The Seahawks... ARE TRADING PERCY TO THE JETS?!?

[HumanCockroach]

Again appreciate it Yoder, but I'm a big boy, and someone on the internet calling me "retarded" isn't going to ruffles my feathers much. Pretty thick damn skin, and that simply ain't much of an insult, sometimes I call myself that as well. LOL

[RiverDog]

Briwas, not trying to be a jerk here but, you're clearly too young to remember some of the really horrible moves the Seahawks have made over the years.
And yes, anyone who was alive will remember that the trade HC is talking about was FAR worse than the Harvin trade. The Harvin trade stinks, no getting around it, but it's not going to set us YEARS back, in fact dumping his salary will allow us to resign a few guys we probably wouldn't have otherwise, so we'll be just fine. We've got receivers who we just drafted, who I personally think can be just fine in our offense, and will likely fit better than Harvin as well...all is not lost, the team will move on, and will be just fine.
The trade HC is talking about...well that whole era was nothing but one long disaster, and a large part of it was due to that trade.
You really need to come back from the ledge buddy. The Seahawks will be just fine, it's not the end of the world, it's really not.

I was very much alive back then, and IMO the Harvin trade, as it stands now, is worse. Besides, the book on the Harvin trade is not yet closed. There's a draft choice pending and we currently have a lot of rumors circulating around the team that all came to surface during the Harvin era that we have yet to put behind us that could have an impact on how we view the two trades. The Stouffer trade, in retrospect, was the beginning of the end to the great teams we had in the mid to late 80's. I'm certainly not saying that we're destined to suffer a similar fate re Harvin, but nevertheless, there exists that possibility, and we won't know that for at least a couple of years. One thing that was not present in the Stouffer trade was a locker room split, physical altercations, et al.

Thanks, Yoder, for keeping everyone on the straight and narrow.

[monkey]

Well Riv, then you have a strange way of making comparisons IMO.
One trade sunk the team LITERALLY for years.
The Harvin trade, not so much. Not sure how that even begins to compare.
We spent season after season after season trying to repair the damage that had been done from the one trade, you could make the argument that we were still trying to patch up that screw up when we drafted Mirer.

We've already replaced Harvin and moved on...probably better off without him too.
Count those draft picks and the money spent on his salary as losses, count the rings the players including Harvin are wearing as wins, and there you have it. Next year, we won't even be thinking about it, because Harvin will be someone else's problem, and he'll have been effectively replaced in our offense.

One trade sunk our franchise into the worst years of its entire history, and helped keep it at that rock bottom level for several years, the other is already paid for and over with, a sunk cost that could, and should have been avoided sure, but hardly one that will derail this team.
The two things don't even begin to compare.

[RiverDog]

Well Riv, then you have a strange way of making comparisons IMO.
One trade sunk the team LITERALLY for years.
The Harvin trade, not so much. Not sure how that even begins to compare.
We spent season after season after season trying to repair the damage that had been done from the one trade, you could make the argument that we were still trying to patch up that screw up when we drafted Mirer.

We've already replaced Harvin and moved on...probably better off without him too.
Count those draft picks and the money spent on his salary as losses, count the rings the players including Harvin are wearing as wins, and there you have it. Next year, we won't even be thinking about it, because Harvin will be someone else's problem, and he'll have been effectively replaced in our offense.

One trade sunk our franchise into the worst years of its entire history, and helped keep it at that rock bottom level for several years, the other is already paid for and over with, a sunk cost that could, and should have been avoided sure, but hardly one that will derail this team.
The two things don't even begin to compare.

There was a little more than the Stouffer trade that sunk our franchise back then, and Kelly Stouffer was far from being the biggest factor, which unarguably was the sale of the club to Ken Behring.

[c_hawkbob]

I totally agree with Monkey in this exchange.

[Hawktown]

Well Riv, then you have a strange way of making comparisons IMO.
One trade sunk the team LITERALLY for years.
The Harvin trade, not so much. Not sure how that even begins to compare.
We spent season after season after season trying to repair the damage that had been done from the one trade, you could make the argument that we were still trying to patch up that screw up when we drafted Mirer.

We've already replaced Harvin and moved on...probably better off without him too.
Count those draft picks and the money spent on his salary as losses, count the rings the players including Harvin are wearing as wins, and there you have it. Next year, we won't even be thinking about it, because Harvin will be someone else's problem, and he'll have been effectively replaced in our offense.

One trade sunk our franchise into the worst years of its entire history, and helped keep it at that rock bottom level for several years, the other is already paid for and over with, a sunk cost that could, and should have been avoided sure, but hardly one that will derail this team.
The two things don't even begin to compare.

+1