Russell Wilson and the Seahawks negotiations (update:signed)

[Dorkington]

I think that if the Hawks pay him that kind of cush, they will suffer elsewhere, and that will expose Wilson, IMO. I've never seen a game where Wilson took the team on his back and won it, like Brady, Rodgers, Manning et al.. Even Flacco has done this, but I could be wrong if someone could point me to a specific game where Wilson, and clearly Wilson alone won the Hawks a game!

 

Tim-

Probably, but they don't have much of a choice... there aren't that many good QBs in the league. Wilson qualifies as good, but not so good that he can carry a bad team to the Superbowl.

[blzrul]

The Seahawks think Marshawn Lynch can take the team on his back and win it, LOL. Or they did, until that last play in the SB. They seriously throw money at that guy, it's hard to believe they don't notice that unless someone makes him a hole, he can't do squat. Guys like Fred can squirt through - necessary when your O-line is lame. The Hawks O line took a hit in the offseason, so it'll be interesting to see what happens this year.

[Mr. WEO]

Probably, but they don't have much of a choice... there aren't that many good QBs in the league. Wilson qualifies as good, but not so good that he can carry a bad team to the Superbowl.

 

 

How many QBs have taken a "bad" team the the SB?

[PlayoffsPlease]

Probably, but they don't have much of a choice... there aren't that many good QBs in the league. Wilson qualifies as good, but not so good that he can carry a bad team to the Superbowl.

Wilson's passer rating in games when the seahawks were trailing last year was 95. When winning it was 98. Both are great numbers. He was also the 16th leading rusher in the league last year. He is the only QB in the league who can set up his own runs with his passing game. Teams need to respect a guy whose passer rating is in the mid 90's. And they have to respect the run of a guy who averages 7 yards a run for 849 yards over a season.

 

One way to describe an elite QB, is that the QB is the main player defenses have to worry about each week. Even with the seahawks way below average receiving corp, Wilson is the seahawk defenses have to plan for the most each week.

 

Wilson is the key difference between the Bills and the Seahawks the last two years. If Wilson had been on the Bills with the same coaching he has in Seattle, the Bills definitely go a lot farther than they did.

 

 

 

[thebandit27]

Wilson's passer rating in games when the seahawks were trailing last year was 95. When winning it was 98. Both are great numbers. He was also the 16th leading rusher in the league last year. He is the only QB in the league who can set up his own runs with his passing game. Teams need to respect a guy whose passer rating is in the mid 90's. And they have to respect the run of a guy who averages 7 yards a run for 849 yards over a season.

 

One way to describe an elite QB, is that the QB is the main player defenses have to worry about each week. Even with the seahawks way below average receiving corp, Wilson is the seahawk defenses have to plan for the most each week.

 

Wilson is the key difference between the Bills and the Seahawks the last two years. If Wilson had been on the Bills with the same coaching he has in Seattle, the Bills definitely go a lot farther than they did.

 

 

 

I don't know how you can say that when they average the 2nd-lowest pass-play percentage in the league.

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/passing-play-pct

 

Teams game-plan for Lynch first, and that's one of the reasons that Wilson is able to do what he's done.

 

I'm on record as saying that I believe Wilson is very good; I don't think he's the focal point of opposing defenses.

[mannc]

 

I don't know how you can say that when they average the 2nd-lowest pass-play percentage in the league.

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/passing-play-pct

 

Teams game-plan for Lynch first, and that's one of the reasons that Wilson is able to do what he's done.

 

I'm on record as saying that I believe Wilson is very good; I don't think he's the focal point of opposing defenses.

Which do you think would have a greater effect on the betting line in a Seahawk game against a random opponent, Lynch being out for the game or Wilson being unavailable? Sorry, but it's not even close. Lynch sitting out might cause the line to move half a point. Wilson being out would move it 4-7 points, IMO.

[NoSaint]

Which do you think would have a greater effect on the betting line in a Seahawk game against a random opponent, Lynch being out for the game or Wilson being unavailable? Sorry, but it's not even close. Lynch sitting out might cause the line to move half a point. Wilson being out would move it 4-7 points, IMO.

thats a differential between the starter and the quality of replacement issue, primarily, though.

