Is Russell Wilson worth 6 years $129m???

[Popeyejones]

^^^^ Great example, and in that case totally agreed.

In my summary I was assuming a long time future with Harbaugh as the 9ers coach, which might be as unlikely as the Hawks letting Wilson leave for the 9ers. :lol:

 

[hawk45]

...
I'm not saying it wouldn't be painful or a decision that would keep you up for weeks. But if I was put in charge of being the main talent evaluator and juggling the salary cap and I had built this team the way it is built, and the bottom line was that I had to pay Russell Wilson 6 years and 129 million dollars, I wouldn't do it. That's too much for what we ask him to do considering some of the limitations that may possibly be lurking out there.

It'll never happen, I understand, and it is silly to even argue about. The only thing up for debate is how much he's going to end up getting. But if it was me, I think it would be a mistake.

On the record now, 6/129 (21.5 mil per) for Wilson would be a mistake. Would doom our franchise and hopes of repeating. Do I have that right?

And letting Wilson walk if he demands $22 (I can hardly even form those word they are so ridiculous) would give us the best chances at long-term success?

This is going to go down as one of those "Wilson is the worst QB I've ever seen" quotes IMO. If we had Andy Dalton, Jay Cutler, Matt Stafford, one of these oh-so-close-but-not-clutch guys, then your mindset applies.

This is Russell F. Wilson. I mean got-damn.

 

[AVL]

Tical21 is still having trouble taking Wilson off of his signature practice squad.


Why not insult him with a franchise tag in 2 years? Do you value him even less than that?

 

[RolandDeschain]

Tical21 is still having trouble taking Wilson of his signature practice squad.


Why not insult him with a franchise tag in 2 years? Do you value him even less than that?

He's not even worth a transition tag, much less a franchise tag.

-Tical21

 

[Sgt. Largent]

This has to be ignorance right? Naivety?

How is this thread 183 comments long full of actual debate? There is no debate, pay the man and praise baby Jesus every day that this glorious bastard of a human being somehow landed in Seattle. Change your children's names to Russell Carrington Wilson, even if you have girls. They'll cry, but eventually they'll understand the enormous gift you've given your little Russelina.

I can only chalk this debate up to some people are new to watching football, or are young in general. Because no one with half a football brain would EVER consider not signing Wilson to a long term deal. He is what football dreams are made of.


Amen

 

[HansGruber]

And the like the Patriots and the Steelers, if you're going to be giving your QB 20 million, you better be having him throwing (or running on designed plays) 40-50 times a game. Not doing so would be like giving Richard Sherman 12 million a year and only using him as a situational nickle back.

Except that's not what the Patriots or Steelers ever did when they were winning. In fact, you could argue that their lack of recent Superbowls is due mostly to the change in strategy toward more passing. Both teams were primarily run+defense oriented when they were having all that success. Rapeyburger especially.

I think that has more to do with the fact that pass-first offenses simply don't win Superbowls. A great defense will always beat a potent pass-first offense. Always. It's been proven so many times throughout history that it's rather amazing to me that people are still so awed by the big-yardage offenses. The Raiders, the Steelers, the Cowboys, 49ers, and Patriots were all run+defense. There really aren't any pass-heavy offenses that have ever won multiple Superbowls.

When we played the Broncos in the Superbowl, I was in this forum stating that the biggest reason Seattle would win that game was simply because Denver relied too heavily on passing and didn't have a great defense. What is old is new again. It's a repeating pattern that has held true since the first Superbowl.

 

[HansGruber]

^^^^ Great example, and in that case totally agreed.

In my summary I was assuming a long time future with Harbaugh as the 9ers coach, which might be as unlikely as the Hawks letting Wilson leave for the 9ers. :lol:

You know... I know this probably makes me a "bad" Seahawk fan, but I don't buy the stuff about Harbaugh being forced out. Not at all. He's the perfect face for that franchise. If they struggle for 3-4 seasons, THEN maybe you'll see him asked to leave, but it's going to take a lot of losing before that happens. Jed York is being honest with his statements, and I believe Harbaugh will be with the Niners for a while to come, probably another 4-5 seasons at least.

