Seahawks reportedly make huge contract offer to Russell

[Hawkfan77]

Year 1-2 is fine but year 3 is what you termed prohibitive. The key for everyone is to relax and accept this may be just like the Flacco negotiation. Tell me is Baltimore hamstrung? Does Flacco's contact look insane now given the current market? No? So why are we stressing out?

Flacco's contract prevented them from signing Bolden and Torry Smith/Ngata this year. The same thing will happen in the next couple of years for us. Irvin and Okung are already gone. If they don't sign Wagner this year, he'll be gone next year. The fact that numerous players on D took less money to keep the team together makes Wilson look bad. I think Wilson has impacted Bennett's holdout.

What players took less? Please go into further detail

Bennett and Avril both took less than market value. Cam Chancellor's contract is very team friendly too. His cap hit is relatively low until the last year.

That's not true. Bennett did not take less than market value, the only 2 teams that showed interest in Bennett were the Hawks and the Bears. And Avril is paid accordingly. Kam's deal at the time was not a "team friendly" deal, they locked him up after he had a so-so year coming off of a couple bad playoff games. I remember quite a few didn't even want Kam re-signed because of the level of his play right before he re-upped.

 

[netskier]

This thread is what happens when capitalism attacks socialism, which it ALWAYS does. It makes for interesting reading on two levels as I ship my morning coffee.

Wilson is being a capitalist going for the gold, and not just a lot of gold, but the most gold. So he is being greedy. This is attractive to the capitalist fans, and ugly to the socialist fans. But, do the fans self identify in this way? Not consciously, I think.

Clearly the team benefits when the players utilize a socialist model to choose lower salaries for themselves in order to maximize roster strength, as the defensive stars have reputedly done to some extent.

I believe that a team roster, which collectively organized to set their own salaries to maximize roster strength, would, on average, beat the teams not perfused this way. In other words, the socialist model organized teams would dominate those teams whose salaries were organized capitalistically.

 

[netskier]

Damn phone. *beat the teams not organized this way.

 

[ptisme]

and apparently he has said no....which is just ridiculous if its true...

2000% more than his current "Ridiculous" salary.
He's worth the 22 + M that Rodgers is getting.
How many TD's has Rodgers RUSHED for in the last two Seasons? Proof is in the doing, not the stats.
We went from Peyton Manning being the best to ever play the game, to 'NO', scratch that, NOW it's Aaron Rodgers that is the best to ever play the game.
All Wilson did was produce when the Season progressed, and the games got tight...enough in fact, that IF Aaron Rodgers were indeed the best to ever play the game, and in the "ELITE" category? he would have been able edge out Wilson to win the NFCGG in January, and he couldn't do it.
The Defense is indeed responsible for keeping the all mighty AR from capitalizing for the victory (carry the team on his back for the win).......Like the Non-Elite Wilson and the Seahawks Special Teams did.
When the chips were down, Wilson did his share of coming from behind to HELP win the game......again.

LOL.

Rushing TD stats for a QB are the basis for Wilson deserving Rodgers money? And arent rushing TD's.....stats??

And yes, as time goes on (Manning getting older) other QB's do take the mantle. Thats how it works. Rodgers being the best QB in the game is pretty unanimous.

You think the Seahawks won the NFC Championship game because Wilson was a better QB than Rodgers?

I love Wilson, but the hawks won that game in spite of him, not because of him. Rodgers has a nice supporting cast, but he would drool to have the same roster that Wilson does.

In fact, as long as we are using your logic, if Wilson was "elite" or even in the same category as Tom Brady wouldnt he have been able to edge out Brady for the Super Bowl? He couldnt do it.....

That logic doesnt work well, does it?

This.... The Seahawks would be looking to Four-peat next year if Rodgers was their signal caller.. Would probably go down as the greatest dynasty in NFL history.

 

[Hawkfan77]

This.... The Seahawks would be looking to Four-peat next year if Rodgers was their signal caller.. Would probably go down as the greatest dynasty in NFL history.

Yeah, if only Wilson had been in the league since 2005. Because we all know Rodgers first 3 years in the league were much more impressive than Russell's first 3 years, right?

I don't get posts like this. Yeah and the Hawks would also be looking at a 4peat if they had Gronkowski at TE and Julio Jones at WR along with Dallas' OL. Plus I'd like to add Suh and JJ Watt to the DL. Think about how good this team could be if we had those guys!

 

[grizbob]

This thread is what happens when capitalism attacks socialism, which it ALWAYS does. It makes for interesting reading on two levels as I ship my morning coffee.

Wilson is being a capitalist going for the gold, and not just a lot of gold, but the most gold. So he is being greedy. This is attractive to the capitalist fans, and ugly to the socialist fans. But, do the fans self identify in this way? Not consciously, I think.

Clearly the team benefits when the players utilize a socialist model to choose lower salaries for themselves in order to maximize roster strength, as the defensive stars have reputedly done to some extent.

I believe that a team roster, which collectively organized to set their own salaries to maximize roster strength, would, on average, beat the teams not perfused this way. In other words, the socialist model organized teams would dominate those teams whose salaries were organized capitalistically.

PWR forum is 3 doors down :141847_bnono:

 

[ptisme]

This.... The Seahawks would be looking to Four-peat next year if Rodgers was their signal caller.. Would probably go down as the greatest dynasty in NFL history.

Yeah, if only Wilson had been in the league since 2005. Because we all know Rodgers first 3 years in the league were much more impressive than Russell's first 3 years, right?

I don't get posts like this. Yeah and the Hawks would also be looking at a 4peat if they had Gronkowski at TE and Julio Jones at WR along with Dallas' OL. Plus I'd like to add Suh and JJ Watt to the DL. Think about how good this team could be if we had those guys!

Really? In the last play of the SB this year the ball should have been in the hands of?:
A: Wilson

B: Lynch

 

[theincrediblesok]

I've barely been here this offseason just because of the Wilson threads. I don't see why it affect's anyone's life that he signs a deal or not. It's a decision he's making for himself. I for one don't lose sleep over it

 

[OkieHawk]

I didn't want to start a new thread, so here is updated information per Rapaport:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... l-outright

 

[Hawkpower]

This.... The Seahawks would be looking to Four-peat next year if Rodgers was their signal caller.. Would probably go down as the greatest dynasty in NFL history.

Yeah, if only Wilson had been in the league since 2005. Because we all know Rodgers first 3 years in the league were much more impressive than Russell's first 3 years, right?

I don't get posts like this. Yeah and the Hawks would also be looking at a 4peat if they had Gronkowski at TE and Julio Jones at WR along with Dallas' OL. Plus I'd like to add Suh and JJ Watt to the DL. Think about how good this team could be if we had those guys!

The comparison was made because:

A. Due to Wilson looking for Rodgers-like (or better) money, the comparisons are going to made.

B. The poster implied that Wilson was much better than Rodgers based on the fact that Russ has more rushing TD's (lol) and the fact that the seahawks won the NFCCG. Which was so ridiculous as a measuring stick it had to briefly be addressed

 

[scutterhawk]

LOL.

Rushing TD stats for a QB are the basis for Wilson deserving Rodgers money? And arent rushing TD's.....stats??

And yes, as time goes on (Manning getting older) other QB's do take the mantle. Thats how it works. Rodgers being the best QB in the game is pretty unanimous.

You think the Seahawks won the NFC Championship game because Wilson was a better QB than Rodgers?

I love Wilson, but the hawks won that game in spite of him, not because of him. Rodgers has a nice supporting cast, but he would drool to have the same roster that Wilson does.

In fact, as long as we are using your logic, if Wilson was "elite" or even in the same category as Tom Brady wouldnt he have been able to edge out Brady for the Super Bowl? He couldnt do it.....

That logic doesnt work well, does it?

Manning getting older pushes him out of being the "Best To Ever Play The Game", Okay.... :roll: if you say so.
So now that Rodgers has passed him with the Most TD's in a Season :roll: , (stats) that makes him the next obvious "Best To Ever Play The Game"
I keep hearing, how a truly "ELITE" Quarterback can put his team "On His Back", and carry them on to victory, yet, "One Of The Best To Ever Play The Game" Aaron Rodgers was unable to do it against the Seahawks...Brady did it, but Rodgers did NOT.
Wilson threw the ball for a TD, so when time ran out, the Seahawks had the (higher score), in spite of Kearse not catching those balls that wound up being interceptions...Those were on Kearse , but the "Stats" has them as interceptions that were thrown by Wilson.
Why was the game played at the Clink?, because the Seahawks had the HFA for the NFCCG, not in GB where the all mighty Rodgers with all the accolades and "Stats" calls home.
That old saying that you win as a team, and you lose as a team is bullshit? because If the Seahawks Win, it's because of the Defense, but if they lose, it's because of Wilson, is that about how you see it?, is that your "Logic"?
Wilson got the ball down to the 1 Yard line IN SPITE of the Defense giving up a 10 point lead cushion, that the Seahawks had on Brady and the Patriots...a bad play-call, and Wilson is responsible for the loss?
Tom Brady edged out Wilson in the Super Bowl, because he "Put his team on his back", and ate up that 10 point cushion that Wilson & Co. had accumulated on the Pats.
So yes, my logic is still in tact.

 

[HansGruber]

Rushing TD stats for a QB are the basis for Wilson deserving Rodgers money?

