Earl Thomas

[burrrton]

Damnit.

[idhawkman]

Time to cut bait. He has a year or two of value left in him but not enough for a whole new contract.

[c_hawkbob]

I'd prefer to see a fair to both sides deal get done (we've lost enough veteran leadership) but I could still see him playing with a star on his helmet this year ...

[HumanCockroach]

Lol... HOF safeties typically play at pro bowl levels until 36... by my count, that's a full contract, and then some... I'm still waiting for a "decline " in performance, maybe you make that decision if you see it, but as of yet, I haven't. Dumping generational talent because a player is 29 never works out well ( well I guess for the player it does) ...

Thomas should be capable of having an Ed Reed type of career, nothing I've seen leads me to believe that isn't not only possible, but to be expected. How old was Reed when he walked away ( * note he walked away, he wasn't cast aside, and had a slew of offers to continue playing for many more years).

Ultimately, a 4 or 5 year deal should be the expectation from earl, and should be realistic for Seattle to accomplish... hell they gave Lynch an extension, RBs burn out far faster than safeties, as they take a pounding on every play. As long as Earl doesn't lose his speed, age has very little to do with it. He isn't an enforcer, he's center field.

[Aseahawkfan]

Get the deal done. He's the cornerstone of our defense. He makes the secondary work that much better. We can use him to provide protection to the young safeties and CBs.

[HumanCockroach]

I've seen zero to make me believe Seattle's defense improves without him, and there's little I've seen to make me believe he isn't the MOST crucial player on the entire team. No I have not forgotten about Wilson, Wagner... both great players, both would be missed, but neither completely sinks that side of the ball the way Thomas does. Your looking at starting a second year player at corner that was pretty average( nice coverage, can't play the ball in the air, lack ball presence), and possibly a rookie at corner, or Maxwell * don't get me wrong, I like the guy, but there's a reason he was on the streets for 8 weeks before Seattle brought him back*...

You don't just NEED Thomas, he's CRITICAL to any type of success Seattle will have this year, if only so they can hope for AVERAGE defense, with a BIG improvement from the offense...

[RiverDog]

Get the deal done. He's the cornerstone of our defense. He makes the secondary work that much better. We can use him to provide protection to the young safeties and CBs.

Agreed. Even though we are in a rebuilding mode, we can't have that much new blood in the secondary. Those young'ens are going to need a veteran to cover their tails when they make a mistake. Put 4 newbies back there w/o a credible teammate and they'll get demoralized, start back biting, etc.


With as much fat that we've culled, we should have no problem fitting him under the salary cap.

[jshawaii22]

I see this as the same decision as we had with Shaun Alexander when we resigned him after the Super Bowl and it didn't exactly work out. ET... his mind is pissed off right now with the team, let alone his body's condition. ET would want at least 35m over 3 years or more. If we're rebuilding, rebuild. We haven't had a top 10 draft pick since the year we drafted ET. Lets get it over with. Who the hell wants to be 9-7 or worse with him? Bad years happen. And after next year we'll probably have a new coach, too. The bad publicity from our ex-players has probably doomed the Rah-Rah era.

[RiverDog]

I see this as the same decision as we had with Shaun Alexander when we resigned him after the Super Bowl and it didn't exactly work out. ET... his mind is pissed off right now with the team, let alone his body's condition. ET would want at least 35m over 3 years or more. If we're rebuilding, rebuild. We haven't had a top 10 draft pick since the year we drafted ET. Lets get it over with. Who the hell wants to be 9-7 or worse with him? Bad years happen. And after next year we'll probably have a new coach, too. The bad publicity from our ex-players has probably doomed the Rah-Rah era.

Wow, I thought that I was the Debbie Downer of the forum.

Yes, it would appear that we're in a rebuilding mode, but you never know until at least 4-5 games into the regular season what our current edition will look like, especially when we have such a dynamic player like Russell Wilson at quarterback. And the only way we have a new HC next season is if Pete retires or goes back to the colleges.

$35M/3 years isn't such a bad deal. Eric Berry signed a 6 year, $78M with $40M guarateed, and he's the same age as Earl. If Earl bit on 35/3, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Thanks to all the blood letting, we're not in a bad position salary cap wise.

