Aseahawkfan wrote: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.
jshawaii22 wrote: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.
idhawkman wrote: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 wrote:**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....
idhawkman wrote: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.
HumanCockroach wrote:
Sure, it isn't like any other team signed aging players and won SBs...
trents wrote: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 wrote: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.
NFL players are neither of these in the true sense of the situation.
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.
burrrton wrote:
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.[/quote]obiken wrote:
idhawkman wrote: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.
idhawkman wrote: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.
Aseahawkfan wrote:
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.
HumanCockroach wrote:So to be clear, ID then you would be for dumping, Wilson, Wagner, KJ, and Baldwin as well right?
idhawkman wrote: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.
Aseahawkfan wrote: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.
NorthHawk wrote: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.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests