Idzik to Jets just happened

oldhawkfan

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
4,132
Reaction score
1,521
Location
Spokane
Ill tell you, that guy Reinfeldt is a whiz on his calculator! A real up and coming player in the cap game![/quote]

I can't imagine that it is good for the calculator if you whiz on it!
 

volsunghawk

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,860
Reaction score
0
Location
Right outside Richard Sherman's house
hawksfansinceday1":2fwxcuzi said:
volsunghawk":2fwxcuzi said:
Not really interested in rehashing Reinfeldt. He had a big part in us losing Hutchinson.
Really? I'd love a link cuz I was convinced it was nearly if not all Timmmaaaaay. He made jokes about being 'the guy that lost Hutch' being put on his tombstone and by looking at his drafts it was obvious he saw o-lineman as eminently and consistently replacable.

http://www.komonews.com/sports/5756051.html

Reinfeldt was part of the decision to designate Pro Bowl guard Steve Hutchinson a transition player instead of a franchise player last offseason. Hutchinson signed with Minnesota in free agency after the Vikings included an unprecedented "poison pill" contract provision Seattle could not match.

I'm not saying I would expect him to do exactly the same thing again, but to me, this signified a guy who didn't understand the value of Hutch to the O-line and team as a whole. I would worry about him having a voice in the FO if he still has blind spots that big.
 

Hamhawk

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
2,166
Reaction score
0
Location
Kenmore WA
I don't think losing our cap guy will impact the team as much as losing another coach this year,...I'm sure they will get a good replacement for Idzik,...I think Reinfeldt would be a good choice ,...but whoever it is,.." in J and P we trust",....
 

The Outfield

New member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
0
Sgt. Largent":hjidxins said:
Blitzer88":hjidxins said:
Man, I really hate how we keep losing our staff guys..........can't we have the same guys from one year to the next lol.

You want to lose your coaches and personnel, it means you're successful.

Pete and John is all we need, the rest of the staff is just frosting. Look at NE, Belicheat's lost just about every coach 2-3 times over, and they're still on top.

I don't think you "want" to lose them. Especially if those guys truly did get you to where you are (we won't know until we see the effect of them being gone). I'd say it's more of an unwanted compliment.
 

xCalibur

New member
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
196
Reaction score
0
Location
Santa Barbara
Hamhawk":2z7gcpq4 said:
I don't think losing our cap guy will impact the team as much as losing another coach this year,...I'm sure they will get a good replacement for Idzik,...I think Reinfeldt would be a good choice ,...but whoever it is,.." in J and P we trust",....

Look, let us pretend that the whole Hutch mess was all on Reinfeldt...that doesn't change the fact that he is known to be very good at NFL franchise economics. Also, who hasn't screwed something up in their life and then grown from it, there is no way he lets something like that happen on his watch a second time. So this may not be such a bad match.
 

chawx

Active member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,343
Reaction score
18
Location
Salt Lake City, UT
What!! How are we going to find someone that knows how to add...AND Subtract?! Ffffffffuuuuh.... that's the end. We're doomed!!
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,534
Reaction score
1,532
Location
Roy Wa.
The Vikings pulling the poisen pill routine was unprecedented, guaranteeing that Hutch would be the top payid lineman as part of his contract was an obvious situation to not be able to negotiate a contract with him with Jones here. They knew that. Historically teams did not pull that stuff and Reinfeldt was basing his thoughts on a degree of good sportsmanship between front offices at that time.

Yes we put him out there and the thought was it should have been the franchise tag after the fact. But the process up to then had been one of good will in negotiations between teams and not undermineing one.
 

drdiags

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
10,682
Reaction score
1
Location
Kent, Washington
The Poison Pill wasn't a new issue in 2005, it just never had been "officially" used in an NFL contract.

The advent of the poison pill was first introduced to the public by 49ers President Carmen Policy in 1996. The 49ers intended to sign Giants running back Rodney Hampton to an offer sheet with a poison pill that stated Hampton would be "on the field for 70% of the offensive plays over the next 2 seasons." The Giants had drafted Tyrone Wheatley with their first round pick in 1995 but he was largely ineffective in his first season. Since he played the same position as Hampton, the Giants had planned to ease him into the offense with Hampton on the back end of his career. For the Giants to match the 6 year deal, they would be forced to play Hampton in 70% of the plays, thus making the previous year's draft pick of Wheatley a loss. The 49ers later decided to not include the clause, as they felt the NFL would never approve the terms. Their assumption would be proven incorrect following the 2005 season, with the historic offer sheet Steve Hutchinson signed with the Minnesota Vikings.