[idhawkman]

I've seen the team pay for older players too many times and have it not pan out. The only SB we have won was with young players, most of them in their first contract term. I think that is where the magic lies. I'd rather not spend the money he is going to demand for another contract. IF he does have that much playing time left, trade him for picks and use those to build the next SB squad.

Plus I really dislike the appeal to the fans to gang up against JS to make a deal. I know it is done and a common practice but I don't think he needed to do it.

[NorthHawk]

**Trade Alert**
Here's what we do for sh*** and giggles since there's nothing else going on at this time of year.
Trade ET and a mid round pick to the Cowboys for Zach Martin (who is also holding out for more money).
Sign S Eric Reid to a friendly deal. He's had no offers so far, so he might sign for a lower price than his worth.
This improves our OL and although we lose some talent at S, it can still be a solid unit.
The Cowboys drafted more OL this year and they have depth there so they can compensate for their loss up front and they get an All Pro who knows Richard's system to a tee and shores up their Secondary.

[HumanCockroach]

I've seen the team pay for older players too many times and have it not pan out. The only SB we have won was with young players, most of them in their first contract term. I think that is where the magic lies. I'd rather not spend the money he is going to demand for another contract. IF he does have that much playing time left, trade him for picks and use those to build the next SB squad.

Plus I really dislike the appeal to the fans to gang up against JS to make a deal. I know it is done and a common practice but I don't think he needed to do it.

Sure, it isn't like any other team signed aging players and won SBs...

[HumanCockroach]

**Trade Alert**
Here's what we do for sh*** and giggles since there's nothing else going on at this time of year.
Trade ET and a mid round pick to the Cowboys for Zach Martin (who is also holding out for more money).
Sign S Eric Reid to a friendly deal. He's had no offers so far, so he might sign for a lower price than his worth.
This improves our OL and although we lose some talent at S, it can still be a solid unit.
The Cowboys drafted more OL this year and they have depth there so they can compensate for their loss up front and they get an All Pro who knows Richard's system to a tee and shores up their Secondary.

Perfect, they can lose majority of their games 52 to 28...

If you had said Brown, and multiple high round picks I would have agreed whole heartedly, idea is to improve as much as possible, the idea that a single offensive lineman no matter how good, cures the entire offense, ......or at least more than the loss of the most key player on the entire team, doesn't seem sound....

[NorthHawk]

Perfect, they can lose majority of their games 52 to 28...

If you had said Brown, and multiple high round picks I would have agreed whole heartedly, idea is to improve as much as possible, the idea that a single offensive lineman no matter how good, cures the entire offense, ......or at least more than the loss of the most key player on the entire team, doesn't seem sound....

Nobody said that trade would cure the entire Offense. It would shore up the middle of the OL and you build from the inside out.
I think ET is gone. If not by trade, then by holdout so we might as well face it now and make the necessary changes.

[HumanCockroach]

Or they can be smart, and pay the man a competitive wage based on his performance and value... there's that option as well....

Might as well trade Wagner and Wilson while your at it, they're both going to want to be compensated in line with top players at their positions as well... lol...

IF the premise is to trade for a player, who ALSO wants a similar salary, I'm entirely baffled why you would? Then burn a draft pick as well, for the privilege of paying a less vital player the same amount? That seems to be moving backwards to me.

[idhawkman]

I've seen the team pay for older players too many times and have it not pan out. The only SB we have won was with young players, most of them in their first contract term. I think that is where the magic lies. I'd rather not spend the money he is going to demand for another contract. IF he does have that much playing time left, trade him for picks and use those to build the next SB squad.

Plus I really dislike the appeal to the fans to gang up against JS to make a deal. I know it is done and a common practice but I don't think he needed to do it.

Sure, it isn't like any other team signed aging players and won SBs...

The key there is "Other Teams". Our team has never done it and I don't really care about other teams. Like you, I don't and have never played in Fantasy football so I have no desire to look at what other teams are doing. The winning formula for this team is young, fast players.

