Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson reign among improvisational QB

[burrrton]

I think some of the rumored numbers are a little outrageous personally but if we lose Wilson we just end up wasting the prime years of our other high priced blue chip players searching for another QB who won't be insufficient on the biggest stage.

This. I'm not sure how hamstrung we'll be giving RW what he's asking for, but I do know we'll have to find a replacement for him before we can expect another Lombardi, and in doing so we'll waste the outrageous talent we have everywhere else.

Jeezus can we just pay the kid (and BW) and get this over with, please?

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

I agree, burrton, I want Wilson paid as well so we can stop all the speculation.

The only thing I want to know, and I'd love to hear everybody's opinion, is there not a line that can't be crossed when it comes to his salary demands? I don't want to overreach, but it sounds like from some of the posters that he should be signed no matter what the cost. I ask this fully aware that none of us know any of the details.

[NorthHawk]

The numbers work best if they sign Wilson in 2016.

If the Seahawks make him the highest paid QB in the league, it will only last until Luck or other QBs re-sign.
As well, the Salary Cap dynamics are that it is expected to increase quite a bit over the next few years.
This means any big contract will consume less of the Cap as a percentage over time.
Factor in big contracts expiring (Okung in 2016 and maybe Lynch retiring soon) and Irvin possibly going to FA and not returning and we have a lot of money freed up to mitigate the Cap hit.
Okung is a $7.28 million Cap hit by himself this year and Irvin is $2.895.
If those two players don't return, that's $10 million that would mitigate the Cap hit.
So a $25 million salary effectively costs the Seahawks $13.5 million extra (Wilson's Cap number is $1.5 million this year).
The Cap will go up and the Seahawks will have to replace Okung and Irvin, but if one or both are draft picks it won't be anywhere near what those 2 cost us this year.

A big contract for Wilson is doable.

[Anthony]

The numbers work best if they sign Wilson in 2016.

If the Seahawks make him the highest paid QB in the league, it will only last until Luck or other QBs re-sign.
As well, the Salary Cap dynamics are that it is expected to increase quite a bit over the next few years.
This means any big contract will consume less of the Cap as a percentage over time.
Factor in big contracts expiring (Okung in 2016 and maybe Lynch retiring soon) and Irvin possibly going to FA and not returning and we have a lot of money freed up to mitigate the Cap hit.
Okung is a $7.28 million Cap hit by himself this year and Irvin is $2.895.
If those two players don't return, that's $10 million that would mitigate the Cap hit.
So a $25 million salary effectively costs the Seahawks $13.5 million extra (Wilson's Cap number is $1.5 million this year).
The Cap will go up and the Seahawks will have to replace Okung and Irvin, but if one or both are draft picks it won't be anywhere near what those 2 cost us this year.

A big contract for Wilson is doable.

agreed, maybe the issue is more about structure and the guarantees like we have heard. If you went on the times board most there would be all for letting him walk they think TJ can get us 11 wins. They blame everything that is wrong on Wilson and everything right on the defense and Lynch. Maybe JS is leaning that way who knows. We really have no fact saying anything just speculating and some media drones, and some blind haters.

[burrrton]

The numbers work best if they sign Wilson in 2016.

If the Seahawks make him the highest paid QB in the league, it will only last until Luck or other QBs re-sign.

Agree, but doesn't the second sentence contradict the first?

In other words, if Luck et al are going to sign for a metric-assload next year, doesn't that just mean RW's price will go up accordingly? Don't we get him cheaper if we get him nailed down now?

Maybe I'm just missing something.

[burrrton]

is there not a line that can't be crossed when it comes to his salary demands?

Of course, but "paid as if I'm among the best in the league" hardly seems indefensible from his POV.

I'm just hoping (and frankly thinking) there is simply some hang-up about when guaranteed money kicks in or something that one or both sides will be willing to compromise on when TC is about to start.

Can't believe RW would prefer to play the season for relatively nothing when the possibility looms that he could be negotiating next year as a QB who didn't get his team to the SB (or some setback like that), and I also can't believe PC and JS wouldn't prefer to have him tied up and happy this season when seemingly 80% of our team is in its prime.

[HumanCockroach]

I never said you did HC. But I do think you are underselling how hard it is to find a good QB and the importance of holding onto one. It's a minor miracle that they figured out how to extend Bennett, Sherman, Avril, K.J. Wright, Lynch and still managed to have room to take on Jimmy Graham's contract and resign Wilson let alone enough room to hopefully fit Wilson and Wagner under the cap. I love Baldwin and Kearse but they are completely replaceable. So you're talking about losing Wagner and Okung. Wilson is more important than both of them combined, even if he's not a Top 5 QB.

My overall point is it isn't just Wilson who's a threat to Wagner being resigned. It's all those guys particularly Lynch who when you read between the lines of how his previous contract was structured and how the team drafted was almost certainly a scheduled cap casualty for this offseason.

Furthermore, all those QBs you listed? It's not about being elite. It's about having a certain level of mastery over the game and the ability to take over a game when necessary. Newton is actually a very good QB that a lot of people refuse to acknowledge for whatever reason. He isn't perfect but he's much closer to Russell Wilson than he is to Colin Kaepernick. At worst he's the 12th best QB in the league. Dalton, Smith and Kaepernick are examples of why you don't let go of a good QB when you have them. You can make the playoffs with those guys but you can only go so far, particularly Dalton and Smith.

The 2011 NFC championship game is the perfect example of why Alex Smith will never win a Super Bowl. A good team took away what he did well and he completely fell apart. Dalton is the same way. His limitations get completely exposed in the playoffs every year. Kaepernick is a bit of an outlier because he's such a physical freak and teams were not able to account for him initially. It's even harder to find a someone with his skill set than it is to find a good QB. So it's not like you can say, "oh we can just go out and get a Kaepernick and be just fine". Furthermore, now that teams know what to expect athletically he will never win a Super Bowl either until he learns to go through his progressions. And if he does learn to go through his progressions then he is a Top 10 QB instantly.

As for Flacco, he's a good QB... he can take over games when necessary in a way that Dalton and Smith can't. Even if he doesn't do it every game. We've seen him go head to head, point for point with Peyton Manning, Tom Brady and Ben Roethlisberger and come out on top more than a few times. And the highly regarded Ravens front office obviously recognized how hard it is to get a QB who can do that. He's in the Eli Manning tier. They may not ever lead the league in passing but you feel completely comfortable with them in a big game.

I think some of the rumored numbers are a little outrageous personally but if we lose Wilson we just end up wasting the prime years of our other high priced blue chip players searching for another QB who won't be insufficient on the biggest stage

I certainly am not attempting to undersell the value of a franchise QB, my issue is with the continued belief of what type of teams win Championships, or at least the foolish belief the QBs do it on their own. Teams need balance, and no matter the quality of said QB, you can not, will not win them if your team does not have it. The thought that Seattle should do an about face, dump valuable players, and invest solely in offensive threats ( well minus Lynch because he limits Wilson's opportunities) and pay Wilson whatever he wants, simply will not win Championships.

The claim I replied to had to do with the theory that QBs and ONLY QBs put teams consistently in the hunt, which is FAR from true, never has been true, and never will be true. Teams win titles NOT QBs. Which would be why teams that are not smart with how the structure said contracts seldom win titles, but make the playoffs.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Good points, burrton. For the teams sake, I hope both sides are looking at it the way you are.

[NorthHawk]

"
Of course, but "paid as if I'm among the best in the league" hardly seems indefensible from his POV.

I'm just hoping (and frankly thinking) there is simply some hang-up about when guaranteed money kicks in or something that one or both sides will be willing to compromise on when TC is about to start.

Can't believe RW would prefer to play the season for relatively nothing when the possibility looms that he could be negotiating next year as a QB who didn't get his team to the SB (or some setback like that), and I also can't believe PC and JS wouldn't prefer to have him tied up and happy this season when seemingly 80% of our team is in its prime."

It almost makes one think that one side is steadfast in what they will accept or wants to wait until next year.
It could be either one of the sides.

[burrrton]

It almost makes one think that one side is steadfast in what they will accept or wants to wait until next year.
It could be either one of the sides.

So far it does indeed seem that way, but I'm finding it hard to accept. I'm not seeing a huge upside for either side in waiting.

