Russell Wilson and the Seahawks negotiations (update:signed)

[Lurker]

Of course age factors in but you can't pay someone money on the basis that he may be able to do something that he hasn't actively demonstrated. It is bad business to do so.

Sure you can if you've got enough comparables (three years of performance data) and have a conviction that the guy can do it for another 4-6-8 years.

 

That's were these 'elite' QB contracts fall down in my estimation. A guy like Manning will never earn his current contract (even with the pay cut) because he was paid like he was still in his prime as a Colt. Brees may be the next guy to start down that path. Big Ben four years from now is unlikely to be the guy he was last year.

 

GMs are paying for past performance, since it's less risky ("hey, the fans would kill me if I didn't!") than sticking your neck out an paying for potential. And with the rigged player ownership world of the NFL, they can get away with it.

 

But again, in a free market non-CBA world outside of pro sports, some owner (i.e., Pegs for example) would say "I want that guy" and Wilson would be paid like BB, Rogers et al.

[The Big Cat]

 

To be fair, oh largest of felines, Wilson was a huge part of their rushing success in 2014. He had more rushing yards than all but 14 RBs.

 

Not saying that weakens your position; just something to consider is all.

 

 

Name one weakness. His physical limitations? Height? That's his only physical limitation and he's proven for every year of his football life that it doesn't affect him. He's built like a rock. He's strong and he's fast. His physicality is one of his major strengths.

It's okay to say it. It completely shoots his ill-conceived, ill-informed theory.

 

The best QB's are great at running, as a supplement to their passing attack. This in now way counters anything I've said. For RW, his running game is superior to his passing attack. This can't be disputed.

[Kelly the Dog]

Nah, I disagree. Projected performance means believing he will get better at the things he has already demonstrated he can do. It doesn't mean projecting him to take over games when he hasn't really done that.

 

As for Seattle thinking he has already demonstrated that..... do they? If they do I suspect a deal would be done or very close.

 

Listen, he is worth a lot of money as everyone here has said and he will get good money but if he gets anywhere in that $25mill range I think they have overpaid.

I guess people don't watch him play much. He definitely takes over games. And I'm really not sure how much better he can get (outside of efficiency). He makes a ton of plays. He wins games in historic proportion. I would bet if you could guarantee RW would play like he has for the next ten years they would jump at the chance to pay him as a top three QB.

[The Big Cat]

I guess people don't watch him play much. He definitely takes over games. And I'm really not sure how much better he can get (outside of efficiency). He makes a ton of plays. He wins games in historic proportion.

 

For you to speak so matter-of-factly about this suggests that you have been ignoring the countless objections to this point scattered throughout this conversation.

Edited July 6, 2015 by The Big Cat

[Kelly the Dog]

His passing is great too. He's fifth all time in post season passing after only three years. Rg3 is known to have one of the best seasons of all time in college in Baylors offense, and Wilson was even better, in Wisconsins. And in three seasons he has had a total of zero reliable targets. Unless you want to count Golden Tate for one year.

 

 

 

The best QB's are great at running, as a supplement to their passing attack. This in now way counters anything I've said. For RW, his running game is superior to his passing attack. This can't be disputed.

[Jauronimo]

 

His passing is great too. He's fifth all time in post season passing after only three years. Rg3 is known to have one of the best seasons of all time in college in Baylors offense, and Wilson was even better, in Wisconsins. And in three seasons he has had a total of zero reliable targets. Unless you want to count Golden Tate for one year.

 

 

 

The best QB's are great at running, as a supplement to their passing attack. This in now way counters anything I've said. For RW, his running game is superior to his passing attack. This can't be disputed.

 

Unless you want to count the really good target he had whose career took off once he landed with Stafford and left behind that elite QB play.

[Kelly the Dog]

Unless you want to count the really good target he had whose career took off once he landed with Stafford and left behind that elite QB play.

You mean by mentioning the guy I mentioned?

 

Tate was a second round pick. Caught about 20 balls as a rookie. Caught about 30 the next year both before Wilson. Caught 45 in his third and then blossomed in his last year with Wilson

Edited July 6, 2015 by Kelly the Dog

[Jauronimo]

You mean by mentioning the guy I mentioned?

Yes, why wouldn't we count Golden Tate as a good receiver and why would include just one of the two seasons that Russel played with Tate? How is that a question?

Edited July 6, 2015 by Jauronimo

[Kelly the Dog]

Yes, why wouldn't we count Golden Tate as a good receiver and why wouldn't we include both seasons that Russel played with Tate? How is that a question?

I answered above.

 

 

Tate was a second round pick. Caught about 20 balls as a rookie. Caught about 30 the next year both before Wilson. Caught 45 in his third and then blossomed in his last year with Wilson

Edited July 6, 2015 by Kelly the Dog

[Jauronimo]

I answered above.

 

 

Tate was a second round pick. Caught about 20 balls as a rookie. Caught about 30 the next year both before Wilson. Caught 45 in his third and then blossomed in his last year with Wilson

Russel was a third round pick. Attempted the fewest passes among starting QBs over the last three seasons.

 

Tate's career took off when he landed with Stafford who no one considers elite. Who was holding who back? Who really "blossomed"?

 

How can you fail to see how easy it is to use the same logic and set of facts to attack your position? Its easier to see things objectively when you aren't emotionally invested in the outcome.

[Mr. WEO]

OK, let's wrap up this endless circular discussion and get right to it: if WIlson was on the Bills and we were just coming off the 3 year run Seattle had, who among this group of bloviators (myself included) would not pay him the richest contract in the league if that's what it took to keep him?

[Kelly the Dog]

Russel was a third round pick. Attempted the fewest passes among starting QBs over the last three seasons.

 

Tate's career took off when he landed with Stafford who no one considers elite. Who was holding who back? Who really "blossomed"?

 

How can you fail to see how easy it is to use the same logic and set of facts to attack your position? Its easier to see things objectively when you aren't emotionally invested in the outcome.

He BLOSSOMED under Wilson. Last year Megatron got hurt so Tate had 45-50 more targets. But he scored more TDs and had a better YPC with Wilson and went from 20-30 catches to 45-65 and then to 99 last year with those 45 extra targets. Percentage of targets he was the same with Stafford and Wilson 99-64 vs 144-99. He was a guy who got better and better but he blossomed with Russell Wilson. There is not a sane person in the world who does not think the jump from mid 60s to 99 in catches was a direct result of Calvin Johnson on one leg the whole year, and I love Golden Tate. He was on my fantasy team and he had a tremendous year.

OK, let's wrap up this endless circular discussion and get right to it: if WIlson was on the Bills and we were just coming off the 3 year run Seattle had, who among this group of bloviators (myself included) would not pay him the richest contract in the league if that's what it took to keep him?

With Wilson as QB I think the Bills would likely be the Super Bowl favorites.

[Mr. WEO]

Yup. And if the Bills had even a semblance of a running game, they'd have made the playoffs.

 

Take away Wilson"s 850 rushing yards and does Seattle have such a great running game?

[What a Tuel]

OK, let's wrap up this endless circular discussion and get right to it: if WIlson was on the Bills and we were just coming off the 3 year run Seattle had, who among this group of bloviators (myself included) would not pay him the richest contract in the league if that's what it took to keep him?

 

So you are asking a fan base that has been deprived of a decent QB for 15 years whether or not they would let one go if they had one? I am sure a lot of people would say sure, pay the man. I am not sure fans are the best gauge for that type of thing or that it is good rationale on what Wilson should make.

Edited July 6, 2015 by What a Tuel

[Mr. WEO]

He BLOSSOMED under Wilson. Last year Megatron got hurt so Tate had 45-50 more targets. But he scored more TDs and had a better YPC with Wilson and went from 20-30 catches to 45-65 and then to 99 last year with those 45 extra targets. Percentage of targets he was the same with Stafford and Wilson 99-64 vs 144-99. He was a guy who got better and better but he blossomed with Russell Wilson. There is not a sane person in the world who does not think the jump from mid 60s to 99 in catches was a direct result of Calvin Johnson on one leg the whole year, and I love Golden Tate. He was on my fantasy team and he had a tremendous year.

With Wilson as QB I think the Bills would likely be the Super Bowl favorites.

 

I'm saying if Wilson had QB'd the team to 2 AFCC wins and a SB win.

 

So you are asking a fan base that has been deprived of a decent QB for 15 years whether or not they would let one go if they had one? I am sure a lot of people would say sure, pay the man. I am not sure fans are the best gauge for that type of thing or that it is good rationale on what Wilson should make.

 

It wouldn't take a special level of intelligence to conclude he should be paid that much to stay.

[BarleyNY]

OK, let's wrap up this endless circular discussion and get right to it: if WIlson was on the Bills and we were just coming off the 3 year run Seattle had, who among this group of bloviators (myself included) would not pay him the richest contract in the league if that's what it took to keep him?

I wouldn't and there is no need to do so. It doesn't matter what team he's on, he should be compensated fairly - which is to say very well even as starting NFL QBs go - but in line with what his value is. Overpaying players is a ticket to mediocrity because there's only so much money (cap space) to go around.

[Kelly the Dog]

 

I'm saying if Wilson had QB'd the team to 2 AFCC wins and a SB win.

 

It wouldn't take a special level of intelligence to conclude he should be paid that much to stay.

Of course we would want that, and we would be right. And Seattle is eventually going to pay him the boatloads.

 

Look at what they did with Lynch? For two years they have been saying publicly we may be moving on from Lynch, and then right when it gets to be critical, they pay him and they pay him pretty good, close to what he is asking for. That's exactly what is going to happen again. Pretty much every team would.

[The Big Cat]

I wouldn't and there is no need to do so. It doesn't matter what team he's on, he should be compensated fairly - which is to say very well even as starting NFL QBs go - but in line with what his value is. Overpaying players is a ticket to mediocrity because there's only so much money (cap space) to go around.

 

and to take it a step further, another key component ignored by those who want to back up the Brinks for RW: paying the core players--particularly on defense--that had as much--or, if you ask me, more--to do with their success over the last three years than he did

[Mr. WEO]

I wouldn't and there is no need to do so. It doesn't matter what team he's on, he should be compensated fairly - which is to say very well even as starting NFL QBs go - but in line with what his value is. Overpaying players is a ticket to mediocrity because there's only so much money (cap space) to go around.

 

 

Oh that's right---you are the guy who pay him by the inch.

 

Can you overpay a legitimate franchise QB? That's the one guy I would "Overpay" (as opposed to a Mario, for instance)--bet you had noi problem with that).

 

So you would allow him to walk and let the Bills go back to what they are now?

 

Yeah....ok.

[Doc]

Take away Wilson"s 850 rushing yards and does Seattle have such a great running game?

Obviously not.