[trents]

My concern is not Thomas's skill set at this stage of his career. My concern is his attitude. I'm just not sure it's where it ought to be after the departure of his defensive buddies. I think that plays into this hold out thing and his contract dissatisfaction. And there's even more to the equation than that even. I also think it has to do with Pete's style which just seems to mesh better with fresh blood. So as long as he's the coach we might see this carousel of lots of old out and lots of new in every three or four years.

[HumanCockroach]

I'm not sure it's got to be young fast players, it's fast players, Bennett lost a step, that was by injury, but the twitch was gone, Sherm coming off Achilles... that's going to affect speed ( I disagree with giving him a chip to stick it to Seattle, but ultimately I understand the move) Thomas hasn't shown any regression in that regard, and honestly last season eased arguably his best year in the league....

Again I'll point out that if that was the recipe, than guys like Lynch wouldn't have been in Seattle when their highest level of success occurred, nor would have Unger, Giacomini, etc... Wagner, Wright, Wilson, Baldwin wouldn't belong now either....

Youth can be good, but those teams success hinged on some experienced players as well... there imho needs to be a balance, and simply don't see value in becoming a team entirely filled with young players, if experienced players are returning at a HOF level... don't care if he's Ray Lewis or a rookie, I want results first and foremost. Thomas still gets results, so imo you PAY him for the results he gets UNTIL he no longer gives you those results...

[trents]

But Wagner, Wilson and other vets still here buy into Pete's party line and still also have skill levels that are not yet in decline. Plus their contracts as far as I know are settled for a few years.

[HumanCockroach]

They buy into the system and Thomas doesn't? I'm still waiting for someone to give me an example of Thomas ' " decline" to date no one's been capable of doing so....

So while those two points might be valid, I don't see anything what so ever that gives examples of that, barring conjecture, speculation and feelings, those aren't anything I've witnessed occurring..... Thomas had perhaps his best season as a pro, in a defense that was decimated by injury, what about that says "declining" ? As for " buying in" where has he said he didn't? I haven't seen it.

[idhawkman]

I am pretty sure that Wilson, Baldwin, Wagner, Unger, etc were on their first contract when we won the SuperBowl. Giacomini was gone in the off season and I think he was on his second contract. Lynch was on his second contract after being picked up from Buffalo. My point being is that they all may have had individual better years than that but the TEAM's best year was with new players to this system. Giacomini and Lynch were still in their first contract with this team.

This will be Thomas' 3rd contract. I just don't see that being a good thing when we know that players get tired of the Rah-Rah from Carroll. His attitude can (not that it has) spoil and then infect the attitudes of the younger players. Holding out for a new contract before the existing one expires is an indicator of his attitude changing in my book not to mention his thoughts of retirement after breaking a leg. I had the same stance on Kam (whose jersey I own) when he pulled his holdout crap.

If he wants a new long term contract, play hard this year and prove you are truly with this team, otherwise trade him and get what you can for him.

[Seahawks4Ever]

Maybe watching his friend and team mate and fellow founder of the LOB get ran out of town on a rail after injuring his ankle and missing the first games in his career. All of a sudden it was suggested that he had already "lost a step" BEFORE he was injured. That was B.S. and everybody knows it.

ET knows that should he get hurt BEFORE the start of the regular season that he could actually get CUT. So, why wouldn't get EVERYTHING he can get UP FRONT???

[RiverDog]

My concern is not Thomas's skill set at this stage of his career. My concern is his attitude. I'm just not sure it's where it ought to be after the departure of his defensive buddies. I think that plays into this hold out thing and his contract dissatisfaction. And there's even more to the equation than that even. I also think it has to do with Pete's style which just seems to mesh better with fresh blood. So as long as he's the coach we might see this carousel of lots of old out and lots of new in every three or four years.

We'll have to wait and see what ET's demands are. He's worth every penny of what Eric Berry got, which was an average of $13M/year but it was for 6 years, which I doubt that we will be willing to go much longer than 3 years, 4 at the most. So if he comes in with something comparable to Berry's yearly average minus the 6 year term, I think that would be a reasonable offer for both sides. If Earl's demands exceed that, then it could very well turn into a redux of Kam's holdout and then it would hurt team morale.

Whether we sign him to an extension or trade him, it needs to happen before training camp.

