idhawkman wrote:Not a surprise. I think he saw that he is being planned out with our recent cut downs and the Luani move. Now we have an out of shape, disgruntled safety reporting and wanting to play. I sit him until he is in game shape.
c_hawkbob wrote:
I bet he's in fine shape. As for disgruntled ... maybe, but he's a pro, he'll handle his business just fine. I'm more than happy to welcome him back.
c_hawkbob wrote:It's just a vet with an excuse to skip TC. Walter used to do it all the time. No big deal.
Aseahawkfan wrote:
I don't recall Walter telling other teams to come get him and pushing to force a trade. For this to go in our favor, I think Earl needs a good year on the field to up his trade value or a long-term extension. I guess we'll see how this goes now that he has shown up.
NorthHawk wrote:Unless the Hawks Tag him.
c_hawkbob wrote:If he has another All Pro season I think we absolutely tag him.
RiverDog wrote:Earl's statement, that ""the disrespect is well noted and will not be forgotten." doesn't sound like a player that wants to remain with the team under any circumstances. I have to think that Pete and John don't want this distraction to continue any longer than it has to while they're embarking on this rebuild. IMO we exeute a trade by the end of October.
Keep an eye on the Cowboys, how they start the season, their injury situation, how their secondary performs, etc. Jerry Jones is one of the biggest suckers in the league. I can't believe that he'd sit on his hands if he thinks Earl can get his team over the hump.
Hawk Sista wrote:Anything to get back to the glory hole days.
Aseahawkfan wrote:If we don't sign him, we have to tag him. Otherwise we lose him for nothing. That would be foolish.
Hawk Sista wrote:Anything to get back to the glory hole days.
RiverDog wrote:Tagging him doesn't insure that we'll get something for him, especially if he subsequently gets injured. It's still going to take a dance partner that will meet our demands for a trade to happen.
If we're going to move him, we need to do so this season before the trading deadline. All along, Earl's been telling us that his holdout was all about business. Now he's talking about being disrespected, which doesn't sound very business-like to me. It's beginning to sound that whether fault lies with Earl or with our FO, that the bridges have been burned and reconciliation next to impossible...unless we want to reward him with an obscene, Eric Berry plus-type contract, which IMO isn't in the best interest of a rebuilding franchise that's a year or two away from competing for a Lombardi.
c_hawkbob wrote:It's just a vet with an excuse to skip TC. Walter used to do it all the time. No big deal.
Aseahawkfan wrote:If Earl has a great year, tag and trade will work just fine. What is it? A first round pick to sign away a franchise tagged player? We don't need to trade him this year unless we get the price we want. If we can't sign him, tag and trade will work just fine.
obiken wrote:I am one of few in here, or anywhere, to say that I think the Mack deal was bad for the Bears. 2 1st rounders? Sorry, he is 27, it will take at least 2 years to build the Bears into winner, then he is 29. Raiders win in the long, haul but that's just me. Golic, Wingo, Cowherd, Wilbon, all the "experts" think the Raiders got took. As the Zen would say, we'll see.
NorthHawk wrote:The Raiders also need a Safety, so maybe they are one of the "other" teams interested in ET.
It would be easy for them to recoup a 2nd and the gamble is their 2nd round pick would be higher than Dallas.
As far as the trade of Mack goes, the old saying holds true that the team that wins the trade is the one that gets the better player.
Right now we don't know who the Raiders will get, but one of them has to be a perennial Pro Bowl or serious candidate for All pro for them to have the better of the trade.
If the other player even turns out to be just a long term starter then the Raiders win.
Maybe they have a plan to package both picks for the 1st overall and want Bosa? We'll know in April or before.
RiverDog wrote:There's too much uncertainty in tagging him. You mentioned one yourself, that 'if' he has a great year. So what if he doesn't? What happens if he gets injured? Besides, having a great year isn't going to increase his value beyond what it is today. Teams already know what he can do, that he's almost unquestionably the best safety in the league. Earl's quality of play in the coming months isn't the primary factor in his trade-ability, it's the needs of the teams that might be willing to swing a trade. Every day we wait, we're rolling the dice, hoping that something doesn't cause his trade value to diminish.
So I say work a deal ASAP, and no later than the trading deadline (Oct. 30th). If a 2nd rounder is the best we can get for him, then cut our losses and pull the trigger. We're not going to get a deal like the Raiders got for Khalil Mack.
Ken Norton Jr: “Oh my goodness, really good to see Earl back. I became a better coach today
Ken Norton Jr: “Oh my goodness, really good to see Earl back. I became a better coach today
Aseahawkfan wrote:Exactly they should sign him. Let at least one member of the LoB retire a Seahawk due to reasons other than health. We lost Kam to a bad health likely due to his size and hitting style. We lost Sherm because of money and a tendon injury. Browner due to a quick decline. Earl's still got the juice and is worth the money. I hope they work a deal.
NorthHawk wrote:I don't know if egos on both sides have pushed this past the point of any deal being possible, but how about the following scenario:
Pay him $40 million/4 years fully guaranteed except for voluntary retirement ($10 million/year).
The money would be paid every March 1st.
This would accomplish a couple of things:
Financial security for ET
First non QB with a guaranteed contract to satisfy his ego which might be enough of a trade off for not being paid the most
Team commitment to him and respect he desires
The team would get a great player and financial certainty without a distraction and the Cap hit % would decrease over time.
RiverDog wrote:
Yes, I believe that egos have pushed this beyond reconciliation. I think that Earl wants out, and that his contract issues are a pretense in order for him to get where he's stated that he wants to go, ie the Cowboys.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests