ESPN Article: 10 Worst NFL Contracts (2 Seahawks)

[seahawkfreak]

Brian Bozworth not on the list. Wow

While Brian Bozworth's contract was a record for a rookie at the time 10 years, 11 million, it is nothing compared to what 1st round picks are paid today. Only the signing bonus was guaranteed, 2.5 million. If you look at the whole top 25 list it is mostly recent players. TJ Houshmanzadeh is on the list too at 21, paid 13.7 million over 1 year, more than Bosworth's entire contract. Notice Nate Odomes isn't on the list, never played a down for the Seahawks. Shaun Alexander does make the this older list worst contracts in NFL, coming in at sixth. Nate Odomes is an honorable mention on that list and has the oldest conract signed in 1994.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=contracts

Not to mention the fact that Bozworth wasn't a bad player. Yes, for the time he played with us he was a good/decent linebacker in the NFL.

 

[bjornanderson21]

I just don't understand people saying Harvin was this catastrophic. To me number ten thru three on the list sound worse because guess what, it was the raiders... Or redskins, or eagles, falcons....

How is it so historically bad when the same year the deal happened, we won a super Bowl?

Money spent?. Yes.

But who's to say if the Broncos didn't have to gameplan for harvin their defense couldn't have been more successful, giving manning at least a chance in hell?

Every dime was worth it imo. You play to win a super bowl. We did. It coincided with over paying harvin. That makes this number ten on the list for me. Big win, big price. I'll take the franchise's first sb win everytime and count the costs later.

The Harvin debacle was so detrimental to us because:
1. We gave up draft picks that could have improved the team with cheap contracts
2. We spent the money that year on a WR who did nothing instead of a WR who contributed.
3. Because of the money tied up in Harvin there was no way to keep Tate.

4. We very easily would've won the SB last year if we had a WR corps that included a REAL wr, which we could have had if we never went after Harvin. We not only got rid of Harvin early last year but as I said earlier we also lost Tate.

5. The Seahawks have dead money from Harvin taking up cap space this year which limited what we could do in FA. No harvin trade = no dead money = better roster this season.

6. Harvin's bad attitude disrupted a locker room that had been tight, and him getting paid so much for doing nothing ABSOLUTELY has led to some of our guys being unhappy with their contract.


If you dont think the Harvin trade was absolutely horrible then you are living in denial.

Harvin's contract is quite fairly the 2nd worst ever, and the TRADE is quite easily the worst or second worst trade in NFL history. It is shocking just how horrible the trade was from day 1. It would be hard to make a worse trade even if you were trying!

 

[HawkFan72]

I'm shocked the Alexander contract wasn't on there.

He was an honorable mention, but probably should have been on the actual list. Especially over Flynn, who shouldn't have been on the list, let alone in the top 5.

Even then, it's bad in hindsight but not really bad at that time. So, you have a league MVP RB who just set some NFL records and you're going to screw around and not pay him ? Problem is, he doesn't get paid, and someone else WILL pay him. Then he goes to another team, and if he tears it up, you're likely to lose your job as the GM who let a league MVP go because you didn't want to pay him, and he benefits another franchise.

Sure, for production it was a bad deal. But even then, no one can see him getting hurt and never recovering. Up to that point, he'd never even really been hurt in his career. so the 29 year old age thing wasn't all that huge either. He'd proven to be durable. You roll with it. I don't criticize that front office for that.

I think you could say this about almost every FA signing on this list though. These contracts are all bad in hindsight, but many of them were justified at the time for the very same reasons you posted.

 

[gubernaculum]

I think that when you look at the Boz's contract, it's important to evaluate apples to apples. I would compare the contract compared to the standards of that time compared. #go Hawks