When do the other dominos fall?

[quadsas]

If we can get a mid-1st, im letting Clark go, otherwise I guess we should keep him

 

[pittpnthrs]

I dont think as highly of Clark as most do (probably me), but I would have no issue letting him walk if others can be signed (Wags, etc,,,). I dont view him as elite or even great. I view him as being the best pass rusher on a team that is sorely lacking in that area. Sure Clarks good, but I dont think he's an absolute necessity. I believe he can be replaced in the draft. Yes, it would be ideal to keep him and draft more pass rushers, but like I said, he can walk and I wouldnt be torn up over it. I would be thrilled with a 2nd for him and satisfied with a 3rd.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

I dont think as highly of Clark as most do (probably me), but I would have no issue letting him walk if others can be signed (Wags, etc,,,). I dont view him as elite or even great. I view him as being the best pass rusher on a team that is sorely lacking in that area. Sure Clarks good, but I dont think he's an absolute necessity. I believe he can be replaced in the draft. Yes, it would be ideal to keep him and draft more pass rushers, but like I said, he can walk and I wouldnt be torn up over it.

It isn't peanuts for an edge rusher to get double-digit sacks. Let him walk and our rush becomes one of the worst in the NFL, and no draft pick is a guarantee to immediately replace that, even in this draft. There's definitely a bird-in-the-hand dynamic here.

I view it the same as the Wilson situation. Yeah, we're overpaying, but what else can you do? Just as the QB has become all-important in the NFL, its natural predator (the edge rusher) inevitably has too.

Or look at it this way: even with Clark's double-digit sacks, it wasn't good enough. That doesn't mean Clark was bad. It means you need more quality rushers, not less.

 

[quadsas]

I dont think as highly of Clark as most do (probably me), but I would have no issue letting him walk if others can be signed (Wags, etc,,,). I dont view him as elite or even great. I view him as being the best pass rusher on a team that is sorely lacking in that area. Sure Clarks good, but I dont think he's an absolute necessity. I believe he can be replaced in the draft. Yes, it would be ideal to keep him and draft more pass rushers, but like I said, he can walk and I wouldnt be torn up over it.

It isn't peanuts for an edge rusher to get double-digit sacks. Let him walk and our rush becomes one of the worst in the NFL, and no draft pick is a guarantee to immediately replace that, even in this draft. There's definitely a bird-in-the-hand dynamic here.

I view it the same as the Wilson situation. Yeah, we're overpaying, but what else can you do? Just as the QB has become all-important in the NFL, its natural predator (the edge rusher) inevitably has too.

Or look at it this way: even with Clark's double-digit sacks, it wasn't good enough. That doesn't mean Clark was bad. It means you need more quality rushers, not less.

Clark seems like a Vic Beasley typa guy. If I can get good shit in return, ill take it

 

[truehawksfan]

Someone made a comment...what type of message are you sending if you let out best edge rusher walk?

Didn’t Clark say this is my team? Isn’t he and Reed our new leaders? Didn’t Pete and JS say we will always keep our own, or something like that?

As someone else mentioned....this sucks. I want to keep Clark and build the next gen Hawks team but at what cost?

what the hell will PC/JS do?

 

[Tical21]

You're not getting a first. Do you trade him for a second now or let him walk and get a 3rd in 2021 after playing out this season?

Now that Russell's signed, you could actually franchise Frank for two years and still not have to pay him the 21-22M per year he's asking for.

Obviously that's more detrimental to the cap, because a new deal you could spread out the cap hit. But it doesn't mean we HAVE to let Frank walk after this year if a new deal isn't signed.

I'm 50/50 on Clark right now. I love how he plays and how he's grown into a leader on the defense, and if he's gone our #1 rush DE is Cassius Marsh, let that sink in for a minute.

But I also don't want to pay him 21M+ a year to just rush the passer. He's not a very good run stopper/well rounded DE. So IMO that's too much to pay him. But idk, we already have a weak pass rush, no Clark and we just became THE worst pass rush defense in the NFL.

I'm not sure that 20 million won't be needed for other things as soon as next year.

I think if he is gone, Green/Martin get full shots to start. I think Marsh is a camp body that is hopefully cut if someone steps up.

Clark is a very good run stopper when he wants to be, he's just got too much Michael Bennett in him, where he's so excited to get sacks that he plays hero ball and abandons his assignment too often.

Personally, now that Russ is signed, I probably make Bobby the odd man out. Although he is definitely the best player of the group, MLB is the easiest to replace, and we need as many good young players as we can get.

 

[Tical21]

I dont think as highly of Clark as most do (probably me), but I would have no issue letting him walk if others can be signed (Wags, etc,,,). I dont view him as elite or even great. I view him as being the best pass rusher on a team that is sorely lacking in that area. Sure Clarks good, but I dont think he's an absolute necessity. I believe he can be replaced in the draft. Yes, it would be ideal to keep him and draft more pass rushers, but like I said, he can walk and I wouldnt be torn up over it.

It isn't peanuts for an edge rusher to get double-digit sacks. Let him walk and our rush becomes one of the worst in the NFL, and no draft pick is a guarantee to immediately replace that, even in this draft. There's definitely a bird-in-the-hand dynamic here.

I view it the same as the Wilson situation. Yeah, we're overpaying, but what else can you do? Just as the QB has become all-important in the NFL, its natural predator (the edge rusher) inevitably has too.

Or look at it this way: even with Clark's double-digit sacks, it wasn't good enough. That doesn't mean Clark was bad. It means you need more quality rushers, not less.

So do you let Reed or Bobby walk?

 

[MontanaHawk05]

I dont think as highly of Clark as most do (probably me), but I would have no issue letting him walk if others can be signed (Wags, etc,,,). I dont view him as elite or even great. I view him as being the best pass rusher on a team that is sorely lacking in that area. Sure Clarks good, but I dont think he's an absolute necessity. I believe he can be replaced in the draft. Yes, it would be ideal to keep him and draft more pass rushers, but like I said, he can walk and I wouldnt be torn up over it.

It isn't peanuts for an edge rusher to get double-digit sacks. Let him walk and our rush becomes one of the worst in the NFL, and no draft pick is a guarantee to immediately replace that, even in this draft. There's definitely a bird-in-the-hand dynamic here.

I view it the same as the Wilson situation. Yeah, we're overpaying, but what else can you do? Just as the QB has become all-important in the NFL, its natural predator (the edge rusher) inevitably has too.

Or look at it this way: even with Clark's double-digit sacks, it wasn't good enough. That doesn't mean Clark was bad. It means you need more quality rushers, not less.

So do you let Reed or Bobby walk?

Gun to my head? Probably Bobby. I've said that before.

But to answer your passive-aggressive question, I don't think there is a need to get rid of one.

 

[Tical21]

I dont think as highly of Clark as most do (probably me), but I would have no issue letting him walk if others can be signed (Wags, etc,,,). I dont view him as elite or even great. I view him as being the best pass rusher on a team that is sorely lacking in that area. Sure Clarks good, but I dont think he's an absolute necessity. I believe he can be replaced in the draft. Yes, it would be ideal to keep him and draft more pass rushers, but like I said, he can walk and I wouldnt be torn up over it.

It isn't peanuts for an edge rusher to get double-digit sacks. Let him walk and our rush becomes one of the worst in the NFL, and no draft pick is a guarantee to immediately replace that, even in this draft. There's definitely a bird-in-the-hand dynamic here.

I view it the same as the Wilson situation. Yeah, we're overpaying, but what else can you do? Just as the QB has become all-important in the NFL, its natural predator (the edge rusher) inevitably has too.

Or look at it this way: even with Clark's double-digit sacks, it wasn't good enough. That doesn't mean Clark was bad. It means you need more quality rushers, not less.

So do you let Reed or Bobby walk?

Gun to my head? Probably Bobby. I've said that before.

But to answer your passive-aggressive question, I don't think there is a need to get rid of one.

There is no question and passive-aggressive? They can't pay them all. Zero chance. We done did the research.

Paying ANY of the 3, will be more expensive than ANY OTHER team pays for their highest 4. Paying all 4 would be like more than ANY OTHER team pays their top 5 or maybe 6. I'd have to look closer at it. I guess you COULD play with 5 players on a side, but would you want to?

 

[FidelisHawk]

I’m with Montana here, even 2015 Frank Clark wasn’t as good as 2018 Frank Clark. The chances of drafting a replacement (outside a top ten pick) is very wishful thinking.

Whether he’s elite or not is a moot point in my opinion, he’s young, he’s already better than average, he’s getting better and he’s the best we have now.

His position and output has created his value, and whether we, the fans, agree or not, somebody will pay for it. Even if we trade for future value we could end up waiting two, three or four years for a CHANCE of getting the same production.

So I’d be in the camp for a young, good, getting better, bird in the hand. Let the other chips fall where the may...

 

[massari]

Your plan B would never exist in the real world. They don't trade him for a late 2nd under any circumstance IMO.

Real plan B. Trade him for a late 1st + a 3rd or 4th....I'll take that all day long.

The Patriots traded Chandler Jones for a late 2nd in 2016 when he was the same age as Clark is now. From what I understand, both Clark and Jones are great pass rushers but pretty mediocre at stopping the run. That's likely why Clark couldn't make the Pro Bowl over a guy like Danielle Hunter who just signed for $14M a season last summer.

Would be nice to get the Colts or Raiders early 2nd rd pick for him if he's demanding $20M+.

Edit: Danielle Hunter was actually just as good against the pass as Clark and he'll still be making $4M-$7M less than Clark per season lol. They have similar career stats with Hunter having the slight edge, but Hunter is considered to be one of if not the best run stopper in the NFL among edge defenders.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

It isn't peanuts for an edge rusher to get double-digit sacks. Let him walk and our rush becomes one of the worst in the NFL, and no draft pick is a guarantee to immediately replace that, even in this draft. There's definitely a bird-in-the-hand dynamic here.

I view it the same as the Wilson situation. Yeah, we're overpaying, but what else can you do? Just as the QB has become all-important in the NFL, its natural predator (the edge rusher) inevitably has too.

Or look at it this way: even with Clark's double-digit sacks, it wasn't good enough. That doesn't mean Clark was bad. It means you need more quality rushers, not less.

So do you let Reed or Bobby walk?

Gun to my head? Probably Bobby. I've said that before.

But to answer your passive-aggressive question, I don't think there is a need to get rid of one.

There is no question and passive-aggressive? They can't pay them all. Zero chance. We done did the research.

Paying ANY of the 3, will be more expensive than ANY OTHER team pays for their highest 4. Paying all 4 would be like more than ANY OTHER team pays their top 5 or maybe 6. I'd have to look closer at it. I guess you COULD play with 5 players on a side, but would you want to?

Then we're not winning any Super Bowls anymore, because you need an elite quarterback and elite pass rushers to get that done.

You are so focused on the cap that you keep forgetting the team needs to be good.

I trust Henderson's logic (linked above). They might have to tweak elsewhere, but this can get done. It will HAVE to get done, or we're going to fall short. And if you ask me which player is likely to have the least direct impact on the team's quality by walking away, out of all four of the guys at hand, I'd say an aging Bobby.

 

[Seymour]

Then we're not winning any Super Bowls anymore, because you need an elite quarterback and elite pass rushers to get that done.

You are so focused on the cap that you keep forgetting the team needs to be good.

I trust Henderson's logic (linked above). They might have to tweak elsewhere, but this can get done. It will HAVE to get done, or we're going to fall short. And if you ask me which player is likely to have the least direct impact on the team's quality by walking away, out of all four of the guys at hand, I'd say an aging Bobby.

So I guess you believe that Eli Manning, Jim Plunkett, Bob Griese, Nick Foles, Jim McMahon, Mark Rypien, Phil Simms, Joe Flacco, Ken Stabler, Brad Johnson, Jeff Hostetler, Len Dawson, Doug Williams, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Theismann are or were all elite QB's then?? :?:

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Some pretty average at best QB's have won the Super Bowl.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Then we're not winning any Super Bowls anymore, because you need an elite quarterback and elite pass rushers to get that done.

You are so focused on the cap that you keep forgetting the team needs to be good.

I trust Henderson's logic (linked above). They might have to tweak elsewhere, but this can get done. It will HAVE to get done, or we're going to fall short. And if you ask me which player is likely to have the least direct impact on the team's quality by walking away, out of all four of the guys at hand, I'd say an aging Bobby.

So I guess you believe that Eli Manning, Jim Plunkett, Bob Griese, Nick Foles, Jim McMahon, Mark Rypien, Phil Simms, Joe Flacco, Ken Stabler, Brad Johnson, Jeff Hostetler, Len Dawson, Doug Williams, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Theismann are or were all elite QB's then?? :?:

I think where some like Tical and others are confused in using these sorts of examples as a blueprint to win a SB is none of these teams SET OUT to win a SB with a crappy QB.

They just happened to have good to great enough defenses and made plays in those SB's to win with an average to below average QB. That doesn't mean the modern blueprint should be "don't pay your top 10 QB in hopes of having a good enough defense and pieces around your rookie QB to win."

Makes no sense. Look at the last 20 years of SB winners...........very few with rookie or even average QB's. Overwhelming majority had great to elite QB's. We're really the only example with Russell.........again WITH Russell, and one of the top 2-3 defenses in NFL history.

Do people honestly think Pete and John can recreate that? I sure don't.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

When Dilfer won his Super Bowl, and he was average, it was all about letting the D take over and don't do anything stupid. He was efficient enough to not screw it up. But he was far from a great QB.
Look at that list that Seymour posted. There are some average AT BEST QB's on that list. Look at how many people would say about Marino "But he's never won a Super Bowl." :roll:

 

[Seymour]

Then we're not winning any Super Bowls anymore, because you need an elite quarterback and elite pass rushers to get that done.

You are so focused on the cap that you keep forgetting the team needs to be good.

I trust Henderson's logic (linked above). They might have to tweak elsewhere, but this can get done. It will HAVE to get done, or we're going to fall short. And if you ask me which player is likely to have the least direct impact on the team's quality by walking away, out of all four of the guys at hand, I'd say an aging Bobby.

So I guess you believe that Eli Manning, Jim Plunkett, Bob Griese, Nick Foles, Jim McMahon, Mark Rypien, Phil Simms, Joe Flacco, Ken Stabler, Brad Johnson, Jeff Hostetler, Len Dawson, Doug Williams, Trent Dilfer, and Joe Theismann are or were all elite QB's then?? :?:

I think where some like Tical and others are confused in using these sorts of examples as a blueprint to win a SB is none of these teams SET OUT to win a SB with a crappy QB.

They just happened to have good to great enough defenses and made plays in those SB's to win with an average to below average QB. That doesn't mean the modern blueprint should be "don't pay your top 10 QB in hopes of having a good enough defense and pieces around your rookie QB to win."

Makes no sense. Look at the last 20 years of SB winners...........very few with rookie or even average QB's. Overwhelming majority had great to elite QB's. We're really the only example with Russell.........again WITH Russell, and one of the top 2-3 defenses in NFL history.

Do people honestly think Pete and John can recreate that? I sure don't.

:lol: :lol:
Well, lets win one "by mistake" then...I don't care.
I'm for signing Wilson. I just disagree with the statement I highlighted. Ohh, and to make it more of a point, many of those SB wins were pre 1994 (salary cap), so winning with a crappy QB with no spending limit was even harder to do. :idea:

 

[Sgt. Largent]

When Dilfer won his Super Bowl, and he was average, it was all about letting the D take over and don't do anything stupid. He was efficient enough to not screw it up. But he was far from a great QB.
Look at that list that Seymour posted. There are some average AT BEST QB's on that list.

Again, Dilfer won with another of the top 2-3 all time NFL defenses. To hold our SB and the Raven's SB as the blueprint is insane.

If you're playing the odds game, which all teams are. Then your odds are far better trusting your FO to build around your elite QB then it for them to build around a cheap mediocre or rookie QB.

Best example of the past 5 years is the Jags. They build a nasty elite defense, and when it came time to take on the Patriots to finally push them over the top, what happened? Oh yeah, they remembered they had Blake Bortles.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Trent Dilfer was also in a game against Kerry Collins. Today's QB comers are having to outpace elite, high-volume passers.

 

[Seymour]

When Dilfer won his Super Bowl, and he was average, it was all about letting the D take over and don't do anything stupid. He was efficient enough to not screw it up. But he was far from a great QB.
Look at that list that Seymour posted. There are some average AT BEST QB's on that list.

Again, Dilfer won with another of the top 2-3 all time NFL defenses. To hold our SB and the Raven's SB as the blueprint is insane.

If you're playing the odds game, which all teams are. Then your odds are far better trusting your FO to build around your elite QB then it for them to build around a cheap mediocre or rookie QB.

Best example of the past 5 years is the Jags. They build a nasty elite defense, and when it came time to take on the Patriots to finally push them over the top, what happened? Oh yeah, they remembered they had Blake Bortles.

No team has won a SB paying more than 13% of the cap to the QB since 2004. That is 15 years of history we are now up against paying Wilson his 18-19%. Ya, I still want him, just stating the numbers are against us. I think since Pete has an archaic offensive strategy, our chances happen to be worse. It took drafting 6 pro bowl level picks over 3 years to do it in 2013. It will take at least that again and likely more IMO.