Earl Thomas desirability poll

.net pulse regarding #29

  • Get Earl in now, he’s badly needed

    Votes: 30 13.1%
  • Trade Earl for no less than a 2nd round pick

    Votes: 75 32.8%
  • Trade Earl for whatever you can get

    Votes: 36 15.7%
  • Let him sit out, then let him walk in 2019 (potential comp pick)

    Votes: 61 26.6%
  • Earl who?

    Votes: 27 11.8%

  • Total voters
    229

Cyrus12

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2013
Messages
17,508
Reaction score
4,842
Location
North of the Wall
He is dead to me. I wrote him off after the Dallas stunt. To think I have an official Jersey of his. Guess I will hang it next to the Harvin one I bought....trade him for whatever and move on...if not let him sit out the year.
 

TwistedHusky

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
6,878
Reaction score
1,046
Simple question:

Are the Seahawks better or worse with the All-Pro Safety that their defense hinges on being on the roster?

To answer this question you have to ask yourself if the utility of the distraction is worth the benefit of his play. And if we can extract the full benefit of his play knowing that Earl may potentially be distracted as well.

The reason to get rid of Earl was because you don't want him leaving for nothing. But at this juncture, you are essentially getting nothing for him. So the best route was to do as already suggested, keep him, play him and then trade him for potentially more IF a team loses their safety in the middle a potential run up to the playoffs (for them). Because they might trade more in order to get that playoff difference maker.

(Though Seahawk defenders have a nasty habit of not being as good when they go elsewhere)

Either way, you have to keep him because there is little way you can argue we are better without him. Your hurt feelings should not be relevant to the decision - if any of you are upset at him for this.
 

toffee

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
10,470
Reaction score
6,625
Location
SoCal Desert
I am really hating on jerruh, when a hall of fame FS at his prime personally hand picked your team as his only destination, you do whatever to accommodate his wishes.

So insulting to Earl that jerruh made not even a half ass effort.

McCloughan and Dorsey may come with their next year’s 1st for Earl, they need help in their secondary and they knew it,


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Sun Tzu

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2016
Messages
589
Reaction score
682
Location
Corvallis
oldhawkfan":3lmgooke said:
I know there is a thread dedicated to Earl Thomas but I thought it would be interesting to see how a poll would sort out the pulse of the board. In 2018 the top brass seemed all in for a run to the Owl considering the trades they made. Had he held out last year, they might have caved by now.
The poll seems flawed since trading Earl for no less than a 2nd is only possible if another team is willing to give up a second. Since that seems unlikely, everyone who voted for trade Earl for no less than a 2nd voted to do nothing and hope. Hope is not a winning strategy.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
I'd trade him for no less than a 2nd rounder.

Other than that let him hold out come back in week 10, play and then if he played well I'd franchise his ass next off season.................AND I'd tell Earl and his agent this. I'd straight up tell them I've got Earl's ass for 1-2 more years if this is the way he wants this to go by holding out.

So good for you Earl, get up on your righteous high horse and make this sound like you're some martyr instead of just another greedy player that's throwing a tantrum because he's not getting an extension.

We'll just keep doing this until we get a high rounder, or we can no longer afford the franchise tag.
 

JGfromtheNW

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2012
Messages
2,345
Reaction score
119
Location
On-Track
Ideally I'd like to trade Earl for no less than a 2nd rounder, but I don't see any team coming 'round knocking any time soon. If we can't get a 2nd for him, then I vote let him ride the bench. I'm over this situation. Dude has $8MM+ reasons to report and play out his final year.

At this point, I'd play hardball and tell him he's going to be a Seahawk unless some team ends up offering a proper trade, ideally Cleveland, or until his rights via contract term out. He has no leverage. Whether this year tolls or not, we still have the franchise tag for the following year. Earl's ego isn't bigger than the team.

On a side note, am I the only one that thinks this is possibly the worst year so far for Earl to do this? A bit of a retooling year where expectations are pretty low, we're not in a win-now situation like we were the previous 5 seasons. It's like he's trying to hold his services above the team's head when the team is more than happy to see what other younger players have to offer.
 

TwistedHusky

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
6,878
Reaction score
1,046
We do this often.

We think we have this amazing system and that players are easily replaceable. 'Next man up' and all that crap.

It does not work.

This team has a tremendous problem in worrying about what it does not have instead of cherishing what it does.

I get players age and you need to replace them. But the differences when you lose guys (or worse, let guys go so you can pay big money to other guys that never fit in here....ugh) is you leave a hole.

