"Clayton claims he's "baffled" by Wilson contract talks"

[AVL]

Don't pay a short person tall person money. Never.


Say what you mean.

 

[Polaris]

I have NEVER seen a team in the NFL be willing to burn two first round picks for anyone (no not even the Browns). I see no reason why the Hawks (especially if they keep a sizeable cap room...which they will) have any reason to be uncomfortable or nervous about using the non-restricted tag....and I wouldn't be either.

You are ASSUMING (as is Rodgers) that the 'hawks will use the exclusive tag and use it both years. Maybe they do, but maybe they don't and I think you are assuming far too much as is Wilson's agent.

What did the Redskins spend for the ability to draft RG3? A guy who had never played a down in the NFL and turned out to be possibly the 3rd or 4th best QB in that draft.

Now compare that to a guy who has shown in every way possible that he is a successful NFL QB with records and a Superbowl ring in his first 3 years.

You seem to be assuming that the Seahawks are lowballing Wilson and I simply doubt this is the case. I think it's a fundamental disconnect between an FO that wants to make an NFL style extension and an agent that seems to want his client to get an MLB contract...by testing free agency if need be.

You are also assuming that other NFL teams value Wilson as highly (or even that Wilson has a high value) with other NFL teams with their own personelle and schemes, and from what I've seen that's hardly a given.

No, I think if it comes down to it, the 'hawks will be very safe and very confortable going with the non-restrictive franchise tag because I think the NFL as a whole values Wilson a lot less than a lot of us do here (including me) or even the Seahawks do. As such I think Rodgers is talking his client into a very serious error.

 

[rideaducati]

I have NEVER seen a team in the NFL be willing to burn two first round picks for anyone (no not even the Browns). I see no reason why the Hawks (especially if they keep a sizeable cap room...which they will) have any reason to be uncomfortable or nervous about using the non-restricted tag....and I wouldn't be either.

You are ASSUMING (as is Rodgers) that the 'hawks will use the exclusive tag and use it both years. Maybe they do, but maybe they don't and I think you are assuming far too much as is Wilson's agent.

What did the Redskins spend for the ability to draft RG3? A guy who had never played a down in the NFL and turned out to be possibly the 3rd or 4th best QB in that draft.

Now compare that to a guy who has shown in every way possible that he is a successful NFL QB with records and a Superbowl ring in his first 3 years.

I'm sure there are plenty of teams that would give a lot of picks for Russell, but if Russell won't sign a reasonable contract with that team, what good would the trade do them? I doubt Russell's agent would be able to extort a different team either.

I still believe Russell will sign a contract before this season starts. It will be in the ballpark of Aaron Rodgers money in average per year. Russell's agent was all about total money, so maybe it will be a five year deal.

I think the Seahawks are willing to make Russell the highest paid QB in the league, but if they do that, they want a five year deal. No sense having to go through all of this again any sooner than you have to. It makes business sense because by the end of the contract, Russell will be considered cheap again. I think Russell's agent wants his client to be paid the most AND have a shorter deal so he can cash in again sooner. Screw that garbage. Just my guess... All will be fine WHEN Russell signs his contract next week.

 

[Anthony!]

Who knows if Wilson would be as successful on any other NFL team?
If we have to pay Wilson $20-25M per year, where will we lose depth and quality? Will we then be a team that has a good QB and offense, but just a good, but not GREAT, defense?

Hypothetical:
Would you rather have one more SB win, with a $20M salary cap advantage and then lose Russell...
Or contend for the next 5 years straight but lose in the playoffs each time and not reach the SB?

I'd be just as happy to have Russell play out the year under the current contract, have our best shot ever at another SB win, with our $15-20M advantage at the QB position, and then see what happens after that.
In any case, the 'Hawks need to be developing the best "Plan B" options they can.

I think Russell Wilson's skill set has unique value in the Seattle system, but not necessarily elsewhere. Wilson and the offense struggled and squandered pretty much a full quarter in SBXLIX while New England made a 10-point comeback. Where was our great QB then? It's not like New England had a truly incredible defense. Blame Bevell if you want, but Wilson didn't exactly get it done when it mattered. Wilson is TOO SHORT for that playcall, and it cost us the Lombardi. (Personally, I blame Bevell more for the retarded playcall that had Wilson using a below-NFL-average area of his skills instead of taking advantage of a playcall that DID use Wilson's true gifts, mobility and decision-making)

The despised Niners made it to a Super Bowl with Colin Kaepernick as their QB, and would have won were it not for Jacoby Jones' 108 yard kickoff return. The Ravens of 2000-ish won a Super Bowl with Trent-freaking-Dilfer as their QB, with an all-time elite defense, which is pretty much the setup the Hawks are in position to prove they have.

