Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
MMQB Russell Wilson article (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter cr8f
- Start date
Jeremy
Footballguy
Obviously 3 Millions dollars over 4 years is a ton of money in "real life" terms, but in terms of starting NFL QBs and the salary cap, it's getting a franchise starting QB for free. And a very good one at that. Seattle is delusional if they think they can ask him to take a home town discount after what he's already accomplished and how little they've paid him so far. Granted the CBA doesn't allow for any more than that, but it's time to show him the respect he deserves by paying him what he's worth. If they don't, there's plenty of teams willing to pay him MORE than he's worth. It seems like Wilson has a lot of leverage here.
It's possible they agree with his detractors that it's not as much him that has delivered all those wins but an historically good defense and a running game that makes his job so much easier, especially late in games when defenses are worn down. I'd be curious to see him on another team with better offensive weapons in the passing game, but a much weaker defense. That would give us an apples to apples comparison to guys like Rodgers and Luck.
It's possible they agree with his detractors that it's not as much him that has delivered all those wins but an historically good defense and a running game that makes his job so much easier, especially late in games when defenses are worn down. I'd be curious to see him on another team with better offensive weapons in the passing game, but a much weaker defense. That would give us an apples to apples comparison to guys like Rodgers and Luck.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
I have a lot of respect for Wilson, albeit with the help of the run game and defense. Especially because of his age, if I were starting a franchise, after QBs like Luck and Rodgers (I wouldn't choose Manning, Brady or Brees), not a lot of QBs I could think of I'd rather have than Wilson.
My question, if they don't sign him in 2015, pay him the exclusive rights franchise tag amount in 2016 (doubtful they would expose him to the unexclusive tag, or he could be sniped by a team for two firsts - if it was a good team, that would be two low firsts, almost like seconds, and the one in the next year would be almost like a third, due to having to wait a year, is he worth a second and third, I would say absolutely), that would make the second year at the franchise amount close to $30 million, prohibitively expensive. I'm not sure he would want to sign long term if they don't take care of him in the next two years?
I have a hard time thinking they won't, after taking care of so many other core players (Lynch, paid Harvin a lot while he was there, took on Graham's salary, not sure about LT Okung's future standing, Sherman, Thomas, Chancellor, Wright, looks they want to extend Wagner, etc.).
My question, if they don't sign him in 2015, pay him the exclusive rights franchise tag amount in 2016 (doubtful they would expose him to the unexclusive tag, or he could be sniped by a team for two firsts - if it was a good team, that would be two low firsts, almost like seconds, and the one in the next year would be almost like a third, due to having to wait a year, is he worth a second and third, I would say absolutely), that would make the second year at the franchise amount close to $30 million, prohibitively expensive. I'm not sure he would want to sign long term if they don't take care of him in the next two years?
I have a hard time thinking they won't, after taking care of so many other core players (Lynch, paid Harvin a lot while he was there, took on Graham's salary, not sure about LT Okung's future standing, Sherman, Thomas, Chancellor, Wright, looks they want to extend Wagner, etc.).
Last edited by a moderator:
cr8f
Footballguy
That and how many QB's they tried plugging in there(Whitehearst, Taveris, Flynn) and failed.
I think they know what they have(they probably read Matt Waldman), probably just trying to save cash to keep as many players as they can(based on his salary and others).
After losing Hutch I doubt they risk losing him.
Last edited by a moderator:
buck naked
Footballguy
Everywhere he has played, he has proven to be a fantastic producer and winner. This will be an interesting season watching him perform now that he has Graham to throw to. He could show himself to be even MORE valuable if given the opportunity.
Tau837
Footballguy
The Seahawks could franchise Wilson as many as three times, but that third time seems particularly unlikely given the projected cost:
2016: ~$20M
2017: ~$24M
2018: ~$35M
From Wilson's perspective, these are the scenarios if he refuses to sign for less than full market value:
1. The Seahawks sign him to a long term contract extension before the 2015 season at full market value.
2. He plays 2015 under his current contract, and the Seahawks choose not to franchise him. He hits the open market at age 27 and gets full market value, probably with his choice of several teams.
3. He plays 2015 under his current contract, and the Seahawks sign him to a long term contract at full market value.
4. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, and the Seahawks choose not to franchise or sign him. He hits the open market at age 28 and gets full market value, probably with his choice of several teams.
5. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, and the Seahawks sign him to a long term contract at full market value.
6. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, plays under the franchise tag for ~$24M in 2017, and the Seahawks choose not to franchise or sign him. He hits the open market at age 29 and gets full market value, probably with his choice of several teams.
7. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, plays under the franchise tag for ~$24M in 2017, and the Seahawks sign him to a long term contract at full market value.
8. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, plays under the franchise tag for ~$24M in 2017, plays under the franchise tag for ~$35M in 2018, and the Seahawks choose not to franchise or sign him. He hits the open market at age 30 and gets full market value, probably with his choice of several teams.
9. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, plays under the franchise tag for ~$24M in 2017, plays under the franchise tag for ~$35M in 2018, and the Seahawks sign him to a long term contract at full market value.
Those are all good outcomes for Wilson, so what is his motivation to accept a contract below full market value?
The only reason to consider settling for less than full market value is to lock in a lot of guaranteed money now in order to avoid the risk that either his play falls off or he suffers an injury serious enough to harm his market value. But Wilson is a guy who seems comfortable betting on himself. And given what he has already shown and the number of teams that are QB hungry, even if his play falls off, the market would probably remain strong for him.
I suppose there is also value in removing this as a distraction, but he seems like a guy who wouldn't be affected by it and wouldn't settle for less than full market value for that reason.
Having said all that, I do not believe there has ever been an instance of a QB playing under a franchise tag for more than one season. (And I think there is only one QB who played even one season under the tag.) I suspect this is because it is basically never the case that a QB is good enough to merit the tag but not a mutually agreeable contract, and perhaps also because it could lead to deterioration of the relationship between the QB and the team, which would likely hurt the team and reduce the value of tagging the QB in the first place.
So I think all of the franchise tag scenarios above are unlikely.
It would be very surprising if they let him walk, and, if they aren't going to do that, it makes more sense to give him a long term contract at market value than to pay him market value via franchise tag for 1-3 years and then sign him anyway.
I have always thought they would extend his contract before the 2015 season, I still expect that.
2016: ~$20M
2017: ~$24M
2018: ~$35M
From Wilson's perspective, these are the scenarios if he refuses to sign for less than full market value:
1. The Seahawks sign him to a long term contract extension before the 2015 season at full market value.
2. He plays 2015 under his current contract, and the Seahawks choose not to franchise him. He hits the open market at age 27 and gets full market value, probably with his choice of several teams.
3. He plays 2015 under his current contract, and the Seahawks sign him to a long term contract at full market value.
4. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, and the Seahawks choose not to franchise or sign him. He hits the open market at age 28 and gets full market value, probably with his choice of several teams.
5. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, and the Seahawks sign him to a long term contract at full market value.
6. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, plays under the franchise tag for ~$24M in 2017, and the Seahawks choose not to franchise or sign him. He hits the open market at age 29 and gets full market value, probably with his choice of several teams.
7. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, plays under the franchise tag for ~$24M in 2017, and the Seahawks sign him to a long term contract at full market value.
8. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, plays under the franchise tag for ~$24M in 2017, plays under the franchise tag for ~$35M in 2018, and the Seahawks choose not to franchise or sign him. He hits the open market at age 30 and gets full market value, probably with his choice of several teams.
9. He plays 2015 under his current contract, plays under the franchise tag for ~$20M in 2016, plays under the franchise tag for ~$24M in 2017, plays under the franchise tag for ~$35M in 2018, and the Seahawks sign him to a long term contract at full market value.
Those are all good outcomes for Wilson, so what is his motivation to accept a contract below full market value?
The only reason to consider settling for less than full market value is to lock in a lot of guaranteed money now in order to avoid the risk that either his play falls off or he suffers an injury serious enough to harm his market value. But Wilson is a guy who seems comfortable betting on himself. And given what he has already shown and the number of teams that are QB hungry, even if his play falls off, the market would probably remain strong for him.
I suppose there is also value in removing this as a distraction, but he seems like a guy who wouldn't be affected by it and wouldn't settle for less than full market value for that reason.
Having said all that, I do not believe there has ever been an instance of a QB playing under a franchise tag for more than one season. (And I think there is only one QB who played even one season under the tag.) I suspect this is because it is basically never the case that a QB is good enough to merit the tag but not a mutually agreeable contract, and perhaps also because it could lead to deterioration of the relationship between the QB and the team, which would likely hurt the team and reduce the value of tagging the QB in the first place.
So I think all of the franchise tag scenarios above are unlikely.
It would be very surprising if they let him walk, and, if they aren't going to do that, it makes more sense to give him a long term contract at market value than to pay him market value via franchise tag for 1-3 years and then sign him anyway.
I have always thought they would extend his contract before the 2015 season, I still expect that.
Tau837
Footballguy
My numbers are estimated figures for the exclusive tag. The 2015 exclusive franchise tag for QBs is $18.5M. It was $16.9M in 2014, $14.9M in 2013, and $14.4M in 2012. Sure, I could be underestimating a bit but I don't think they will come close to your figures here.
If they did use the non-exclusive tag, I don't know what the difference in the projected tag value would be. Regardless, in that situation, Seattle would have the right to match any offer sheet Wilson would sign. I agree that Seattle would likely use the exclusive tag if they franchise him.
ETA: I see that King stated that it would be $24.5M in 2016. I don't know where he got that number from, but that would be a 33% increase year over year, which would be a bit surprising.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
I was repeating figures Charley Casserly used. He may have been wrong, but was a former GM (picked Mario Williams over Reggie Bush), and I think it is fair to say he seems pretty in the loop with current league matters.
This could be an important distinction between the two sets of figures (your original ones and Casserly's, not exclusive and non-exclusive), because if Casserly is right, I don't see any way they would go beyond one year of the exclusive franchise tag. We agree it would be a surprise if they don't get something done long term, and 2015 seems more likely then 2016. But if they don't, I don't think a second year on the EXCLUSIVE franchise tag (extending into 2017) would be a viable option.
This could be an important distinction between the two sets of figures (your original ones and Casserly's, not exclusive and non-exclusive), because if Casserly is right, I don't see any way they would go beyond one year of the exclusive franchise tag. We agree it would be a surprise if they don't get something done long term, and 2015 seems more likely then 2016. But if they don't, I don't think a second year on the EXCLUSIVE franchise tag (extending into 2017) would be a viable option.
Last edited by a moderator:
ShamrockPride
Footballguy
See this is all just stupid. In another 5 years this already insane salary that's being discussed will be eclipsed. Then further after that. How high will they go before teams start saying no? I don't understand for the life of me as a gm why you would set your franchise back like this. You could count me out of the Wilson sweepstakes if these are the numbers being discussed. Let another franchise dig their own grave.
Tau837
Footballguy
I agree, if your numbers are correct, multiple years of franchise tags seems even more unlikely.
I don't know where to find ground truth on this. I Googled it and there are a lot of sources that say what the franchise tag and transition tag values are without specifying whether the franchise tag values are exclusive or non-exclusive. I think it is very likely they are all citing exclusive, since calculating/projecting the exclusive tag value is a lot easier than the non-exclusive tag value, and the exclusive tag is also likely more commonly used.
Values for 2016 and beyond have to be speculative, no matter the source. But think about what a $24M tag value for 2016 would mean -- that would have to be the average of the top 5 QB salaries for 2016. If that average for 2015 is $18.5M, does it make sense that it would increase by 33% for 2016? Based on what new contracts? Newton, Luck, Rivers, Eli. We know what Newton got, and it wouldn't drive this figure up above the $20M range. Luck could break the bank, but it's doubtful that Rivers or Eli would be at or above $24M.
So it seems logical that $20M is closer to the right number.
Tau837
Footballguy
Right. And who was Seattle's QB before Wilson? Tavaris Jackson. Any team is better off paying Wilson, Newton, Flacco, et al. $20M than starting a journeyman QB like Jackson and paying him a few million.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
Another article from a local Seattle reporter, quoting a former NFL agent and so called salary cap expert, coming up with an estimate for the 2016 exclusive franchise tag number in the neighborhood of $25 million. Maybe the discrepancy has to do with a difference we aren't accounting for with the exclusive and non-exclusive franchise tag amount (as noted, your attempt to nail this point down was inconclusive). To me, I find it far more likely that a former GM, a high profile general NFL writer like King with front office contacts all over the league, and a local SEA writer with input from a former agent, know what they are talking about. Maybe most tellingly, it doesn't seem logical that they would all make a collective "mistake" that was approximately THE SAME AMOUNT?
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seahawks/salary-cap-expert-joel-corry-with-another-look-at-russell-wilsons-contract/
"Under the exclusive franchise tag, a player will receive a one year offer from his team that is the greater of the average of the top five salaries at his position once the restricted free agent signing period of the current year has ended (April 24 for 2015) or 120 percent of his prior year’s salary. The exclusive franchise tag currently projects to $25.18 million in 2016 but will decrease if any of the quarterbacks with the five highest 2016 salaries are released or rework contracts to lower salary cap numbers before the 2016 franchise tag designation period ends (March 2 this year). Based on the projected number, a second franchise tag for Wilson in 2017 would be $30.216 million, a 20 percent increase over his 2016 franchise number. A third franchise tag with a 44 percent increase over the 2017 figure would be unrealistic. The average of franchising Wilson twice exclusively, especially if he has another good season in 2015, could be used as justification for a long-term deal in excess of $25 million per year next offseason.”
Last edited by a moderator:
Jeremy
Footballguy
Spotrac calculates his market value at 5 years, 109,760,000. Average salary of $21,950,000, estimated $61,460,000 guaranteed.
http://www.spotrac.com/research/nfl/forecasting-the-guaranteed-value-of-russell-wilson-519/
That sounds about right to me.
http://www.spotrac.com/research/nfl/forecasting-the-guaranteed-value-of-russell-wilson-519/
That sounds about right to me.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Yep. Can't wait for Russell to be paid what he's worth. Welcome to the bigs Seahawks fans.Jeremy said:Spotrac calculates his market value at 5 years, 109,760,000. Average salary of $21,950,000, estimated $61,460,000 guaranteed.
http://www.spotrac.com/research/nfl/forecasting-the-guaranteed-value-of-russell-wilson-519/
That sounds about right to me.
cr8f
Footballguy
I can see him giving the Seahawks a little hometown deal, I don't think he wants every penny to go to a dysfunctional team.
I don't think he wants to leave and after losing Hutch how they did don't see them using a lowball tag.
Who preceded him there, Whitehurst, Tavaris and $10million Flynn? They won't let him walk.
I don't think he wants to leave and after losing Hutch how they did don't see them using a lowball tag.
Who preceded him there, Whitehurst, Tavaris and $10million Flynn? They won't let him walk.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
I hope he gets every penny he's worth. He's a good kid.
cr8f
Footballguy
That's the key, what's he worth? I don't think Seattle minds spending the money, it seems their concern is if they pay him XXX how many other good players can't they afford to keep.
The nature of free agency isn't it? You have a few great players then the majority of your teams gets a lot closer to the minimum.
The question I think is how much over $20 million a year will he take(and they offer)? Cam's contract makes everything harder.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
I think he deserves to be the "current" highest player in the NFL. Why not? That title usually goes to the most recent QB who has shown he is elite. Well, Russell has shown that. Seattle has had a huge advantage over teams like New England, Green Bay, Baltimore, New York, Dallas, and Denver because they were paying Wilson chump change. I want his salary to be in the upper range to level the playing field.
cr8f
Footballguy
Do you think Cam was overpaid? I do and think Wilson should come in a little below that.
Some players think it's disrespectful to get less than the top salary, I don't se Wilson that way but agree he needs to be paid well.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Yes, I think Cam is overpaid. Yes I think Russell should be making more than Cam.
Jeremy
Footballguy
He might, but I wouldn't blame him if he didn't. They've already gotten a HUGE discount for the last 3 years. Near elite QB play for little more than the league minimum. It would almost be more fair if they paid him something extra for what he's already given them, though of course it doesn't work that way.cr8f said:
I think his agent wants to get him into free agency. The biggest name free agent always gets overpaid. Suh got $19 million per with $60 mil guaranteed as a defensive tackle. If Wilson bets on himself and has another year like the last 3, $25 million per season might almost be his floor. It only takes 1 willing to pay that. Of course there's risk in going that route.
Maybe the play for the Seahawks is to get one more cheap year out Wilson, put the non-exclusive tag on him, pocket the 2 1st that a QB desperate team will almost certainly pay, use the savings to bulk up that offensive line and re-sign every decent defensive player they have + others, and try to win with running and defense. It'd basically be a more extreme version of what they do now.
biju
Footballguy
Actually, I think Seattle has a history of paying their players. Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, Earl Thomas, KJ Wright, and soon Bobby Wagner; this doesn't mention giving their top performers such as Lynch and Bennett solid contracts (although each has also complained about it too). I don't think Seattle is looking for a discount--I really believe they are working to find a deal commensurate with his talent and potential. I'll continue to say this, but there's no near-term deadlines so this isn't going to be resolved soon and most of this "drama" is media created. The reason why this continues to be fueled is the average NFL fan thinks Seattle can't afford Wilson and that simply isn't true.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
biju
Footballguy
Ok. Is that your only retort? Or are you going to post that Russell Wilson picture again because we keep beating your ####ty team.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Which player are you again?
biju
Footballguy
Are you going to add value to the thread, or do you think you're "getting to me"? Feel free to keep making yourself look foolish.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Jeremy
Footballguy
I guess what I'm curious about is why they're (reportedly) so far apart? There's not a lot of mystery as to what his supposed market value is based on recent contracts. He's better than Newton. He's not as good as Rodgers. The cap is going up, so it wouldn't surprise me to see him eclipse Rodgers. But the range should be $20-$23 million per with somewhere in the $60-$65 million guaranteed range, wouldn't you think? If Seattle was offering the low end and Wilson asking for the high end, would that really be considered "far apart"? I guess that's a fairly big difference when you're talking 5 or 6 years, but each side gives a little and it should be fairly easy.
So here some possibilities as I see it:
A. Seattle is philosophically opposed to paying a QB that much money, thinking it cripples a team in the long run.
B. Seattle doesn't think he's irreplaceable. IE: they buy the narrative that the wins come as much or more from the defense and/or running game.
C. Wilson's agent wants him in free agency where he can really cash in. Happens all the time in baseball, and he's a baseball agent.
Has any top QB really pushed the boundaries of what they could get on the open market? Rodgers signed his 2 years before his contract expired. Newton was under contract this year. P. Manning seemed to care more about getting another title and was an older player. Same with Brady. With the escalating salary caps and a dozen or more QB needy teams, there's potentially a HUGE pot of gold at the end of that rainbow. If he plays at the same level next year and stays healthy, the worse case scenario is he gets the exclusive cap at nearly $25 mil for 1 year and then it goes up 20% per season after that.
I'd love to see the numbers that are being exchanged in negotiations.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Agreed. Might be much ado about nothing to be honest. Media need to type things. I bet they get it figured out long before he's a free agent.
biju
Footballguy
I'd say it's being reported this way because we're in an age of "retweets" instead of reporters actually, you know, doing their ####### job. For example, one of the more plugged in reporters for the Seahawks is Rob Rang who reported they are "closer in negotiations than some people believe." (Link). Nobody is reporting that however because it isn't attention grabbing.
The "new media" really sucks at their day job.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
It was kind of surreal hearing former teammate Michael Robinson saying he doesn't think Wilson is worth a top 5 QB contract, due to the advantages he has had on defense and in the run game.* He actually said that is what he thinks as a businessman, not as a friend. He also thought Aaron Rodgers was deserving of an "anomalous" contract, because he is the best in the game, and Wilson hadn't done enough yet to command something in the same ball park.
Nate Burleson countered with three stats:
1) Most wins first three seasons (42-13), though since QBs don't win games solely, unclear how relevant it is to Robinson's point?
2) Game winning drives since 2012 including playoffs (15)
3) Best record in OT games by a starting QB since '74 (5-0)
Not saying either is right or wrong, just passing along the debate, and it was interesting to me that Robinson is a former teammate.
* NFL Network's Total Access (Monday 6-15).
Nate Burleson countered with three stats:
1) Most wins first three seasons (42-13), though since QBs don't win games solely, unclear how relevant it is to Robinson's point?
2) Game winning drives since 2012 including playoffs (15)
3) Best record in OT games by a starting QB since '74 (5-0)
Not saying either is right or wrong, just passing along the debate, and it was interesting to me that Robinson is a former teammate.
* NFL Network's Total Access (Monday 6-15).
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