[Anthony]

I certainly am not attempting to undersell the value of a franchise QB, my issue is with the continued belief of what type of teams win Championships, or at least the foolish belief the QBs do it on their own. Teams need balance, and no matter the quality of said QB, you can not, will not win them if your team does not have it. The thought that Seattle should do an about face, dump valuable players, and invest solely in offensive threats ( well minus Lynch because he limits Wilson's opportunities) and pay Wilson whatever he wants, simply will not win Championships.

The claim I replied to had to do with the theory that QBs and ONLY QBs put teams consistently in the hunt, which is FAR from true, never has been true, and never will be true. Teams win titles NOT QBs. Which would be why teams that are not smart with how the structure said contracts seldom win titles, but make the playoffs.

dude the FACT is it is harder to find a franchise QB than any other position in football, they are also the most important player and position in the game. None has every said they win by themselves, but you can go avg on other positions with a franchise QB you cannot with an avg QB. Point in case our own team because of Rw we can go avg to below avg in pass blocking/oline and avg to below avg at WR. That is 5-10 spots on the roster just on offense were you can go cheap, and even restock via the draft with no real issue. You cannot do that with the QB all this foolish belief crap is something you came up with no place did I say that. However again the FACT still is the QB has the single biggest impact on the team and game, and a franchise QB is the hardest animal to find period.

[Anthony]

"
Of course, but "paid as if I'm among the best in the league" hardly seems indefensible from his POV.

I'm just hoping (and frankly thinking) there is simply some hang-up about when guaranteed money kicks in or something that one or both sides will be willing to compromise on when TC is about to start.

Can't believe RW would prefer to play the season for relatively nothing when the possibility looms that he could be negotiating next year as a QB who didn't get his team to the SB (or some setback like that), and I also can't believe PC and JS wouldn't prefer to have him tied up and happy this season when seemingly 80% of our team is in its prime."

It almost makes one think that one side is steadfast in what they will accept or wants to wait until next year.
It could be either one of the sides.

"paid as if I'm among the best in the league" that's very defensible he is amongst the best in the league at QB

[HumanCockroach]

dude the FACT is it is harder to find a franchise QB than any other position in football

Absolutely, and not one time have I said otherwise.

they are also the most important player and position in thte game. None has every said they win by themselves, but you can go avg on other positions with a franchise QB you cannot with an avg QB. Point in case our own team because of Rw we can go avg to below avg in E tass blocking/oline and avg to below avg at WR. That is 5-10 spots on the roster just on offense were you can go cheap, and even restock via the draft with no real issue. You cannot do that with the QB all this foolish belief crap is something you came up with no place did I say that. However again the FACT still is the QB has the single biggest impact on the team and game

,

Conjecture, speculation, your opinion, and not remotely a "fact" but a fact as you see it. You can claim you believe that a franchise QB puts you in the hunt every year, but that would be a false statement, NO single player puts a team in the hunt, not Manning ( neither Eli or Peyton) not Rothlisburger, not Rivers, or Rodgers, Brady or Elway, nor Montana or Young, pick a QB and I promise you they have all missed the postseason minus two currently playing, BOTH of which happen to be on balanced teams with a strong running game and defense. It isn't an anomaly, that 90% of teams that have won a Championship in the SB era have had a top ten defense.

I really don't care if you want Seattle to spend all available resources to sign Wilson, dump Lynch and surround him with explosive players like Rodgers, you ARE entitled to that OPINION. My own opinion differs drastically, and not one of your opinions will ever change mine, regardless of how many times you insist yours are a fact.

[burrrton]

"paid as if I'm among the best in the league" that's very defensible he is amongst the best in the league at QB

Agree wholeheartedly. I just worded it that way to remove any contention.

[Anthony]

Conjecture, speculation, your opinion, and not remotely a "fact" but a fact as you see it. You can claim you believe that a franchise QB puts you in the hunt every year, but that would be a false statement, NO single player puts a team in the hunt, not Manning ( neither Eli or Peyton) not Rothlisburger, not Rivers, or Rodgers, Brady or Elway, nor Montana or Young, pick a QB and I promise you they have all missed the postseason minus two currently playing, BOTH of which happen to be on balanced teams with a strong running game and defense. It isn't an anomaly, that 90% of teams that have won a Championship in the SB era have had a top ten defense.

I really don't care if you want Seattle to spend all available resources to sign Wilson, dump Lynch and surround him with explosive players like Rodgers, you ARE entitled to that OPINION. My own opinion differs drastically, and not one of your opinions will ever change mine, regardless of how many times you insist yours are a fact.

Dude it is a fact they are the most important player on the field. There is a reason they are the highest paid player there is a reason only 2 teams in the last 25 years have won an SB with a low tier QB. Their is a reason they are the ones with the ball in their hands doing more than just hiking it on every offensive play. No other player does that. Its not conjecture it is fact and all the experts back it up it is indisputable FYI as to your 90% have a top 10 defense maybe I have not looked but again that is a defense the whole 11 guys on defense. However while I am not going back through the whole SB era I will look at 10 years; NE NO, Us YES, Balt NO, Giants NO, GB yes, NO NO, Pitt YES, NYG yes , Indy NO, Pitt yes. So lets see that is 5 out of 10 so 50% Hmm not even close to 90% now lets also look a the QBs how many were franchise QBs; NE Yes, Us Yes, Balt Yes, Giants yes, GN yes, NO yes, Pitt yes, NYG Yes, Indy YEs, Pitt Yes. So 10 out of 10 had franchise QBs or 100% HMM. We are talking about the single most important player not the post important side of the ball. FYI as I said facts deal with it.

[HumanCockroach]

LOL. You need to stop professing the "experts" say so, so it is a "fact", that is also their OPINION just because you buy it hook line and sinker does NOT make it fact. If the experts opinion made things "facts" than Luck is better than Wilson, the Seahawks missed the playoffs last year, lost to Denver the year before, the Mariners are going to win the WS this year, and the world is flat, the sun orbits around the Earth, and Zeiss might rain down lightning bolts for grievances at any moment.

I have already said QBs are important, as are offenses, but they certainly aren't the ONLY thing that is, and BALANCED teams win championships, and that actually IS a fact. 40 of 49 SB Champs have had top ten defenses, of the other nine the ranked above 15, AND even your examples ( of which you based it solely on yardage) NE ranked 12th and NYG ranked 13 th by a COMBINED 27 yards a game.

Let me say that again, top tier offenses with explosive weapons and Franchise QBs win championships, but NOT without defense along for the ride, period. It does nit matter if you have Montana, or Brady or Wilson, you are NOT winning a SB without a good to great defense. No matter your skill level.

QBs may be key, but it is the team that ultimately wins each and every Lombardi, without it, every QB is roadkill.

[Anthony]

LOL. You need to stop professing the "experts" say so, so it is a "fact", that is also their OPINION just because you buy it hook line and sinker does NOT make it fact. If the experts opinion made things "facts" than Luck is better than Wilson, the Seahawks missed the playoffs last year, lost to Denver the year before, the Mariners are going to win the WS this year, and the world is flat, the sun orbits around the Earth, and Zeiss might rain down lightning bolts for grievances at any moment.

I have already said QBs are important, as are offenses, but they certainly aren't the ONLY thing that is, and BALANCED teams win championships, and that actually IS a fact. 40 of 49 SB Champs have had top ten defenses, of the other nine the ranked above 15, AND even your examples ( of which you based it solely on yardage) NE ranked 12th and NYG ranked 13 th by a COMBINED 27 yards a game.

Let me say that again, top tier offenses with explosive weapons and Franchise QBs win championships, but NOT without defense along for the ride, period. It does nit matter if you have Montana, or Brady or Wilson, you are NOT winning a SB without a good to great defense. No matter your skill level.

QBs may be key, but it is the team that ultimately wins each and every Lombardi, without it, every QB is roadkill.

and you cannot get over your self and the fact you have nothing to support your claim. I proved your whole defense thing was wrong and in doing so proved my Qb reference is right. You are right the Qb is key and has such is the most important player on the team and filed thanks for finally getting it right and admitting it

[HumanCockroach]

You proved nothing except what I continue to point out, which is, while important, teams win SBs, not QBs.

[Anthony]

You proved nothing except what I continue to point out, which is, while important, teams win SBs, not QBs.

Sure I did I proved and you agreed that the QB is the most player and position, which has been the point hence why when you get a franchise QB you keep them.

[Agent 86]

I think HC and Anthony should probably just agree to disagree....once again...

You both bring valid opinions and I think get to the heart of what 'Hawks fans are thinking.

I would agree with HC's assessment, but at the same time for what RW3 has done in his 3 years, how can you picture him not being a Seahawk for life. So why not just give him the best deal out there and risk losing other parts?

