there's a reason why he wasn't getting the job done. draft a pocket passer lower round, pickup a 2nd stringer that is waived. trade flynn for a 1st or second round pick and get top d-line and o-line players in the draft so they can shuffle guys in and out during a drive to keep them fresh just like the niners did.

These are nice ideas, however there isn't a team in the league that's gonna give up a 2nd rounder for Flynn, let alone a 1st. Jackson would be a serviceable backup. Just consider his .500 record as a starter as evidence. I suspect with this offensive line that's VASTLY superior to what he had his first time around, not to mention the upgrade/improvement at nearly every skill position, there's no reason to suspect he couldn't produce a .500 record or better if called on. That's about all you can ask from your backup. If there's a better alternative, I'm down with that too.

Actually there were several reasons. The worst pass protection in the league throughout the first half of the season, Sidney Rice was hurt, Deon Butler was a bust, Golden Tate wasn't being productive, Zack Miller was a full time blocker to try and compensate for the shoddy OL play and the running game was totally off the tracks. All the while fans were under the misconception that it was all Tarvaris's fault which is typical. If it's all gone sideways, blame the QB and the coach. When it all started coming together the 2nd half of the season Tarvaris played fairly well, the Hawks went 5-3 over the last 8 (and almost 6-2 if they had won the OT game vs AZ in week 17) and Tarvaris I'm guessing probably had a QB rating of around 90 during that stretch. So yeah, there's no doubt he could hold down the fort as the backup here. He's not starter material and has his flaws but is a more than capable backup. All the talk about Tarvaris being such a bad QB has been totally blown out of proportion.

You might as well ask if we should obtain Charlie Whitehurst.

There will be a veteran at the back end of their career available, and they should look to draft someone to bring up in the system...that way the salary will be low.

I wouldn't mind keeping Flynn, but it seems fair to give him a chance to take a shot somewhere else...but it can't be for nothing in trade. He should be worth a 2nd round pick.

There are lots of possible senarios...how about straight up for Calais Campbell in AZ? Or swap 2nd and 3rd round picks with Kansas City?

You are severely overvaluing Flynns trade value. Lol especially in the calais campbell suggestion. Theyd get a 3rd round for him in the absolute perfect scenario. The only strong interest he had in FA was MIA and SEA. Now he got beat out by a rookie. A good rookie but he got beat out and that diminishes confidence from other teams. There are a few desperate team but it'll probly be a 4th.

Couple of points. Firstly, Flynn has value as a backup. He's overpriced as a back up, but with Wilson's contract being exceedingly low for a starter they are fine in agregate.

Secondly, I agree, AZ is very unlikely to part with Campbell...but I wouldn't want to trade a viable QB in division without a huge price tag...such as Campbell.

thirdly, the market last year is not the market this year. The teams that were looking for QB's has changed...so the valuation could have changed as well. Additionally, there are a couple of teams with staff that were on the Seahawks from last year, and if their inside information leads them to believe Flynn is worth a deal then you've got a new market.

If the best offer was a 4th round pick I'd keep Flynn. You won't find a better backup for less value.

Obviously you and I are outsiders and time will tell.

I'm just not sure I could stomach watching him hold the ball too long and take sack after sack. Remember the Cleveland game last year? So bad. T Jack lacks the very important QB skills of being able to make a decision and pull the trigger. There has to be a better option somewhere. As for Flynn, I think we could get good value by packaging him up with a couple of our picks to move up if the right player is available. Usually, I would like Pete and John with more picks at their disposal, but it doesn't look like there is room on this roster for the 10 players we could potentially draft. It seems like the perfect time to shove some chips into the middle of the table and go for it.

That was Charlie Whitehurst in the Cleveland game..Tavaris wasn't great but as far as backup QB's go he'd be fine.

You're right... that game was so god-awful I forgot who who was playing QB.

Thats about as good as you could expect for a back up. He doesnt make terrible mistakes and he has good qualities like Arm strength and accuracy. He obviously cant read and dissect defenses very well but hes not a starter.

josh portis is a better option for the back-up spot! T-JACK is a no go for any competitive team. JOSH PORTIS will be ready and he has a good arm! Matt Cassel could be available as a back-up! any body but tarvaris...

Are you serious? Have you ever watched Portis play? He got cut BTW.

You think Matt Cassel could have done any better than Tarvaris during the first half of last season when the team was a train wreck? Tjack never had a chance. Once he had a chance to do some things the 2nd half of the season he did a decent job. And how can you say Josh Portis would be a better backup than Tarvaris? The last time Portis played he had a lower completion percentage at Division 2 (58%) than Tarvaris had last year in the NFL (61%). It's all about perception. I still remember how so many people were talking about how great Hasselbeck was for the Titans last year and how horrible Tarvaris was for the Seahawks. But in actuality after Hatt H.'s torrid start over the first 3 or 4 games last year Tarvaris OUTPLAYED Matt the rest of the season and the numbers back it up.

But I'd bet you Hasselback will be available too....

First of all when the Seahawks GM John S said they would listen to offers for Flynn he was not talking about 4th, 5th, 6th round draft picks. Matt Flynn is very valuable as a back up to RW and will NOT be traded unless there is near equal value. Remember this, the Seahawks do NOT want to trade him and dont mind paying him 7 million to sit! Ever since that radio interview there has been local and national speculation on this. The whole KC Chiefs nation is saying wait until the Hawks cut Flynn... HAHAHA That aint happening either.

JS saying the Hawks will listen to offers isn't anywhere close to saying the Hawks want to trade him. I'm sure that like you said the Hawks have a minimum threshold in moving Flynn and see keeping him as the better option if they're offered anything less than that minimum.

As a back I have NO problem with it. Flynn will gone in a year anyways. Teams dont win/lose because of back up QB's but they need to be servicable and know your system. And he is?has both

Tarvaris showed he could manage a game enough to win. He can not make enough plays to win it himself but as a #2 option hes perfect for it. But he'd have to be ok with that.

I have seen this ridiculous suggestion, and wholeheartedly reject this. I cant believe my ears on how you think TJack would be a better alternative to Flynn. Flynn would make my mind at ease on the few times he did relieve Wilson, he didn't blow the lead, in face he scored a few times. If TJack was the back up I can see him kneeling with 8 seconds left, fumble and lose a game with a pic 6. Or a whole quarter of 3 and outs. Besides from my lack of trust on TJack, as a football fan, he is not an entertainer. He is like a scratch on a broken record that some dissolutioned owner think will disappear if they play it enough. If people are only offering a 5th or a 6th for Flynn, keep him-its not like we're hurning in cap space.

You're right in not believing your ears because no one is suggesting Tjack is a better alternative to Flynn. The suggestion is that Tjack is a capable backup while Flynn is overkill and a resource better utilized elsewhere if they can get something decent for him. Why on earth do you assume that all the Flynn trade speculation is because people don't think he's any good? It's actually just the opposite. Should they trade him for say, a first round pick? Sure they should. So the question then becomes, who would the Hawks bring in to replace him? Well, how about Tjack? That's where the idea comes from, it's not at all a Flynn vs Tjack thing. The question here isn't "Is Tjack better than Flynn?" The question is "Is Tjack an adequate backup in case they decide to trade Flynn?"

Derrol...for writing a nice explanation for all the morons who don't understand what this is all about.

Seahawks should get Charlie Back. Charlie was and did good things for Seatlle why not bring him back. I would be good for the Team.

Yeah let's get the guy that couldn't beat out Jackson in the first place. There was a reason: Charlie ain't no good. Sorry.

I really hope you're trolling..