In fact, it's a lot more likely that Baalke gets the boot if there really is a rift there.

A good head coach is like a good QB. You don't let those guys walk. Otherwise, you end up with a Chucky in Tampa beating you in the Superbowl type of situation, and a lot of disgruntled fans who don't believe you want to win (which doesn't help with those expensive new seat licenses). Baalke is a lot more disposable and losing him wouldn't cost you a single season ticket holder, at least when compared to Harbaugh.

 

[Russ Willstrong]

Not what you're trying to justify - which is why you continue to argue Wilson isn't worth 22 million plus to Seattle. You've missed the forest for the trees.

Just to clarify (again, again, again :lol: ), I've NEVER argued that Wilson isn't worth 22 million plus to Seattle. I've said:

1) I think it's a more interesting question for teams like the Hawks, 9ers, and Chiefs than it is for many other teams

and

2) To give that much coin to one position impacts what you're able to do, the consistency you can have, and how much you can focus your strategy for winning on other positions.

Likewise, I'm not just making a simple argument about stats. I'm making an argument about the cap, salary allocation, and its relationship to strategy.

The idea that you can one day spend over 20 million dollars MORE per year at a position without changing anything else you're doing is simply ludicrous.

That's not contentious. When the Hawks are spending 4,300% more per year on Wilson's salary, in the short or long term they're going to have to lean on him more. What exactly is objectionable about this?

I feel like I'm getting a load of grief for stating the obvious. :lol:

You contradict yourself when you say haven't argued that Wilson isn't woth 22 mil then continue to say that his position doesn't warrant it or that we need more out of him or that he's not the face of the franchise, etc....
If you have to argue that RW needs to pass for 300 yards routinely to earn his big payday then you haven't been following along.
First of all the team WILL prove that Wilson's stats and record is worth more than 22 mil/year by offering the big contract without a hitch or hesitation.
Secondly, PC decides how much we lean on RW's arm and more often then not PC has been conservative to that point NOT WILSON. And yes Wilson has proven he can wing it with the best AND in past interviews he has hinted he would like to pass more often like BREES--that's partly why he continues to say that his game can improve.
Thirdly, RW has become the face of our franchise as he is the player representative for team interviews, a voted team captain and he sets the tone/poise for all other players at crucial moments. In case you haven't been following the Seahawks closely the featured stories and focus has been on RW the most of any seahawks players. Yes, Sherm is on the Madden cover but he's neither a captain nor doesn't even set the tone for the defense (Kam and Earl do).

So will other teams pay 22 million for a quarterback who throws it 200 yds/game? The answer is Yes if that guy makes everyone else a winner and routinely sets the table for them. RW with all his quickness, smarts, accuracy and intangibles would make lesser teams like the Vikings, Cardinals, Rams, Skin, Texans, Titans, Ravens, Dolphins and Jets contenders.

 

[WilsonMVP]

Is there a chance that Wilson DOESNT get a contract after this year? He DOES have 1 MORE year left on his original contract right?

I believe he should be paid but does the FO pay him or do they let the contract go and then pay him. I hope the contract is less per year but a ton of guaranteed money.

Newtons contract expires the same year Wilsons does I believe since he was a 1st round pick? OBV he hasnt won a superbowl but the case can be made that he is due a ton of money to considering the stats he has put up.

Luck was in the same draft as Wilson so doesnt that mean he has an extra year on his contract? If that is the case wouldnt Luck get his contract a year AFTER Wilson, or possibly 2 years after Wilson if they waited until after his final year?

Also to note with the Colts. They will have to pay Hilton too unless they let him walk. I wouldnt be suprised if he got 8+ mill a year

I think our offense will be fine if we let Okung go and as long as we have Harvin, Doug, Wilson and Willson we will be fine with cheaper options elsewhere whether thats through FA or Draft

 

[Tical21]

I'm not saying Russell doesn't deserve to get paid a huge raise. I'm just saying you don't write a blank check. There has to be SOME limit, doesn't there?

 

[v1rotv2]

No other position on the team has the influence that the QB has. The QB even has an effect on the defense of his team. Sustaining drives and keeping the defense off the field is a major factor. His effect on the offense is so overwhelming it would take too much space here.

