Someone on another board said the below, what do you think?

[Escamillo]

Guess I'll have to be the one to disagree with the consensus shown in this thread.
I love RW, but I'm not in favor of paying him 20 million a year, because I've yet to see any instance of a team winning a SB by doing that. And I've seen multiple of instances of teams destroying themselves by doing that. That should end the argument right there. Those of you in favor of paying RW 20 million, please cite an instance of a SB-winning team that had a 20 million per year QB. I can tell you right now that there are plenty of examples of SB-winning teams that did not have 20-million per year QBs or QBs that made 1/6th of their team's salary.

SF is going to destroy themselves like the Bears did with Cutler, like the Ravens did with Flacco, like the Cowboys did with Romo, when they pay Kaep 20 million. We'll see if the Seahawks go down that same road to destroying their own team to pay one guy 1/6th of the team's salary.

Oh, and those of you who have said that anyone against paying the QB 20 million "doesn't understand football"? LOLOLOL
It's you guys that don't understand football. You've bought into the "We need an elite QB, therefore money is no object when it comes to QB" philosophy. A philosophy that has never worked.

And those of you who say that anyone who is against paying RW 20 million has never watched 38 years of Seahawks QBs? Seahawks actually have had good QBs before RW. Hasselbeck was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Moon was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Kreig was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Yes, Mirer, Stouffer, Gelbaugh, Huard (sorry Brock), McGwire, Whitehurst, et al were mediocre at best, horrible at worst. But that history doesn't necessitate paying RW 1/6th of the team's total salary.

BTW, I listen to various podcasts of sports radio stations around the country, and lots of them have on as a guest from time to time Greg Cosell, of NFL Films. He has multiple times stated that the consensus across the league is that RW is merely an "above average" QB. That's what the consensus is among the coaches in the NFL. And they literally laugh out loud if you put RW in the same breath as Luck, according to Cosell. And he pisses me off whenever he says this, because he says it with a certain glee, like he gets off on putting RW down, and he also tends to put the Seahawks down in general. But my point is, if it's true that RW is considered just an "above average QB" across the league, it might be the case that he won't be able to command 20 million per year on the market anyway. He'll get well paid regardless, and he'll get plenty of endorsement money too, but it may be possible to keep him for less than 20 million per year.

 

[razor150]

I agree with a lot of what he says, until he says Wilson would be easy to replace. QBs bust way to much to consider it an easy position to replace. I also think he is wrong if he thinks the Wilson we have now will be the same Wilson 5 years from now. I just don't believe that. Wilson still has a lot of potential and if we can find him a #1 reciever and a decent offensive line I think that poster will regret ever posting that.

 

[Escamillo]

Simply, I would just be real careful about how "all-in" we go to re-signing a player that really has ONLY helped this team win by making smart decisions, not turning the ball over and being clutch.

My brain just exploded. Romo and Flacco get $20 mill a year and we have a QB who is ONLY clutch so we should let him walk.

:177692:

Romo, Flacco, Cutler, Bradford, Rivers, et al, are actually the examples of why it should give teams pause to pay one guy 1/6th of the team's salary. This ain't basketball. There are ~50 players; paying one guy 1/6th of the total salary would appear to be a risky move just mathematically speaking, and has never resulted in a Lombardi (I don't think).

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Guess I'll have to be the one to disagree with the consensus shown in this thread.
I love RW, but I'm not in favor of paying him 20 million a year, because I've yet to see any instance of a team winning a SB by doing that. And I've seen multiple of instances of teams destroying themselves by doing that. That should end the argument right there. Those of you in favor of paying RW 20 million, please cite an instance of a SB-winning team that had a 20 million per year QB. I can tell you right now that there are plenty of examples of SB-winning teams that did not have 20-million per year QBs or QBs that made 1/6th of their team's salary.

SF is going to destroy themselves like the Bears did with Cutler, like the Ravens did with Flacco, like the Cowboys did with Romo, when they pay Kaep 20 million. We'll see if the Seahawks go down that same road to destroying their own team to pay one guy 1/6th of the team's salary.

Oh, and those of you who have said that anyone against paying the QB 20 million "doesn't understand football"? LOLOLOL
It's you guys that don't understand football. You've bought into the "We need an elite QB, therefore money is no object when it comes to QB" philosophy. A philosophy that has never worked.

And those of you who say that anyone who is against paying RW 20 million has never watched 38 years of Seahawks QBs? Seahawks actually have had good QBs before RW. Hasselbeck was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Moon was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Kreig was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Yes, Mirer, Stouffer, Gelbaugh, Huard (sorry Brock), McGwire, Whitehurst, et al were mediocre at best, horrible at worst. But that history doesn't necessitate paying RW 1/6th of the team's total salary.

Even if we pay him 22 million that would be under 15% of the cap which is projected to be 150 million in 2016 more likely much higher. So lock him up and watch 18-22 million be the steal of the century.

 

[Escamillo]

Guess I'll have to be the one to disagree with the consensus shown in this thread.
I love RW, but I'm not in favor of paying him 20 million a year, because I've yet to see any instance of a team winning a SB by doing that. And I've seen multiple of instances of teams destroying themselves by doing that. That should end the argument right there. Those of you in favor of paying RW 20 million, please cite an instance of a SB-winning team that had a 20 million per year QB. I can tell you right now that there are plenty of examples of SB-winning teams that did not have 20-million per year QBs or QBs that made 1/6th of their team's salary.

SF is going to destroy themselves like the Bears did with Cutler, like the Ravens did with Flacco, like the Cowboys did with Romo, when they pay Kaep 20 million. We'll see if the Seahawks go down that same road to destroying their own team to pay one guy 1/6th of the team's salary.

Oh, and those of you who have said that anyone against paying the QB 20 million "doesn't understand football"? LOLOLOL
It's you guys that don't understand football. You've bought into the "We need an elite QB, therefore money is no object when it comes to QB" philosophy. A philosophy that has never worked.

And those of you who say that anyone who is against paying RW 20 million has never watched 38 years of Seahawks QBs? Seahawks actually have had good QBs before RW. Hasselbeck was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Moon was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Kreig was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Yes, Mirer, Stouffer, Gelbaugh, Huard (sorry Brock), McGwire, Whitehurst, et al were mediocre at best, horrible at worst. But that history doesn't necessitate paying RW 1/6th of the team's total salary.

Even if we pay him 22 million that would be under 15% of the cap which is projected to be 150 million in 2016 more likely much higher. So lock him up and watch 18-22 million be the steal of the century.

Why would he agree to a "steal of the century", then? If we know that the salary cap goes up every year, certainly RW's agent knows this as well. So why would not his agent also take note that the salary cap goes up every year, and demand a higher salary accordingly? RW's agent could point to Cutler as an example and say, "If Cutler is worth 1/6th of the Bears salary in 2013, then RW should be worth at least 1/6th of a team's salary in 2015, and again in 2016, and again in 2017, etc, such that by 2020, RW should be earning 30 million per year"? I don't know that such a demand is in the offing, but if it were, everyone here would be all for it, so it would seem.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Besides Keapernick and Newton will be the benchmark anyway whether anybody likes it or not. So this could get very interesting with a quickness.

 

[Anthony!]

Guess I'll have to be the one to disagree with the consensus shown in this thread.
I love RW, but I'm not in favor of paying him 20 million a year, because I've yet to see any instance of a team winning a SB by doing that. And I've seen multiple of instances of teams destroying themselves by doing that. That should end the argument right there. Those of you in favor of paying RW 20 million, please cite an instance of a SB-winning team that had a 20 million per year QB. I can tell you right now that there are plenty of examples of SB-winning teams that did not have 20-million per year QBs or QBs that made 1/6th of their team's salary.

SF is going to destroy themselves like the Bears did with Cutler, like the Ravens did with Flacco, like the Cowboys did with Romo, when they pay Kaep 20 million. We'll see if the Seahawks go down that same road to destroying their own team to pay one guy 1/6th of the team's salary.

Oh, and those of you who have said that anyone against paying the QB 20 million "doesn't understand football"? LOLOLOL
It's you guys that don't understand football. You've bought into the "We need an elite QB, therefore money is no object when it comes to QB" philosophy. A philosophy that has never worked.

And those of you who say that anyone who is against paying RW 20 million has never watched 38 years of Seahawks QBs? Seahawks actually have had good QBs before RW. Hasselbeck was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Moon was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Kreig was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Yes, Mirer, Stouffer, Gelbaugh, Huard (sorry Brock), McGwire, Whitehurst, et al were mediocre at best, horrible at worst. But that history doesn't necessitate paying RW 1/6th of the team's total salary.

BTW, I listen to various podcasts of sports radio stations around the country, and lots of them have on as a guest from time to time Greg Cosell, of NFL Films. He has multiple times stated that the consensus across the league is that RW is merely an "above average" QB. That's what the consensus is among the coaches in the NFL. And they literally laugh out loud if you put RW in the same breath as Luck, according to Cosell. And he pisses me off whenever he says this, because he says it with a certain glee, like he gets off on putting RW down, and he also tends to put the Seahawks down in general. But my point is, if it's true that RW is considered just an "above average QB" across the league, it might be the case that he won't be able to command 20 million per year on the market anyway. He'll get well paid regardless, and he'll get plenty of endorsement money too, but it may be possible to keep him for less than 20 million per year.

Well for one considering the 20 mil QB is new as of this year we really do not know do we. As to Cosell the only problem with that is there are plenty of experts, players, coaches who say Rw is in the top 10 so he will get what ever the going rate it. It might be 20 it might be 18 we will see, but he is going to get it.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Contracts don't work off the cap they work off preexisting contracts of your peers. So logically it will be something like 18-22 million regardless of the salary cap. With a decent chance at the lower end because he doesn't have the crazy statistics or regard his contemporaries do.

 

[Escamillo]

maybe he wasn't last year. But he's only just finished his second year. We are likely going to getting a better Russell Wilson going forward as he matures with age. Saying we should let a SB winning 2 time pro bowl QB walk after 2 years is crazy. If Colbert and Belicheck thought like you guys do Brady and Roethlisberger would not still be on their respective teams because they didn’t carry their teams early in their careers.
Just my two cents. We’ve been searching for a QB for a long time, I don’t really want to go through that again.
And if we had say picked up Carson Palmer, or anyone from this draft, we may win 11 games, but we sure as hell aren’t winning the SB.
But again people think the russell wilson we had last year is the same russell wilson we'll have going forward, let him grow. Even at this point in his career I wouldn't let him walk

I understand your line of thinking, except neither Brady nor Big Ben were making 20 million per year when they won SBs. I think Big Ben today only makes 12 million. Yet everyone here wants to pay RW 20 million? Just because Cutler and Romo got that much (and ruined their teams in the process)?
And I don't agree that "we've been searching for a QB for a long time". You guys have short memories. Go look up Hasselbeck's stats. I really don't get why Hasselbeck is so dumped on around here like he was a mediocrity or to be lumped in with the Whitehursts and Mirers of the world. We had a great QB with Hasselbeck (a three-time Pro-Bowler), then spent two years looking for his replacement. It's not like we were out in the wilderness for 40 years looking for a new QB.

 

[Anthony!]

Simply, I would just be real careful about how "all-in" we go to re-signing a player that really has ONLY helped this team win by making smart decisions, not turning the ball over and being clutch.

My brain just exploded. Romo and Flacco get $20 mill a year and we have a QB who is ONLY clutch so we should let him walk.

:177692:

Romo, Flacco, Cutler, Bradford, Rivers, et al, are actually the examples of why it should give teams pause to pay one guy 1/6th of the team's salary. This ain't basketball. There are ~50 players; paying one guy 1/6th of the total salary would appear to be a risky move just mathematically speaking, and has never resulted in a Lombardi (I don't think).

You might want to rethink that it is not 1/6th it is 15%, and Eli manning was making about 15% at the time he won the SB based on the cap of that year. All that said how many teams even make the playoffs without a franchise QB? Answer few. Without one you do not continually make the playoffs, without that you cannot win an SB to do that you need a franchise QB and to get one of them you need to pay the going rate.

 

[Sac]

Whoah there buddy. Hass is revered around here, make no mistake. But RW IS better. Easy.

 

[Giblien]

"making smart decisions, not turning the ball over and being clutch"

You know who else that sounds like to me? Troy Aikman...how did he do again? Hall of Fame and 3 rings you say?

Yeah, we need to pay Wilson.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Ben is making that because that's what his contemporaries were making when he had to negotiate. Both Brady and Manning are outliers they could get 30 million right this second if they wanted but they're not stupid and neither is Wilson.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

...

 

[Anthony!]

maybe he wasn't last year. But he's only just finished his second year. We are likely going to getting a better Russell Wilson going forward as he matures with age. Saying we should let a SB winning 2 time pro bowl QB walk after 2 years is crazy. If Colbert and Belicheck thought like you guys do Brady and Roethlisberger would not still be on their respective teams because they didn’t carry their teams early in their careers.
Just my two cents. We’ve been searching for a QB for a long time, I don’t really want to go through that again.
And if we had say picked up Carson Palmer, or anyone from this draft, we may win 11 games, but we sure as hell aren’t winning the SB.
But again people think the russell wilson we had last year is the same russell wilson we'll have going forward, let him grow. Even at this point in his career I wouldn't let him walk

I understand your line of thinking, except neither Brady nor Big Ben were making 20 million per year when they won SBs. I think Big Ben today only makes 12 million. Yet everyone here wants to pay RW 20 million? Just because Cutler and Romo got that much (and ruined their teams in the process)?
And I don't agree that "we've been searching for a QB for a long time". You guys have short memories. Go look up Hasselbeck's stats. I really don't get why Hasselbeck is so dumped on around here like he was a mediocrity or to be lumped in with the Whitehursts and Mirers of the world. We had a great QB with Hasselbeck (a three-time Pro-Bowler), then spent two years looking for his replacement. It's not like we were out in the wilderness for 40 years looking for a new QB.

They were making 15% of the cap at that time, when they won. RW should get paid what ever the going rate is, if it is 18 mil then it is, if it is 20 then it is 20. We had a good QB in Hass, and now we have a great QW in RW.

 

[jdemps]

maybe he wasn't last year. But he's only just finished his second year. We are likely going to getting a better Russell Wilson going forward as he matures with age. Saying we should let a SB winning 2 time pro bowl QB walk after 2 years is crazy. If Colbert and Belicheck thought like you guys do Brady and Roethlisberger would not still be on their respective teams because they didn’t carry their teams early in their careers.
Just my two cents. We’ve been searching for a QB for a long time, I don’t really want to go through that again.
And if we had say picked up Carson Palmer, or anyone from this draft, we may win 11 games, but we sure as hell aren’t winning the SB.
But again people think the russell wilson we had last year is the same russell wilson we'll have going forward, let him grow. Even at this point in his career I wouldn't let him walk

I understand your line of thinking, except neither Brady nor Big Ben were making 20 million per year when they won SBs. I think Big Ben today only makes 12 million. Yet everyone here wants to pay RW 20 million? Just because Cutler and Romo got that much (and ruined their teams in the process)?
And I don't agree that "we've been searching for a QB for a long time". You guys have short memories. Go look up Hasselbeck's stats. I really don't get why Hasselbeck is so dumped on around here like he was a mediocrity or to be lumped in with the Whitehursts and Mirers of the world. We had a great QB with Hasselbeck (a three-time Pro-Bowler), then spent two years looking for his replacement. It's not like we were out in the wilderness for 40 years looking for a new QB.

I totally agree with your position that paying the quarterback a high percentage of your team's total cap can handicap the team. Found a nice little article about it here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/allenstjohn ... priced-qb/. So the higher salaried QB has won 5 of the last 14 superbowl which MIGHT be due to the high salaries handicapping the team. I don't think RW is going to DEMAND to be paid on par with Culter/Romo/Flacco but those contracts are likely going to dictate where his agent and JS are going to start negotiations. I think 10-15% of your salary CAP going to QB or 1-2 other cornerstone "once in a generation" players is how teams sustain greatness. If you look at the last 14 years, you see that a solid defense mixed with consistent, clutch QB play (which is RW) puts you in a position to win SBs. If we can lock up ET, Sherm, and RW long term, we'll be competitive for a long time.

 

[drdiags]

For those arm-chair GMs who are sweating about Wilson's contract, which cannot be extended until next year, if you are suggesting that the Seahawks franchise Wilson after letting him play out his rookie contract, good luck with that. Yeah it sucks that QBs judged to be elite get crazy contracts but that is the lay of the land. Unless Wilson does a big career reversal, he will have a market for his services. You will know soon enough what type of market he has before TC, if Baalke is able to sign Kaep by then as he indicates he wants to happen by then.

Maybe the team needs to hit on some rookie DL or WRs to lower their costs in those areas? Maybe the Seahawks will have to let Beastmode go after this season? I am sorry, but once you find a QB that fits your system and has proven to be a winner, you are going to have to pay him. I don't know what the expectations are otherwise, such as letting Wilson walk or traded? Try low-balling him? Franchise him for a couple of seasons (which is pretty expensive against the cap as well)?

I think some folks just get too caught up in playing with the numbers and assume the players are all plug-n-play. Not sure what to tell those folks. Wilson will get paid and some good talent is going to be let go because of it.

 

[Largent80]

28 wins in his first 2 years, an all time record, and topping that with the World Championship, yeah, let him walk.

 

[Escamillo]

maybe he wasn't last year. But he's only just finished his second year. We are likely going to getting a better Russell Wilson going forward as he matures with age. Saying we should let a SB winning 2 time pro bowl QB walk after 2 years is crazy. If Colbert and Belicheck thought like you guys do Brady and Roethlisberger would not still be on their respective teams because they didn’t carry their teams early in their careers.
Just my two cents. We’ve been searching for a QB for a long time, I don’t really want to go through that again.
And if we had say picked up Carson Palmer, or anyone from this draft, we may win 11 games, but we sure as hell aren’t winning the SB.
But again people think the russell wilson we had last year is the same russell wilson we'll have going forward, let him grow. Even at this point in his career I wouldn't let him walk

I understand your line of thinking, except neither Brady nor Big Ben were making 20 million per year when they won SBs. I think Big Ben today only makes 12 million. Yet everyone here wants to pay RW 20 million? Just because Cutler and Romo got that much (and ruined their teams in the process)?
And I don't agree that "we've been searching for a QB for a long time". You guys have short memories. Go look up Hasselbeck's stats. I really don't get why Hasselbeck is so dumped on around here like he was a mediocrity or to be lumped in with the Whitehursts and Mirers of the world. We had a great QB with Hasselbeck (a three-time Pro-Bowler), then spent two years looking for his replacement. It's not like we were out in the wilderness for 40 years looking for a new QB.

I totally agree with your position that paying the quarterback a high percentage of your team's total cap can handicap the team. Found a nice little article about it here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/allenstjohn ... priced-qb/. So the higher salaried QB has won 5 of the last 14 superbowl which MIGHT be due to the high salaries handicapping the team. I don't think RW is going to DEMAND to be paid on par with Culter/Romo/Flacco but those contracts are likely going to dictate where his agent and JS are going to start negotiations. I think 10-15% of your salary CAP going to QB or 1-2 other cornerstone "once in a generation" players is how teams sustain greatness. If you look at the last 14 years, you see that a solid defense mixed with consistent, clutch QB play (which is RW) puts you in a position to win SBs. If we can lock up ET, Sherm, and RW long term, we'll be competitive for a long time.