[thebandit27]

Which do you think would have a greater effect on the betting line in a Seahawk game against a random opponent, Lynch being out for the game or Wilson being unavailable? Sorry, but it's not even close. Lynch sitting out might cause the line to move half a point. Wilson being out would move it 4-7 points, IMO.

 

You're speaking more to positional importance, not necessarily which specific player represents the foundation of the offensive attack.

 

I mean, the drop off from Teddy Bridgewater to Shaun Hill is pretty significant, and would most likely move the betting line more than the drop off from Adrian Peterson to Jerrick McKinnon; that says nothing of who opposing DCs are spending more time preparing for...know what I mean?

[YoloinOhio]

Ruh Roh

 

@RapSheet: Sources: #Seahawks S Kam Chancellor wants more money, has told Seattle that hes strongly considering a camp holdout to make it happen.

[thebandit27]

Ruh Roh

 

@RapSheet: Sources: #Seahawks S Kam Chancellor wants more money, has told Seattle that hes strongly considering a camp holdout to make it happen.

Geez...he's in the 2nd year of a 4-year contract that averages $7M/season. Yes, he's a better player than Byrd, who got $2M/year more, but c'mon man...at least pretend to play out 50% of your deal.

[The Big Cat]

Ruh Roh

 

@RapSheet: Sources: #Seahawks S Kam Chancellor wants more money, has told Seattle that hes strongly considering a camp holdout to make it happen.

 

 

Geez...he's in the 2nd year of a 4-year contract that averages $7M/season. Yes, he's a better player than Byrd, who got $2M/year more, but c'mon man...at least pretend to play out 50% of your deal.

 

You can argue till you're blue in the face whether Wilson is 'elite' or deserves top-10 money, but the simple fact that the argument exists means that so long as the factors above ALSO exist (and Kam won't be the only one), the Seahags CAN'T and WON'T give him the money others in this thread insist he's owed.

Edited July 29, 2015 by The Big Cat

[Alphadawg7]

 

I don't know how you can say that when they average the 2nd-lowest pass-play percentage in the league.

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/passing-play-pct

 

Teams game-plan for Lynch first, and that's one of the reasons that Wilson is able to do what he's done.

 

I'm on record as saying that I believe Wilson is very good; I don't think he's the focal point of opposing defenses.

 

I dont understand why people say that...Lynch's career rushing YPC before Wilson is 3.99 YPC and 3.95 YPC in 2 years in Seattle alone before Wilson. With Wilson, its 4.65 YPC. Looks more like Wilsons ability to run and pass is what makes Lynch a more effective runner.

 

Even look at the final SB play...people screamed for Lycnh but overlooked lynch was 1 for 5 on the season in that exact situation. Lynch is a hard runner, and that makes him exciting. But people over exaggerate him too much. He had a pretty long career as a guy who had less than a 4 YPC average before Wilson came and opened up that offense.

 

Its crazy how people give Lynch all the credit for Wilsons success and completely ignore that a QB who can run and throw to beat you is far harder to game plan for and that true dual threat completely changes how a team can defend against the run.

 

Its literally an urban legend that people game plan for Lynch. Teams are not stacking the boxes on Seattle, and thats just the truth. Not to mention, Seattle hasn't even had any real serious receiving threats for defenses to key in on, and yet they still haven't been stacking the box since Wilson was a rookie.

[Gugny]

Ruh Roh

 

@RapSheet: Sources: #Seahawks S Kam Chancellor wants more money, has told Seattle that hes strongly considering a camp holdout to make it happen.

 

I wish teams would just let these ass holes go. Even if it meant hurting the team. If enough teams would do that, then these types of players would be the least likely to get any kind of deals in the future.

[Alphadawg7]

 

I wish teams would just let these ass holes go. Even if it meant hurting the team. If enough teams would do that, then these types of players would be the least likely to get any kind of deals in the future.

 

Why? Players in the NFL have terrible contracts, they are not guaranteed...teams cut guys for money all the time, so why shouldn't a player do everything he can to get the best deal, especially given the NFL is a violent sport where your career can end on a single play, even in practice. People hate on players for fighting for money but don't say a peep when teams break those contracts, cut them, and they don't get paid all the time to save money.

[NoSaint]

 

Why? Players in the NFL have terrible contracts, they are not guaranteed...teams cut guys for money all the time, so why shouldn't a player do everything he can to get the best deal, especially given the NFL is a violent sport where your career can end on a single play, even in practice. People hate on players for fighting for money but don't say a peep when teams break those contracts, cut them, and they don't get paid all the time to save money.

to hold out this early is not fair play. the team gave him a signing bonus and guaranteed dollars way to recently to say that is reasonable for a player to demand a new deal. they couldnt even cut him for the holdout as his dead money at this point is too high cause the deal is so new.

[YoloinOhio]

 

Why? Players in the NFL have terrible contracts, they are not guaranteed...teams cut guys for money all the time, so why shouldn't a player do everything he can to get the best deal, especially given the NFL is a violent sport where your career can end on a single play, even in practice. People hate on players for fighting for money but don't say a peep when teams break those contracts, cut them, and they don't get paid all the time to save money.

what would you say if Aaron Williams decided to hold out for more money this year? Sure he's not on Kam's level, but maybe he thinks he's worth more that he signed for? Would you say - go for it AW! Get yours! Screw the fact we are trying to win, pay other guys so we can do that AND stay under the cap, oh and that you are already well paid and under contract! Edited July 29, 2015 by YoloinOhio

[Alphadawg7]

to hold out this early is not fair play. the team gave him a signing bonus and guaranteed dollars way to recently to say that is reasonable for a player to demand a new deal. they couldnt even cut him for the holdout as his dead money at this point is too high cause the deal is so new.

 

Still, its ok for teams to break contracts early to avoid paying the player what they agreed to pay him. Why then is it not OK for a player to try and get a better deal if the opportunity is there? I never understood the backlash against players in the NFL which has no guaranteed contracts. Teams pull the rug out from under players regularly and then are surprised when players push back and fight to get paid.

 

And young players need to do this most as they often are grossly underpaid early in their career if they are a good or great player. So they dont have anything close to long term financial security if they get hurt. Fans tend to look at the dollar amount and never factor in what the player REALLY gets after taxes, agents, managers, etc. So younger players who have their whole lives ahead of them and are relying on their football career to set them up wont have that kind of long term stability if they get hurt because their contract isn't guaranteed and often don't make a lot of money early in their career considering the long term stability it needs to provide. They need to be aggressive because at any given moment their career can end, and so will their contract.

 

So, again, I just don't think people are fair to players who fight for their future in a world thats not guaranteed from a health or contract point of view. Especially since the teams themselves take full advantage of the non guaranteed status and break their contracts with players all the time to avoid paying them what they agreed to pay them, even when they are living up to that contract.

what would you say if Aaron Williams decided to hold out for more money this year? Sure he's not on Kam's level, but maybe he thinks he's worth more that he signed for? Would you say - go for it AW! Get yours! Screw the fact we are trying to win, pay other guys so we can do that AND stay under the cap, oh and that you are already well paid and under contrac

 

I wouldn't have a problem with AW going after a new contract if his current one wasn't up to par. And I am talking about every time a player fights for money there is backlash. You can try and twist it and paint the most negative scenario for a player, but the truth is players are always made out to be the villain when fighting for their future in a sport which has a short career average and high chance of injury coupled with non guaranteed contracts. Its not just about a single scenario...I was responding to a post that stated he wished teams cut these a**holes when they want to hold out for money. He is grouping all the players who fight to negotiate the best deal they can. And holding out is part of their leverage, just like franchise tagging is part of a teams leverage...or the threat of trading him...or cutting him.

 

PS: And when a team trades, cuts, or forces a renegotiation on a player its said "Its not personal, its business"...but when a player fights for his financial future its made out to be personal and rarely viewed as them doing their business due diligence. Players are treated as a business commodity from the teams perspective, but fans make it personal when they try and do whats in the players best business interest.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Alphadawg7

[NoSaint]

 

Still, its ok for teams to break contracts early to avoid paying the player what they agreed to pay him. Why then is it not OK for a player to try and get a better deal if the opportunity is there? I never understood the backlash against players in the NFL which has no guaranteed contracts. Teams pull the rug out from under players regularly and then are surprised when players push back and fight to get paid.

 

And young players need to do this most as they often are grossly underpaid early in their career if they are a good or great player. So they dont have anything close to long term financial security if they get hurt. Fans tend to look at the dollar amount and never factor in what the player REALLY gets after taxes, agents, managers, etc. So younger players who have their whole lives ahead of them and are relying on their football career to set them up wont have that kind of long term stability if they get hurt because their contract isn't guaranteed and often don't make a lot of money early in their career considering the long term stability it needs to provide. They need to be aggressive because at any given moment their career can end, and so will their contract.

