Rumor: RW asking to be the highest paid player in history

[Tical21]

JSea and Sac, what is your breaking point? If he wants 30 million per year, you pay him? 35? 50? What's the most you would consider paying?

30 Million is unrealistic. If you want a serious answer, you shouldn't phrase your question in hyperbole. If you want to go that route, I'd pay Russell 100+million and let him make a fool of defenses 11 on 1 as he runs around and throws the ball to himself and ban anyone that disagreed with me.

25? 28?

Make him the highest paid NOW, whatever that amount is to be. And do it before Andrew Luck gets his new contract. In three years, whatever we're paying RW will be a bargain. And don't forget the salary cap is going to just keep going up substantially over the next few years.

So you offer to make him the highest paid now. 1 million more than than the next highest. And he turns it down. What do you do then?

 

[Hawkfan77]

So you offer to make him the highest paid now. 1 million more than than the next highest. And he turns it down. What do you do then?

What if he doesn't turn it down? Then you have your franchise QB locked up long term and don't have to worry about that position for the next decade.

 

[Anthony!]

I wouldn't even trade him for Luck:

QB rating: 98.6 vs. 86.6
Completion percentage: 63.4% vs. 58.6%
Yards per attempt: 7.9 vs. 7.1
TD percentage: 5.8% vs. 4.7%
INT percentage: 2.1% vs. 2.4%
Overall INTs: 26 vs. 43
Rushing yards per attempt: 6.1 vs. 4.8
4th Quarter comebacks: 10 vs. 9
Game-winning drives: 15 vs. 12

The only measureable advantage Luck has is 11.7 more passing attempts per game, and therefore more yards and TDs, albeit at a lower rate than Wilson.

What about the things you can't measure? Things like having Marshawn Lynch vs. Trent Richardson. Things like being able to rely on the best defense in the league, versus having to put up a ton of points because you have the 22nd ranked defense in the league?
Switch the two. Put Wilson on Indy, do you really think they win any more games than they have with Luck?

Put Luck on the Seahawks. Do we get any worse? Do we possibly win more?

Since their situations are so vastly different, where one is asked to throw as much as any QB in the league, and the other is asked to throw less often than any other QB, numerical comparisons are pretty tough to reach and make.

Fair point, but what about having a better receiving corps? What about running an offense that opens things up more in the passing game, vs a very simplistic one? What about playing from way behind 4-5 times a year and accumulating stats, vs ALWAYS playing a close game or with a lead and every play mattering? What about playing in a division that plays serious defense, housing some of the best D's in the league, vs playing in unarguably one of the worst divisions in the league? It goes both ways. Someone pull up Luck's stats vs the NFC West from two years ago. Scary stuff. Don't get me wrong, Luck is fantastically great. Russell Wilson is just as good. They are two transcendent players with the arrow only pointing up. Only difference is RW is a Tom Brady, Michael Jordan, prime Tiger killer. Don't let the christian PC persona blind you to what he really is. The most competitive dude in the league, who wants to gut you and everyone else.

You can add in on Luck has a top 10 pass blocking oline while Wilsons is ranked 24th. People are very quick to point out the advantages Wilson has but very slow to point out the advantages Luck has. Add to that in 2011 our defense was top 10 but not #1 they were on the field and avg of 33 minutes a game. Once Wilson got here they were only on the field an avg of 27 minutes a game. That 6 minutes difference I am sure helped the defense. in 2011 we had NO 4th qtr/ot comeback wins. Since Wilson we have the most, I am sure knowing they have QB that can come form behind helps that D. As to Lynch again, since Wilson he has had his best seasons ever both as a runner and receiver. Having Wilson back there as a threat to run any time helps Lynch as much as Lynch helps Wilson. I have little doubt Luck on the hawks would be really bad, mainly because of his TO issues and now being on the Hawks with a worse oline and WR it would be worse. Wilson in Indy facing easier defenses, with a better WR corps, better Oline would be game over.