Am I reading that chart right? Was Hasselbeck really making 19 million per year in 2005?

 

[WilsonMVP]

Guess I'll have to be the one to disagree with the consensus shown in this thread.
I love RW, but I'm not in favor of paying him 20 million a year, because I've yet to see any instance of a team winning a SB by doing that. And I've seen multiple of instances of teams destroying themselves by doing that. That should end the argument right there. Those of you in favor of paying RW 20 million, please cite an instance of a SB-winning team that had a 20 million per year QB. I can tell you right now that there are plenty of examples of SB-winning teams that did not have 20-million per year QBs or QBs that made 1/6th of their team's salary.

SF is going to destroy themselves like the Bears did with Cutler, like the Ravens did with Flacco, like the Cowboys did with Romo, when they pay Kaep 20 million. We'll see if the Seahawks go down that same road to destroying their own team to pay one guy 1/6th of the team's salary.

Oh, and those of you who have said that anyone against paying the QB 20 million "doesn't understand football"? LOLOLOL
It's you guys that don't understand football. You've bought into the "We need an elite QB, therefore money is no object when it comes to QB" philosophy. A philosophy that has never worked.

And those of you who say that anyone who is against paying RW 20 million has never watched 38 years of Seahawks QBs? Seahawks actually have had good QBs before RW. Hasselbeck was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Moon was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Kreig was a Pro-Bowl QB with the Seahawks. Yes, Mirer, Stouffer, Gelbaugh, Huard (sorry Brock), McGwire, Whitehurst, et al were mediocre at best, horrible at worst. But that history doesn't necessitate paying RW 1/6th of the team's total salary.

BTW, I listen to various podcasts of sports radio stations around the country, and lots of them have on as a guest from time to time Greg Cosell, of NFL Films. He has multiple times stated that the consensus across the league is that RW is merely an "above average" QB. That's what the consensus is among the coaches in the NFL. And they literally laugh out loud if you put RW in the same breath as Luck, according to Cosell. And he pisses me off whenever he says this, because he says it with a certain glee, like he gets off on putting RW down, and he also tends to put the Seahawks down in general. But my point is, if it's true that RW is considered just an "above average QB" across the league, it might be the case that he won't be able to command 20 million per year on the market anyway. He'll get well paid regardless, and he'll get plenty of endorsement money too, but it may be possible to keep him for less than 20 million per year.

Just an Above Average QB thats not in the same breath as Luck? WTH has Luck done to make himself such a great QB. I swear Luck is living off that draft hype. Im sure that those GMs would much rather have Lucks 8 postseason INTS in 3 games started as opposed to Wilsons 1 int that wasnt even important because it was a last second prayer in Atlanta because the D choked. Not to mention Luck hasnt even broken 90 qb rating let alone 100 like Wilson has. For God Sakes Christian Ponder had a better QB rating than Lucks rookie year when they both first started the whole season. I just dont want to hear about Luck in comparison to Wilson anymore...just everyone please...stop...Luck is not on the same level.

As far as some of the other things brought up in this post. Unlike Flacco, Cutler, Romo and Kaepernick when he gets extended Wilson will ACTUALLY be worth the money we pay him. Flacco went on an unbelievable playoff run where his WRs bailed him out with amazing catches I dont know how many times. Outside of that he hasnt been that impressive. In the 9 playoff games before their 4 game playoff run for a ring Flacco had 8TDs 8Ints and 2 fumbles. That sounds like a real winner there. His career rating is also 83.7 and he has only broke 90 one time in 6 seasons. Wilson has broke 100 twice.

Cutler seems to be injury prone with a bad attitude. For all the hype Cutler gets his best season only produced 27 TDs, whop de doo, Wilson has 26 twice and didnt throw 26 ints like Cutler did. Romo chokes in the worst of ways. Kaepernick is an ok passer but he seems to not be able to go through progressions and takes off too fast. He is dangerous while running but his passing is just ok.