We never recovered after losing Irvin, and everyone was sure he was not worth the money. And losing Tate essentially lost us at least one SB and probably a trip or 2 others. You keep your great players unless you are the Patriots. Because the difference makers ARE the players. We removed guys that fit here, so we could pay guys that didn't (Harvin, Graham, etc). Those gambles rarely pay off for us, if ever.

When we lose our better players, we get weaker. We don't do a good job of filling the holes at all. So in that light, creating the hole in the first place is probably something you want to avoid for as long as possible.
 

mistaowen

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,334
Reaction score
606
No point in trading him for next to nothing just to get him off the roster, he's still a top FS in the NFL and deservedly wants that type of money. The FO still feels burned by the unfortunate career ending injury to Kam on his third contract and now want to avoid a similar situation with guaranteed dead money. I wish he would just show up and be a leader, proving he is deserving of a solid third contract through his play, but I also understand his desire to be financially secure as he gets older. FO made it clear they aren't budging and all signs point to them being done reaching out, feeling from camp is he's already forgotten. Time for Earl to just show up...
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
TwistedHusky":22wludj0 said:
We do this often.

We think we have this amazing system and that players are easily replaceable. 'Next man up' and all that crap.

It does not work.

This team has a tremendous problem in worrying about what it does not have instead of cherishing what it does.

I get players age and you need to replace them. But the differences when you lose guys (or worse, let guys go so you can pay big money to other guys that never fit in here....ugh) is you leave a hole.

We never recovered after losing Irvin, and everyone was sure he was not worth the money. And losing Tate essentially lost us at least one SB and probably a trip or 2 others. You keep your great players unless you are the Patriots. Because the difference makers ARE the players. We removed guys that fit here, so we could pay guys that didn't (Harvin, Graham, etc). Those gambles rarely pay off for us, if ever.

When we lose our better players, we get weaker. We don't do a good job of filling the holes at all. So in that light, creating the hole in the first place is probably something you want to avoid for as long as possible.

1. You can't pay everyone. Irvin didn't earn an extension with us, he had 5.5 sacks his last year here..........and we have too much salary already committed on defense. So he was expendable.

2. If we had a lot of cap space and we were in a SB window, instead of in a roster turnover trying to reload? I'd agree with you, I'd take a risk on giving Earl a nice extension and hope he stays healthy and productive for 2-3 more years.

But we're not, so why would you pay Earl 15M a year like he wants when we're still 2-3 years away from challenging for a SB...............IF Pete and John can reload and get the depth back. Makes no sense to pay Earl now. You trade him and use those pick(s) to get younger and hungrier on defense.

If we've learned anything through Pete's tenure here, it's that it's impossible to have an old hungry expensive defense.
 

Jac

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,272
Reaction score
650
Sgt. Largent":3sdzg3l1 said:
TwistedHusky":3sdzg3l1 said:
We do this often.

We think we have this amazing system and that players are easily replaceable. 'Next man up' and all that crap.

It does not work.

This team has a tremendous problem in worrying about what it does not have instead of cherishing what it does.

I get players age and you need to replace them. But the differences when you lose guys (or worse, let guys go so you can pay big money to other guys that never fit in here....ugh) is you leave a hole.

We never recovered after losing Irvin, and everyone was sure he was not worth the money. And losing Tate essentially lost us at least one SB and probably a trip or 2 others. You keep your great players unless you are the Patriots. Because the difference makers ARE the players. We removed guys that fit here, so we could pay guys that didn't (Harvin, Graham, etc). Those gambles rarely pay off for us, if ever.

When we lose our better players, we get weaker. We don't do a good job of filling the holes at all. So in that light, creating the hole in the first place is probably something you want to avoid for as long as possible.

1. You can't pay everyone. Irvin didn't earn an extension with us, he had 5.5 sacks his last year here..........and we have too much salary already committed on defense. So he was expendable.

2. If we had a lot of cap space and we were in a SB window, instead of in a roster turnover trying to reload? I'd agree with you, I'd take a risk on giving Earl a nice extension and hope he stays healthy and productive for 2-3 more years.

But we're not, so why would you pay Earl 15M a year like he wants when we're still 2-3 years away from challenging for a SB...............IF Pete and John can reload and get the depth back. Makes no sense to pay Earl now. You trade him and use those pick(s) to get younger and hungrier on defense.

If we've learned anything through Pete's tenure here, it's that it's impossible to have an old hungry expensive defense.

