HumanCockroach wrote:Also not a hardline, as they have indeed extended players that are a no show for team activities.
PC's statement today was a pretty hardline. "Earl should be here!"
HumanCockroach wrote:Also not a hardline, as they have indeed extended players that are a no show for team activities.
Marshawn Lynch's holdout from Seattle Seahawks camp is over.
The star running back was present at the team facility Thursday, ending a one-week holdout.
NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport reported the Seahawks moved money around in Lynch's existing contract to end the stalemate, according to a source who has seen the deal.
Lynch had been set to make $5 million this year with $500,000 in per-game roster bonuses and another $500,000 in incentives. The Seahawks rolled that $1 million bonus and incentive money into his base salary and added $500,000 that had been bookmarked to Lynch for 2015. All told, Lynch's base has been bumped from $5 million to $6.5 million
HumanCockroach wrote:I was under the impression it was wk 8 of the regular season....
HumanCockroach wrote:Kam came back week 4 I think. Brown came back week 8 against Seattle after his holdout last season... it's week 8... i'm positive.
HumanCockroach wrote:Good enough Bob?
HumanCockroach wrote:Eh, mans making a business decision. Seattle don't want him, promise somebody else does. Unfortunate situation. Seattle gets significantly worse. The "re boot" talk can go out the window, the word is full rebuild.
Without him my prediction changes from 7-9 to 9-7 to 5-11 to 7-9... to bad, but hopefully this rebuild won't waste Wilson's career years like it did Kennedy, Jones, Warner, Largent etc.
NorthHawk wrote:A few years ago we didn't know much about Chancellor or Sherman, so maybe there is someone we haven't seen much of who's going to surprise us.
idhawkman wrote:I don't recall who it was they were talking about but I think it may have been Thorpe when they said he had the most INTs in camp than any other player. We'll see if he can unseat Griffin or Maxy.
NorthHawk wrote:A few years ago we didn't know much about Chancellor or Sherman, so maybe there is someone we haven't seen much of who's going to surprise us.
HumanCockroach wrote:Maybe, but that's prayer, not realistic expectation. Holding to hope is fine. Maybe several magical all pro players suddenly appear, it's possible, if unlikely. I don't base my opinion or assessments on hope. I base it on evaluation of the players play. I've seen 0 that leads me to believe there's a hidden Sherman, Chancellor. Bennett, Avrill, or Thomas currently residing on the team.
Perhaps a rookie surprises, but honestly, while not a lot was known about Sherman. Chancellor, Thomas, Bennett etc... it didn't take a long time to see it. Sherman was apparent ( at least to me) game #1 during the preseason his rookie year, Thomas the same. I didn't feel the same about Chancellor ( mediocre coverage skills. Something that never changed) ultimately believed they would use him same way as Milloy which didn't happen. Bennett was one of the last players cut for a reason, and Seattle had hoped to retain him on the practice squad. He flashed immediately.
That all said, 90% of the young players, have already been residing in Seattle for a full season already, seeing the field, playing due to injuries, or in rare cases starting. Nothing I've seen to date makes me believe any of them are the caliber of the players listed ( even when they were rookies).
Like I said, nothing wrong with hoping, just don't see it
Earl was in a much different boat than Sherman and Chancellor. He was a consensus first round pick and the #2 player at his position (Eric Berry was the top rated safety that year). Although I don't think anyone expected the HOF career that we got out of him, being that he was the #13 overall it was reasonable to expect that he'd at least become a solid starter. Chancellor and Sherman were taken much later, Sherman late enough to where one could reasonably expect him to be nothing more than training camp fodder. Earl took to Pete's defense like a duck takes to water. His impact was immediate. He covered so much territory back there that it allowed Sherman and Chancellor to blossom.
The last player I celebrated that we drafted was Aaron Curry. Is it any wonder why I don't spin cartwheels over our draft picks anymore?
mykc14 wrote:="idhawkman"]
I don't recall who it was they were talking about but I think it may have been Thorpe when they said he had the most INTs in camp than any other player. We'll see if he can unseat Griffin or Maxy.
