it's never necessary). 

 

Separate from that, I do think we overpaid for him by a little bit. His contract makes him one of the highest paid backups in the league. And if we broke it down to guys who signed specifically to be a backup, he's probably far and away the highest paid backup. And ideally, he'll never see the field, and so will never earn that contract through his production. But let's say we're paying him twice what we should be, it's still not a significant portion of the cap.

 

There's also the possibility that Harnish is a very capable backup, although I think that possibility isn't one you want to hang the fate of your season on. If your starter goes down for a month, you want someone you can rely on, not someone who has never seen gameday lights before. But he is physically talented, and so it's possible that he'd be a capable backup. But that's a nerve-wracking proposition, I think.

 

I get your points. I just think we're better off with Hasselbeck, even if he's overpaid. As such, we don't have a QB2 dilemna. 

 

 

 

You and I went back and forth on this when the signing took place . I respected your opinion then and I do now. I just think many here don't understand the value of a roster spot . This is one of the problems that would make this a bad deal if Harnish ends up the better QB. It just is not good management if you pay a guy 4.5 million to be the back up and he ends up stinking the joint up and you have to use a roster spot on Harnish instead of the PS route. That means you goofed on two accounts. One Harnish was better than you thought and Hasslebeck was over the hill. 

 

The above if true , makes it a bad signing . That's all I'm saying and those that want to be right regardless of what happnes come back with stuff like he's worth the 4.5 cap just to tudor Luck. This IMO is pretty silly stuff as I'm sure on GM would agree that he would screw up a roster spot and use 4.5 mill of cap room so his QB with a mind like a rocket scientist has a good guy holding he clipboard.

 

Everything you have makes perfect sense and I'm not sure what other options the Colts had if they were not comfortable with Harnish as the No.2. I would think there was a cheaper guy they could have brought on. But I honestly can't present the options as I don't know them. 

 

That all said , Andrew Luck is a 240lb bull that will probably play every snap again this year. I like Harnish a lot as a No. 2 and I just don't think it was money well spent. You have to figure what the odds are of losing Luck and how much 4.5 mill means as far as upgrading your team. You could take that money and couple it with Waldren's contract and maybe that player signed would be a better value than those two guys.

 

Anyway , your point is well taken and I was only pointing out that this could have been a waste of cap space and could cost us a roster spot if Harnish shines in the pre season. I don't think many posters that responded here realize how valuable a roster spot is. It could very well mean a guy like Donald Brown gets cut. Crazy .. Not really. Havril makes the team , Bradshaw and Ballard make the team. K Williams has looked pretty explosive so far and could return kicks. There probably is no way you can carry 3 QB's and 5 RB's. So the thing we want is to have Harnish on the PS. Then even if Luck went down and Harnish was better than MH , you could activate Harnish the following week.

 

 

Later... amigo

[Superman]

You and I went back and forth on this when the signing took place . I respected your opinion then and I do now. I just think many here don't understand the value of a roster spot . This is one of the problems that would make this a bad deal if Harnish ends up the better QB. It just is not good management if you pay a guy 4.5 million to be the back up and he ends up stinking the joint up and you have to use a roster spot on Harnish instead of the PS route. That means you goofed on two accounts. One Harnish was better than you thought and Hasslebeck was over the hill.

I'm very okay with Harnish being better than we thought. I don't think that's a goof; I think that's a good problem. Especially given recent history, I'd rather err on the side of caution when it comes to QB2. It's much more likely that Harnish is Curtis Painter than it is that he's Tom Brady. More likely, he's TJ Yates, and that only works if you have a really strong defense and running game, and we don't know that we have either just yet. So going overboard to shore up QB2 is fine.

I also think it's unlikely that Hasselbeck is suddenly not capable of doing what he's done the past two years, if necessary. I think it's more likely that Harnish is bad than it is that Hasselbeck is bad.

As for a roster spot, I don't expect the team to carry two backup quarterbacks. I expect Hasselbeck to be QB2, and even if we keep Harnish on the 53, I don't expect us to keep him all season. He'd be one of the first to go if we need that roster spot. 

 

The above if true , makes it a bad signing . That's all I'm saying and those that want to be right regardless of what happnes come back with stuff like he's worth the 4.5 cap just to tudor Luck. This IMO is pretty silly stuff as I'm sure on GM would agree that he would screw up a roster spot and use 4.5 mill of cap room so his QB with a mind like a rocket scientist has a good guy holding he clipboard.

Tutor isn't the word I'd use, though I do think there's immeasurable value in having a seasoned vet for Luck to associate with. As much as I think that's good for his growth and development, I wouldn't want us to waste a roster spot and $4.5m for it.

Then again, if things go the way we hope, any amount of money you pay any backup quarterback could be considered a waste. We hope QB2 never plays. He's an insurance policy that you hope you never have to use. In that case, it's better that he has some noteworthy value in meeting rooms and on the sideline. Still, Hasselbeck is making more than I think he should be making as a glorified clipboard holder. The point is that it's worth it IF you ever need him to play.

::knocks on wood::

 

Everything you have makes perfect sense and I'm not sure what other options the Colts had if they were not comfortable with Harnish as the No.2. I would think there was a cheaper guy they could have brought on. But I honestly can't present the options as I don't know them.

There were and are other guys available for less. I personally think Hasselbeck is better than all of them, even if he's overpaid. I kind of shrug about the whole thing. I wish we had signed him for less, but I'm still glad we signed him.

 

That all said , Andrew Luck is a 240lb bull that will probably play every snap again this year. I like Harnish a lot as a No. 2 and I just don't think it was money well spent. You have to figure what the odds are of losing Luck and how much 4.5 mill means as far as upgrading your team. You could take that money and couple it with Waldren's contract and maybe that player signed would be a better value than those two guys.

 

Anyway , your point is well taken and I was only pointing out that this could have been a waste of cap space and could cost us a roster spot if Harnish shines in the pre season. I don't think many posters that responded here realize how valuable a roster spot is. It could very well mean a guy like Donald Brown gets cut. Crazy .. Not really. Havril makes the team , Bradshaw and Ballard make the team. K Williams has looked pretty explosive so far and could return kicks. There probably is no way you can carry 3 QB's and 5 RB's. So the thing we want is to have Harnish on the PS. Then even if Luck went down and Harnish was better than MH , you could activate Harnish the following week.

 

Later... amigo

Yes, I agree with most of this. Ideally, Harnish clears waivers and winds up back on the practice squad. But he'd still be ripe for the picking by any other team.

In all, I think we're going to cut a handful of good players that could easily make our roster under different circumstances. I think Harnish will be one of them. I doubt we cut Brown; my projection is he stays, and we waive Williams with an eye on signing him to the practice squad. Especially if Bradshaw isn't 100%. And while I think we have some tough decisions to make, I think we'll have some flexibility with the 52nd and 53rd spots. If we have to carry an extra RB or QB, I think we can make it work for a couple weeks.

[esmort]

Insuring the #2 QB position is more valuable than whichever roster bubble player we end up dropping, even if that means carrying a 3rd QB.  If circumstances required that we needed a player at the position we cut the odds of us being able to reacquire the player we cut, or being able to pick up a FA with comparable skills to the roster bubble player is far greater than finding a FA QB capable of walking in off the street, learning our playbook, and winning games for however long Luck might be out.

[dw49]

Insuring the #2 QB position is more valuable than whichever roster bubble player we end up dropping, even if that means carrying a 3rd QB.  If circumstances required that we needed a player at the position we cut the odds of us being able to reacquire the player we cut, or being able to pick up a FA with comparable skills to the roster bubble player is far greater than finding a FA QB capable of walking in off the street, learning our playbook, and winning games for however long Luck might be out.

 

 

 

All true and good as long as Matt Hasslebeck > Chandler Harnish. If not it's simply a bad signing and it wasn't the first and won't be the last.

[dw49]

I'm very okay with Harnish being better than we thought. I don't think that's a goof; I think that's a good problem. Especially given recent history, I'd rather err on the side of caution when it comes to QB2. It's much more likely that Harnish is Curtis Painter than it is that he's Tom Brady. More likely, he's TJ Yates, and that only works if you have a really strong defense and running game, and we don't know that we have either just yet. So going overboard to shore up QB2 is fine.

I also think it's unlikely that Hasselbeck is suddenly not capable of doing what he's done the past two years, if necessary. I think it's more likely that Harnish is bad than it is that Hasselbeck is bad.

As for a roster spot, I don't expect the team to carry two backup quarterbacks. I expect Hasselbeck to be QB2, and even if we keep Harnish on the 53, I don't expect us to keep him all season. He'd be one of the first to go if we need that roster spot. 

 

Tutor isn't the word I'd use, though I do think there's immeasurable value in having a seasoned vet for Luck to associate with. As much as I think that's good for his growth and development, I wouldn't want us to waste a roster spot and $4.5m for it.

Then again, if things go the way we hope, any amount of money you pay any backup quarterback could be considered a waste. We hope QB2 never plays. He's an insurance policy that you hope you never have to use. In that case, it's better that he has some noteworthy value in meeting rooms and on the sideline. Still, Hasselbeck is making more than I think he should be making as a glorified clipboard holder. The point is that it's worth it IF you ever need him to play.

::knocks on wood::

 

There were and are other guys available for less. I personally think Hasselbeck is better than all of them, even if he's overpaid. I kind of shrug about the whole thing. I wish we had signed him for less, but I'm still glad we signed him.

 

Yes, I agree with most of this. Ideally, Harnish clears waivers and winds up back on the practice squad. But he'd still be ripe for the picking by any other team.

In all, I think we're going to cut a handful of good players that could easily make our roster under different circumstances. I think Harnish will be one of them. I doubt we cut Brown; my projection is he stays, and we waive Williams with an eye on signing him to the practice squad. Especially if Bradshaw isn't 100%. And while I think we have some tough decisions to make, I think we'll have some flexibility with the 52nd and 53rd spots. If we have to carry an extra RB or QB, I think we can make it work for a couple weeks.

 

 

I think Williams makes the team if he brings things to the table the other backs don't. That being an explosive open field runner that is very good as a receiver and an electric KR. If that is the case , then the FB stays and it will be tough to carry 5 RB's. But I'm sitting here in HB CA and going by hunches and what I read. Could be that K Williams went right where he should have in that draft. If so , he probably doesn't make the roster.

 

All the other stuff is probably going to be perception as chances are Luck will not miss any games. So we'll probably never know what MH was really worth. However , we might end up losing Harnish and time will tell if that's the case and if it's a loss. So I guess it's really going to be what floats your boat. It can't be a no brainer to sign a 38 year old guy for 4.5 mill because you have a 2nd year QB. Washington didn't do it , Seattle didn't do it , I think Moore is on a one year deal and I would say that Miami did it either. I believe Andrew Luck , who most claim is ridiculously smart , would not need "help" more than those guys. So I think that while that doesn't prove me right , it gives at least some substance to my argument. On the other hand if MH is the best back up available , then I'm wrong. 

[Superman]

I think Williams makes the team if he brings things to the table the other backs don't. That being an explosive open field runner that is very good as a receiver and an electric KR. If that is the case , then the FB stays and it will be tough to carry 5 RB's. But I'm sitting here in HB CA and going by hunches and what I read. Could be that K Williams went right where he should have in that draft. If so , he probably doesn't make the roster.

 

All the other stuff is probably going to be perception as chances are Luck will not miss any games. So we'll probably never know what MH was really worth. However , we might end up losing Harnish and time will tell if that's the case and if it's a loss. So I guess it's really going to be what floats your boat. It can't be a no brainer to sign a 38 year old guy for 4.5 mill because you have a 2nd year QB. Washington didn't do it , Seattle didn't do it , I think Moore is on a one year deal and I would say that Miami did it either. I believe Andrew Luck , who most claim is ridiculously smart , would not need "help" more than those guys. So I think that while that doesn't prove me right , it gives at least some substance to my argument. On the other hand if MH is the best back up available , then I'm wrong.

Things are very much in flux with the running back position. I personally don't think Williams would make a good #2 back, so if Bradshaw is still not ready and it's Ballard as the first back, are you going to make Williams RB2? I wouldn't. JMO. I'd much rather keep Brown, since not only do I think he's a better, more complete back, but we won't have much depth behind Ballard at the start of the season. If Bradshaw is ready, then we might be looking for different qualities out of RB3. Or, Williams could be a really good option as a ball carrier. We'll see.

I think it starts with the fact that I'm not as down on Donald Brown as the general public seems to be. He is what he is; I'm not arguing that we need to give him another chance. I just think he's a solid option on a well-rounded roster.

As for Hasselbeck, I think the major motivation is that they wanted a solid insurance policy. The veteran qualities that should help Luck are just a bonus. I don't think that what other teams with young QBs did is really pertinent. The Colts wanted a strong option at QB2, and didn't have one, despite what we might think of Harnish's upside. The Redskins have Cousins, who proved he can perform last year. The Seahawks have Brady Quinn and Tarvaris Jackson, neither of which is anything special, but both have performed in the pros and are more proven than Harnish. Both teams were already better at QB2 than we were.

Matt Moore was already a Dolphin. He resigned for two years, $8m, believe it or not. But again, he's better than Harnish, so the Dolphins were better than us at QB2 as well.