That's exactly how I feel. If we're a couple years out from having out next "SB window" roster...and we're not going to sign Thomas to an extension...and Thompson seemingly having a lot of potential and positive reviews...then it doesn't make sense to pull Thompson off the field (particularly if Thomas comes back mid year to accrue his season). Give him that development time. Thomas is pulling this stunt in the most disadvantageous time in the history of holdouts. I sense literally no consternation or hand wringing out of the team regarding his absence.
 

mrt144

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
4,065
Reaction score
0
Donn2390":16qpcc8z said:
LargentFan":16qpcc8z said:
I might get hate for this, but I think Earl might be a top 5 all-time Seahawk. Add in that he is still playing top level football and I am sold on keeping him.

Quick and dirty top 5 Seahawks of all time in no particular order...
Steve Largent
Walter Jones
Cortez Kennedy
Kenny Easley
Hmmm...Marshawn Lynch, Russell Wilson or Earl Thomas might fit here...
Ok he's borderline top 5 all-time and a lock for top 10 all-time.

Ask yourself this...
The next time Earl Thomas makes a play that no other player could make, don't you want to see him in a Seahawks jersey when he does it?
His attitude and financial demands would need to improve 100% before I could agree to that statement. As it is, he is on the down hill side of age and health. He should be thankful he has a job, not holding out for more money. You don't see other teams lining up for his services..!!
He needed to come in early, work hard and have a terrific season and then talk about a new contract. An honorable man honors a contract, he is a spoiled child. The rest of the bad attitudes are gone, he needs to follow them.
We have some new stars on the horizon who still want to play hard and earn their spot and their money. Too many of these guys meet with a little success and their ego's get all blown out of shape and they begin to think they are more important than the team or the game. At this point, Earl is NOT a team player. That will lead to failure.

So owners are dishonorable inherently? Or is your sense of honor guided by the letter of a contracts? And if they are then what exactly is dishonorable given the provision for holdouts baked into any contract?
 

Steve2222

New member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,993
Reaction score
1
As clearly been demonstrated by his holdout and actively being on the trade block, Earls value isn’t what he thinks it is. His hold out make no sense for him at this point, assuming he still wants to collect a handsome NFL paycheck and play footballl.

From a fan POV, I’m just treating the whole thing like he’s hurt and on the PUP. If he comes back great. If he doesn’t, oh well.
 

JGfromtheNW

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2012
Messages
2,345
Reaction score
119
Location
On-Track
Jac":1mg9gh0p said:
That's exactly how I feel. If we're a couple years out from having out next "SB window" roster...and we're not going to sign Thomas to an extension...and Thompson seemingly having a lot of potential and positive reviews...then it doesn't make sense to pull Thompson off the field (particularly if Thomas comes back mid year to accrue his season). Give him that development time. Thomas is pulling this stunt in the most disadvantageous time in the history of holdouts. I sense literally no consternation or hand wringing out of the team regarding his absence.

Not only is it bad timing in regards to where our roster/franchise is, you've still got guys like Eric Reid sitting in FA that will, if signed to a team, demand a smaller salary than Earl. So unless a contender wants to throw a contract at Earl for a win-now situation, the league already has stop-gaps sitting there for cheaper.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
LargentFan":2dqc8j5q said:
I might get hate for this, but I think Earl might be a top 5 all-time Seahawk. Add in that he is still playing top level football and I am sold on keeping him.

Quick and dirty top 5 Seahawks of all time in no particular order...
Steve Largent
Walter Jones
Cortez Kennedy
Kenny Easley
Hmmm...Marshawn Lynch, Russell Wilson or Earl Thomas might fit here...
Ok he's borderline top 5 all-time and a lock for top 10 all-time.

Ask yourself this...
The next time Earl Thomas makes a play that no other player could make, don't you want to see him in a Seahawks jersey when he does it?

What Earl's done in the past has absolutely no bearing on the decision to give him 40M guaranteed as he's asking for with his extension demands.

Yes he probably still has 2-3, maybe even 3-4 good years left. But not for 12-15M a year with 40M guaranteed in a rebuild cycle where we're trying to get younger and hungrier on defense AND get our cap right in order to have the flexibility back of signing other extensions and add key pieces in the future (Clark, Bobby, Doug, KJ, Russell, etc)

This is the NFL, you're either in a SB/compete window, or you're not. If you are as we thought we were in last year? That's when you do risky extensions and go for broke trying to win a SB.

We ain't there anymore. We have holes all over the roster and depth issues at just about every position. Not the time to give your aging safety 40M. It's just not.
 

themunn

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
3,946
Reaction score
462
Fade":3jjxqvc4 said:
Let him sit. Then Franchise Tag him at the end of the year. Sometimes players need to be made an example of so the other players don't get any funny ideas about holding out.

Strictly business, I don't hold any ill will towards Earl. I just don't want future players getting the idea it's a good idea to hold out. The Marshawn holdout led to the Kam holdout which is now the Earl holdout. That is 3 holdouts in 5 yrs. No more.

Yeah that's some of the most popular players in the dressing room. Add that to the cutting of the likes of Sherman and Bennett and such actions tell the players we don't really give a rat's ass about you and when it comes to free agency time they're gonna look for the highest bidder.
In fact, when was the last time we retained a key free agent?

When it was Kam and Marshawn we were told they don't renegotiate with more than 1 year left. Well ET has one year left so...
 

jammerhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
10,138
Reaction score
1,750
Holding out is hardly negotiating.

My way or no way is Et's negotiating position. the rest of the rubbish is good reason for the two sides to talk but ET doesn't seem to want to talk.

He has a present contract which pays him $8.5 million for this season that he needs to honour, and withdrawing his services is hardly the way to present his best case for a new contract.

I don't want the team to give in, and want them to make him pay the fines for his withdrawal of attendance. He has put himself above the team and needs to show up before discussions can even start on a new deal. Even then there is a large difference in the present market for safeties between what ET wants and what the present market is for the position.

If he isn't 'all in' then he needs to be gone and he is accomplishing that at a significant daily cost to himself. I doubt he comes back to play here for the Seahawks.
 

mrt144

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
4,065
Reaction score
0
jammerhawk":2eugd0wr said:
Holding out is hardly negotiating.

My way or no way is Et's negotiating position. the rest of the rubbish is good reason for the two sides to talk but ET doesn't seem to want to talk.

He has a present contract which pays him $8.5 million for this season that he needs to honour, and withdrawing his services is hardly the way to present his best case for a new contract.

I don't want the team to give in, and want them to make him pay the fines for his withdrawal of attendance. He has put himself above the team and needs to show up before discussions can even start on a new deal. Even then there is a large difference in the present market for safeties between what ET wants and what the present market is for the position.

If he isn't 'all in' then he needs to be gone and he is accomplishing that at a significant daily cost to himself. I doubt he comes back to play here for the Seahawks.

Punitive measures arent business measures.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,610
jammerhawk":2l065sbg said:
He has a present contract which pays him $8.5 million for this season that he needs to honour, and withdrawing his services is hardly the way to present his best case for a new contract.


He doesn't need to honor anything, just like teams don't need to honor the contract if they think the player is no longer worth the contract and dead cap hit.

That's the trade off, and why leverage is so important in the NFL when it comes to contract negotiations.

THIS is Earl's problem, he has ZERO leverage.

- No other team wants to pay him what he wants
- No other team wants to meet the Hawk's price for a trade
- We're not in a SB window where it's life or death if he plays or not
- He's not 24 and coming off a Pro Bowl year with no health issues and prime for an extension

That's it, it's that simple. No leverage = no extension...............and the only way to get the leverage back is to play. Sure as hell isn't sitting at home losing millions and continuing to have the injury and performance concerns hanging over you.

Dumb.
 

Jac

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,272
Reaction score
650
Sgt. Largent":1wa3axb6 said:
jammerhawk":1wa3axb6 said:
He has a present contract which pays him $8.5 million for this season that he needs to honour, and withdrawing his services is hardly the way to present his best case for a new contract.


He doesn't need to honor anything, just like teams don't need to honor the contract if they think the player is no longer worth the contract and dead cap hit.

That's the trade off, and why leverage is so important in the NFL when it comes to contract negotiations.

THIS is Earl's problem, he has ZERO leverage.

- No other team wants to pay him what he wants
- No other team wants to meet the Hawk's price for a trade
- We're not in a SB window where it's life or death if he plays or not
- He's not 24 and coming off a Pro Bowl year with no health issues and prime for an extension

That's it, it's that simple. No leverage = no extension...............and the only way to get the leverage back is to play. Sure as hell isn't sitting at home losing millions and continuing to have the injury and performance concerns hanging over you.

Dumb.

I add in that the team's patience is gone with respect to holdouts, media stunts, 'me first' culture distractions, expensive third contracts, etc. They've turned the page as an organization, and Thomas got left holding the bag. The rest of the teammates that he grew up with found themselves in different situations than his.
 
Top