So many factors play into it.....how will breaking the bank effect the rest of the team in terms of who has to go?....how will teammates view RW3 if he takes a contract that hamstrings the team?.....how long are they going to stick with the "conservative" run first offence, will they let RW3 loose to and get him the weapons to throw for 5000 yards and 30 TD's and have a mere 350 yards on the ground?....is that what RW3 wants, is that part of the negotiation..."hey coach, I want to throw the ball more and be the ultimate dual threat QB".....how much is Luck going to sign for?....how much is RW3 worth in free agency?...how much gets guaranteed?

I went through a similar contract issue last summer with my other favourite team, the Montreal Canadiens and PK Subban....it got nasty in the press to the point where serious trade rumours surfaced...the next week he signed a deal for 8 years and made him the highest paid defenseman in the league.

So I have stayed away from the media for the most part on this one, and remain very optimistic something will get done by next week. And have the comfort of knowing if it doesn't, the tag can be applied next year. It's there for a reason and if you have to use it you use it.

This is the most interesting negotiation I can remember, RW just has so many intangibles that are off the charts that he is truly a unique athlete, in a class by himself. I am sure Pete and John have had their hands full on this negotiation.

Funny what you get when your team becomes successful, I don't remember any of these kinds of problems before like this. The SA37 and Hutch deals are the only ones that come to mind.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

You keep the franchise QB at too high a cost then getting to the Superbowl is even harder. You have to have a very complete team. I don't think any of us detractors, if we could even be called that, are advocating not signing Wilson, but there's got to be a breaking point where you have to say "no" to an exorbitant salary demand. We don't even know if that is the case, and I have to believe they can make a deal that will satisfy Wilson and not kill the cap. As much as I don't want to see Wilson playing for anybody else but the Seahawks, I also don't want to see a great team achieve less and less every year because they paid their quarterback too much.

[Anthony]

You keep the franchise QB at too high a cost then getting to the Superbowl is even harder. You have to have a very complete team. I don't think any of us detractors, if we could even be called that, are advocating not signing Wilson, but there's got to be a breaking point where you have to say "no" to an exorbitant salary demand. We don't even know if that is the case, and I have to believe they can make a deal that will satisfy Wilson and not kill the cap. As much as I don't want to see Wilson playing for anybody else but the Seahawks, I also don't want to see a great team achieve less and less every year because they paid their quarterback too much.

No one ever said at all cost, that was not the debate. The other thing do you want to see a great team achieve less and less because they do not have that franchise QB. There is a line, but given all the biggies on defense but Wagner is signed for a few years there is little risk that the team with Wilson will go to heck. It is mainly going to be depth that will go and that will need to be addressed via the draft and low cost FAs. Still a better option than not having a franchise qb which history shows is a must to stay competitive and win SBs. You said keeping the franchise QB at all cost makes getting to the SB harder but not having a franchise qb makes it near impossible, and unlike CB ,FSW, SS, DT, RB, Wr etc finding a franchise QB is very very hard.

[HumanCockroach]

I would agree with HC's assessment, but at the same time for what RW3 has done in his 3 years, how can you picture him not being a Seahawk for life. So why not just give him the best deal out there and risk losing other parts

Absolutely to a point. If you told me would I take Wilson, and let Irvin walk, I would not bat an eye, if you said Irvin and Baldwin ,again I would not hesitate, if you told me Irvin, Wagner, Okung, Baldwin and Lynch? My tune would change. The truth is, no matter the "value" of one player, there IS a limit, whether he be a QB or not. It would be the same no matter what name was on the back for me. A great QB can make up for deficiencies, but no matter how great they are, the can not make up for ALL of them.

Some have bought into the hype that has been spun for so many decades. I'm just not one of them. All great players, no matter what position are difficult to find, if it wasn't EVERY TEAM WOULD HAVE ONE at every position, truth is, players that are unique and special are Damn hard to find, and finding a QB is zero different.

[Agent 86]

Absolutely to a point. If you told me would I take Wilson, and let Irvin walk, I would not bat an eye, if you said Irvin and Baldwin ,again I would not hesitate, if you told me Irvin, Wagner, Okung, Baldwin and Lynch? My tune would change. The truth is, no matter the "value" of one player, there IS a limit, whether he be a QB or not. It would be the same no matter what name was on the back for me. A great QB can make up for deficiencies, but no matter how great they are, the can not make up for ALL of them.

