Seymour":1qhknbdt said:mrt144":1qhknbdt said:Seymour":1qhknbdt said:Sgt. Largent":1qhknbdt said:While I agree, Pete and John paid Russell the first time around, what makes you think they wouldn't do it again?
Because again, the alternative is for them to go on another search for a franchise QB, develop that QB and hope it works out..........all while they're also on the last couple years of their deal, and Pete's 67 years old.
Your math is right Seymour, but as a franchise you have to have a successful alternative/gameplan if you're not going to extend your franchise QB.
Wilson has shown his ceiling now, where as on his rookie deal it was still relatively unknown for one. For another, all GM's need to think long and hard now as the QB is taking a higher % of the cap than ever. Yes, the cap has gone up, but the QB salaries have gone up even more the last 2 years.
I don't think "Pete wouldn't do it". I just think he may be questioning it or has at least lowered the rate further below Rodgers possibly.
Hypothetically, let's say RW leaves and eclipses his prior performances. I don't care whether you think this is likely or not. Just indulge me.
What would your first thought be in this hypothetical?
I actually think that WOULD happen under many conditions. My first thought on that is coaching and roster limited his effectiveness, and I already believe that anyway. When I said we've seen his ceiling, I mean under Pete he has found it. A change of use and philosophy could raise it again.
Okay, we're on the same page there then. Part of me knows it's super dubious and selfish to simply want to keep a player to keep him out of the hands of another team but...It would be demoralizing to see him succeed for the Niners (and I'm just using them because of the Division and having a ton of cap space and an injured JG) in ways we didn't think possible.