HawkShack.com

Moving on....

Well 'F' him!

It must not be about winning........
Must be about playing the Vikes twice a year and keeping his family close by in Minn.
Good luck getting a ring in Chicago Mr. Allen, you could have been part of a great team.

I'm OK with this one.....see it was a 4 year deal....they overpaid I am sure and that is what it was gonna take to get him...glad we didn't ....

UPDATE.....4 years, $32 million....

NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport reports the contract is for $32 million, although the contract voids to three years for $24 million. The deal includes $15.5 million in fully guaranteed money. There is a large guaranteed bonus due next March along with fully guaranteed salaries in the first two years. We'd expect this to turn into a two-year deal.

Guessing the Hawks might have been in the range dollar wise, but no way a 4 year deal......I think they were probably offering up a 1 year deal.

JA had to take the security, he has been and is a great player....glad he got what he was looking for, although would have been nice to see him here for the year.

Business decision. A dumb one, but one nonetheless.

I got no problem with it. We put in bid that fit our budget, he took a higher bid from another team. We didn't hurt ourselves by giving in to the temptation to up our bid with money already earmarked, Jared gets to make a couple mil more a year for another playoff contender and the Bears now have a scary pass rush. Everybody wins.

That's how this free agency thing works.

And let this be the final nail in the coffin of the "A player would take less money from a championship quality team to pursue a Superbowl ring" theory.

I have seen this theory on boards and in articles a lot over the past two months. However as expected (see this years free agency as evidence) the players are always going to choose the cash (with a rare exception here and there).

No issues with players choosing the money- their careers are short, there lifespan should be 40 - 50 more years after they retire - they need to grab as much cash as they can during their short window of opportunity.

Now if there are two or more offers that are substantially equal and one of the offers is from a team with an excellent chance of competing for a Superbowl - will then that opportunity to win a Superbowl could give the team an edge and be a deciding factor in a players choice as to which offer to accept.

But like the outcome of any auction, a player will almost always choose to sign with the highest bidder.

savvyman wrote:And let this be the final nail in the coffin of the "A player would take less money from a championship quality team to pursue a Superbowl ring" theory.

I have seen this theory on boards and in articles a lot over the past two months. However as expected (see this years free agency as evidence) the players are always going to choose the cash (with a rare exception here and there).

No issues with players choosing the money- their careers are short, there lifespan should be 40 - 50 more years after they retire - they need to grab as much cash as they can during their short window of opportunity.

Now if there are two or more offers that are substantially equal and one of the offers is from a team with an excellent chance of competing for a Superbowl - will then that opportunity to win a Superbowl could give the team an edge and be a deciding factor in a players choice as to which offer to accept.

But like the outcome of any auction, a player will almost always choose to sign with the highest bidder.

Sorry but I can't get there from here. I think it's a consideration for some, less so for others, but to call it a non-factor on the evidence of this example is just not accurate.

It's exaggerated but it's to say it's not a factor is ridiculous. The Raiders had 65 million in cap room this off season. Remind me what great free agents they were able to sign with that insane amount of money?

Michael Bennett took less money to play in Seattle over the same Chicago team even though he could have been playing with his brother. Sounds like winning means something to someone.

Venice_Hawk wrote:It must not be about winning........
Must be about playing the Vikes twice a year and keeping his family close by in Minn.
Good luck getting a ring in Chicago Mr. Allen, you could have been part of a great team.

Actually, when you think about it, given what the Bears were reportedly offering, I'd say it was about BOTH winning and getting paid.
Reports were that Seattle was offering a two year deal, at around 6-7 mil.
Bears clearly paid a lot more, more guaranteed, and more years, AND they have a decent team, which has a legit chance to make the playoffs this year.
Let's not forget too, he wanted a lot of playing time, and the Seahawks would have been using him far less than he was used with Minn. and will be with the Bears.

All those things together, and really this makes perfect sense.
Really the only thing the Seahawks had on the Bears, and the reason he had such a hard time deciding, was the window of opportunity to win here. Aside from that, the Seahawks offer wasn't really competitive and yet Allen was still obviously tempted by it, just for the chance to win.

Allen went after the money and stayed close (relatively speaking) to where his home is.
You can't blame him for that. At 31, he has very few paydays left so maximizing his income becomes more relevant as you approach retirement.

In one way, I'm a bit relieved because maybe we can take care of ET this year with some of that extra cash. He's said to be a priority to re-sign so now's our chance.

Monkey nailed it.

savvyman wrote:And let this be the final nail in the coffin of the "A player would take less money from a championship quality team to pursue a Superbowl ring" theory.

I have seen this theory on boards and in articles a lot over the past two months. However as expected (see this years free agency as evidence) the players are always going to choose the cash (with a rare exception here and there).

No issues with players choosing the money- their careers are short, there lifespan should be 40 - 50 more years after they retire - they need to grab as much cash as they can during their short window of opportunity.

Now if there are two or more offers that are substantially equal and one of the offers is from a team with an excellent chance of competing for a Superbowl - will then that opportunity to win a Superbowl could give the team an edge and be a deciding factor in a players choice as to which offer to accept.

But like the outcome of any auction, a player will almost always choose to sign with the highest bidder.

Like Bob, I cannot go there either.
First, Allen was clearly VERY tempted by the Seahawks who weren't offering even a competitive offer. The ONLY thing the Seahawks had going was the bigger window of opportunity to win.
The Bears were willing to pay more, give him more playing time (a HUGE consideration for Allen BTW!) AND have a relatively decent chance to make the playoffs next year.

This wasn't a straight up money vs. chance to win a ring thing, but, even if it had been, it would not necessarily be representative of how every player everywhere thinks.

I'm kinda bummed we didnt land Allen, I was looking forward to watching him at the Clink fly off the edge at the Clink. I'm happy he received what he thought was fair.

It's going to be interesting to see what have with Williams and Hill. I guess I'm optimistic the FO likes what we have inside and will allow Bennett more time on the edge with Avril and Irving. Mayowa? Who knows he may end up being the guy.

Apparently the Bears came in with an offer at the last minute giving him the numbers that were close enough.
That's the way things go in FA.

I think the FO will pick up a DE cheap later in free agency to pair with Avril, Mayowa, Suggs and Bennett ( ala Bennet Avril deals last season) maybe a Phillips or something, don't think Irvin is going to play on that line much, of at all, he is going to play a LB spot IMO, nothing I've read points to that not being the case.

He got the contract he wanted.

The end.

Honestly I would be surprised to not see DE players lining up for a chance to "upgrade" their status in the league later in the offseason. Playing in Seattle provides a rare opportunity for either young guys not viewed as great pass rushers, or older players that many feel don't have the speed necessary to continue. Playing in Seattle increases a DE's ability to improve his numbers. The "jump" they get in Seattle, as well as the extra time to get to the QB matters, would be surprised if players out their don't realise it.

Wasn't huge on Allen to begin with, much rather they find a young guy on a short term inexpensive contract. Not opposed to bringing back Schofield, or drafting a speed rusher in the mid to late rounds, or even rolling with Scruggs and Mayowa getting increased time. IMO playing on that D-line improves success in Seattle over a majority of teams in the NFL.

HumanCockroach wrote:Honestly I would be surprised to not see DE players lining up for a chance to "upgrade" their status in the league later in the offseason. Playing in Seattle provides a rare opportunity for either young guys not viewed as great pass rushers, or older players that many feel don't have the speed necessary to continue. Playing in Seattle increases a DE's ability to improve his numbers. The "jump" they get in Seattle, as well as the extra time to get to the QB matters, would be surprised if players out their don't realise it.

Wasn't huge on Allen to begin with, much rather they find a young guy on a short term inexpensive contract. Not opposed to bringing back Schofield, or drafting a speed rusher in the mid to late rounds, or even rolling with Scruggs and Mayowa getting increased time. IMO playing on that D-line improves success in Seattle over a majority of teams in the NFL.

They may line up, but Pete is particular in what he wants so even if a lot of players want to come here there may be a small pool of acceptable potential applicants.
That said, maybe we can get the top picks of the litter (so to speak).
It's a good position to be in.

It might be a blessing in disguise. We'll be able to carry over what ever it was we were going to pay Allen and use it to resign our Big 3, which is a much higher priority.

As far as Allen's decision goes, I disagree with Sis that it was 'dumb'. The Bears might not have as good a chance of winning SB 49 or 50 as we do, but they are still a contender. It's not like he's going to Jacksonville, Oakland, or Cleveland. And I'll challenge anyone in the forum to say 'no' to $3M bucks, or the difference between the two offers....as if any of us will ever get the chance to turn down a tenth of that amount.

Jared Allen seems like a good guy and does some great charity work. I wish him well, except on those occasions where he's lined up against us.

Im 100% fine with this.

My approach to free agency (in all sports) for the past 15 years has been that teams should decide on a fair value for a player and make that offer. If the player demands more then you move on to the next player.

Hawks had a price and they wouldn't budge, thats how it SHOULD go down.

Judging from the contract it looks like the guaranteed money was the main hurdle. If hawks were offering $8m for one year that doesn't even come close to matching a guaranteed $15m. The bear's offer essentially eliminated any 1-year offers from contention.

Im just glad this saga is over because I was hoping we wouldn't get him anyway.

That is something like 68 million tied up in 3 DE's over the next 3 years, interesting thought process by the Bears. They invested a HELL of a lot in pass rushers, but wasn't it the run D that was Chicago's weak link last season? Not just the pass rush? Seems odd to me, they didn't really get younger haven't upgraded the back end, and did nothing to improve the rushing defense. Maybe; this would have been smart when the Pack was throwing 50 times a game, but last I checked, the Pack now has a running game, and Minnesota ONLY has a running game, with the exception of the Lions, these moves make little sense to me.

4XPIPS wrote:Well 'F' him!

ah hahahaha.

At the rate he signed on with the Bears for, it's easy to see why he didn't sign with Seattle.

It's just that....
...it was soooo close to happening, lol.

And you know what - it hurts a bit. For me it does, anyway, because I think he would've had a Monster season with the Seahawks. That, and he was litterally at team HQ, contract in front of him, just waiting to be signed.

Then he walked away.

Anyhow, we still have an excellent shot at repeating. But, man, the possibilities, lol.

Regardless, I wish Jared Allen well in Chicago. The guy will be in the HOF discussion when he retires, maybe some say he's a lock, even though it wouldn't be 1st ballot, which is tough to do, period.

Zorn76 wrote:At the rate he signed on with the Bears for, it's easy to see why he didn't sign with Seattle.

It's just that....
...it was soooo close to happening, lol.

And you know what - it hurts a bit. For me it does, anyway, because I think he would've had a Monster season with the Seahawks. That, and he was litterally at team HQ, contract in front of him, just waiting to be signed.

Then he walked away.

Anyhow, we still have an excellent shot at repeating. But, man, the possibilities, lol.

Regardless, I wish Jared Allen well in Chicago. The guy will be in the HOF discussion when he retires, maybe some say he's a lock, even though it wouldn't be 1st ballot, which is tough to do, period.

That's exactly how I feel as well.
I understand why he chose the Bears and don't blame him one bit, but it still stings, because MAN he would have fit PERFECTLY here!!
I think he would have BLOWN UP on our line with Avril, Bennett, Mebane etc...
As a part of a rotation, I think he would have stayed fresher, been allowed to focus more on just pass rushing (which is definitely his strength anyway, Vikings fans were pretty down on how much Allen would sell out to pass rush, to the point of being terrible against the run at times) and would have EASILY gotten at least the same numbers (11 sacks) as he did last year, and extended his career (less wear and tear) at the same time.

I'm sure he thought of all that, but, as long as the guy had an agent buzzing in his ear and as long as agents get commissions*, the Bears bigger offer was bound to be the one he took.

*Sadly, agents DON'T actually look out for the players best interest all the time, they DO however, always try to make their client the most money they can get, because the more money the client gets, the bigger the commission. So naturally an agent will steer his client towards the bigger contract, even if the other one would actually be better for the clients career in other ways.

I agree he's pretty much a safe bet he's going to the Hall. Maybe not first ballot, though he also may still have a good four years of football left ahead of him, (who knows?) but he's a safe bet to make it eventually, because he deserves it!

I can't fault Allen for taking a better deal than he was offered by our Seahawks. I mean, 8 mil. a year and 15mil guaranteed for a player who will be 32 when the season starts? no, I couldn't see us paying that.

Now, while WE TWELVES may firmly believe that our Seahawks are a cinch to win back to back Super Bowls, I can see why a player like Jared Allen might think that the Bears have as good a chance of winning the Super Bowl in the next few years as our Seahawks do AND he will make more dough. I myself am firmly believe that we art going to win back to back Super Bowls but be the first team to win 3 in a row, but that's just me.

Letting both Red Bryant and Chris Clemons go and losing McDonald to Free Agency our D-Line didn't just lose depth we lost our two starting DE's. Now, that is going to open the door to a couple of guys that have either been injured or have under achieved to step up to the plate and deliver.

We all know that the more pressure our D-Line puts on opposing QB's the easier it is for the LOB to make plays in the defensive back field.

It isn't going to be easy, and making it look too easy is probably why J.S. didn't win executive of the year, but I expect J.S. along with the coaching staff will put together a team that will be as good if not better than this seasons.

Seahawks4Ever wrote:Now, while WE TWELVES may firmly believe that our Seahawks are a cinch to win back to back Super Bowls, I can see why a player like Jared Allen might think that the Bears have as good a chance of winning the Super Bowl in the next few years as our Seahawks do AND he will make more dough. I myself am firmly believe that we art going to win back to back Super Bowls but be the first team to win 3 in a row, but that's just me.

That's how I feel about it, too. Although I think our chances of winning the SB next year is as good or better than any team in the league, I think some of us may be over estimating the impact our winning XLVIII has on free agents. IMO guys like Allen are more interested in staying away from franchises like Cleveland, Oakland, Jacksonville, Buffalo, et al, than they are giving a large discount to the reigning champ.

Out of Bryant, Clemons and McDonald, only the latter could be argued as a noticeable loss, IMO. Red and Chris were certain to go after post season's end, and they did. CC was actually pretty lucky to be playing in Seattle this year, considering his injury in DC and speculation that he was a cut possibility before last fall.

We'll be fine.

The x-factor, strangely enough, for both the offense and defense is Percy Harvin. I mentioned elsewhere that if we avg 3 more ppg, it'll take pressure off our D to close games like they did in '13. The SB was just the tip of the iceberg. Having him healthy for a full year (or thereabouts, lol), helps us in all other facets of the game.

Zorn76 wrote:Out of Bryant, Clemons and McDonald, only the latter could be argued as a noticeable loss, IMO. Red and Chris were certain to go after post season's end, and they did. CC was actually pretty lucky to be playing in Seattle this year, considering his injury in DC and speculation that he was a cut possibility before last fall.

We'll be fine.

The x-factor, strangely enough, for both the offense and defense is Percy Harvin. I mentioned elsewhere that if we avg 3 more ppg, it'll take pressure off our D to close games like they did in '13. The SB was just the tip of the iceberg. Having him healthy for a full year (or thereabouts, lol), helps us in all other facets of the game.

The way Harvin plays it will be tough to keep him on the field all year long. I hope he plays all 16 games + Playoffs if we make it, but history isn't on our side.

I'm not sure how accurate of an assessment on Harvin that is. He played 45 of a possible 48 games his first three years in the league, that last two have certainly drawn questions, though his last year in Minnesota IMO had more to do with his attitude, not his ability to play, which leaves really last season. Hopefully it doesn't develop into a pattern, but IMO he has been fairly durable, at least up until last year.

Something tells me it won't become a consistent issue, but in this game who really knows? Any player, no matter talent, speed or toughness can fall into that trap.

HumanCockroach wrote:I'm not sure how accurate of an assessment on Harvin that is. He played 45 of a possible 48 games his first three years in the league, that last two have certainly drawn questions, though his last year in Minnesota IMO had more to do with his attitude, not his ability to play, which leaves really last season. Hopefully it doesn't develop into a pattern, but IMO he has been fairly durable, at least up until last year.

Something tells me it won't become a consistent issue, but in this game who really knows? Any player, no matter talent, speed or toughness can fall into that trap.

To some degree, the same can be said about last season, too. There was certainly some questions about his attitude until he bucked up for the playoffs. Hopefully his performance in the Super Bowl will cure his attitude ills.

RiverDog wrote:

HumanCockroach wrote:I'm not sure how accurate of an assessment on Harvin that is. He played 45 of a possible 48 games his first three years in the league, that last two have certainly drawn questions, though his last year in Minnesota IMO had more to do with his attitude, not his ability to play, which leaves really last season. Hopefully it doesn't develop into a pattern, but IMO he has been fairly durable, at least up until last year.

Something tells me it won't become a consistent issue, but in this game who really knows? Any player, no matter talent, speed or toughness can fall into that trap.

To some degree, the same can be said about last season, too. There was certainly some questions about his attitude until he bucked up for the playoffs. Hopefully his performance in the Super Bowl will cure his attitude ills.

Guys like Harvin(isn't this supposed to be a thread about Allen?) befuddles everyone since no one knows what he will do at any given moment. He played in just one game, got torn up pretty good. And then comes back for the SB and gets a touchdown. Seems to me as if he wanted to play all along to shut up his critics. He now has the money, and with his health back he should be fine for next year.
With guys like Harvin, you just don't want to piss him off or his numbers will fall. I suspect that as long as we are winning, he will be as happy as a lark cause he gets more airtime, more coverage and the chance to turn into a league leading receiver. Although I suspect with our scheme that may not happen. I take that back, with his speed, I think it just may happen actually.

RiverDog wrote:

HumanCockroach wrote:I'm not sure how accurate of an assessment on Harvin that is. He played 45 of a possible 48 games his first three years in the league, that last two have certainly drawn questions, though his last year in Minnesota IMO had more to do with his attitude, not his ability to play, which leaves really last season. Hopefully it doesn't develop into a pattern, but IMO he has been fairly durable, at least up until last year.

Something tells me it won't become a consistent issue, but in this game who really knows? Any player, no matter talent, speed or toughness can fall into that trap.

To some degree, the same can be said about last season, too. There was certainly some questions about his attitude until he bucked up for the playoffs. Hopefully his performance in the Super Bowl will cure his attitude ills.

How so? There was NEVER a question about his attitude from people that MATTERED in the equation ( ie the people that brought him in, the coaches that chose whether to play him or not, and his team mates) the ONLY questions were and still are amongst the fans on this and other boards, that in general, didn't like the trade from the get go, how that has any bearing on how the team feels about him, escapes me.