Isn't the Seahawks mantra "We reward our own..."?

[volsunghawk]

Rewarding people for past performance is and will always be a bad way to run a football team.

Agreed. The FO should be asking itself whether it thinks Lynch's performance will drop off significantly over the next couple of seasons, and whether the offense can function efficiently and effectively without his presence on the field. And when the FO is trying to determine these things, they will necessarily need to look at what Lynch is doing this year. Trends are valuable (like RBs breaking down as they near 30), but they're not the only determining factor. If the FO thinks Lynch can perform at this level through, say, 2016, then it would be ridiculous for them to cut him loose just because of his age. Right now, he's the most consistent (and possibly ONLY consistent) thing about our offense.

 

[kpak76]

Niether is Lynch, whats your point?

You must not have watched the game yesterday.

Maybe some of you guys are new fans to the game and don't understand how contracts work in the NFL. That's the only thing I can chalk this up to.

You're naive to think Lynch will happy and content walking into camp next year without a new deal. A player's window of opportunity to maximize his earnings is very finite. So why would he do that?

You must not be following Allens career. He had 12 and 11.5 sacks the last 2 years of his contract with the Vikings. Allen is the perfect example you refuse to see dude.

Lynch being happy has nothing to do with his contract situation. Players can be forced to play unhappy. Its not unheard of.

 

[kpak76]

Rewarding people for past performance is and will always be a bad way to run a football team.

Yup, well said.

Paying players for future unproven performance is an equally bad way to run a team. That said, I don't think anyone here is talking about "Rewarding" Lynch...

Follow the thread dude. This thread reaks of jumping the gun after a great performance by Lynch.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Niether is Lynch, whats your point?

You must not have watched the game yesterday.

Maybe some of you guys are new fans to the game and don't understand how contracts work in the NFL. That's the only thing I can chalk this up to.

You're naive to think Lynch will happy and content walking into camp next year without a new deal. A player's window of opportunity to maximize his earnings is very finite. So why would he do that?

I dont think Lynch would be happy. But I dont think Lynch holds the cards like you think.

If he holdsout, we just let him holdout. Then we dont pay him, as he will be subject to pay forfeiture. So it will be like we cut him, and he cant play for anyone else. On top of which, he will have a whole year of no play and completely hurt his bargaining power at age 31 for the next season.

If Lynch is done, and doesnt care, then it wont matter to him. But if he wants more money, holding out is his worst option. Its not like it used to be, and the new CBA makes sure that teams dont lose out on money from players holding out.

This is a win-win situation for the team. They can play the high risk cards and extend him to a big contract. They can play the current cards and make him play out his current contract. Whether he plays or not is on him, but it would be no different then option 3, which is to just cut him right out.

So I think the smart option is straight up, force him to play out his contract and roll the dice on free agency for 2015.

This is all crazy to me.

1. You don't risk a super pissed off Marshawn destroying your locker room by forcing him to play out his contract.
2. You don't go into 2015 without the RB situation resolved, as it's the BACKBONE to your entire team.
3. You don't send a message to the rest of the team that if you play Pro Bowl quality at your position we're not going to reward you.

If all you guys were right, why did we re-do Earl's deal? Sherm's deal? Doug's? Max's? Why are we going to reward Russell when he has a year left? Bobby? KJ? Want me to keep going?

In no scenario does calling Marshawn's bluff and him holding out help anybody. If both sides can't agree on the new deal, we trade him to a team that does. It's as simple as that.

Do we give him a 4-5 year deal? Hell no, but I think Pete and John would be open to a 2-3 year new deal. But he still might demand a longer deal.

 

[kpak76]

Niether is Lynch, whats your point?

You must not have watched the game yesterday.

Maybe some of you guys are new fans to the game and don't understand how contracts work in the NFL. That's the only thing I can chalk this up to.

You're naive to think Lynch will happy and content walking into camp next year without a new deal. A player's window of opportunity to maximize his earnings is very finite. So why would he do that?

I dont think Lynch would be happy. But I dont think Lynch holds the cards like you think.