Poison Pills. Only the Seahawks would fall for it.
 

tdlabrie

Active member
Joined
May 2, 2009
Messages
1,189
Reaction score
0
jammerhawk":1qgkmdkz said:
Reinfeldt is still available and was more talented than Idzik.
Really? I didn't know that. He was great when he was here, and I agree, more taented than Idzik. Don't know how good JS is with that sort of stuff, but it seems like we need somebody. And pretty soon, huh?
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
The Battle #83":1vuwp0ex said:
How can a cap guy be a GM?
83, best question I have heard all day.

My guess is Idzik is there to get them out of the salary cap issues, and is not expected to have say so in personnel. Woody and Rex are handling that.
 

mikeak

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
8,202
Reaction score
25
Location
Anchorage, AK
You need a hitman to take out Sanchez to get them out of cap hell lol. How do they keep - get rid of him AND sign a guy that can play...
 

therealjohncarlson

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
4,467
Reaction score
285
Scottemojo":32b084pp said:
The Battle #83":32b084pp said:
How can a cap guy be a GM?
83, best question I have heard all day.

My guess is Idzik is there to get them out of the salary cap issues, and is not expected to have say so in personnel. Woody and Rex are handling that.

My not hire an accountant then?
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
Throwdown":lo222aqt said:
Wasn't Schnieder considered a cap guy when he was hired on here?
Nope. that is the job Idzik had. Schneider has always been valued for his scouting eye (which is how we got bot Whitehurst, grrrr, and Wilson, yippee.
 

BlueTalon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
8,958
Reaction score
1,608
Location
Eastern Washington
drdiags":ov7nk8am said:
In hindsight, Ruskell should have figured on the increase and anticipated the poison pill, though Blue Talon will dispute that last thought. :stirthepot:
Oh right, people should always expect something that has never happened before... :roll:



For people who need a refresher, poison pills in contracts have a long history. One was used early in the existence of NFL free agency requiring more money from the player's old team than his new team -- after that, such contracts were banned. Since that time, perfectly legal and legitimate poison pills have been commonly used by teams trying to spirit a player away, in the form of front-loaded contracts, trying to leverage the other team's cap situation. That was something the Seahawks were prepared for in the Hutch situation. What they were not prepared for was the never-before-seen use of guarantees, and language involving other players' salaries and arbitrary dates, to effectively do what was previously banned.

Doesn't matter now. Lesson learned, life goes on. I'm over it. :thirishdrinkers:
 

hawk45

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
10,009
Reaction score
16
Schneider/Carroll, then Cable, in descending order of who we can least afford to lose. Everyone else who cares. LMAO at teams thinking that installing Bradley or Bevell as HC is going to change their fortunes. Bradley was here before JS/Pete came in and began making pro-bowlers out of 5th round castoffs on defense, and oddly enough Bradley's defenses weren't so great back then.

A cap guy doesn't even make the radar.

I'm ecstatic we haven't heard many rumors about Cable leaving. Okay so pass pro hasn't been outstanding, but Cable seems to be able to fashion a run blocking line no matter who is injured, and after the years where we'd be screwed all season when one lineman would go down, this is euphoria.

However we need to avoid listening to Cable when it comes to drafting players. The Carpenter/Moffit picks aren't exactly living up to their slots. Well not yet at any rate. I'm assuming those were his suggestion.
 

drdiags

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
10,682
Reaction score
1
Location
Kent, Washington
BlueTalon":tiq2mpka said:
drdiags":tiq2mpka said:
In hindsight, Ruskell should have figured on the increase and anticipated the poison pill, though Blue Talon will dispute that last thought. :stirthepot:
Oh right, people should always expect something that has never happened before... :roll:

:


And again, I don't agree with your review of the history

The advent of the poison pill was first introduced to the public by 49ers President Carmen Policy in 1996. The 49ers intended to sign Giants running back Rodney Hampton to an offer sheet with a poison pill that stated Hampton would be "on the field for 70% of the offensive plays over the next 2 seasons." The Giants had drafted Tyrone Wheatley with their first round pick in 1995 but he was largely ineffective in his first season. Since he played the same position as Hampton, the Giants had planned to ease him into the offense with Hampton on the back end of his career. For the Giants to match the 6 year deal, they would be forced to play Hampton in 70% of the plays, thus making the previous year's draft pick of Wheatley a loss. The 49ers later decided to not include the clause, as they felt the NFL would never approve the terms. Their assumption would be proven incorrect following the 2005 season, with the historic offer sheet Steve Hutchinson signed with the Minnesota Vikings.

I agreed with the original call done by Ruskell, though I didn't know of the possibility of a Poison Pill. I was just joking around so I am not sure what is up with the "rolling eyes" icon. Thought we were better than that.
 

Latest posts

Top