My Pessimistic View of our Cap Situation

[Jville]

Anyone remember John Schneider saying in his very first presser that is exactly where we wanted to be? Everyone coveting our players and having to let some of them go? I do.

Anyone also remember our cap-ologist, John Izdik leaving for the Jets last offseason?

Yes ...... makes this off season more interesting. We've turned to a new page.

 

[Lady Talon]

I just realized that I probably could have simplified this whole thread and said it another way.....how's this........

we're 30 million over the cap, wtf should we do now?

Not sure I understand your math. We're hovering right at the cap now. We potentially shave ~$25M off that number by cutting various "big" contracts. Don't over-commit yourself to Golden and Bennett (doesn't mean you can't resign), and I don't see a problem.

A player's extension doesn't have to hit your cap hard immediately. Russell isn't even eligible for an extension until 2015, which means his cap number won't really hit us hard until 2016. By then, Marshawn and Unger's contracts are over, and you have flexibility with Percy/Kam/Okung. Brand new stars will emerge and completely change the "invaluable vs. just valuable" equation.

That was the whole argument last year with Percy. He isn't hitting us hard yet. He only cost us 2 rookie contracts and any way you slice it, either an elite or great piece of the best defense in more than a decade with his second year cap hit. All for 50 snaps and no guarantees of an injury free next year or meaningful seasons over the life of that contract.

So we extend our secondary and lose teeth everywhere else, while enduring another down draft year, and wait for those awesome low first year cap numbers to become insane the next. Then, we have to lose valuable pieces at other positions else and sign our QB to an even larger contract, assuming we can repeat or come close for two years and don't kill him the process.

While drafting at both a positional and numerical disadvantage to the rest of our division during the whole process with yearly roster churn (and this FO's drafting has been the turning point of the franchise' whole history). What new stars? How many picks can they miss on before we're out of contention?

Seems 6 draft picks from last year are either gone (Harper), ended up on IR or held on the roster while injured (Williams, Hill, Simon, Ware), redshirted while conspiracy theories abound (Michael) yet the thought of Lynch slowing down is unpalatable to fans. One of those 5 may not even be able to have an NFL career due to bad knees (Williams). We've lost an NFL draft years worth of cheap stars already.

 

[DavidSeven]

Well, yeah, if we fail to draft quality talent in three consecutive years, then I agree that we're in pretty bad shape. And we would deserve to be. The alternative is to force yourself to re-sign fairly average or above-agerage talent (i.e. Golden, Breno, Malcolm, Red, Thurmond, outside O-line help, etc.) at the expense of a better player (e.g. Sherman) because you don't trust your own drafting to replace above-average players.

I'm stealing this from someone else: assume a good NFL teams are loaded with players rated between 6-9. Generally, teams hit on 6s and 7s frequently in a draft. 8s and 9s are rare, especially if you're picking toward the end. Thus, it's smarter to retain your 8s and 9s, even it costs you several 6s and 7s. If you utterly fail at acquiring 6s and 7s in three consecutive drafts, then shame on you.

I'll use San Francisco as an example: if I ever read that they decided to cut ties with Colin Kaepernick, Navarro Bowman, Aldon Smith, or Michael Crabtree so they could re-build their O-Line or sign two more receivers or get secondary help, I would be ecstatic! The reason being is that I think those few guys are unique and rare and that their continued presence alone will help them be competitive for years to come regardless of deficiencies elsewhere. IMO, Wilson, Sherman, Thomas, and Percy fit that criteria for Seattle. If you disagree with any of those names or that the talent needs to be more "spread out," then that's fine. People will disagree on scouting issues. I'm just conveying the scouting philosophy that you retain your studs and churn anyone who's anything less.

 

[Tokadub]

I agree that the money situation is a bit tighter than I originally thought when I looked into this a little bit. We really are going to have to make tough decisions a few of our guys are really overpaid right now which complicates things but also gives us a bit of room to clear some space if we cut them or restructure their contracts.

The way I see it we should take these steps:

1) Let Bennett go so we can keep Tate, I don't think we can keep them both. I think we REALLY need Tate especially if Harvin gets injured god forbid. I just don't think we can make any sacrifices on offense right now. I'm pretty confident our defense will be REALLY good even if we shake things up a bit, offense I don't think we can afford to lose one of our best and most versatile players. Tate is underrated straight up, I recently watched a highlight video from 2012 and even I forgot how insane some of his plays were, dude is amazingly good. Last season wasn't phenomenal for stats but he was still VERY solid even with our offensive line issues and had almost as many receiving yards as Baldwin. His punt return skills are necessary as well.

2) Attempt to restructure some guys for less pay if we can't make a deal possibly cut them. Guys like Clemens, Red Bryant, Okung, Sidney Rice, Zach Miller are all making too much money.

3) Restructure Earl Thomas to lock him in but don't over pay him, need to somehow minimize his cap hit for when we pay Russell.

4) So after all that we are still probably above the cap or very close to it. We may have to cut additional guys like Giacomini to make room for Haushka for example. We most likely lose Sidney Rice straight up or another team pays him more than the 3 million or so we offer. We probably lose Red Bryant he's simply making too much money and another team pays him more than we can.

5) If we do all that we might barely be able to stay under cap and pretty much keep our core together more or less for another Super Bowl run.

6) The biggest problems will be 2015 when we pay Wilson which has to happen. Hopefully he gets around 16 million/year tops which would be one heck of a bargain since I think he'll be undoubtably a top 5 QB next year even for the doubters (I already rank him in top 5 league wide, but he is my #1 for our team specifically I wouldn't rather have any other guy).

After we pay Wilson is when things truly get scary. I hate to say it but we might have to lose Sherman, doing so would almost instantaneously solve our money problems but I'd hate to see that happen if he stays healthy. If we don't restructure Sherman this offseason (I don't think we should) I think that's a big warning sign of this possibility. Harvin is just too expensive even if he's worth it, I can't imagine we can keep Harvin and Sherman once we pay Wilson or we will have to literally gut the team. Barring some draft or FA miracles I can't see us having the depth to gut our roster.

Another possibility is that we cut Lynch but unless Christine Michael is clearly more effective that would be a huge blow. I'd like to see us keep Lynch just pay him less so we have 2 dominate RBs.

7) Finally for the draft and FA I don't think we should focus on receivers with all these other key players we might be losing. Just keep Tate and we are fine at reciever even if we can't keep Rice, that is why Tate is so important it allows us to focus on other FA and drafts than gamble on recievers when we don't even need them.

#1 draft priority should be to finally get a good offensive line that can protect Wilson. Our offensive line is the only reason we don't have an elite offense. Imagine how good we would be if we can consistently out score everyone AND our defense dominates.

After you fix our offensive line you start getting guys to replace the guys we are losing. We will want pass rushers especially to replace Bennett and Clemens, and we might even need a guy to replace Sherman


That's about the best I can break it down, at the end of the day I think we either gonna have to lose Sherman which would instantly solve all our money problems, or we need to take a riskier approach and really shake things up and lose a lot of guys in 2015.

Edit: one more possibly stupid thought as I'm thinking how could we possibly replace Sherman... Any chance we keep Browner? Shouldn't his legal stuff be settled worst case scenario by 2015? Might be a bargain to get him cheap if he stays in shape, the whole smoking reefer thing doesn't really bother me with him sounds like he really got screwed, and I bet we have a several other guys who smoke just don't get caught.

 

[The Outfield]

At least I won't fret as much about this now that we won the Super Bowl. We had all of the talent in the world this year and we probably won't be able to keep it all. Just have to hope Pete & John can keep up their magic in the draft and free agency.

 

[Lady Talon]

San Francisco wouldn't need to do that because they have put themselves in great position in drafts while remaining competitive, during Harbaugh's reign anyway. They've played their starters and hardly sub any rookies in, but they aren't exactly lacking a bright outlook there, what with almost twice the picks we have this year.

Not exactly how we've built things here. We got here by depending on draft ability and cheap contracts. So why have we changed? Because we won a Superbowl? You can cite Percy, but we got through the season, playoffs and won the Bowl with the cheap/snubbed nobodies we had in spite of his contract instead of because. Now we can't survive without huge contracts weighing us down while cheaper starting quality depth loses it's value behind them. Sit on our hands for a few drafts and hope I guess.

 

[DavidSeven]

The reason San Francisco has so many picks is because they keep letting good depth players leave in free agency and are getting compensatory picks in return. Goldson, Delanie Walker, Ginn, etc. Their "good team" cycle started one year earlier than us. I would expect Seattle to get multiple compensatory picks next year.

 

[Lady Talon]

Yet they have 5 picks before we pick our third. That concept of trading when you have adequate depth and such.

 

[plyka]

Time for me to earn my class pessimist label. I've been reading posts since the Super Bowl about guys we "have" to keep, to find a way to get done, etc. Doing my remedial math and going over some basic numbers, I just really don't see that we can do much of anything at all, let alone sign anybody to pretty large contracts, i.e. Bennett and Golden.

From the reports on the radio, we're currently somewhere around 1-2 million over the cap. I've seen arguments that we're 1-2 million under, but whatever, we'll just consider it that we're at the cap for these purposes. This, of course, is without Bennett's money, without Tate, Breno, McDaniels/Donald, Hauschka, etc., etc., etc.

So, first, we've got to find a way to field a team, right? We need some bodies on the D-Line, maybe some on the O-Line. Just in order to field a team, we can cut Sidney Rice, right? The popular names that everybody throws around to cut are Rice, Miller, Red and Clem. Saves us 24 million against the cap this season. Right? Follow me?

The popular sentiment around here is that we immediately can spend that 24 million. We can give 8 of it to Bennett, 6 to Golden, re-sign Breno and McDaniel and Hauschka, maybe re-negotiate Red and basically be done with it right? I know contracts are for more complex than this, but we're in the ballpark.

A few things keep looming in my head. Sure, we have those four guys that are "dead weight". But we really don't have anybody like this coming up in the next few years. The next steps are to start talking about cutting guys like Lynch and Mebane. A little different from cutting Sidney Rice and Zach Miller. So we're not going to have the luxury of just cutting dead weight every year. The fat will basically be trimmed after this one-time deal.

The other issue I see is that we can't afford to be at the cap. By the end of next season, we need to find a way to come up with 30 million, maybe more, to keep Russell Wilson and Sherman. Thomas may not cost a bunch up front, but his contract will be really big in later years too. Okung may actually save us a couple of million up-front as he has a pretty big cap number now. 30 million, gentlemen (and ladies), 30 milllion. 30 million.

So, I view this as our one chance. I view the cutting of Rice, Miller, Red and Clem as our chance to keep Richard Sherman. If you want to find a way to do it, that is your way to do it. But you need to change your philosophy from "if there is any way to keep player x, we'll find it", to "if there is any way to cut player x, we have to do it". We are deepest team in the NFL? Time to prove it.

If we want to keep Sherman, we can't afford Bennett. We can't afford Golden. We can't afford Breno. We probably can't afford McDaniel. Maybe McDonald, maybe McDaniel if he comes really cheap on a short deal. Probably can't afford Hauschka.

If Bowie looks ready, gotta save the money. If Willson/McCoy look ready, gotta save the money. If Jordan Hill isn't ready, still gotta save the money. Unless you think we don't need Sherman. Then it makes things a bit more breathable.

After Russell and Sherm are done, we're going to have more than 50 million tied up in four players. Then you start talking Mebane, Kam, Lynch, Okung, and you've got like 75 million tied up in 8 players. 2/3 of your cap in 8 players. I don't think we have room to add another 7-8 million dollar contract. I don't even think we have room to add another 4 million dollar contract, long-term.

Am I wrong? Am I missing something? Please, please don't simply respond by saying John Schneider finds a way because he's John Schneider. I would love to think that we can re-sign and extend everybody and all hold hands around the fire, but I don't even know that a miracle can do this. The good news, is that most of the guys will be back next year, let's go get another one.

Lynch is a next year issue. Who knows what his odometer will look like by then? As for the rest, here goes.

You are absolutely correct, there is only room on the roster for 7 or 8 big deals, and you will probably have to count Russell as two of those. We are going to lose fan favorites. There is no doubt about that. The compensatory picks we get will be of small consolation to fans, but they matter.

This year is when John Schneider begins to earn his raises. This is uncharted territory for Seahawk fans, having half our team both coveted and earning a lot of eyeball as free agents. However, there is a myth that John and Pete somehow got lucky with late round picks. Which is unsustainable. I adamantly counter that Pete's program is so good at developing players that we can expect the late round success to continue. Pete's program is absolutely sustainable.

I would not be averse to trading/losing to free agency Richard Sherman or any other star besides Wilson/Earl/Kam (who is locked up anyway) if need be. I know that statement is as popular as drinking horse piss, especially in the case of Sherman, but bear with me. Take fan sentimentality out of the mix, and there are a couple of undeniable facts.

As a secondary coach(and head coach here), Pete coached a Niners secondary, a Vikings secondary, and a Seahawks secondary into what is statistically supported as 3 of the best secondaries of the last 40 years. There is also some merit to believing that he knows what the hell he is doing schematically when you consider how he has made guys like Maxwell, Browner, and Lane look like very good NFL players. The only constant in those 3 teams? Pete. His program and approach will continue to develop good athletes into good players. I used to think the draft was all about finding good players, but it has been watching this program that has convinced me just want a role player development plays in a great program.

Also, much as we love Sherman here, there is some merit to the argument you hear from NFL players that Sherman isn't a true lockdown player, primarily because he plays so much cover 3 zone, and he plays the right side only. I am not denying the talent we have seen on the field, or cheapening his ability, but outside of week two on a slow Boldin, we do not see Seattle scheme to take away the best receiver on the other team by putting one DB on him. Any team willing to pay Richard huge money to go all over the field and lock down a receiver would be purchasing an unknown quantitiy which I think Tical is well aware of. My point? Paying Richard top CB money would be silly. I would not begrudge him a big contract, top ten, but if Seattle signed him to the biggest deal a CB has gotten they would be paying him to do things they schematically will not even ask him to do. Add to that Pete's track record of great secondaries, and I think we can trust this front office to sustain good defense without going into cap hell to keep players beyond a small group of stars.

How much are you expecting Sherman to command? I've said it many times, but you have to throw Revis's deal out of the equation because there are zero guarantees in it. It's a succession of one-year deals. Second highest paid corner is making $10M/yr. The baseline for Sherman's deal will likely be set by Alterraun Verner (UFA), Patrick Peterson (eligible for extension), and Aqib Talib (UFA). Unless three other teams are planning to hand out $16M/yr contracts for a CB, I don't think you have to worry about Sherman's deal being out-of-control. Luckily, we have the good fortune of waiting for Verner and Talib to get done before creating a number for Sherman.

Sherman's deal needs to get done this year. The hawks have the leverage. They can offer hi. An extension with 10mil per year now. For a guy that hasn't made his money yet, and is being paid $600k, it's a huge deal. He is one serious injury away from a prove it deal. He also can get paid 10m next year instead of $600k. The hawks can get a lower contract for sherm now because of this leverage.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

The reason San Francisco has so many picks is because they keep letting good depth players leave in free agency and are getting compensatory picks in return. Goldson, Delanie Walker, Ginn, etc. Their "good team" cycle started one year earlier than us. I would expect Seattle to get multiple compensatory picks next year.

Correct. And it's a fact they're 1-2 years ahead of us in the dynasty cycle. Yet riddle me this..... who won a SUPERBOWL and who put up meaningless regular season records? What? I can't hear you Lady T so speak up already.

 

[mikeak]

Not going to quote massive posts but just reply in general.

Seahawks draft - we and the 49ers had the most complete rosters. It is extremely hard to draft in that position and have what is looked upon as a good draft within a year. Even first rounders (if we had one) should have a tough time to crack our 2013 roster.

I am not willing to say we had a bad 2013 draft. Most if the ayers are still in the organization. I think Simon and Michael make lots of rosters in this league but pure speculation at this point.

Without further research if I recall correctly the 49ers 2012 draft yielded basically nothing.

Davidseven - in general we agree about teams like NE & GB. I just think all such reasoning gets very skewed when you put in one of the best QBs in the league. You move NE to the NFC West and they win less than 8 games last year......

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Time for me to earn my class pessimist label. I've been reading posts since the Super Bowl about guys we "have" to keep, to find a way to get done, etc. Doing my remedial math and going over some basic numbers, I just really don't see that we can do much of anything at all, let alone sign anybody to pretty large contracts, i.e. Bennett and Golden.

From the reports on the radio, we're currently somewhere around 1-2 million over the cap. I've seen arguments that we're 1-2 million under, but whatever, we'll just consider it that we're at the cap for these purposes. This, of course, is without Bennett's money, without Tate, Breno, McDaniels/Donald, Hauschka, etc., etc., etc.

So, first, we've got to find a way to field a team, right? We need some bodies on the D-Line, maybe some on the O-Line. Just in order to field a team, we can cut Sidney Rice, right? The popular names that everybody throws around to cut are Rice, Miller, Red and Clem. Saves us 24 million against the cap this season. Right? Follow me?

The popular sentiment around here is that we immediately can spend that 24 million. We can give 8 of it to Bennett, 6 to Golden, re-sign Breno and McDaniel and Hauschka, maybe re-negotiate Red and basically be done with it right? I know contracts are for more complex than this, but we're in the ballpark.

A few things keep looming in my head. Sure, we have those four guys that are "dead weight". But we really don't have anybody like this coming up in the next few years. The next steps are to start talking about cutting guys like Lynch and Mebane. A little different from cutting Sidney Rice and Zach Miller. So we're not going to have the luxury of just cutting dead weight every year. The fat will basically be trimmed after this one-time deal.

The other issue I see is that we can't afford to be at the cap. By the end of next season, we need to find a way to come up with 30 million, maybe more, to keep Russell Wilson and Sherman. Thomas may not cost a bunch up front, but his contract will be really big in later years too. Okung may actually save us a couple of million up-front as he has a pretty big cap number now. 30 million, gentlemen (and ladies), 30 milllion. 30 million.

So, I view this as our one chance. I view the cutting of Rice, Miller, Red and Clem as our chance to keep Richard Sherman. If you want to find a way to do it, that is your way to do it. But you need to change your philosophy from "if there is any way to keep player x, we'll find it", to "if there is any way to cut player x, we have to do it". We are deepest team in the NFL? Time to prove it.

If we want to keep Sherman, we can't afford Bennett. We can't afford Golden. We can't afford Breno. We probably can't afford McDaniel. Maybe McDonald, maybe McDaniel if he comes really cheap on a short deal. Probably can't afford Hauschka.

If Bowie looks ready, gotta save the money. If Willson/McCoy look ready, gotta save the money. If Jordan Hill isn't ready, still gotta save the money. Unless you think we don't need Sherman. Then it makes things a bit more breathable.

After Russell and Sherm are done, we're going to have more than 50 million tied up in four players. Then you start talking Mebane, Kam, Lynch, Okung, and you've got like 75 million tied up in 8 players. 2/3 of your cap in 8 players. I don't think we have room to add another 7-8 million dollar contract. I don't even think we have room to add another 4 million dollar contract, long-term.

Am I wrong? Am I missing something? Please, please don't simply respond by saying John Schneider finds a way because he's John Schneider. I would love to think that we can re-sign and extend everybody and all hold hands around the fire, but I don't even know that a miracle can do this. The good news, is that most of the guys will be back next year, let's go get another one.

Lynch is a next year issue. Who knows what his odometer will look like by then? As for the rest, here goes.

You are absolutely correct, there is only room on the roster for 7 or 8 big deals, and you will probably have to count Russell as two of those. We are going to lose fan favorites. There is no doubt about that. The compensatory picks we get will be of small consolation to fans, but they matter.

This year is when John Schneider begins to earn his raises. This is uncharted territory for Seahawk fans, having half our team both coveted and earning a lot of eyeball as free agents. However, there is a myth that John and Pete somehow got lucky with late round picks. Which is unsustainable. I adamantly counter that Pete's program is so good at developing players that we can expect the late round success to continue. Pete's program is absolutely sustainable.

I would not be averse to trading/losing to free agency Richard Sherman or any other star besides Wilson/Earl/Kam (who is locked up anyway) if need be. I know that statement is as popular as drinking horse piss, especially in the case of Sherman, but bear with me. Take fan sentimentality out of the mix, and there are a couple of undeniable facts.

As a secondary coach(and head coach here), Pete coached a Niners secondary, a Vikings secondary, and a Seahawks secondary into what is statistically supported as 3 of the best secondaries of the last 40 years. There is also some merit to believing that he knows what the hell he is doing schematically when you consider how he has made guys like Maxwell, Browner, and Lane look like very good NFL players. The only constant in those 3 teams? Pete. His program and approach will continue to develop good athletes into good players. I used to think the draft was all about finding good players, but it has been watching this program that has convinced me just want a role player development plays in a great program.

Also, much as we love Sherman here, there is some merit to the argument you hear from NFL players that Sherman isn't a true lockdown player, primarily because he plays so much cover 3 zone, and he plays the right side only. I am not denying the talent we have seen on the field, or cheapening his ability, but outside of week two on a slow Boldin, we do not see Seattle scheme to take away the best receiver on the other team by putting one DB on him. Any team willing to pay Richard huge money to go all over the field and lock down a receiver would be purchasing an unknown quantitiy which I think Tical is well aware of. My point? Paying Richard top CB money would be silly. I would not begrudge him a big contract, top ten, but if Seattle signed him to the biggest deal a CB has gotten they would be paying him to do things they schematically will not even ask him to do. Add to that Pete's track record of great secondaries, and I think we can trust this front office to sustain good defense without going into cap hell to keep players beyond a small group of stars.

How much are you expecting Sherman to command? I've said it many times, but you have to throw Revis's deal out of the equation because there are zero guarantees in it. It's a succession of one-year deals. Second highest paid corner is making $10M/yr. The baseline for Sherman's deal will likely be set by Alterraun Verner (UFA), Patrick Peterson (eligible for extension), and Aqib Talib (UFA). Unless three other teams are planning to hand out $16M/yr contracts for a CB, I don't think you have to worry about Sherman's deal being out-of-control. Luckily, we have the good fortune of waiting for Verner and Talib to get done before creating a number for Sherman.

Sherman's deal needs to get done this year. The hawks have the leverage. They can offer hi. An extension with 10mil per year now. For a guy that hasn't made his money yet, and is being paid $600k, it's a huge deal. He is one serious injury away from a prove it deal. He also can get paid 10m next year instead of $600k. The hawks can get a lower contract for sherm now because of this leverage.

Relax he'll be done in 2015.

 

[willyum]

all the people and critics out there saying Seattle won't be able to keep everyone, do they think in the meantime, they are going to go through the drafts and free agencies with their thumbs up their asses? Schneider and the Hawks are in this position because of a reason and that is they are masters at finding talent, and they are not going to just stop out of nowhere.

 

[Tical21]

Sherman is a smart guy. I don't know that I can see him taking the bait of a lesser contract for the immediate satisfaction. He might, you never know. I'm sure it is awfully hard to turn down 10 million dollars. When I was trying to figure numbers, I had him at 13 and Russell at 20. If Russell has a big year in 2014, no way we get him for much under 20, if not over. Of course, with a contract that big, you can move the money around to make the bad hits whenever you want to, but we're going to have to cut a bunch of players just to sign the QB, and cut a bunch more just to sign Sherman. Which I'm okay with, I think they are both more that deserving, but like many others have said, the draft becomes your life blood, and you aren't going to be able to add any contracts.

The question kind of becomes....would you rather have Bennett and Breno and maybe McDonald for a few years, or Richard Sherman?

 

[TJH]

I get crucified every time I say this on here, but if we let Sherm walk this whole thing becomes managable.

 

[mikeak]

I get crucified every time I say this on here, but if we let Sherm walk this whole thing becomes managable.

And I get crucified when I say if we hadn't signed Percy then your post wouldn't be needed....

Actually this is pretty good thread. 90% of the posts are respectful and add information for an interesting debate with different viewpoints

 

[mikeak]

Sherman is a smart guy. I don't know that I can see him taking the bait of a lesser contract for the immediate satisfaction. He might, you never know. I'm sure it is awfully hard to turn down 10 million dollars. When I was trying to figure numbers, I had him at 13 and Russell at 20. If Russell has a big year in 2014, no way we get him for much under 20, if not over. Of course, with a contract that big, you can move the money around to make the bad hits whenever you want to, but we're going to have to cut a bunch of players just to sign the QB, and cut a bunch more just to sign Sherman. Which I'm okay with, I think they are both more that deserving, but like many others have said, the draft becomes your life blood, and you aren't going to be able to add any contracts.

The question kind of becomes....would you rather have Bennett and Breno and maybe McDonald for a few years, or Richard Sherman?

Russell is a durable qb. He has in theory many years to make his money. I truly believe he will take a lesser deal knowing he has 10 years in the league (at least) and will make a lot of money and better to be in a good team than to be the highest paid. It allows the team to add the pieces that protects him and give him outlets. Not maximizing his money will pay more in the long run

CB is a completely different situation. You are more exposed and speed is more if value. While some last a long time it is not the norm. Sherman need to make a lot if money in the upcoming contract BUT it is a huge risk for him to not sign a deal now.

If I was offered $10million now or if I could take a bunch if hits and run around for a year I was given $12 million next year then I am taking the $10million now.

There is one other thing out there. Adrian Foster sold his outside football revenue streams for millions if dollars. A company is betting that by paying him millions and them getting his endorsement money they will go plus. The player gets a secure amount if money knowing that one bad year / significant injury can make them irrelevant. Interesting concept and will be interesting if some of our stars do the same to secure a large wad if cash

 

[SeatownJay]

"We're doomed."

Quoted so Blitzer doesn't have to repeat me.