I'm fine with letting Russell play out the final year of his rookie contract and taking our chances with that.
How do we know that Belichick and the Patriots didn't expose enough fatal flaws in Wilson's game in SB XLIX that other teams will now use this year to stymie and ultimately beat the Hawks?

Do we really know that Wilson can carry the team himself with $20M less of talent on Defense and Offense?
How many times has Wilson carried the team with the +$20M advantage we have now? I'd like to say GB NFCCG, but really, Wilson dug that hole, and the D shut down Rogers just enough, the Special Teams made big plays, so it's hard to credit Wilson fully with carrying the team out of it. I could go with Wilson carrying the team in several games in 2012, including Chicago, and in the Atlanta loss in the playoffs, and in 2013, maybe the NFCCG vs Niners, but again it was Wilson's screwups that helped set up the dire circumstances to begin with, and it was the D that sealed the game.

If Wilson's agent wants to roll the dice, fine, but the sky is NOT falling for the Seahawks. Would Seattle be a better team by tying up $25M/Year in the QB position? I'm not convinced the answer is yes. Could PC/JS strike gold again in the draft at QB, or by a retread who discovers new life when they have an elite defense and a great running game? Let Wilson and his agent do what they will, but the Seattle FO should not cave to team-crippling demands.

Great post completely one sided missing a lot of information, but great, I like they way you under score what very very few positives about Wilson you make and over score if not exaggerate the things that take away form Wilson. All and all a great post worthy of any anti Wilson person.

 

[Anthony!]

Its really interesting to read some of the.....stuff said here. Lets keep him for 1 more year and then let him go. Less money to spend on the offense,, reality check we do not spend much on the offense, the advantage of Wilson low oline costs. Wilson would only work here and no place else. It is really laughable how some you really think so little of Wilson. Our great Defense and our Great Run game is why we win and Wilson is why we loose, well know one said it but they eluded to it. DId it occur to you that our playing style holds Wilson back, our lack of offensive weapons and oline hold shim back. Make me wonder if he read this board if he would want to stay here given evidently some here seem to think he easily replaceable. So easily replaced they bring up Trent Dilfer comparisons. I mean I get it Trent an avg at best QB won an SB with a great D and run game and he is only one in the last 20 years to do it so I can understand why some think we should be able to also and do so every year.

Its like their is a huge portion of people trying to convince themselves Wilsons irrelevant or at best Avg. 1 guy pointing out the few times were Wilson failed forgetting all the times, and he leads the league in this , were he succeeded. He mentions that great defense and run game and forgets Wilson is a huge part of the reason for that great run game or the substandard oline and Wr play. It is really very interesting especially when most of you really do not believe it. If you did you would not be fighting so hard to convince everyone of it.

Its really pretty funny reading all this.. stuff. I am a Hawks fan first I just believe we will take a major step back if Wilson leaves and we are forced to use an Avg QB. Hence why I want him to stay. We know with him we are an SB contender, without him in 2011 we were not even in the playoffs. You can argue we are better now than then, but that would be an opinion as we were good then too, had Lynch and a top 10 defense that were not coming off surgeries.

There is an old saying a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Do you really want to test your theory any avg QB would do? Are there that many Lynchs, Kams, Sherms, Ets out there, ever year? I am not saying give him anything, but we should all be able to agree he deserves top money and he gives is the best chance to get to another SB now and in the future. Problem is some of you do not want to agree.

I find it ironic for those who spit out the very very few things they can point to, to underscore Wilson but leave out the vast volume of things that support him.

You know its funny if anyone says anything even remotely negative about Lynch or the defense there is hell to pay, but about Wilson they have no problem with it at all. Wilson is getting the Alexander treatment. Only difference is Alexander deserved it, Wilson does not. Alexander was an RB behind the best oline in history. Wilson is a QB behind a bottom 10 oline with bottom 10 wr corps. Every QB has his advantages, Luck has always had better Wr and a better oline and in the AFC were defenses are less. Manning has always had great Wr and RBs, and again AFC, Brady was playing really bad till Gronk came back, and all of his truly great years he had great WRs. But for them its all about them, yet here we are and in the 2 categories of players that help a QB ost WR and oline he has had far less talent then most and yet its not about him, he is replaceable, he is a duncel. AND that by Seahawks fans.

I do find it ironic that most hear have been yelling for a franchise QB and now we have one and now most here are fine with letting him go, even if it means we are no longer SB contenders.

 

[Polaris]

NOBODY has suggested in this thread or any other that we should just "let" Wilson go. Using a franchise tag (no matter what flavor) is quite the reverse of this.

 

[Anthony!]

NOBODY has suggested in this thread or any other that we should just "let" Wilson go. Using a franchise tag (no matter what flavor) is quite the reverse of this.

one guy said keep him for this year, let him go, weather trade, or whatever, we may have 1 down year but will be fine after that. How we let him go is not relevant its just the letting him go.

 

[Bigbadhawk]

NOBODY has suggested in this thread or any other that we should just "let" Wilson go. Using a franchise tag (no matter what flavor) is quite the reverse of this.

one guy said keep him for this year, let him go, weather trade, or whatever, we may have 1 down year but will be fine after that. How we let him go is not relevant its just the letting him go.

Yeah because one guy or even a small handful of guys speaks for all of the fans You should know by now with all of the bi-monthly Wilson related topic that are started with all of the info inside regurgitated from one Wilson topic to the next that the majority of fans here don't want see Wilson go.

 

[AgentDib]

He mentions that great defense and run game and forgets Wilson is a huge part of the reason for that great run game or the substandard oline and Wr play. It is really very interesting especially when most of you really do not believe it.

One of the quirks about public discussion is that many will pick one side of an "argument" and advocate for it exclusively to the point of hyperbole, fact distortion, and ignoring opposing viewpoints. Their rationale for this is the (foolish) idea that they can shift public opinion towards the "correct" viewpoint if they just argue enough about it.

We know with him we are an SB contender, without him in 2011 we were not even in the playoffs.

Who is the audience you are addressing with this? The people reading this forum in the off-season are highly knowledgeable Hawk fans who are very aware that Wilson is a much better quarterback than TJack. They also know that there were a ton of differences between the 2011 and 2013 ball clubs including Wilson but not limited to him. I bet if you were motivated you could list a dozen major differences off the top of your head (Sherm's 10 game rookie year, TJack and Okung both tearing their pecs (thanks Trent Cole), the infamous Browns fiasco, the Gallery disaster).

 

[seedhawk]

Its really interesting to read some of the.....stuff said here. Lets keep him for 1 more year and then let him go. Less money to spend on the offense,, reality check we do not spend much on the offense, the advantage of Wilson low oline costs. Wilson would only work here and no place else. It is really laughable how some you really think so little of Wilson. Our great Defense and our Great Run game is why we win and Wilson is why we loose, well know one said it but they eluded to it. DId it occur to you that our playing style holds Wilson back, our lack of offensive weapons and oline hold shim back. Make me wonder if he read this board if he would want to stay here given evidently some here seem to think he easily replaceable. So easily replaced they bring up Trent Dilfer comparisons. I mean I get it Trent an avg at best QB won an SB with a great D and run game and he is only one in the last 20 years to do it so I can understand why some think we should be able to also and do so every year.

Its like their is a huge portion of people trying to convince themselves Wilsons irrelevant or at best Avg. 1 guy pointing out the few times were Wilson failed forgetting all the times, and he leads the league in this , were he succeeded. He mentions that great defense and run game and forgets Wilson is a huge part of the reason for that great run game or the substandard oline and Wr play. It is really very interesting especially when most of you really do not believe it. If you did you would not be fighting so hard to convince everyone of it.

Its really pretty funny reading all this.. stuff. I am a Hawks fan first I just believe we will take a major step back if Wilson leaves and we are forced to use an Avg QB. Hence why I want him to stay. We know with him we are an SB contender, without him in 2011 we were not even in the playoffs. You can argue we are better now than then, but that would be an opinion as we were good then too, had Lynch and a top 10 defense that were not coming off surgeries.

There is an old saying a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Do you really want to test your theory any avg QB would do? Are there that many Lynchs, Kams, Sherms, Ets out there, ever year? I am not saying give him anything, but we should all be able to agree he deserves top money and he gives is the best chance to get to another SB now and in the future. Problem is some of you do not want to agree.

I find it ironic for those who spit out the very very few things they can point to, to underscore Wilson but leave out the vast volume of things that support him.

You know its funny if anyone says anything even remotely negative about Lynch or the defense there is hell to pay, but about Wilson they have no problem with it at all. Wilson is getting the Alexander treatment. Only difference is Alexander deserved it, Wilson does not. Alexander was an RB behind the best oline in history. Wilson is a QB behind a bottom 10 oline with bottom 10 wr corps. Every QB has his advantages, Luck has always had better Wr and a better oline and in the AFC were defenses are less. Manning has always had great Wr and RBs, and again AFC, Brady was playing really bad till Gronk came back, and all of his truly great years he had great WRs. But for them its all about them, yet here we are and in the 2 categories of players that help a QB ost WR and oline he has had far less talent then most and yet its not about him, he is replaceable, he is a duncel. AND that by Seahawks fans.

I do find it ironic that most hear have been yelling for a franchise QB and now we have one and now most here are fine with letting him go, even if it means we are no longer SB contenders.

Nice discourse. Now, answer me this. If I say RW is a 20M a year Qb, and he signs for say 22 or 23/yr, was I correct or was I wrong?

 

[seahawksTopGear]

Let's make it simple. What is their motivation?

Front office: build best team possible within cap. Win superb owl.
Willson: be greatest ever (starts with winning superb owls and being highest paid)
Wilson's agent: break into nfl, get highest contract ever for his client.


Ok. Motivations are clear. Can the FO give Willson highest ever contract?

Right now no. There are two things in the way. The 1.5mil Willson will make next year can't be folded into that kind of contract. Number two issue, the Andrew Luck contract is not out yet. If the FO pays Willson less than luck everybody loses (yes. Including FO. They need Willson happy even if it costs an extra million a year)

So we wait for this year to pass and Lucks contract to come out. Then sign Willson to highest paid contract. Everybody wins.

 

[hawknation2015]

Let's make it simple. What is their motivation?

Front office: build best team possible within cap. Win superb owl.
Willson: be greatest ever (starts with winning superb owls and being highest paid)
Wilson's agent: break into nfl, get highest contract ever for his client.


Ok. Motivations are clear. Can the FO give Willson highest ever contract?

Right now no. There are two things in the way. The 1.5mil Willson will make next year can't be folded into that kind of contract. Number two issue, the Andrew Luck contract is not out yet. If the FO pays Willson less than luck everybody loses (yes. Including FO. They need Willson happy even if it costs an extra million a year)

So we wait for this year to pass and Lucks contract to come out. Then sign Willson to highest paid contract. Everybody wins.

That's incorrect. Take Rodgers' extension as an example (but pretty much any QB would work). Rodgers' cap hit in 2013, when he signed his extension, was only $11.65 million. If you included that year in the deal, then it would have been worth far less than $22 million per year. This is why Rodgers' cap hit never exceeds $21 million through 2019.

That's just how NFL extensions are calculated, allowing the team to secure their QB's future while lowering their future cap hit.

 

[Sports Hernia]

I always find it interesting how we speculate on what is going on. I really do not think anyone really knows. Just because a guy was a baseball agent does not mean he is not smart enough to handle a NFL contract. There are many who do both as well as other sports and I would assume that if they are smart they have done their research on NFL contracts.

Just yesterday Wilson stated that he thought he would have a deal before camp. Then PC stated there is no timeframe. So who really knows.

Maybe Rogers is the best agent ever, maybe he's a schmuck and totally does not get football or maybe he is in between 8)

Maybe he isn't a schmuck, but maybe he is?
A lot of agents have the mentality that the players work for them, not the other way around which is reality.
Time will tell.

 

[Anthony!]

NOBODY has suggested in this thread or any other that we should just "let" Wilson go. Using a franchise tag (no matter what flavor) is quite the reverse of this.

one guy said keep him for this year, let him go, weather trade, or whatever, we may have 1 down year but will be fine after that. How we let him go is not relevant its just the letting him go.

Yeah because one guy or even a small handful of guys speaks for all of the fans You should know by now with all of the bi-monthly Wilson related topic that are started with all of the info inside regurgitated from one Wilson topic to the next that the majority of fans here don't want see Wilson go.

No place did I say everyone not one place, try reading.

 

[Anthony!]

He mentions that great defense and run game and forgets Wilson is a huge part of the reason for that great run game or the substandard oline and Wr play. It is really very interesting especially when most of you really do not believe it.

One of the quirks about public discussion is that many will pick one side of an "argument" and advocate for it exclusively to the point of hyperbole, fact distortion, and ignoring opposing viewpoints. Their rationale for this is the (foolish) idea that they can shift public opinion towards the "correct" viewpoint if they just argue enough about it.

We know with him we are an SB contender, without him in 2011 we were not even in the playoffs.

Who is the audience you are addressing with this? The people reading this forum in the off-season are highly knowledgeable Hawk fans who are very aware that Wilson is a much better quarterback than TJack. They also know that there were a ton of differences between the 2011 and 2013 ball clubs including Wilson but not limited to him. I bet if you were motivated you could list a dozen major differences off the top of your head (Sherm's 10 game rookie year, TJack and Okung both tearing their pecs (thanks Trent Cole), the infamous Browns fiasco, the Gallery disaster).

and yet you left off the part were I addressed the part were we are better than we were in 2011. HMm

 

[Anthony!]

Its really interesting to read some of the.....stuff said here. Lets keep him for 1 more year and then let him go. Less money to spend on the offense,, reality check we do not spend much on the offense, the advantage of Wilson low oline costs. Wilson would only work here and no place else. It is really laughable how some you really think so little of Wilson. Our great Defense and our Great Run game is why we win and Wilson is why we loose, well know one said it but they eluded to it. DId it occur to you that our playing style holds Wilson back, our lack of offensive weapons and oline hold shim back. Make me wonder if he read this board if he would want to stay here given evidently some here seem to think he easily replaceable. So easily replaced they bring up Trent Dilfer comparisons. I mean I get it Trent an avg at best QB won an SB with a great D and run game and he is only one in the last 20 years to do it so I can understand why some think we should be able to also and do so every year.

Its like their is a huge portion of people trying to convince themselves Wilsons irrelevant or at best Avg. 1 guy pointing out the few times were Wilson failed forgetting all the times, and he leads the league in this , were he succeeded. He mentions that great defense and run game and forgets Wilson is a huge part of the reason for that great run game or the substandard oline and Wr play. It is really very interesting especially when most of you really do not believe it. If you did you would not be fighting so hard to convince everyone of it.

Its really pretty funny reading all this.. stuff. I am a Hawks fan first I just believe we will take a major step back if Wilson leaves and we are forced to use an Avg QB. Hence why I want him to stay. We know with him we are an SB contender, without him in 2011 we were not even in the playoffs. You can argue we are better now than then, but that would be an opinion as we were good then too, had Lynch and a top 10 defense that were not coming off surgeries.

There is an old saying a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Do you really want to test your theory any avg QB would do? Are there that many Lynchs, Kams, Sherms, Ets out there, ever year? I am not saying give him anything, but we should all be able to agree he deserves top money and he gives is the best chance to get to another SB now and in the future. Problem is some of you do not want to agree.

I find it ironic for those who spit out the very very few things they can point to, to underscore Wilson but leave out the vast volume of things that support him.

You know its funny if anyone says anything even remotely negative about Lynch or the defense there is hell to pay, but about Wilson they have no problem with it at all. Wilson is getting the Alexander treatment. Only difference is Alexander deserved it, Wilson does not. Alexander was an RB behind the best oline in history. Wilson is a QB behind a bottom 10 oline with bottom 10 wr corps. Every QB has his advantages, Luck has always had better Wr and a better oline and in the AFC were defenses are less. Manning has always had great Wr and RBs, and again AFC, Brady was playing really bad till Gronk came back, and all of his truly great years he had great WRs. But for them its all about them, yet here we are and in the 2 categories of players that help a QB ost WR and oline he has had far less talent then most and yet its not about him, he is replaceable, he is a duncel. AND that by Seahawks fans.

I do find it ironic that most hear have been yelling for a franchise QB and now we have one and now most here are fine with letting him go, even if it means we are no longer SB contenders.

Nice discourse. Now, answer me this. If I say RW is a 20M a year Qb, and he signs for say 22 or 23/yr, was I correct or was I wrong?

irrelevant, so why should I answer it

 

[Anthony!]

Let's make it simple. What is their motivation?

Front office: build best team possible within cap. Win superb owl.
Willson: be greatest ever (starts with winning superb owls and being highest paid)
Wilson's agent: break into nfl, get highest contract ever for his client.


Ok. Motivations are clear. Can the FO give Willson highest ever contract?

Right now no. There are two things in the way. The 1.5mil Willson will make next year can't be folded into that kind of contract. Number two issue, the Andrew Luck contract is not out yet. If the FO pays Willson less than luck everybody loses (yes. Including FO. They need Willson happy even if it costs an extra million a year)

So we wait for this year to pass and Lucks contract to come out. Then sign Willson to highest paid contract. Everybody wins.

Hmm interesting thoughts.

 

[Anthony!]

So for the first time i have seen other than the largest ever or highest paid we have some numbers, I am not sure if these are true as they are more speculation from "multiple reports" but here we go anyway

"Well we finally have someone saying what Wilson wants, we do not know it is true but at least it is a number

That rings hollow if Seattle doesn't take care of Wilson. According to multiple reports, he is seeking a five-year deal worth more than $110 million. Sounds like a bargain.

http://www.denverpost.com/renck/ci_2834 ... e-seahawks

Given Newton got 5 years 103.8 is this really unrealistic for Wilson?"


What is interesting to me is if what Clayton said is true they offered 4 yea2s 87.8 mil they are 1 year and .2 mil apart. I doubt the .2 is the issue I think it is the 5th year as the Hawks as a norm do not do 5 year contracts. It would be a shame to go through all of this for 1 year.

 

[hawknation2015]

So for the first time i have seen other than the largest ever or highest paid we have some numbers, I am not sure if these are true as they are more speculation from "multiple reports" but here we go anyway

"Well we finally have someone saying what Wilson wants, we do not know it is true but at least it is a number

That rings hollow if Seattle doesn't take care of Wilson. According to multiple reports, he is seeking a five-year deal worth more than $110 million. Sounds like a bargain.

http://www.denverpost.com/renck/ci_2834 ... e-seahawks

Given Newton got 5 years 103.8 is this really unrealistic for Wilson?"


What is interesting to me is if what Clayton said is true they offered 4 yea2s 87.8 mil they are 1 year and .2 mil apart. I doubt the .2 is the issue I think it is the 5th year as the Hawks as a norm do not do 5 year contracts. It would be a shame to go through all of this for 1 year.

The only way I could see the team turning down that offer would be if it INCLUDED this year, which is not the norm for an NFL extension.

$110 million, including this year, would be the equivalent of a $27 million a year extension over four years.

 

[Anthony!]

So for the first time i have seen other than the largest ever or highest paid we have some numbers, I am not sure if these are true as they are more speculation from "multiple reports" but here we go anyway

"Well we finally have someone saying what Wilson wants, we do not know it is true but at least it is a number

That rings hollow if Seattle doesn't take care of Wilson. According to multiple reports, he is seeking a five-year deal worth more than $110 million. Sounds like a bargain.

http://www.denverpost.com/renck/ci_2834 ... e-seahawks

Given Newton got 5 years 103.8 is this really unrealistic for Wilson?"


What is interesting to me is if what Clayton said is true they offered 4 yea2s 87.8 mil they are 1 year and .2 mil apart. I doubt the .2 is the issue I think it is the 5th year as the Hawks as a norm do not do 5 year contracts. It would be a shame to go through all of this for 1 year.

The only way I could see the team turning down that offer would be if it INCLUDED this year, which is not the norm for an NFL extension.

$110 million, including this year, would be the equivalent of a $27 million a year extension over four years.

Agreed but that 5 year number like I said the Hawks have shown they do not like 5 years contracts. Kam, Et, and Sherman all 4 years. The real question is would the FO mess around over a 5th year. We do not know as this is uncharted waters for them. I have said for awhile I think it is Wilson wants 5+ years and the FO wants 4. And this article sure make sit look like that is it. I doubt it includes this year as Wilson has said he will play this year without a new contract, so it would make little sense for that to be the hold up as once this year is over then that's it. I believe it is that 5th year.