 

So, again, I just don't think people are fair to players who fight for their future in a world thats not guaranteed from a health or contract point of view. Especially since the teams themselves take full advantage of the non guaranteed status and break their contracts with players all the time to avoid paying them what they agreed to pay them, even when they are living up to that contract.

if he were grossly underpaid or a few more years into the deal, id buy your arguments. im normally in the do what you have to do camp, and agree with your take.

 

i do not think this is an example of that at all. hes not chris hogan signing a 5 year deal tomorrow and then becoming a probowler and wanting a fair raise.

 

the man signed a raise on his last contract before the team had to, received a signing bonus and guaranteed dollars, and still has 3 years of a 4 year extension left. like i said his dead money based on the bonus and guarantees would be $8m - they couldnt reasonably cut him if they wanted.

 

would you advocate that a guy be in the right to sit out the day after his signing bonus check is deposited? obviously theres some sliding scale to whats "right" and i dont think hes over that hump yet.

Edited July 29, 2015 by NoSaint

[YoloinOhio]

 

Still, its ok for teams to break contracts early to avoid paying the player what they agreed to pay him. Why then is it not OK for a player to try and get a better deal if the opportunity is there? I never understood the backlash against players in the NFL which has no guaranteed contracts. Teams pull the rug out from under players regularly and then are surprised when players push back and fight to get paid.

 

And young players need to do this most as they often are grossly underpaid early in their career if they are a good or great player. So they dont have anything close to long term financial security if they get hurt. Fans tend to look at the dollar amount and never factor in what the player REALLY gets after taxes, agents, managers, etc. So younger players who have their whole lives ahead of them and are relying on their football career to set them up wont have that kind of long term stability if they get hurt because their contract isn't guaranteed and often don't make a lot of money early in their career considering the long term stability it needs to provide. They need to be aggressive because at any given moment their career can end, and so will their contract.

 

So, again, I just don't think people are fair to players who fight for their future in a world thats not guaranteed from a health or contract point of view. Especially since the teams themselves take full advantage of the non guaranteed status and break their contracts with players all the time to avoid paying them what they agreed to pay them, even when they are living up to that contract.

 

 

I wouldn't have a problem with AW going after a new contract if his current one wasn't up to par. And I am talking about every time a player fights for money there is backlash. You can try and twist it and paint the most negative scenario for a player, but the truth is players are always made out to be the villain when fighting for their future in a sport which has a short career average and high chance of injury coupled with non guaranteed contracts. Its not just about a single scenario...I was responding to a post that stated he wished teams cut these a**holes when they want to hold out for money. He is grouping all the players who fight to negotiate the best deal they can. And holding out is part of their leverage, just like franchise tagging is part of a teams leverage...or the threat of trading him...or cutting him.

 

PS: And when a team trades, cuts, or forces a renegotiation on a player its said "Its not personal, its business"...but when a player fights for his financial future its made out to be personal and rarely viewed as them doing their business due diligence. Players are treated as a business commodity from the teams perspective, but fans make it personal when they try and do whats in the players best business interest.

its the CBA their union negotiated.

[Alphadawg7]

if he were grossly underpaid or a few more years into the deal, id buy your arguments. im normally in the do what you have to do camp, and agree with your take.

 

i do not think this is an example of that at all. hes not chris hogan signing a 5 year deal tomorrow and then becoming a probowler and wanting a fair raise.

 

the man signed a raise on his last contract before the team had to, received a signing bonus and guaranteed dollars, and still has 3 years of a 4 year extension left. like i said his dead money based on the bonus and guarantees would be $8m - they couldnt reasonably cut him if they wanted.

 

would you advocate that a guy be in the right to sit out the day after his signing bonus check is deposited? obviously theres some sliding scale to whats "right" and i dont think hes over that hump yet.

 

I agree with this...and I agree its case by case. Like when Jason Peters wanted more money when he wasnt living up to what he was already being paid IMO (gave up most sacks in the league and was fat and out of shape). My point was more directed to the general backlash players get when fighting for their contracts overall. Again, the original poster I responded to clumped them all together as a**holes who should be cut even if it hurt the team.