Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
False claims? I have to give it to you, that was a good one. Good burn for sure.
I love Lynch as much as the next guy, but stop with this nonsense. QB >>>>>>>>> RB in today's NFL. Wilson is a foundation piece for the franchise for the next decade.
Like I said, I disagree. I think differently than you about Wilson and think he is a smart QB with a great deep ball, but he is what he is, 3300 yards and 26/10. I can go into the pros and cons for Wilson in his thread. But I think a guy who gets you 300/1400/12 is much more rare than a 3000 yard QB with 20 some TDs. His running adds a great dimension, but without his defense, how would he do having to throw the ball a lot?
The could certainly do that. Question is, do they want to? Or would they rather wait and see what happens this year before making that commitment? There is no real incentive for them to just guarantee that money. All they get is a happier Lynch for one year. They get nothing next year because they can just keep him at that salary if they want to. So if they believe he will eventually play this year, there just isn't much in it for them except to be "good guys". And if they already believe he is being adequately compensated...
That's actually not entirely true since you can roll over extra cap. If the Seahawks save money this year it can be used for Wilson's contract next season.
Yeah, but the main point is that this is nowhere near an either / or situation. It's really not even remotely close to that, and calling it that is a huge oversimplification and just a really bad way to look at it.
Is a happy Lynch better or worse than an angry Lynch? Personally, I think Lynch will run the same either way - like a beast.
Lynch is kind of a strange dude. Most players would just cave and take the millions already on the table -- he might not. Probably will, but there's a greater chance of him staying out into the season than most players IMO.
Russell Wilson by rule can not have his contract renegotiated until next offseason.
Agreed.
Yes, I am well aware of the discussions, ad nauseam, and I am also aware he was only being hyperbolic, and so was I asking for him to show me threads stating the the Seahawks only need Michael and nothing else.
Good lord, man. I replied to hyperbole with hyperbole.No one has ever said Michael was all they need, and that was your comment. Regardless of how many posts made you mad stating Michael was going to ... whatever, no-one ever said that is all they need. You left a snark reply to a post and I followed to show how stupid doing so wasFalse claims? I have to give it to you, that was a good one. Good burn for sure.
Let me respond simply with this.
A guy who has touched the ball only 18 times in his NFL career has a 45 page thread while the offense rookie of the year Eddie Lacy has a 27 page thread.
So yes I will call that a lot.
No one pulled you in to anything, you decided to comment yourself. Strange you say you hate being "pulled" into a discussion which is what a forum is for.Good lord, man. I replied to hyperbole with hyperbole.No one has ever said Michael was all they need, and that was your comment. Regardless of how many posts made you mad stating Michael was going to ... whatever, no-one ever said that is all they need. You left a snark reply to a post and I followed to show how stupid doing so wasFalse claims? I have to give it to you, that was a good one. Good burn for sure.
Let me respond simply with this.
A guy who has touched the ball only 18 times in his NFL career has a 45 page thread while the offense rookie of the year Eddie Lacy has a 27 page thread.
So yes I will call that a lot.
EDIT - But congrats on pulling me into the thing I hate most. But with that, I am done. Onto more productive things. I am sure we can all agree posts like these do nothing beneficial. So ... moving on
Yes. And then cut him if he didn't agree. It happens all the time. Maybe they don't even offer. There is no right or wrong here, it's all a money grab - the team that doesn't wanna pay more, the player that wants paid more.
I think he realizes that he's a cap casualty next year. My guess is that he is trying to get more money this year and less money next year so 1) he gets his money now and 2) he doesn't get cut next year because of his cap hit. But that's just my drunken speculation.
Whoa, I way misread your post. Took it as asking him to take a pay cut, not that that's all that much different. Bottom line is it's not about what's right or wrong, it's about leverage. Everyone wants more money, and every owner wants to pay player less. Charles just got redone, and that's because the team can't afford to not have him so made it worth his while not to risk it.
I used to think like you but now realize that the NFL is primarily a business with both sides trying to get the best deal they can. There's no good or bad, only two sides trying to do what is best for them.
But he's in no position to be making demands. Luca Brasi didn't have a gun pointed at Lynch's head as he signed his last contract. Does his signature on the agreement mean nothing? Honor the damn contract.
Why do you care so much about Seattle's wallet? You Paul Allen's son?
lol keep towing that line young man.........Raider Nation said:They should probably seek a more financially rewarding job then.
EGGS-----zactly!
Lynch isn't walking away from 5 million dollars this year and 13 million left on his deal...I don't care how "set" he is.....so he really does not hold all of the leverage. Seattle isn't going to cut him if he is holding out.
Owners want to win Super Bowls because it helps them make money, the Seahawks have a 0% chance of repeating without Lynch and do not win last years title without Lynch. Lynch has more leverage then some want to admit.
Paul Allen doesn't want to win Super Bowls because he needs the money. That post is all kinds of fail.
I might be missing your point, but Baldwin is saying that he has Lynch's back in this. Teams sign players to deals when they know they can cut them before it expires.
Are you serious? Do you watch many of the Seahawk games? Or are you fishing?
And how many of those QBs also throw in over 500 rushing yards?
To assume a guy who is efficient because of the running game Lynch provides will be that efficient without him is pretty funny. I think I mentioned his legs add a dimension? Yes I did, so thanks for reading the whole point I made.
Why don't players have the right to renegotiate contracts that obviously do not stack up to their value? These players get one or maybe 2 contracts in their careers if they are lucky. Most when they retire from the sport have amassed a little bit of money but end up woefully under equipped to survive in the world you and I live in. Why do you resent the money they make just because you have the physical ability to get up and go to work everyday?
Lynch is making a fair wage for an elite RB. This is an obvious desperate money-grab because he's a fan favorite and they just won the Super Bowl, and he sees the end of his career in a couple years rushing up on him. Some guys are obviously underpaid.