 

[Tical21]

So you offer to make him the highest paid now. 1 million more than than the next highest. And he turns it down. What do you do then?

What if he doesn't turn it down? Then you have your franchise QB locked up long term and don't have to worry about that position for the next decade.

I'm done commenting on that part of it, I'm just referring to the people that have implied that they would open the checkbook for him and let him name his own price. There has to be a limit in there somewhere, no?

 

[Sac]

So you offer to make him the highest paid now. 1 million more than than the next highest. And he turns it down. What do you do then?

What if he doesn't turn it down? Then you have your franchise QB locked up long term and don't have to worry about that position for the next decade.

I'm done commenting on that part of it, I'm just referring to the people that have implied that they would open the checkbook for him and let him name his own price. There has to be a limit in there somewhere, no?

Again with the hyperbole.

RW deserves his payday. You can make him the highest paid QB in the NFL and NOT pay him 30 million.

 

[Tical21]

So you offer to make him the highest paid now. 1 million more than than the next highest. And he turns it down. What do you do then?

What if he doesn't turn it down? Then you have your franchise QB locked up long term and don't have to worry about that position for the next decade.

I'm done commenting on that part of it, I'm just referring to the people that have implied that they would open the checkbook for him and let him name his own price. There has to be a limit in there somewhere, no?

Again with the hyperbole.

RW deserves his payday. You can make him the highest paid QB in the NFL and NOT pay him 30 million.

How was that hyperbole? That is a very realistic situation. What do you want from me? Rodgers makes 22 million per year. So you offer Russell 23, but he wants 25. Does that seem unrealistic? And would you give it to him?

 

[HawKnPeppa]

If RW's frame of mind is anything close to what Softy said, it's all the more reason for him to play out his contract. Could backfire if he gets a season-ending injury. Not trying to jinx him, but I think that should always be a in a player's thought process. Strike when the iron is hot.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Here's the thing though, we don't know what he wants, but we know what the FO wants and that is 4 years 80 million, that's only $20 million a year. They are staying pat with that amount and have not budge. I think Wilson wants a long term contract more than 4 years, he want to stay here as long as he can and maybe even retire here, we know he's given them a number, but we don't know the exact number. What if Wilson is giving them a number around $23 million a year for 5-6 year contract and the FO is the one stopping the deal from going forward because they want to stick with the 4 year $80 million contract? Right now the ball is in Wilson's court but we know what the FO's limit is and they are not budging from that amount.

 

[kearly]

I'm asking this out of curiousity, because I've never taken the time to look into it. Say Russell gets what, 5 years at 100 million, 50 million guaranteed, 30 to sign. Is that ballpark right? 30 million over 5 years means the cap hit for the signing bonus is 6 per year. Year 1 salary is going to be like 4 million? Does that mean his year 5 salary is like 35 million? I don't get that part.

It's actually the exact opposite, since you'd be pushing expensive 2016-2019 money into Wilson's last cheap year. Let's say Wilson makes $10 million this year. That's $9 million more than he would have made without getting a deal. So that's $9 million less you have to pay from 2016-2019.

Look up the annual cap hits for Kaepernick, who signed with one cheap year left to go. It's the exact same thing. Kaep's 2014 cap hit went from $0.645 million to only $3.767 million in the first year he signed the deal. Dude signs a $126 million contract, but his cap hit is only $3.7 million in year one, and it didn't inflate future numbers because it was basically making use of Kaep's last cheap year. WIlson is going to get a much bigger signing bonus so I think a more realistic 2015 cap hit forcast for Wilson might be $10 million.

There is talk that Wilson's agent wants the last year ripped up but of course that will never happen. Ripping up that last year, even for a reasonable deal like 4/80, would be the same as waiting til next year to sign a 3/79 contract. Unless Wilson's agent is clinically insane, we can safely assume that Seattle will make use of Wilson's last cheap year, whether he signs this year or not. But better to do it this year, as it takes some of the hit out of future cap commitments.

Additionally, the cap is rising very fast these days. In the next three years the cap will rise enough to cover Wilson's salary by itself, probably with some money to spare.

Okay, so we've found that the Super Bowl winners probably aren't going to come from the 5 highest paid QB's. So they will most likely come from this next group. Brady fits my criteria quite well. Maybe Rivers or Dalton. Maybe Luck? He would have to win this year to meet my criteria most likely. Maybe the next champs are going to come from guys making less than the guys on this list. Maybe Foles or Bradford? Newton? It will be an interesting theory to follow for the next several seasons, especially as Luck and Wilson get paid.

Brady is a very special case (net worth of him an Giselle is about $400 million), and he's also in the twilight of his career. Rivers is young enough that he might get top five money on his next deal just like Big Ben did. Like Wilson, Rivers is a FA next offseason. Luck will soon get paid and get paid big. Foles? Bradford? Newton? Dalton? No. No. No. No. But even if they did win it all, guess what happens next? They get the Joe Flacco treatment.

I thought we were the team known for outside the box thinking. The ballsy, outside the box move is to not bow to the pressure of the media and fanbase to overpay your quarterback. I know it is a huge risk, and I know it is absolutely unheard of to try, but the rest of our roster is so darn good, I think we can teach a QB not to turn it over and hopefully make a couple plays in the process. There are cheap guys we can win Super Bowls with. Then we would have the money to add that receiver AND add Houston or another huge piece, AND pay Wagner. And continue to have one of the most ridiculous rosters in the history of pro football.

I don't know if you've been following the draft, but it's really hard to draft SB winning QBs. GMs talk all the time about how getting a QB makes their jobs easier. Including JS.

I can't see any team in the NFL treating the QB position as though it were fungible. Maybe the Eagles could, since Kelly's system makes everyone in it look better than their talent, but even Kelly tried to go the Hershel Walker route for Marcus Mariota.

If you think Russell is THAT guy, you have no choice, you have to pay him. But if he isn't, paying him will completely kill your franchise. I personally don't think he is THAT guy. He makes it look so much more difficult than all the other incredible quarterbacks we have seen over the years, and I just don't think he really gets the intricacies of the passing game. Eventually those dancing shoes will get holes in them if he doesn't start to take strides that will make life easier on himself. Watch that playoff and SB tape. It's not good. And it wasn't because of the receivers or Bevell primarily.

Behind door number one, I have Russell Wilson. Behind door number two, I have Alex Smith and KJ Wright. It's choosing door number two that will kill a franchise, not door number one.

 

[Anthony!]

Here's the thing though, we don't know what he wants, but we know what the FO wants and that is 4 years 80 million, that's only $20 million a year. They are staying pat with that amount and have not budge. I think Wilson wants a long term contract more than 4 years, he want to stay here as long as he can and maybe even retire here, we know he's given them a number, but we don't know the exact number. What if Wilson is giving them a number around $23 million a year for 5-6 year contract and the FO is the one stopping the deal from going forward because they want to stick with the 4 year $80 million contract? Right now the ball is in Wilson's court but we know what the FO's limit is and they are not budging from that amount.

Well you see it is not really 4 years 80 mil. It is 5 years 81 Mil. HIs current 1 year at 1.5 and then the 4 at 80. The FO can still use the 5 years to spread out the cap hit but Wilson does not see any addition to his pay this year. So the FO wants the benefit of the extension but not want to give anything up. 5 years 81 mil is only 16 mil a season. If Wilson wants 6 years at 23 mil per that is 138 mil but you add in his current year that is 7 years at 139 mil or 19.7 mil a year and its still cheap. Sounds to me like the FO wants their cake and to eat it too.

Add to this the FO seems real good at sticking to their guns with everyone but Lynch who they cave to every year. The message the FO is sending to Wilson and to other players is not a good one and could cause real problems. If you name is Lynch you can threaten to hold out or retire and we will bow down to you, if you are anyone else we do not care.
Trying to remember how many SB did we go to with just Lynch? oh yeah NONE. Bad bad game they are playing.

 

[mikeak]

Kearly- doesn't matter to the team if you sign an extension or wait to next year as unused cap rolls over these days.

Four year rumor doesn't make sense though. Not sure why you would want to negotiate that soon again.

 

[Tical21]

Kip, I don't know how to quote properly so I'm just going to add here.

If any of those QB's mentioned win a Super Bowl and then get the Flacco treatment, their team would simply never be able to get back. Similar paydays happened for Ben, Brees, Rodgers, Peyton and Brady. None have gone back and won a Super Bowl since they got paid.... except for Brady, who had a very long hiatus between Super Bowls, and didn't get back until he ultimately agreed to take less pay so they could pay other players. The only exception was Eli.

Alex Smith and KJ Wright comparison isn't fair. Two terribly overpaid players. My thought process was finding another QB on a rookie contract or finding a diamond of a cheap veteran that you like. Maybe a few of each and let them duke it out. It really can't be that hard to find QB's that can play cautiously and run it a bit. Our system allows us to treat the QB position with kid gloves if we have to. It can make a lot of guys look a lot better than they really are. I think there are a bunch of QB's that would have won at least one Super Bowl with our roster over the past two or three seasons.

How about door number 1 is Wilson
Door number 2 is a couple cheap QB's that you like, Vincent Jackson and Lamar Houston, and I get to keep another one of my own guys. I can roll with that. I think within a year or two we could find a QB to win with for another year or two. I know it is unconventional, but I gotta say, I'd feel pretty good with something like that. 23+ million to spend on players. That's a couple of pro bowlers right there. You gotta hit on a QB, I get that. I really do. I'm the guy that has long said you are only as good as your quarterback. But I hadn't seen a roster like this, and not many quarterbacks made this kind of franchise hindering money. And we throw the ball less than anybody else. I think there can be another way.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Kip, I don't know how to quote properly so I'm just going to add here.

If any of those QB's mentioned win a Super Bowl and then get the Flacco treatment, their team would simply never be able to get back. Similar paydays happened for Ben, Brees, Rodgers, Peyton and Brady. None have gone back and won a Super Bowl since they got paid.... except for Brady, who had a very long hiatus between Super Bowls, and didn't get back until he ultimately agreed to take less pay so they could pay other players. The only exception was Eli.

Alex Smith and KJ Wright comparison isn't fair. Two terribly overpaid players. My thought process was finding another QB on a rookie contract or finding a diamond of a cheap veteran that you like. Maybe a few of each and let them duke it out. It really can't be that hard to find QB's that can play cautiously and run it a bit. Our system allows us to treat the QB position with kid gloves if we have to. It can make a lot of guys look a lot better than they really are. I think there are a bunch of QB's that would have won at least one Super Bowl with our roster over the past two or three seasons.

How about door number 1 is Wilson
Door number 2 is a couple cheap QB's that you like, Vincent Jackson and Lamar Houston, and I get to keep another one of my own guys. I can roll with that. I think within a year or two we could find a QB to win with for another year or two. I know it is unconventional, but I gotta say, I'd feel pretty good with something like that. 23+ million to spend on players. That's a couple of pro bowlers right there. You gotta hit on a QB, I get that. I really do. I'm the guy that has long said you are only as good as your quarterback. But I hadn't seen a roster like this, and not many quarterbacks made this kind of franchise hindering money. And we throw the ball less than anybody else. I think there can be another way.

I see what your saying and in parts I agree but your betting the farm on not taking a good quarterback your just looking for one that can do dump passes and hand the ball off. Financially it make sense since that's how the Seahawks got good in the first place because we are winning on Wilson's rookie contract, but you also have to look at the offensive weapons that Seattle took to get them, giving up huge huge contracts to Sidney Rice, Zach Miller, Matt Flynn and Percy Harvin also don't forget Marshawn and his contract. Besides Marshawn everyone else didn't play the worth of their contracts.

Have you forgotten about Charlie Whitehurst and the TJack experiment. With all those mention do you trust our front office to find offensive playmakers that can actually play up to par with their contracts? They have not shown the consistency to get it right so it wouldn't matter if they get playmakers on the offensive side if they can't perform, that would make it worse for a new drafted QB.

If you choose door number two, the chances Lynch retires after this year might be pretty good which means no running game for a new QB. Not to mention that once some on the defensive side needs to extend their contracts you think they will take a home discount to stay, I doubt that after winning a Super Bowl most will want to go look for a larger contract, they already got their ring now it's about the payday, you're already starting to see that with the whole Bennet thing and Irvin.

Also our secondary have been getting injured back to back years now, how long before they can play at the elite level before they start to get injured earlier in the season rather then later.

It's a huge risk and you could end up like the Buffallo Bills, Texans, Titans, Jets, Browns And other Quarterback needy teams for that matter.

 

[Anthony!]

Kip, I don't know how to quote properly so I'm just going to add here.

If any of those QB's mentioned win a Super Bowl and then get the Flacco treatment, their team would simply never be able to get back. Similar paydays happened for Ben, Brees, Rodgers, Peyton and Brady. None have gone back and won a Super Bowl since they got paid.... except for Brady, who had a very long hiatus between Super Bowls, and didn't get back until he ultimately agreed to take less pay so they could pay other players. The only exception was Eli.

Alex Smith and KJ Wright comparison isn't fair. Two terribly overpaid players. My thought process was finding another QB on a rookie contract or finding a diamond of a cheap veteran that you like. Maybe a few of each and let them duke it out. It really can't be that hard to find QB's that can play cautiously and run it a bit. Our system allows us to treat the QB position with kid gloves if we have to. It can make a lot of guys look a lot better than they really are. I think there are a bunch of QB's that would have won at least one Super Bowl with our roster over the past two or three seasons.

How about door number 1 is Wilson
Door number 2 is a couple cheap QB's that you like, Vincent Jackson and Lamar Houston, and I get to keep another one of my own guys. I can roll with that. I think within a year or two we could find a QB to win with for another year or two. I know it is unconventional, but I gotta say, I'd feel pretty good with something like that. 23+ million to spend on players. That's a couple of pro bowlers right there. You gotta hit on a QB, I get that. I really do. I'm the guy that has long said you are only as good as your quarterback. But I hadn't seen a roster like this, and not many quarterbacks made this kind of franchise hindering money. And we throw the ball less than anybody else. I think there can be another way.

I see what your saying and in parts I agree but your betting the farm on not taking a good quarterback your just looking for one that can do dump passes and hand the ball off. Financially it make sense since that's how the Seahawks got good in the first place because we are winning on Wilson's rookie contract, but you also have to look at the offensive weapons that Seattle took to get them, giving up huge huge contracts to Sidney Rice, Zach Miller, Matt Flynn and Percy Harvin also don't forget Marshawn and his contract. Besides Marshawn everyone else didn't play the worth of their contracts.

Have you forgotten about Charlie Whitehurst and the TJack experiment. With all those mention do you trust our front office to find offensive playmakers that can actually play up to par with their contracts? They have not shown the consistency to get it right so it wouldn't matter if they get playmakers on the offensive side if they can't perform, that would make it worse for a new drafted QB.

If you choose door number two, the chances Lynch retires after this year might be pretty good which means no running game for a new QB. Not to mention that once some on the defensive side needs to extend their contracts you think they will take a home discount to stay, I doubt that after winning a Super Bowl most will want to go look for a larger contract, they already got their ring now it's about the payday, you're already starting to see that with the whole Bennet thing and Irvin.

