So if we sign Finley does that mean Zach

is gone- since we resigned McCoy????????

Listening to John Clayton last night on 710AM, he certainly thought that signing Finley would mean the end of Miller. He acknowledged that would mean a fairly large offensive philosophy shift with how the TEs are going to be used.

I wouldn't say so . . . Finley would be used mostly as a WR. I could see some really interesting looks where we run two-TE's with Miller and Willson with Finley split wide.

He is due 1 mil roster bonus next Thursday. He will count 7 mil against the cap. we have freed up a lot of money so I would think he may be asked to restructure the contract.

Finley is no blocker, and he may not even be cleared to play. I would suspect if he passed the Hawks doctors they sign him very cheap. He left town already w/o a contract pending the outcome of tests.

by Larry Hartstein | CBSSports.com
(3/12/14) The Seahawks must decide by next Thursday whether to keep tight end Zach Miller. That's when his $1 million roster bonus is due, reports ESPN's Adam Caplan.
Seattle is hosting free agent tight end Jermichael Finley on Wednesday

McGruff":2gmmq2qx said:

I wouldn't say so . . . Finley would be used mostly as a WR. I could see some really interesting looks where we run two-TE's with Miller and Willson with Finley split wide.

Click to expand...

That is what I thought too. I thought I read somewhere Finley lined up as a WR a lot of the time.

Watch Finley's highlights. He plays like a big WR. He doesn't necessarily give you what Miller does in the blocking game or as a checkdown option. To be honest, I'm not sure McCoy or Willson do either. There's some speculation here that they could carry 3 TEs, 5 WRs, and Finley (who would list as a TE but primarily play slot WR).

So, imagine this for just a moment...

Russell and Beast in the backfield in the pistol or shotgun...

4 WR set... Baldwin and Kearse outside, and wait for it...

Jermichael Finley in the slot on one side, Percy Harvin in the slot on the other... Holy mismatch central, batman.

Harvin in motion.... Does Russell hand it to Harvin for the fly sweep? Does he hand it to Beast Mode? Does he keep it and run? Does he play action off of all of that to find Finley matched on a linebacker???

That is a scary, scary proposition for a defense to consider.

DavidSeven":118e4c95 said:

Watch Finley's highlights. He plays like a big WR. He doesn't necessarily give you what Miller does in the blocking game or as a checkdown option. To be honest, I'm not sure McCoy or Willson do either. There's some speculation here that they could carry 3 TEs, 5 WRs, and Finley (who would list as a TE but primarily play slot WR).

Click to expand...

I do think Pete would like Finley to compliment Zach, not replace him. But that might be a tall order, it'd require Zach to restructure AND Finley to come in on a one year low cap salary. Not sure if either of those things are going to happen, let alone BOTH.

With or without Finley, I believe Zach to be done in Seattle unless he takes a rather large reduction in pay.

No. It doesn't. If Miller won't restructure, JSPC probably have to bite the bullet and cut him. Otherwise, he restructures, we take a flyer on Finley remaining healthy (assuming docs sign off), and at least 6 TE's vie for 3/4 roster spots for the coming season. (Normally 3 - but Finley may play a hybrid TE/WR role, with Miller, Willson, and Beckham/McCoy as other TE's on roster to start the season.)

Finley kicked the tires, then booked without a contract.

If I had to choose between the two, I would rather have Miller than Finley. Miller's blocking and steady hands in the red zone makes this offense hum. Cutting Miller only saves $5 million. I am guessing Finley will want $6 million per year, so there will likely be a net loss from exchanging Miller for Finley. If they can add Finley on a one or two year deal, maybe they can have both.

Resigning Miller depends less on Finley, who would be a cheap deal, and more on:

1.) If we pay for another big name FA this season (Melton, Allen, etc)
2.) If we plan on doing someting with Earl Thomas as far as an extension goes.


That's not to say signing him wouldn't be a big factor in the decision but I don't think it would be the determining factor as much as those two.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=91462

Since we've re-signed Zach I think that answers your question.

:les: