NorthHawk wrote:They signed a few top players on Defense in the last year that will skew the numbers to a degree.
When Wilson is signed it should start to even out a little, but this team is Defense focused so it will probably always be in favor of the Defense.
What would it look like if Harvin was still here and Wilson is re-signed? I suspect it would be even closer.
mykc14 wrote:What is so interesting about that?
Anthony wrote:
The point was that while I knew we spent more on Defense than Offense I was not aware it was that big a difference, and While I agree resigning Wilson will make it closer the cap also goes up and they will resign Wagner so odds are the number next year will look like this, with Wilson getting 22 mil and Wagner 8 mil. The talent or lack there of on offense reflects this gap.
61.9 Mil on offense, 74.7 mil
That is still a big gap. To me it is interesting, especially since Wilson can now be resigned. Will he want to sign with a team that puts so little value on offense, specifically the passing game, when he wants to be the best QB ever. Right now probably will, but if we win another SB maybe not. That is all and you can bet Wilson knows about this or at least his agent does. That's all just interesting to me. While someone of you might disagree lets not fool ourselves, without Wilson this offense does nothing at all.
mykc14 wrote:
Like I mentioned before you really need to add Harvin's cap number next year to that (6 or 7 mil) and the numbers suddenly get much closer (using your numbers): 68 mil to 74 mil. And that is before they have even signed anybody else and again, wouldn't you expect the NFL's Best Defense to have more money spent on it than the offense?
HumanCockroach wrote:IMHO your missing the boat on this. There are 6 players playing on the offense in their first contracts, while the defense has multiple second contract players that have already been resigned. Sherman, Thomas, Wright, Mebane, Avril all were recently signed, with Wagner due an extension as well. This has zero to do with " how much they are investing in defense" and everything to do with WHEN those players were able to be extended. Kearse, Willson,Sweezy,Britt,Richardson,Norwood,Wilson ALL are on first contracts and ALL of them are "limited" to those contracts by the NFL not the Seahawks.
You keep attempting to create a storyline by which the Hawks "ignore" the offense, and that story is make believe. UNTIL players can be extended ( and perform at a level for a large extension, like Wilson) there is going to be the discrepency. If you want to aimlessly throw money at players that's your deal, thank the lord it isn't the Seahawks front office's thing.
Anthony wrote:
1 if you look to the left they do take into account dead money
.
Anthony wrote:everything else they do on offense is on the cheap, and the one time you could argue they did not go cheap it was a miserable failure. The reality is it is no make believe they do ignore the offense, 3 years line is no better, 3 years no big or #1 wr. That's ignoring or at worst being un successful.
mykc14 wrote:
I am sorry you are just wrong. PC and JS have used their first 1st pick in the draft on OL or WR EVERY YEAR except 1. Every f-ing year. In their 5 drafts, if you look at their first 2 picks (so that would be 10 total draft choices) they have used 7 on the O (with 6 being OL or WR). How you can't understand that they are not ignoring those positions or throwing resources at them is beyond me. They have used 70% of their first 2 picks per draft on offense. Because you are so obsessed with this concept where exactly do you want them to improve the OL? Lets look at it position by position: LT Do you want them to sign a premier LT? If so who and how much would that cost? Should they draft a LT. I am pretty sure there are no franchise quality LT's being drafted with the 32nd pick. RG, although Carp has played decent this year that could be upgraded, but again at what cost $ or what cost another first round pick? Center, RG, RT same questions. The point is they are not in a position to easily upgrade their OL, especially when it is such a good RBlocking unit. IMO the biggest issue with the OL has been health. If you were to get a healthy season of Okung, Carp, Unger, Sweezy, and Britt next year you would have a very good NFL OL, IMO.
Anthony wrote:
Notice the word Successful? That is the key my point is the FO is very very good at finding top defensive talent, but when it comes to oline and WR yeah not so much,. You forgot the key word Successful.