If he holdsout, we just let him holdout. Then we dont pay him, as he will be subject to pay forfeiture. So it will be like we cut him, and he cant play for anyone else. On top of which, he will have a whole year of no play and completely hurt his bargaining power at age 31 for the next season.

If Lynch is done, and doesnt care, then it wont matter to him. But if he wants more money, holding out is his worst option. Its not like it used to be, and the new CBA makes sure that teams dont lose out on money from players holding out.

This is a win-win situation for the team. They can play the high risk cards and extend him to a big contract. They can play the current cards and make him play out his current contract. Whether he plays or not is on him, but it would be no different then option 3, which is to just cut him right out.

So I think the smart option is straight up, force him to play out his contract and roll the dice on free agency for 2015.

This is all crazy to me.

1. You don't risk a super pissed off Marshawn destroying your locker room by forcing him to play out his contract.
2. You don't go into 2015 without the RB situation resolved, as it's the BACKBONE to your entire team.
3. You don't send a message to the rest of the team that if you play Pro Bowl quality at your position we're not going to reward you.

If all you guys were right, why did we re-do Earl's deal? Sherm's deal? Doug's? Max's? Why are we going to reward Russell when he has a year left? Bobby? KJ? Want me to keep going?

In no scenario does calling Marshawn's bluff and him holding out help anybody. If both sides can't agree on the new deal, we trade him to a team that does. It's as simple as that.

Do we give him a 4-5 year deal? Hell no, but I think Pete and John would be open to a 2-3 year new deal. But he still might demand a longer deal.

And you seem to not have learned from history. You dont reward a player heading towards the downside of his career with a big contract. We did it with Shaun Alexander and it didn't do well for us. Lynch would be better served playing his last year with us and seeing if he will resign for another year. If he causes an issue in the locker room he can be cut like Percy was. It's just that simple. No player is bigger than the team. This isn't the NBA.

 

[volsunghawk]

Rewarding people for past performance is and will always be a bad way to run a football team.

Yup, well said.

Paying players for future unproven performance is an equally bad way to run a team. That said, I don't think anyone here is talking about "Rewarding" Lynch...

Follow the thread dude. This thread reaks of jumping the gun after a great performance by Lynch.

You're being short-sighted if you think that the arguments for extending Lynch are based on a single game.

 

[kpak76]

You're being short-sighted if you think that the arguments for extending Lynch are based on a single game.

It's based on what he is doing in the past couple of games. It's not like Lynch has been on fire with the exception of the past two games this year. A lot of that is on the OL, but people are definitely being swayed with how Lynch ran yesterday. You're turning a blind eye if you don't see it.

 

[LawlessHawk]

Rewarding people for past performance is and will always be a bad way to run a football team.

Yup, well said.

Paying players for future unproven performance is an equally bad way to run a team. That said, I don't think anyone here is talking about "Rewarding" Lynch...

Follow the thread dude. This thread reaks of jumping the gun after a great performance by Lynch.

Wow.

BTW: *reeks

I'll be stepping on out of this one now. SMH

 

[Sgt. Largent]

And you seem to not have learned from history. You dont reward a player heading towards the downside of his career with a big contract. We did it with Shaun Alexander and it didn't do well for us. Lynch would be better served playing his last year with us and seeing if he will resign for another year. If he causes an issue in the locker room he can be cut like Percy was. It's just that simple. No player is bigger than the team. This isn't the NBA.

I'm tired of arguing with you.

Just promise me when Lynch get his new deal here or on another team just look to the sky and yell "WHY GOD WHY!" and remember this conversation.

 

[kpak76]

And you seem to not have learned from history. You dont reward a player heading towards the downside of his career with a big contract. We did it with Shaun Alexander and it didn't do well for us. Lynch would be better served playing his last year with us and seeing if he will resign for another year. If he causes an issue in the locker room he can be cut like Percy was. It's just that simple. No player is bigger than the team. This isn't the NBA.

I'm tired of arguing with you.

Just promise me when Lynch get his new deal here or on another team just look to the sky and yell "WHY GOD WHY!" and remember this conversation.

If you dont want a discussion then why respond back to me? If Lynch does sign with another team its because the Hawks let him sign with another team. He is not heading to FA this summer. He is still under contract, and its not a player option like you see in baseball. The team decides his fate.

 

[kpak76]

Wow.

BTW: *reeks

I'll be stepping on out of this one now. SMH

Aww yes grammer Nazi, so I misspelled reeks. Not the first time I misspelled a word I bet. So you don't agree with me, thats ok, a lot on here aren't agreeing with me. Its fine, its why its called a discussion.

 

[volsunghawk]

You're being short-sighted if you think that the arguments for extending Lynch are based on a single game.

It's based on what he is doing in the past couple of games. It's not like Lynch has been on fire with the exception of the past two games this year. A lot of that is on the OL, but people are definitely being swayed with how Lynch ran yesterday. You're turning a blind eye if you don't see it.

It's based on how important the run game has been to the team's offense for the last several years and also based on how our offense looked in games this year when Lynch wasn't the focal point. When gameplans seemed to be based around how to get the ball to Harvin in space, our offense looked abysmal. Only when returning to Lynch as the primary weapon (and therefore, the primary threat that allows Wilson to run rampant, as well), did the offense seem to start imposing its will again.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

And you seem to not have learned from history. You dont reward a player heading towards the downside of his career with a big contract. We did it with Shaun Alexander and it didn't do well for us. Lynch would be better served playing his last year with us and seeing if he will resign for another year. If he causes an issue in the locker room he can be cut like Percy was. It's just that simple. No player is bigger than the team. This isn't the NBA.

I'm tired of arguing with you.

Just promise me when Lynch get his new deal here or on another team just look to the sky and yell "WHY GOD WHY!" and remember this conversation.

I wouldn't expect any deal for him next year given he still has a year on his current deal and we have players that we will need for years going forward in the last year of THEIR deals. Priorities gentlemen and currently Lynch isn't one until NEXT year and then a big decision will have to be made and nothing would surprise me (resigning him, cutting him after this year, or playing out his contract and testing FA so that both he and the team know what the market price will be so that an informed non-emotional decision can be made).

At some point if they decide to give Wilson franchise money the offensive philosophy and focal points will change it's unlikely they would want to pay top money for the running back position over one of the receiver positions it's just how it works in the current NFL.

 

[kpak76]

You're being short-sighted if you think that the arguments for extending Lynch are based on a single game.

It's based on what he is doing in the past couple of games. It's not like Lynch has been on fire with the exception of the past two games this year. A lot of that is on the OL, but people are definitely being swayed with how Lynch ran yesterday. You're turning a blind eye if you don't see it.

It's based on how important the run game has been to the team's offense for the last several years and also based on how our offense looked in games this year when Lynch wasn't the focal point. When gameplans seemed to be based around how to get the ball to Harvin in space, our offense looked abysmal. Only when returning to Lynch as the primary weapon (and therefore, the primary threat that allows Wilson to run rampant, as well), did the offense seem to start imposing its will again.

The run game is more than just Lynch. The fact he went off showed how important Unger and Okung are also to the run game. Did you see some of the runs that Michael and Turbin had yesterday also? The line was on fire yesterday. I'm not saying Micahael and Turbin are as good as Lynch, but we do seem good in that area too as long as we can retain the core of the OL.

 

[ivotuk]

I believe Brock Huard said he's scheduled to make 8 Million in 2015. That's a good chunk of change. I'm all for adding on another year but Pete and John are much smarter, and less emotional than us fans.

We LOVE Marshawn and like Walter Jones, we want him to remain a Seahawk until he retires. Nothing wrong with that. And Marshawn is NOT every other running back, he's unnatural, and will last longer than other running backs.

AND, you can not compare the Shaun Alexander debacle to this team or front office. That was Tim Ruskell who overpaid for SA and neglected to pay Steve Hutchinson.

The cost? Shaun was unable to run because we lost our elite line. And it shortened Big Walt's career because all of a sudden he was taking on too much trying to keep his QB upright. And it cost Matt Hasselbeck.

So not only was it too much too late, but the damaged continuity of the Oline had a negative effect on almost every other player on the offense.

Lots of people were trying to pay Shaun Alexander huge money, the Panthers wanted him badly. At the Pro Bowl other players kept trying to get SA to wear their hats and were telling him what a great team they had. I wish he would have signed with someone else.

But these two situations are in no way similar. Marshawn Lynch is like no other running back in the history of the game, and there will never be another one like him. Even so, Pete and John are doing the smart thing, they have him under contract for 8 million which should be enough to make Lynch happy.

And if he plays well next year, with a reduced role, I hope they extend him another 2 years on a smaller contract with a lighter load so that he can extend his career, and end it, in Seattle.

 

[NJSeahawk]

You're being short-sighted if you think that the arguments for extending Lynch are based on a single game.

It's based on what he is doing in the past couple of games. It's not like Lynch has been on fire with the exception of the past two games this year. A lot of that is on the OL, but people are definitely being swayed with how Lynch ran yesterday. You're turning a blind eye if you don't see it.

It's based on how important the run game has been to the team's offense for the last several years and also based on how our offense looked in games this year when Lynch wasn't the focal point. When gameplans seemed to be based around how to get the ball to Harvin in space, our offense looked abysmal. Only when returning to Lynch as the primary weapon (and therefore, the primary threat that allows Wilson to run rampant, as well), did the offense seem to start imposing its will again.

The run game is more than just Lynch. The fact he went off showed how important Unger and Okung are also to the run game. Did you see some of the runs that Michael and Turbin had yesterday also? The line was on fire yesterday. I'm not saying Micahael and Turbin are as good as Lynch, but we do seem good in that area too as long as we can retain the core of the OL.

Of course it. However Lynch is an absolute freak. He is an x-factor as well as a top 5 RB in the league. Let's put Julius Jones in behind that line and see if he can produce Beast's numbers. Was Beast still carrying us when Unger was out?

 

[Cartire]

Niether is Lynch, whats your point?

You must not have watched the game yesterday.

Maybe some of you guys are new fans to the game and don't understand how contracts work in the NFL. That's the only thing I can chalk this up to.

You're naive to think Lynch will happy and content walking into camp next year without a new deal. A player's window of opportunity to maximize his earnings is very finite. So why would he do that?

I dont think Lynch would be happy. But I dont think Lynch holds the cards like you think.

If he holdsout, we just let him holdout. Then we dont pay him, as he will be subject to pay forfeiture. So it will be like we cut him, and he cant play for anyone else. On top of which, he will have a whole year of no play and completely hurt his bargaining power at age 31 for the next season.

If Lynch is done, and doesnt care, then it wont matter to him. But if he wants more money, holding out is his worst option. Its not like it used to be, and the new CBA makes sure that teams dont lose out on money from players holding out.

This is a win-win situation for the team. They can play the high risk cards and extend him to a big contract. They can play the current cards and make him play out his current contract. Whether he plays or not is on him, but it would be no different then option 3, which is to just cut him right out.

So I think the smart option is straight up, force him to play out his contract and roll the dice on free agency for 2015.

This is all crazy to me.

1. You don't risk a super pissed off Marshawn destroying your locker room by forcing him to play out his contract.
2. You don't go into 2015 without the RB situation resolved, as it's the BACKBONE to your entire team.
3. You don't send a message to the rest of the team that if you play Pro Bowl quality at your position we're not going to reward you.

If all you guys were right, why did we re-do Earl's deal? Sherm's deal? Doug's? Max's? Why are we going to reward Russell when he has a year left? Bobby? KJ? Want me to keep going?

In no scenario does calling Marshawn's bluff and him holding out help anybody. If both sides can't agree on the new deal, we trade him to a team that does. It's as simple as that.

