Losman, Whitehurst and QB options

Good question from Jeremy via Facebook: Should we read between the lines in regards to the future of Charlie Whitehurst with the signing of J.P. Losman? How come Seattle didn't sign him last week instead of Zac Robinson?

Mike Sando: The Seahawks wanted two backup quarterbacks familiar with their offense, but they weren't excited about setting aside two spots on their 53-man roster. Robinson let them have it both ways because, unlike Losman, he was eligible for the practice squad.

Robinson was practicing without using a roster spot. The team signed him to its 53-man roster when a concussion sidelined Matt Hasselbeck, but Seattle then lost him to a Detroit Lions waiver claim when trying to get him back onto the practice squad. The waiver claim probably came as a surprise. Why Robinson?

The Seahawks still wanted two backups familiar with their offense. Losman became the fallback option. His signing came at the cost of a spot on the 53-man roster, but the Seahawks were in better position to use a roster spot for him after getting a few players back from injury. They had more flexibility. There are no guarantees Robinson will stick with the Lions, either. Perhaps he comes back eventually.

It's very unlikely the Seahawks view Losman as a long-term investment even if he does provide some experienced insurance should something happen to Hasselbeck or Whitehurst.