Marshawn Holdout Poll

I figured the original post should have included a poll, so I'm just doing one here to see how we overall feel about it. I expect to see an even split.

Simply put, I don't think this is about this year, but next year.

Lynch is likely to get cut next year and unlikely to find a deal that pays him what his contract states. That's just business. If the team "forces" him to play his current deal and then cuts him next year, it's bullshit really. So from Lynch's perspective, it makes sense to hold out. I want to keep my players happy - and at the moment I still feel there's a bit of ill-feeling in the dressing room regarding the way Bryant and Clemons were treated. Lynch has been one of the best players in the league at his position, and rightfully so he's been paid like one, but there's still significant talent left there that Lynch could get paid better for elsewhere.

I look at it this way - if Lynch was to hit the open market as a free agent today, would he get a better contract over the next 2-3 years than he's scheduled to make? Yes, absolutely. So pay him like it. Next year? Maybe not. We know he plays a physical game, and this year could be the last year he has the bargaining power for a big deal.

For those that say "he's made his money over the last 2 years, now it's a team friendly deal for the next 2 years", if that's the case, teams should never cut anyone who gets a deal that's team friendly for the first half of a contract before they earn the big dollars at the end. It goes both ways. Lynch is entitled to do what he's doing, he's been the best running back since mid-2011 and has been paid like it. Continue to pay him like it or watch him retire.

Let him retire already if he wants. It's a moot point he isn't getting anymore money in total. They might do a restructure if it's feasible and that won't be known right now. And factor in if Christine Micheal is all that and a bag of chips, like they seem to think, then his position just gets worse.

Whatever they do just please don't repeat the Shaun Alexander debacle. I am very leery about doing any kind of restructure/extension for running backs nearing 30, especially one with a punishing running style like Lynch.

I hope they fine him, force him to play or trade him.

ImTheScientist":2c8bibfl said:

I hope they fine him, force him to play or trade him.

Click to expand...

Because we are so much better without him.

I don't see why the middle option is even there. They can either cave to him or else not. They can't hold him to his contract but also not fine him. If anything, if they cave, they will still fine him for the lost days prior to the new deal.

I am very worried about a bad precedent being set...

I'm pretty sure the fining is an automatic procedural thing dictated by NFL rules.

CALIHAWK1":2wvwznxv said:

ImTheScientist":2wvwznxv said:

I hope they fine him, force him to play or trade him.

Click to expand...

Because we are so much better without him.

Click to expand...

MB12":2wvwznxv said:

I am very worried about a bad precedent being set...

Click to expand...

That'd be my concern with giving him a new deal. There's more at stake than just making Beast happy. Hell I feel the team has already bent over backwards for him. He misses a lot of practices/camps, he doesn't have to talk to the media, barely does any publicity things (most of his stuff is his own foundation in Oakland) in the Seattle-area. He's almost becoming like a Diva, but a Diva who doesn't talk if that makes any sense.

MB12":1lmc8jk1 said:

I am very worried about a bad precedent being set...

Click to expand...

I can't really see how they can cave to him, regardless of how deserving he is of more money.

The whole slippery slope argument.

gargantual":22dddcik said:

I'm pretty sure the fining is an automatic procedural thing dictated by NFL rules.

Click to expand...

Nope it's up to the FO.

There will be no new deal or money added we are talking about moving some of next years money to this year and I think it's fair because he will be cut next year unless he plays great and he probably will then who knows, anyway he's worth it.

You know this really isn't worth worrying about his only leverage is retirement I can't see him walking away from millions of dollars and if he does next man up.

It's not like Chris Clemons checked to see if there was a precedent before holding out in 2012. It's not like Doug Baldwin checked to see if there was a precedent when he refused to sign his tender until he got a long term deal. And it's not like Marshawn cares about a precedent right now.

The concept of the holdout has been going on in the league forever and no team is immune to it. There will be more holdouts in the future for Seattle regardless of how they handle this. If a player thinks he has leverage, he will use it. It's as simple as that.

I think the real question is whether or not Marshawn is worth the extra years or money. When Clemons held out, he ended up getting a bunch of money in 2013 and dead money in 2014 that he wouldn't have received otherwise thanks to his late season knee injury at Washington. That extension was a real bummer for Seattle, but they NEEDED Clemons and Clem gave Seattle 11.5 sacks that season.

Seattle has said they are willing to accelerate existing money on the deal and Lynch did not bite, so clearly this is about more money and/or more years. Is Lynch worth that added expense when the remainder of our RB group is so strong? I think he is, but it's a really tough call. If he wants a brand new 4/30 type deal I would say no, but if he just wants a couple extra million this year I would be okay with that.

I am okay moving some money from next year but even that is a bit dangerous. But Lynch is not your average Joe RB so making an exception for him may make some sense but it could have ramifications later.

gargantual":1xfqkzpx said:

MB12":1xfqkzpx said:

I am very worried about a bad precedent being set...

Click to expand...

I can't really see how they can cave to him, regardless of how deserving he is of more money.

The whole slippery slope argument.

Click to expand...

Yep, especially with the way the FO conducts itself. Pete's comments in his press conference and on the Rich Eisen podcast were very revealing. I think we force him to honor his contract, with fines.

gargantual":2jnwy1bn said:

I'm pretty sure the fining is an automatic procedural thing dictated by NFL rules.

Click to expand...

Not NFL rules but CBA rules which the players reps voted on.

:roll:

De Smith is bad as his job and the players are bad with money, which combines to make the NFL CBA a terrible one. The NFLPA needs to instruct players to save their money and be frugal for a few years before the next CBA, and then the NFLPA reps should fire Smith and hire a Donald Fehr type.

I voted A because I love the dude and he has given me a ton of my best memories as a Hawk fan.

If the team shuffles money to appease him could Marshawn be happy sharing the ball as PC and Bevell suggested?
Would he show PC his beasty bird finger when they try to sub him?
Would he pout each time Michaels breaks a big run? Can 'Beast Mode love and appreciate that'?
I hate to say it but players who refer to themselves in the third person usually have ego issues.