Hasselbeck was released a couple weeks into free agency. So it's unlikely that he was a part of the team's offseason plan all along. But they seemingly pounced as soon as he hit the market, and they weren't the only team interested. Again, he's overpaid, assuming he never plays. If Luck doesn't miss any games, I might as well be QB2. But I don't think the team wanted to have Harnish one step away from being the starting quarterback, especially given how disastrous 2011 proved to be.

[HtownColt]

After a day of thinking about it, I still don't see a number 2 QB dilemma

[dw49]

Things are very much in flux with the running back position. I personally don't think Williams would make a good #2 back, so if Bradshaw is still not ready and it's Ballard as the first back, are you going to make Williams RB2? I wouldn't. JMO. I'd much rather keep Brown, since not only do I think he's a better, more complete back, but we won't have much depth behind Ballard at the start of the season. If Bradshaw is ready, then we might be looking for different qualities out of RB3. Or, Williams could be a really good option as a ball carrier. We'll see.

I think it starts with the fact that I'm not as down on Donald Brown as the general public seems to be. He is what he is; I'm not arguing that we need to give him another chance. I just think he's a solid option on a well-rounded roster.

As for Hasselbeck, I think the major motivation is that they wanted a solid insurance policy. The veteran qualities that should help Luck are just a bonus. I don't think that what other teams with young QBs did is really pertinent. The Colts wanted a strong option at QB2, and didn't have one, despite what we might think of Harnish's upside. The Redskins have Cousins, who proved he can perform last year. The Seahawks have Brady Quinn and Tarvaris Jackson, neither of which is anything special, but both have performed in the pros and are more proven than Harnish. Both teams were already better at QB2 than we were.

Matt Moore was already a Dolphin. He resigned for two years, $8m, believe it or not. But again, he's better than Harnish, so the Dolphins were better than us at QB2 as well.

Hasselbeck was released a couple weeks into free agency. So it's unlikely that he was a part of the team's offseason plan all along. But they seemingly pounced as soon as he hit the market, and they weren't the only team interested. Again, he's overpaid, assuming he never plays. If Luck doesn't miss any games, I might as well be QB2. But I don't think the team wanted to have Harnish one step away from being the starting quarterback, especially given how disastrous 2011 proved to be.

 

 

Agree with you on the RB situation if Bradshaw is not ready.

 

As far as the back ups for the other rookies , that was in response to all those that say MH is worth that kind of money to help Luck out. My point is that it doesn't appear that the GM's of Luck's counter part felt that way. I do admit or agree... that going into the 2013 season with Harnish would have been risky. Just my opinion that everything considered , I didn't like the big contract on MH. Not for nothing but if any of the top QB's went down for an extended period , none of them have very good backups other than maybe NE and they were looking to trade him besides.. Brees , Eli , Rogers , kapernick , Flacco .. they all have sketchy back ups.

 

Let me ask you all this one... 

 

1) What team spent the most money and resources to win now ? 

 

 

Answer ..Right... Denever Broncos

 

 

2) Who and what year was their backup QB in ?

[Superman]

Agree with you on the RB situation if Bradshaw is not ready.

 

As far as the back ups for the other rookies , that was in response to all those that say MH is worth that kind of money to help Luck out. My point is that it doesn't appear that the GM's of Luck's counter part felt that way. I do admit or agree... that going into the 2013 season with Harnish would have been risky. Just my opinion that everything considered , I didn't like the big contract on MH. Not for nothing but if any of the top QB's went down for an extended period , none of them have very good backups other than maybe NE and they were looking to trade him besides.. Brees , Eli , Rogers , kapernick , Flacco .. they all have sketchy back ups.

 

Let me ask you all this one... 

 

1) What team spent the most money and resources to win now ? 

 

 

Answer ..Right... Denever Broncos

 

 

2) Who and what year was their backup QB in ?

Agreed on the most points.

I'm not sure the Broncos spent the most money this offseason. But they certainly are making moves to win right now. Their backup QB is in his second year, Brock Osweiler. Thing is, they're hitching their wagon to Manning. That team is constructed differently, has a differently structured payroll, and has a different window of opportunity. Same goes for the Giants, Saints, etc.

Closest similarity is the Niners, but that's because they have their franchise QB on a rookie contract like us. But they already have a proven defense and run game, unlike the Colts. They also have a more veteran coaching staff that has been able to have success with a different, more limited quarterback.

Back to Hasselbeck, I think his ability to help Luck is just a bonus. In my mind, the major objective was having a proven backup, just in case.