Golden Tate opens up about Seahawks offer

[hawksfansinceday1]

Classy enough. No untruths, no whining, no hurt feelings. Sometimes it's just business.

Agree all the way around.

 

[sc85sis]

I understand the FO's thinking with the Tate situation. They just signed Harvin to a big deal and probably loved the receiver class, and with a RW contract coming up they wanted to save money where they could.

In hindsight, though, not re-signing Tate has to be one of Schnieder and Carroll's biggest regrets. I know I get a little pissed whenever I see him break a tackle in his unique Tate fashion in a Lions uniform.

Depending on how Richarson and Norwood pan out, PnJ may still come out of that smelling like a rose. Those two are looking legit.

Point taken, but methinks PRich should have forced his way on to the field by now if PnJ are going to come out smelling like roses. PRich is a burner, but when we're throwing a sluggo/skinny/9 route it's still Kearse getting the call.

Very hard to gauge the progress of Richardson when Russ is doing the sandlot thing. Mirroring his QB is not Richardson's game...but that is the game of Kevin Norwood. Unfortunately Norwood missed a huge chunk of time and it's a difficult enough position for a rook when healthy and in full participation.

Both are solid route runners with respectable hands and at the risk of beating a dead POS, with Harvin now removed, I'm sure both rooks are more comfortable, which should allow for better focus and progress. Once we can get Russ a bit more comfortable back there, I expect to see great things from both and it will be fun watching them grow together in the offense.

As far as Pete and John regretting the Harvin signing ... in terms of emotions, I'd list foolish and irresponsible ahead of "regret" if I were either of them. That goes double for John.

"Pete and Bevel wanted Harvin". So what? It's the GM's job to tell them guys to piss off when acting like a couple of cheerleaders gushing over the troubled kid that just butchered the other teams mascot.

Tate remains one of my favorite players and I wish him only the best.

Pete has final say over player personnel, not John.

I don't blame Pete for wanting Percy. He'd recruited the guy and had a relationship with him from that experience. Bev had dealt with Percy in Minny. Obviously they both felt Percy wouldn't be the trouble he turned out to be, and/or they believed the risk outweighed the possible reward. Swing and a miss. It happens, it's just very unfortunate this particular miss was so expensive.

 

[ivotuk]

Good for him. I think he should have taken the time to negotiate a little more with Seattle but I can understand he was probably expecting a better offer and was insulted. So rather than go back with a counter offer, he just signed with Detroit.

Glad to see he is having success and is realistic about it all. He played well last year, but prior to that he was wasting our money and a sometimes I wondered if he was worth the roster spot. But in 2013 he was worth the wait with his talent being one of the cogs that got us to the SuperB Owl.

I'm not one to worry much about what could have been, especially now that we have a Lombardi. It's time to look ahead to this weeks opponent, the KC Chefs, and go beat them senseless!

They haven't played against a team this physical and are more of a finesse team. They're liable to be putting players on IR Monday

 

[CANHawk]

Code Warrior, when has Pete ever forced rookies into the starting lineup for any reason other than necessity? His MO has always been to slow play it with the kids. He has vets in front of them so the vets are going to get the call until Pete thinks the kids are ready. PRich and Norwood are coming along at pretty much the exact pace I would expect Papa Pete to bring them along at.

As for Harvin, it was a swing for the fences, it was either going to be a grand slam or nothing. We’re just fortunate we got to see him put up a few nice games in the playoffs.

 

[Spin Doctor]

I'm surprised people are rationalizing the loss of Tate like they are. Seattle would unquestionably be the better team for having Tate. Right now he comes at a bargain bin price compared to his production in Detroit. Would have have that kind of production in Seattle? No, but he would unquestionably make our receiver corps exponentially better. Baldwin would be able to move to his natural position as the slot receiver, and Golden Tate would draw coverage away from Kearse and Baldwin.

 

[ivotuk]

I'm surprised people are rationalizing the loss of Tate like they are. Seattle would unquestionably be the better team for having Tate. Right now he comes at a bargain bin price compared to his production in Detroit. Would have have that kind of production in Seattle? No, but he would unquestionably make our receiver corps exponentially better. Baldwin would be able to move to his natural position as the slot receiver, and Golden Tate would draw coverage away from Kearse and Baldwin.

Nobodies rationalizing, just accepting the facts. We couldn't afford Golden Tate. Have you seen his contract? 10.5 million counts against the cap this year! 7.4 million next year! Michael Bennett is more valuable to this team that Golden Tate is and it's an "either/or" situation, you can sign one, but not both. We were also able to re-up Doug Baldwin.

And if you remember, Golden disappeared in the playoffs. Add to that, where was he the first 3 years that we were paying him? On the bench because he was being a diva. And when he did get on the field early, he did nothing.

Edit to add link to Tate's contract:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/detroit-lions/golden-tate/

 

[CANHawk]

I'm surprised people are rationalizing the loss of Tate like they are. Seattle would unquestionably be the better team for having Tate. Right now he comes at a bargain bin price compared to his production in Detroit. Would have have that kind of production in Seattle? No, but he would unquestionably make our receiver corps exponentially better. Baldwin would be able to move to his natural position as the slot receiver, and Golden Tate would draw coverage away from Kearse and Baldwin.

Nobodies rationalizing, just accepting the facts. We couldn't afford Golden Tate. Have you seen his contract? 10.5 million counts against the cap this year! 7.4 million next year! Michael Bennett is more valuable to this team that Golden Tate is and it's an "either/or" situation, you can sign one, but not both. We were also able to re-up Doug Baldwin.

And if you remember, Golden disappeared in the playoffs. Add to that, where was he the first 3 years that we were paying him? On the bench because he was being a diva. And when he did get on the field early, he did nothing.

And it isn't just about this year. Tate is just going to get older and more expensive while PRich and Norwood get better. Just because we've won one now doesn't mean it isn't still a marathon as opposed to a sprint. We’re not going to continue to be a perennial contender if we don't make the tough decisions...

 

[Seahwkgal]

Classy enough comments by Tate. I still think it's more to sway certain opinions away from the smoke. I am sure he knows the rumors as much as others do. Just say'in. Why is he all of a sudden talking about old news? Hmmmmmm..

 

[DavidSeven]

I'm surprised people are rationalizing the loss of Tate like they are. Seattle would unquestionably be the better team for having Tate. Right now he comes at a bargain bin price compared to his production in Detroit. Would have have that kind of production in Seattle? No, but he would unquestionably make our receiver corps exponentially better. Baldwin would be able to move to his natural position as the slot receiver, and Golden Tate would draw coverage away from Kearse and Baldwin.

Nobodies rationalizing, just accepting the facts. We couldn't afford Golden Tate. Have you seen his contract? 10.5 million counts against the cap this year! 7.4 million next year! Michael Bennett is more valuable to this team that Golden Tate is and it's an "either/or" situation, you can sign one, but not both. We were also able to re-up Doug Baldwin.

And if you remember, Golden disappeared in the playoffs. Add to that, where was he the first 3 years that we were paying him? On the bench because he was being a diva. And when he did get on the field early, he did nothing.

Edit to add link to Tate's contract:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/detroit-lions/golden-tate/

Those are actually his dead money numbers (i.e. the penalty for cutting him). His cap hit is $3.1M this year, $5.4M next year, goes up about $1M each year after that. That's an absolute steal for Detroit.

For me, the price is worth the proven commodity, especially if your team is in a championship window. There's also the fact that Tate is actually a good fit for this offense, doesn't get hurt, and doesn't complain about touches. This team is going to have a much harder time finding the "right" receivers with the right mindset than other teams will. But it is what it is. The Harvin deal essentially made Tate's departure inevitable.

 

[Jville]

The article is about Golden Tate as a member of the Detroit Lions.

The article does not contrast the style differences of Golden Tate verses Percy Harvin ..... or any other Seattle player. Also, the article does not address the the changes in the Seahawk offense of 2013 verses 2014. It is strictly a write up on the perspective of Golden Tate.

I would also offer the perspective that .... different roles in different offenses generate different contract values and offers. And, it is note worthy that the 2013 Seahawk offense and 2014 Seahawk offense and 2014 Lion offense all have important differences.

 

[QuickLightning]

I'm surprised people are rationalizing the loss of Tate like they are. Seattle would unquestionably be the better team for having Tate. Right now he comes at a bargain bin price compared to his production in Detroit. Would have have that kind of production in Seattle? No, but he would unquestionably make our receiver corps exponentially better. Baldwin would be able to move to his natural position as the slot receiver, and Golden Tate would draw coverage away from Kearse and Baldwin.

Nobodies rationalizing, just accepting the facts. We couldn't afford Golden Tate. Have you seen his contract? 10.5 million counts against the cap this year! 7.4 million next year! Michael Bennett is more valuable to this team that Golden Tate is and it's an "either/or" situation, you can sign one, but not both. We were also able to re-up Doug Baldwin.

And if you remember, Golden disappeared in the playoffs. Add to that, where was he the first 3 years that we were paying him? On the bench because he was being a diva. And when he did get on the field early, he did nothing.

Edit to add link to Tate's contract:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/detroit-lions/golden-tate/

You're misreading the contact pretty badly. I'm not really sure how, since it pretty clearly has a column called "cap hit"

His cap hit this year is only 3.1 Million.