But hey on second thought you are right all is right and great on offense, who needs to improve on offense. The offense is just fine, great world class. Just keep trying, forget about succeeding as long as they are trying, even if it fails that is okay, heck we are winning, for now.
mykc14 wrote:This is exactly my point. In the past you have said they haven't used the same resources on the O as the D, in fact that was the whole point of this thread. I showed you where they have used some of their most precious resources on the OL and WR. Now you are arguing that they have tried but haven't been successful. So your plan is to throw more resources at those positions when we haven't been successful at drafting/trading/signing FA there in the first place? Again, who on the OL do you want to replace? All of them? Who on the D should we not have signed to afford these players (ET, Sherm, Kam, KJ, Avril, Bennett)? Should we not re-sign our All-Pro LB Bobby Wagner to upgrade some area of the OL? As far as your remark about them being in the 20's when they were all healthy I would argue that was very, very early in the season. I would submit that they would look much better now, if all had been healthy all year and Britt with a full season under his belt.
I have been saying for a long time that we need a true #1 receiver. They tried to get Harvin, and failed. I have also been hoping that somehow Dez gets out of Dallas and we can sign him. My point has always been that in the salary cap era of the NFL we can't have the best everything and you aren't going to be able to sign everybody. We have the best D in the league and I wouldn't want to mess with that too much, would you?
But when you have that big a difference in what you defensive and offensive payroll is, says a lot. Yes I know that it will change son, but they have had 3 years of it at this level,
HumanCockroach wrote: http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/seattle-seahawks/
That isn't accurate, not in the least. Same site from the SB winning year shows more money spent on offense than defense Anthony, not the other way around, you want to complain about how the money was spent, be my guest, but please stop making stuff up to create a backstory for why Wilson is going to leave.
HumanCockroach wrote:Yep, offensive spending was higher last season. Resigned this year on defense, Sherman, Thomas, Wright,Avril, and Bennett. Resigned on offense, Baldwin. Isn't rocket science, and exactly coincides with when and how a player will be paid. Would you be happier if the Seahawks were overpaying for Carpenter and Britt ( as would have been the case a few short reasons ago) Wilson for the love of god is woefully underpaid, and there isn't a damn thing Seattle could or can do about it.
If you think that has nothing to do with the disparity, your insane.
briwas101 wrote:Here's how it is:
The Hawks HAVE devoted both a lot of money as well as Draft picks to both the offensive line and WR corp. As an example, they had the most expensive offensive line in the conference or entire nfl one or two years ago. They have used early picks on offensive line. The Hawks have also spent Draft picks and big money on WRs, as evidenced by Sidney Rice and Harvin becoming the most over - paid and least - productive wr duo in nfl history. They have used early picks on WR, including the one wasted on Harvin.
The Hawks have spent lots of money and Draft picks on wide receivers and offensive linemen. The problem is that it was almost always on the wrong players. That has been the problem. For as good as they have been on defense, that's how bad they have been with wide receiver and offensive line. I dare you guys to find one GM who has wasted more resources on wide receiver busts than Schneider in the last few years. The Hawks have been epically bad at finding a #1 wr.
Thank God for that defense and that little man named Russell Wilson
and all Seahawks fans who heard and agreed said?Thank God for that defense and that little man named Russell Wilson
briwas101 wrote:Here's how it is:
The Hawks HAVE devoted both a lot of money as well as Draft picks to both the offensive line and WR corp. As an example, they had the most expensive offensive line in the conference or entire nfl one or two years ago. They have used early picks on offensive line. The Hawks have also spent Draft picks and big money on WRs, as evidenced by Sidney Rice and Harvin becoming the most over - paid and least - productive wr duo in nfl history. They have used early picks on WR, including the one wasted on Harvin.
The Hawks have spent lots of money and Draft picks on wide receivers and offensive linemen. The problem is that it was almost always on the wrong players. That has been the problem. For as good as they have been on defense, that's how bad they have been with wide receiver and offensive line. I dare you guys to find one GM who has wasted more resources on wide receiver busts than Schneider in the last few years. The Hawks have been epically bad at finding a #1 wr.
Thank God for that defense and that little man named Russell Wilson
Anthony wrote:If I were Wilson and I am sure his agent has said this, I would be hesitant to resign here.
briwas101 wrote: The Hawks have been epically bad at finding a #1 wr.
obiken wrote:We trade up and give up Wilson, we get Marcus Mariota, and we continue to march with a new cap. Oregon my Alama Mater we guard the on and on!! Hee hee!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests