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.
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.
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.
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.
4XPIPS wrote:Well 'F' him!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 18 guests