Nate Burleson visting Texans (1 Viewer)

[John 14:6]

Regardless of whether this is a revenge signing or not, I said all along that Burleson was worth a least a third.  I would be surprised if the Vikings don’t match.

Wil the be able to match if Seattle plays a poison pill clause?

I think Burleson is a good receiver but he is not “poison pill” good. If Seattle is smart and I think they are, they will offer Burleson a contract that is just high enough to make the Vikings think twice about matching.

Why wouldn't they just put some clause in there so that the Vikings can't match? The precedent was set.

Because Nate is a restricted free agent, not a transition player. If the Vikings don't match, then the Seahawks got a GREAT player! He is vastly underrated, in my opinion, and would represent good value for fantasy football playing opposite Darrell Jackson. I hope the Vikings match (although I haven't seen numbers yet). Good move Seahawks...you'll LOVE Nate!!

What difference does his being an RFA vs a Transition player make as to a poison pill? I don't see any.

My bad...you are right. The only difference is the compensation that the Vikings would get if they don't match...but wouldn't make a difference for a "poison pill" clause.

What kind of "poison pill" would they use? I don't know the salaries of each teams' WRs, but I don't see the Seahawks making Burleson their highest paid WR and I think the Vikings would be willing to make Burleson their 2nd highest paid WR...

 

[DoctorDetroit]

Regardless of whether this is a revenge signing or not, I said all along that Burleson was worth a least a third.  I would be surprised if the Vikings don’t match.

Wil the be able to match if Seattle plays a poison pill clause?

I think Burleson is a good receiver but he is not “poison pill” good. If Seattle is smart and I think they are, they will offer Burleson a contract that is just high enough to make the Vikings think twice about matching.

Why wouldn't they just put some clause in there so that the Vikings can't match? The precedent was set.

Because Nate is a restricted free agent, not a transition player. If the Vikings don't match, then the Seahawks got a GREAT player! He is vastly underrated, in my opinion, and would represent good value for fantasy football playing opposite Darrell Jackson. I hope the Vikings match (although I haven't seen numbers yet). Good move Seahawks...you'll LOVE Nate!!

What difference does his being an RFA vs a Transition player make as to a poison pill? I don't see any.

My bad...you are right. The only difference is the compensation that the Vikings would get if they don't match...but wouldn't make a difference for a "poison pill" clause.

What kind of "poison pill" would they use? I don't know the salaries of each teams' WRs, but I don't see the Seahawks making Burleson their highest paid WR and I think the Vikings would be willing to make Burleson their 2nd highest paid WR...

Burleson becomes the highest paid Vikings WR if he plays one home game in a domed stadium. There are 100,000 more combinations. This poison pill stuff will negatively affect the NFL in the long run. Many teams will get burned on this now that others see how the Vikings got it through an arbitrator. BAD PRECEDENT.

 

[John 14:6]

Regardless of whether this is a revenge signing or not, I said all along that Burleson was worth a least a third.  I would be surprised if the Vikings don’t match.

Wil the be able to match if Seattle plays a poison pill clause?

I think Burleson is a good receiver but he is not “poison pill” good. If Seattle is smart and I think they are, they will offer Burleson a contract that is just high enough to make the Vikings think twice about matching.

Why wouldn't they just put some clause in there so that the Vikings can't match? The precedent was set.

Because Nate is a restricted free agent, not a transition player. If the Vikings don't match, then the Seahawks got a GREAT player! He is vastly underrated, in my opinion, and would represent good value for fantasy football playing opposite Darrell Jackson. I hope the Vikings match (although I haven't seen numbers yet). Good move Seahawks...you'll LOVE Nate!!

What difference does his being an RFA vs a Transition player make as to a poison pill? I don't see any.

My bad...you are right. The only difference is the compensation that the Vikings would get if they don't match...but wouldn't make a difference for a "poison pill" clause.

What kind of "poison pill" would they use? I don't know the salaries of each teams' WRs, but I don't see the Seahawks making Burleson their highest paid WR and I think the Vikings would be willing to make Burleson their 2nd highest paid WR...

Burleson becomes the highest paid Vikings WR if he plays one home game in a domed stadium. There are 100,000 more combinations. This poison pill stuff will negatively affect the NFL in the long run. Many teams will get burned on this now that others see how the Vikings got it through an arbitrator. BAD PRECEDENT.

Oooh, good one

 

[DoctorDetroit]

John Clayton just said that the Seahawks want to offer Burleson a contract but are working out something "special" for the Vikings. Good stuff.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

John Clayton just said that the Seahawks want to offer Burleson a contract but are working out something "special" for the Vikings. Good stuff.

Let me see...Seattle gets: a good WR2

Minnesota gets: the best OG in the game + a 3rd round draft pick

Seahawks got them good there!!

 

[BigJim®]

Regardless of whether this is a revenge signing or not, I said all along that Burleson was worth a least a third. I would be surprised if the Vikings don’t match.

Wil the be able to match if Seattle plays a poison pill clause?

I think Burleson is a good receiver but he is not “poison pill” good. If Seattle is smart and I think they are, they will offer Burleson a contract that is just high enough to make the Vikings think twice about matching.

Why wouldn't they just put some clause in there so that the Vikings can't match? The precedent was set.

Because Nate is a restricted free agent, not a transition player. If the Vikings don't match, then the Seahawks got a GREAT player! He is vastly underrated, in my opinion, and would represent good value for fantasy football playing opposite Darrell Jackson. I hope the Vikings match (although I haven't seen numbers yet). Good move Seahawks...you'll LOVE Nate!!

What difference does his being an RFA vs a Transition player make as to a poison pill? I don't see any.

My bad...you are right. The only difference is the compensation that the Vikings would get if they don't match...but wouldn't make a difference for a "poison pill" clause.

What kind of "poison pill" would they use? I don't know the salaries of each teams' WRs, but I don't see the Seahawks making Burleson their highest paid WR and I think the Vikings would be willing to make Burleson their 2nd highest paid WR...

Burleson becomes the highest paid Vikings WR if he plays one home game in a domed stadium. There are 100,000 more combinations. This poison pill stuff will negatively affect the NFL in the long run. Many teams will get burned on this now that others see how the Vikings got it through an arbitrator special master. BAD PRECEDENT.

Fixed. No one will ever know what the result would have been if the Seahawks had gone the arbitrator route. Reportedly, they insisted upon a hearing in front of a Special Master saying that they planned to argue that this was not a principal term, when they may have been better served going in from of an arbitrator to argue that the clause otherwise violated the spirit of the CBA.

 

[BigJim®]

John Clayton just said that the Seahawks want to offer Burleson a contract but are working out something "special" for the Vikings. Good stuff.

As a Burleson owner I hope they do so Brad Johnson isn't throwing to him.As a Viking fan, I'm thinking how petty to fixate on getting even.

As one who loves disputes, can't wait to see what they come up with.

 

[DoctorDetroit]

John Clayton just said that the Seahawks want to offer Burleson a contract but are working out something "special" for the Vikings.  Good stuff. 

As a Burleson owner I hope they do so Brad Johnson isn't throwing to him.As a Viking fan, I'm thinking how petty to fixate on getting even.

As one who loves disputes, can't wait to see what they come up with.

 

[FunkyPlutos]

John Clayton just said that the Seahawks want to offer Burleson a contract but are working out something "special" for the Vikings.  Good stuff. 

As a Burleson owner I hope they do so Brad Johnson isn't throwing to him.As a Viking fan, I'm thinking how petty to fixate on getting even.

As one who loves disputes, can't wait to see what they come up with.

 

[coolnerd]

I think Gaffney's as good as Burleson. Why wouldn't they have just kept Gaffney??????

Gaffney was an Unrestricted FA. unless a player shoots off his mouth, we never know whether or not the player expressed a desire to the team that he wants to pursue other opportunities.

Right but he signed a one year deal in Philly. I would think his team could have done that very easily. A 3rd and more money for Burleson? Not sure I think that's a good move. Burleson looked good opposite Moss. Gaffney had a good year with the worst O in football.

Sure, but again Gaffney may think it is a better chance for him to get really good long-term money by showing that he could put good numbers in a pass friendly offense then getting stuck as no better than the 2nd option (probably like 4) in an offense that will still be run oriented. My point is that we don't know what happen between the team and player behind closed doors. The player has a choice in the matter. Just to give another example that has happened recently, why in the world would Andre Davis sign a one deal with Bufalo than with stay with the Patriots?

Here is why there is no Gaffney in Houston.http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports...nt/3739841.html