[HumanCockroach]

All I read there ID is be stupid, ignore that a career can end on a routine tackle, cut, or movement, and throw caution to the wind and pray that either A) it doesn't happen to you ..or B) pray that if you do get injured, Seattle for some reason, despite a NFL history, and their OWN history, will honor THEIR contract? AND will give him 12 to 13m a year if he blows out his acl like Sherman did? ( think we know the answer to that).... truth is, a player has very little leverage, and a holdout is pretty much the ONLY thing they can realistically use.

Ultimately, the players are independent contractors, I don't know of a single independent contractor that does a job without certain guarantees... that's not a sour or bad attitude, it's intelligent, well thought out business... he's the product, you know of another business that risks the entirety of their product based on "loyalty" ......or sells said product when in demand for pennies on the dollar?

I certainly don't... I don't lambast employees for asking for a raise, when their performance and dedication isn't paralleled, why would I for ET? This entire thought process that players should live up to the fulfillment of a contract that's worthless before the ink dries absolutely baffles me and will until the day I die... until owners are held to the same standards of players, I'll never, complain about a holdout. It's hypocracy in its truest form.

[idhawkman]

All I read there ID is be stupid, ignore that a career can end on a routine tackle, cut, or movement, and throw caution to the wind and pray that either A) it doesn't happen to you ..or B) pray that if you do get injured, Seattle for some reason, despite a NFL history, and their OWN history, will honor THEIR contract? AND will give him 12 to 13m a year if he blows out his acl like Sherman did? ( think we know the answer to that).... truth is, a player has very little leverage, and a holdout is pretty much the ONLY thing they can realistically use.

Ultimately, the players are independent contractors, I don't know of a single independent contractor that does a job without certain guarantees... that's not a sour or bad attitude, it's intelligent, well thought out business... he's the product, you know of another business that risks the entirety of their product based on "loyalty" ......or sells said product when in demand for pennies on the dollar?

I certainly don't... I don't lambast employees for asking for a raise, when their performance and dedication isn't paralleled, why would I for ET? This entire thought process that players should live up to the fulfillment of a contract that's worthless before the ink dries absolutely baffles me and will until the day I die... until owners are held to the same standards of players, I'll never, complain about a holdout. It's hypocracy in its truest form.

So in your response you start out stating he's a contractor and then you say he's an employee asking for a raise. In the real business world, an employee can ask for a raise at any time and the owner can say yes or no. They are free to quit and find work somewhere else or stay and work at their wage. A contractor that signs a contract however, can be taken to court and forced to perform to the agreed upon terms of the contract. NFL players are neither of these in the true sense of the situation. His value to the team is not worth $13M for 3 or more years IMO.

[burrrton]

NFL players are neither of these in the true sense of the situation.

This, and the silly "OH BUT THE TEAM DOESN'T HAVE TO HONOR THE CONTRACT?!?" stuff ignores that the player making the team is part of the contract. Generally speaking, the contract allows the team to look at the player's value (cost vs performance, etc) every year and decide if they're worth it. When they're not, they're cut, or traded, or whatever.

If they don't want the team to retain that flexibility, they're perfectly free to negotiate guarantees in (as many players do!) and/or otherwise structure it so they remain a good value (taking a pay cut if their performance declines, etc).

I can't figure out why so many people think the privilege of playing in the NFL means players shouldn't remain subject to the same ups and downs the rest of us deal with.

He's worth every penny of what Eric Berry got, which was an average of $13M/year but it was for 6 years, which I doubt that we will be willing to go much longer than 3 years, 4 at the most.

This is where I come down, too. He's still arguably the best FS in the game, so let's get him a contract that both pays him accordingly ($13M-ish?) and protects the team (2-3 years?).

[idhawkman]

This, and the silly "OH BUT THE TEAM DOESN'T HAVE TO HONOR THE CONTRACT?!?" stuff ignores that the player making the team is part of the contract. Generally speaking, the contract allows the team to look at the player's value (cost vs performance, etc) every year and decide if they're worth it. When they're not, they're cut, or traded, or whatever.

If they don't want the team to retain that flexibility, they're perfectly free to negotiate guarantees in (as many players do!) and/or otherwise structure it so they remain a good value (taking a pay cut if their performance declines, etc).

I can't figure out why so many people think the privilege of playing in the NFL means players shouldn't remain subject to the same ups and downs the rest of us deal with.

I don't disagree that he has the right to hold out for more money, most likely huge guarantees and signing bonus which costs the team a huge amount of cap space if he does get cut/hurt/or whatever before the end of his contract. My position is that he's not worth that risk.

[HumanCockroach]

Lol... I'm a contractor, pleeeeeeaaaaasssseeee enlighten me about how I'm not an employee. That can leave at any time, refuse to work if I want, demand a wage increase, join a competitor or be sued if I choose any of the above options....

Then by all means please tell me about how contacts are strictly adhered to by employers... I'd absolutely love to hear how it works in the "real world " since I clearly just don't get it. I mean sure I've only been doing it for over 2 decades, but I clearly haven't a clue how contract work is applied outside of sports, or how contracts can't be renegotiated at any time....

Lmao...

[obiken]

[/quote]I don't disagree that he has the right to hold out for more money, most likely huge guarantees and signing bonus which costs the team a huge amount of cap space if he does get cut/hurt/or whatever before the end of his contract. My position is that he's not worth that risk.[/quote]

He has no right to hold out, he can if he wants, but he leaves a boatload of cash on the table if he does. I would sign him, then trade him as fast as possible, clear the decks, you will have to in 2 or 3 years anyway.

[NorthHawk]

I don't disagree that he has the right to hold out for more money, most likely huge guarantees and signing bonus which costs the team a huge amount of cap space if he does get cut/hurt/or whatever before the end of his contract. My position is that he's not worth that risk.[/quote]

He has no right to hold out, he can if he wants, but he leaves a boatload of cash on the table if he does. I would sign him, then trade him as fast as possible, clear the decks, you will have to in 2 or 3 years anyway.[/quote]

I think that's why some are advocating a 3 year extension. It helps protect the Seahawks but gives him more money.

[HumanCockroach]

Of course he has that right, if he didn't, he couldn't do it. Lol

Zero laws I'm aware of that makes it illegal to walk away from a paycheck.

[Aseahawkfan]

I don't disagree that he has the right to hold out for more money, most likely huge guarantees and signing bonus which costs the team a huge amount of cap space if he does get cut/hurt/or whatever before the end of his contract. My position is that he's not worth that risk.

One of the most valuable members of the defense with speed and instincts of a Pro Bowl Hall of Famer isn't worth the risk. You would rather risk some younger, unproven guy and losing hoping you find another generational talent like Earl? Hmmmm. Not sure your risk assessment is smart NFL roster management.

[idhawkman]

I don't disagree that he has the right to hold out for more money, most likely huge guarantees and signing bonus which costs the team a huge amount of cap space if he does get cut/hurt/or whatever before the end of his contract. My position is that he's not worth that risk.

One of the most valuable members of the defense with speed and instincts of a Pro Bowl Hall of Famer isn't worth the risk. You would rather risk some younger, unproven guy and losing hoping you find another generational talent like Earl? Hmmmm. Not sure your risk assessment is smart NFL roster management.

Its more than just the risk Asea. As I've previously stated, players get tired of Carroll's coaching and stories and this team seems to do better with younger players that can be Rah-Rah'd.

[HumanCockroach]

So to be clear, ID then you would be for dumping, Wilson, Wagner, KJ, and Baldwin as well right?

[idhawkman]

So to be clear, ID then you would be for dumping, Wilson, Wagner, KJ, and Baldwin as well right?

At the end of their current (2nd) contract , yes. I may consider keeping Wilson since QBs have more longevity than any other position but it would depend on the wear and tear on Wilson by that time.

[Aseahawkfan]

Its more than just the risk Asea. As I've previously stated, players get tired of Carroll's coaching and stories and this team seems to do better with younger players that can be Rah-Rah'd.

This stupid idea again? Players do well because they have talent and get paid, not because of Carroll's stories and motivating speeches. If Rah-rah crap mattered, then the NFL would be full of coaches doing that type of coaching. Pete's an expert at teaching the game and teaching players how to win, not rah-rahing. Earl plays well. He's not going to show up and start slacking if he's paid.