Do we give him a 4-5 year deal? Hell no, but I think Pete and John would be open to a 2-3 year new deal. But he still might demand a longer deal.

You ASSUME Lynch plays pissed off and destroys a locker room. If he does that, then we cut him. Which is already a dominate option anyway.
You ASSUME the 2015 RB situation wont be resolved. Many people already think its resolved in 2014 with Turbin and Cmike. Why all of sudden is it a huge void for 2015?
They did reward him. Why do people keep forgetting that? Hes getting top 5 RB money. In the most undervalued position in the entire NFL.

Im sorry dude. Youre super passionate right now. But you also seem to be completely blind to many other things going on.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I believe Brock Huard said he's scheduled to make 8 Million in 2015. That's a good chunk of change. I'm all for adding on another year but Pete and John are much smarter, and less emotional than us fans. .

I think Pete and John would jump at just adding one more year to Lynch's current deal.

The question isn't this, it's would Marshawn be OK with that?.........and if this past off season of him wanting a new long term deal taught us anything, it's that the answer is no.

My guess is he wants at least a new 3-4 year deal. I'm hoping we can just do a 2-3 year deal at around the same price, but if there are teams out there willing to break the bank for Lynch (which is probably the case), then my gut feeling is he's gone.

 

[scutterhawk]

There's a reason most elite players don't play out the last year of their contracts, because they have the leverage to hold out and demand a new contract.

Right now Lynch is one of these players, and we know that, which is why we gave him 1.5M more this year when he was going to hold out. What makes you think he's going to be OK with risking coming into training camp next year without a new long term deal?

Just doesn't happen. Marshawn is GOING to get a new deal next off season, either here or elsewhere.

Exactly. And I think most people commenting on this issue, in this thread and others, understand the situation. Lynch isn't just going to play-out next year... I'd think he'd just walk away before that happens.

Welp, the way I see it, with Marshawn still kicking ass towards the end of THIS Season, he could be in a position to hedge his barter for a "One More" big bonus paycheck.
I think a lot will depend on where ML feels his body is at by next off Season.
I also think he knew that he could perform at a top 5 RB this season, and that's why he was willing to hold out.
I'm not seeing any drop-off from his play YET, but he hasn't experienced an injury that could bring everything to an abrupt stop either, and those things can and do happen to players that throws their body into the fray like he does.

 

[kpak76]

I believe Brock Huard said he's scheduled to make 8 Million in 2015. That's a good chunk of change. I'm all for adding on another year but Pete and John are much smarter, and less emotional than us fans.

We LOVE Marshawn and like Walter Jones, we want him to remain a Seahawk until he retires. Nothing wrong with that. And Marshawn is NOT every other running back, he's unnatural, and will last longer than other running backs.

AND, you can not compare the Shaun Alexander debacle to this team or front office. That was Tim Ruskell who overpaid for SA and neglected to pay Steve Hutchinson.

The cost? Shaun was unable to run because we lost our elite line. And it shortened Big Walt's career because all of a sudden he was taking on too much trying to keep his QB upright. And it cost Matt Hasselbeck.

So not only was it too much too late, but the damaged continuity of the Oline had a negative effect on almost every other player on the offense.

Lots of people were trying to pay Shaun Alexander huge money, the Panthers wanted him badly. At the Pro Bowl other players kept trying to get SA to wear their hats and were telling him what a great team they had. I wish he would have signed with someone else.

But these two situations are in no way similar. Marshawn Lynch is like no other running back in the history of the game, and there will never be another one like him. Even so, Pete and John are doing the smart thing, they have him under contract for 8 million which should be enough to make Lynch happy.

And if he plays well next year, with a reduced role, I hope they extend him another 2 years on a smaller contract with a lighter load so that he can extend his career, and end it, in Seattle.

You just don't know that. Any number of things can happen to derail this. He could have some sort of major injury. Or he could just be like SA and fall off a cliff after an MVP year (which coincided with probably the best LG in Seahawk history signing with another team). I've seen too much to be be content with what happens now applying to the future.