Also our secondary have been getting injured back to back years now, how long before they can play at the elite level before they start to get injured earlier in the season rather then later.

It's a huge risk and you could end up like the Buffallo Bills, Texans, Titans, Jets, Browns And other Quarterback needy teams for that matter.

Yeah what he s suggesting is a huge gamble, and don't you think If it could be done it would have already. We had a chance ourselves in 2011 remind me how that worked. History has shown that QBs like Wilson do not come around very often and history has shown you need one to stay competitive. So either we try something that has not worked for any other team or more than 1 season or we go with what we know has an can work and sign our franchise Qb.

 

[seatownlowdown]

25m/yr to a 25 year old class-act franchise qb

or

probably 2 1st round picks via trade and 25m/yr to spend on the rest of the roster


hmmmm....

we all love wilson. he has been key to our recent success. it would be hard to imagine flynn or some other unknown stringing together a better last 3 seasons at qb. but lets look at the flip side... our whole roster (outside of oline/wr) has been elite. that won't be the case when rw gets a 25m/yr pay raise. we can hope he takes less (20m/yr) but thats still 20m/yr of your cap gone. i wonder if schneider has another qb or 2 in mind that he believes would be special on this team, in this offense.

i still think a deal gets done with rw, but its just food for thought

 

[Tech Worlds]

When you have a franchise Qb you pay him as such. It's really that simple. Franchise qb's do not hit the open market for a reason.

 

[Hawkfan77]

25m/yr to a 25 year old class-act franchise qb

or

probably 2 1st round picks via trade and 25m/yr to spend on the rest of the roster


hmmmm....

we all love wilson. he has been key to our recent success. it would be hard to imagine flynn or some other unknown stringing together a better last 3 seasons at qb. but lets look at the flip side... our whole roster (outside of oline/wr) has been elite. that won't be the case when rw gets a 25m/yr pay raise. we can hope he takes less (20m/yr) but thats still 20m/yr of your cap gone. i wonder if schneider has another qb or 2 in mind that he believes would be special on this team, in this offense.

i still think a deal gets done with rw, but its just food for thought

No food for thought. QB is probably the most important position in all of sports. You would let Wilson go so you could what? Keep a LB and a DE? Well goodbye winning then

 

[FPD]

When you have a franchise Qb you pay him as such. It's really that simple. Franchise qb's do not hit the open market for a reason.

You hit the nail on the head Dom. Russ will get paid... and it'll be by the Hawks.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Wait so he's expecting us to hit on 1st round draft picks, we don't even have a good history of that either, besides Okung and Earl Thomas that was it. Guess who had a ton of 1st round drafts each year for the last thousand years or so, the Rams, and they are still looking for a QB, that's what's keeping them from going over .500. If it was easy the Rams should have fielded an elite group all over the boards already. 25 millions equates to two players that you can get. You can have the best defense in the world, but if you don't have a good QB to move the chains it wouldn't matter, look at the Bills and Cardinals. Your betting on a defense that's starting to get injured more and more, and Lynch who might not be here after this year. Baldwin will be gone in a few years, he will want more money. The O-line will change and Sweezy will demand some money. Most people on offense will be gone, and the FO will have to replace almost everyone on the offensive side of the ball from 2012.

People on here expect the FO to keep drafting like the 2012 draft but forget that they missed on a lot of players too. If they were so good at drafting how come we have so many Unrestricted Free Agents Starting and playing, not a knock on them but it shows that in the draft we don't always hit it out of the park.

 

[Sac]

or

probably 2 1st round picks via trade and 25m/yr to spend on the rest of the roster


hmmmm....

The Redskins gave up three first round picks and a second round pick so they could draft RGIII. There's no way the FO trades RW for 2 firsts only. If they traded him for what the 'Skins gave up we'd still be getting screwed. The only thing that would make a trade of RW even close to palatable would be a trade so historically one sided that the like would never be seen, ever again. And if that happened I'd still be pretty damn upset.