They should definitely be part of it. If you have watched many Seahawks games in which Russell Wilson has led the comebacks, you would notice a specific trend - that comeback is often sparked by Wilson's ability to scramble out of the pocket and pickup the required yards, first downs, or scores with his feet. In fact, when I think of Wilson-led comebacks, I often picture his repeated scrambles for first downs in the last minute of the game, keeping an eventual game-winning drive alive.

And yes, as time goes on (Manning getting older) other QB's do take the mantle. Thats how it works. Rodgers being the best QB in the game is pretty unanimous.

Well, until he goes to the playoffs, of course. Or, if he's playing an NFC West defense. Then he turns into garbage statistically, and his team's record shows that.

You think the Seahawks won the NFC Championship game because Wilson was a better QB than Rodgers?

Most definitely. How many times was Rodgers gifted the ball in Seahawks territory? And how often was GB able to convert those drives into points?

Further, last I checked, it was Russell Wilson's ability to lead driving scores late in the game that led to us even having a chance at a comeback. Of course, you'll find some way to discount that.

I love Wilson, but the hawks won that game in spite of him, not because of him. Rodgers has a nice supporting cast, but he would drool to have the same roster that Wilson does.

This is where I question if you're actually a real football fan. You're going to seriously state that GB has a worse offense than Seattle? LOL. That speaks volumes.

In fact, as long as we are using your logic, if Wilson was "elite" or even in the same category as Tom Brady wouldnt he have been able to edge out Brady for the Super Bowl? He couldnt do it.....

In fact, he did what was required to win that game. He doesn't get to choose the play calls.

That logic doesnt work well, does it?

The problem with your "logic" is that anyone who's been watching the Seahawks for a few years immediately realizes how wrong all your points are. I can think of very few QBs in the NFL who have been weaker against the Seahawks and the rest of the NFCW (and weaker in the postseason) than the Packers. I laugh every time the pundits declare they will win the next Superbowl. We hear it every year, and yet, every year they choke it up in the postseason. The Packers, and specifically Aaron Rodgers, are absolute garbage against quality defenses.

But yeah, he got you a ton of fantasy points last season, and me too. I wish he could have done that when it mattered, and against quality teams. It would have netted me a fantasy championship. Luckily, I play in a 2-QB league and Russell Wilson was my other QB. Wilson absolutely crushed it in fantasy last season, picking me up 50 points on the championship game. It was actually Rodgers' poor performance that cost me in the end.

 

[LolaRox]

Truth is nobody knows what's really going on, just a bunch of speculation from different 'sources'. The overall numbers and what Russ wants/asks for keep changing everyday. How would anyone outside of John/Pete and Mark/Russ know that for sure and why would they share that information? This team normally keeps their business close to the vest.

I don't, and won't, hold any of this against Russ and I don't think it is contradictory to his character or what he's represented to this point. There is a business side to this football thing and fans seem to be accepting of that concept only when it applies to the team. It's not personal.

I suggest anyone who's interested read Rapoport's story that was linked above. Do you really think Russ should accept less guarantees than Newton, Flacco & Ryan?

[tweet]https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/625362464654393345[/tweet]

 

[CamanoIslandJQ]

Why is it that the Seahawks front office "offers", and the RW camp "demands". It's a complicated negotiation of terms with no current firm deadline, that's why it's taking so long. It'll all work out in the end w/o character bashing the player that has played 3 years for less salary than the long snapper. Any $$ RW receives in his contract will be "fair" IMO.
Come on pre-season, we need something else to discuss.

 

[Hawkpower]

Rushing TD stats for a QB are the basis for Wilson deserving Rodgers money?

They should definitely be part of it. If you have watched many Seahawks games in which Russell Wilson has led the comebacks, you would notice a specific trend - that comeback is often sparked by Wilson's ability to scramble out of the pocket and pickup the required yards, first downs, or scores with his feet. In fact, when I think of Wilson-led comebacks, I often picture his repeated scrambles for first downs in the last minute of the game, keeping an eventual game-winning drive alive.

And yes, as time goes on (Manning getting older) other QB's do take the mantle. Thats how it works. Rodgers being the best QB in the game is pretty unanimous.

Well, until he goes to the playoffs, of course. Or, if he's playing an NFC West defense. Then he turns into garbage statistically, and his team's record shows that.

You think the Seahawks won the NFC Championship game because Wilson was a better QB than Rodgers?

Most definitely. How many times was Rodgers gifted the ball in Seahawks territory? And how often was GB able to convert those drives into points?

Further, last I checked, it was Russell Wilson's ability to lead driving scores late in the game that led to us even having a chance at a comeback. Of course, you'll find some way to discount that.

I love Wilson, but the hawks won that game in spite of him, not because of him. Rodgers has a nice supporting cast, but he would drool to have the same roster that Wilson does.

This is where I question if you're actually a real football fan. You're going to seriously state that GB has a worse offense than Seattle? LOL. That speaks volumes.

In fact, as long as we are using your logic, if Wilson was "elite" or even in the same category as Tom Brady wouldnt he have been able to edge out Brady for the Super Bowl? He couldnt do it.....

In fact, he did what was required to win that game. He doesn't get to choose the play calls.

That logic doesnt work well, does it?

The problem with your "logic" is that anyone who's been watching the Seahawks for a few years immediately realizes how wrong all your points are. I can think of very few QBs in the NFL who have been weaker against the Seahawks and the rest of the NFCW (and weaker in the postseason) than the Packers. I laugh every time the pundits declare they will win the next Superbowl. We hear it every year, and yet, every year they choke it up in the postseason. The Packers, and specifically Aaron Rodgers, are absolute garbage against quality defenses.

But yeah, he got you a ton of fantasy points last season, and me too. I wish he could have done that when it mattered, and against quality teams. It would have netted me a fantasy championship. Luckily, I play in a 2-QB league and Russell Wilson was my other QB. Wilson absolutely crushed it in fantasy last season, picking me up 50 points on the championship game. It was actually Rodgers' poor performance that cost me in the end.

Lol...well you typed alot of stuff there, and some of it probably has good merit. Other parts, not so much.

I do want to clarify though that I stated Seattle has a better ROSTER than GB, which they do. Yes, Rodgers would drool to play on our roster, as would any QB in this league. 2 TD's and field goal gets you a win 90 percent of the time with this defense. Hand it off to one of the top 3 RB's in the league.

Wilson will do well to remember that through this process. I see the narrative here that we cant just plug and play any old QB. Maybe not. But Wilson cant just plug in any old roster around him and be a Super Bowl winning QB either.

Both sides need each other. Which is why I believe rational heads will eventually prevail.

 

[Hawkfan77]

This.... The Seahawks would be looking to Four-peat next year if Rodgers was their signal caller.. Would probably go down as the greatest dynasty in NFL history.

Yeah, if only Wilson had been in the league since 2005. Because we all know Rodgers first 3 years in the league were much more impressive than Russell's first 3 years, right?

I don't get posts like this. Yeah and the Hawks would also be looking at a 4peat if they had Gronkowski at TE and Julio Jones at WR along with Dallas' OL. Plus I'd like to add Suh and JJ Watt to the DL. Think about how good this team could be if we had those guys!

The comparison was made because:

A. Due to Wilson looking for Rodgers-like (or better) money, the comparisons are going to made.

B. The poster implied that Wilson was much better than Rodgers based on the fact that Russ has more rushing TD's (lol) and the fact that the seahawks won the NFCCG. Which was so ridiculous as a measuring stick it had to briefly be addressed

The comparisons are lazy and thats my point. Rodgers got his 5 year 110 million dollar deal in 2013 when the salary cap was what? 121 million? The salary cap is now close to 144 and expected to go as high as 170 in the next few years. A 20 million APY deal will soon be the new 15 million APY deal. Russell doesn't have to be as good or better than Rodgers to justify being paid less than Rodgers when it comes to a percentage of the salary cap, which is all that matters.

**I understand APY does not truly matter as it pertains to the cap, but since everyone is so hung up on Russell's APY compared to what Rodgers currently has as his APY, let's do a little demonstration:

Rodgers received APY deal of 22 million when the cap was 121 million, thats a cap percentage of 18.1% at the time his deal was signed. If Wilson receives an APY of let's say 24 million when the cap is 143, that's a cap percentage of 16.78%. And that's with Russell having a much better resume at the time of their respective new deals.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Rodgers had the #2 defense in 2009 and 2010, he beat the #1 defense by DVOA the Pittsburgh Steelers to win his first SB. Rodgers had a good defense to win him a ring. Rodgers even stated that he doesn't even call his own plays, he even said that even Peyton Manning doesn't, so the perception of these elite QBs calling their own plays is false, and Wilson have been ridiculed because he doesn't.

"Well, Peyton doesn't do that," Rodgers said during a recent interview. "Nobody does that."

http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-packe ... er-will-he

 

[grizbob]

It's going to be the longest 6 days in the history of mankind :180670:

 

[TheHawkster]

Why is it that the Seahawks front office "offers", and the RW camp "demands". It's a complicated negotiation of terms with no current firm deadline, that's why it's taking so long. It'll all work out in the end w/o character bashing the player that has played 3 years for less salary than the long snapper. Any $$ RW receives in his contract will be "fair" IMO.
Come on pre-season, we need something else to discuss.

That is typical union vs company contract lingo.
don't get wrapped up in the verbage, it's just posturing.
Offer and demand from contract negotiations are like prosecution and defandant when watching a court case.

 

[SeaChase]

One part of me thinks that he has by far exceeded his rookie contract, but at the same time isn't in the top 5 QB's in the league. So I think the 21 Million a year, not knowing the true details of the deal, is probably a good deal.