TypeSly":2w9lplwj said:
But who says he has to take a 1 year contract? I'm sure plenty of teams would happily take him and sign him to a longer deal than that. I now believe that Carson will re-sign with the Seahawks, and I'm guessing it will be to a 3yr-deal with some incentives. This would probably be a compromise from both sides (Seahawks wanting 1-2 years, Carson and his agent wanting 4-5 years). I think that Carson will just be more realistic on his wanting top-5 RB money. He stated that at the same time he stated that he would be healthy for all 16 games, so I'm sure he's backed off that some. Also with the additions of Adams and Dunlap, the team is much more solid going forward and more players will want to stay, even if they have to take a little less than what they desire.:
I just explained it, because RB's are not on the same value level as other position groups anymore, and there's recent examples of team's regretting giving their top 10 RB's long term deals (Gurley and Bell).
Carson's yet to play a full season, he's always injured, so if you think another teams going to give him a
monster long term deal? I have no idea where you'd get that precedent from.
Carson's also very unique to our style of offense, which is not run by 75% of other teams. So you have to factor that into the equation as well. Why would another team want to give an often injured RB like Carson a long term deal in a role that's diminished within their offense.
I think you guys are overvaluing Carson's worth. Yes he's still important in OUR offense, but on the open market? I just don't see it.