HumanCockroach wrote:Um... obi Sherm was a corner coming out of college under Harbaugh.... Pete didn't "convert" him.
And I certainly never saw Seattle waiver in the case of Chancellor.... he held out to week five, and came back with no new contract, that and unlike Chancellor, ET is actually in his final year, like many before him, Seattle has indeed shown a willingness throughout the current leadership to rework contracts..... at least for players they want.... "core " players..... somehow they've decided ET isn't one, though I'm hard pressed to understand how.
HumanCockroach wrote:I guess, that said, "leadership" matters right? I mean can anyone say having Thomas on the field directing the bevy of mediocre, young, or young and mediocre talent in the defensive backfield would be not preferred to the other option?
Lot of people stoked about Brown resigning SPECIFICALLY because of that, many believe the offense can flourish BECAUSE of Wilson.... etc...
Thomas will not be replaced by anyone on that roster ( and likely in the next decade of drafts) and that is simply performance wise, add in the experience, knowledge and leadership and you've multiplied it exponentially....
Anybody think Maxwell, Griffin or McDougald replaces that??
I certainly don't.
HumanCockroach wrote:I'm simply regurgitating what others have said about Brown ... and on a team with fewer and fewer bonafide leaders, it becomes more, and more difficult to point out who they are ( and obviously specifically signed recently).... the bulk of Seattle has a "leader" of the position groups, I simply referenced two. Whether Brown's play is in my opinion sub standard based on cost, isn't relevant to the discussion. Ultimately, you've got Bobby in LBs, Earl in DBs, Baldwin in receivers, Brown by default in O line,
Maybe ET has soured, I certainly would have if I was him, after watching the moves and decisions made over the last couple seasons, added to the absolutely appalling lack of appreciation amongst the fan base and front office, but regardless, this absolutely could have been avoided entirely, Thomas owns some of the responsibility, but so does the Seattle front office.
c_hawkbob wrote:I don't have a problem with a player holding out. IMO where Earl lost whatever portion of the fan base he's lost (this doesn't include me, I'm still a huge fan) he lost when he ran up to an opposing coach telling them to "come get" him.
HumanCockroach wrote:Treating him as you would any other human that helped accomplish something that has never been done before for a city with a single championship to their name, looking out for himself and his family. Like adults do. Realizing he's a business man, making a business decision, instead of acting like a bunch of jilted girlfriends?
Why stop there, fans did the same to Sherman after he signed in SF, claiming he owed them something, when the FO cut him.
I know it may be hard to grasp for some, but players don't owe us squat. We aren't the ones putting our bodies, health and livelihood on the line, we aren't the ones putting in the work, nor weighing the cost vs. rewards.
As for what I "expect" them to say, probably the same as any contractual employee that is attempting to get a better deal... ie nothing, because it isn't their lives on the line. Certainly not insults.
In the real world, if you have a legally binding contract and don't perform, you get your azz sued for breach of contract.
burrrton wrote:This, and before anyone chimes in with the inevitable "BUT THE TEAM CAN JUST CUT HIM SO HOW IS THAT HONORING THE CONTRACT", the team's right to cut a player, and/or otherwise withold $$, is only within the terms of the contract. They're not breaking anything in deciding a player isn't worth what they're paying him anymore.
The only thing a player is guaranteed is whatever they negotiate into the contract ("guaranteed money"), and the team can't renege on that.
Why some think players should be treated differently than every other employee/contractor in the country baffles me, and further, so does this attitude that their money-earning ability is gone if they're no longer in the NFL.
Look at the NFL for what it is: a voluntary, temporary, highly-lucrative job that a lucky few are hired to do. Yes, it's dangerous, but that's a known factor, and if the money isn't worth the risk, DON'T DO IT (which, to be fair, many players have done!).
When they're no longer able to secure a position, they join the rest of the planet in figuring out how to earn a living (assuming they didn't save enough to retire on at the age of 30-something).
They're not pity cases- quit treating them as such.
NorthHawk wrote:The league permits it to happen and the players are taking advantage of it.
It's just business.
And people wonder why I don't wear jerseys with player's names/numbers.
Users browsing this forum: River_Dog and 3 guests