Some have bought into the hype that has been spun for so many decades. I'm just not one of them. All great players, no matter what position are difficult to find, if it wasn't EVERY TEAM WOULD HAVE ONE at every position, truth is, players that are unique and special are Damn hard to find, and finding a QB is zero different.

HC,

This is the first instance that I can remember that has made me question myself on how I view things. At the end of the day, I fell on the side of the fence that you cannot lose too many parts to satisfy having a franchise QB. As difficult as it would be seeing RW3 in another uniform, if it meant losing the players you mentioned above (the second batch of players) it would be difficult to win a championship.

As you mentioned, we are talking about the ultimate team sport. So many great QB's never won a Super Bowl, or fell just short because of a porous defence or untimely missed field goal or poor special teams play. You made a good point about Brady going so long between Super Bowls while he was being paid a huge chunk of money. He finally gets to the point where he took a cut and look what happened.

I honestly can't fathom RW3 holding Pete and John by the balls on this one given what we know of him. Obviously it is his agent who is going for broke if in fact they are asking for something that is too much.

Wouldn't it funny if they had a deal done a while ago and then decided to have fun with the media and the fans for a couple months. Just imagine them sitting back and watching it all unfold. Scheming what to say to what reporter. I think that would be awesome if someone did that.

[Anthony]

Absolutely to a point. If you told me would I take Wilson, and let Irvin walk, I would not bat an eye, if you said Irvin and Baldwin ,again I would not hesitate, if you told me Irvin, Wagner, Okung, Baldwin and Lynch? My tune would change. The truth is, no matter the "value" of one player, there IS a limit, whether he be a QB or not. It would be the same no matter what name was on the back for me. A great QB can make up for deficiencies, but no matter how great they are, the can not make up for ALL of them.

Some have bought into the hype that has been spun for so many decades. I'm just not one of them. All great players, no matter what position are difficult to find, if it wasn't EVERY TEAM WOULD HAVE ONE at every position, truth is, players that are unique and special are Damn hard to find, and finding a QB is zero different.

The problem is you act like it is an either or when it may not, and then add you assume the hawks even want some of those people back and in Lynch's case he will either play out his contract for the reamainder 2+ years, retire or force the FO to give him even more at the expense of Wilson or others which you seemed to have no issue with. You may not believe the hype but the facts support it so you want to ignore the fact that is on you, Since you have nothing to loose it is easy for you, But if JS decides not to sign Wilson and then we go to 7-9 for several seasons it is his job and not just here but other places, I mean the guy who did not sign his franchise QB and then relegated his team to 7-9 not great on a resume. The fact is with Wilson we are a consistent SB contender without him we are not period. You keep acting like we are going to loose important players, one we do not know that we will, and 2 kam, Sherman, Et our 2 defensive ends, Lynch, Graham are all locked up for a few years, So who are we going to loose? Irwin who cares, Baldwin he just signed so no, Okung the guy who can not stay healthy and is marginal at best, Wagner we do not know as they can sign both pretty easily I might add, So who? Answer guys who are #35+ on the roster and will be replaced with cheaper players. So your whole we will loose a lot of guys is BS we lost a lot of guys last year, and the year before even when Wilson was not an issue, it happens. So all you BS is well a waste as none of it is relevant. Where were you when Sherman, Kam ,Et and Lynch were getting their deals were you about well if we pay Sherman top CB money that is less for others we might loose others? No you and others were all for it no issue even though just 500K less might mean keeping Okung or not. You did not care. You only care because it is our QB and the amount involved and the mistaken thought that the QB is not as important. Imagine if Kam, Et, Sherman and Lynch all took 500k less than would be 2 mil more we would have, but nope no one cared when it was them just now that it is our Qb. Heck Bennett wanting to redo his deal is less of a concern than Wilson. Why? because some of you have bought the hype that the QB is not as important on our team, Guess what your wrong, the only thing is unlike JS you have nothing to loose if you mess up.

[Agent 86]

The problem is you act like it is an either or when it may not, and then add you assume the hawks even want some of those people back and in Lynch's case he will either play out his contract for the reamainder 2+ years, retire or force the FO to give him even more at the expense of Wilson or others which you seemed to have no issue with. You may not believe the hype but the facts support it so you want to ignore the fact that is on you, Since you have nothing to loose it is easy for you, But if JS decides not to sign Wilson and then we go to 7-9 for several seasons it is his job and not just here but other places, I mean the guy who did not sign his franchise QB and then relegated his team to 7-9 not great on a resume. The fact is with Wilson we are a consistent SB contender without him we are not period. You keep acting like we are going to loose important players, one we do not know that we will, and 2 kam, Sherman, Et our 2 defensive ends, Lynch, Graham are all locked up for a few years, So who are we going to loose? Irwin who cares, Baldwin he just signed so no, Okung the guy who can not stay healthy and is marginal at best, Wagner we do not know as they can sign both pretty easily I might add, So who? Answer guys who are #35+ on the roster and will be replaced with cheaper players. So your whole we will loose a lot of guys is BS we lost a lot of guys last year, and the year before even when Wilson was not an issue, it happens. So all you BS is well a waste as none of it is relevant. Where were you when Sherman, Kam ,Et and Lynch were getting their deals were you about well if we pay Sherman top CB money that is less for others we might loose others? No you and others were all for it no issue even though just 500K less might mean keeping Okung or not. You did not care. You only care because it is our QB and the amount involved and the mistaken thought that the QB is not as important. Imagine if Kam, Et, Sherman and Lynch all took 500k less than would be 2 mil more we would have, but nope no one cared when it was them just now that it is our Qb. Heck Bennett wanting to redo his deal is less of a concern than Wilson. Why? because some of you have bought the hype that the QB is not as important on our team, Guess what your wrong, the only thing is unlike JS you have nothing to loose if you mess up.

Anthony,

I think you would be better served if you came to the absolute realization that this is a "fan forum". I would bet 95% of what is typed on here is pure opinion. There is very rarely a right or wrong.

You bleed Seahawks green and blue, I can see that. You post alot on here which is awesome. But anything good you put gets clouded behind posts like the one above. It's not a 1 way street, I get that some posters will egg you on.

Just my opinion, don't come down hard on me.....I just think I would enjoy your posts more if they didn't sound the way they do. Just say your point and let others say theirs. There is no use in trying to change someone's opinion in the manner that you do it. Just trying to help man....

[Anthony]

Anthony,

I think you would be better served if you came to the absolute realization that this is a "fan forum". I would bet 95% of what is typed on here is pure opinion. There is very rarely a right or wrong.

You bleed Seahawks green and blue, I can see that. You post alot on here which is awesome. But anything good you put gets clouded behind posts like the one above. It's not a 1 way street, I get that some posters will egg you on.

Just my opinion, don't come down hard on me.....I just think I would enjoy your posts more if they didn't sound the way they do. Just say your point and let others say theirs. There is no use in trying to change someone's opinion in the manner that you do it. Just trying to help man....

MY original post did not start that way it became that way in response to a few over the top people. That said I appreciate the message however as with all things it takes 2 to tango, and as I said my original message was pretty even keeled until certain people started in.

[HumanCockroach]

You are using examples of teams that haven't won but a single championship in recent years, with the exception of the Pats, who happen to have a QB that makes 14 million a year. None of the others listed have won one since getting obscene numbers. You might want to use some other examples. If you want to be like Dallas, or even GB fine, but don't expect everyone else to have the same goal. Not everybody wants only to have a franchise QB who season ends before February every year

Yep, WAY over the top, no way is this an even keeled response.

[Anthony]

Yep, WAY over the top, no way is this an even keeled response.

Its not because you cannot name a franchise who is always in the hunt who does not have a franchise QB and as said they cost. Now I am sure you would much rather have a team that does not have a franchise QB and misses the playoffs every year except for that once every 10 years trip in and once every 20 year SB win. Me I would rather be in the hunt every year because once in anything can happen. So lets see be a winning team and SB contender every year or once every 10-20 years. HMm pretty simple choice and for the correct choice you need a franchise QB and they cost

[Distant Relative]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmh1gl5hVgw

Ya Baby!!!!!

[HumanCockroach]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmh1gl5hVgw

Ya Baby!!!!!

[Anthony]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmh1gl5hVgw

Ya Baby!!!!!

You and HC should try it maybe it will knock some sense into you