IndyHawk":2qluc2vt said:
What if 30 mil isn't 40-50% of the offense because of cap inflation or changes to the CBA in 2020? What if if they structure the contract in a way that is structured so that only 2 of 4 or 5 years hit that mark?
But you can assume that lightning strikes twice with QBs drafted 3rd round or later? At least with RBs and WRs you can diversify across round.
There was someone, a long while ago that opined that there are natural cycles to cap expendetures depending on cycle of drafting. In our championship season we in fact were 'cheap' on defense with the offense consuming 52.31% of the cap and defense consuming 39.07% according to sportrac http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/positional/2013/full-cap/. Our defense was young and relatively unpaid, just like RW was. On a long enough timetable we are not going to have our LOB players and it stands to reason they will try to replace through the draft thus resulting in a cheap defense again. This has already happened on the line, we have some young guys with promise but none is a total beast (even if I think Frank Clark is awesome). If they hit their picks with defense we very well could be in a similar position of salary cap % where the defense pulls down less than 45% in 2020 or 2021.
the funny thing is, I have been a staunch defender of the defense from time to time but this team was just in a blessed situation having so much good young talent balling out of their minds on cheap contracts supplemented with above average veterans on middling contracts. The defense hasn't been nearly as good as that high water mark and thats fine because that high water mark was historical - you just aren't going to have ever increasing benchmarks when you're in the discussion for best defense of all time year 2 of the playoff run. But even being a staunch defender, I can see that they simply haven't equaled a ratio of their salary to performance from the 2012-2014 run.
On the other hand, the team has made huge money and draft pick mistakes (both shipping and actual picks) with offense in a seemingly rudderless or stubborn path of failure.
Well I'll put you down as an optimist that the rest of the offense figures their crap out because a game manager is not going to cut it out there with something resembling the 2017 offense.
I don't see how you view the winning formula as you do or in the context you do. It isn't as simple as historical defense and a game manager QB when you interject salary, draft, extensions, FA pickups and other considerations. The 2012-2014 Seahawks were young and cheap with almost every single of their best players on defense. And they were not only good but one of the best at the position compared to the ENTIRE league.
To me the forumula seems to be criminally underpaid HOF defensive players on defense surrounded by solid players, an average line and two dynamic weapons on offense one of who is underpaid and relatively unknown in his capabilities.
If you just want to blow the team up fine, blow it up, and there's not fault in that opinion. But at least understand what you're blowing up before you push the plunger.
We could totally have a conversation about how you keep a historical defense together under the conditions of the NFL where the best players are on rookie or friendly 2nd contracts. I just don't know if we'd wind up in even close to the current Seahawks roster.
ukeface:
