What's new
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!

Seattle takes Franchise Tag off LB Leroy Hill.... (1 Viewer)

Fighting Noles

Footballguy
Pretty interesting with the Curry signing there today. They could sign him to a longterm deal but he already turned down a pretty decent offer earlier this offseason. On the show Lombardi made it sound as if he'd be available on the open market now....Could have a big impact on Curry & Lofa's #'s this year.

 
wow. I'm not sure exactly what this means. I imagine he could still re-sign in Seattle, but this opens up the possibility for some other team to come in and sign him without having to give any compensation. I wish the Bills would get involved.

 
Huge news on Leroy Hill overnight. It's worth noting that Curry and the Seattle beat writers are the only ones who've specifically said SLB. Curry talked to the Seattle coaching staff, but relatively briefly, and took no predraft visits there. I think Ruskell's comments about Derrick Brooks and that the coaches will figure out where he'll play were foreshadowing the Hill move in hindsight, despite Ruskell's own comments to the contrary. Risking losing Hill altogether after the first two rounds of the draft with no one of note on the free agent market is a major move.

 
Wow. If Hill leaves Seattle it would help Curry's value tremendously imo. Just went from the #3 LBer to #1 if i were drafting in a dynasty.

 
Wow. If Hill leaves Seattle it would help Curry's value tremendously imo. Just went from the #3 LBer to #1 if i were drafting in a dynasty.
It'll make what was shaping up to be a fairly mild discussion into another offseason of debate, that's for sure.Do you want the safe, projectable player without clear big play ability who's playing OLB next to a very good MLB?Or do you want the lunchpail MLB who should put up 90 solos every season but may never bust into the LB1 tier?Or do you want the downhill backer who may not be an every-down player, at least not until 2010?Hill may still end up playing a big role for Seattle, but this absolutely reads like Seattle wants Curry in a highlighted role. From the beginning, it was hard to see a defense that wants to be downhill and aggressive (and, by passing Sanchez, apparently wanting to win now) grabbing a SLB to smash him into lead blockers and tight ends.
 
The Franchise Tag is total BS... can't believe the Union ever agreed to this.

We're going to prevent you from entering FA, oh what... we just drafted a top 5 LB.. we're lefting the Tag so now you can go.

Oh, sorry, all the landing spots for you are filled.

 
The Franchise Tag is total BS... can't believe the Union ever agreed to this.

We're going to prevent you from entering FA, oh what... we just drafted a top 5 LB.. we're lefting the Tag so now you can go.

Oh, sorry, all the landing spots for you are filled.
Yeah... thats a bad deal. Very strange turn of events.
 
The Franchise Tag is total BS... can't believe the Union ever agreed to this.

We're going to prevent you from entering FA, oh what... we just drafted a top 5 LB.. we're lefting the Tag so now you can go.

Oh, sorry, all the landing spots for you are filled.
Yeah... thats a bad deal. Very strange turn of events.
But how long did he have to sign it? He had the opportunity before they drafted Curry to sign the 1 yr Franchise Tag tender and be locked in (is the $ guaranteed?). That is the risk he took. It might not appear fair, but if he was unwilling to play for the $ they were offering, they had to look elsewhere. And they found what they were looking for in Curry. Hard to pass up that kind of talent!

 
in addition to not signing the 1-year tender for $8.3 million, he also turned down a 6year, $36 million contract offer from Seattle. I don't think the franchise tag is unfair.

 
I could see the Redskins being interested, and they actually have some cap room, believe it or not. Something like $9M (before the rookie picks are signed).

 
in addition to not signing the 1-year tender for $8.3 million, he also turned down a 6year, $36 million contract offer from Seattle. I don't think the franchise tag is unfair.
Hill really blew this one. He will never get close to that on the open market IMO.
Agreed. And Seattle probably figured he was just going to be a headache, even as a franchise player; so unless they franchised him again, he was going to be gone. So they draft Curry, and it's bye bye Hill. And he'll have a tough job doing as well elsewhere.
 
in addition to not signing the 1-year tender for $8.3 million, he also turned down a 6year, $36 million contract offer from Seattle. I don't think the franchise tag is unfair.
Hill really blew this one. He will never get close to that on the open market IMO.
I guess thats true.. just don't like how these Teams can prevent players from entering FA. Imagining getting out of College and 1 company gets to Tag you for a yr saying that you can't become employed by any other company expect us (lets face it, no one was going to fork over the picks required for Hill). They give you an offer and you refuse it, mean while all the other companies out there fill their positions. Then a new recruit comes along and the team tells you that your untagged, go and find another company or expect a much lower offer than the 1st one we sent.Now, it was foolish for Hill to turn down the 6 Mil a yr offer... but it just doesn't seem right that you don't let the guy go out and find a job during the peak signing season after he fulfilled his contract.
 
in addition to not signing the 1-year tender for $8.3 million, he also turned down a 6year, $36 million contract offer from Seattle. I don't think the franchise tag is unfair.
Hill really blew this one. He will never get close to that on the open market IMO.
I guess thats true.. just don't like how these Teams can prevent players from entering FA. Imagining getting out of College and 1 company gets to Tag you for a yr saying that you can't become employed by any other company expect us (lets face it, no one was going to fork over the picks required for Hill). They give you an offer and you refuse it, mean while all the other companies out there fill their positions. Then a new recruit comes along and the team tells you that your untagged, go and find another company or expect a much lower offer than the 1st one we sent.Now, it was foolish for Hill to turn down the 6 Mil a yr offer... but it just doesn't seem right that you don't let the guy go out and find a job during the peak signing season after he fulfilled his contract.
There's an old saying that I use for my litigation clients when they've been offered a good settlement and still want more: "Pigs get fat, and hogs get slaughtered." You can complain all you want about the fairness of the current CBA, and there are plenty of valid points there, but he most certainly knew the rules going in and knew the downside of holding out for more, and it's ended up biting him. This isn't a guy who was highly drafted, or who is some sort of perennial All Pro, or who frankly is even much known outside of his relatively small market team stuck in the corner of the country. He doesn't even play a premium position. In short, he's created this crisis and so my sympathy for him in his "predicament" after blowing a chance to make over $8M between now and next January is quite limited.
 
in addition to not signing the 1-year tender for $8.3 million, he also turned down a 6year, $36 million contract offer from Seattle. I don't think the franchise tag is unfair.
Hill really blew this one. He will never get close to that on the open market IMO.
I guess thats true.. just don't like how these Teams can prevent players from entering FA. Imagining getting out of College and 1 company gets to Tag you for a yr saying that you can't become employed by any other company expect us (lets face it, no one was going to fork over the picks required for Hill). They give you an offer and you refuse it, mean while all the other companies out there fill their positions. Then a new recruit comes along and the team tells you that your untagged, go and find another company or expect a much lower offer than the 1st one we sent.Now, it was foolish for Hill to turn down the 6 Mil a yr offer... but it just doesn't seem right that you don't let the guy go out and find a job during the peak signing season after he fulfilled his contract.
It's all on Hill for not signing. It's a business and what Seattle did was within the labor agreement. Hill could have signed the offer. He chose not to.
 
in addition to not signing the 1-year tender for $8.3 million, he also turned down a 6year, $36 million contract offer from Seattle. I don't think the franchise tag is unfair.
Hill really blew this one. He will never get close to that on the open market IMO.
I guess thats true.. just don't like how these Teams can prevent players from entering FA. Imagining getting out of College and 1 company gets to Tag you for a yr saying that you can't become employed by any other company expect us (lets face it, no one was going to fork over the picks required for Hill). They give you an offer and you refuse it, mean while all the other companies out there fill their positions. Then a new recruit comes along and the team tells you that your untagged, go and find another company or expect a much lower offer than the 1st one we sent.Now, it was foolish for Hill to turn down the 6 Mil a yr offer... but it just doesn't seem right that you don't let the guy go out and find a job during the peak signing season after he fulfilled his contract.
franchise tag means you get paid like a top-5 player at your position. that's more than fair compensation for not hitting the open market.
 
in addition to not signing the 1-year tender for $8.3 million, he also turned down a 6year, $36 million contract offer from Seattle. I don't think the franchise tag is unfair.
Hill really blew this one. He will never get close to that on the open market IMO.
I guess thats true.. just don't like how these Teams can prevent players from entering FA. Imagining getting out of College and 1 company gets to Tag you for a yr saying that you can't become employed by any other company expect us (lets face it, no one was going to fork over the picks required for Hill). They give you an offer and you refuse it, mean while all the other companies out there fill their positions. Then a new recruit comes along and the team tells you that your untagged, go and find another company or expect a much lower offer than the 1st one we sent.Now, it was foolish for Hill to turn down the 6 Mil a yr offer... but it just doesn't seem right that you don't let the guy go out and find a job during the peak signing season after he fulfilled his contract.
It's all on Hill for not signing. It's a business and what Seattle did was within the labor agreement. Hill could have signed the offer. He chose not to.
I would go one step further and put some of this on Hill's agent.The agent should understand the remifications of not signing a tag offer before the NFL draft & should advise his client accordingly.Your team has tagged you at $8+ MIL. They have the #4 pick. There's a player in the draft who plays your position and is universally thought of as a Top 5 pick. 1 + 1 + 1 = a lot less than $8 MIL for refusing signing the offer sheet.
 
The Seahawks are reportedly still negotiating with Hill, and Hill has expressed that his preference is to stay in Seattle. I don't have any feel for where that is going.

 
The Seahawks are reportedly still negotiating with Hill, and Hill has expressed that his preference is to stay in Seattle. I don't have any feel for where that is going.
Well this sucks - I have a draft this weekend and I'm struggling on Curry's ranking. I hope Hill signs somewhere before Saturday. :goodposting:
 
I've read (and can't find a link) that they will use a system with no SLB/WLB but keep LOLB/ROLB like I believe Houston did last year. Any truth to this? From a skill set perspective, is Hill or Curry better suited for SLB? With Hill being only 27 and now signed long-term, this could have serious impact on Curry's dynasty value.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top