OK, that's his effect on the team now let's talk about RW's situation here and now. He is a one of a kind that gives the Hawks such flexibility it boggles the mind. His skill and knowledge is immeasurable and will continue to grow. And the biggest benefit is that we have all this in only his third year. We have probably another 10 or more years with him at the helm. That in it's self is worth a premium on top of everything else.

Why is there any question at all about paying him? If anyone is thinking about it hampering the signing of other positions may I point out that every other position on the field is 10 times easier to fill at the closest. Left tackle maybe next but still 10 times easier.

 

[HansGruber]

No other position on the team has the influence that the QB has. The QB even has an effect on the defense of his team. Sustaining drives and keeping the defense off the field is a major factor. His effect on the offense is so overwhelming it would take too much space here.

OK, that's his effect on the team now let's talk about RW's situation here and now. He is a one of a kind that gives the Hawks such flexibility it boggles the mind. His skill and knowledge is immeasurable and will continue to grow. And the biggest benefit is that we have all this in only his third year. We have probably another 10 or more years with him at the helm. That in it's self is worth a premium on top of everything else.

Why is there any question at all about paying him? If anyone is thinking about it hampering the signing of other positions may I point out that every other position on the field is 10 times easier to fill at the closest. Left tackle maybe next but still 10 times easier.

Amen to everything you just said. You put it perfectly.

There are always a few good LTs in every draft, even the drafts where everyone bemoans a lack of OL. We see new tackles coming into the league and holding their own all the time. We see our own team drafting tackles like Britt in the later rounds and we see them being competitive. Maybe not Walter Jones, but competitive.

The difference between Walter Jones and an "okay" LT might be 2-3 wins at most.
The difference between Russell Wilson and an "okay" QB is countless wins, postseason appearances, and championships.

It's not even comparable.

 

[hawk45]

I'm not saying Russell doesn't deserve to get paid a huge raise. I'm just saying you don't write a blank check. There has to be SOME limit, doesn't there?

Yeah but you said the limit was 21.5 per and that's what has me shaking my head.

Yeah, the richest QB contract right now is Rodgers at 22 (I googled nfl richest contracts, didn't look at breakdown between guaranteed and all that so my numbers aren't above reproach here), Flacco and Matt Ryan at around 21, Brees at 20. Manning at 19.5.

Manning's contract seemed huge at the time, a couple years later doesn't seem so bad, cap increases tend to do that.

Look if Wilson's agent starts talking 26 and above then at that point I'd say hey now, maybe we as a franchise threaten the franchise tag or something to get him a teensy bit down, but 22 is a no-brainer, heck 24 is a no-brainer. And no matter what, he stays a Seahawk.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

...........I challenge you to name one franchise in NFL history that has ever had greater regular and postseason success over the career of a QB than the Patriots with Tom Brady. EVER. Before the salary cap or after it. Before the Superbowl or after it.

Patriots with Tom Brady:
Regular Season - 163 wins, 52 losses = 75.8% winning percentage over 13+ seasons
Postseason - 17 wins, 7 losses, 5 Superbowl appearances, 3 Superbowl wins = 70.8% winning percentage and tied for second in history for most Superbowl wins by a single QB

Otto Graham...
The Browns' record with Graham as starting quarterback was 114–20–4, including a 9–3 record in the playoffs. He still holds the NFL career record for yards per pass attempt, averaging nine. He also holds the record for the highest career winning percentage for an NFL starting quarterback at 81.4%.
Graham made the championship game every season of his career, 10 in all and won it 7 times.



Not saying your point isn't valid Hans, but a bit of a history reference seemed in order. Graham is the NFL's all-time winner.

 

[irocdave]

Man, as the day gets closer the arguments get stronger. This thread has turned into a great philosophical debate of what makes the Hawks successful and what will continue the success. I would guess that the side that says "make him the highest paid QB ever" would be the same side that in two years says " WTF, why did we cut Lynch and why cant our D tackle", the side that says " no more than 15 million per season" will be lamenting watching RW rescue some down trodden franchise that has lots of cap space. They will also be bitching about letting one of only a couple of really good homegrown Hawk QB's walk.

Then there is the "well he's really smart and will take less cause he knows he needs everyone" crowd. Really? His career can end on the first play this Sunday versus the cowpatties. He would be cut and all that equity RW built up goes up in smoke.
RW's political career would begin right then and their. RW isn't stupid, neither is his agent. He will be asking for top shelf money and will get close to or summit the largest QB contract ever.

I get all of this and that's why what happens this coming offseason is so interesting. Toss in the fact that RW hasn't been tasked with carrying the team during his career, more than likely Lynch will be gone at the end of the 14 season and the starting left tackle in 15 probably isn't on the roster.

My belief is that Lynch is just as important as RW. It's going to suck when he no longer is the anchor of the toughness of this team. He is the heart and soul of the toughness, not RW.

Big time decisions will be made this coming offseason that will have an impact on the franchise for the next 5 - 7 years. THAT is the reality that the OP is posing.

 

[Tical21]

Brady is good enough by himself to win a bad division annually. But they haven't won a Super Bowl since he got big bucks.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Tical wants to give up Russell to save money so we can lose games with boneheaded QB play at the end of the 4th quarter like the Texans just did.

#GeniusPlan

 

[NFSeahawks]

Tical you high bruh?

I mean even to have that idea is kinda stupid given the fact that very few average to below average QB's have ever won the super bowl. Oh and you know the QB position at times is a crap shoot just like everything else, you can't just get a "good" QB.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Man, as the day gets closer the arguments get stronger. This thread has turned into a great philosophical debate of what makes the Hawks successful and what will continue the success. I would guess that the side that says "make him the highest paid QB ever" would be the same side that in two years says " WTF, why did we cut Lynch and why cant our D tackle", the side that says " no more than 15 million per season" will be lamenting watching RW rescue some down trodden franchise that has lots of cap space. They will also be bitching about letting one of only a couple of really good homegrown Hawk QB's walk.

Then there is the "well he's really smart and will take less cause he knows he needs everyone" crowd. Really? His career can end on the first play this Sunday versus the cowpatties. He would be cut and all that equity RW built up goes up in smoke.
RW's political career would begin right then and their. RW isn't stupid, neither is his agent. He will be asking for top shelf money and will get close to or summit the largest QB contract ever.

I get all of this and that's why what happens this coming offseason is so interesting. Toss in the fact that RW hasn't been tasked with carrying the team during his career, more than likely Lynch will be gone at the end of the 14 season and the starting left tackle in 15 probably isn't on the roster.

My belief is that Lynch is just as important as RW. It's going to suck when he no longer is the anchor of the toughness of this team. He is the heart and soul of the toughness, not RW.

Big time decisions will be made this coming offseason that will have an impact on the franchise for the next 5 - 7 years. THAT is the reality that the OP is posing.

Be prepared to learn why running backs are so devalued while quarterbacks aren't. Houston is the perfect object lesson if you doubt me. With an average quarterback Houston wins close with someone above average (Cutler, Keap) game isn't close and somebody elite (Rodgers, Wilson) child please.

 

[Mick063]

The man is the first Seattle quarterback to win a championship. He did it while playing for peanuts. He did it while exuding an aura that can only be described as the perfect example for "face of the franchise".

In the face of the NFL's best running back being suspended, amongst great controversy because of multiple players mired in personal conduct issues, Russell described the game against Denver as "What the NFL needed". He was absolutely right. He "gets it". He is playing for something much bigger than himself.

Russell isn't just the face of the franchise. For that weekend, he was the saving face of the NFL. A saviour. Russell and Luck will eventually inherit the title of "NFL Ambassador" from such dignified torch bearers as Manning and Brady, among others.

I find it incredulous that there is even a debate about the worth of a man destined to become NFL royalty. A man that is ascending not linearly, but logarithmically. A man that has not shown the slightest hint of hitting a wall.

Russell just finished his most jaw dropping performance. If the 2012 NFL draft were held again, teams knowing then what they know now, Russell would have been taken second overall by the Washington Redskins. They would have paid the same price in draft picks to move up to do so.

In short, this debate is embarrassingly stupid.

"Go Hawks"