Roster management and coaching is about finding great talent and putting them in a position to succeed through scheme and planning. All this other stuff is just bunk someone brings up when things aren't working as expected or desired. A coach won't succeed if the talent isn't there no matter how effective a motivator they are.

[RiverDog]

This stupid idea again? Players do well because they have talent and get paid, not because of Carroll's stories and motivating speeches. If Rah-rah crap mattered, then the NFL would be full of coaches doing that type of coaching. Pete's an expert at teaching the game and teaching players how to win, not rah-rahing. Earl plays well. He's not going to show up and start slacking if he's paid.

You're going to be surprised with me, ASF. I agree 100%.

Pete has succeeded here because he's one of the best defensive minds in the current era. His system is organic in that it can heal thyself. He has a keen eye for defensive talent that's unrivaled. I don't think that his rah-rah college style (for lack of a better description) of motivation helped him a lot in creating the team that gave us our only Lombardi and nearly made it two in a row.

I do, however, feel that his rah rah motivational style is one of the things that hindered him from being able to keep things together. As Sherman and others indicated, that type of management style has a shelf life.

[idhawkman]

Time will tell whether Earl has another contract in him or not and whether it is here or not.

[NorthHawk]

The only concern I have is wear and tear.
He's played 8 seasons and almost a full season of playoff football.
That takes a lot out of players. Maybe he's an exception, but his game is built on speed and that can decline pretty quickly.
Mgmt has to decide if a long term contract is in the teams best interest. Maybe they've seen some signs of him having reached
the top and see him as now at the start of a decline. With the Cap situation we got into last year, does mgmt risk repeating it
with another star? I don't know the answers, but the older he gets, the higher the risk and at some point the money he's asking
for will exceed the risk.
If he gets a 4 year extension, he will be 33 at the end of it. We don't know if he will be like Darrell Green and still retain his speed,
or if he will be like most others after 30 and lose that fine edge that separates him from others. If he starts to lose it, does it
happen at 31 or 32, or will it be obvious only in his last year? That's all part of the risk section of the equation in determining
his future value.
Couple that with a very weak Safety environment with both Vaccaro and Reid not getting offers, and his value would seem to
be somewhat limited. Perhaps his current contract and Berry's were the last of the big money spent on Safety's for a while.

There might be a way out of this like others have suggested and that's a shorter term contract. Maybe sweeten this years deal
by a couple of million and extend for 2 more years at a higher rate than today. That gives the team more Cap flexibility and can
maybe entice him to sign on. At 32, both sides will have a better idea of what the future will hold.

[idhawkman]

The only concern I have is wear and tear.
He's played 8 seasons and almost a full season of playoff football.
That takes a lot out of players. Maybe he's an exception, but his game is built on speed and that can decline pretty quickly.
Mgmt has to decide if a long term contract is in the teams best interest. Maybe they've seen some signs of him having reached
the top and see him as now at the start of a decline. With the Cap situation we got into last year, does mgmt risk repeating it
with another star? I don't know the answers, but the older he gets, the higher the risk and at some point the money he's asking
for will exceed the risk.
If he gets a 4 year extension, he will be 33 at the end of it. We don't know if he will be like Darrell Green and still retain his speed,
or if he will be like most others after 30 and lose that fine edge that separates him from others. If he starts to lose it, does it
happen at 31 or 32, or will it be obvious only in his last year? That's all part of the risk section of the equation in determining
his future value.
Couple that with a very weak Safety environment with both Vaccaro and Reid not getting offers, and his value would seem to
be somewhat limited. Perhaps his current contract and Berry's were the last of the big money spent on Safety's for a while.

There might be a way out of this like others have suggested and that's a shorter term contract. Maybe sweeten this years deal
by a couple of million and extend for 2 more years at a higher rate than today. That gives the team more Cap flexibility and can
maybe entice him to sign on. At 32, both sides will have a better idea of what the future will hold.

I thought about Darrell Green playing his 21 years or so but he was a CB, not a safety. DG didn't do a lot of hard full speed hits like ET has done (Green would never have broken Gronk like ET did).

If the team signs ET to a 4 year contract, he'll only play 3 of them before holding out for another contract since that is now his M.O. so he'd be 32 on his next contract.